Facebook Plans New Privacy Controls

Facebook has announced that they will be reshaping their privacy in order to give the user more control over who can and cannot view certain parts of your Facebook page. These privacy controls will allow users to separate their friends, family and co-workers into three separate groups allowing each group to view different parts of the user’s Facebook page. This has made me beg the question: why do we need privacy? If we are willing to broadcast almost anything on Facebook, then why should we be bothered that certain people may see it?

 

I think the answer to this question lies in two directions. The first of which is it is not that we do not want anyone seeing our information; it is that we want the control over who may and who may not view it. It is more the control over the content than the content itself. One of the most important factors of websites such as Facebook, MySpace and Bebo is the element of customisation and if we are not able to customise who may view our website, then an element of customisation has been lost. Linked to this is there are actually certain groups of people who we do not want to see our webpage. Parents for example are a god example of someone who we don’t want to see our photos. Potential job employers are another group who we feel should not be allowed to view our page. Often job employers will visit potential employees Facebook pages to see the type of person we are.

 

The other direction that this question leads us in is that the fact that we broadcast our deepest and darkest feelings to the world is not that we want them to be read by others; but more simply that we want them to be written down on paper. Often people feel that by writing their problems down is a good way of releasing or at least making them more tangible. Blogs are another good way of doing this; they are almost like virtual diaries. Here people can reflect on their day-to-day lives in a way that is easy to remember and go back to. All in all, privacy is a very interesting issue. We do not like being spied upon or having our privacy invaded, yet we are willing to broadcast our private issues to the world.

YouTube Coming to TV

Tivo, the popular maker of American digital video recorders, announced an agreement with YouTube that will deliver millions of Web videos directly to users’ TV screens. This agreement will allow users to watch their playlisted YouTube items on their TV screens. What strikes me about this information is will this be a stepping to the eventual position where small, lowly-funded websites being able to compete with Multi-national, billion dollar companies? We are well aware that the internet can produce worldwide success for companies on a very small budget? But will these companies not only be able to compete with other Media companies in general, but also outside of their comfort: on the television screen.

 

Before we can see a website such as YouTube become a truly independent television channel, I feel it is essential for it create a new style specific to Television. At present, You Tube is very oriented around interactivity; after all it is you that decides which clips you would like to watch. For YouTube to become a television channel or even a television program, it needs to take away that direct interactivity (clicking onto links etc), whilst keeping some sense of interactivity. Perhaps, a half-hour show could be the answer. Your most watched videos on the internet could be shown, with the ability to vote for your favourite. This way a television program available to all can be produced whilst it keeps the essence of YouTube alive.

 

Finally, now that have seen YouTube take the television “plunge”, will we see other websites doing the same? If so, will this create even more of an opportunity to spill-over success to small internet-based companies? If we were to see other Internet websites convert to television, which websites would they be? A good example may MySpace. With the Media baron, Rupert Murdoch (who owns BSkyB amongst many other television sources) having recently purchased the social network, could he invent a new and exciting way to interact with MySpace. Only time will tell how this will develop, but it is very interesting time for the internet and television alike.

AOL announce their intention to acquire Bebo

It was revealed last Thursday that AOL will be buying the social network site Bebo for $850 million. Although not as popular as MySpace or Facebook, it is the third social networking site in the United States. My main concern with this piece of news is whether Bebo, with this acquisition, will be able to overcome both MySpace and Facebook in popularity and whether this will improve the success of the once successful AOL.

 

One way in which the Internet Service Provider wishes to boost its revenue is by incorporating Bebo with its instant-messaging service. If AOL is able to effectively merge these two applications together, we may see AOL as one of the key actors in internet portals.

One of the main objectives, as mentioned on a podcast for CNET News.com, that AOL will need to do in order to “save” their company is advertising. At present, Bebo has over 40 million users, but the majority of users are from the UK and Ireland. If AOL wishes Bebo to be popular in the US, it must advertise this unique website, which combines both the customization aspects of Myspace with the deeper social aspects of Facebook.

One thing that AOL must be careful of is not to change the essence of Bebo too much so as to alter the overall experience the user may encounter. Often large companies have the tendency of dramatically altering websites on acquiring in the hope of enticing new members and therefore generating more money. AOL must remember that if they were to alter the website in any way, they may exclude their existing audience thereby in turn actually losing money.

 

 

Only time will tell how this acquisition not only Bebo, but AOL and even the social networking world itself, but if there ever was a time the AOL needed to do something drastic, now is it.

Indy Media: The Important of independent news

Following the last seminar, I began to consider the following question: does the use of such websites as www.indymedia.org encourage political participation and give a different angle to the way in which news is portrayed or is it simply an extension and new way of displaying current affairs? It is the first time we have seen such an opportunity for widespread independent media, but does this form of media really differ dramatically from more mainstream news outlets?

As described in the website itself, Indymedia is “… a collective of independent media organizations and hundreds of journalists offering grassroots, non-corporate coverage. Indymedia is a democratic media outlet for the creation of radical, accurate, and passionate tellings of truth.” Upon browsing this website, I have come to the conclusion that it does indeed offer non-corporate coverage of the news and it also gives news which would otherwise not be reported.

Whilst websites such as this one are written by independent journalists, free from pressure from employers and the political stance of the paper, I cannot see how these are able to encourage political participation. Yes it is true that those involved in the website and those aware of the website are more likely to share their views, but there is only a small number who is aware that a website such as this exists. When considering whether this new form of reporting the news gives a less biased view of the news, there can some argument to say that may not be the case. Yes it is true that this website is written from a less glamorized and less edited version of the news, it is still written (as all news is) with someone with an opinion and therefore cannot help but be swayed to a particular bias. It is often argued that the news can be described as a form of subtle propaganda, a website such as this could tend to be more so as those writing are more passionate about the subject they whereas those writing for papers are simply reporting the news. With all this said, I do not doubt that Indymedia gives an insight to the news that would not be heard otherwise and for this, I commend it. 

The Importance and relevance of the use of the Internet within election campaigns

With the US Presential Primaries well underway and the US Presential fast approaching, I felt this should be the subject of my first blog. Whilst searching the internet, i managed to find two very interesting articles on the use of the internet during election campaigns. The first article was taken from the bbc website, published late last year. It is a very interesting article dealing with how the internet could be used to improve voter turnout leading up to the US presential elections later this year. It also maps out the positive aspects of using the internet and how else the internet may be used to encourage political participation.

The second article comes from the journal entitled “Political Science Quarterly”. It deals with the 2000 US Presential elections. This article deals with the relationship between the internet and democracy and looks in depth into the nature of online voting (what is called I-voting) and is yet another good article that can help us better understand the subject of E-democracy.

 The links to the two articles are as follows :-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6101624.stm

http://www.jstor.org/view/00323195/ap030003/03a00040/0?frame=frame&userID=86dba507@rhbnc.ac.uk/01c0a8346a00501d0125a&dpi=3&config=jstor