facebook wraps up its road show as yahoo faces yet another ceo crisis. pert analysis this morning from the altimeter group's charlene lee. plus your cell phone knows what you did and where you did it. and cell phone companies are plenty eager to offer that information to police. the aclu sounds the alarm. our reporters ralph needleman and john swartz of usa today, this week on "press here." >> good morning, everyone. two big stories silicon valley. the facebook road show ahead of

its ipo and the newest mess yahoo has found itself in. let's get right to discussing it. charlene lee is the founder and ceo of altimeter group. fast company called her one of the most creative and most influential women in technology. thanks for being with us. joined by john swartz of usa today and ralph needleman of c-net. as we get ready for the facebook ipo and everybody talks about the pop or expectations, implied in there is that facebook has somewhere to go, that this is not the end of facebook in the end of wen site. there is growth ahead. what do you think the growth is? >> if you think of the advertising market it's still nascent, especially in the social space. all of the money spent in facebook today is advertising. it's marketing, promotion, advertising and all the touch points. customer service, innovation.

they're hoping to tap into working with users to understand touch points and working with with the company as much as advertisers who could be interested in reaching users. there is a lot to growth. we're at the beginning of this. >> do we get the feeling facebook know it is plan, that it has things that it's ready to do once it become as public company? >> definitely. they have a lot of smart people there. again this is a company that's eight years old. the advertising market in the space is three or four years old. if you think back to another space like this, search when it first went public in 2004, we are at the beginning of that. >> so many areas with the potential of mobile, social commerce, search. there is a rumor that facebook is looking at search. but on the other hand you hear zuckerberg and the company are reluctant to go public. they're under pressure to do things faster than they would have as a private company. are these factors playing off

against one another? >> i think of the speed which they have been moving at. even two years ago. the advertising was minuscule compared to today. if they continue on that trajectory they can meet expectations. what you continue to see is the advertisers also have this pent-up demand and appetite. mobile has been around, but the mobile advertising market is the issue here. >> they haven't figured it out yet. they have adjusted the ipo. not much of a presence there. >> nor do we expect to in the future. not yet. that's where the growth is. >> testify to figure out mobile. you can't keep buying companies and the apps which they just launched. they will be helping apple sell apps because they need mobile. >> mobile itself, talking about the apps or experience on tablets, you can buy a lot of

that especially the war chests that facebook will have. the bigger issue isn't the app and user experience as they are shifting people from a lucrative space, the web platform into a mobile advertise where they can't advertise. which is an adjustment they had. >> when we say they can't advertise we accept, oh, yes, it's hard to advertise on mobile. is it the expectation of the user that somehow when i'm typing here and i see a banner ad it's acceptable. but when it's my phone it's different somehow even though those a silly distinction? >> the screen is so much smaller. it's the context of what you're trying to do. what facebook has been able to do is take your activity fee and insert marketing or relevant tools and messages into that. the bigger issue is that the people who pay for the mobile ads, the effectiveness and advertisers haven't embraced mobile advertising.

they are trying to figure out social and a lot of them are trying to figure out digital. they are having a big debate and digital has been around 15, # 20 years now. >> facebook really set it is standard in an emerging advertising market which is going to be huge. social mobile advertising is going to be giant. nobody's figured it out. >> it takes the might of a giant like facebook to push it forward, to consolidate and get everybody on the same platform. there are four competing mobile ad platforms now. >> maybe the ipo is the watershed moment where mobile advertising takes a turn. here's the thing i keep thinking about though. once they go public it's like they jumped the shark in a sense. three months from now, six months from now people will be looking at the quarterly results and say, okay, they made x billion dollars for the quarter. >> they already have. >> $95 billion valuation. look at google by comparison.

this doesn't make sense. >> in some ways facebook is trained in the market. the results for the past quarter weren't as strong. they are sending a strong signal that we will continue on this path. >> the companies that don't react. google did it early in the filing. we're going to do what we think is right and facebook did as well. >> i wonder if facebook eventually, six or nine months from now, i'm thinking way into the future -- and i'm sorry for that -- it falls into the same trap as yahoo had. it's unfair but that's the way the market reacts. >> if you look at the value of facebook, a fifth or sixth of what apple created you have to scratch your head and say, is the potential there? if you look at market makers which facebook will be for the foreseeable future.

we are talking about a couple of years. will they be able to move the markets forward at the pace people anticipate with strong players like goolg and apple in the game as well. >>. >> you once wrote about leaders. be open, transparent, authentic. i'm quoting you. when scott thompson -- when it came out he had not graduated with a computer science degree which i don't really care, to be honest with you. but there were claims he had. he released an apology that said i'm sorry you were distracted by this which didn't strike me as authentic. >> he had to say something. he couldn't say, i'm sorry i lied or stretched the truth. >> that would have been refreshing. >> open, transparent and authentic. it's all fuzzy as to where it came out. >> i think what happens as a

leader, you rest on your ability to lead comes from a source of credibility. his credibility is shot to pieces with that. >> a guy that was from yahoo told me scott thompson had a good reputation on the marketing side but there were questions about the tech side. now probably more. he has a reputation of having a lot of hubris and being confident. does that shatter the myth about him in a short time? >> the reason this became basically a lie is because of questions about his kridability as a technologist. he knows it's a study of that, but not having the background.

maybe one, two, three. >> i don't mind having an accountant running my company as long as i know he's an accountant running my company. one last thought. earlier this week i called the university of wisconsin. i don't know if you did this or not. i asked if carl barts at a c.s. degree and she did. indeed she did. charlene, thank you for being with us. up next, they may have badges but they don't have warrants. how can police get data about you from your cell phone company? we'll have a closer look when "press here" continues.

your phone does this all the time even when you're not making a call. cell phone companies keep this information for a very long time. at&t says it has records of customer cell phone pings dating back to 2008. a bill making its way through the california state house would severely restrict the release of that data. nicole ozer is watching the progress of the bill carefully. not only is she a card carrying member of the aclu, she's the

policy director for northern california. joined by john swartz, raffle needleman of c-net. i have seen enough police crime drama to know you need a warrant. how can a policeman go to at&t, sprint or t-mobile and say, tell me where nicole has been. yeah, sure, hold on. we'll look it up for you. >> our cell phones have been a game-changer for convenience. they allow us to find directions when we are lost, connect and communicate on the go. they have been a game changer for people who want to track us. >> i thought i knew the law well enough to know you're not supposed to just tell people my record. >> the great technology has far outpaced the privacy laws. the federal electronic laws haven't been updated since 1986. you know, 25 years ago when cell

phones were the size of bricks and the web didn't even exist. >> only gordon gecco. >> i don't understand how this falls under the wiretap laws which require a warrant to get information from the cell carriers. >> wiretap laws cover content of communicatio communications. one of the issues is that the 1986 laws knew we would have cell phones and covered the content but they didn't realize there would be location data about who we were and where we went down to detailed information of we were at a doctor's office or religious service. >> that's not content? >> we consider it content but law enforcement disagrees with that. >> from an engineering point of view it's not content. have you ever been on a trip to new york city and your cell phone rings and how does it know i'm in new york? it's pinging the tower.

that could be not content but an electronic bit of data. >> location information is sensitive. it can reveal who you are, where you go, what you do whether -- >> the thing i'm wondering is how often are the phone companies relaying the information to law enforcement and for what reason? how common is it? >> the cell phone companies and police are trying to keep us in the dark about how often our information is demanded and disclosed. the aclu found out disturbing things over the past couple of years. sprint as given up location information over 8 million times in just a 13-month period. we saw michigan police seeking cell phone records of all of the cell phones within the vicinity of a planned labor protest and the aclu has been able to get stacks of invoices from cell

phone companies charging law enforcement for access to our location information. this is happening across the company. big cities to small towns. >> just to specify, the millions of times, millions of location data points. >> exactly. >> not necessarily millions of customers. the push is for cell phone companies not only to knock it off, at least without a warrant but then report back to the public and say, this is how much times we did it this month. they don't want to do that. one of the reasons they give is essentially we are too busy helping law enforcement to do that. in other words, we're too busy doing the thing that makes you uncomfortable to tell you how often we're doing the thing that make use uncomfortable. >> the trade association whose members include at&t, verizon, sprint, nextel says a warrant to track california residents would create greater confusion for wireless providers when responding to legitimate law

enforcement requests. >> we have laws that are older than the web right now. we're trying in california and other states around the country and also through congress to create a nice clear rule that makes people understand if my location is being collected it will be safeguarded from misuse. the police can't access it without going to a judge and getting a warrant. it's a nice clear rule. the bill is moving through in california. we want to make sure the public knows how often and why their sensitive location information is being disclosed. it was unfortunate that the wireless industry opposed that provision of the bill. they certainly want to make sure that the public doesn't understand how many millions of pieces of location information are being disclosed. >> something about this. obviously this is of great concern. you know, when i pay a company for a service, i feel like i'm the customer. in the case of facebook where i'm not paying them anything, i

kind of know that i'm the product and not the customer. in this particular case i'm paying them and they are selling my data. >> absolutely. most of us are paying far more for our cell phone service than we realize. we are paying a lot of money and also paying with personal information about who we are, where we go, what we do. cell phone companies should be working for us, the customer, and doing more to protect our privacy, not opposing important laws that safeguard our personal information. >> if i'm an iphone user and i have a bunch of apps tied to location what's the best way for me to protect myself? do i not use the apps? anything i can do to minimize the tracking of what i'm doing and where i'm going? >> there are a couple of things. we want to make sure the laws get updated. unlike our software privacy doesn't update. the millions who have cell phones and shouldn't have to choose between using new

products and our privacy to push legislators and companies to do a much better job to protect us. the second thing is to make sure the companies know privacy is an important part of the exchange and that we really want to safeguard in place. >> with the understanding that there are legitimate uses for this, but with a warrant. with some sort of supervision would make perfect sense. nicole will track that bill very carefully. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back.

welcome back to "press here." it would appear yogi berra never commented on crowd sourcing. he may have said, in order to attract a crowd, you need a

crowd. crowd sourcing is getting people to do work for you generally for free. yelp for instance doesn't pay users to post reviews, but without reviews, yelp would be useless. it's really a paradox for start-ups. in order to attract a crowd you need a crowd. now one start-up that's been able to clear the hurdle is traffic tracking company ways. it uses data from drivers to tell other drivers about traffic tie-ups. ways went from zero to 15 million users in a matter of months. noam bardin is a silicon valley ceo you can't afford to ignore. thanks for joining us. how does one go -- and if i'm watching this, trying to create my own crowd sourcing act how do you go from zero to $15 million when the first guy has nothing to benefit from or the second or

the third or the 1,000th because not enough people are using it to make it interesting? >> it's 17 million, but who's counting. >> right. >> not important. that's the main challenge in a crowd sourcing service. day one, there's nothing there. think about wikipedia without content. >> what ebay would be if nobody were selling. >> different industries have different ways of how to get there. what happens today if you use the service, you don't know there is a crowd. most of the people don't know with yelp people put in the information. we started out focusing very much on early adopters. they need a different application from the average person. a lot of fun components that provided value for people that had nothing to do with the service. drive around with the app open and we did everything behind the scenes. you hit a tipping point when enough people are doing it where you are giving value and things explode. >> is there a tipping point or

does it depend on the app? >> what's enough? a specific area? you obviously need enough density in a specific area. 3 to 5% of the vehicles in an area. >> gave you a statistical -- >> if you take l.a., 6% of the vehicles use it. >> 6% of the cars in l.a. use wave and not google maps or android navigator. >> it's not that they are not using those. they are using wave. >> it's not exclusive. >> we're a free app on top of an operating system. the amazing thing is it's not that users grow slowly over time. you're frustrated and banging your head against the wall. can't figure out why it's not working and it takes off. it becomes like the movies. an overnight success that's a long way. >> do you have a tie-in to a local radio station that does

traffic reports? >> we have ties to local tv stations. when you begin hitting critical mass your data becomes interesting. you know things before traditional technology knows about it. we partnershiped with tv stations locally in l.a., san francisco, philadelphia, chicago. in the morning show you will see data from other users. >> are they paying you, you paying them? >> we cooperate. we'll see where it goes. there are things every morning. >> what is kgo you speak of? >> yeah. >> in a sense there is a preoccupation about traffic on television in the afternoon. it makes sense. >> more than that, we provide tv stations with a group so people associated with the tv station can join the group. it's interesting. they can have their name read on tv. if you report something, they

will mention that wayser john 24. >> don't say he's not at home now, house standing empty. >> i love this app. i use it all the time. i guess i'm contributing to the crowd, using the crowd's features but i don't do the games or report my name. i just use it as a traffic app. it's great for that. you also get data from the traditional road censor sources? >> no. we would like to cooperate with the road sensors but as a free app we can't afford to pay for the data. we'll bring in data from free sources. >> is there a point you will be selling your data to them? or does it run counter to your business in the sense you're helping them? >> we have to make the decision. are we selling data or building a community? we care about users in the community. >> there is wrst the evidence coming from? >> silicon valley. >> revenue.

>> i'm sorry. >> you're a reporter. don't apologize. where does the revenue come from? >> location-based advertising. all of the things we say will happen and never happened like the iphone took forever. same thing with location-based advertising. there is so much data collected, so many officers, deals, promotions that we'll hit critical mass there as well. >> will you put advertising in the apps or take the data and sell it to facebook so facebook can sell ads based on where i have been? >> no. when you arrive at a destination and you're looking for coffee, you may not know but the coffee shop around the corner has a deal for you. you will go through a range of gas prices. the only difference is where they stand. we don't believe there is a difference in gas. >> does the advertising become

better the more often you take the same route? >> exactly. if you're commuting and this app is about saving time on commuting. if you commute every day a few biloxi from the commute, you never know and they never found you. you both have a common interest. that's really what we are trying to focus on. allowing you to discover businesses close to the route who have something you want. >> we have swung around to mobile advertising. that's the time we have. waze.com. >> and the app stores. >> thank you very much. we'll be right back.

that's our show for this week. my thanks to our guest from waze and charlene lee, author of

"open leadership" and "ground swell." we have more information about the california privacy bill on our website, pressheretv.com. thank you for making us part of your sunday morning.