Digital Smarts Blog

Facebook has added sections to its Community Standards page designed to help people better understand what is acceptable to share on Facebook. The new Community Standards page is longer than the previous version and is split up into four sections: safety, respectful behavior, privacy and security, and intellectual property. Facebook also revamped its guidelines on hate speech, bullying and harassment. Users will no longer be able to post anything that promotes violence in a distasteful manner. Hate speech and other material that directly attacks race, ethnicity, nationality, disabilities, religion or sexual orientation will be removed, however satire, humor and social commentary relating to these topics will still be allowed. Of course, the process of having something removed remains a difficult one and your family members should be reminded that once something is online, even it is removed quickly, it often takes on a digital life of its own.

Facebook has added sections to its Community Standards page designed to help people better understand what is acceptable to share on Facebook. The new Community Standards page is longer than the previous version and is split up into four sections: safety, respectful behavior, privacy and security, and intellectual property. Facebook also revamped its guidelines on hate speech, bullying and harassment. Users will no longer be able to post anything that promotes violence in a distasteful manner. Hate speech and other material that directly attacks race, ethnicity, nationality, disabilities, religion or sexual orientation will be removed, however satire, humor and social commentary relating to these topics will still be allowed. Of course, the process of having something removed remains a difficult one and your family members should be reminded that once something is online, even it is removed quickly, it often takes on a digital life of its own.

The concept of “oversharing” by parents with pictures, posts and updates on their children’s lives is not a new discussion. Now the phenomenon has a new name: “over-sharenting ”, and according to a new poll  done by the University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital, 74% of parents say they know a parent who has shared too much information about a child on social media. 56% even said they knew someone who shared embarrassing information about a child. The pros of sharing online are that parents can use social media to discuss children’s health questions, parenting, and issues related to raising children. Nearly three-quarters of parents who took the poll said using social media makes them feel less alone. Experts say that is a good thing, especially for young parents who may live far from extended family, helping them feel connected and supported. On the flip side, 68% percent of respondents were concerned that their children's privacy could be compromised, 67% worry that someone will re-share their children's photos and 52% are concerned that their child will be embarrassed about posts when they are older. This latter concern is a consequence that parents should be cognizant of in the age of digital permanence. What might seem like a hilarious anecdote about a 2 year old now could become fodder for bullies in the future.

The concept of “oversharing” by parents with pictures, posts and updates on their children’s lives is not a new discussion. Now the phenomenon has a new name: “over-sharenting ”, and according to a new poll  done by the University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital, 74% of parents say they know a parent who has shared too much information about a child on social media. 56% even said they knew someone who shared embarrassing information about a child. The pros of sharing online are that parents can use social media to discuss children’s health questions, parenting, and issues related to raising children. Nearly three-quarters of parents who took the poll said using social media makes them feel less alone. Experts say that is a good thing, especially for young parents who may live far from extended family, helping them feel connected and supported. On the flip side, 68% percent of respondents were concerned that their children's privacy could be compromised, 67% worry that someone will re-share their children's photos and 52% are concerned that their child will be embarrassed about posts when they are older. This latter concern is a consequence that parents should be cognizant of in the age of digital permanence. What might seem like a hilarious anecdote about a 2 year old now could become fodder for bullies in the future.

A new survey about social media that was conducted on over 1,600 people has painted a clear picture that society has become social media obsessed. According to results from the survey done by Joseph Grenny and David Maxfield, co-authors of New York Times bestsellers like Crucial Conversations, posting to social media is interfering with daily life activities. 58% of people surveyed said "posting the perfect picture has prevented them from enjoying life experiences." Furthermore, about 91% of the respondents said they've witnessed others miss a great moment because they were trying to capture it for social media and many of those admitted doing the same thing themselves.

Perhaps that sounds familiar? Have you missed what was really going around you because you were trying to get it all on camera, or completely missed your child’s face when opening a special present because you were taking a picture of the box and not looking at them? This phenomenon has been dubbed “trophy hunting” by Grenny and Maxfield, and happens when people are more interested in getting a shot they can post on their Facebook page than in enjoying the moment.

If you want help beating the addiction, take a look at this infographic that shares some tips including learning to snap, look and listen as you engage with the experience, instead of just trying to bag the “trophy shot.”

A new survey about social media that was conducted on over 1,600 people has painted a clear picture that society has become social media obsessed. According to results from the survey done by Joseph Grenny and David Maxfield, co-authors of New York Times bestsellers like Crucial Conversations, posting to social media is interfering with daily life activities. 58% of people surveyed said "posting the perfect picture has prevented them from enjoying life experiences." Furthermore, about 91% of the respondents said they've witnessed others miss a great moment because they were trying to capture it for social media and many of those admitted doing the same thing themselves.

Perhaps that sounds familiar? Have you missed what was really going around you because you were trying to get it all on camera, or completely missed your child’s face when opening a special present because you were taking a picture of the box and not looking at them? This phenomenon has been dubbed “trophy hunting” by Grenny and Maxfield, and happens when people are more interested in getting a shot they can post on their Facebook page than in enjoying the moment.

If you want help beating the addiction, take a look at this infographic that shares some tips including learning to snap, look and listen as you engage with the experience, instead of just trying to bag the “trophy shot.”

You may not be aware of it, but one way major cellphone carriers make money is by selling your search and browsing history to advertisers. If this is disturbing to you, there are methods to block tracking in the Settings on your iPhone, Android and Windows phones. Unfortunately, most carriers are working on ways around that so you won’t be able to stop tracking by just changing a setting on your phone.

You may not be aware of it, but one way major cellphone carriers make money is by selling your search and browsing history to advertisers. If this is disturbing to you, there are methods to block tracking in the Settings on your iPhone, Android and Windows phones. Unfortunately, most carriers are working on ways around that so you won’t be able to stop tracking by just changing a setting on your phone.

Posting pictures of your children on your social media accounts might seem innocent enough, and although everyone seems to be doing it, an unsettling trend has developed: strangers are appropriating the images and pretending the children are their own. Stories have emerged of “digitally kidnapped” Facebook and Instagram pictures of children that are being shared by strangers on blogs, websites and on role playing games through Twitter (hashtagged #BabyRP, for Baby Role Play, and #KidRP). Many parents who have experienced this have admitted their privacy settings on Facebook were not set high enough or were out of date. The best advice is to keep track of your privacy settings, and consider using a privacy app, such as KidsLink, that is used to share photos with only the friends and family whom you have approved of to view the images.

Posting pictures of your children on your social media accounts might seem innocent enough, and although everyone seems to be doing it, an unsettling trend has developed: strangers are appropriating the images and pretending the children are their own. Stories have emerged of “digitally kidnapped” Facebook and Instagram pictures of children that are being shared by strangers on blogs, websites and on role playing games through Twitter (hashtagged #BabyRP, for Baby Role Play, and #KidRP). Many parents who have experienced this have admitted their privacy settings on Facebook were not set high enough or were out of date. The best advice is to keep track of your privacy settings, and consider using a privacy app, such as KidsLink, that is used to share photos with only the friends and family whom you have approved of to view the images.

Facebook is facing a class action suit after it has refused to provide refunds for purchases made by children through the site without permission from their parents. The issue of children making purchases online without the permission of their parents is a dicey one that has cost other tech companies a fair amount of money.

In January 2014, Apple was forced to refund at least $32.5 million in a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over the ability of children to make in-app purchases without parental consent. Last September, Google was ordered to shell out $19 million in refunds over the same issue, while in July, the FTC sued Amazon over unauthorized in-app charges made by children. Given the outcome of these past cases, Facebook is likely to face a tough challenge in court and may end up having to settle the suit and refund the purchases. In the meantime, be sure to talk to your kids about not buying anything within an app without your permission.

Facebook is facing a class action suit after it has refused to provide refunds for purchases made by children through the site without permission from their parents. The issue of children making purchases online without the permission of their parents is a dicey one that has cost other tech companies a fair amount of money.

In January 2014, Apple was forced to refund at least $32.5 million in a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over the ability of children to make in-app purchases without parental consent. Last September, Google was ordered to shell out $19 million in refunds over the same issue, while in July, the FTC sued Amazon over unauthorized in-app charges made by children. Given the outcome of these past cases, Facebook is likely to face a tough challenge in court and may end up having to settle the suit and refund the purchases. In the meantime, be sure to talk to your kids about not buying anything within an app without your permission.

Twitter recently announced a change to The Twitter Rules, explicitly prohibiting “revenge porn” or other non-consensual, intimate photos using the service, alongside its prohibitions against making threats due to a person's race, gender or age. The move comes two weeks after Reddit, another social media site cracked down on revenge porn itself. Under the new rules, Twitter users who see such photos of themselves posted online will be able to report the unauthorized material to the company. Only the subject of the photo -- or their legal representative -- is allowed to request a review and removal of the pictures. Those who post the photos are allowed to appeal a takedown decision if they feel it was unwarranted. Keep in mind, however, there is no estimate of how long it will take to remove a picture.

Unlike Reddit policies, if Twitter employees determine a photo does violate the new rules, the firm will not only hide the post from public view, but also lock the account of the person who posted it."[Those] users will be required to delete the content in question before being able to return to the platform," the company says on its Rules page. Those who post content intending to harass others could be suspended from Twitter altogether. If the photos become the subject of a legal investigation, the company says that it will follow its existing rules if asked to turn over personal information on the person who posts the pictures.

Twitter recently announced a change to The Twitter Rules, explicitly prohibiting “revenge porn” or other non-consensual, intimate photos using the service, alongside its prohibitions against making threats due to a person's race, gender or age. The move comes two weeks after Reddit, another social media site cracked down on revenge porn itself. Under the new rules, Twitter users who see such photos of themselves posted online will be able to report the unauthorized material to the company. Only the subject of the photo -- or their legal representative -- is allowed to request a review and removal of the pictures. Those who post the photos are allowed to appeal a takedown decision if they feel it was unwarranted. Keep in mind, however, there is no estimate of how long it will take to remove a picture.

Unlike Reddit policies, if Twitter employees determine a photo does violate the new rules, the firm will not only hide the post from public view, but also lock the account of the person who posted it."[Those] users will be required to delete the content in question before being able to return to the platform," the company says on its Rules page. Those who post content intending to harass others could be suspended from Twitter altogether. If the photos become the subject of a legal investigation, the company says that it will follow its existing rules if asked to turn over personal information on the person who posts the pictures.

A French teacher whose Facebook account was blocked after he posted a link to a famous 19th-century painting by Courbet of a nude woman has been given permission to sue the social network in a French court. The painting is world-renowned and hangs in the Musee d’Orsay. What is interesting about the case is that, according to Facebook’s terms of service, the teacher cannot sue in a French court, but yet the court has agreed to hear the case. The ruling may force Facebook to abide by French laws and prevailing morals in moderating posts, which may open Facebook up to lawsuits all over the world. Although already sparking controversy, it will probably take a year for the case to be litigated.

A French teacher whose Facebook account was blocked after he posted a link to a famous 19th-century painting by Courbet of a nude woman has been given permission to sue the social network in a French court. The painting is world-renowned and hangs in the Musee d’Orsay. What is interesting about the case is that, according to Facebook’s terms of service, the teacher cannot sue in a French court, but yet the court has agreed to hear the case. The ruling may force Facebook to abide by French laws and prevailing morals in moderating posts, which may open Facebook up to lawsuits all over the world. Although already sparking controversy, it will probably take a year for the case to be litigated.

The app Yik Yak, a social media messaging network that allows users to write anonymous posts, has a history of making news because of links to cyberbullying and spreading false rumors about bomb threats at schools. Recently, though, The New York Times has reported that the abuse of the app to bully and harass has not abated despite blocking features that were put in place. Yik Yak made it possible for schools and campuses to block its use on their WiFi networks, but students can still use their cell phones to access the app.

On college campuses, it has been reported the app is being used to harass not only fellow students, but faculty as well. However, colleges (and schools) are powerless to do much about it as the app’s privacy policy prevents schools from identifying users without a subpoena, court order or search warrant, or an emergency request from a law-enforcement official with a compelling claim of imminent harm. That kind of legal entanglement makes it hard to pursue those who seem almost frighteningly compelled to use the anonymity the app offers for hateful purposes, and seemingly without the threat of any consequences. Comments on the Times article about Yik Yak abuse point out that most of what is on Yik Yak is pretty mundane or harmless, and hateful comments typically get “voted down” by users. While likely true, it is always easier to advocate having a “thick skin” when the abuse is not happening to you.

The app Yik Yak, a social media messaging network that allows users to write anonymous posts, has a history of making news because of links to cyberbullying and spreading false rumors about bomb threats at schools. Recently, though, The New York Times has reported that the abuse of the app to bully and harass has not abated despite blocking features that were put in place. Yik Yak made it possible for schools and campuses to block its use on their WiFi networks, but students can still use their cell phones to access the app.

On college campuses, it has been reported the app is being used to harass not only fellow students, but faculty as well. However, colleges (and schools) are powerless to do much about it as the app’s privacy policy prevents schools from identifying users without a subpoena, court order or search warrant, or an emergency request from a law-enforcement official with a compelling claim of imminent harm. That kind of legal entanglement makes it hard to pursue those who seem almost frighteningly compelled to use the anonymity the app offers for hateful purposes, and seemingly without the threat of any consequences. Comments on the Times article about Yik Yak abuse point out that most of what is on Yik Yak is pretty mundane or harmless, and hateful comments typically get “voted down” by users. While likely true, it is always easier to advocate having a “thick skin” when the abuse is not happening to you.

You might be surprised to know that a good amount of what we read today is created by computer algorithms, and not humans. With the amount and speed of information that comes and goes daily over the Internet, we probably shouldn’t be all that surprised. There are many content areas demanding constant updating that no human could keep up with it. An emerging industry known as “automated narrative generation” uses algorithms and natural language generators to create written content for everything from financial earnings to merchandising to sports updates. Even some books are robo-written too. (Think you can spot the difference? Take this interactive quiz.)

As with most technology, there are pros and cons to this emerging field of automated narrative generation. Robo-journalism will give humans time to do more reporting and less data processing. Of course that also means that certain insights a human mind may impart could be missed when considering the same information, such as drawing connections and conclusions that aren’t necessarily obvious when just looking strictly at the data.

You might be surprised to know that a good amount of what we read today is created by computer algorithms, and not humans. With the amount and speed of information that comes and goes daily over the Internet, we probably shouldn’t be all that surprised. There are many content areas demanding constant updating that no human could keep up with it. An emerging industry known as “automated narrative generation” uses algorithms and natural language generators to create written content for everything from financial earnings to merchandising to sports updates. Even some books are robo-written too. (Think you can spot the difference? Take this interactive quiz.)

As with most technology, there are pros and cons to this emerging field of automated narrative generation. Robo-journalism will give humans time to do more reporting and less data processing. Of course that also means that certain insights a human mind may impart could be missed when considering the same information, such as drawing connections and conclusions that aren’t necessarily obvious when just looking strictly at the data.