Ross,My wife just read that Facebook is now worth OVER $100 BILLION dollars. That's BILLION with a "B" as Carl Sagan said of the heavens. I find Facebook disgusting - but not because of its "worth". That one jerk has taken society to the cleaners by sucking my grandchildren and my daughters-in-law into his stupid social arena is disgusting. Zuckerberg is a predator, feasting on our children and adults, just as sexual perverts do. We just haven't caught up with the harm he and his brain child has done to our culture.You state:"Only pot, selfies and Facebook will abide — and the greatest of these will probably be Facebook."What a sad and disastrous state for our country. Let's hope the Millenials catch on to Facebook's darker side.
I think in addition to helping drive voter turnout (for whatever party), it also helps them get a better picture of who their users are. Candidates have been using Facebook for campaigns since at least 2010, as they have all the basic information that politicians wanted, when targeting voters: Gender, Party Affiliation (D vs R), Occupation, Religion, Age. The final piece is the voting button, which is a binary option; Yes or No, allowing campaigns to try and push last minute get out the vote operations as well as see if users have voted in the past. Facebook doesn’t just do things for the sake of doing things, there’s almost always a business motive. This voter button was something I had written about last election too here: http://connectingthecircles.blogspot.com/2012/11/facebook-knows-you-vote...
Dan, your experience is reflected in those of almost 33,000 others on the Facebook page run by myself and The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org): https://www.facebook.com/HelpingAddictedSmokers?ref=hl. While of course "anecdata," these vignettes of desperate smokers who finally quit using e-cigarettes (vaping) amount to quite a testimony to their efficacy, until the actual experimental data come rolling in, likely this year. Gil Ross MD/ACSH
This article assumes that Facebook and other social media should play a significant role in a person's life. The problem is that people, especially younger ones, are beginning to make that same assumption when it's not true. Private lives, those intimate, embarrassing, discomforting, secret, and passionate moments, are no one else's business. Don't believe you're seeing the truth of my life on Facebook, and I'll do you the courtesy of not believing the truth of your life on your page.
This is why it's unethical for the Times to demand that readers use Facebook in order to have 'preferred' status as a commentator or to lure underage students to 'ask experts' about colleges, but only on Facebook.If you think Target is invasive, try Facebook. At least with Target we know that Target wants the info for itself. Facebook pretends to be a service purely to get people to reveal as much as possible about themselves. It is massive, secretive, Machievellian way of selling info for advertisers, a fact which it makes no attempt to conceal, but which the media 'forgets.'Target wants the info for Target. Whom does the Times want the information for? Why does it demand readers use Facebook?