Facebook Addiction Disorder. Real?

Article


This article questions the reasons behind FAD. Questioning if FAD is actually a mental health concern. Also, if the term FAD made by modern psychologists is simply just a way to define our fascination with the social network. The Article describes how Facebook includes something for everyone and that it is only human nature to get carried away on the site.

This was the only article that I could find about any opposition towards FAD. Even in this article it still supports FAD on some occasions towards the end but the beginning you can tell that the writer still questions if FAD is a true concern or not.

I do support the article when it explains about the human nature to get carried away with Facebook, but I do believe there is a sense of being addicted. There have been many cases that I have read where people access Facebook multiple times a day. Check it in the morning before they brush teeth, and check Facebook before the go to sleep. During a work day in office many have complained of checking Facebook multiple times a day, about 5 times or more in one work day. This seems to be a problem of being addicted because many can't perform to their upmost ability being sidetracked on Facebook. Just like any other drug, the symptoms keep you from your top performance and can ruin your life. Some cases involve ignoring family members. One woman ignored her daughters plea for help on homework. To me ignoring your daughter over something can be  sense of an addiction disorder. I have also read where psychologists have had multiple clients come in and talk about being to drawn and strung to Facebook and to me these cases and stories tell me that Facebook addiction is real and has to be dealt with.

Fighter Jet gets shot down by libyan rebels

Thought it would be cool to post something different and interesting other than Facebook. Recently the civil war broke loose in Libya and this is footage of a fighter jet from Gaddafi's army. The rebels shot it down and it is crazy how we can see this today right at home, without being at war. Anyways check it out, tell me what you think.

Growing up too Fast?

Article

This Article talks about how Facebook is growing massively large in just the last 8 months. The article said that it has produced a million new jobs in the last 8 months around the world. It recently reached its 100 millionth user and is already getting closer to the 200th marker. The article also talks about how Facebook has broken the social barrier between families. That this one woman who recently joined Facebook has already found cousins in Zurich, Hong Kong and New York that she never knew and prob. never would if it wasn't for Facebook.....

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2011/0303/Charlie-Sheen-on-Twitter-How-much-more-damage-can-he-do


This is an article about the recent news of Charlie Sheen. Its pretty interesting because when he made a twitter account he had over 1 million users in 25 hours. According to the Guinness book of world records, he broke the record of most users in the shortest amount of time. Its about the cancellation of the show Two and a Half men and what Charlie Sheen has to say about it.

Facebook Addiction Disorder (FAD)

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/facebook-addiction.html

This article is pretty interesting. It talks about a disease called Facebook Addiction Disorder.
Some of the things that are listed are pretty true and scary. There are also statistics about a survey leading to the percentage of users that check facebook before they brush their teeth. Here is the list...

• You wake up in the morning, and first thing you do is log onto your Facebook account.
• You spend more than an hour on Facebook - at a stretch or in short episodes over regular intervals.
• You and your siblings converse through Facebook wall and messages, even though you stay in same house.
• You can't seem to stop thinking about Facebook updates and comments when you are offline.
• You check Facebook for updates and comments after every hour at your workstation or on your cell phone.
• You look forward to get home in the evening so that you can see what is happening in cyberspace (on Facebook to be precise.)
• Your Facebook wall is full of status updates, comments, and applications that you just used.
• You can't go for a day without using Facebook, and even this thought makes you go into sort of depression.
• You give priority to Facebook over your commitments in professional and personal life.
• And lastly, your day ends with you checking Facebook for that one last time and bidding people 'good nite' through your Facebook status update. (You may even get an urge to wake up at middle of the night to see whether anyone has commented on your 'gud nite' status.)

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-23/health/ep.facebook.addict_1_facebook-page-facebook-world-social-networking?_s=PM:HEALTH

This link addresses the problem of being addicted to Facebook. The writer talks about a mother that is way too addicted to Facebook and how that affects her life. Her child asked her for help on homework but she could't because she was way to busy on Facebook. Really? It also says that this mother checks her Facebook about 10 times a day, right when she wakes up and before she goes to bed. The big shocker was that she actually ignored her daughter for help because she was too busy on Facebook. To me this is taking it too far and once you start ignoring the people around you, especially family, you have a problem. Some questions I have is how many hours do people spend on Facebook a day? How has that affected other peoples lives? How many times does the average person log on Facebook? You can surely argue that if these numbers are too high something has to change. You can't live your life on Facebook.

Essay blog

So, I finished my essay yesterday and overall I'm pretty happy with it. I thought I did a good job evaluating my topic and I hope I get a good grade. I thought the essay was fun and interesting. Writing about something that is so well-used in our lives was pretty easy to write about. I enjoyed writing this paper and it took little time. I knew so much about it that I had to do no research. I wish every essay was like that. haha

Ads on Facebook

3 ads on Facebook:

This particular ad had to do with a rave event in Raleigh NC. Supposedly some club called Planet dub is having a huge rave on Feb. 11. Music ranges from techno, house to hardcore and acid.
-I'm guessing I was targeted for this ad because some of the Likes and interests I have include house and techno music. Also maybe I was targeted because I'm a freshman in college and I'm at the age where a person is wanting to go to events like these.

Another ad was to enter the X3 Matchup to win the ultimate X3 experience. All I have to do to enter was "like" the ad.
-To be a target for this ad I'm sure everyone on facebook was included because who wouldn't want to win a car (especially a BMW). But they could target me because in my info I put I can speak German and my hometown is Dusseldorf Germany. Since my info includes german characteristics and the car they are giving away is made from a German company maybe they targeted me because I am more likely to enter. Also I'm a college student and a free car would be the best thing right now.

This ad was advertising a music degree, asking if I would like to earn my bachelors degree in the music industry with full sail university.
-I believe I was targeted for this because I'm a freshman and college and maybe they thought I wasn't sure what I was majoring in and if they advertised a degree in music it would sound interesting. I'm not gonna lie I definitely wouldn't mind doing that but I'm sure some kind of talent is required to obtain that degree. Also many of my likes and interests deals with music. I also post a numerous amount of videos so maybe thats how they targeted me.

The Facebook Effect Review

Review: Kirkpatrick’s The Facebook Effect Is A Wonderfully Biased History Of Facebook

Michael Arrington

Jun 24, 2010

I’ve read David Kirkpatrick’s The Facebook Effect twice now. I’ve also interviewed him about the book twice on stage – once at TechCrunch Disrupt and a second time this evening at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco.

On a side note, as far as I know Kirkpatrick’s publisher Simon & Schuster is still planning on suing us for copyright infringement. I never heard back from them after their initial legal volley. I’m not holding that against Kirkpatrick, though – he’s a long time friend.

So I’ve spent a lot of time with this book. And I’ve spent a lot of time covering Facebook over the last five years, since my first post in 2005 when the company told us that 85% of college students at covered schools were logging into the site at least once a week.

About two years ago Kirkpatrick decided to write a book about Facebook. At the time the site was growing extremely quickly but it certainly wasn’t clear that it would become the 800 lb cultural gorilla that it is today. But he walked away from his position as one of the most senior tech writers at Fortune to pursue this book. And the end result is a fascinating read.

Here’s my recommendation: If you are interested in startups, or how marketing and advertising are evolving, or just how Facebook is changing the world, buy this book. It’s very readable and gives great insights into how Facebook grew from a dorm room to a huge company. There’s no other book out there that gives such a complete history of the company and of Mark Zuckerberg.

But if you’re looking for an objective and true history of Facebook, this isn’t it. Kirkpatrick really, really loves Facebook. So much so that I’m not sure he’s even close to capable of being objective about the company. He’s Bella staring at Edward, the vampire, with those puppy dog eyes full of deep, meaningful, painful adoration. Edward/Facebook is awesomeness in a bottle.

The result is a book that not only celebrates Facebook’s truly amazing accomplishments, but it’s also a book that makes excuses for, or denies, Facebook’s stumbles along the way. And that’s fine. But it isn’t really the truth. And what we need, eventually, is a book that tells the absolute, brutal truth about Facebook.

Facebook isn’t just a social network or a potentially huge business, says Kirkpatrick. It might alsobring world peace. In the prologue he ponders: “Could [Facebook] become a factor in helping bring together a world filled with political and religious strife and in the midst of environmental and economic breakdown?” he adds later: “[Facebook] is altering the character of political activism, and in some countries it is starting to affect the process of democracy itself.”

Oh boy.

I mean, historically speaking all this may certainly end up being true, and more. But it just seems a little early to be talking about Facebook in these terms. In our conversation this evening Kirkpatrick also compared Zuckerberg to Bill Gates, noting how both have a strong desire to mold the world to their vision. That may also eventually be true, but we need to let a little time go by before we put Zuckerberg in the same category as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs.

I’d forgive Kirkpatrick’s love affair with the company if he was a little more circumspect and careful with the historical facts. The two famous lawsuits that fell out of Facebook’s early days – ConnectU and houseSYSTEM – were characterized more as nuisance lawsuits than real questions about the integrity of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

We don’t need Kirkpatrick to shy away from the ugly details about the early days of Facebook. Sausage making is never pretty. But he gives such a one-sided view of the story that it leaves me wondering what details are being left out.

And plenty of details are left out, apparently. Kirkpatrick says he never actually spoke with the Aaron Greenspan, or the Winkelvoss brothers, or any of the other people who sued Facebook and Zuckerberg. Instead Kirkpatrick relied on the legal documents filed in those cases for their side of the story. That’s just not a good way to get to the truth.

“Zuckerberg clearly stole from the Winkelvoss brothers,” Kirkpatrick said this evening, “but the Winkelvoss brothers clearly stole from everybody else.”

That’s a great conclusion, but Kirkpatrick should have interviewed all of those people, and told the story from their perspective as well as Facebook’s. I think most readers are intelligent enough to look at both sides of the story and draw the right conclusions. Perhaps even the same conclusions that Kirkpatrick came to without even interviewing the people involved.

They say that history is written by the victors. In the end The Facebook Effect reads more like an authorized biography than anything else. It’s the story of Facebook as Facebook wants the story told. It is a wonderful, if flawed, story about the creation of a company that half a billion people interact with regularly. I highly recommend you read it, and then wait for the book that will tell the whole story.

In this particular article Arrington writes an interesting review about the Facebook effect. He starts off giving good insights and points of why to buy the book. He quickly changes the tone of the article saying that the book is written in a biased way. He feels as if many things were left out at the beginning of the startup of Facebook. He said this and it got me thinking that it may be true. The book does make it seem like everything went smoothly and that it took no time at all. The article was very interesting to me, check it out!

10 Reasons to Delete your facebook account

Dan Yoder for Business insider

After some reflection, I've decided to delete my account on Facebook. I'd like to encourage you to do the same. This is part altruism and part selfish. The altruism part is that I think Facebook, as a company, is unethical. The selfish part is that I'd like my own social network to migrate away from Facebook so that I'm not missing anything. In any event, here's my "Top Ten" reasons for why you should join me and many others and delete your account.

10. Facebook's Terms Of Service are completely one-sided. Let's start with the basics. Facebook's Terms Of Service state that not only do they own your data (section 2.1), but if you don't keep it up to date and accurate (section 4.6), they can terminate your account (section 14). You could argue that the terms are just protecting Facebook's interests, and are not in practice enforced, but in the context of their other activities, this defense is pretty weak. As you'll see, there's no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, they see their customers as unpaid employees for crowd-sourcing ad-targeting data.

9. Facebook's CEO has a documented history of unethical behavior. From the very beginning of Facebook's existence, there are questions about Zuckerberg's ethics. According to BusinessInsider.com, he used Facebook user data to guess email passwords and read personal email in order to discredit his rivals. These allegations, albeit unproven and somewhat dated, nonetheless raise troubling questions about the ethics of the CEO of the world's largest social network. They're particularly compelling given that Facebook chose to fork over $65M to settle a related lawsuit alleging that Zuckerberg had actually stolen the idea for Facebook.

8. Facebook has flat out declared war on privacy. Founder and CEO of Facebook, in defense of Facebook's privacy changes last January: "People have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people. That social norm is just something that has evolved over time." More recently, in introducing the Open Graph API: "... the default is now social." Essentially, this means Facebook not only wants to know everything about you, and own that data, but to make it available to everybody. Which would not, by itself, necessarily be unethical, except that ...

7. Facebook is pulling a classic bait-and-switch. At the same time that they're telling developers how to access your data with new APIs, they are relatively quiet about explaining the implications of that to members. What this amounts to is a bait-and-switch. Facebook gets you to share information that you might not otherwise share, and then they make it publicly available. Since they are in the business of monetizing information about you for advertising purposes, this amounts to tricking their users into giving advertisers information about themselves. This is why Facebook is so much worse than Twitter in this regard: Twitter has made only the simplest (and thus, more credible) privacy claims and their customers know up front that all their tweets are public. It's also why the FTC is getting involved, and people are suing them (and winning).
Update: Check out this excellent timeline from the EFF documenting the changes to Facebook's privacy policy.

6. Facebook is a bully. When Pete Warden demonstrated just how this bait-and-switch works (by crawling all the data that Facebook's privacy settings changes had inadvertently made public) they sued him. Keep in mind, this happened just before they announced the Open Graph API and stated that the "default is now social." So why sue an independent software developer and fledgling entrepreneur for making data publicly available when you're actually already planning to do that yourself? Their real agenda is pretty clear: they don't want their membership to know how much data is really available. It's one thing to talk to developers about how great all this sharing is going to be; quite another to actually see what that means in the form of files anyone can download and load into MatLab.

5. Even your private data is shared with applications. At this point, all your data is shared with applications that you install. Which means now you're not only trusting Facebook, but the application developers, too, many of whom are too small to worry much about keeping your data secure. And some of whom might be even more ethically challenged than Facebook. In practice, what this means is that all your data - all of it - must be effectively considered public, unless you simply never use any Facebook applications at all. Coupled with the OpenGraph API, you are no longer trusting Facebook, but the Facebook ecosystem.

4. Facebook is not technically competent enough to be trusted. Even if we weren't talking about ethical issues here, I can't trust Facebook's technical competence to make sure my data isn't hijacked. For example, their recent introduction of their "Like" button makes it rather easy for spammers to gain access to my feed and spam my social network. Or how about this gem for harvesting profile data? These are just the latest of a series of Keystone Kops mistakes, such as accidentally making users' profiles completely public, or the cross-site scripting hole that took them over two weeks to fix. They either don't care too much about your privacy or don't really have very good engineers, or perhaps both.

3. Facebook makes it incredibly difficult to truly delete your account. It's one thing to make data public or even mislead users about doing so; but where I really draw the line is that, once you decide you've had enough, it's pretty tricky to really delete your account. They make no promises about deleting your data and every application you've used may keep it as well. On top of that, account deletion is incredibly (and intentionally) confusing. When you go to your account settings, you're given an option to deactivate your account, which turns out not to be the same thing as deleting it. Deactivating means you can still be tagged in photos and be spammed by Facebook (you actually have to opt out of getting emails as part of the deactivation, an incredibly easy detail to overlook, since you think you're deleting your account). Finally, the moment you log back in, you're back like nothing ever happened! In fact, it's really not much different from not logging in for awhile. To actually delete your account, you have to find a link buried in the on-line help (by "buried" I mean it takes five clicks to get there). Or you can just click here. Basically, Facebook is trying to trick their users into allowing them to keep their data even after they've "deleted" their account.

2. Facebook doesn't (really) support the Open Web. The so-called Open Graph API is named so as to disguise its fundamentally closed nature. It's bad enough that the idea here is that we all pitch in and make it easier than ever to help Facebook collect more data about you. It's bad enough that most consumers will have no idea that this data is basically public. It's bad enough that they claim to own this data and are aiming to be the one source for accessing it. But then they are disingenuous enough to call it "open," when, in fact, it is completely proprietary to Facebook. You can't use this feature unless you're on Facebook. A truly open implementation would work with whichever social network we prefer, and it would look something like OpenLike. Similarly, they implement just enough of OpenID to claim they support it, while aggressively promoting a proprietary alternative, Facebook Connect.

1. The Facebook application itself sucks. Between the farms and the mafia wars and the "top news" (which always guesses wrong - is that configurable somehow?) and the myriad privacy settings and the annoying ads (with all that data about me, the best they can apparently do is promote dating sites, because, uh, I'm single) and the thousands upon thousands of crappy applications, Facebook is almost completely useless to me at this point. Yes, I could probably customize it better, but the navigation is ridiculous, so I don't bother. (And, yet, somehow, I can't even change colors or apply themes or do anything to make my page look personalized.) Let's not even get into how slowly your feed page loads. Basically, at this point, Facebook is more annoying than anything else.
Facebook is clearly determined to add every feature of every competing social network in an attempt to take over the Web (this is a never-ending quest that goes back to AOL and those damn CDs that were practically falling out of the sky). While Twitter isn't the most usable thing in the world, at least they've tried to stay focused and aren't trying to be everything to everyone.
I often hear people talking about Facebook as though they were some sort of monopoly or public trust. Well, they aren't. They owe us nothing. They can do whatever they want, within the bounds of the laws. (And keep in mind, even those criteria are pretty murky when it comes to social networking.) But that doesn't mean we have to actually put up with them. Furthermore, their long-term success is by no means guaranteed - have we all forgotten MySpace? Oh, right, we have. Regardless of the hype, the fact remains that Sergei Brin or Bill Gates or Warren Buffett could personally acquire a majority stake in Facebook without even straining their bank account. And Facebook's revenue remains more or less a rounding error for more established tech companies.
While social networking is a fun new application category enjoying remarkable growth, Facebook isn't the only game in town. I don't like their application nor how they do business and so I've made my choice to use other providers. And so can you.

My Wordle

The Social Network Review

The following link is a review towards the movie The Social Network. Published by The New York Times and written by Manohla Dargis.



http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/movies/24nyffsocial.html

Persuasive Photo

The persuasive message is simply, Warning!, Beware of Dog. The intended audience for this particular picture is 




for those it concerns. For instance, whoever posts this sign is saying that beyond this sign there is a little dog 




that is very dangerous and shouldn't be messed with. The writer or someone who posts this picture is obviously 




protecting something or just warning trespassers for whats to come if they go beyond this point. The photo is 




specifically saying that the little dog will bite you in the butt.

Hey

This is my first blog for English class.