Stalking: Has Facebook Given the Term some Legitimacy?

“I just stalked all of ___ pictures from freshman year of college.”

Or. 

“She like __ television shows. I saw it under her “TV shows” on Facebook.” 

               

                The fact that people even admit such things would have been astounding a few years ago. Facebook is a tool that has allowed people create a digital life that is on public display for friends, family, and coworkers to see. Because it’s all there, is it okay to look at EVERYTHING? Has the ease with which we can use Facebook made it okay to see everything and not feel weird about it?

                I believe there are many basic Facebook features that have made stalking easier and more acceptable. For instance: tagging people in photos. If one did not want the Facebook world to view the photos they upload or are tagged in, they would not post them or they would untag themselves. Another example: Wall posts. If you did not want everyone who stumbles upon (or purposefully so) a profile to see what you have posted, you would message them, text them or tell them in person. And people still act surprised when they realize they are being stalked. But Facebook was created for the purpose of making interacting with others easier. It accomplishes this goal very well but are users gaining too much information about their friends?

                The new “See Friendship” feature amplifies the amount of stalking someone can do. Every single interaction you have had with a person is recorded under this page. Searching isn’t even necessary anymore. Why is this useful? This feature shows users the longevity and strength of a relationship. If there are many interactions, you obviously like the person and are intent on continuing whatever kind of relationship you have with them.

                But looking at other people’s profiles…

                Is that acceptable? I believe it is because people put stuff out there for other people to see. It is not unreasonable for users to be curious and to venture into the inner workings of someone’s profile if they are already clicking on other things they’ve posted. Because it is so easy to gather information about people, it is no longer abnormal for people to know particular facts about another person because they saw it on Facebook. Because the fact is, you put it out there, people are going to look. The term “stalking” does still have a negative connotation, but not when used with Facebook. Let’s be honest, everyone does it and we all thoroughly enjoy itJ.

Psychology of the "Friend Request"

                Before online social networking sites existed, we would make friends during face to face interactions with people we meet. Interactions would occur through classes you take together (if you are in school still), on trips you go, through various activities (like sports, clubs, etc.), through work, etc. Although many interactions still start this way, with the addition of social networking sites, we are faced with many more complications to creating friendships.

                Is anything really official until it is “Facebook official?” The argument goes that any sort of relationship isn’t worth anything until you decide to make it public. So “public” is advertising the relationship on Facebook? As silly as the argument may seem, there is some truth to it. Facebook has become as important as face to face interactions. Anything that is said or done on Facebook inevitably will influence what people think about the user and it will affect real life interactions.

                So when you want to add a friend on Facebook, what goes through one’s mind? First, the user decides whether or not they are good enough friends with the person to make their friendship “official” on Facebook. This determination is exclusive to the user’s thought process. Do you friend someone you met briefly? Do you add someone that your friends are friends with but that you have not even introduced yourself to? If you feel comfortable enough that it won’t be awkward when you see them, the user will most likely add them.  What about them friending you though? The friend request has created a complex within people that can be tricky to deal with. For instance, if you add a person you just met, will they think you are too anxious to be their friend, or will they be pleased that you also want to be their friend? If you add them, will it be awkward the next time you see them? Things were so much easier before, but Facebook has added a dimension to social interaction that is enjoyable and fun, right??

                What happens when a friend request goes wrong? Before I came to Stanford, members of the class of 2013 were allowed to join the Stanford 2013 group. I was able to see everyone who had joined the group and we were able to interact on the group’s page with future peers. There were a few people that added what feels like the entire Class of 2013 group. Although they might have just been really excited, it definitely created weird stereotype on the people who did this. And it was actually so awkward when I met them in person.

                But again, going back to the argument that “if it isn’t on Facebook, it’s not real.”— The stigma that this argument produces is a result of users buying into it. Facebook is such a powerful networking tool that you are able to interact with people that you would never otherwise interact with. Because users are able to become friends with virtually anyone on Facebook, and can therefore become “public” friends with people they don’t care much about, why not be able to say it isn’t official until it is Facebook official?

Why is Facebook So Easy/Pleasing to Use?

You open your internet browser and go to www.facebook.com. You are only logging onto Facebook to check a message. What comes up is a login screen. Fairly straightforward. You then log in and the homepage pops up, giving you easy access to what your friends are doing, your own page, and anywhere else you want to go in the Facebook world through the search box. Instead of just checking your messages, you end up looking at the pictures your friend uploaded from last night.

                Facebook has become so integrated life that it is sometimes hard to imagine not having Facebook. Facebook is growing at an astounding rate of over 5 million new users per week and a social networking site that used to only attract the age group of 18-24 year olds, is now being used mostly by, 75% that is, all other age groups. But why is Facebook so easy and pleasing to use? Why are so many people jumping on the Facebook bandwagon?

                What Facebook does that other social networks don’t is allow users to create a real digital world. In real life, we join clubs, we make new friends, we talk to these friends, we share pictures, etc. You can do all of this on Facebook. You can plan to attend an event by accepting an event invitation, you can join clubs and groups online, you can chat with your friends while on Facebook and you can browse through friend’s photos.

But why is this better than just doing all of this in real life? I believe it is because of the speed and accessibility that this information age demands. Writing letters is so 1950’s. Today, when our friends go travel the world, we want to stay in touch with them the whole time by Facebook chatting occasionally and viewing photos from their trip that they upload as opposed to doing all of this when they return. Facebook allows people to do their social interactions from the comfort of their home. Although this might not always be the best way to maintain friendships and relationships, it helps keep in touch tremendously and is very convenient.

Why else is Facebook pleasing? The digital world that Facebook has created is a social medium that fosters and inspires communication. While logged onto Facebook, one feels like they are connected with all of their friends even from their own room. From thousands of miles away, you can be involved in real relationships with people through chatting and viewing their updates (pictures, statuses, etc.). Distance and location does not matter. On Facebook, you can be as present in the lives of your friends as you would be while hanging out with them in person.

Facebook is easy to use but why? Facebook has an intuitive interface. You don’t need to know anything about it to figure out how it works.  Everything is very simple, a click of a button away. Adding a friend, posting a comment, liking- it’s just one click.

                In short, Mark Zuckerberg has created a social networking site that is transparent for all types of users. There is something for everyone on Facebook and because so many people are using it, and because it disregards many things that could prevent you from having a relationship with someone in real life (such as distance). 

Facebook Destroying Relationships

A quick blurb on a shocking discovery I recently made:

In a shocking survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, it was revealed that one in five divorces involve Facebook due to flirty messages and photographs (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/business/1-in-4-us-divorces-involve-facebook-study_100467699.html). The article also mentions that many cases involve social media users reconnecting with old lovers and having inappropriate sexual chats with those they aren’t supposed to. Because of Facebook’s storage of wall posts, messages, and pictures, anything can be used as evidence. Using Facebook makes it easier to learn more about one’s personal life.

So...is Facebook is to blame for these relationships being destroyed?

I believe not. These statistics are not Facebook’s fault. Unfortunately, Facebook’s powerful social networking presence is simply a powerful medium for users to express the desires that they’ve always had; Facebook just makes it possible and easy to cheat. Rather, the fact that having a new medium has led to a spike in divorces tells us something about human nature.

Facebook here unfortunately functions as an easier way for spouses to cheat and destroy their own relationships. However, the solution to this isn’t reprimanding Facebook for destroying marriages. In fact, Facebook should be given credit for bringing out this problem into the light to let society know just how rampant cheating is and how prevalent the idea can be in any spouse’s head. A social network itself is just technology; negative concepts spawning from the social network comes from the network’s users, not the network itself.

Staying Connected with Facebook

Let’s visit a stereotypical high school reunion situation in movies. There are tons of hugs going around. Everyone is asking everyone else what they’re up to nowadays, if they are married, how the kids are—anything to get a better sense of how their classmates have grown and changed. There may be that nerdy guy in high school who is now a big shot, and when his former classmates see him they are taken aback and surprised. It’s an exciting situation, where everyone is trying to make up for lost time.

I believe that this picture of a reunion is changing with the growing popularity of Facebook in high schools.

I am Facebook friends with most of the people I ever talked to in high school. This range is very wide, since being a Facebook “friend” with someone else doesn’t have to mean real friendship; a slight acquaintance is commonly sufficient for Facebook friending. Rather than only being a site where true friends can interact, Facebook also lets us stay connected permanently with anyone we choose for the rest of our Facebook account’s lifetime. This loose standard for friending has enormous implications. All it takes for me to constantly be updated and notified of what’s going on in someone’s life is a friend request. After that initial step, the friend’s activity will constantly be appearing in my newsfeed, forever (unless I go out of my way to “unfriend” this person).

Reunions will lose much of their appeal and excitement because people are constantly updated about their acquaintances through Facebook in their daily lives anyways, whether through the newsfeed or a manual lookup. The old question of “I wonder what Bob is up to nowadays” disappears because I would already know what Bob is going through. While seeing classmates in person for a face-to-face chat still has its benefits, the mystery in a reunion is gone as people are constantly maintaining their relationships post-graduation.

Every summer and school break, I still constantly see most of my high school classmates; all it takes is a Facebook event invite to Lynbrook High School Class of 2009 for everyone to be notified. These happen frequently, so I am still strongly connected to my high school class, with relationships that have not dwindled much since graduation as they did before Facebook. Facebook thus acts as glue in holding social groups together through different life eras in instances where distance would usually cause a fall out in the friendship.

Social Media: Stanford Students on Facebook (Part II)

Our group created a survey for Stanford students to analyze the social media they use regularly. The survey contained of the following question:

“Let us say you are sitting in lecture and your professor introduces Mark Zuckerberg (CEO/President/Co-founder of Facebook) as a guest speaker. Mr. Zuckerberg begins the class by passing around a slip of paper to each student with one question: "If you could change Facebook in any way, what would you do?" Zuckerberg gives the incentive that the top 5 best ideas will be incorporated into the social networking site within the next year. What would you write?”

Some of the responses we received were:

“There needs to be better actions taken against spam.”

“I would incorporate a professional aspect to Facebook so websites like linkedin are necessary. It would keep everything in one place. So the idea would have a personal profile which is what we all have now and then a professional profile which companies could use to see your resume and work experience and things like that.”

“Better security!”

“Ability to video chat over Facebook in group chat setting.”

“I would add contact management capabilities. Specifically:

1. The ability to redesign my ‘facebook workspace’ to make it more conducive to networking and organizing contacts

2. Private tagging / grouping of people, for example I want to tag people as ‘runners’ or ‘bankers at Morgan Stanley’ or ‘engineers’

3. A reminder system to help me stay in touch with people”

It seems that student users are most preoccupied with ease of information access, privacy, and further means of communication. Those that are interested in using Facebook for professional or business networking means would enjoy features that easily “group” people into manageable categories.

A curious thing about our survey results is the number of responses concerning privacy. It seems contradictory that those using Facebook (a medium for publicizing oneself) are seeking more privacy. Yet it is logical that as more people use Facebook and other social networks, the opportunities to “hack” profiles and need to protect one’s information would increase.

In addition (and the most important for our group’s analysis), we included a system for students to rank their most commonly used means of communication with friends and family, giving each medium a score from 1 (being what they used the most) to 11 (being what they use the least).

A sampling of our results follows:

· 31.6% of students use “face-to-face conversation” the most

· 5.3% of students use “letters (post)” the most

· 31.6% of students use “text messages on mobile phones” the most

· 21% of people gave “letters (post)” a score of 5 or lower

· 74% of people gave “Facebook” a score of 5 or lower

· 84% of people gave “face-to-face conversation” a score of 5 or lower

· 80% of people gave “text messages on mobile phones” a score of 5 or lower

I was surprised at some of the results we received. Particularly, the fact that text messaging is on nearly the same footing as face-to-face conversations.

What do these results say about the fate of other means of communication in the face of technology?

As discussed in my “Has Facebook driven social interaction into a corner?” series, the value of the letter has significantly decreased. From our survey data, it appears that face-to-face conversations are also nearing subordinating to technology. What is the cause of this? Perhaps social networking sites and cell phones are keeping rates of in-person communication low. Perhaps the increasing pace of people’s lives forces them to use technology. A deeper question should follow: What increases the pace of people’s lives? My answer would be technology. As mentioned in previous posts, technology appears to be the cause and remedy of this increase in pace. In such a situation, can the world ever slow down?

Survey link:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/JVKJD7C

Pros and Cons of Facebook

                For many people, Facebook has become an integral part of daily life. Whether it be your 50 year old mother that goes on Facebook but only sits on the homepage or your peers that keep Facebook open for a greater part of the afternoon, Facebook has infiltrated most people’s daily routines. Facebook can be a great tool of communication and social networking (that is its purpose right?). Although it is one of the most one of the most innovative, popular and flourishing social networking platforms, there are most definitively positive AND negative aspects of Facebook usage.

                To start, let’s discuss the obvious pros to Facebook. There are two major positive aspects of Facebook that encompass other pros of the social networking site. The first thing, and what I believe is the most resourceful thing Facebook can provide, is the ability to find friends, family and coworkers. What does this do for the younger generation? Reaching out to someone can be difficult but becoming Facebook friends could be that first step that sparks a blossoming relationship. Personally, Facebook has helped me stay participate in the lives of and keep updated with family from India, even when geographically so far away from each other. With the time difference and costly phone bills, I would otherwise be unable to stay as connected as I am with them. I am able to view pictures, see what they are doing (via statuses and other wall posts) and even communicate directly via Facebook chat. And for the older generations? Reconnecting with old friends is made easy with Facebook and can be the reason many folks from the older generation join Facebook in the first place. For example, my Dad hadn’t spoken to his best friend from college since he had come to the United States but found him on Facebook and the two have been in touch since then. For the business oriented Facebook users, the networking power presented are immense and extremely helpful. You may get in touch with people who can help further your career or even just promote yourself and any work you do.

                The other main positive aspect of Facebook is its versatility. When you log onto Facebook, you are able to see a quick snap shot of what your friends are doing. The homepage allows users to see status updates collectively. Facebook has become social organization tool. Events are publicized and are sometimes the only form of invitation to events. The new chat feature has created a more personal interface, as you can interact with your friends who are online directly rather than just browsing other people’s profiles. The many different ways to interact on Facebook (liking, commenting, posting, poking, etc.) has made Facebook interactions more personable and real. Instead of just a profile with basic information, the interactivity has created a new world with the feeling that the people in the profiles genuinely exist.

These features have all given people reason to integrate Facebook into their daily lives and such a thing can be useful but also harmful. What do I mean by that? The ease with which users are able to find other people on Facebook can be convenient but its effectiveness can also bring unwanted friend requests and unwanted attention. Although Facebook has become a great way to network, there can be a lot of drama surrounding things that are said or done on Facebook. For instance, it is common for people to maintain an accurate relationship status on Facebook, whether that be “single” or newly “In a Relationship” with someone else. The transition between these phases can cause a lot of drama and unnecessary attention. It can also create awkwardness. An example: You and your boyfriend break up and you leave the post up on your wall. Your friends who didn't like your boyfriend like the relationship status change. This kind of cyber interaction can ruin or harm future real world interactions. Although Facebook isn't face to face, it is viewed as a way to express real feelings and therefore can be taken as seriously as face to face interactions. 

Privacy issues can be a negative aspect. Facebook has become easier to hack and spam. Although not a huge nuisance, it is still a deterrent. Another issue has come up with personal information sharing. This has caused a huge debate, some critics saying that Facebook is a gross violation of people’s rights. Businesses now use Facebook to check up on a prospective employee. Privacy invasion can be unwanted but is not necessarily the fault of Facebook itself. Each user chooses to be a part of the Facebook world and the risks they take with privacy are at their own discretion. Many new privacy protecting features have been added to Facebook in an attempt to give the user more control over their profile and who sees it. Users can now hide themselves from being searched and can determine what specific groups of friends can and can’t see on their profile (pictures, wallposts, etc.).

Perhaps the biggest con that Facebook faces is the amount of time you can spend on it. Though this is a con people associate with Facebook, it is truly only the decision of the user to log onto Facebook and stay on. Although Facebook isn’t complaining, it can become a real problem. There are even programs out there (ex. Self Control) that can control which websites you can’t visit for a certain period of time and which I know for a fact that many of my peers use to control their Facebook usage when they need to be productive. Why do people spend so much time on Facebook? Humans are naturally curious and Facebook quenches the thirst of curiosity in respect to social happenings. There is not possible way a person could be involved in the life of every single person they know but Facebook provides a medium to feel involved even if not face to face.

Do the pros outweigh the cons? I believe that the user experience is useful, fun, and fulfilling so why wouldn’t they?! Although there are negative aspects to Facebook, many of them can be eliminated by exercising self-control or changing privacy settings.

Writing on the Wall: Stanford Students on Facebook (Part I)

Our group conducted a survey asking what features Stanford University students use most on Facebook. The top choices among students were the ability to right on friends’ walls and the availability of photo albums for public viewing. The survey statistics are as follows:

Writing on Walls 72%

Facebook Messages 31%

Pokes 6%

Newsfeed 50%

Photo albums 66%

Statuses 9%

Profile personalization 30%

Creating groups 3%

“Liking” 59%

What does this say about the functionality of Facebook within the college student population? Have the reasons for using Facebook changed since its creation six years ago and booming popularity?

It is no great wonder that the most used feature on Facebook is the ability to “write” on one’s friends’ “walls.” It was one of the social network’s original basic features, and continues to be the most important way for users to communicate. To those who are not aware of the jargon Facebook users have to describe the social network’s features, this seems like a subversive activity, something akin to writing graffiti on a building or defacing public property. Yet I think Facebook creators chose this name because it did indeed attract the attention of users. Wouldn’t it be amusing to “write” on a “wall” without fear of penalization? There is a sense of danger and risk inherently attached to publicly showcasing your comments that must get Facebook users’ endorphins flowing. If there were no sensational incentive to writing on someone’s wall, then Facebook users would communicate solely through the Facebook message system, a feature preferred by less than one third of users in our group’s survey. That being said, there tends to be a certain tone taken with wall “posts” that goes beyond the basic meaning of letters, emails, or messages. As users are aware that their posts are to be viewed by the public, they usually lace them with sarcasm or derision.

Altering the manner of communication because of their awareness that it is to be publicly viewed vastly decreases the legitimacy of communication. According to our survey’s statistics, most people enjoy the wall posts on Facebook than private messages. This fact hints at the direction interpersonal communication has been going in since the onset of the Internet. Is privacy no longer valued as much as it once was? Is the private or intimate conversation going extinct? I don’t think there will ever be a suitable replacement for the private conversation, or at least one that can match the sincerity and genuine lack of pretense intrinsic to a person-to-person exchange.

Let us briefly call attention to the second most popular Facebook feature: the photo album. This is a curious addition to a website focused on connecting people. The photo album capabilities of the site have added to the growing amount of features transforming Facebook into a “sharing,” as well as a “connecting” medium. It appears the “sharing” aspects of the networking site have become the main source of entertainment for users. As previously discussed, modern generations are seeking higher levels of stimulation. The ability to “tag,” comment, and “like” photos gives users the opportunity to take part in the characterization of their friends. Whether it is an image of a friend in compromising situations at college or in a family photo, Facebook has ensured that others play a central role in the development of an individual, for good or for bad.

Survey link:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/QZ2CW3L

Video of the New Facebook Profile

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150349956720484

Watch how the new Facebook profile makes it easier for you to tell your story and learn about your friends. It now has more room for your photos and experiences, and it includes new ways to share the things you care about most. To get the new profile, or learn more about the new features, visithttp://www.facebook.com/about/profile/. (facebook.com)

Yet another way how Facebook "re-enchants" it's users with constantly changing but not necessarily upgrading new features.

And to accompany this, an article from the LA times:

Facebook makes profiles more personal

December 5, 2010 | 3:16 pm

Facebook began rolling out a redesign of its users' profiles Sunday, a move Facebook says is intended to better define and display who each user is.

The redesign will reach all 500-million-plus users by early next year, the social networking site said.

The makeover, which makes personal data more visible and visual, was revealed during a "60 Minutes" interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg slated to air Sunday night. And an introduction to the new profile page layout is on Facebook's blog.

The profile page is at the heart of Facebook, the place where a user expresses who he or she is. The new layout is designed to give a better sense of who users are while encouraging them to share even more information with their friends.

If users do share more, that could create a bonanza for advertisers who could target users based on that data. EMarketer says Facebook will ring up $1.28 billion in worldwide advertising revenue this year, up from $665 million in 2009.

On the redesigned profile pages, biographical information such as the user's employer, hometown and birthdate is displayed at the top of the page. Also prominently displayed are the latest photos of the user, tagged by the user or by friends. A new section lists the most important people in a user's life. Another feature shows a history of a user's Facebook interactions with any of his or her friends.

"Facebook wants to encourage people to update their pages more," Altimeter Group analyst Charlene Li said.

Now that the profile page is more prominent, users who have neglected to update their profile for months or years will be more likely to do so, Li said.

That will start more conversations between friends, making Facebook more valuable to those relationships, and encouraging people to spend more time on the website, Li said. Plus, the kinds of information on the profile page -- what movies and books or other hobbies users enjoy, for example -- are extremely valuable to advertisers, she said.

Li also anticipates an uproar from users who typically voice their displeasure whenever Facebook redesigns a major part of the site. She said Facebook is trying to "cushion" the new profile page layout for users by not making it mandatory.

This redesign is the latest of several new features, including a new messaging system, an online check-in application and a deals service that Facebook has introduced to woo users and advertisers.

Related:

Facebook unveils new messaging service

Facebook opens up about mobile, unveils new Deals program

With Facebook's new Places feature, users can announce where they are

-- Jessica Guynn

Likely this will not only boost revenue, but also ring in more user updates which in turn means more time on the site. What is the immediate result, a regrowth in popularity. What is the overarching cultural and societal consequences? More dependence on a webpage to display who you are, rather than a face-to-face confrontation. Good or bad? We'll have to see.

-Sean P.

Psychology of the "Like" Button

Anonymous just finished class for the week and has returned to her dorm room. She takes her laptop out of her backpack and turns it on. After letting her computer start up, she opens an internet browser, types in “face,” and the browser program recognizes that she wants to go to “facebook.com” and she is automatically sent there. She logs onto Facebook and waits for her homepage to load. After looking through some of her friends statuses, she decides to “like” a particular status that is pertinent to her own feelings about the upcoming weekend.

The scenario described above exemplifies a very common interaction that Facebook users could have with the “like” button. But what is a “like” and why do Facebook users indulge in it? The most neutral definition I could come up with for “Facebook like button” is an option on the Facebook website that allows users to provide feedback on stories that other friends have posted, whether that be a picture, wall post status, etc. The like button is a feature that allows users to acknowledge their friends’ items. Before we dive into exploring the often nebulous and intricate workings of human psychology, let’s discuss ways Facebook users can use the “like” button.

1.       Status updates: A friend puts up a new status about a life goal, an inspiring quote, an accomplishment, or an event they are enjoying, dreading, afraid for, etc.

2.       Relationship status: A friend tells the Facebook world that they are currently committed to some sort of relationship. Or, maybe, in a more unfortunate circumstance, they tell the Facebook world that there was a break up.

3.       Pictures: A friend puts up new pictures of an event, a place, a trip, etc.

4.       Wall post: A friend posts a link, picture, video, etc on another friend or the user’s own wall.

5.       Comments: A friend comments under a picture, status, wall post, note, group, event and the user is allowed to like that specific comment.

6.       Fan Page/Place/Business/University/etc.: Informational pages about the preceding entities are allowed to be “liked” by the user.

7.       Friendships: A friend accepts your friend request or a friend is recently friends with someone else. The user is allowed to “like” this interaction.

So many options!! Don’t people typically think “the more features, the more interesting and worthy the product?” Facebook recently released statistics saying over 65 million users “like” things daily. But what really drives people to use the “like” button. The most common reason is to show positive feedback for the update. Showing approval, encouragement, engaging in the sarcasm presented in an update, or proving a point are all reasons to “like” an update, whatever it may be.

With regard to ways the “like” button can pose negative feedback, it all depends on the perspective. Let’s say a friend just broke up with his nagging, controlling, awful girlfriend. Over 15 people like this relationship status change. What is encouraging and motivational (in the sense that he made the right decision) the guy can be devastating to the girl who was dumped. The like button is an influential tool that can boost or shatter one’s ego depending on their perspective and the context the “like” was performed in.

But why do people care enough to even bother to do this? Humans are interactive and social beings. Participating in other peoples’ lives is often necessary for comfort and satisfaction in a person’s daily life. Why do people care whether or not their updates become “liked?” For the same reason that people even bother to like- humans need interaction and approval from others to feel satisfaction about their own lives. Yes, the like button in many ways enables egotism. But, hey, apparently people need it and thrive off of it. Even without being asked, a person can make a statement in another’s life. The power of the “like” button can be reassuring to one person but devastating to another.

-          Shilpa Apte

Ps: Food for Thought- Does the “like” button help Facebook thrive in the way it does? Without the “like” button, providing the feedback that encourages the user to keep updating wouldn’t be facilitated as easily. The “like” button is a fast and simple way to encourage more Facebook usage.

What are the Reasons for Facebook's Proven Success?

                There are currently over 500 million Facebook users (this number does not account for people that have multiple profiles). This number totals more than the population of the entire United States and just under half the populations of the incredibly populated countries, India and China. If success were measured in shear amount of usage, Facebook would triumph. It is the leading social networking site with Myspace and Twitter in close second and third respectively, but each trailing Facebook by at least 400 million users. What creates the astonishing difference between Facebook usage and other social network usage? Facebook’s proven success is driven by the ease of its usability. Facebook fares well on all five Nielson characteristics of Usability:

1.       1. Learnability- Facebook is pretty self-explanatory and straightforward. The userface is intuitive and simple in comparison to other social networking sites.

2.      2.  Efficiency- The speed of AJAX (programming language) interfaces allows for Facebook users to perform actions quickly and to be more interactive.

3.      3.  Memorability- Facebook’s layout has stayed fairly consistent. Once you get the hang of using Facebook, it is hard to forget and if forgotten, easy to pick up again.

4.      4.  Error-handling- Thanks to AJAX, errors are caught quickly and eliminated efficiently. Users will rarely see a blank screen and feedback is immediate.

5.       5. Satisfaction- Aesthetically, Facebook is very pleasing. It is clutter-less, organized, and easy to navigate. The graphics are neutral but agreeable.

Besides usability, Facebook has averted a significant amount of hacking and spamming in comparison to other social networking sites. Not only has it kept its platform relatively clean, it has also been on the forefront of innovative social networking. For instance, businesses now use Facebook as a primary source of publicity. Facebook has attracted the older generations as well as the younger generations. For many parents, Facebook is the only way they have been able to contact long lost friends from college or high school. The fact that Facebook transcends all generations is a measure of success in an age where technology grows and changes at a rate higher than the learning curve for many older generations.

It is human nature to want to know who we are dealing with. A person’s Facebook profile can recreate or represent a user’s personality and this makes the Facebook experience sincere and real. At its inception, Facebook gained the support of the student body of one of the most prestigious Universities in the whole world and this kind of exposure has given a kind of legitimacy that no other social networking site has been able to receive.

Has Facebook driven social interaction into a corner (Part VI)?

In Parts I-V stated the following: Facebook allows its users quick and simple communication on a pleasant interface with millions upon millions of fellow users and the ability to individualize one’s profile information.

In my last entry, I discussed the “millions upon millions of fellow users” portion of my original statement. I looked at how Facebook has been able to acquire such a large population base, and attempted to solve the paradox intrinsic to that question. We then examined the psychology of Facebook “friendships,” paying special attention to the limits of the brain, sensory system, and maximum emotional capacity. Finally, I asked if these “friendships” are just brief acquaintances or a new kind of human relationship evolving since the onset of the internet. Yet we were left with the following question: Can human interaction evolve this drastically within such a short timeframe?

I would like to wrap up this series about Facebook’s effects on social interaction by looking at the last part of my original statement: “the ability to individualize one’s profile information.” As previously discussed, Facebook is unique from the internet’s previously most popular social networking site, Myspace, because of its “corporate” or genuinely considered more professional appearance. Although Facebook allows its users a certain level of personalization (through photo albums, profile pictures, and personal information areas), the general appearance of one’s profile is largely uniform. As you can see from Sean Posada’s blog entry below, Facebook users cannot change from the classic blue and white format. It seems this uniformity between profiles keeps Facebook unique from other social networking sites in which you can personalize or reformat many, if not all, profile aspects. Many users believe this is an advantage to using Facebook, as most of the profile is “done” for you and cannot get aesthetically out of control.

There is a certain weight that the “Information” tab carries for Facebook users, particularly the “Basic information” section. This profile area offers viewers the user’s fundamental characteristics, yet they contain some of the most socially contested details on the internet. The “Interested In” and “Religious Views” areas have been a great source of individualistic expression, generally providing users with the first step in accepting and expressing themselves in a public fashion. The question arises whether this is a healthy alternative to conversation with friends and family over such issues. On the one hand, this medium gives users the advantage of a certain degree of confidence which other, more intimate situations might not grant them. On the other hand, this type of self-expression skips over the development stages of a self-concept and allows users to immediately publish their personal thoughts and feelings to a global audience. When talking yesterday with a former academic ahdvisor, the topic of personalization via social networking sites came up. My advisor stated, “Nothing’s private anymore with Facebook.” I couldn’t help agreeing. The handful of questions Facebook initially asks of its users subject them to instant social stigmas and profiling by their peers, families, and superiors.

With social networking sites, it is impossible to split your worlds. What I mean by this is that a Facebook user cannot choose which “friends” can know he’s an atheist and which cannot, without restricting larger parts of his profile. People using Facebook for “business networking” reasons cannot mix their details with their friends and family if they are to keep up a professional appearance. Thus, the personalization aspect of Facebook becomes a blessing and a curse.

In addition, Facebook has recently pushed its users to utilize Facebook as an “organizer” for their other social websites. The ad at the beginning of this post urges users to register their other sites through Facebook for “instant personalization.” This begs me to ask, how much information is too much information? It’s a slippery slope to the end of privacy.

Has Facebook driven social interaction into a corner? (Part V)

In Parts I-IV I stated the following: Facebook allows its users quick and simple communication on a pleasant interface with millions upon millions of fellow users and the ability to individualize one’s profile information.

In my last entry, I discussed the “pleasant interface” portion of my previous statement under the assumption that Facebook has imposed itself open society instead of the user population consciously changing its tastes to online social networks over other forms of communication. We have seen that this comes about by a combination of users seeking new thrilling media and social networks taking advantage of popular preferences.

Let us now examine the “millions upon millions of fellow users” portion of my original statement. I will begin with a few questions. Is the “millions upon millions of fellow users” facet of Facebook what draws so many users? In other words, is the promotion of its large network the reason for its large network? On a psychological level, can humans maintain so many social connections? Are the relationships “maintained” through Facebook illegitimate relationships, or are they a precursor to human interaction in decades/centuries/millennia to come? What is the significance of “adding” someone as a friend? Are all these friends on an equal level? Are they even friends at all?

It seems paradoxical but it appears that the reason that Facebook has hundreds of millions of users is because it indeed has hundreds of millions of users. As discussed before, Facebook began with a considerably smaller population of users who, ironically using other forms of media (e.g. word of mouth, phone conversations, etc.), diffused the ingenuity of the social network. It is thus logical that before a certain point, Facebook’s survival was in the hands of a select group of individuals who, the network’s officials hoped, would give the site enough publicity that it could soon support itself. Only now can Facebook’s reputation support itself regardless of word of mouth. It appears that a range of user numbers was sufficient for the social network to sustain itself, and become more successful through its undisputed dominant position over other networking sites.

This year, Robin Dunbar, a professor of evolutionary anthropology at Oxford, held a study on human relationships in which he discovered that “people tend to self-organise in groups of 150 because social cohesion begins to deteriorate as groups become larger.” If this is so, how do people have hundreds of friends? How is it that 95% of my own Facebook friends have over 150 friends, and 10% have 1000 or more? If the human brain and physical and emotional capabilities are able to have 150 relationships, does this mean 95% of my friends have evolved beyond this limit? I think not. The probable explanation is that Facebook is conducive to forming acquaintances. Facebook has its members with 2000 friends believe they indeed have at least 2000 relationships in their lives. Yet in reality, “friends” are “made” by just a click of a button. 1850 of these “friends” have distant and frayed social network connections to our 2000-friend member. The question arises again, “Is Facebook preparing us for the future of human relationships?” Will social networking sites enhance human capabilities to sustain relationships in the future? This is highly doubtful for millennia. For now, Facebook just does a superior job of connecting their users to one another. Facebook can’t make friends for you. But it can make you thousands of acquaintances whose histories and faces you can chunk in your memory. Our emotional range and sensory systems haven’t quite caught up with Facebook’s social enthusiasm.

Article from The Sunday Times

OMG: brains can’t handle all our Facebook friends

Chris Gourlay January 24, 2010

WE may be able to amass 5,000 friends on Facebook but humans’ brains are capable of managing a maximum of only 150 friendships, a study has found.

Robin Dunbar, professor of Evolutionary Anthropology at Oxford University, has conducted research revealing that while social networking sites allow us to maintain more relationships, the number of meaningful friendships is the same as it has been throughout history.

Dunbar developed a theory known as “Dunbar’s number” in the 1990s which claimed that the size of our neocortex — the part of the brain used for conscious thought and language — limits us to managing social circles of around 150 friends, no matter how sociable we are.

These are relationships in which a person knows how each friend relates to every other friend. They are people you care about and contact at least once a year.

Dunbar derived the limit from studying social groupings in a variety of societies — from neolithic villages to modern office environments.

He found that people tended to self-organise in groups of around 150 because social cohesion begins to deteriorate as groups become larger.

Dunbar is now studying social networking websites to see if the “Facebook effect” has stretched the size of social groupings. Preliminary results suggest it has not.

“The interesting thing is that you can have 1,500 friends but when you actually look at traffic on sites, you see people maintain the same inner circle of around 150 people that we observe in the real world,” said Dunbar.

“People obviously like the kudos of having hundreds of friends but the reality is that they’re unlikely to be bigger than anyone else’s.

“There is a big sex difference though ... girls are much better at maintaining relationships just by talking to each other. Boys need to do physical stuff together.”

Dunbar’s study is due to be published later this year.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article6999879.ece