All Articles Tagged "facebook"
Okay, I know two days doesn’t sound like that much of a victory, but when you eat, breathe and sleep what populates on your timeline, it can be quite a feat to be able to dismiss Facebook , Twitter and Instagram for an extended period of time.
It was something I had to do in order to rescue myself from myself. I was losing my mind because of my crippling dependency and obsession with updating my status as well as responding to those who are equally as active. There are so many benefits that come with being able to attain instant gratification just by clicking a button. I am not sure how I survived a time when that was inconceivable, but I am darn grateful that I lived long enough to now partake in all the action.
To be honest, I used to be a skeptic when it came to social media. I just didn’t want to buy into the idea that a mere tweet has the potential to change the course of your life, or a random posting on FB could activate a dormant relationship. But once I gave in, it didn’t take very long for me to succumb to the media tools of my choice. Twitter was my first love, and I nurtured that relationship to the hilt, and then I finally transferred some of it to Facebook and Instagram. Once I began receiving feedback, I became irrevocably hooked. At first I convinced myself that I was in control, but it soon became clear that I was swiftly losing my grip. My phone became my most valuable possession, and as a result, it always had to be within reach.
The crazy part is that I used to tease my friends for doing the exact same thing. I used to get irritated whenever we would hang out and they absolutely could not complete a sentence or carry out a conversation without checking their phones. I would accuse them of being rude and explain how pathetic it was that they had allowed themselves to be “technologically whipped.” But alas, I have become that person, I might actually be worse than they ever were. Sometimes in the middle of the night, instead of getting up to use the bathroom like normal people do, I reach out for my phone to see what My FB friends in London are up to and then I quickly scan my Twitter feed. My habit unfortunately extends to my office hours and I still don’t know how I am able to prevent it from interfering with my job duties. I guess years of forced multi-tasking pays off.
So, needless to say, I had gotten to the point where I needed to prove to myself that I wasn’t a lost soul. Could I neglect the pangs of social media, no matter how hungry I get? So I chose the weekend because that is usually when things heat up. Saturday morning was hard, because just like clockwork, I reached for my phone. But then once I realized I was on probation, I put it down and closed my eyes. I started meditating, which is something I rarely do, but should be doing more often. It felt good to release all the stress and to welcome a lighter temperament. The rest of the day was spent indulging in activities that were not influenced by FB friends or Twit pals. I didn’t care if anyone liked anything I had posted days before, and I wasn’t anxious to see what hilarity was erupting on Instagram.
Basically, my experiment assured me that I am not a lost cause after all. I enjoy utilizing social media because I can and even though it has gradually become a big part of my life, I am not an addict. I take advantage and indulge more than I should but if I need to extract myself – I can. I wonder how many others are like me. Would you classify yourself as a social media addict?
You all let me know when you’re tired of these daddy-daughter posts because every time I see one, I’m going to share it.
They’re just too adorable!
The most recent one is spreading courtesy of the “America’s Funniest Home Videos” Facebook account.
This moment is different from the other videos we’ve shared in that this father didn’t realize he was being recorded, which kind of makes it more sweet and authentic.
It looks like his daughter is standing in or around the sink as she and her father celebrate the fact that today is her birthday with a little song and dance. He’s into it.
But when he finally notices that he’s being filmed, he’s suddenly shy.
A woman, who claims to be the little girl’s mother, saw the video and posted a comment.
That is my husband Major Kimbrough and daughter Jaz, when she was 3 yrs old…I sent thus video in almost 8 yrs ago!!! I was sooo HAPPY to see it on AFV and Facebook!!!!!
Through Facebook’s accessibility initiative, Internet.org, the social media giant now has 100 million active users in Africa, and 80 percent of those are via mobile, signaling that most people on the continent are opting for a small screen for Internet access rather than a laptop or other larger device. This is a whopping 50 percent of all Africans connected to the Internet, reports TechCrunch.
So if drones, satellites, and deals for free access from local carriers get the Internet to more people in such places like India and South America, it is most likely a big percentage of them will become Facebook users.
Facebook’s latest user milestone offers more detail to its typical earnings report of user growth breakdowns, which groups Africa into a big “Rest Of World” region that had 411 million active users at the end of Q2 2014. “To put the 50 percent penetration rate of Facebook amongst Internet-connected Africans, Facebook has a 71 percent penetration rate in the US and Canada region, or 204 million users out of 283.7 million,” reports TechCrunch.
Facebook has been working diligently to get more users in Africa. The tech company recently announced a telecom partnership to bring Internet to the five billion people who are disconnected. Through this deal it debuted its Internet.org app in Zambia. The African telecom Airtel fully subsidizes the data charges so that the Internet.org’s app will show people the value of the Internet, and ultimately get them to buy a subscription to the whole web.
Since Internet usage in much of Africa is prohibitively high, Facebook is working on such types of free Internet carrier partnerships among other ways to decrease data expenditures and offer improved transmission efficiency.
As the company writes “We know that a one-size-fits-all approach won’t work when it comes to building products and solutions that address diverse local needs around the world, which is why we’re committed to crafting solutions specifically for high-growth markets.”
Can we stop calling Black people, who tweet on Twitter, “Black Twitter?”
No, not an option? Okay. I’ll concede.
But if folks insist on using this terminology, can we all acknowledge that Black people, who tweet on Twitter, or Black Twitter, is a pretty wide and varied, and definitely not one singular voice? Likewise the platform belongs to every single Black body, who uses Twitter, including:
The Black activists, Black researchers, Black feminists and womanists; Black No MA’AM; Black nationalists; Black separatists, Black integrationists; Black Africans; half-Black biracial people, Black Christians; Black Muslims; Black Hindus; Black African spiritualists; Black atheists; Black snobs and elitists; Black commoners and hood ni**as; Black democrats; Black republicans; Black libertarians; Black Alex Jones-followers; Black foodies, Black vegans, Black emos and goths, Black geeks; Black nerds; Black whatever kind of community this is.…basically, any Black people, who did the simple task of signing up for a Twitter account and tweeting some shit – possibly to some other Black people.
Can we also admit that Black Twitter is not an actual thing?
There is no url, which leads me to this mythical cyber land called Black Twitter. There are no secret handshakes or head nods to give to a big Black bald-headed bouncer, which will open the velvet rope of regular Twitter to reveal where all the Black people and rap music be hiding at.
Black Twitter is really just a subset of somebody – a non-Black somebody – else’s platform, which we use for free and on their terms (of service). And while our words are copyright protected up to a certain extent (mainly the attribution kind), we give up much of our ownership rights when we allow our thoughts to be shared and reshared. And as such, none of us Black folks, who tweet for free on that other person’s platform are really in a position to tell other users how to use what amounts to public and searchable information. Of course, the caveats are signing out of your Twitter account completely and possibly changing your privacy settings. But that will never happen.
And I think this lack of realization is what I find most frustrating about this recent Black Twitter outrage over a project by the Annenberg Innovation Lab at the University of Southern California, which aims to study, “public discourse on Twitter that explores both macro and micro-scale activity simultaneously in order to draw out particularly active, engaged “neighborhoods” within the larger population.” And that “engaged neighborhood” in which they speak of is, of course, Black Twitter.
Despite original concerns about several of the project team members being White, the project is actually being led by a Black woman, a Ph.D candidate (and who also has a Twitter account, thus making her part of the clan), who is using the data she collects for her dissertation. And she seeks to track this “engaged neighborhood” by focusing on how this group of people helped to propel ABC’s hit television show, “Scandal,” into the number one spot.
Not the most original of topics, considering many other news outlets have noted the greater than average social media engagement the show has and how the show’s creator even gets on the act by tweeting and responding to tweets during the broadcast of the show. And yet folks still continue to trash her research and levy all sorts of accusations that she was trying to exploit the Black social networking, by way of the Twitter, community.
The researcher behind this project, has responded in her own words to all the criticism here. But personally I found this criticism of her alleged “usury” particularly rich considering that on any given day of the year, we can read a headline, written from Black fingers and featured on Black or pseudo Black online media publication (hell, even some of the majors are getting in on the game), going on about “What Black Twitter said.” Or academics sitting up on CNN in Don Lemon’s face, translating what Black Twitter said. Hell, there are even journalists and bloggers at certain news publications, whose main beats are reporting exclusively on what Black Twitter said. So Black Twitter’s indignation now over someone else, who is Black, taking a slice of the “Black Twitter” pie seems a bit selective and short-sighted.
A Florida mom says she recently complained about her son’s private school on social media and it got her expelled.
And it was a seemingly minor complaint. Ashley Habat grumbled on Facebook that Sonshine Christian Academy didn’t give enough notice about picture day. Even though her Facebook post was private, she tagged the school. The next day she says she was told by school administrators that the school didn’t seem to be a good fit for her son, reports WJXT-TV (via The Huffington Post).
In the post, Habat asked: “Why is it that every single day there is something new I dislike about Will’s School? Are my standards really too high or are people working in the education field really just that ignorant.”
A letter of dismissal given to Habat from the school said her “relationship with Sonshine did not get off to a very good start the first day of school,” stating that she “utilized social media to call into question not only the integrity but the intelligence of our staff. … These actions are also consistent with sowing discord, which is spoken of in the handbook you signed.”
According to its website, Sonshine Christian Academy is “a thriving, Christ-Centered Academy providing academic excellence through the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, equipping each student to make an impact in our community and the world.”
Hmm. Wouldn’t the Christian thing to be to talk to the mother privately about the social media mishap and not punish an innocent child? These days, people talk about their lives–good and bad–on social media. The parent wasn’t calling for a boycott of the school, merely using her freedom of speech.
The school did not respond to The Huffington Post’s request for comment.
Was the school right in kicking out Habat’s son?
No baby pictures please!
While many parents like to show off their darling children on Facebook, there is a new trend brewing were parents are saying “no” to posting their baby’s pics on Facebook. Some cite privacy and safety concerns as well as the child’s right to autonomy as reasons why. But others are worried about how companies might use their child’s image and personal data. As one parent told the Dallas Morning News, “If I don’t want somebody to know about my child, to take an active interest in them, to recognize them in a city street or as they are leaving the schoolyard, the easiest way to do that is to not have any identifying information out about them.”
Even Facebook says it’s concerned about baby pictures on the social media site and in fact urges parents to use the site’s privacy setting. This will limit who can see the baby photos and posts. You can also create a group of close friends and relatives to share kid updates with. Still parents want more protection, not just against Facebook users but from the network itself. It is now widely known that Facebook uses user data to attract advertisers. So imagine if Facebook used info about your baby to lure in ads.
Social media sites “have not been very transparent about the way they collect data about users,” says Caroline Knorr, parenting editor at the nonprofit Common Sense Media, which promotes safe technology and media for children. “Facebook’s terms of service and privacy [policies] — no one reads it, it’s too obscure.”
In lieu of using Facebook to share photos of his baby with family and friends, one parent purchased a website domain with his son’s name.
“I’m going to make it a private website with a password so family can log in” to see updates, he told the newspaper. “When he gets old enough, I’ll probably give him the keys.”
Still a majority of parents like posting their children’s photos on social media. But it depends on how old the parents are.
A 2011 poll done in part with the Longitudinal Study of American Youth at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research found that 66 percent of Generation X parents (those born in the 1960s and ‘70s) said they post photos of their children online. And more than half said they have shared news about a child’s accomplishment online as well.
But Aisha Sultan, a fellow at the institute when the poll was conducted, says if the poll was done today, the result would might be drastically different.
“Back [then] there wasn’t a lot of conversation about this,” says Sultan. “When parents first started joining Facebook in large numbers it wasn’t the primary concern. We felt like we were in control of information we were sharing with friends and family.”
Not only parents are concerned about this issue, politicians are as well. Under new California law that goes into effect in 2015 online services, websites or apps that collect personally data must remove that content that minors are in the posts, if requested.
Do you post photos of your baby on social media?
This celebrity posted this adorable picture of she and her mother on her Facebook page today in honor of “Throwback Thursday.” Can you tell who this little girl grew up to be? You really don’t need to look too much further than the woman on the right because she grew up to look quite a bit like her.
But in case you’re struggling her a couple of hints.
The little girl has two children of her own now and a bonus child.
She’s married to one of Hollywood’s A-list stars, though people always speculate that their marriage is crumbling…
And she was in the movie Woo.
There you have it. Surely, you know who it is by now.
Have you ever started a Facebook page for your favorite celebrity or product? Well, Stacey Mattocks did when in 2008 she opened a Facebook page for her favorite TV show, The Game. Her page became such a hit that BET took notice and began to do business with Mattocks to promote the series. And with the help of Mattocks’ page the show’s popularity grew and the Facebook page garnered massive likes.
But things went south when BET wanted to take over the rights to the page. A messy lawsuit ensued last year. Finally a judgment has been rendered — and it could have a major impact on how we define who owns what on social media. A Florida judge has ruled that Facebook likes are not the property of page creators. According to the ruling, Mattocks can’t establish she owns a property interest in some 6.2 million likes she collected.
Mattocks had sued the Viacom-owned cable channel for “allegedly committing tortious interference, breach of contract, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and copyright infringement,” reports The Hollywood Reporter. Mattocks later amended the lawsuit to add a claim of unlawful conversion.
In her lawsuit, Mattocks charged that BET initially agreed to pay her $30 per hour to work as a social media “freelancer” and later offered her an $85,000-a-year salary, which she turned down. According to Mattocks, BET pulled out all the stops to change her mind, even flying her out to Los Angeles for promotional interviews. But when she refused to transfer ownership of the fan page to BET, Facebook temporarily shut down her account.
What followed was a “Letter Agreement” with BET under which the network agreed that Mattocks wouldn’t be excluded from the page. In turn, she agreed to grant BET full administrative access. Mattocks says she signed the agreement under duress.
BET also tried to buy the page, offering $15,000; Mattocks requested $1.2 million, according to court papers. The negotiations continued and Mattocks dropped BET’s administrative access on the Facebook page from “manager” to “moderator.” BET, in turn, to issue a cease-and-desist letter. In the letter BET cited intellectual property and a demand to Facebook that it remove the page. This prompted Mattocks’ lawsuit.
“Based on the record, Mattocks cannot establish that she owns a property interest in the ‘likes’ on the FB Page,” writes the judge in an opinion (read more here). ” ‘Liking’ a Facebook Page simply means that the user is expressing his or her enjoyment or approval of the content. At any time, moreover, the user is free to revoke the ‘like’ by clicking an ‘unlike’ button. So if anyone can be deemed to own the ‘likes’ on a Page, it is the individual users responsible for them. Given the tenuous relationship between ‘likes’ on a Facebook Page and the creator of the Page, the ‘likes’ cannot be converted in the same manner as goodwill or other intangible business interests.”
The judge also dismissed Mattocks’ tortious interference claim, writing: “While BET may also have had other financial motives in disabling the Page and Twitter account, no record evidence shows that BET took these steps for purely malicious reasons.”
So remember, if you thinking to make money off a Facebook page for a product or other person, according to this judgment you have no legal ownership of pages’ likes. Be sure you know what’s yours and focus on monetizing those elements. Everything else belongs to users, Facebook and the Internet.
— Antonio French (@AntonioFrench) August 19, 2014
Are some social media outlets omitting the biggest news of the past week from your timeline? Depending whether you are on Facebook or Twitter your news feed about the uproar in Ferguson, Mo., over the fatal police shooting of unarmed Black teenager Michael Brown could be entirely different.
The difference is an algorithm, which dictates a lot of what happens on social media. An algorithm is a mathematical formula that decides what you see and when you see it. Twitter’s feed isn’t dictated by an algorithm. Tweets are seen in real time. Facebook, however, uses a complex algorithm to decide what winds up in your news feed. Although Facebook won’t reveal its algorithm, it is partly based on your history of likes, clicks or shares.
Ars Technica’s Casey Johnson tells The Washington Post that Facebook’s algorithm tends to omit controversial content, which racially charged protests could be seen as. “There is a reason that the content users see tends to be agreeable to a general audience: sites like [BuzzFeed, Elite Daily, Upworthy, and their ilk] are constantly honing their ability to surface stuff with universal appeal. Content that causes dissension and tension can provide short-term rewards to Facebook in the form of heated debates, but content that creates accord and harmony is what keeps people coming back,” says Johnson.
Johnson’s theory carries some weight. A Georgia Institute of Technology study of how political content affects users’ perceptions of Facebook, found that “because Facebook friend networks are often composed of ‘weak ties’ where the threshold for friending someone is low, users were often negatively surprised to see their acquaintances express political opinions different from their own. This felt alienating and, overall, made everyone less likely to speak up on political matters (and therefore, create content for Facebook),” summarized Johnson.
Take the situation in Ferguson for example. According to University of North Carolina sociologist Zeynep Tufekci, last Wednesday, when there were riots in Ferguson and arrests of journalists, she heard of the events in real time on her Twitter feed. Posts about Ferguson didn’t appear in her Facebook feed until the next morning.
“Would Ferguson be buried in algorithmic censorship?” she wrote on Medium. Adding, “How the Internet is run, governed and filtered is a human rights issue.”
Facebook, Twitter Making Changes That Impact What You See On Your Timeline. Some Good, Some Not So Much.
Facebook will now label fake news articles as satire because users read the articles and think it’s the truth. Satirical media outlets such as The Onion will be the subject of such labeling. Facebook representatives told Buzzfeed:
“We are running a small test which shows the text [‘Satire’] in front of links to satirical articles in the related articles unit in News Feed. This is because we received feedback that people wanted a clearer way to distinguish satirical articles from others in these units.”
Chances are, a good number of people have been called out for falling for something that wasn’t real. So helping people recognize satire might be a good change. But Twitter has also put a change in place that’s rubbing people the wrong way.
The social network has started posting tweets on user timelines that have been favorited by others they follow. “Why does my twitter timeline randomly show me what people have favourited and who they follow? I don’t give a sh*t,”writes Rosie from London. Well all righty then. They will also receive notifications when others follow other Twitter users. The Next Web says Twitter is also taking away Bing translations from tweets and sending notifications when people start following a handle (we’ve received notices as people have started following reporters covering the situation in Ferguson).
Pando Daily also reports that Twitter may switch to a Facebook algorithm. By doing so, Twitter timeline content will be selected for users. Pando’s David Holmes says if this happens, Twitter users will not receive important information on breaking news as they do now, one of the major pluses of being on Twitter.
Del Harvey, head of Twitter’s Trust and Safety team, exclusively told IT World, that they’re also looking at rules that will curb trolls like those that drove Robin Williams’ daughter Zelda off of social media entirely. “[Twitter] suspended a number of accounts related to this issue for violating our rules, and we are in the process of evaluating how we can further improve our policies to better handle tragic situations like this one. This includes expanding our policies regarding self-harm and private information, and improving support for family members of deceased users.”
Twitter has yet to respond about it’s recent changes regarding the favorited tweets. Any thoughts on these changes?