Consumer Guide for Today's Media

By Ava Dinges

There is no doubt that User Generated Content (UGC) websites like Wikipedia and YouTube have revolutionized the way people get their news and information. But since its creation, the mass media has warned about the accuracy of this “new” media. Unlike established news websites, like CNN.com or ABC.com, user-generated websites do not have to follow strict content guidelines. Anything can become breaking news, without anyone verifying whether it’s true or not. Throughout their existence, UGC websites have been criticized for spreading rumors.

And it seems that once again, UGC websites may be living up to their reputation.

Yesterday morning on the popular CGM website Digg, someone posted a blog titled: "Google, Microsoft Said to Be Preparing Bids for Digg".

Quite obvious from its name, the blog was about the possibility of Digg being sold to either Google or Microsoft. The article’s only source was an “unnamed source” (curse words to any trained journalist's ears), but the author reassured his readers by saying that the source was “very close to the deal”.

Within hours, the post made it on Digg’s most popular list and over 900 other Digg users commented on the page.

Some users were against the sale. Stone420 commented: “Unless you want to retire.
DONT DO IT.”

Others endorsed it. “This is a big cash-in for the digg founders, who only received $11.3M from investors...”, wrote abstractwater.

Some even gave their opinion on who’s bid digg.com should accept. User macwisdom wrote, “Stay above corporate influence ...Well as much as you can.... If you got to sell go with google.”

But buried in the midst of the whole debate, were comments suggesting that there may not even be a sale at all. Digg user canewediggit wrote: “not sure if I’m buying this story”, listing Microsoft’s hatred for the Digg.com website and Google’s recent financial losses as major reasons.

The original post created such a stir that Digg CEO Jay Adelson felt obliged to post a rebuttal of his own. In his post, titled "Rumors and Speculation", Adelson denounced that any sort of bidding war was taking place, marking the original post as “completely inaccurate.”

Yet even after being confirmed as a rumor, comments continued to be made about the sale. User prleet writes, “DONT SELL OUT, everyone use caps lock.”

Talk about a perfect example of the idiom "One Bad Apple". Chalk that up to the list of black marks on the blogging reputation.

By Ava Dinges

If you thought the Newsfeed was the next best thing since sliced bread, just wait until you hear whatFacebook has planned for you next. The newest Facebook redesign will include such things as the wall-feed, and strive to bring Facebook closer to its roots as a communication website.

On Tuesday, March 25, Facebook hosted its first Developer Roundtable events at its offices in Palo Alto, Cali., to discuss its newest platform. Private developers across the country were encouraged to attend, provided they could add value to the conversation.

Facebook called for invitation requests back in early March, inviting developers to attend any of the many roundtables to be held within the next several months. The topic on hand at this week’s event was: redesigning the profile page and restoring the application system reputation, according to private developer Justin Smith, who attended the first event.

Sasha Rush, Facebook software engineer, said that “the main goals of the redesign is to help users communicate and share information more efficiently, generate more meaningful activity and increase user trust”, according to Smith's notes from the event. Among the updates will be a merging of the wall and Newsfeed, since Rush said Facebook views these as the “most important communication channels” on the site. Facebook also plans to add tabs to the website, which will help hide the more static profile information, turning more attention toward newly posted information.

While most people will appreciate how much these new updates will de-clutter the website, users should also know that the updates are geared toward maintaining the essence of social networking websites: communication. The feed’s focus will move away from broadcasting what users have done, to sharing more about content being created, said Rush.

Sounds like Facebook is trying to step away from its current look as social site, and reach toward becoming more of a news medium. With that, one problem seems to arise, as it has arisen for every other news organization trying to make it online: How will the site make money? New media companies have yet to establish financial platform that actually works, so why is facebook spending so much time on goal that’s unrelated to making money.

Smith, who tracks facebook diligently on his Inside Facebook blog, has a more idealistic and positive take on Facebook’s latest initiative. He does not see this new initiative as one that will “instantly reap financial benefits”, yet sees it more as a “long term plan that has the potential to significantly change how the world shares information.”

Nicely said, but Facebook still needs a way to make some money, especially if it heads in the communication-based direction. Personally, I’m not going to lose sleep over facebook’s potential losses. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg must know what he’s doing. Anyone capable of creating a colossal online empire like facebook while still in college, shows hope of innovativeness. I mean, the "kid" (23-year-old) is the world's youngest self-made billionare. Who knows, maybe Facebook will be the first beat everyone to the financial platform punch.

By Ava Dinges

The other day in class, a student made a comment that got me thinking yet again about the many ways new media has made an impact on young society. He mentioned how fast videos of the KU Final Four Mass Street riots made it onYouTube, with some videos posted within hours. Not to say that any of the quick turnaroundvideos had any sort of merit, but I hear being the fastest YouTuber may score you well with the ladies.

YouTube’s trademark slogan is “Broadcast Yourself”, and I can’t think of a better way to describe the way the young generation treats these new forms of media. Sites such as YouTube, MySpace and Facebook, give us the potential to broadcast any sort of detail of our lives, with some people taking this much too literally. I remember visiting a “friends” facebook page once only to find her Newsfeed littered with her hour by hour activities and feelings:

So and so is bored right now.... Posted at 3:30 p.m.
So and so is doing homework, yuck!.... Posted at 4 p.m.
So and so loves her boyfriend...Posted at 5 p.m.

(I think you get the picture).

All I’m saying is that people have become obsessed with sharing their story with the world because of new media;or maybe society has always been obsessed with this, yet finally has the means to actually do it. People might give you funny looks if you started handing out pictures from your last bar escapade, but that’s essentially what’s happening on social networking sites. I can’t remember the last time I took a picture with my digital camera without someone shouting, “you better tag that on Facebook.”

I often wonder what kind of impact the ability to broadcast ourselves has on our lives. It has obviously changed the way we share our lives (I can typically stay connected with the lives of my friends back home without ever having to pick up the phone, just by looking at their profiles on Facebook). But I also wonder if this ability also impacts the way we live our lives. From a personal note, I’ve seen a difference in my life. I’m definitely more careful about the pictures I let even my friends take of me, knowing they could haunt me online. And I’ve noticed a tendency for content in the online realm to spark more arguments and rumors in real life. Your boyfriend may not have seen you go out with your friends in that skimpy mini skirt, but he’ll definitely have it shoved in his face through pictures the next time he goes online.

It’s great to “broadcast yourself” and all, but some things cross the unnecessary, irrelevant, and the what-the-heck-were-you-thinking-when-you-posted-that line.

By Ava Dinges

On a scale of one to ten, I would give myself an ‘eight’ on Facebook privacy savvy ness. I have never listed my phone number or street address on my profile, my profile is only open to my friends, and I never accept friends that I don’t know. Sometimes, I even go as far as to delete people that I’d no longer like to have access to my profile (no offense or anything).

Despite all my precautions, and the false sense of security I get when I un-friend people on Facebook, realistically, I’m probably not anywhere near an eight on the safety scale. Nor are most people who use Facebook. That’s because there are still ways for random people to obtain your information, no matter how many privacy measures you use.

In 2007, Facebook introduced its newest platform based on the use of “applications”, a move that helped make it the sixth most trafficked site in the U.S. Most applications are third-party created, with the purpose being to generate content that is of interest to users while promoting companies and internet developers. From “bumper stickers” to “sports brackets” to “babe-o-meters”, I’m sure there’s an application for everyone. According to a keynote speech by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the most important aspect of the applications is that “they use all the real connections that people have in order to help people share information more effectively”.

There's plenty of ways to waste your life away online
with Facebook's 23,466 applications.
Courtesy of: Facebook.com