Yesterday, one of the most powerful social media entities went down. The lesson learned was more social than technological.
At around 3pm Eastern Time, 2pm Central, noon Pacific Facebook went down for users all across the country, even becoming inaccessible for many people. All that would come up is an error message. It didn’t take long for disgruntle Facebook users to take to twitter and trend about this annoyance. One lady joked that she had to resort to talking to her family again. Another person tweeted they can finally go eat lunch instead of starving themselves looking at Facebook. Facebook went back up around 5pm Eastern Time. This was the third time Facebook went down in as many weeks. A Facebook spokesperson told tech news site Mashable the shutdown cause was due to a configuration issue. Facebook’s platform status said they were experiencing a major power outage. And that’s not all. Rumors were posted claiming Facebook was now charging $5.99 a month and greater just for people to keep their account. I saw at least five people post this on my page. This rumor is false. Facebook is as free as it ever was.
But there are lessons learned here. First off, we can’t believe everything we read on Facebook. So many people were freaking out that they may have to pay for something that’s been free for years. That’s just not the case. Think of all the celebrity death hoaxes people put on Facebook over the years. People freaked out when Facebook shut down altogether. This shows you how dependent we are on social media. I see it all around me. From coffee shops to bars to diners, ?I’ve seen incidents where people don’t even look up at each other; just down on their smartphones. Between you and me, I’m thankful there weren’t riots and violence. I fear a day like that coming; I hope I’m wrong. I saw a poll in which 83% of Americans say they can live for a day without today’s technology. Why are we lying to ourselves?
You know what I learned today? I learned as early as 2008, government agencies all over the world plotted to spy on ordinary citizens. I learned of Great Britain’s disturbing name and spy system.
It’s called the Karma Police. This mass surveillance project began in 2008 by British government spies without the knowledge, approval or debate of the British people. The UK people can thank Government Communication Headquarters, or GCHQ, for this one. For years, they recorded the online activities of every British Internet user. This include their visits to adult websites, news websites, blogs, search engines, social media sites, you name it. The GCHQ’s doings were exposed by Edward Snowden‘s The Intercept article. Not only that, these revelations come when the UK government pushes for even more surveillance. The Karma Police comes in compartments. One compartment builds profiles displaying web users’ habits. Another compartment analyses?all, and I do mean all, aspects of online communication, from emails to texting to social media postings. One compartment kept tabs on…ahem…suspicious search engine inquiries. And the GCHQ can do all this spying without any legal ramifications or accountability. By the end of 2012 (The Intercept article came out in 2014), they had about 100 billion metadata records. There is some good news to this. According to this metadata, the content of calls or emails weren’t recorded, just the senders and recipients of that call.
Well, I can take that as good news. But it still doesn’t excuse the fact this organization has countless documents of innocent people. And now they have the audacity to ask for even more surveillance? ?Yeah, I’m sure the British people will love that one. I don’t know much about their Magna Carta, but I’m sure it wouldn’t condone this any more than our Constitution would condone it. I‘m sure many British legislatures will say, “But we need it to fight terrorism and other serious crimes.” How many terrorist and serious crimes have the Karma Police caught so far?
Some people just don’t like ads. There are apps out there who cater to this dislike. One top selling app has been blocked from providing this service.
The Peace App and Apple Store are parting ways. You can thank Peace App’s developer Marco Arment for this one. It was one of the top selling pay-for apps in Apple’s arsenal. It’s known for blocking ads and other unwanted content. They help strip websites of ads and tracking (when an ad follows you from one website to the next one). Arment notices the ad blocking wars. These wars are too out of control for his taste. He complains Apple’s way of dealing with ad blocking is too blunt and one-sided. The Peace app’s services are more complex. Meanwhile, advertisers and publishers are worried such ad blockers will strip them of profits and revenue. Independent and small publishers are especially concerned. Some are taking action. Media website CNET are insisting web blockers disable their blocks so ads can get through. So has historic newspaper medium The Washington Post. It wasn’t always this contentious between publishers and ad blockers. Then Apple pretty much enabled the blockers. Now many are worried. The ad blocking wars show no signs of ending anytime soon.
I don’t mind ads. I would rather watch through ads and see them on my screen than have to pay for certain websites and services out of my own pocket. How do you think social media sites like You Tube, Facebook, and Twitter remain free for consumers? Somebody’s got to be paying for it. These sites sure don’t run on charity, and money doesn’t grow on trees. Better advertisers pay for it than consumers. I can see how tracking ads and ads following people around can make people uncomfortable. That? gives an Orwellian feel to online ads. Do tracking ads really entice the consumer in purchasing anything? Is there any solution to solve the ad blocking wars?
Last year, Microsoft teamed up with the NFL. The NFL used their tablets for coaching and game calling purposes. This year, a social media company teams up with America’s most successful sports conglomerate.
Snapchat and the NFL have a one year deal in which Snapchat that will provide NFL video and photo footage to the NFL’s Live Story feature. This feature will go from the beginning of this season through Super Bowl 50, which is scheduled for February 7, 2016. Snapchat will host a NFL Live Story episode every week/end. Both will peddle to advertisers and both will split profits. But there is a catch. Snapchat is forbidden by the NFL to use NFL broadcast footage. This means most of Snapchat’s footage will be coming from fans like you and me. The NFL season and Super Bowl aren’t the only upcoming happenings for Snapchat. Recently, Snapchat has covered live events from fashion week to the Republican presidential debates. And Snapchat isn’t the only social media venue the NFL is making deals with. It has partnerships with Facebook and You Tube. Remember last Super Bowl, when certain commercials aired on You Tube first? The NFL announced a two year partnership with Twitter. This is a trend that is going nowhere fast.
Despite scandals and disputes that seem to follow the NFL everywhere, from Ray Rice to Deflategate, the NFL is still the number one sports franchise in the USA. Many millions follow their favorite team on any given Sunday…and Monday night…and Thursday night. Over a hundred million Americans watch the Super Bowl every year. Snapchat knows it and the numbers prove it. Live Story already draws an audience of 20 million people. Facebook, You Tube and Twitter know the economic power the NFL has. The NFL knows social media is the new way of communication. Sounds like both are doing the smart thing and playing off each other. Is this a good relationship?
Did anyone see last night’s Republican presidential debate? It’s all people are talking about on Facebook this morning. As you know, there is a lot of tension and dissension between the two parties and within the parties. Many FB friends give their take. This sounds like a perfect time for Facebook’s dislike button.
Two days ago, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced his company was working on a thumbs down ‘dislike button. This comes at the request of countless FB users. Zuckerberg said people have been pressuring him about a dislike button. The dislike is supposed to be used for posts deemed sad or negative events happening to the person. The dislike button isn’t supposed to be used toward the content of a post. For example, someone talks about a job loss, death in the family, disease diagnosis, divorce/break-up, or a bad news event that happened in their community. The dislike button is to express empathy toward the person enduring such events, as in saying, “I dislike this trauma or hard time you’re going through.” Zuckerberg said, “We really want the ability to express empathy. Not every moment is a good moment.” He talked about he and his wife’s fertility struggle as an example. To the best of my knowledge, there is no debut date set for the Facebook dislike button.
So it’s supposed to be used for empathy. But come on, guys. You know it’s going to be used, even abused, to judge someone else’s content. I and anyone with a little street smarts see it coming. Don’t get me wrong; I’m for the Facebook dislike button. That’s because I’m for anybody and everybody using their free speech, as long as it’s done in a non-threatening manner. ?But why do you think so many people are on Zuckerberg’s case to build a dislike button? Why do you think so many people want this button to begin with? What’s empathy got to do with it?
Google Fiber is Google’s way to provide faster Internet and better cable TV services to various metro areas around the United States. They’re looking for new cities and states to expand in. Two areas are high on their list.
Those two areas are Irvine, CA, San Diego, CA and Louisville, KY. It has to get approval from local government leaders. But if Google’s plans go through, it will be the first time Google Fiber has ever been in Southern California or Kentucky. Fiber promises services up to 100x faster than rival Internet services. Google Fiber Internet costs about $70 a month. For five years, Google Fiber has been instrumental in pressuring major broadband companies like Comcast and Verizon to move to faster speeds. Google Fiber is already available in both Kansas City areas (Kansas and Missouri), Provo, Utah and Austin, Texas. It’s scheduled to come to various cities and towns in North Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee. It’s also scheduled to come to Salt Lake City, UT and San Antonio, TX. As many as twelve months may pass before Google Fiber comes to Southern California and Louisville, KY. That is, assuming Google and local officials can agree and collaborate to bring this ultra-fast Internet service.
Now a question comes to mind here. Why is it taking so long for Fiber to come to greater Los Angeles/San Diego? This is one of the biggest metropolis areas in the nation. One would think this and the New York City Tri-State area would be the first to get Fiber. Blame corporate competition for that. Cox Communications is working on Southern California by offering gigabyte service. I often wonder if politics have something to do with it too. But Google Fiber is growing in states that are rapidly growing in population. Should Google Fiber do even more to target major metropolis areas?
