No, Technology Doesn't Replace Reporting... But Who Said It Did?

from the tools-vs.-activity dept

A bunch of folks have been sending in Roger Cohen's NY Times Op-Ed basically mocking those who claim that Twitter is replacing journalism. The only problem? It's not clear anyone is actually doing that. I actually agree with much of Cohen's op-ed, but it seems to be setting itself up against a strawman that doesn't exist. No one's saying that Twitter replaces journalism. Just that it (and blogs and social networks and a variety of other new tools) help change the overall landscape that is journalism. So, when Cohen writes:

For journalism is distillation. It is a choice of material, whether in words or image, made in pursuit of presenting the truest and fairest, most vivid and complete representation of a situation.

It comes into being only through an organizing intelligence, an organizing sensibility. It depends on form, an unfashionable little word, without which significance is lost to chaos. As Aristotle suggested more than two millennia ago, form requires a beginning and middle and end. It demands unity of theme. Journalism cuts through the atwitter state to thematic coherence.

I agree. But I don't see how that says anything bad about Twitter or participatory journalism at all. In fact, it just reminds me of why the larger ecosystem allows more wonderful things to happen thanks to these new tools. Of course there's still an important role for distilling all of the info. Of course there's still a huge role for professional journalists. I don't think anyone denies that. But that's not a condemnation of Twitter or the fact that it's being used by many as a part of the journalism process. It just highlights how there's a bigger ecosystem of data and information for the professional journalists to distill. And it would be great if they did that instead of spending so much time fretting about the rise of these tools instead.

Filed Under: journalism, reporting, social networks, technology

New Lawsuit Against Facebook From People Who Just Don't Like Facebook

from the what's-your-cause-of-action? dept

Another day, another bizarre lawsuit. Eric Goldman points us to a lawsuit against Facebook that is best summarized as "we don't like Facebook, and we're sure it's doing something bad." It involves a few different plaintiffs who all have very different complaints, combined with some weird claims about Facebook violating their privacy, and that it's really a data mining company in disguise. But, of course, there's an easy way to avoid any such issue. It's called not using Facebook. The lawsuit also seems to rely on the fact that lots of people don't like the terms of service that Facebook has used, but not liking the terms don't necessarily make them against the law. There's also a poorly explained copyright claim -- but it's so unclear that I can't tell if the complaint is that Facebook is violating copyrights by showing the photos that one of the plaintiffs themselves uploaded (which would be flat out ridiculous), or that the issue is other users uploading photos (which would be pre-empted by the DMCA's safe harbors). The whole thing seems like a group of people suing Facebook for the hell of it and hoping to get some cash out of it.

Filed Under: lawsuits, privacy, social networks
Companies: facebook

Home Burglar Returns To Taunt Couple Via Facebook?

from the remote-logout-time? dept

Over in the UK, there's a story about a home burglar, who stole a laptop among other things, and then used the fact that the latpop was logged into a Facebook account to taunt the victims via one family member's own Facebook account, noting that he was happy with his take (especially the laptop and a Nintendo DS) and that he'd left the TV because it was "rubbish," before noting that he was off to the pawn shop (he wrote "porn shop" but he probably meant the former). He then signed it, "regards, your nighttime burglar." Of course, it makes you wonder if this only makes him easier to catch, as now police have an IP address to look up as well...

Filed Under: burglar, social networks

Illinois Says Sex Offenders Can't Use Social Networks

from the ok,-but... dept

Mark alerts us to the news that Illinois has approved a new law that bans registered sex offenders from social networking sites. Now, I have no sympathy for anyone who uses a social networking site to approach kids for such nefarious purposes, but this seems like a rather broad brush for a variety of reasons. First, considering how many sites have added "social networking" features lately, this could block out a rather large portion of the internet. Hell, just recently Google announced new social features for its iGoogle homepage. Second, the vast majority of registered sex offenders weren't convicted of trying to entice a kid via a social network. Completely blocking all of those people from social networks seems rather pointless. Finally, the whole idea that social networks are some sort of breeding ground for predators is a moral panic made up by the press. Studies have shown that the common story of a predator getting online, pretending to be a kid, and befriending "targets" and "grooming" them is mostly a myth. That's not to say it hasn't happened, but it's quite rare, and the best way to deal with it is simply to educate kids on how to deal with strangers. Most are smart enough to deal with the issue on their own. But, of course, that doesn't make for good headlines for politicians who want to make sure everyone knows they're "protecting the children."

Filed Under: bans, illinois, sex offenders, social networks

Facing Five Years In Prison For Posting A Photo On MySpace Wearing Gang Colors

from the seems-a-bit-harsh dept

Dealing with gang activity is certainly a priority in areas beset by gang violence, but does that mean we throw out certain First Amendment rights? Last year, Florida passed a new anti-gang law that banned using electronic communications "for the purpose of benefiting, promoting, or furthering the interests of a criminal gang" and that included "advertis[ing] his or her presence in the community" via an online image or video. Apparently, authorities in Florida have now arrested 15 people under this law based on their MySpace profiles, including one 14-year-old who "posted pictures of himself dressed in gang colors and displaying gang hand signals." For this, all of those arrested now face up to 5 years in prison. Some are already protesting the constitutionality of this law. It certainly seems like a limit on free expression.

Even recognizing the problems with gang violence, it seems a bit extreme to arrest people and threaten them with jailtime just for posting such photos on their profiles. Why not use that information to track and monitor certain gang members to try to stop actual illegal gang activity? Here are kids advertising to anyone (including the police) that they're in a gang, which should make it easier for the police to follow them and use that info to deal with real gang activity.

Filed Under: florida, free speech, gangs, social networks
Companies: myspace

Are Parents Making Facebook Uncool?

from the it's-always-something dept

My parents recently joined Facebook (a few months after joining Twitter), and I actually thought that was pretty cool -- but I'm no longer at the age where everything my parents do embarrasses me. For kids who are at that point in their lives, having parents join Facebook is quite a conundrum. The latest study out of the UK is suggesting that, with parents suddenly joining Facebook en masse, it's becoming uncool for kids to be there. I have no idea how accurate the study is, but if it's true, it raises an interesting question: is there a way to avoid such an "uncoolness" factor as a site like Facebook expands? I would think that you'd need to build in certain features to separate out groups easily, so that you could quickly dunk parents into a certain bucket, and friends into a different one, to make sure that lives are "kept separate."

Filed Under: parents, social networks, uncool

What Would Happen If Social Networking Sites Charged

from the a-thought-experiment dept

JohnForDummies alerts us to a suggestion from Dan Lyons over at Newsweek, saying that sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube should just start charging for their basic service. He brushes off those who think it's a bad idea as "the prevailing wisdom in Silicon Valley today is that everything on the Internet must be free." Except, that's not true. No one (NO ONE) is saying "everything on the internet must be free." This is just a silly strawman put forth by folks with little understanding of the business models people are actually discussing. Lyons also fails in recognizing that his "example" isn't even a very good one. He talks about PalTalk, who has built a business by offering premium features at a fee. That's the typical "freemium" model, but that's not what he then suggests for Facebook and Twitter, who he says should just start charging. Amazingly, he suggests that Facebook would only lose 50% of its users if it started charging (in fact, he seems to suggest that this is a conservative estimate: "Even if half of Facebook's members were to leave rather than pay...")

Well, there's a problem with both Lyons' math and his crystal ball. In cases where companies have gone from free to charging, the numbers I've seen (and, yes, it does range slightly, depending on the service) the rate of uptake is usually somewhere between 0 and 1% at best. Even if we grant Facebook some credit as being a "necessity" for students, I'd be shocked if they could get 5% of people to pay up to use the service -- and they'd find that number dwindle really fast. With only 5% of people using the service, it certainly becomes a lot less useful. Rather than communicating with all your friends, you can now only communicate with the 5% who ponied up. Or, you jump ship to someone else that doesn't charge.

And that's the real issue. The second that Facebook even hinted at charging users for basic service is the second users would start moving en masse to another (very, very happy competitors would be quick to offer themselves as an alternative). I recognize that it was still back in the days when Dan Lyons hated social media and thought social networking and blogs were evil, but he might want to familiarize himself with the history of Friendster. For a while, there were all sorts of rumors that Friendster was about to start charging, and MySpace kicked off a very well coordinated "grassroots" rumor campaign about how Friendster was about to charge, and everyone should switch to MySpace before Friendster put up a paywall.

In other words, not only will a lot less than 50% of people sign up for a pure fee-based Facebook, but everyone will move elsewhere, making that the place to be (for free). That's not to say that Facebook couldn't come up with some additional offerings of value that it could charge for, but the idea of charging for the basic service is really short-sighted and easily debunked if you think through it.

Filed Under: charging, daniel lyons, social networks
Companies: facebook, twitter

Student Files Lawsuit After Teacher Demands Facebook Password, Logs Into Account & Distributes Private Messages

from the wow dept

Remember the story recently about how Bozeman, Montana was asking all applicants for city jobs to hand over their social networking passwords so city officials could log into their accounts? After some widespread complaints, the city smartly backed down, but apparently they're not the only ones demanding passwords. CitMediaLaw points us to a lawsuit filed in Mississippi, concerning a high school student who turned over her Facebook password at the demand of a teacher at the school. The teacher proceeded to log into her account, read her private messages and then send them around to others at the school, causing a lot of problems for the girl.

Apparently, the teacher had originally demanded usernames and passwords to Facebook from a bunch of students to see if they were doing anything illegal (drugs, drinking, etc.), which is already pretty questionable from a privacy standpoint (and violates Facebooks' terms of service). But to then use the contents of private communication to publicly humiliate the girl and punish her for her private messages seems to go way beyond what is both right and legal. Other students at the school had quickly deleted their Facebook profiles when the teacher demanded their passwords, but this girl chose not to, but certainly never expected what followed. It's amazing that any teacher would think that they have a right to demand access to private social networking accounts and then to make use of the content of private messages in that manner.

Filed Under: passwords, social networks, students, teachers
Companies: facebook

Associated Press's Continued Delusion: Social Networking Guidelines Require Employees To Delete Other People's Content

from the hello,-let-me-explain-to-you-the-web dept

It's no secret that the Associated Press has had a rather difficult time figuring out its place in the online world, often resorting back to weak attempts to re-enact the old walls and scarcities that simply don't exist in the internet world. Lately, it's been having a lot of trouble figuring out how to have its own employees interact on social networks -- first reprimanding an employee for stating his personal opinion about an AP-member newspaper in his Facebook account. Now, however, the AP has released "staff guidelines" for how to use social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook, and there are some highly questionable rules there. The one getting the most attention -- for good reason -- is the bizarre and troubling demand that those who use Facebook not only have to watch their own language, but the language of any friend that posts a comment on their Facebook "wall." Seriously. They want AP employees to comb through any comments that friends/family/etc. post on their wall -- and if they "violate AP standards: any such material should be deleted." It's difficult to fathom how this could possibly make sense and isn't a huge burden for AP employees as well as obnoxious to their friends and family. Does the AP also tell its employees that when out to dinner with friends, they must "shush" them if their friends say anything not up to "AP standards"?

Filed Under: guidelines, reporters, social networks
Companies: associated press

Bozeman Drops Requirement For Social Networking Passwords

from the wonder-what-made-that-happen? dept

Last week, we were among a bunch of blogs and news organizations who questioned the fact that the city of Bozeman, Montana was making job applicants hand over not just info on their social networking activities, but usernames and passwords to all accounts. This certainly got a lot of attention, and, not surprisingly it's caused the city to drop the requirement and to say that it had made a mistake (found via Slashdot). Still, it makes you wonder why it took a press onslaught for the city to recognize the potential problems with such a privacy violation.

Filed Under: bozeman, job applicants, privacy, social networks