I don't have a problem with an attempt at privacy. I grok that: I have no social networking accounts, nor does my wife, nor is an electronic record of any child of mine tagged, tracked and overshared online.
What I don't get is the disconnect between their claim that oversharing is bad and privacy is good, but their actions that underscore a belief that Facebook is really, really important.
I think you're right. They're still in the baby boomer - brand is everything - mindset. At least she'll have a website where she can post her conference schedules and ebooks.
I don't really get the problem. While they have their priorities, Facebook IS important for many people, and might very well be in the future, so making sure to register the right usernames etc. in case is the right thing to do. Just like it's the right thing to do to register domain names if you start a company, regardless of whether you have an immediate intention of launching a website.
I think the emphasis on Facebook is simply because that is what readers are familiar with, currently. Of course they will have to be aware of and active in protecting identities on other future networks, platforms, and services, too.
At least, that is how I interpreted the references to "Facebook" every five words.
What I don't get is the disconnect between their claim that oversharing is bad and privacy is good, but their actions that underscore a belief that Facebook is really, really important.