News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 1K     3 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 273     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 806     0 

Are Social Media Websites like Facebook and Twitter becoming too powerful?

I don't think that Twitter is too powerful. They solve one problem, and they do it extremely effectively and simply.

Facebook is far more debatable. My huge problem with them is how they're trying to wall their site off from the rest of the Internet, and essentially become the Internet. The kind of fragmentation they're trying to create will be disastrous for the web. It will set us back years and years. Nothing depresses me more than seeing companies advertise their product, and then point consumers to "facebook.com/company". I struggle to figure out how that is any more convenient or better than "company.com" (and ICANN recently approved changes where names can become TLD's, so in the future it will just be "company"). This isn't even to say anything about their attitude towards their users and their privacy, for which they have a long track record of showing little more than contept.

I'm in the Google+ trial and it seems extremely promising, I'm really looking forward to this as a way to get a lot of the benefits of Facebook from a system that doesn't attempt to subvert the Internet's natural ecosystem.
 
I don't use Fakebook or TWITter. I agree with the OP.

Here are some strips:

nvuw6q.png

Xzlqsck.gif

7rF3ndF.gif

97MpthA.gif

2T9fRow.gif

TAEHo8g.gif


Nowadays, both Fakebook and TWITter are very pro-business. It is very annoying to see advertisements containing Fakebook and TWITter logos. You know how much free advertising they get? There is no doubt they are getting too powerful. True that the Arab Spring used social media. However, the Arab Spring allowed new dictators to gain control. Liberators often become the new oppressors, as history has shown over and over. Why? Liberators try to gain trust of many people before they become oppressors, since they want to maintain power and getting people on their side helps maintain their power. Fakebook and TWITter are liberators that later become oppressors. Social media is a powerful tool when oppressors take advantage of them and use them as propaganda to drown out the liberators' messages.

Fakebook makes so much money from selling personal information to advertisers, as well as from people who purchase in-game items as a way to win much more easily and/or to buy time (and yes, Fakebook not only condones real-money gambling, but has casino-type games that allow players to spend real money). TWITter also makes so much money from selling personal information to advertisers. Fakebook does advertise alcohol to minors, despite what they say. Oh, and Fakebook does have a "buy" button, which is not good for spendthrifts and/or those who don't know how to budget, as they are many automotive advertisements for example.

Fakebook and TWITter help unite people over common interests. However, they also divide people over opposing interests. Cyberbullying is rampant on both websites; there is quite a large number who died from those websites, albeit indirectly (often through suicides), and are rarely reported. TWITter's reporting feature is very byzantine, which only empowers the bullies (and ignoring them does not always work, since anyone (including those with malicious intents) can create multiple accounts easily). Free speech also allows those with extreme views to express their opinions, no matter how vile.

Let me mention Zitagram. It is owned by Fakebook and a very large portion consist of ego-boosting selfies.

There are also Reddit and Tumblr as well. LinkedIn is much more professional.

Wikipedia as social media is debatable. I am on the side that Wikipedia is social media. Why? Take a look at an active user's userpage. It contains userboxes and userbox categories. There are thanked edits, as well as watchlists and WikiProjects. Oh, and it involves collaboration with many people (and Wikipedia (especially in user talk pages) has so much drama not unlike Fakebook or TWITter (evidence of drama can also be seen with semi-protected articles, which are semi-protected because it had drama before they were semi-protected)).

Here is a good website that discusses the problems of Wikipedia (and all other social media): http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/

Here is some criticism of Facebook: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook

1146px-Mark_Zuckerberg_1984_Berlin_Graffiti.jpg

There is no coincidence that Zuckerberg was born on the same year as a certain George Orwell novel. Zuckerberg is Big Brother. Orwell got the year right.
 
Last edited:
Long Island Mike said:
Everyone: I had to ask this question:

Are Social Media Websites like Facebook and Twitter becoming too powerful?

I want to ask opinions here at UT because my Internet use does not include either site...

I am not a Facebook member and I do not "Tweet"...

I am a member of posting sites like UT and a couple of others that concern interests and hobbies that I have...

One thing that I was never a fan of was posting any personal information on the Internet...

There are good things about Social Media such as reuniting with people you knew in the past but as everyone knows there is a huge downside also...

Speaking of Social Media: What has become of MySpace? You just don't hear about it any more...

In closing I ask if there could ever be a backlash towards the giants of Social Media?

It would not affect me because that sort of thing is just not for me...

Opinion and thoughts from Long Island Mike
Click to expand...

What do you mean by too powerful? The medium can reach a lot of people in a short amount of time - yes. Can it hurt them? that they are getting bigger? I cannot see how since they are the mediums not any content - backlash how?

My space went away because it wasn't as good and didn't provide enough value for the users to continue using it...
 
I think Facebook is on the decline in its core market of new consumers, i.e. teens and young adults.

o-TEENS-FACEBOOK-900.jpg


While its brand reach is declining, meaning its customers (i.e. corporations) have less connection with Facebook's product (i.e. us)

Organic-Facebook-Reach-Chart.jpg


As a 43 year old male I use Facebook to share pics with family overseas, and that's about it. All of the under 25 year old folks I speak to at work have stopped or seldom use Facebook, while they claim to be huge Twitter and Instagram users. Once your Mom is on Facebook posting vids on cats, any teen or young adult will run for the door.

IMO, Facebook will the the Myspace of the 2010s. Big, then huge, then forgotten.
 
The average Facebook user is well older than its CEO even.

Teens and young adults flock to whatever is new and cool. Once it becomes mainstream, they flock to another website, since the old website becomes a sellout. I am 26 years old and I know this trend very well.

Instagram is owned by Facebook. It would allow them to continue growing for years to come. Instagram is like Facebook for young people. However, I use neither.

Admiral Beez, you should take a look at the comic strips I posted above.

With regards to the "Other" category, Reddit is becoming popular with young males.

There is quite a gender gap between users of various social media. See here: http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/08/26/why-women-have-no-time-for-wikipedia/

Wikipedia, the most popular reference site on the Internet, as well as the most popular non-profit website, has a huge disjunct between readers and contributors, with regards to demographics. Women often prefer the likes of Facebook and Twitter over the likes of Wikipedia or Reddit. Why? Women tend to prefer websites full of pictures rather than one full of long walls of text, while males tend to prefer utilitarian websites.
 
Last edited:
Johnny Au said:
There is no coincidence that Zuckerberg was born on the same year as a certain George Orwell novel. Zuckerberg is Big Brother. Orwell got the year right.
Click to expand...
Only if the public surrender their privacy. No one is forcing us onto Facebook. I have a Facebook account, but under a pseudonym that only my true friends know of.

Do you notice how we're now being encouraged to keep (or back-up) our hard drives and data to the "cloud". Well, of course the government and big data don't want you to be storing things on your own home pc where they can't access and data mine it. The NSA would likely prefer that everyone's data was on the "cloud" so that it could be easily accessed with our without warrant.
 
Admiral Beez said:
Do you notice how we're now being encouraged to keep (or back-up) our hard drives and data to the "cloud". Well, of course the government and big data don't want you to be storing things on your own home pc where they can't access and data mine it. The NSA would likely prefer that everyone's data was on the "cloud" so that it could be easily accessed with our without warrant.
Click to expand...
This is why I still back everything up to an external hard drive. Oh, and believe it or not, external hard drives are cheaper than cloud backup. Why? You only need to pay for external hard drives once, while cloud backup is often paid yearly.
 
Admiral Beez said:
Only if the public surrender their privacy. No one is forcing us onto Facebook. I have a Facebook account, but under a pseudonym that only my true friends know of.

Do you notice how we're now being encouraged to keep (or back-up) our hard drives and data to the "cloud". Well, of course the government and big data don't want you to be storing things on your own home pc where they can't access and data mine it. The NSA would likely prefer that everyone's data was on the "cloud" so that it could be easily accessed with our without warrant.
Click to expand...

Enough of your metadata is already available to scrutiny - they don't *really* need access to the content of your HD. Ditto FB pseudonym.

Paper and pen is probably the tools of choice if you want your data to remain private.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Enough of your metadata is already available to scrutiny - they don't *really* need access to the content of your HD. Ditto FB pseudonym.

Paper and pen is probably the tools of choice if you want your data to remain private.

AoD
Click to expand...
...and a locked drawer and/or a locked safe inside a locked room inside a locked house
 
Backlash against social media? Easy answer-Don't become a member...

chloe22 said:
What do you mean by too powerful? The medium can reach a lot of people in a short amount of time - yes. Can it hurt them? that they are getting bigger? I cannot see how since they are the mediums not any content - backlash how?

My space went away because it wasn't as good and didn't provide enough value for the users to continue using it...
Click to expand...

Chloe: This was actually in the end an easy question to now answer: If you want to rebel against the giants of social media
don't join that web site whatever it may be...

Social media websites are rich powerful corporations that have major influence in aspects of today's society and just as I
figured those "in the know" here at UT would answer questions and offer insight about how social media works...

That interesting spray-painted caricature of Mark Zuckerberg and his birth year of 1984 speaks words on how some view
social media and what it can do or control...

I thank everyone for all of the opinions and information concerning this subject...LI MIKE
 
Yes I agree social media websites are becoming not only too powerfull but making everyone dumber.

instead of actually discussing news, you hear stupid things like "OH MY GOD, DONT EAT NUTELA ITS BAD FOR YOU"

or "stop MONOSANTO" Or "gmos or msgs are bad for you" basically crap info, why do u ask/ because theres a lot more things that are bad for you besides nutella and no body talks or cares about them, but the ppl reading the articles stop eating nutella or trash talk it, but eat things 10 times worse for them but contains the bad stuff nutella contains but dont talk about it. hypocrits if u ask me
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top