When The S*** Hits the Fan

Here’s Why You Shouldn’t Use #Facebook’s #Reactions Buttons

by

(ANTIMEDIA) Belgian police are warning users not to use the Facebook Reactions feature to respond to posts if they want to protect their privacy. In February, the series of six emoticons, allowing users to express a range of emotions from anger to love, were added to the original thumbs-up option. They came in response to calls for a ‘Dislike’ button.

However, the new expressions are another big ‘like’ for Facebook and a ‘dislike’ for its users — according to Belgian police who claim the site is using them as a way to collect information on people to target advertising toward them. In a statement released on their official website on Wednesday, the Belgian force warned people to avoid using the series of emoticons if they want to preserve their privacy.

The statement on the police website reads, “The icons help not only express your feelings, they also help Facebook assess the effectiveness of the ads on your profile.” It adds, “One more reason not to click if you want to protect your privacy.”

The statement warns that users are simply a ‘product’ to Facebook, claiming their reactions to posts are helping the social networking giant build up a profile of them. As a result of the profiling, the site will target ads it thinks users will be more receptive to based on how they are reacting to specific posts at the time.

“By limiting the number of icons to six, Facebook is counting on you to express your thoughts more easily so that the algorithms that run in the background are more effective,” the police said. “By mouse clicks you can let them know what makes you happy.”

RELATED: Why Facebook Really Wants You to Use Its New Reaction Buttons

In short, the moment Facebook gauges that the user is in a good mood, it will cash in on that by showing them an ad.

It’s no secret Facebook’s growth is fuelled by advertising. In 2015, the company received 96.5% of its revenue from ads, which generated a staggering $17.08 billion in revenue. Just days after former Facebook employees accused the platform of censoring stories while pushing others, few will be surprised to learn the marketing champion has seized another opportunity to do what it does best — collect more information on its users.

This article (Here’s Why You Shouldn’t Use Facebook’s Reactions Buttons) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Droid Stuff. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org

From theantimedia.org Team

Are You Feeling #Depressed? #Facebook May Be to Blame

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) Few would deny the profound changes social networking has made to society and interpersonal relationships — for better or worse. By now, most people with a Facebook account know how overwhelming the platform can be, and even sarcastic memes have insinuated that people’s lives may not be quite as wonderful as they make them out to be on the social networking site.

As social media has become an increasingly important part of human interaction, research into the phenomenon has continued to develop, and much of it is uncovering a consistent theme. Time and time again, studies have shown heavy use of Facebook and other social networking sites might be responsible for more than just provoking minor irritation — and can be a contributing factor in more serious mental health issues.

The most recent study by the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine published in the Depression and Anxiety journal last month found the more time young adults spend on social media, the more likely they are to be depressed. To examine the effects of social media on the moods of users, 1,787 adults between 19 and 32 were given questionnaires relating to their use of the 11 most popular platforms: Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Google Plus, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit, Tumblr, Pinterest, Vine, and LinkedIn.

On average, the study participants used social media for a total of 61 minutes per day and visited a number of social media accounts 30 times per week. Alarmingly, over a quarter of them were classified as having “high indicators” of depression. Significant associations were noted between their social media use and depression, whether it was measured in terms of total time spent or frequency of visits.

Those who most frequently checked social media throughout the week were 2.7 times more likely to be depressed than peers who spent less time using the platforms. Additionally, those who spent the most time on social media during the day had 1.7 times the risk of depression than those who spent less time.

Researcher Lui yi Lin, B.A., said it may be that people who are already depressed turn to social media to fill a void, but also acknowledged exposure to social media may cause depression, which could then fuel more use.

Facebook — dystopian not utopian

Lin’s analysis builds on the findings of a 2014 study by the University of Houston that specifically focused on Facebook and uncovered why heavy use can lead to depressive symptoms. The study entitled, “Seeing Everyone Else’s Highlight Reels: How Facebook Usage is Linked to Depression,” concluded excessive social comparison to peers negatively impacts the psychological health of users.

Facebook has over 1.65 billion monthly active users worldwide, and 1.09 billion users log on daily. In the U.S. alone, users devote a staggering 19% of their internet browsing to Facebook-related activities. After logging in to the site, they are bombarded with a barrage of information, including status updates, strong opinions, harrowing news, pictures of other people’s romances, babies, or travels.

“Prior research has tied Facebook use to positive effects such as fulfillment of ego needs, greater subjective well-being, and higher relationship quality for those in a romantic relationship. However, for some individuals the results of such cyber exchanges may be more dystopian than utopian,” the study reads.

Comparisons

The University of Houston used a 14-day diary method to examine the extent to which spending time on Facebook encouraged individuals to compare their lives to the lives of others. Individuals were questioned on their usage and how likely they were to make social comparisons. Interestingly, the link between the amount of time spent on Facebook and depressive symptoms was mediated by what researchers referred to as “upwards, nondirectional (neutral) and downwards social comparisons.”

The upwards comparisons, like looking up to someone perceived as more popular or attractive, tended to make people feel worse. In contrast, downward comparisons, like comparing oneself to someone with lower grades, for example, made people feel better about themselves.

Chicken or egg?

Consequently, it seems it is a chicken and egg argument as to whether exposure to social media causes depression or if depression fuels usage. Regardless of what came first, the link between social media usage and depressive symptoms is being proven time and time again, and there are a number of factors that create the connection.

The studies find that along with comparisons — which elicit feelings of envy and the distorted belief that others lead happier, more successful lives — engaging in activities of little meaning on social media may give users a feeling of “time wasted,” which can therefore negatively influence mood. Additionally, as the University of Pittsburgh researchers noted, excessive social media use can fuel “internet addiction and spending more time on social networking sites increases the risk of exposure to cyber-bullying or other similar negative interactions — which can also cause feelings of depression.”

This article (Are You Feeling Depressed? Facebook May Be to Blame) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

How #Facebook, #Instagram, Google, and Twitter Use Censorship to Kill Free Speech

by

Michaela Whitton
May 3, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter play an increasingly important role in our lives, but a brand new study into online censorship has revealed a number of developing trends regarding how social media platforms are attempting to regulate their users’ speech.

While most readers have likely been lucky enough to evade Facebook jail, others might have friends who have been kicked off the social networking site for designated periods of time for ‘violating community standards.’ Some may even have had their Facebook accounts closed permanently due to the site’s  ‘real names’ policy. Others have likely have had posts flagged or removed for containing nudity or other allegedly offensive content.

“UNFRIENDING CENSORSHIP: Insights from four months of crowdsourced data on social media censorship” is a brand new report that draws on data gathered from users of six social networking sites between November 2015 and March 2016. The inaugural study by Onlinecensorship.org — a collaborative effort between the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Visualizing Impact — asked users to submit reports when their content was reported or their accounts were removed from Flickr, Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Instagram, and YouTube.

“Account suspensions, the most stringent form of moderation, were the most frequent type of content takedown in our dataset,” the report notes.

After analysing the collected data across geography, platform, content type and issue areas, the analysis revealed a number of trends in social media censorship. Here are some highlights of the information gathered from 161 submissions across 26 countries, with content in 11 languages:

censorship-3

– Facebook was the most frequently reported platform, with account suspensions the most reported content type.

– Nudity and false identity were the most frequent reasons given for the removal of  content on Facebook.

– Of 119 reports received from Facebook users, 13% had been asked to prove their identity to Facebook under its name policy.

– Instagram users tended to report “inappropriate content” as the reason their content was taken down.

– Twitter takedowns tended to be linked to targeted abuse, harassment, or fraud/spam.

– Nearly half of copyright-related takedown submissions came from YouTube.

– 53% of users did not appeal the takedown of their content, 50% said they didn’t know how, and 41.9% said they didn’t expect a response. In four cases content was restored, but in 50 cases the user didn’t receive a response.

– There were widespread reports that flagging is being used for censorship, and 61.6% of users believed that this was the cause for the removal of their content.

“The content was the Wikipedia photo of human anatomy showing a man and a woman in full frontal nudity. It is against Facebook’s guidelines about nudity,” reads one case study.

Although measures were used to help verify reports — and users were given the opportunity to send screenshots to support their claims — onlinecensorship.org did not work with the social media companies to obtain their data. Consequently, the study does not claim to be representative of all content takedowns or user experiences.

EFF explained the importance of tracking how social media companies are regulating the speech of their users:

“As self-ordained content moderators, these companies face thorny issues; deciding what constitutes hate speech, harassment, and terrorism is challenging, particularly across many different cultures, languages, and social circumstances.”

EFF added that while the U.S.-based companies don’t believe their policies constitute censorship, the purpose of onlinecensorship.org is to challenge this assertion by examining how their policies (and their enforcement) may be having a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

After examining how the policies of social media platforms are being enforced — and how this affects the lives of users — the report goes on to make a set of recommendations for how the social media sites can improve the experiences of users and boost their commitment to free expression.

READ NEXT: Wikileaks Drops Hillary Email Bomb That Could End Her Campaign but FB Censored It

Those who wish to report content blocking and online censorship can do so here.

This article (How Facebook, Instagram, Google, and Twitter Use Censorship to Kill Free Speech) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Tyler Menezes. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

#Wikileaks Drops #Hillary Email Bomb That Could End Her Campaign but FB Censored It

by

Michaela Whitton
March 20, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — On Wednesday, a major archive containing over 30,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails were released. Though the State Department began releasing the emails in May last year — after a Freedom of Information Act request — it is the first time the messages have been made easily available in a searchable format, courtesy of WikiLeaks. Before the launch, the FBI was investigating the Democratic candidate’s use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State. The archive contains over 7,000 emails written by Clinton herself.

The scary, albeit fascinating exposé on who’s in bed with whom in the halls of global power has expanded to include Facebook, according to WikiLeaks. The organization has accused the social networking site of censorship, saying Facebook is blocking users’ access to the latest Clinton dispatch.

wikileaks-hillary

As a result of the outing, Twitter users are calling Clinton wicked, a thug, and a hypocrite. The released emails uncovered that the presidential frontrunner was instrumental in spreading chaos and extremism in Libya. They also revealed that she pushed for oil privatization in Mexico and forwarded emails claiming a Sunni-Shiite war would be good for Israel and the West.

wikileaks-hillary-2

For those who are fascinated but don’t have the time or inclination to sift through more than 30,000 documents, here is a snapshot of what Clinton’s emails revealed:

This article (Facebook, WikiLeaks and Clinton’s Warmongering Emails) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Facebook’s New Tool to Help You Prevent Your Friends from Committing Suicide

by

Michaela Whitton
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Over one billion people are active daily on Facebook, and as a result, the social networking giant is continually updating its products and services. The most recent attempt to expand resources available to users was rolled out last week in the U.K., with a feature that aims to reduce suicides.

Facebook Stats
— 1.04 billion daily active users on average in December 2015
— 934 million mobile daily active users on average in December 2015
— 1.59 billion monthly active users as of December 31, 2015
— 1.44 billion mobile monthly active users as of December 31, 2015
— Approximately 83.6% daily active users are outside the U.S. and Canada

We are more open and connected to others online than ever before. By now, many of us have stumbled across troubling posts by friends that leave us unsure as to how to respond, if at all. Maybe it is someone we don’t feel we know well enough to intervene, or perhaps we debate whether to send a private message but simply ignore the cry for help and scroll past. Well, Facebook has taken the dilemma out of our hands.

Hoping to help reduce suicides, the social media platform’s new tool offers assistance to those who may be at risk of harming themselves. Launched last year in the U.S. and Australia, the opportunity to report suicidal content on Facebook has now been launched in the U.K.

Built in partnership with the Samaritans, the tool has been developed to encourage users to help friends they feel may be at risk, as well as offer support for friends and family. While Facebook encourages people to contact emergency services first if they are worried about friends, the tool is intended to flag posts with troubling content.

Suicidal posts will be prioritised by a round-the-clock team, and when friends flag a post they are concerned about, staff will assess the best way to proceed.

The next time the user logs into their account, they will receive a message saying “a friend thinks you might be going through something difficult and asked us to look at your recent post.” Those who Facebook feels are struggling to cope will then be offered options for support. As with most resources on the social networking site, the support options can be ignored, should the person wish.

Samaritans CEO Ruth Sutherland said:

“If people can start to talk about the unbearable pain that they’re facing, we can interrupt that journey towards suicide. Suicide is not inevitable, it is preventable. This tool plays a really vital role in achieving that.”

If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article and need to talk to someone, visit samaritans.org or call 08457 90 90 90.

This article (Facebook’s New Tool to Help You Prevent Your Friends from Committing Suicide) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team