The Facebook Effect. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

OrpheusAgonistes -> The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 7:49:12 AM)

I've long avoided Facebook like the plague, for a number of reasons.  I'm concerned about privacy issues, I'm concerned about the erosion of one's ability to compartmentalize one's life and friends, and I'm just not very fond of social networking (or any kind of scenesterism) in general.  Though I'm certainly neither a recluse nor a hermit, I prefer friendships be conducted on a personal level, rather than via status updates and virtual scribbling on virtual walls.  That said, I was reading this post the other day http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/ and even I was taken aback by the fact that Zuckerberg (Mr. Facebook) is not only unconcerned with the disintegration of privacy, he seems to see it as a kind of crusade he's undertaken.

If you don't want to read the whole article, here is the moneyshot:

You have one identity,” he emphasized three times in a single interview with David Kirkpatrick in his book, “The Facebook Effect.” “The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly.” He adds: “Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.”

I'm just wondering if I'm alone in having a strong visceral reaction against this kind of attitude.  I know that, as a practical matter, the idea of "privacy" has to be completely reevaluated in the modern age.  But as a matter of preference, I really value having the ability to present different sides of myself to different groups of people, and I value having other people do the same.  I mean, there are absolutely things about other people that are none of my business, and I value the fact that they can present the side to me that they want to present.

It isn't the inevitable death of privacy that I resent, it's the concurrent death of discretion and the ability to have private lives that gets to me, and the idea that Facebook is apparently (according to its founder) designed to hasten this death makes me doubly glad I've never become involved.



tigreetsa -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:02:31 AM)

And yet you're here on Collarme? Hmmmm.. 



smartsub10 -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:03:59 AM)

Have to say I am pretty much in agreement with you Orpheus.  There is no reason whatsoever that my job colleagues need to know every aspect of my life and I want to continue to have the ability to compartmentalize my life.

I use a separate email account to communicate with men on this site if it goes beyond C-mail.  Several men have attempted to find a Facebook page using that email address to find out more information about me.  Totally creeped me out.  My IM account does not have any personal information either. 

Sometimes I feel like a dinosaur for not having a social website account.  I'm a product of my generation where personal information should only be shared with those one trusts.  It was considered a privilege to be given information from a trusted friend.  Now, it seems it's supposed to just be "out there".  I like my privacy too much.



RCdc -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:06:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrpheusAgonistes
I'm just wondering if I'm alone in having a strong visceral reaction against this kind of attitude. 


I doubt you are alone, but I do now wonder how many profiles you might have that makes you so concerned.[;)]
I tend to agree with lack of integrity thang - unless someone is a performance artist or has some sort of personna thing going on - but those tend to be pretty open about it so it's a moot point then.

the.dark.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:20:34 AM)

quote:

I tend to agree with lack of integrity thang - unless someone is a performance artist or has some sort of personna thing going on - but those tend to be pretty open about it so it's a moot point then.


I find this position confusing.  I'm not at all sure how discretion about certain parts of my life (the fact that I like to be tied up by women is not low on that list) equates to a lack of integrity.

There are people I deal with every day professionally who have no idea what my personal life (and not just the kinky parts) is like.  They don't know much about my political beliefs.  Life runs more smoothly when it is compartmentalized.  To me, there are things business friends and co-workers should not know and things I should not know about them.  His statement that, The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly, to be candid, gives me a case of the howling fantods.

That said, I value compartmentalization, not duplicity, so I'll come out and say that I posted under one other account on CM that was an over-the-top parody and from which I never sent a private message.  My own interest isn't in being deceptive, it's in being able to keep separate parts of my life separate.

Along the same lines, if a real friend (not just an acquaintance or a contact) asked me something about my private life, I'd answer honestly.  If they asked my opinion about a political, social, ethical or moral issue, I'd answer honestly.  There's a difference between being open with people you trust and flying a flag for everybody you're in contact with to see.  My reading of Zuckerman is that he doesn't have any interest in honoring that distinction and actually wants to see it obliterated.



MMercurial -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:29:58 AM)

The fact is, the Facebook creators are youthful and inexperienced in life. And, like Google, greedy for data. Deal with the immature and their creations carefully.

I have two Facebook accounts,and one that I closed, due to privacy issues. Then, when I thought I was satisfied with the settings, they again changed how they worked. I don't put much there, and I probably won't add much in the future. I can't make adjusting to their business model a part-time job.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 8:38:20 AM)

quote:

I have two Facebook accounts,and one that I closed, due to privacy issues. Then, when I thought I was satisfied with the settings, they again changed how they worked. I don't put much there, and I probably won't add much in the future. I can't make adjusting to their business model a part-time job.


Yeah, exactly.  A number of people I know have quit recently over their latest wave of changes, and an ex (whose hubris I find delightful) commented "I'd quit, but I'm not sure the world could survive without me."

The salient point, for me, is that most people seem to have been under the assumption that Facebook is working to try to strike a balance between their own business model and revenue stream and the concerns users have over privacy.  What makes the article I linked, and Zuckerberg's comments in particular, so worrisome is that they make it seem as if Facebook is not just willing to reluctantly see some aspects of privacy die in order to make a profit, but rather that they are openly, aggressively, and ideologically committed to this process. Capitalists can be dealt with and worked around, but entrepreneurial ideologues are the stuff of which nightmares are made.



Louve00 -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 9:11:38 AM)

I do believe Facebook is trying to expand.  And that expansion does lead to privacy issues as when you sometimes add a friend to your list, Facebook will ask you to suggest a friend add another friend to your (or their) list.  That I find an invasion of privacy and feel if you want to seek someone out on facebook you are free to, without being prompted by facebook to do so.  As of this day Facebook doesn't charge, but there is rumor they want to start charging people a nominal charge for a facebook account, so yes, it can be beneficial to facebook to (at the risk of someone's privacy) expand their client base.

The beauty of this process is it is your choice.  You can ignore facebook's request to suggest other friends add some of your friends to their lists.  You can't stop the trolls who just look for people to connect with, but you can ignore them and be aware of what you want to share with the world, knowing you're posting on the internet. 

As far as multiple accounts portraying different people other than who they are, that happens on more than just facebook.   As far as keeping sections of your life prvt and seperate from other sections, I believe that is the right of everyone.  An alcoholic does not have to reveal his disease to his employer if he can keep it under control and it doesn't affect his work.  So can a drug addict.  People didn't need the internet to hide certain aspects of themselves from others.  Its been happening for a while.





Missokyst -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 9:24:00 AM)

....never understood the value of social networking sites and never will, but the quoted text below makes the most sense. These sites are held only to their own rules which can be changed on a whim. I don't need anyone to know the smallest details of my life simply to prove my authenticity or to reveal everything to show my integrity. My cousin in DC doesn't have to know the details of my life, nor does some friend who was added on because I know his neighbor's mother's sisters friend.

Why do people feel the need to be so popular?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrpheusAgonistes
Capitalists can be dealt with and worked around, but entrepreneurial ideologues are the stuff of which nightmares are made.





RCdc -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 10:06:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrpheusAgonistes
I find this position confusing.  I'm not at all sure how discretion about certain parts of my life (the fact that I like to be tied up by women is not low on that list) equates to a lack of integrity.


I don't see how having one facebook suddenly makes discretion impossible.  I mean how on earth do so called 'vanilla' folks manage discretion with their friends or boss and not talk about how they fucked their husband last night?

quote:

There are people I deal with every day professionally who have no idea what my personal life (and not just the kinky parts) is like.  They don't know much about my political beliefs.  Life runs more smoothly when it is compartmentalized.  To me, there are things business friends and co-workers should not know and things I should not know about them.  His statement that, The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly, to be candid, gives me a case of the howling fantods.


I never get this whole 'people I work with shouldn't know I'm kinky'.  The don't need to know if you slept with your wife either, or whether you like knitting.  But that doesn't mean you have to hide yourself away and be two different personalities.  What are you going to put on your facebook for goodness sake?  If you are that ashamed of what you are that you feel that you cannot express yourself without fear, then you should question your own issues, whether that's religious, sexual or political.  If you don;t want people to know, you don't tell them or you tell them to mind their own business or take you as you are.

quote:

That said, I value compartmentalization, not duplicity, so I'll come out and say that I posted under one other account on CM that was an over-the-top parody and from which I never sent a private message.  My own interest isn't in being deceptive, it's in being able to keep separate parts of my life separate.


So you do have more than one profile here?  I was only joking around when I teased about the profile[:)].  That said, there are people on here with a comedy profile and normal one but they don't hide the fact and with them it is different.  I can't apologise for finding your admission suspicious and untrustworthy.

quote:

Along the same lines, if a real friend (not just an acquaintance or a contact) asked me something about my private life, I'd answer honestly.  If they asked my opinion about a political, social, ethical or moral issue, I'd answer honestly.  There's a difference between being open with people you trust and flying a flag for everybody you're in contact with to see.  My reading of Zuckerman is that he doesn't have any interest in honoring that distinction and actually wants to see it obliterated.


My 15 year old daughter recently has a great saying.  Take me as I am, or watch me as I go.  I pretty much dig that.

the.dark.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 10:49:54 AM)

Your response was articulate and thoughtful, but we seem to be at sixes and sevens.  My interest is in a particular statement Zuckerman made.  Verbatim, The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly.

Your point seems to be that it's still entirely possible to be discreet about what one needs to keep discreet.  Zuckerman's contention seems to be that being able to keep your private life private from work acquaintances and professional contacts is a bad thing, a "lack of integrity" that he'd deliberately like to see come to an end.  This is the part that both interests and troubles me.

If I've misread you I apologize.  But the point of the OP was specifically the fact that Zuckerman is not just incidentally, but openly, hostile to the idea of being able to come off one way to contacts and cousins and another way to friends.



RCdc -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 12:24:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrpheusAgonistes

Your response was articulate and thoughtful, but we seem to be at sixes and sevens.  My interest is in a particular statement Zuckerman made.  Verbatim, The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly.

Your point seems to be that it's still entirely possible to be discreet about what one needs to keep discreet.  Zuckerman's contention seems to be that being able to keep your private life private from work acquaintances and professional contacts is a bad thing, a "lack of integrity" that he'd deliberately like to see come to an end.  This is the part that both interests and troubles me.

If I've misread you I apologize.  But the point of the OP was specifically the fact that Zuckerman is not just incidentally, but openly, hostile to the idea of being able to come off one way to contacts and cousins and another way to friends.



I don't read it as hostile as such - too me that is rather dramatic wording.  From a business POV, he is shooting himself in the foot really because surely the more profiles there is then the higher the earning potential for facebook.
But I still feel he has a point.  Why would anyone with any sense of integrity, lie about themselves to the extent that they have to create different personnas?

Anyone with an ounce of sense, knows that discretion when on a dating site - doesn't matter if it's bdsm or eharmony - should be used and as such exercise a certain amount of caution for safety.  You don't want some obsessed person finding out where you might live.  But that isn't what is being spoken about.  It's being different people to different associates - family, workmates, your old school friends, the people you play golf with.  Somewhere along that line is pretense.  Do you really believe that any type of pretense has any correlation with integrity?

the.dark.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 12:48:27 PM)

quote:

Anyone with an ounce of sense, knows that discretion when on a dating site - doesn't matter if it's bdsm or eharmony - should be used and as exercise a certain amount of caution for safety. You don't want some obsessed person finding out where you might live. But that isn't what is being spoken about. It's being different people to different associates - family, workmates, your old school friends, the people you play golf with. Somewhere along that line is pretense. Do you really believe that any type of pretense has any correlation with integrity?


Good point, and good question. 

I agree that "somewhere along the line" having completely different identities for different groups of people becomes pretense and deceit.  I think we disagree about just how far down the line that really is.

I think that it is very important, especially in some professions, to be able to keep certain views private from coworkers and clients.  For example, I can imagine why a high school teacher might not want his political views (whatever they might be) out in the open.  A cop might not want coworkers to know he has a silly, goofy interest in UFOs.  An investment adviser may not want people to know he's part of the punk scene on weekends (he also may not want his punk friends to know he's an investment adviser, but that seems like a less serious concern). 

Maybe I'm overstating Zuckerman's case (though I read him the way several bloggers who are much smarter than me also read him) and what he means by "identity" really is "an entirely different persona."  In that case, I don't disagree.  I'm not supporting the right to create a number of elaborate personae to match whatever situation one happens to find oneself in (no one has the unalienable right to be Felix Krull).  My concern isn't that we should all be able to carry on an elaborate masquerade in which we are constantly tricking people or pulling a fast one--my concern is that we should be allowed to have interests that might be well outside the mainstream and not be embarrassed (or worse) by having every single person we know well enough to be a contact aware of them.

In fact, I think that this is where Facebook would actually face a capital crunch if Zuckerman's statement is 1)  accurate and 2)  implemented.  They already have had a couple of ripples of users leaving the site.  There's a point at which people will decide "No.  That's just too much information about me for everybody to see," and start leaving/quit signing up.

I do think we should be able to omit certain predilections and quirks from the dynamic we have with certain groups of people.  I read Zuckerman's own position to be "Everyone's life should be an open book to anyone who knows them even casually," and I find that extremely troubling.  It's clear that you read him differently.





Arpig -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 12:55:02 PM)

I have a facebook account but rarely use it, the only thing it is for is my daughter uses it to tell me when she has a rugby game, other than that it is pretty much ignored.



subtee -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 1:28:40 PM)

~FR

It seems to me the concern stems from Facebook changing the rules and then requiring an opt-out instead of opt-in. The default is that it's all open, and this has never been the case before. So if you've been free and loose with your info they'll make it available to some you may not want it available to. You don't get to choose these new viewers, you have to choose not to let them see it.

I disagree that not disclosing everything is the same as lying.

Further, there has been some discussion that FB will turn these changes into revenue by disclosing to 3rd party sites your preferences in order that they can track what you buy or are into:

"Facebook will share your information with them in - in what they say is a very controlled manner. And - in -because of that, as a result, if you go to one of those sites, if you go to Pandora, say, which is a music site, even if you've never been there before, Pandora will sort of be able to tell what kind of music you like and play music for you based on your Facebook profile."
Facebook Privacy a Growing Concern - NPR



LaTigresse -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 2:00:53 PM)

I adore Facebook. My family is able to keep in touch with one another far better than we ever did before. We can share photos, stories, and laughs. The key, for me, is to limit it to only a very select few. If I remember correctly, I have only about 33-34 'friends'. Given the size of my family, that makes my list of people approximately 95% family. That is likely all I will ever have until the younger family members reach an age their parents allow them access.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 2:40:58 PM)

quote:

It seems to me the concern stems from Facebook changing the rules and then requiring an opt-out instead of opt-in. The default is that it's all open, and this has never been the case before. So if you've been free and loose with your info they'll make it available to some you may not want it available to. You don't get to choose these new viewers, you have to choose not to let them see it.


Yeah, exactly.  Of course this isn't limited to Facebook.  I logged into YouTube some time ago and was cheerfully informed by the site that everybody on my Gchat friends list could now find me and see what I've been watching.  I really don't want anyone to know how much time I waste watching kittens, Yes, Minister clips and bad New Wave videos, so I quickly opted out of this "feature."  What is worrying a lot of people about Zuckerberg's comments is that it seems like Facebook has an actual ideological interest of some kind in sharing as much information as possible with as many people as possible.  A profit motive is something that can be dealt with and rationalized, but if it's some kind of agenda for social engineering, that's more upsetting.

Also thanks for the link to the NPR article.  Food for further thought.

quote:

I adore Facebook. My family is able to keep in touch with one another far better than we ever did before. We can share photos, stories, and laughs. The key, for me, is to limit it to only a very select few. If I remember correctly, I have only about 33-34 'friends'. Given the size of my family, that makes my list of people approximately 95% family. That is likely all I will ever have until the younger family members reach an age their parents allow them access.


Arpig mentioned something similar, and I know several families (especially where they've either become fairly far flung or where everybody seems to travel) who spend weeks at a time keeping in touch primarily via Facebook.  It actually seems ideally suited to this purpose.





DesFIP -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 3:23:15 PM)

It only tears away all privacy if you share everything. My oldest and her friends use it primarily to post pictures of horse shows and new show outfits. I know she has less salubrious activities, she is in college after all, but she doesn't post those things. 



TreasureKY -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 3:35:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

It's being different people to different associates - family, workmates, your old school friends, the people you play golf with.  Somewhere along that line is pretense.  Do you really believe that any type of pretense has any correlation with integrity?


Greetings to you and yours!  [:D]

I think I get what you're saying, dark, and I agree that there might be a question of integrity should someone portray themselves to different groups as something they are not.  However, I don't think selective portrayal is always deceptive.  Not everyone I'm acquainted with is entitled to know everything about me.

The issue with Facebook is that it doesn't allow compartmentalization of those individuals who are in your "Friends" list, and there can be problems with people who find you and don't understand why you'd deny adding them as a friend.

A lot of people use Facebook to keep in touch with their friends... sort of like "Twitter" with just quick blurbs about what they are doing or feeling.  Some people enjoy keeping in touch with family, and some just business acquaintances.  A lot have a mixture, including people who are just friends of friends.

Understand that while I do have an account, I don't post comments like that.  But if I did, to be honest, it wouldn't be any business of the people I used to attend High School with to know that dear old Uncle Orville had a bad time with his colonoscopy yesterday.  Yet that same information might be important to family who, outside of Facebook, I might not have much contact with.

In the same vein, hypothetically speaking, it wouldn't be any business of my business acquaintances to know that I met a really cute guy last night whose deep voice made my legs turn to jelly, and I decided to go home with him.  If one of the girls I worked with was a good friend, I'd probably tell her... but my bible-thumping boss or that good client I'm hoping will recommend me to others might take that information as evidence of poor judgment and character on my part.

Note again, please... that's a hypothetical situation just to illustrate my point.  Firm still holds exclusive license to all my jelly leg reactions.  [:)]

As DesFIP said, the real solution is to not post anything personal you wouldn't want everyone to see.  Of course, that would sort of make the whole Facebook thing kinda boring and maybe even moot.

But I agree with Orpheus that it is a little disturbing for there to appear to be a push of any kind to tear down those walls of privacy.



sunshinemiss -> RE: The Facebook Effect. (5/17/2010 3:36:08 PM)

I too love FB. I am able to be in contact with people about their day to day lives which generally people don't think is important to share with me. It has helped me maintain relationships that I wouldn't have been able to. Too often, people think that telling me about the dinner they made or the flowers they planted or the tummy ache that had them down is not worth discussing, and I'm often left out of the day to day things that are the foundations of relationships. That has been a gift.

By the same token, certain cruel people have used it to deliberately exclude me in ways that are mean spirited. It just reminds me that every tool can be turned into a weapon.

I'm having some dislike of the new attaching interests to other pages. I don't like that at all and deleted all my interests. while I love the book Illusions by Richard Bach, I don't want my interest in it linked to something outside of my grasp. I wouldn't necessarily choose that page to use as the one to get *my* point across about why I like it.

I'm very careful about what I say. Also, people I love are FB friends with people who try to harm me. Therefore, I have made it so that a lot of people can't see what I say. That makes me sad, but I don't want to interfere with their relationships. (Wish more people were as ethical as I am ... sigh)

Finally, I have a couple of friends who don't know how to watch what they say. I make sure to delete any posts they make that I don't want my teenage family members reading. At this point, FB is well worth the trouble.

best,
sunshine



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875