mathmission
09-08-2006, 07:52 AM
So, our newspaper found it front page worthy to write an article about the online site www.facebook.com. It demonstrated how frustrated students across the nation are with it's new found news feed that allows all users to see what everyone is up to.
Here was my response. I sent it in to the news paper, but I'm sure it will not be published. I've written them several times without any response.
In response to you September 8th, 2006 article “Facebook takes heat over new ‘creepy features.’
Several days ago, an overwhelming amount of students stood up together, and petitioned an online organization called Facebook. Apparently the addition of a new feature called “News Feed,” and “Mini-Feed,” which offered its users a sort of 1984 “Big Brother” feel, caused a major uproar. Students across the entire nation developed online groups through this site in protest of said addition. As the Missourian reported on September 8th, one of these many groups had up to 650,000 members. Such a response!
The argument presented to Facebook was/is that the new feed, focusing on features and information previously available, exerts too much emphasis on making public each and every aspect of its user’s site activity. Students call it Creepy, arguing that it promotes stalkers within the community. Funny thing is, none of this emphasized information was previously private. It was available to all the same users. The only thing different is that these actions were/are illustrated on the main page. So what, then, I ask, did the students actually lose, in terms of privacy?
I will admit: I am, and have been a Facebook user for some time now. And for a moment, I hoped that the founders of Facebook would announce they were really researchers, perhaps psychologists or sociologist, examining psycho-sociological response to privacy, and our reactions when an imaginary wall of privacy was removed. Or perhaps they were doing some research on internet dependability and its likeness to controlled substances. Anyone remember the 1981 made-for-TV film The Wave? Sadly, that wasn’t the case.
Which brings me to my point: I am very happy to see that so many of my peers are interested in protesting what they believe to be a violation of their privacy. I was even happier to hear that so many people had written petitions, and expressed their opinions in such a civil way. But that’s when it hit me. How many of these same students who were so adamant to vote against this new Facebook feature, an online website, voted in the recent elections? How many of them voted in the recent propositions presented to the city of Columbia?
How many of these students (who were of ages at the time) voted in the 2004 national election? To bring this closer to home, how many of these students voiced their opinions concerning the Brady Commons renovation? If students are so willing to fight for what they believe, why is our voter turnout so low?
I asked a friend of mine these same questions, and this was her response: “Because they know that Facebook directly affects them, so they care. With politics, it's usually inconvenient to vote and most people either don't know or don't care about it.”
If she is right, all I can say is…Uh—what?
Here was my response. I sent it in to the news paper, but I'm sure it will not be published. I've written them several times without any response.
In response to you September 8th, 2006 article “Facebook takes heat over new ‘creepy features.’
Several days ago, an overwhelming amount of students stood up together, and petitioned an online organization called Facebook. Apparently the addition of a new feature called “News Feed,” and “Mini-Feed,” which offered its users a sort of 1984 “Big Brother” feel, caused a major uproar. Students across the entire nation developed online groups through this site in protest of said addition. As the Missourian reported on September 8th, one of these many groups had up to 650,000 members. Such a response!
The argument presented to Facebook was/is that the new feed, focusing on features and information previously available, exerts too much emphasis on making public each and every aspect of its user’s site activity. Students call it Creepy, arguing that it promotes stalkers within the community. Funny thing is, none of this emphasized information was previously private. It was available to all the same users. The only thing different is that these actions were/are illustrated on the main page. So what, then, I ask, did the students actually lose, in terms of privacy?
I will admit: I am, and have been a Facebook user for some time now. And for a moment, I hoped that the founders of Facebook would announce they were really researchers, perhaps psychologists or sociologist, examining psycho-sociological response to privacy, and our reactions when an imaginary wall of privacy was removed. Or perhaps they were doing some research on internet dependability and its likeness to controlled substances. Anyone remember the 1981 made-for-TV film The Wave? Sadly, that wasn’t the case.
Which brings me to my point: I am very happy to see that so many of my peers are interested in protesting what they believe to be a violation of their privacy. I was even happier to hear that so many people had written petitions, and expressed their opinions in such a civil way. But that’s when it hit me. How many of these same students who were so adamant to vote against this new Facebook feature, an online website, voted in the recent elections? How many of them voted in the recent propositions presented to the city of Columbia?
How many of these students (who were of ages at the time) voted in the 2004 national election? To bring this closer to home, how many of these students voiced their opinions concerning the Brady Commons renovation? If students are so willing to fight for what they believe, why is our voter turnout so low?
I asked a friend of mine these same questions, and this was her response: “Because they know that Facebook directly affects them, so they care. With politics, it's usually inconvenient to vote and most people either don't know or don't care about it.”
If she is right, all I can say is…Uh—what?