Siri-ously Troubling

Siri is a voice activated guide to your iPhone's capabilities. The addition of Siri is part of the latest version of the iPhone in the iPhone 4s model. You can ask the gender ambiguous Siri to make a list for you, get directions, and send text messages among many other things. It is even programmed to help you hide a body, tell jokes and tell stories. Many people today can be found with their iPhone at their fingertips at any given time of the day. It has become something that our society has become familiar with and it has been incorporated into many of our lives. Every new version of the iPhone comes with updated feature that make the iPhone a hot commodity.

However, Wired has written an article about where all this information goes. We never really think about what happens to the information that we input to any device we mostly care about the result. There was discussion over user privacy concerning the personal data that Siri uses such as location, addresses, and names. IBM in particular was on alert because of the issues that Siri presents to their company. If the e-mails contain private messages the company is worried about where that information will end up. Another globally known company, Google has had to face problems like this as well. Their solution is to make their user data anonymous after nine months.

This issue is not a new issue for the public to be worrying about. IBM should not have to be worried about banning Siri but instead should come up with a different solution. There are many different ways to protect your company's valuable information such as privatized e-mail. If IBM really has an issue with information going through Siri, its employees should just not use the voice control and type it out like we used to before Siri and the difference isn't that much, you just push more buttons. There is really no need to use Siri in the office other than maybe scheduling meetings and finding directions to your next client and things of this nature. IBM and other companies concerned with controlling leaks of information sounds more like an internal problem than an iPhone app problem.

The Future of Facebook Journalism

Today, Facebook raised about $16 billion by selling approximately 421 million shares at $38 each, following through on the private company's initial public offering (IPO) announcement this past February. 

Source:  http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/17/tech/facebook-journalists-stout/index.html

According to Reuters, investors have been eager to purchase shares that may deliver "big, even astronomical returns -- a rare opportunity in today's low-yield and turbulent markets." Now that Facebook has to answer to its shareholders as a publicly-traded company, its focus will certainly shift to the emphasis of money-making. With Wall Street grinning from ear-to-ear with Facebook's high profitability prospects, what does the addition of another player mean to the game of Facebook journalism?


Kristie Lou Stout delves into this increasingly complex question in her article, "Is Facebook a must-buy for journalism?" She asserts that because Facebook has transformed into a public entity, journalists (as well as the millions of other Facebook users) are now merely a product being sold. 


She questions the need for journalists to utilize Facebook as a tool for news sharing and various other forms of journalistic expression, arguing that its only benefit now is to create a "personal brand" catered to mass consumers. 


Though it is unarguable that Facebook's move to go public will not affect the dynamic of Facebook Journalism in some way or another, there is certainly more merit to the usefulness of Facebook than Stout would believe. 


Journalists and news companies have already made a significant presence on social media platforms like Facebook, engaging almost personally with its audience base whilst facilitating the notion of "trusted referral." Trusted referral is essentially Facebook's greatest gift to journalists -- the wildfire spread of content via shares and likes brings credible news and information to the forefront of a friends' eyes. 


Facebook has not only become a useful tool for seasoned, professional journalists, but to the Average Joe as well. Regardless of Facebook's newest alliance with Wall Street, citizen journalism will continue to find its way into the newsfeeds of the platforms 900 million users. 


Though some would argue that the IPO announcement of Facebook places the future of Facebook Journalism at stake, I believe this is not the case. Surely, the dynamics of the social site will continue to change (as it has been with the constant re-introduction of layouts), but that will not stop the word from getting out. Many of us have been accustomed to having Facebook as an almost integral part of our lives -- and even in our social revolutions -- that public trading will not change that. 


The future of Facebook Journalism will continue to stay ours.

Social ID: Citizen Advertising at its worst

Not only has the internet and social media sites opened the gateways for citizen journalism, but the website, SocialIQ.com, aims to use these resources a step further with citizen advertising. The way it works is that anybody with either a Facebook or Twitter account can, by setting up yet another account on this site, find their "social IQ," which is their social influence across networking platforms. Basically, it measures how many status updates and blog posts their friends actually pay attention to instead of glossing over in their newsfeed. Then, by using this number, participating companies will be able to know each individual's potential as a marketing space, and will be able to hire them for brand advertisement. So, in the future, if you're wondering why one of your friends is wearing a different ADIDAS hoodie in every single picture of their new album, consider yourself a target.

Although it seems like a brilliant idea on the part of creator, Akram Benmbarek, there is some obvious negative backlash that such an idea risks receiving. First of all, when a friend's personal Twitter account is obviously being used as a marketing tool, they therefore lose their credibility amongst followers as a trusted and unbiased source. This marketing scheme of brands giving free "gifts" to bloggers in exchange for a favorable post is nothing new, but in each case the blogger will almost always feel obligated to add a subnote in the description of each item, such as "Courtesy of" or "A gift from" to maintain themselves as an independent personality free from corporate control. This is because the bloggers recognize just how annoying it is that businesses always manage to taint what followers believe to be a genuine social connection. The key to gaining celebrity status on social media sites is to appear sincere and relatable as well as informative, not like a worker who regurgitates information in an attempt to start a "hot new craze."herefore when an internet personality is used as practically a human billboard, it will not take long for followers to realize this and grow resentment for the fact that their networking space is continually being imposed upon.  We all know that social media sites are used to sell products to us, but keep the ads in the margins of the page, please.

If You Can't Beat Them Join Them

{Photo credit: http://www.dudelol.com/grandma-on-facebook/}

Although some elderly people are frustrated with social media and feel isolated from it; others are embracing it and taking the approach "If you can't beat them join them!" This article brings to light the ways older generations are using social media outlets such as Facebook to keep in touch with their grand kids and other relatives and feel more involved in their lives. The article jokes "That next friend request could be grandma."

 http://www.insidefacebook.com/ is a website that keeps track of its users data and analyzes how facebook is being used; it has found that it's fastest growing demographic is women over the age of 55. These women could include everything from grandma wanting to see her grand kids faces or a mom - stalking her kids while they are away at college. The point is this crowd is using facebook as a tool to keep informed. Unlike Facebook's younger users who often join Facebook to connect with current friends in high-school or college Facebook's older users are drawn to the possibility to connect with friends they have not seen in years and family members who they do not see often enough.

It is more difficult for some older users to learn how these social media outlets work, but generally once they have the will and patience to learn they become more comfortable with it. It can be a foreign concept to some because they are not accustomed to technology and because of the way it is taught. An elderly women in the article comments "Most things in the world we learn from elders, but technology is the realm we learn from the younger generations." Older generation are being taught the ins and outs of social networking sites by their younger relatives or now many Senior Citizen living communities are offering classes on it as well. Some older generations tend to shy away from social networking sites is because they feel it is an invasion of privacy and it may feel uncomfortable and unnatural broadcasting certain information about themselves. Because of this, older Facebook users are more likely to comment on others postings and photos than initiate. As the older generations become more comfortable with Facebook, some claim other sites such as Twitter are still very intimidating for them and they do not see themselves participating in the near future. They are taking baby steps to become a more tech savvy crowd.

YouTube Parenting: The Modern Punishment

A few decades ago it was socially acceptable for parents to punish their children with violence.  A spanking or slap on the wrist to help children learn right from wrong was not seen as child abuse.  In modern society, the slightest form of physical abuse can lead to a visit from child-protective services.  A recent YouTube video demonstrates how some parents are adapting to the digital age and have reverted from violence to public embarrassment as punishment.  Tommy Jordan, the father of a teenage girl, became an internet sensation after posting a YouTube video called "Facebook Parenting: For the Troubled Teen".  In this video Jordan describes how his daughter posted an inappropriate and ungrateful  status on Facebook complaining about how her parents force her to do chores.  To punish her for this Facebook post, Jordan shoots his daughter's laptop 9 times and posts it online for the public eye.  With over 32 million Youtube views it is obvious that this video stirred controversy.  Some people believe that this video demonstrates terrible parenting and others think that Jordan's punishment was deserved.  While the morality of Jordan's punishment is subjective, one thing is certain, this video demonstrates how wide of an audience the internet reaches. In a response to his video, Jordan writes that his parents used to punish him and humiliate him in public places.  However, the internet is not just a public moment in time, this video can be viewed multiple times by people all over the world. His parenting in this video can be analyzed by psychologists and will probably follow his daughter for a very long time.  Public humiliation has been a tactic of punishment for many parents for decades and, with the advancement of technology, people have access to a much larger outlet for public humiliation.  If more parents decide to use the internet to punish their children, it may have an adverse affect on their children's future.  Internet posts are easily spread and difficult to erase so a mistake that a child makes at a young age could be public for the rest of their lives.  It is common for modern youth to post private things on the internet.  However, parents should be wiser than their children and realize that some issues are meant to be private and should not be exploited by the use of the web.  There is no question that physical abuse is wrong, but bruises do not leave scars like emotional humiliation.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kl1ujzRidmU

Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)

We all have heard of the SOPA bill that was proposed in January, and we know about the blackouts on certain websites that stood to protest the proposed bill. However, we have not heard much about the new attempt at regulating the internet. The CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act) bill is being proposed as a form of "tracking the nefarious activities of hackers, terrorists and foreign states" (The Guardian). Although the bill may sound like it is for regulating hackers and online terrorists, it is written with loose language that allows these forms of regulation to be used on the everyday citizen. This bill will allow for the government to demand private information from web companies about users for "security purposes". Many argue that these are forms of surveillance or tapping. Ultimately the language in the bill allows for the government to conduct searches on people without search warrants. The EFF has explained their main concerns with the bill stating that:

"• First, there is a lack of any standard for the type of information that can be collected.
• Second, all the information will go to the national security agency, the US defense department's online intelligence arm. In 2010, the NSA was found guilty of conducting surveillance programmes without warrants.
• Third, there is no clarity in the bill as to what the information will be used for. "It should be used for cybersecurity purposes only, but the bill doesn't say that," Reitman said." (The Guardian)


Many people who know about the bill have voiced their concerns for it, however, this bill has been doing a good job at flying under the radar, not getting nearly as much attention as SOPA. I found it particularly interesting that upon searching the title of the bill in the Google search engine many of the discussions on the bill were discussions by news organizations from other countries or tech websites, but nothing from any major news channels here in the US. This bill could bring many changes to the way in which our information is used on the internet and yet there is very little coverage of it with major news organizations.
There is a video clip for whoever would like to explore it a little more on the RT.

Gender differences arise in social media use

Whether it's Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, or Tumblr, there's bound to be some social networking platform where you belong and exist as an online entity. And that should be of no surprise -- anyone who's anyone (and even more-so those of less celebrity) is on the Internet. The more puzzling fact is the question of whether social networking world tailoring itself towards one gender or the other.

Anthony Carranza, of the Minneapolis Tech Culture Examiner, answers this question with a staggering "yes." And where do these people come from? Venus, of course. No, I'm not talking about aliens -- I'm talking about women.

The title of Carranza's article, "Gender differences arise in social media use" says it all. With the use of networking platforms only expanding since its advent in the early 2000s, researchers have been able to identify patterns of social media use between men and women.

"When it comes to using social media, women are just as willing to reveal personal information about their relationships, brand preferences, jobs, religious affiliations, and political ideology as men."

As a whole, women and men score similarly on the various questions regarding privacy in the realm of social media platforms like Facebook and Myspace. But where women truly take the heat (or in the case of my previous planetary metaphor, the cold) is in social media content.

On websites like Pinterest, over 97% of the users are women.

There's a lot to say about whether or not social media platforms tend to lean in favor of the female, if it does at all. Surely, the statistics don't lie -- and with women generally being more in-tune with their emotions and human relationships, it's only natural that they'd be more social media-savvy than men. As a female user myself, I can vouch for myself the affinity I have for social media platforms like Facebook and Pinterest. But does that mean that the Internet is more tailored to us, just because we show a greater number of use?

Decide for yourself. Check out http://www.examiner.com/tech-culture-in-minneapolis/gender-differences-arise-social-media-use?cid=PROG-ExaminerArticle-SocialMediaDL1-GenderDifferences for the full article.

Klout.com - The New Way of Determining Social Media Influence

Have you ever came across an online news article that by no means interested you at all, so you skipped over reading it? But then saw on Facebook that a friend linked that exact article, and so you read it, because of the fact that your friend recommended the article? Ever come across a not-so-funny YouTube video, only to watch it two days later with your friend and laugh your head off because he thinks it's hilarious?

Klout.com, a website designed to measure an individual's social media influence, has become so big in today's online news and information sharing world, that 'highly influential people' have recently began putting their Klout scores as something to brag about on resumes. Yes, on their resumes.

So what is Klout, you ask? Using a special formula that measures one's influential ability to drive others' online actions, Klout cranks out a daily fluctuating score (mines is 49 out of a possible 100), that determines your true reach (the number of people you can reach through various social networks). To give you something to compare my meager score to, Justin Bieber currently holds the highest Klout score with a perfect 100/100. Klout lets a user connect his or her Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, Google+, personal blog, etc, to their Klout account to determine one's true reach. This formula calculates the number of Facebook wall posts, Twitter retweets, mentions, and followers, and 'likes' that one might receive on a given day and uses these numbers and online friends to generate a number of people you currently 'influence.'

It's a pretty cool concept, albeit, a rather convoluted one. Pam Moore of Social Media Today, wrote an interesting column on why she deleted her Klout profile. Skeptics have criticized the privacy methods, Klout score criteria, and its general legitimacy in the online social media networking world that we are all a part of today. Even though many professional organizations and journalists doubt Klout, there is no doubt that peer-to-peer journalism and information sharing is more influential and popular than ever before.

Regardless of the doubts of its legitimacy claims, Klout is a fun tool to play around with at the very least. Check out this infographic that uses an individual's Klout score to determine who the ten most influential people in U.S. politics are on Twitter.