Facebook and Online Dating Security

Two new postings from me today on Facebook and online dating security.

Over at Windmill Networking, this month’s column is on Facebook pages and two things that you can do to improve your security and help keep control of your Facebook page.

And over at Seattle’s KING5, see me talk about online dating security on Jesse Jones’ “Get Jesse” segment.

Tellme Siri it ain’t so: the do-it-yourself Pepsi Challenge

Some of the tech press are writing about Jason Cartwright of TechAU’s YouTube video here he does a side-by-side test of the voice recognition features in Windows Phone 7 (Tellme) and iPhone 4.5 (Siri).

Anthony James over at TechFlash today notes how some folks are saying how the test may not be a fair one, while the folks at geek.com write that the test is fair and fault Microsoft’s Craig Mundie for setting himself up.

Regardless of whether you think the test is fair or not, there is an important lesson here around social media and competitive claims that anyone who’s a public face or counsels them needs to be mindful of. With things like YouTube now, it’s quite easy for third parties to go ahead and conduct their own trials of your claims on video and post them for all to see. Basically, anyone can do their own “Pepsi Challenge” now.

The upshot of this is that you don’t want to make competitive claims unless you’re sure you can win. The better move is to steer clear of these sorts of claims, since someone can always rig the competition against you.

How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life.

This is a much more personal post than most. But ultimately it relates to social media in a way that I think is appropriate for my work blog.

In the past ten months, I have learned about the deaths of three people that I know through Facebook. Two of them were “friends”, one was a “friend of a friend”, actually of several friends. One of them, a former co-worker, died after a bout with cancer. The other two were former high school classmates, both of whom died of suicide.

In all three cases, I learned about this through Facebook wall postings. Over time, the walls became a place where people exchanged information, memories, paid respects, expressed grief and loss, and in some cases supported one another.

Today, just now, I was on Facebook and the one person I wasn’t friends with was just presented to me as “Someone you may know”.

I’ve said that “social networking is truly social” meaning that it is a true extension of ourselves as social creatures: we have embraced it and extended our social behaviors, both good and bad, to that medium. And nothing drives home that point more than death on Facebook.

The suggestion that I “friend” someone who is now dead, and my other recent experiences around the deaths of people on Facebook led me today to realize that Facebook’s use and importance as part of our social interactions has outstripped some of its capabilities. Put simply, Facebook (or any other social networking site) lacks mechanisms to deal gracefully and thoughtfully with death. From the question of “how do you take control of the Facebook account of a loved one who has died” to keeping the profile alive (pun somewhat intended) but reflecting the fact that the person is deceased, there’s no graceful, easy way to deal with death on Facebook.

It’s not just a technology problem: there are questions around etiquette and customs as well that we as a society have to work out.

But at this point, it’s certainly clear to me that as social networking becomes ever more truly social, it needs to be able to handle not just the good of our social lives, but also the hard things.

Kirk asked in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: ”[H]ow we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life, wouldn’t you say?”

As regards social networking, I believe the answer is an unequivocal “Yes”.

A Death, A Birth, A Possible Terminal Diagnosis

It’s an interesting 24 hours in the world of social networking with big news related to three big companies that marks them moving to a new stage. Basically, we’re seeing a death, a birth, and a possible terminal diagnosis.

First the death. Kara Swisher is reporting this morning at allthingsd.com that News Corp. is selling MySpace. Based on the excellent, detailed story on MySpace over at Bloomberg Businessweek and the fact that  News Corp paid $580 Million in 2005 and is unloading it today for $35 Million, it’s clear that MySpace is following Friendster to the Island of Misfit Social Networking sites.

Next the birth. Google announced yesterday it’s latest attempt at a Facebook killer: Google+. It’s very early, to be sure. But some of the early reviews of it sound that after the failure of Buzz and Wave, the third time may be a charm and Google may have something that will stick around.

Finally, a possible terminal diagnosis: Twitter. Biz Stone announced yesterday that he’s leaving Twitter. On the heels of several other reshufflings and the fact that Stone has been the face of Twitter from the beginning, you have to wonder if this is going to turn out to be Twitter’s “jump the shark” moment.

We’ll see how this all plays out. But it’s been a big day for social networkng.

This just in: Facebook isn’t new and shiny any more…

…and in other news, people get bored eventually.

Last week the blog Inside Facebook reported that Facebook had lost in the neighborhood of 8 million users from the United States, Canada, and other industrialized countries.

Since there, there’s understandably been discussion and analysis about what that means. Blake Snow posted some analysis of this over at CNN talking about some of the reasons why people are dropping Facebook.

It’s an interesting read, and to his credit, Snow isn’t predicting the coming demise of Facebook.

While some might take the declining numbers and anecdotal evidence of people deleting their accounts as the first sign that Facebook has peaked and is starting its decline, I think that evidence tells a different story. I think that evidence tells us that Facebook is becoming better understood, more mature, and more integrated into our lives.

Let me give a personal example (and show I’m old too). When I was six or so in the mid 1970′s, my mother brought home from work an amazing new thing called a “calculator“. I was amazed and played with it for hours, most of the day in fact. But over time, they became more common and more broadly used. And so over time, they became better understood and more integrated into my life. I don’t spend hours playing with calculators like I did that day, but I can’t live without them. Some people though, don’t need them. But I’ll bet they’ve used them at some point in their life because they’re so integrated.

I think the same applies to Facebook (and other social media). We’ve all had time to start figuring out what’s its good for, what it’s not good for, what we like about it, and what we don’t like about it. I may not use it as much as I did before, but where I do use it, I use it more intelligently and meaningfully. It’s more integrated into my life than it was in the early days.

My take on this (and there’s some hints of this in Snow’s article at the end) is that social media has shown its a permanent new addition to our world of communications, just like when the telephone became widely used in the mid-Twentieth century. The demise of Facebook won’t come about because people don’t see a need for it in their lives. The demise of Facebook will come about much like the demise of the old Trimline telephone I used that same day my mother brought me the calculator: because something will better fill its space in our lives, giving us even more capabilities and options.

The Intersection of Design and Downfall

It’s a treat to find someone able to bring a different and informative point of view to a topic that’s essentially being carpet bombed in the media.

Steven Levy has an article over at Wired today that talks about the design of Twitter and how that may have played a role in facilitating the Weiner crisis.

I’ve generally liked Levy’s work in the past and this article is a very insightful one. It combines an interesting story about the decisions behind Twitter when it was built with a story about how those application behaviors have played a role in this crisis. For instance, he talks about the decision to make “following” two one-way decisions rather than a single joint decision.

Well worth a read to better understand Twitter and to understand another aspect of the Weiner crisis.

Of course, you could also pop over to TMZ.COM and get the latest gossipy piece of news in this all: former porn star Ginger Lee talking about how she was encouraged to lie to the press by Representative Weiner.

The One Two Punch

It’s always nice to start the week off with a positive, successful story.

Today’s example of a good way to use social media to manage bad situations comes from McDonald’s via Mashable.

The facts appear to be that someone managed to lay hands on or create an official looking piece of McDonald’s letterhead. They then proceeded to print something outrageously racist  on it. They taped it up on the glass of a door to a McDonald’s restaurant, took a picture, posted it to Twitter and then sat back to watch the “fun”.

McDonald’s used a smart combination of Twitter and traditional media response in their handling to very smart effect. They used the speed and succinctness of Twitter to get out a quick and effective response.  Mashable also contacted McDonald’s and got a full statement from Rick Wion, one of the folks on their Twitter handle, that reiterates the point that it’s a hoax and uses the format of that response to give more background and detail.

These two used together like this form a potent and effective “one two punch”. McDonald’s also gets credit for having what seems likely to be the same person handle both responses. It makes the response more human and genuine.

Sometimes less is more in terms of responses. And this shows how the short form of Twitter can work very well in those instances.

Overall a successful defusing of a potentially bad situation. You likely wouldn’t have heard about it if I didn’t write on it. That is the mark of success in this space.

Hiding in Plain Sight

This morning’s news feed contains stories about the breaking of another so-called “superinjuction“.

If you’re not aware, a “superinjunction” is a legal order out of the United Kingdom. It’s similar to what we would call a “gag order” here in the United States.

“Superinjunctions” though go a step further than traditional gag orders because not only can you not talk about whatever it is the injunction has been granted to cover, but the very fact that the injunction exists and what it enjoins is also covered. In other words, not only can you not talk or write about something, but you can’t talk or write about the fact that you can’t talk or write about it either.

Superinjunctions aren’t new. But they took on a new light in April when information that was covered under one of these superinjunctions was leaked to Twitter. The holder of the injunction went to Twitter to enforce the injunction. Being a legal order, Twitter had no real choice and started to enforce the order by removing tweets. The Twittersphere, though, took issue with this act of censorship and used the easy, quick sharing capabilities of Twitter to confound the effectiveness of enforcing the order be retweeting the story faster and more broadly than it could be removed. Folks also took to Facebook to post information too.

Today, now, we read that an Irish newspaper has released information sealed under a different superinjunction. Since Ireland isn’t part of the UK, the British superinjunction has no teeth in Ireland.

The Twitter episode also shows how the old tools to control information simply don’t work now. Peer sharing creates millions of possible communications channels at once, and it’s infeasible to monitor and shut them all down at once. This is compounded too by the fact that there are multiple peer sharing channels. Even if you are able to block Twitter for example, people will move to Facebook and even text messages.

Both episodes also underscore how actively trying to kill discussion of something in the public sphere ultimately achieves the opposite effect. In a global, socially connected world like we live in now, not only can you not put the toothpaste back in the tube, but if you try, people will pick up on that and give the story significantly more attention than it otherwise would have gotten.

This global, socially connected world is one that is highly sensitive to attempts to control information. And it’s one that will respond quickly and vigorously to those attempts.

The lesson from this is clear. If you have a story that you don’t want people to read about: leave it. Do NOT try to shut down discussion because you will only make the matter worse. Your best bet is to try and hide in plain sight.

Using Facebook to Help After a Disaster

A short post today to highlight an ingenious and fascinating new application of Facebook.

In the wake of the terrible string of tornadoes across the southern United States this week, some people have stood up a Facebook page to enable people who find lost photos and documents to post scanned images of them in the hopes that their rightful owners will find them and claim them.

Granted, this is a new thing and it may not work as expected. One person has posted on the wall a reminder/caution to obscure personally identifiable data, saying the last thing a tornado victim needs is to be a subsequent victim of identity theft. And there may be risks around theft or unverified claims.

But the fact is that people are trying to use new tool to solve a very human problem. And that deserves note and watching.

It also marks another way in which social networking is becoming truly “social”: a part of our true social interactions as people.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.