We've all seen the story of a group of Florida cheerleaders ganging up on a fellow student. Their reason? The girl had made mean posts about them on MySpace. It seems every day brings a new case of violence, bullying or other crime facilitated by the Internet.
Today, I saw a unique case in The Seattle Times. This time, it was a grown woman allegedly contributed to the suicide of a 13-year-old girl. The story states,
"She allegedly helped create a MySpace account in the name of someone who didn't exist to convince young neighbor Megan Meier that she was chatting with a 16-year-old boy named Josh Evans."
The girl later hanged herself after receiving cruel messages from the fictional boy. This is a strange case, to say the least. The victim's parents say they monitored her MySpace account. They also admitted that the girl sent mean messages back to "Josh".
The woman who allegedly impersonated Josh Evans will be charged with one count of conspiracy and three counts of accessing protected computers without authorization. The U.S. Attorney in the case says this is the first time the latter charge will be used in a social networking case.
To me, this seems like a long shot prosecution. If the victim's parents were monitoring her account, why didn't they stop what was going on? If they did not feel it was a problem then, why do they believe it contributed to her suicide?
Has any other reader seen this case? If you have any details or thoughts to add, I'd love to hear them.
Showing posts with label Relationships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Relationships. Show all posts
Friday, May 16, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
This Is The Problem With MySpace
A few weeks ago, I asked all of you to share an interesting story from the world of social networking sites. Within the first week, I had 9 stories. I quickly noticed that these stories had the same pattern. My friend Nabila writes:
"So my friend convinced me to get a MySpace account. I literally copied everything from my Facebook and threw it up there. All of a sudden, MySpace decides I'm one of the "cool new people" and plants my picture on the homepage. Over the course of the next 24 hours I have 5400 hits to my profile, 350 friend requests and about 130 emails. Out of control.
Granted most of the emails centered around the theme of "holy crap, you have huge boobs", but when you get a letter from a "friend" it's the thought that counts, right? Another good one was from a native Arabic speaker. He wrote, "I like you very," which mirrors the word order of Arabic. I particularly liked the email from the "remember 9-11" site, which said, "honka, honka, I want to squeeze your t*****s". Very classy.
Anyway, I was totally amused by the whole thing. Who knew a pink halter-top and red hair could elicit such a response? "
This kind of story why I'm leaving MySpace. Facebook is structured in a way that's conducive to keeping in touch with your friends. MySpace, on the other hand, is designed to "make new friends." The problem is, every scientific study on the subject says that to develop genuine friendships, we need real interaction. A "Merry Christmas" eCard posted on the message boards of 200 buddies just doesn't cut it.
MySpace users, how many of you have one or two people in your friends list who you've never met before? How many of you have not talked to that person since adding them? Ask the same question of Facebook users, and I would bet the result is much different. Do you want to meet people who "like you very" without ever meeting you, or would you rather know what happens in the lives of your real friends?
"So my friend convinced me to get a MySpace account. I literally copied everything from my Facebook and threw it up there. All of a sudden, MySpace decides I'm one of the "cool new people" and plants my picture on the homepage. Over the course of the next 24 hours I have 5400 hits to my profile, 350 friend requests and about 130 emails. Out of control.
Granted most of the emails centered around the theme of "holy crap, you have huge boobs", but when you get a letter from a "friend" it's the thought that counts, right? Another good one was from a native Arabic speaker. He wrote, "I like you very," which mirrors the word order of Arabic. I particularly liked the email from the "remember 9-11" site, which said, "honka, honka, I want to squeeze your t*****s". Very classy.
Anyway, I was totally amused by the whole thing. Who knew a pink halter-top and red hair could elicit such a response? "
This kind of story why I'm leaving MySpace. Facebook is structured in a way that's conducive to keeping in touch with your friends. MySpace, on the other hand, is designed to "make new friends." The problem is, every scientific study on the subject says that to develop genuine friendships, we need real interaction. A "Merry Christmas" eCard posted on the message boards of 200 buddies just doesn't cut it.
MySpace users, how many of you have one or two people in your friends list who you've never met before? How many of you have not talked to that person since adding them? Ask the same question of Facebook users, and I would bet the result is much different. Do you want to meet people who "like you very" without ever meeting you, or would you rather know what happens in the lives of your real friends?
Monday, May 5, 2008
Six Degrees of Messenger
The story that we're all connected by 6 degrees of separation may not always work in the real world. This fascinating concept about the way our social networks are set up has plenty of critics and skeptics. In the world of instant messaging, though, this maxim has been vindicated. A study by Microsoft researchers shows that users of Microsoft Messenger are separated, on average, by about 6.6 "steps" between mutual friends.
Jure Leskovec and Eric Horvitz analyzed 4.5 Terabytes of data, representing all the usage of Microsoft Messenger in one month during the summer of 2006. The information was anonymous, but the researchers used general demographic data (age, zip code, gender, etc.) to produce some interesting results. Their findings break down into 3 major areas: age, gender, and geography.
In general the study shows that even online we stick with our own. The majority of our conversations take place with others who share our language. The next strongest factors are geographical distance and age group.
The world of messaging has always had a strong over-representation of people between the ages of 15 and 35. According to the data, this younger segment also tends to communicate mostly with others in the same age group. This changes as we get older. Users over 35 show less bias based on age. Our conversations also get deeper with age, it seems. While people over the age of 50 have fewer IM conversations in general, their conversations are generally longer and involve more messages. Interestingly, the conversations also got slower, with less "messages per hour" than younger users.
As for gender, guys talking to guys are just as taciturn online as on the phone. The average male-male conversation was shorter than any other based on gender. The average male spent 4 minutes per conversation with other males. Female-female conversations averaged 4.5 minutes apiece. The study also confirmed that we invest more in conversations with the opposite sex. Half of all IM exchanges were between opposite sexes, and these conversations averaged 5 minutes each. Opposite genders involved in conversation with each other also tended to do web searches for similar subjects, indicating that we really do pay more attention to communicating with current or prospective mates.
Next, the study describes the geographical results. Distance-wise, we stay close to home. The research shows a peak in communications at distances of 500km or about 312 miles. The researchers theorize that this is partly the result of geographic features. For example, past a distance of 3000km, there is a sharp decline in the amount of communications. This distance is also the approximate width of the Atlantic Ocean, giving a probable explanation for the decrease in links.
Looking at a map of what countries talk to each other the most, the conclusions about "homophily", or associating with people like yourself, still hold true. Spanish-speaking countries in Central and South America have strong links to each other and Spain. Taiwan, China, Hong Kong and the Korean peninsula form a tight network. Turkey shows strong links to Germany, which has a large population of Turkish immigrants.
The countries of the Arabic-speaking world stick close together and also communicate heavily with France, a former colonial power in North Africa and home to a large population of Arabs. These countries also have some of the longest conversations out of all the places in the study, a reflection of the family-oriented, close-knit culture of the area.
These conclusions are interesting, but not surprising. To me, the most important result is proof of something I've believed for a while. Instant Messaging can span the globe, but for the most part it doesn't make you new friends. The social network stays more or less same. It's just another medium to keep in touch with those you already know.
Jure Leskovec and Eric Horvitz analyzed 4.5 Terabytes of data, representing all the usage of Microsoft Messenger in one month during the summer of 2006. The information was anonymous, but the researchers used general demographic data (age, zip code, gender, etc.) to produce some interesting results. Their findings break down into 3 major areas: age, gender, and geography.
In general the study shows that even online we stick with our own. The majority of our conversations take place with others who share our language. The next strongest factors are geographical distance and age group.
The world of messaging has always had a strong over-representation of people between the ages of 15 and 35. According to the data, this younger segment also tends to communicate mostly with others in the same age group. This changes as we get older. Users over 35 show less bias based on age. Our conversations also get deeper with age, it seems. While people over the age of 50 have fewer IM conversations in general, their conversations are generally longer and involve more messages. Interestingly, the conversations also got slower, with less "messages per hour" than younger users.
As for gender, guys talking to guys are just as taciturn online as on the phone. The average male-male conversation was shorter than any other based on gender. The average male spent 4 minutes per conversation with other males. Female-female conversations averaged 4.5 minutes apiece. The study also confirmed that we invest more in conversations with the opposite sex. Half of all IM exchanges were between opposite sexes, and these conversations averaged 5 minutes each. Opposite genders involved in conversation with each other also tended to do web searches for similar subjects, indicating that we really do pay more attention to communicating with current or prospective mates.
Next, the study describes the geographical results. Distance-wise, we stay close to home. The research shows a peak in communications at distances of 500km or about 312 miles. The researchers theorize that this is partly the result of geographic features. For example, past a distance of 3000km, there is a sharp decline in the amount of communications. This distance is also the approximate width of the Atlantic Ocean, giving a probable explanation for the decrease in links.
Looking at a map of what countries talk to each other the most, the conclusions about "homophily", or associating with people like yourself, still hold true. Spanish-speaking countries in Central and South America have strong links to each other and Spain. Taiwan, China, Hong Kong and the Korean peninsula form a tight network. Turkey shows strong links to Germany, which has a large population of Turkish immigrants.
The countries of the Arabic-speaking world stick close together and also communicate heavily with France, a former colonial power in North Africa and home to a large population of Arabs. These countries also have some of the longest conversations out of all the places in the study, a reflection of the family-oriented, close-knit culture of the area.
These conclusions are interesting, but not surprising. To me, the most important result is proof of something I've believed for a while. Instant Messaging can span the globe, but for the most part it doesn't make you new friends. The social network stays more or less same. It's just another medium to keep in touch with those you already know.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Breaking Up Online
Fellow blogger Brie Aleida at Taut Thoughts has a great post today on how to break up correctly via MySpace or Facebook. In short, she writes:
"Today the way we maintain friendships is different. Writing letters and making phone calls have given way to Facebooking and txting. The right way to break up with your boyfriend or girlfriend has changed with time, too. In case you are ready to end things and aren’t sure how or you are just curious, here is a step-by-step way to break up with someone and be clear that it is OVER..." [Read more]
Though the post is hilarious, it does illustrate a great point. The way people start, maintain, and end relationships has changed drastically in the last few years. Today, there is a whole new set of etiquette and social normals for dealing with this kind of thing.
Before the advent of social networking sites, a fight would start over finding the proverbial lipstick stains on a shirt collar. Today the dispute becomes both pettier, and a lot more public. Forgetting to untag yourself in a Facebook picture with your ex can lead to an angry message on your public wall from your current love interest.
In the past, there'd be a box of returned records and sweaters on the front lawn. now, the baggage is electronic. Anyone can sift through your returned dirty laundry if they want.
For an example, take the (in)famous case of a wife uploading her divorce rant to YouTube. To date, the video has gotten thousands of hits. Lawyers say the video won't help her divorce case, but I imagine it was done more for catharsis than monetary gain.
Of course, for those of us happy with our relationship, this is mostly just another form of sick entertainment, akin to watching fists fly on Jerry Springer. But then, I guess that's the intent, isn't it?
"Today the way we maintain friendships is different. Writing letters and making phone calls have given way to Facebooking and txting. The right way to break up with your boyfriend or girlfriend has changed with time, too. In case you are ready to end things and aren’t sure how or you are just curious, here is a step-by-step way to break up with someone and be clear that it is OVER..." [Read more]
Though the post is hilarious, it does illustrate a great point. The way people start, maintain, and end relationships has changed drastically in the last few years. Today, there is a whole new set of etiquette and social normals for dealing with this kind of thing.
Before the advent of social networking sites, a fight would start over finding the proverbial lipstick stains on a shirt collar. Today the dispute becomes both pettier, and a lot more public. Forgetting to untag yourself in a Facebook picture with your ex can lead to an angry message on your public wall from your current love interest.
In the past, there'd be a box of returned records and sweaters on the front lawn. now, the baggage is electronic. Anyone can sift through your returned dirty laundry if they want.
For an example, take the (in)famous case of a wife uploading her divorce rant to YouTube. To date, the video has gotten thousands of hits. Lawyers say the video won't help her divorce case, but I imagine it was done more for catharsis than monetary gain.
Of course, for those of us happy with our relationship, this is mostly just another form of sick entertainment, akin to watching fists fly on Jerry Springer. But then, I guess that's the intent, isn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
