Mark Zuckerberg: The Smartest Nerd In the Room
by Damon Martin
It’s funny to look back just over the last decade and realize how much social networking has changed everyone’s lives. From the musicians who were launched on MySpace, to the friends who reconnected on Facebook, to the endless (and often inane) updates on Twitter, social networking has become a ubiquitous part of everyday life for millions all over the world. It’s a way to stay connected, it’s a way to stay interested, and for the 26-yeaor old creator of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, it’s a way to become the world’s youngest billionaire.
The story of Zuckerberg, and the creation and launch of Facebook, will hit the big screens today. However, even pre-release, the critics have given high praise to The Social Network, which was directed by David Fincher (Fight Club) and written by Aaron Sorkin (West Wing). The movie follows Zuckerberg as he awkwardly tries to make his way in upper crust society while attending an Ivy League school. It was during his time at Harvard that Zuckerberg, along with some classmates, created The Facebook, as it was originally known.
In the case of both the film, and the book on which it is based, it’s the essence of the very story that has come under scrutiny. In 2009, author Ben Mezrich released The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal. The book was labeled as non-fiction by the publishers, but Mezrich has come under fire for sensationalizing characters and stories in his previous “non-fiction” works – such as Bringing Down the House, which was made into the film 21 (which starred Kevin Spacey) in 2008.
Mezrich, who’s a fellow Harvard alum, gleaned most of his information by speaking to Facebook co-creator Eduardo Severin, a classmate of Zuckerberg’s who would eventually be forced to sue his friend to even get recognition on the site’s masthead. Severin’s direct accounts of events are littered throughout Mezrich’s work. But though Mezrich interviewed many other key contemporaries of Zuckerberg & Co., the author has been accused of making up or embellishing incidents to cover gaps and heighten drama. Zuckerberg himself was never actually interviewed for the book.
[Emi in Distraction]
Mezrich’s book was optioned by multi award-winning writer Aaron Sorkin, who turned it into a screenplay. But though some parts of the story are under dispute, others are very much in the public record, and, as such, are obviously based on fact. Like when Zuckerberg was sued by two fellow classmates who claimed he had stolen the idea for Facebook; the much-reported case was ultimately settled for $65 million. The movie also covers the arrival and involvement of Sean Parker (played by Justin Timberlake), one of the founders of Napster, who served as Facebook’s president until 2005, when a drugs bust hastened his departure. (Though elusive when it comes to the press, Vanity Fair recently interviewed Parker for a profile in their October issue, which is well worth reading.)
Social Network will likely garner a few awards come event season, and concerns of fact vs. fiction don’t appear to be an issue for most who will go see the film. Is Zuckerberg a Gordon Gekko-like shrewd businessman, hell-bent on greed and capitalism? Or a Bill Gates-like awkward geek, who hopes his dot-com success will somehow turn him into a Prince Charming? The truth probably lies somewhere between the two stereotypes, and Zuckerberg likely a little bit of both. Did he step on a few toes and maybe even jab a knife or two into the backs of a few classmates along the way? The evidence says maybe. But if any group of friends was offered a similar chance to make billions, a lot of Lord of the Flies backstabbing would likely ensue.
Zuckerberg obviously isn’t a saint, neither is Parker, Severin, or anyone else that was involved with Facebook’s creation. What’s remarkable about the story isn’t the apparent social disfunction of these early online networkers that ultimately severed friendships (and cost millions). It’s that in a few short years, the work put in by a bunch of kids at college resulted in a service that currently boasts over 500-million users and a site that has toppled the mighty Google in terms of time spent by users.
In a world where suited corporate fat cats sitting in their plush chairs at Goldman-Sachs continue to collect paycheck after paycheck while robbing hard working folks blind, it’s refreshing to see a film follow the life and times of a pretty normal kid who came up with a pretty phenomenal idea, and who’s now living everyone’s dream life. However, the question the film may leave viewers wondering is how many true friends does the founder of Facebook really have?
Asshole Fuckface Roundup #41
Its Saturday. That means you lucky bastards are going to read about the horrible actions of this weeks Asshole Fuckfaces. This year is the 185th anniversary of Asshole Fuckfacery. The first was a Greek revolutionary named Lykurgos Logothetis. In 1822 he was commander of the island of Samos. The Samian people were itching for a fight with their Ottoman rulers and they wanted the good people of neighboring island Chios to join them. The Chios were not interested in fighting, or really being a part of anything.
So, Logothetis thought if he invaded Chios, then they would be forced to take sides and join him. But the Chians were not fighters. He ended up killing a bunch of them and taking over the island. Then the Turks got pissed that the Chians were helping the Greeks and Sultan Asshole Fuckface Mahmoud ll sent an army to kill all males over 12, all women aged over 40 and all two-year-old children.
When the Turks arrived, Logothetis sailed off in his ship, leaving his own men stranded on the island. The Turks then massacre the peaceful island people. Corpses filled the streets and clogged the harbor. When they ran out of Christians to kill, they burned the churches and monasteries. Although, they got lucky and burned 2,000 women and children alive in one monastery. You can still see the bones and skulls on display today.
Over 20,000 Chians were massacred and 45,000 were sold into slavery. There were so many slaves taken from Chios it caused a massive drop in slave prices throughout the region. Ever since Logothetis, my people have been pointing out Asshole Fuckfaces every week. Today, I scour the news to find the worst of the worst and pull them into the light for you to mock. So, put on your goggles, this is going to be ugly.
First up, only an Asshole Fuckface would punish someone for flag waving.
In 1950, the Republic of South Maluka attempted to break away from Indonesia. The rebels were crushed within six months and the leaders scurried off to the Netherlands, where we can assume they sat around smoking pot and talked about going back someday.
Forty-nine years later, they got their shit together or probably their kids. Or grandkids. The separatist Christians started up again eight years ago due to rising religious conflicts. Indonesia apparently has a strict no separatist policy and bad flag waving is forbidden. Very forbidden.
An Indonesian court has sentenced a man to life in prison for unfurling a flag of a separatist movement before President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono during his visit to the eastern province of Maluku last year.
Wow. Just think what would have happened if he had actually done something wrong. Johan Teterisa was found guilty of treason because he coordinated the flag wave with a group of 28 dancers. At least he can spend the rest of his life knowing he stood up for what he believes in.
Teterisa, who cried after hearing the verdict, told the court he had followed the orders of RMS leader Simon Saiya, who is still at large.
Oh well, never mind. The dancers are also learning about the horrors of flag waving.
In a separate hearing, the court also sentenced one of the dancers, Ambaraham Saiya, to 15 years imprisonment for his involvement in the performance. Earlier last month, three other male dancers were also sentenced between 15 and 20 years in jail.
Its like Footloose Nation. Good luck with that.
Next up, youre an Asshole Fuckface if you have a fake dude pregnancy.
By now, most of you should have heard of the pregnant man. His name is Thomas Beatie and he is pregnant. Tommy revealed his belly prize to the world last week in the latest issue of The Advocate.
To our neighbors, my wife, Nancy, and I dont appear in the least unusual. To those in the quiet Oregon community where we live, we are viewed just as we are -- a happy couple deeply in love. Our desire to work hard, buy our first home, and start a family was nothing out of the ordinary. That is, until we decided that I would carry our child.
I am transgender, legally male, and legally married to Nancy. Unlike those in same-sex marriages, domestic partnerships, or civil unions, Nancy and I are afforded the more than 1,100 federal rights of marriage. Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights. Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire.
Well, bully for you. But, Id just like to say one thing to Tommy: Hey crazy lady with the vagina and no penis, youre a lady. Just because you had your breasts cut off does not make you a dude. Youve still got this thing between your legs called a vagina. People with penises are men, and those with vaginas are women. I learned that a long time ago and it has been quite handy information when I want to put my penis in a vagina. I know not to hit on dudes at bars.
The crazy part of this story is that the press is reporting it as a medical miracle.
PREGNANT MAN: THE 'MIRACLE' OF HAVING A BABY
PREGNANT US MAN DEFENDS RIGHT TO HAVE CHILD
PREGNANT MAN TELLS OPRAH: IT'S A MIRACLE
Wow, great headlines. Too bad none of them are true. Heres what a true headline should say:
LADY WITH GIANT CLIT HAVING BABY.
Because that is all this Asshole Fuckface is. Tommy lopped off her breasts and took testosterone treatments to increase the size of her clit. She uses her clit as a cock and slips it into her disappointed wife. And Tommy has a VAGINA. Thats where the baby comes out. Babies don't come out of men's vaginas.
I could give a shit if a transsexual has a baby, just dont try to pass yourself off as something you are not. You were born a lady, youve got lady parts and you get to have a baby. You are not a pregnant man.
Also, thank God Tommy and her wife went to the press. Now their kid will have an awesome life of scorn and ridicule. Also, some religious nut may try to kill Tommy. Good work, attention whores.
My next Asshole Fuckface is a bad, bad, bad woman.
Abigail London-Fife has to learn a bit of self-restraint. Abby suspected her husband of having sweet, sweet intercourse with other women. She had intercepted several phone calls and was clearly not going to let Leonard get away with it.
So, one night while she was going at it with her man, she pulled a knife out from under the bed and went Highlander on his balls.
It was a trust position. He was in a vulnerable position and she took advantage of it.
I do love a good trust position, just without the knife slicing into my Johnson.
The victim sustained a 2.5-centimetre laceration to the shaft of his penis, a 15-centimetre laceration to his left buttock, a puncture wound inside his right thigh, a laceration to his scrotum, a 10-centimetre laceration to the back of his shoulder and 7.5-centimetre lacerations to both hands.
This week, Abby went to court for her vicious frank and beans assault. The judge was not pleased.
Regardless of what's going on in the home and background, you do not take two knives to the bedroom and stab your husband in the penis and buttocks.
You knock a pot off the stove.
Exactly. But dont knock the pot onto his penis. Abbys attorney tried to explain how she is not such a bad gal.
This is a one-off, not planned. This was a sudden outburst of rage, perpetuated by Mr. Fife's infidelity or thoughts of infidelity.
It was inappropriate to use a weapon. It was not thought out.
It was inappropriate to use a weapon? So, it would have been better if she had punched him in the balls? Clearly, fisticuffs, or fisticocks, would have been more appropriate. Also, if you are hiding a knife under the bed, youve been thinking it out.
The Abby received a 12-month "conditional jail sentence." I dont know what that means, but she spends the first six months under house arrest hopefully dude has moved out. I think she should have to travel the country and apologize to guys balls for a year.
My next Asshole Fuckface is another crazy Muslim from Saudi Arabia.
Facebook is getting a bad rep in Saudi Arabia. Sheik Ali al-Maliki is leading the anti-Facebook charge, claiming it is destroying the youth.
Women are posting revealing pictures and behaving badly.
Facebook is a door to lust and young women and men are spending more on their mobile phones and the Internet than they are spending on food.
Well, maybe that just means the price of food is low. You really havent made a good point. But the religious nutters of Saudi Arabia are making noise about the site. Facebook has 30,000 Saudi Arabia users, while 6,500 people have signed a petition to ban the site. They are mostly concerned that Facebook Promotes homosexuality. They do have a point, because almost every time I log onto Facebook I end up blowing a dude. And Im not even gay.
But the real and obvious problem is that Facebook is fucking up the strict control of men over women. Women are signing up for accounts and not posting their pictures. Its an anonymous world where they can say and do what they want. Now women are contacting dudes outside of their class system and families.
Now a father has been forced to kill his daughter for chatting on Facebook. He killed her to save her. Talk about a catch-22.
The woman from Riyadh was beaten and shot at point-blank range after her father walked in on her chatting with a male on the popular social destination.
Well, that will teach her. Shell definitely think twice before doing that again. And you can go to bed every night with the image of you beating and shooting your daughter dancing in your head, you Asshole Fuckface.
Finally, get used to Asshole Fuckfaces who dont even know theyre racist.
Until November, expect to see some white Republican idiot making an ignorant racist comment every week. They are so used to making offensive comments to each other that they dont even realize they are being an Asshole Fuckface when they make the same comments in public. Take David Bellavia, who introduced John McCain at an event on Wednesday.
Tiger Woods? Now, what does Tiger Woods have in common with Barack Obama? Oh, right, they are both part black. Kudos, fuckface. Not only did you compare Obama to Tiger Woods, but you picked the one partial black guy who NEVER LOSES. True Asshole Fuckfacery.
Oh, and those of you living in New York District 26, David Bellavia is running for Congress. Remember to vote!
Keeping Paedos off Facebook? That'll Work!
The UK government is attempting to block registered paedophiles from using social networking sites.
The Home Office has been working alongside the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) and childrens charities including the NSPCC, to develop new measures to keep children safe from online grooming by paedophiles.
Under the new plans, police will provide websites such as Facebook, MySpace and Bebo with the email addresses of registered sex offenders. Those email addresses will be used by police to track the online activities of previous offenders, and by the sites themselves to block certain users.
Software to protect children online will now also be able to gain a Kitemark to ensure standards of security are as high as possible.
The NSPCC's Diana Sutton said:
"Many sex offenders will go to extraordinary lengths to access children, and we need to ensure that safety measures in cyberspace are as stringent as they are in the wider world."
Im unclear how these measures will impact upon any but the most careless of child molesters. It seems unlikely that a registered offender would attempt to register on a social networking site, using the same email address which they gave to the police.
Graham Cluley of computer security firm SOPHOS isnt impressed:
"It is not possible to monitor things online without it being incredibly costly and resource hungry.
This makes a good headline, but the fact is a sex offender could just create a different e-mail address in two seconds."
The governments guidelines will also urge young people to be vigilant about what they do and dont share on their profiles.
Default settings on many of the social networking sites leave users' personal details open for public viewing, but the guidelines encourage children to make sure their privacy is tight.
I find it interesting that the responsibility for ensuring privacy is put with the children, and not with the sites whose default settings these are.
Theres also the question of how well Facebook et al will look after the information that police have given them. After the murder of Sarah Payne in 2001, the News of the World championed a naming and shaming policy, and took it upon themselves to print information on past offenders which had been leaked to them.
As a result:
An innocent man, Iain Armstrong, was beaten up by a mob in Manchester after being mistaken for one of the pictured paedophiles - apparently because he wore a neck-brace which looked like one worn to the man in the News of the World's picture.
Meanwhile, the actual offenders, alerted by the News of the World, fled their homes or otherwise went underground making them harder, not easier, to trace.
MoveOn.org Launches Anti-Facebook Campaign
"Why the Hell Was My Whole Holiday Shopping List Published in My Facebook News Feed?" That's what some Facebook users have been wondering ever since the site's new "social advertising strategy" started publishing information about members' activity on third-party partner sites to their friends' "News Feeds." In other words, Facebook users who make online purchases are finding that many of those transactions are showing up for everyone to see. Kind of sucks for people making "personal" purchases, or trying to surprise friends and family with holiday gifts.
Why does MoveOn.org care? They say that the program -- called "Beacon" -- is a major violation of privacy.
"The bottom line," MoveOn spokesman Adam Green said in an interview with CNET News.com, "is that no Facebook user should have their private purchases online posted for the entire world to see without their explicit opted-in permission."
It's true that Beacon advertisements are limited to the news feeds of the people on a user's friends list, but Green said that doesn't make a difference. He cited Facebook user testimonials that ranged from members who said their entire Christmas lists had been published on their News Feeds (spoiling many a surprise in the process) to student activists who were concerned that sensitive purchases might show up and result in serious consequences--"If a college kid rents Brokeback Mountain and some homophobic person on his campus sees that, that could be a real problem," he explained.
Beacon is not mandatory, and Facebook users can opt out, but that choice is well-hidden and only temporarily visible. MoveOn.org insists that Facebook needs to do a better job of informing and protecting their users. Facebook, of course, claims that MoveOn.org is misrepresenting the site feature. In response to MoveOn's attack, Facebook offered a statement saying that they had it all wrong.
"We encourage feedback from our users on new products," the Facebook statement read, "but in this case, the MoveOn.org-led group misrepresents how Facebook Beacon works. Beacon gives users an easy way to share relevant information from other sites with their friends on Facebook."
Facebook's statement stressed that because this information is not public, it isn't an invasion of privacy. "Information is shared with a small selection of a user's trusted network of friends, not publicly on the Web or with all Facebook users," the statement explained. "Users also are given multiple ways to choose not to share information from a participating site, both on that site and on Facebook."
You think the MoveOn gang bought that weak excuse? Everyone knows that many of the "friends" listed on social networking site profiles aren't the real deal. Not only that, but who even wants their true friends to have access to all of their purchases? I don't need my good friends or classmates to know that I got myself a copy of Sexually Transmitted Diseases: A Physician Tells You What You Need to Know. This should be the sort of thing that users choose to turn "on" instead of "off," and Facebook has a responsibility to make their users aware of new features like this before they go into effect.
Tuesday Tasting: Leopard Lust, Facebook And Feel Ups
Each week, Ariel Waldman serves a tasting of the latest in sex and tech.
Kelly Bares All For Leopard Unboxing
No doubt, by now you've seen all the unboxing and read all the bitching about the recently released Leopard Mac OSX. While we've yet to screw with our system, KellysArcade has seemingly done just that. Stripping down for her system upgrade, Kelly took photos of her Mac fangirl fetish and provided us with quite the fleshy photo album. We can't help but concur with Fleshbot, these might be the sexiest set of unboxing photos we've seen.
Mobile Phones Attempt to Fend Off Feel Ups
With a rise in train riders with wandering fingers, feel ups have become a problem for many female commuters in Japan. The "Anti-Groping Appli" is a mobile phone application that flashes threatening text-based messages and sounds at potential perverts. With messages like "Excuse me, did you just grope me?" "Groping is a crime," and "Shall we head to the police?", the phone attempts to be an anti-social object for women who don't want the "hassle" to be heard. We'd recommend a quick elbow to the gut instead before grabbing for your phone.
Risque Facebook Application Goes IRL
Naughty Gifts is one of the most used applications among Facebook fetishists. Gifts like blue balls, whipped cream and pearl necklaces are given as virtual play things for other profiles.
"The kids of MySpace appeared to be more deviant than their Pottery Barn Facebook counterparts," said the St. Petersburg-born developer, a member of several women's advocacy groups including the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus. "Facebook users, much like Southern senators, kept their naughty sides under wraps and it made sense to make an app to bring out the naughtiness."
Going.com, the creator of the craze, is now taking the toy teasing to a series of IRL parties, from San Francisco to New York. The events are sure to be interesting, as giving ball gags as gifts might be best left for behind glowing screens. [via]
Facebook: Feeding Babies is Obscene
Facebook has made a bad mistake. Apparently they've been deleting pictures of breastfeeding mamas and babies, and in some cases even deleting the accounts of said mamas. This, apparently, because they (1) consider breasts obscene, and (2) can't differentiate between a titty shot and a picture of someone feeding a baby.
"Photos containing an exposed breast do violate our Terms and are removed," she said.
It's not clear what constitutes an "exposed breast", which has the lactivists baffled.
Facebook did not respond to emails requesting further clarification but several group members have reported that their images were removed despite the fact they contained no nipple.
As anyone who's ever had a baby knows, you Do Not Fuck With Breastfeeding Mamas, who are one of the most easily organized groups on the internet. After all, websurfing is one of the few things you can do easily while nursing a baby. And mamas who breastfeed are pretty damn militant (rightly so), since it takes a certain amount of chutzpah just to overcome the "omg, titties!" thing and decide to nurse in the first place.
I predict that Facebook's going to change their mind about this policy within a week. So if you're on Facebook and agree that they should learn the difference between porn and breastfeeding, you'd better hurry up and join the Hey, Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene! group; since the original article linked at the top of this story appeared three days ago, the group's gotten almost 10,000 members, who've posted over 600 breastfeeding photos.
Bitch_PhD breastfed her kid for two and a half years.
True Stories from the Social Network Special Olympics
I don't know if it's something in the pixels or if the constant flow of friend requests are finally getting to some people but in the last week I've heard some of the most insane stories about bullshit people have pulled on social networking sites. And by bullshit I mostly mean people doing things online and then being surprised when other people find out about them. I'm actually kind of impressed by the level of ignorance going on, and thought you might be too. Here are a few situations I've heard about this week, all of which are entirely true. Names, of course, have been changed to protect the guilty.
Jack is dating Jill. Seriously. Like, a serious "committed" relationship. Jill isn't online as much as Jack but decides to check out his MySpace profile one day. This profile is full to the brim with photos of and notes too / from other girls that Jack is apparently hooking up with on a regular basis. Jill is obviously upset by this and confronts Jack. Jack denies it. Jill pulls up his profile right in front of him. His reaction - "oh, um... yeah." Jack is no longer dating Jill.
Thomas knows about Susan, but doesn't like her. He makes several posts on his MySpace blog about what a whore he thinks she is. Susan does not really know Thomas so doesn't read these posts. Thomas meets Susan in person and has a problem, she's totally cute. Thomas takes tons of photos of him and her together at a party and posts the photos to his Facebook profile, seemingly to prove that he has actually talked to cute girls before. Thomas tags Susan in the photos. She finds them and follows the links back to his MySpace page and sees everything he's written about her. Thomas is shocked, SHOCKED when he asks Susan out and she says No.
I don't even know what to say about this except... really? Someone actually thinks this is at all entertaining?
Tina and Laura have been hooking up pretty regularly. Laura invites Tina to do something one evening and Tina declines saying she can't because her job has her working extra hours and she can't do anything except that for the next week or two. That evening rolls around and Laura starts getting tweets from Tina about a great party she's at. A little shocked, Laura sends Tina a text message asking what she's up to. Tina responds saying she's still at work and will talk to Laura later, then sends one to twitter saying "just got txt from old girlfriend while hanging out with new one... awkward!"
Jeff meets Katrina at a party. Katrina tells Jeff about her ex-boyfriend Louis. Louis is her ex-boyfriend because Katrina caught him getting busy with his coworker Janet. And by getting busy I mean having sex. Jeff is sympathetic and understanding. Katrina and Jeff leave the party together and one thing leads to another. And by one thing leads to another I mean they have sex. The next day Katrina finds Jeff on MySpace and leaves him a cute, flirty comment. Then clicks on his photos, where she finds several photos of him with Louis, and some with Louis and Janet. At their office. Where they all work together.
Mike and Ted are friends with Steven and Francis. Steven and Francis get in some stupid tiff with Ted and then Mike and Ted decide to no longer be friends with them. Mike is especially vocal about not liking Steven and Francis anymore because of what happened with them and Ted. Ted is psyched that Mike has his back. Months later Mike makes up with Steven and Francis and starts hanging out with them again but tells all his friends not to let Ted know. Mikes friends feel uncomfortable but keep their mouths shut. Steven however isn't so quite, and posts photos of them all hanging out on his Flickr account. Mike doesn't know this, but all his friends do, and are just waiting for that bomb to blow up.
So what I'm wondering, is when did people all the sudden forget that when they put things online, other people can see them. And if you have a secret, putting it online isn't the best way to keep it a secret. Did everyone simultaneously suffer head injuries? Are other people seeing this kind of thing or have I just found a patch of online idiots this week?
With Friends Like These, Who Needs Friends?
Recently I was talking with a new-to-social-networks friend of mine about what the hell we're doing with all these online communities. I pointed out that while a benefit of these systems is collecting your friends in one place, it's still fairly difficult to differentiate between loose and strong ties. That is, what's the difference between someone you've known for 10 years vs. someone you just met at a party? In your head you know that the long time friend is a different kind of a connection, but the SNS haven't been able to figure that out yet. There are probably things you'd tell one friend that you aren't sure yet about telling the person you just met, but when your only option is friend or not friend, how do you control what info goes to what people?
Facebook has an option of friending someone while only allowing them to see your "limited profile" which is a step in the right direction, but honestly adding in one more level hardly solves the issue of classifying what is probably hundreds of different kinds of friends. In efforts to continue filing people into handy little categories there is now a "Top Friends" application that, similar to the "Top 8" on [ULR=http://myspace]MySpace, allows you to highlight people who are really your friends, or at least you really want people to think they are your friends. Not surprisingly these two steps actually cause more problems than they solve. In fact these actually take what are supposed to be comfortable social interactions and make them awkward and drama filled.
In the case of a limited profile, people know you've chosen this option the moment they click to your profile and only see half the info they can see on their other friends pages. In the case of a set of "Top" friends, more often than not there are people who think they should be in that list and will take it personally when they aren't included. Or worse, people you don't even know will ask you to put them in there and then you are forced to either do it, which negates the value of the list all together, or tell them "no" which puts you in an uncomfortable situation. Software and services designed to help facilitate social behavior should never create uncomfortable situations, but unfortunately it's all too common.
And this doesn't only apply to friends. Here on SuicideGirls we have the option of picking favorite girls. I'm fairly certain this feature was put in so members could highlight the sets and photos of the girls they really liked, but quickly it became a status issue with "favorite" spots on certain members pages becoming coveted achievements. Recently I actually deleted all of my favorites because I was sick of getting messages from girls asking to be added to my list. Not responding, or saying no totally sucked, but I didn't want to just add them to a list that was supposed to be something I hand picked so rather than keep stressing about I just killed that list all together.
While my take-my-ball-and-go-home solution works for some people, others are resorting to a different form of not playing. Xeni Jardin from BoingBoing responded to a question asked on twitter about these friends lists creating awkward situations by saying, "I recently changed all my 'top friends' on MySpace to non-human entities (blogs, tv shows, dead cultural icons) for that VERY reason." If there's no way to tell your real friends from your casual acquaintances, and very special lists of very special friends have to be deleted to stacked with things other than actual friends so as not to hurt any feelings -- doesn't that kind of defeat the point? Have you ever felt obligated to put someone in a list you really didn't think they belonged in? How did you deal with it?
Facebook Vs. MySpace: What's Class Got To Do With It?
(Photograph by Mack Reed)
At least twice a month someone asks me for a link to my page on MySpace -- I usually end up pointing them to a blog post I made about this time last year called, "MySpace can eat a bag of dick." The short version is that I got so frustrated with every single aspect of how MySpace works that I deleted my account, walked away, and never looked back. The interesting change is that at that point people were asking me for the link several times a week and it's been steadily decreasing since then. For the most part I'm not very vocal about my distaste for MySpace so I don't think that's why requests have slowed, instead I'm getting the same questions but now asking about my page on Facebook.
I'd been noticing more and more of my social circle moving over to Facebook but had just assumed it was the same kind of migration we'd seen a few years ago when people started moving off of Friendster and over to MySpace. This was just my assumption and I had little to back it up, so when danah boyd started talking about the same topic I was very interested. Turns out it's anything but the same kind of migration, and in fact is more of a division. A few months ago danah wrote a piece called, "Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace" where she noted that only certain kinds of people were leaving MySpace for Facebook but for some circles MySpace was still the premier SNS. After a bit of explanation about how "class" in America has less to do with how much money you make and more with who you surround yourself with, she points out where this split is happening:
The goodie two shoes, jocks, athletes, or other "good" kids are now going to Facebook. These kids tend to come from families who emphasize education and going to college. They are part of what we'd call hegemonic society. They are primarily white, but not exclusively. They are in honors classes, looking forward to the prom, and live in a world dictated by after school activities.
MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school. These are the teens who plan to go into the military immediately after schools. Teens who are really into music or in a band are also on MySpace. MySpace has most of the kids who are socially ostracized at school because they are geeks, freaks, or queers.
A very important note to make here is that danah's research focuses on high school kids only, as that's who she was speaking with directly before she came to these conclusions. It was interesting to see that among Facebook users, all of them knew about MySpace (and often had negative things to say about it), but frequently MySpace users hadn't ever heard of Facebook. As you might expect people misread her article, pulled bits out of context and jumped to conclusions prompting her to write a response a month later addressing many of the issues people brought up. The age issues was a big one, as was the use of race in her observations. In her follow up she clarified a bit more where all this info came from, stating:
When I talk about data, I'm not talking about my friends or what I hear from teenagers in Los Angeles (or San Francisco). I drive to disconnected communities and talk to teenagers from different schools about their lives. I hang out in public places where I watch teens. I hang out on MySpace and scan the micro-profiles that one can see on Facebook. I talk to parents, teachers, pastors, and community leaders from all over the nation. I talk to people from varied backgrounds, all to get at what's going on. The trick to ethnographic work like this is to understand the biases that are operating in the spheres you study. This is not survey work. This is about contextualizing what you learn, making sense of how an individual is or is not like her/his peers. This is not about random sampling, but sampling until you start to see patterns that are predictable, until you flesh out the domain. While individual experiences are important, when I'm drawing patterns, I'm talking beyond the individual - I'm trying to paint a meta portrait.
One point from her original piece that really struck me was how this division was reflecting in the military. She found that the educated Officers were all on Facebook, while the rank and file troops were hanging out on MySpace. MySpace was recently banned while Facebook remains accessible - perhaps because of who each site is reaching. danah writes:
MySpace is the primary way that young soldiers communicate with their peers. When I first started tracking soldiers' MySpace profiles, I had to take a long deep breath. Many of them were extremely pro-war, pro-guns, anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, pro-killing, and xenophobic as hell. Over the last year, I've watched more and more profiles emerge from soldiers who aren't quite sure what they are doing in Iraq. I don't have the data to confirm whether or not a significant shift has occurred but it was one of those observations that just made me think. And then the ban happened. I can't help but wonder if part of the goal is to cut off communication between current soldiers and the group that the military hopes to recruit.
Bringing this back to my own observations, my peers use their SNS for more than just staying in touch with a select circle of friends. Lots of business is done through these sites and connecting with the right network of people can make all the difference when launching or hyping a new project. As key figures in these networks jump from one ship to the other there are huge circles of people following their lead, in the same way popular kids in high school circles determine (often without knowing it) which sites their peers will be using simply by which they choose to stay on themselves. I personally shifted to Facebook simply because it worked, where MySpace never seemed to.
Look Who's Lurking
If you want to land that dream job, be wary of what you post on the Internet. A survey conducted by the National Association of Colleges found that future employers are likely to peep social networking profiles as part of the hiring process.
With sites like MySpace and Facebook being popular amongst college students, it is almost inevitable that someone, your boss included, will log on to dig up some dirt on you.
NACE study found: "More than one in 10 employers (11.1 percent) responding to NACE's recent Job Outlook 2007 Fall Preview survey reported plans to review profiles on social networking when considering candidates for jobs." And the survey found more companies admitted they may look at social networking sites in the future. "Moreover, profile information may have at least some effect on an employer's hiring decisions: More than 60 percent of employers who review social networking sites said the information gleaned there has at least some influence on their hiring decisions."
Its great to know that the antics of crazy college kids can be discussed and shared but not when it comes back to haunt your professional career.
"It makes a great deal of sense for an employer to go ahead and get creative about the sources they are turning to to get that information," said Joe Spartz, of the Employers Association Inc.. "The Internet is an incredible vehicle by which employers are able to gather information in a way they weren't able to do as little as four to five years ago."
But Spartz recommends employers carefully consider if the information they are gaining is accurate and relevant to the skills the employee will need to do his or her job.
I dont know about you but lurking an employees blog is almost as bad as asking one's sexual preference during an interview. Its sneaky. Still, NACE's advice needs to be taken.
"You have to make sure that whatever is written about you on the Internet is something you want other people to see because it is out there forever."