AP FILE PHOTO    
    A social phenomenon nowadays is online social networking (OSN).    This is exemplified by Facebook which, according to one case,    has created a worldwide forum enabling friends to share    information such as thoughts, links, and photographs, with one    another (H v. W, Case No. 12/10142, Jan. 30, 2013).  
    To address concerns about privacy, but without defeating their    purpose, OSN sites use different privacy tools. For example,    while the default setting of Facebook profiles is public    (where the online information may be viewed by everyone on    Facebook), a user can limit access to his or her information    to: Friends of Friends where only the users Facebook friends    and their friends can view the information; Friends where    only the users Facebook friends can view the information;    Custom where the information is made visible only to    designated individuals, and Only Me where the information can    be viewed only by the user.  
    When a user limits accessibility of his or her online    information or data to friends (or other similar privacy    tools in other OSN sites), does such restriction legally    protect the privacy of the user?  
    This question was answered by the Supreme Court in Vivares vs.    St. Theresas College (G.R. No. 202666, September 29, 2014).  
    Before answering the question, the high court, citing former    Chief Justice Reynato Puno, said that there are three strands    of the right to privacy, viz: locational or situational    privacy; informational privacy, and decisional privacy.  
    The right to informational privacy refers to the right of    individuals to control information about themselves.  
    In the Vivares case, several high school students of the St.    Theresas College were not allowed to graduate because they    were seen drinking liquor in public places and wearing    revealing outfit in public places in violation of the schools    rules. The evidence consisted of photos shown by the friends    of the students to the school authorities. They claimed that    their right to privacy was violated, pointing out that they    limited access to their photos to their Friends.  
    The Supreme Court ruled against the students, stating that    setting a posts or profile details privacy to Friends is    no assurance that it can no longer be viewed by another user    who is not Facebook friends with the source of the content. The    users own Facebook friend can share said content or tag his or    her own Facebook friend thereto, regardless of whether the user    tagged by the latter is Facebook friends or not with the    former. Also, when the post is shared or when a person is    tagged, the respective Facebook friends of the person who    shared the post or who was tagged can view the post, the    privacy setting of which was set at Friends.  
    The court added: To illustrate, suppose A has 100 Facebook    friends and B has 200. A and B are not Facebook friends. If C,    As Facebook friend, tags B in As post, which is set at    Friends, the initial audience of 100 (As own Facebook    friends) is dramatically increased to 300 (As 100 friends plus    Bs 200 friends or the public, depending upon Bs privacy    setting). As a result, the audience who can view the post is    effectively expandedand to a very large extent.  
Here is the original post:
Is there a right to privacy in online social networking?