Entries from July 2011 ↓
July 18th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Internet Safety, Online Reputation Management, Parenting, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about overconfident criminals getting caught after boasting about their crimes online, as well as the feasibility of teaching mandatory social media safety classes in elementary schools.
–
They say there’s no such thing as the perfect crime, but it’s especially true when the criminals blab about it on Facebook. This article from CBS News discusses how some criminals were caught after boasting about their crimes on Facebook. Quoting the article, “In Kentucky, one man had his probation revoked for breaking rules that required him to stay alcohol free. A prosecutor tells the Courier-Journal newspaper the man posted pictures of himself drinking – and this, after inviting his probation officer to be his friend on Facebook.”
This article in the Austin-American Statesman discusses the social scoring service Klout and how one’s online reputation, equated here with one’s social networking popularity, can help one gain access to certain special events or products. While the article’s main focus is on social scoring rewards, it also discusses how online reputation can negatively impact an individual’s life, such as during a hiring decision.
This article from the Washington Post talks about Old Dominion University Computer Science Professor Michael Nelson’s research into Internet history and his studies into how information is saved and permanently archived online. Quoting the article, “Nelson and some colleagues at Old Dominion and the Los Alamos National Laboratory have developed a sort of Internet time machine called Memento . When attached to a browser, it enables the user to search for a Web site as it appeared on some past date, if an archived page exists.”
Some schools in Australia are considering adding social media safety classes to their curriculum to help fight the growing problem of cyberbullying and also to help students better understand the importance of a good online reputation. According to the Telegraph, Australian parents also back this effort: “The country’s main parents association has backed calls for schools to teach students about online etiquette, privacy protection and the long-term consequences of posting embarrassing or offensive content.” The adoption of mandatory social media safety classes has been discussed throughout the world, but it has yet to catch on in a big way. Perhaps Australia will lead the way and show off a model that works.
The hacker group Anonymous, which has been linked to a number of high profile cyber attacks in recent months, was booted from the new Google social network Google+ for violating the company’s terms of service. In response, Anonymous has vowed to build its own social network called AnonPlus, which will offer “a social network where there is no fear of censorship, of blackout, nor of holding back” according to a statement from the group.
July 15th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Internet Safety, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about the growth of Google+, share some cybersafety advice, and share more evidence that self-regulation among Internet advertisers is flawed.
–
After only two weeks, Google’s new social networking site Google+ has accumulated 10 million users, according to Google CEO Larry Page. The incredible growth of Google+ suggests that the service, Google’s latest in a long line of attempts at social networking, may actually be a viable threat to Facebook. Part of the appeal of Google+ is the service’s easy ability to filter contacts into distinct groups or “circles.” Of course, Google’s numbers should be taken with a grain of salt since the company is a legitimate tech giant. Facebook and Twitter took much longer to achieve the same number of users, but they were much smaller at the time by comparison.
The British Medical Association (BMA) recently issued a warning to its members to avoid contacting patients online via social networking websites. According to the Wall Street Journal Health blog, the BMA told its members, “Given the greater accessibility of personal information, entering into informal relationships with patients on sites like Facebook can increase the likelihood of inappropriate boundary transgressions, particularly where previously there existed only a professional relationship between a doctor and patient.”
The BMA’s warning mirrors similar calls from other medical organizations, which are collectively coming to grips with how the Internet, and social media in particular, has changed the doctor-patient dynamic.
According to a new UK survey from the security firm Bullguard, “more than half of parents surveyed said they keep an eye on their children by checking their activity on sites like Facebook.” As reported by Mobiledia.com, the survey revealed that “nearly half of parents check their children’s updates and look at postings, while one-in-three check out tagged photos.” However, parents are not always able to access their child’s page. According to the same study, “Thirty percent of parents say their kids rejected their attempts to ‘friend’ their them,” forcing parents to find alternate means to check up on their kids online.
This article from the Seattle Weekly offers advice to teens and their parents on how to avoid having their social media accounts violated and used for cyberbullying or cyberstalking. The offer’s sensible suggestions include always logging out of your social media account when you’re finished with your session and never using the “save password” option.
PCWorld reports that, “some online advertising networks continue to track Web users after tracking opt-out requests, even though the networks have promised to honor those questions, according to a new study from Stanford University’s Center for Internet Society.” The study revealed that 33 out of 64 members of the Network Advertising Initiative “left tracking cookies in place after a Web user opted out of targeted ads,” in defiance of the NAI’s stated self-regulatory guidelines. Stanford’s research sheds light on why self-regulatory efforts are not enough to protect consumers from data abuse online.
July 14th, 2011 | CyberBullying, Facebook, Google, Legal Issues, Online Reputation Management, Parenting, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about Google+ privacy settings, share a case of cyberbullying, and ponder the role that Facebook plays in divorce.
–
Google’s new social networking project, Google+, is still in beta mode, but it’s growing fast. And along with the site’s growth have come expectations for simple privacy controls. Yesterday, in response to user concerns, Google implemented more comprehensive privacy controls for all Google+ users. The controls, which are still somewhat difficult to use, allow users to conceal their profile so that only their name and picture are visible. This article from ComputerWorld discusses how to use the new privacy controls.
In a case that shows the consequences of cyberbullying for both bullies and victims, a 12-year-old Washington girl has been given probation for cyberstalking, following an incident in which she accessed a classmate’s Facebook account and posted sexually explicit images and language to the victim’s page. According to MSNBC, the bully “not only posted explicit photos, but sent out solicitations for sex,” and, despite the victim’s attempts to delete the inappropriate content, it has “been copied and reposted elsewhere and everywhere.”
This article from research scientist Sheril Kirshenbaum discusses the ways in which Facebook and similar social networking technology has contributed to extra-marital affairs and divorce among the baby boomer generation. Describing how the sudden reappearance of a lost love via Facebook can trigger the release of certain brain chemicals, Kirshenbaum writes, “But now the ghosts of romance past are alive and well online, popping up on chat services and sending greetings on Facebook. In the 21st century, old friends are virtually at our fingertips, and a seemingly harmless email sent to someone with the innocent intention of ‘catching up’ can quickly go further.”
A true sign of the times, 1 in 10 household pets in the UK has a Facebook profile according to new research. The data, commissioned by (no joke) a pet insurance company, reveals not only the Brits’ fondness for animals, but also an extremely high level of awareness and comfort with social networking technology. If we’ve reached the point where we’re creating social networking profiles for our pets, we can surely say that social media is here to stay.
Child identity theft is on the rise, which is a major concern for regulators who hope to protect kids from long-lasting reputation and privacy damage. According to veteran consumer advocate and Reuters reporter Mitch Lipka, “a study found children’s identities are stolen at more than 50 times the rate of adults.” Because children don’t have credit, it is easy for thieves to rack up fraudulent activity without fear of it being discovered in a routine credit report. In order to help prevent child ID theft, parents should take proactive steps to limit where their child’s information appears online and also strictly limit who they provide it to you in personal transactions.
July 13th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Internet Safety, Legal Issues, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about an unfortunate identity mix-up on Facebook, why Google executives are keeping to themselves on Google+, how banks are serving foreclosure notices via social networking sites, and why a man’s vacation photos could cost him an insurance claim.
–
The Internet went into an angry uproar last week when Casey Anthony was acquitted of killing her two-year old daughter. However, in its lust for vengeance, the Web may have picked the wrong target for retribution. This article from MSNBC details the plight of a different Casey Anthony, a middle-aged African-American man, who has been besieged with threats on his Facebook page since the trial. Mr. Anthony told MSNBC that the extra attention went from funny to scary quickly: “It went from comical and scary to being just outright … make you mad, you know, because these people don’t even know you, they don’t have a clue.”
This is not the first time someone has had their identity mixed up on Facebook, and it likely won’t be the last, which is why it’s important for Facebook users to lock down their Facebook profile as much as possible if they intend to use the site.
In the UK, an insurance company has sued a man for contempt after they saw Facebook photos that seemingly disproved his previous insurance claim. According to the BBC, following an auto accident, the man sued the other driver’s insurance company claiming, “he had been left unable to drive and was dependent on a wheelchair when going any distance from home.” The man also claimed he was “phobic” of traveling. However, in the Facebook pictures, the man and his wife are seen enjoying a caravan vacation, which is what prompted the lawsuit from the insurance company.
For the last few years, banks around the world have begun serving foreclosure documents to delinquent homeowners via Facebook. As detailed in this article from the Boston Herald, “The Facebook foreclosure phenomenon started in 2008 when an Australian judge approved a lender’s effort to foreclose on a home by serving notice on the borrowers’ Facebook account, as well as at their Canberra home and a second address. The couple were considered successfully notified in the eyes of the court because within a day of receiving the notice, they tightened their privacy settings. Shortly thereafter, MKM Capital, the lender, seized and sold the house. Since then, courts around the world have approved the use of Facebook in similar cases.”
As their Google+ social network has taken off, Google executives have begun closing up their accounts as tightly as possible. As Ed Bott at ZDNet reports, the Google execs are using the site’s strictest privacy settings to ensure that the number of people following them is hidden, which of course begs the question, “If Google feels that standardizing on these settings is important for their privacy, why isn’t it the default for the rest of us?”
July 12th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits, Research, Social Networking | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we share an interesting study from Carnegie-Mellon University, talk about Google+ privacy issues, and how Facebook doesn’t really want you to be social.
–
Many researchers assume that online shoppers are just looking for the best deal. But a new study from Carnegie-Mellon University reveals that privacy is even more important than price. In the study, participants were tasked with purchasing products from websites rated high and low for privacy protections. Quoting TGDaily, “when shopping online for batteries, study participants were happy to pay 59 cents more of their own money for batteries that came from such a website.They made significantly more purchases from sites rated ‘high privacy’ (47.4 percent) than those rated ‘no privacy’ (5.6 percent).” This finding clearly demonstrates that online privacy is important to consumers.
Facebook wants its users to share information, but only if they share it on Facebook. CNET reports that the company recently shut down a second application that allowed Facebook users to export their contacts to the new Google+ social network. Obviously, Facebook is just protecting its turf from a new competitor, but the irony of Facebook hoarding people’s data while the company claims it wants the world to share and be connected is pretty rich.
With Facebook’s recent messaging change, the company has overhauled its message inbox. Unlike the previous iteration of the inbox, which listed messages independently in the same way that e-mail does, the new system includes every message ever shared between the two users. The problem with this, as Bridget Carey points out in her Netiquette column, is that if you’ve ever had an awkward exchange with someone on Facebook, you’re continually reminded of it when you try and message them again.
Carey writes, “This is a wakeup call for anyone who depends on Facebook for messaging professional contacts. You’re better off sticking with a traditional email if you don’t want an awkward message to linger. (Deleting a message will only eliminate it from your view.) And if you do get a message via Facebook, it’s all the more important to respond.”
According to The Telegraph, “the [UK] Nursing and Midwifery Council has told health workers not to put sensitive information or photographs relating to their jobs on social networking websites, and to keep their professional and personal lives separate on the internet.” The advice comes as more and more nurses are asking the organization for clarification on what they can and can’t do online. Prof Dickon Weir-Hughes, chief executive of the NMC, said in a statement, “The NMC is committed to public protection and ensuring nurses and midwives make the welfare of those in their care their first priority at all times. “I would advise nurses and midwives to exercise caution when using social networking sites. They could risk their registration if they share sensitive information, make inappropriate comments, or befriend patients online.”
In an interesting article for ZDNet, Michael Krigsman writes about Google+’s privacy policy and how its vagueness could spell trouble for users. Krigsman takes particular exception with a line that gives Google intellectual property rights to anything users share. Quoting the article, “On the surface, it seems rather innocuous, intended merely to give Google permission to transmit your data across various networks onto all sorts of mobile devices. However, Google demands extremely broad rights from users. Under what circumstances would you sign a contract giving someone such free range with your intellectual property?”
