Unthinking the Future of Social Media

I recently read about a new social media website called “Unthink”. My immediate thoughts were that the name sounded like something right of “1984”, and “Great, another social media website.” I have been wondering what would be the new Facebook, since we had the Xanga-Myspace-Facebook progression in a short 6 or 8 years. But evidently those two thoughts were completely wrong! Number one, it’s quite different from the pattern of “1984”. Whereas the novel covers strict rules and limitations in decision making and even personal thinking, Unthink is about revolution and denying norms and standards. It’s based in the idea that “We can bring the change we wish to see in the world”. And, as the news article described, it’s quite opposed to Facebook and the way they run. Upthink creators strive for it to be “everything Facebook and Google are not.” A large component of this goal is privacy. “Facebook and Google both collect information about users to tailor advertising to them. Privacy concerns have cropped up over various features Facebook has rolled out -- from mobile check-ins to integration with other websites that can make a user's online behavior more public if settings aren't tweaked.” Unthink insists that the information stored on its website will be the property of the user, and not used for their own entrepreneurial or monetary incentives. They’ll even allow you to essentially transfer your Facebook account, photos and all, over to this website where privacy is not to be a question. This does however, come with a bit of a cost. As the article puts it, what is “[Unthink’s] business model for fighting the corporate social-media giants? Corporate sponsorships.” But in keeping with the revolution, they do allow you to choose an available business to support your website, or otherwise pay a $2 annual fee. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and if the website’s creators will have quite the revolution they’re looking for.

Senior Citizen Security

Last week, I found the blog on elderly internet safety very interesting, so I’m going to expound on that this week. I looked at a couple of government websites, both of which include an introduction as to why and how the elderly are targeted and lists of surprisingly varied aspects of their safety, ranging from online dating to vacation planning, cemetery fraud and counterfeit prescriptions . 

The first website I looked at was that of the Attorney General. It began with some common precursors to issues that the elderly may have, like a general lack of computer and internet skills. It encourages them to be familiar with security software and secure passwords. It also encourages the elderly to be familiar with how websites work and also how scammers use websites and emails against them. Simply knowing what’s out there can take away the uncertainty and fear that comes along with beginning in technology, and help them to avoid those who want to harm them. The elderly are generally a more trusting generation. All of their lives they’ve been learning how to judge character based of off personal interaction and official looking documents. These rules, however, do not apply to the internet, and the blog highlights the craftiness of scammers in their seemingly kind. An interesting point made by this blog is that elderly also fall victim to cyberbullying. Often this is done by family, either emotionally through angry comments, or financially by gaining access to their accounts and stealing their money.

The other was sponsored by the FBI, and its information is related to why the elderly are targeted and what it looks like. For example, many senior citizens own their own home and have great credit, which makes them very appealing to criminals. Likewise, this blog highlights that scammers know that people who have grown up in the mid-1900s were “raised to be polite and trusting” and are more likely to stay on the line during a phone call. An important point made by this blog is that the elderly are less likely to report being scammed- either because they don’t really know how, or are ashamed that they’ve fallen victim to this type of crime, and don’t want to seem as though they can’t function without assistance. There is also a great appeal to senior citizens for products for healthfulness and vitality or preventative drugs. Insurance and prescription scams are, therefore, common occurrence. 

There are a lot of avenues taken by scammers and phishers to attack the elderly population- definitely more than had occurred to me. It’s so unfortunate, because senior citizens are seeking to remain independent, or at least not be burdensome upon family members, but don’t see through scams like they should. I think it’s increasingly important that the elderly should learn how to use computers and the internet safely and healthfully so that it can increase their independence and allow them to enjoy their last years to the full.

Rhetorical Analysis

The first blog I came across is that of Martin Greif and Jose Niro Romano Nillasca’s Privacy Partners. What I noticed upon reading through several of their posts is the general feel of neutrality, which I find especially unique for a blog. They’re very informative as they relay current events related to digital privacy and security and they pose questions to consider the effects of the meaning of the events. They don’t necessarily peg something as being especially beneficial or terrible, or use their bias to express a meaning that may or may not be there. Instead they offer a couple of ideas for the implications of a certain ruling on a case or aspect of digital privacy and safety. So this blog mostly appeals to ethos. They describe events such as legal cases and include quotes from the Attorney General and other involved and educated people. They cover a variety of digital mediums and scenarios such as GPS tracking devices, teacher-student internet relations, and cookies, which allows the reader to consider different ways security and privacy may factor into digital life. 

The second blog is Cyber-Security-Tips. It focuses on internet safety for different age groups including, what I thought to be the most interesting: the elderly. Grouping posts this way, in and of itself, shifts to an appeal to pathos. Whereas the first blog had a general audience and appealed to ethos through citing specific examples, the second blog brings images of our elderly friends, grandparents, children and coworkers.  There is a more personal approach to the blog as they list ways to be involved in the security of someones information and future. This blog describes how the elderly are specifically targeted by scammers and phishers and provides videos of older people who have been affected by them, through identity theft and losing money. The safety tips are presented in a bulleted style to be direct and applicable. This post also begins questioning the safety of the elderly in nursing homes. The blog is more personal and encourages involvement by related adults and caretakers of the elderly.

"All alone, no light, hard to breathe- now that's one man whose data is secure!"

In typical satire fashion, The Onion describes an option for increased privacy: Google's "Opt-Out". In fact, this would provide you with “complete” privacy: No outside access, no innovation, but a return to rudimentary survival methods. This is a funny extreme because of the people who fear the information available. I know my mom is constantly concerned about privacy. She shreds every envelope that has her name and address on it, even though, as my dad points out almost every time "that information is available in the phonebook". So truly, privacy on a global scale can only really be found through this idea of a remote village with no phone or internet access. But then, as Born Digital has highlighted, there would be the severe lack of privacy within the village. Everyone would know your every business. While I can find out random information about people I don't know just because it's there, why would I? And if I did, it wouldn't make any difference anyway. So as for a complete privacy, there really isn’t such a thing. And there isn’t, largely, a necessity for one. Bank information- sure, needs to be private. Constant stream of GPS location- could fall in the wrong hands. Other things, however, such as questionable/criminal activity or crazy pictures that you’ll regret in a few days or a few years, or even the random nothings that just appear on the internet... that can’t really be up to a form of regulation to protect.

On the opposite extreme, in the interview with the faux-representatives of Google, there's some element of truth to their invasion of privacy. As the interviewee said, "If you don't want to give us complete access to your most private thoughts and feelings- that's fine- you can just toil in the hinterlands and die young". While outlandish, Google, and other such search engines, really do find and make available this information with little or no permission, though it could be argued that posting information is, in its own right, providing permission. While there are specific people you wouldn’t want to have specific information about you, it just won’t matter in the hands of the overwhelming majority of people. The issue is that we can’t really decide who gets to know what about us.  

http://www.theonion.com/video/google-opt-out-feature-lets-users-protect-privacy,14358/