 I’m in a debacle. I’m not a fan of Twitter whatsoever, but I feel compelled to join. I feel a little guilt that I’m not on it because pretty much every speaker we have in class says we should for job opportunities. But I really just don’t want to join.
One reason I haven’t joined yet is because I like to have a little disconnect from being “connected.” I purposely don’t have internet on my phone for this reason. I’m already on my lap top enough. I check my e-mail and Facebook at least three times per day and I don’t want to spend more time updating Twitter. However, maybe I should take the time, especially if it’s going to land me a job.
Also, as mentioned before, I don’t have internet on my phone. I could get it, but I don’t want it. It seems like half the reason to have a Twitter account is so you can easily update it from your phone. So wouldn’t I be defeating the purpose by having to go to a computer every time? On the other hand, so what if I have to update Twitter via lap top? I’m already on it a lot anyway.
And my debate continues….
I love Facebook, don’t get me wrong, but I hate the mindless status updates. Isn’t that pretty much what Twitter is? I’m not sure I could handle more updates like “So and So is eating pizza and watching Dancing With the Stars,” or “So and So is running errands and then getting a manicure.” Who cares?
But, should I try to get past my annoyance of these updates if it means I will get a job?
Another reason I’m not sure I should join Twitter is that I’m not sure how well I’ll maintain it. Sure, I update my Facebook status, but probably only once or twice a week. I just can’t see myself Tweeting more than 3-4 times per week. I know it should be at least 3-4 times per day. I’m not sure I’m up for that. But should I be? Should I somehow become more motivated in that way?
I remember in class last week, Linda (our professor) told us that we shouldn’t think we have to be on absolutely every social media site to enhance our social media presence. I already know I’m not joining sites like MySpace, Bebo, Delicious, Digg, etc. But what about Twitter?
It seems like when anyone talks about social media Web sites the first to that come to mind are Facebook and Twitter. Will my chances of getting a job diminish if I don’t join Twitter because it’s one of the “mainstream” social media sites?
More than likely, I will not become a social media analyst, strategist or anything like that. I understand if I were, then joining Twitter would be a no brainer.
Maybe I’m making this into a bigger deal than it needs to be. Maybe I should just join. But I just can’t bring myself to do that.
What should I do?
Maybe I'm getting old. Or maybe I am a technology snob. Whatever I may be, I just don't understand why anyone would need (or want) an iPad. If you want one that bad, then go buy an iPhone. It does everything an iPad does, plus you get an extra bonus: a phone!
Each student in our class last week got to play with an iPad. I had never used one before, so I was looking forward to it. Maybe it was because there were no downloaded apps on this one (because it belonged to the university), but I after I played with it for about an hour, I became bored. My boredom with it could be chalked up to my sometimes lack of patience with things, but I still don't see why anyone would need one. I guess no body really needs a laptop either though, and here I am typing this blog on a laptop...
I think if I owned an iPad I would struggle with when to use it. I'm just sitting around browsing Facebook, should I put my laptop away and get out my iPad? But now I need to get going on that 20-page paper I have to write, do I put away my iPad now and get out my laptop? (iPad's do not have Microsoft Word.) Uh oh, I encountered a Web site with Flash. (iPad's do not load Flash pages.) Now I have to put away my iPad and get out my laptop. I'm going for a road trip to California, which do I bring? I digress...
iPad's also do not have a USB port or a disc drive. You can use the keyboards on them, but my guess would be not too many people would want to write anything more than a short e-mail on them. Because iPad's do not have many essential items for some people there are many download-able apps — many for a fee. Apple also has gadgets you can purchase such as a stand you can plug the iPad into so you can attach a keyboard, or adaptable plugs for a USB port. When iPad's are already around $600, who would want to spend more money on gadgets? I also know that there's basically an app for everything. But, like I said before, I'd rather just get an iPhone and load that with apps.
I know I'm being cynical, but sorry Apple, I'm not impressed. I would rather have a device that has everything an iPad has, plus a phone for less money. I know it's smaller, but with my 25-year-old eyes, it doesn't matter.
Until Apple develops (maybe it already has) an iPad with a USB port, Microsoft Word and able to download Flash, I'm not buying one.
Job searching has reached a whole new level. Even in the short three years since I graduated from undergrad, trying to stand out when applying to a job as changed vastly. I'm not sure if it's due to the economic recession and the more than 100 people applying to nearly every job, or if it's because of the way social media has taken off in the past few years. It's probably a little of both.
Laura Gainor, a young professional social media strategist for Comet Branding in Milwaukee spoke to our class last week about the way in which she was hired a few months ago. Moving from Charlotte, North Carolina to Milwaukee with her husband, she knew she need to do something extraordinary to sand out amongst a talented crowd of people who already lived in Milwaukee. She used video sharing, slide show sharing and social media (mostly Twitter) to market herself and tell her story. She kept emphasizing about what she could offer the company, not the other way around.
I kept going back and forth about what I would think about this if I were the company. Would I think it was creepy and that this girl was insane and desperate? Or would I think it was innovative and a smart way to differentiate from the other candidates? I think the type of position she was applying for (social media strategist) made what she did seem creative — any other position and she might have seemed nuts.
If Laura had simply e-mailed her resume to Comet Branding, my guess is that she probably wouldn't have gotten the job. Or, what if she put herself out there like that and still didn't get the job?
When I was in college it was all about making your resume stand out from others; about highlighting your experiences. In some ways, I think it's still about that, but just with using different forms of media. We no longer have to have just a paper or electronic resume. We have to have a Web site at minimum, and it probably wouldn't hurt to have a Twitter, Facebook, LinkdIn and slideshare either. (Slideshare is a slideshow like PowerPoint on a sharable Web site. You can link your slideshare to social media Webs sites.)
I wonder if this new way of applying for jobs is just a fad. In 10 years when and if we are out of the recession, will applying to jobs will be the same? Or, since it might be less competitive, will we go back to simply e-mailing a job a resume? I guess time will tell.
Isn’t it ironic how technology has done both good and bad things for our health? It seems like not a day goes by I don’t hear about childhood obesity due to video games, but yet I also rarely go a day without seeing a runner using an iPod, or someone’s Facebook status that says they accomplished running five miles, or signed up to run a 10K, half marathon, etc.
Maybe it’s just me because I am a runner and I seek information on health and fitness, but it seems like there are plenty of ways technology helps in becoming physically fit and in how to eat well. It seems like within the past few years there have been several advances in technology that have tried to combat the obesity problem. There shouldn’t be a problem for someone wanting to get in shape, although the individual has to do the information seeking themselves.
There are probably thousands of Web sites available with exercise tips and healthy recipes. Some Web sites I’ve seen allow you to track your eating and exercise habits online, or have a training schedule to print out. If you simply Google half marathon training tips or 5K training tips for beginners, hundreds of Web sites appear. There are also tips on what to eat to avoid cramps, what to do for blisters or shin splints, what to wear for comfort, etc. A few Web sites (such as active.com) are also available to help find races and physical activities in a specific area.
Other gadgets, such as the iPod, or Nike Plus make it easier to enjoy the time spent exercising. Nike Plus is a chip designed to go in special Nike shoes. It tracks things like calories burned, mile pace and time, and lets you upload the information to your iPod or computer. I love the idea, but I hate Nike shoes so I’ve never tried it. I’m hoping Asics will develop something similar soon.
To me, the iPod puts me in the jamming-out-to-music zone and sometimes helps me run the extra mile. My fiancé uses his while he’s running to listen to pathology lectures for med school. It also helps me in the winter when I use a treadmill to rid the boredom. Speaking of treadmills, who would have thought they would become so fancy? They now have ones with built in TVs and head phone plugs so you can listen to your own show without bothering the person next to you. They also count calories, monitor your heart rate and of course track your speed and distance for you. Yet another way technology has advance in an attempt to make us healthier.
I can’t mention technology and fitness without mentioning the Wii. I wondered how successful they were going to be when they first came out. I questioned it until I tried it, but now I understand what the craze is all about. But I still wonder if it’s just a fad.
Somehow still, with all of this technology to help us become healthy, the United States is still the fattest country in the world.
Last Friday, I had the opportunity to see The Social Network. Overall, I thought the movie was just fair. It's worth seeing, but if it wasn't a class assignment I probably would have just waited until it came out on DVD. If you haven't seen it yet, you might not want to read the rest of this. Following are the reasons why I thought it is was just so-so. Mark Zuckerberg's character. For one, I'm not sure if was an accurate portrayal of the creator of Facebook. Even if it was, his character drove me nuts. Maybe that's how the producers meant it, I'm not sure. Although funny at times, he seemed rather socially awkward and nearly heartless. The end showed me he did have a small heart, and that Justin Timberlake's character Shawn Parker, the creator of Napster, was the one behind the heartless decisions. I thought Zuckerberg was into Facebook only for the business and not to make friends. I guess maybe that's what it takes to be the youngest billionaire in the world. I just didn't realize that he was like that.I also thought the movie made college girls look like drunk idiots most of the time, with the exception of his ex girlfriend. Most scenes with girls showed them dressed suggestively, drunk, and/or having one nights stands. The girls (such as the Standford girl) were mostly portrayed as stupid sluts. I was in college, and I can tell you that not all college girls are like that.Justin Timberlake as the Napster guy. The guy is a singer, not an actor. I'm not sure how accurate the movie was. Some scenes showed the characters possibly texting, or at least reading e-mails on their phones. I am only a year younger than Zuckerberg, and I don't remember technology being that advanced at that time. Although maybe it was and I just didn't realize it.Even though I found I didn't like a few aspects of the movie, I did actually like parts of it, and I learned a lot from it. For example, I had no idea the law suits that arose from Zuckerberg's creation of Facebook. I remember hearing that he may have stole the idea, but I never knew anything else. I also never knew exactly what writing code for Facebook entailed. According to the movie, Zuckerberg spent the better part of his college career writing code. He would spend hours and hours and a time writing it. How boring and tedious that sounds. I also learned that if a person tries to "make it big," it's not going to be easy. I would like to know Zuckerberg's take on the movie. The only comments I know he said is, "I just wished that nobody made a movie of me while I was still alive." Is it accurate?
In class last week we listened to guest speaker Philip Nowak, who is a social media analyst for Delver.com, which was spearheaded by Sears. His career path reminded me of the way social media works — he didn't find his job, it found him. It's amazing to me that we even have social media analysts and that they find stuff to do for 40 hours or more per week. But we do.
Philip was a fascinating speaker. One topic he talked about was recent development of the Facebook Open Graph. I honestly didn't even know until his lecture what it was called, but I knew what it was. Perhaps you've heard of it too, but just don't know it.
Have you ever gone to a Web site such as Pandora, YouTube, or even the NHL? If you've seen a Facebook logo asking you to "like" a certain NHL team (go Red Wings!!) then you know what an open graph is. It's a way for companies to gain more interest, which will likely turn into more profit.
This is amazing to me. Last spring, to create the open graph, Facebook gave away their code. When I first heard that, I wondered why in the world Facebook would do that. But with more than 400 million users on Facebook, it's the exact opposite. Because of the Facebook Open Graph, Facebook itself can now have more costumers. And here I thought keeping "recipes" like that a secret was a good thing.
Now someone doesn't have to go to Facebook to "like" something, they can simply go to the company's site. That might even get a non-Facebook user to join. Smart move, Mark Zuckerberg (president and CEO of Facebook).
I think social media has turned into something no one thought it would. It's not the fad a lot of people once thought it was. If a business doesn't have a Facebook page now, they are considered out of the loop. If a person doesn't have a Facebook profile, people might wonder what planet they're from. Five years ago who would have thought there would be jobs for social media analysts? Five years from now, will these positions still exist?
I wonder what is next for Facebook. If they (and other social media sites) have come this far, I wonder what will happen, say, 10 years down the road.
One thing is for sure. I wish I had the same thoughts Mark Zuckerberg had just five years ago.
For more information on Facebook Open Graph, visit
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-20003053-36.html.
For those of you who don't know (and I'm sure there aren't many), Facebook crashed last Wednesday. It was only down for a few hours, but one would have thought it was down for days, or even weeks. One also might have thought the world was about to end, or the sky was falling.
God forbid we had to live without knowing what was going on in the lives of other people for a few hours, or that we had to work on a paper continuously for two hours without a Facebook procrastination break. Admittedly, I'm guilty of this too. I mean, seriously, who can sit at their computer for two hours straight and work on a paper without checking Facebook? Seems so stupid, but it's so true. What in the world did we do without this procrastination station?
When I was in high school, cell phones were just making their debut. When I was a freshman in undergrad, live journals were popular. Lap tops were just becoming affordable and wireless internet was just becoming the "thing." Remember wireless cards? My first lap top had one. We also... gasp... didn't have Facebook! It wasn't until probably the middle of my sophomore year in college that I opened a Facebook account.
Now I wonder what we did without it.
I wonder if some people could live a week without Facebook, or any other social media site. It seems preposterous to think that some people couldn't, but I really wonder with the way I saw people freaking out when it was down.
It's not just Facebook. Do you ever drive somewhere and realize you forgot your cell phone? I admit that I get a little worrisome when I do that. Heaven forbid if something happens I'll have to knock on someone's door and ask to use a phone. That's so 15 years ago.
Now it seems weird to just use a cell phone for just an actual phone. Now we're "wired" 24/7 to social media sites, our e-mail, and who knows what else. For a while it was cool to watch a movie on a big TV screen. Now it's cool to watch it in HD on the tiny screen of your phone. How weird is that? If you think about it, why do we need internet on our phones?
It's hard to imagine a world the way in which our parents lived in. A world where they used actual paper maps, card catalogs, encyclopedias, land lines and filing cabinets. I wonder if they felt disconnected if the phones were out, or if they felt uneasy driving somewhere without a map.
It's just amazing to me how dependent we've become on technology. When it breaks or something goes wrong, we don't know what to do with ourselves. We've been a part of technology for most of our lives and it has become a part of our daily routine. It would be weird to me not to check my e-mail every morning, or not to be able to pay a bill online.
It's amazing how technology has shaped our lives, isn't it?
About 15 years ago when I was 10-years-old, we played this game on the playground with a kickball. You’d hit the rubber ball with your hands into the four different squares marked with chalk. The object of the game was to make as little mistakes as possible and get to the first-ranked square. The game was called foursquare. Up until a few weeks ago, this was the only foursquare that existed to my knowledge.
Now Foursquare is a social networking Web site. Huh?
According to foursquare.com, the mobile application lets users “check in” through their smart phone to let others know where they are. “Friends” can track the history of where a person has been and who they’ve been with. Launched in March 2009, the application now has more than 3 million users.
And I thought Twitter was weird.
Hi, I’m out eating dinner at wherever, please come rob my house. Or, I’m at a bar drinking Miller Lite with my friends. And I care why?
The only way I can see Foursquare being in the least bit useful is for restaurants and retail stores. If a restaurant has a promotion that the first 20 users to “check in” get a free appetizer, then I can sort of see that. Just like any other social media site, the information is probably very viral. If I saw that my friend checked in at Macy’s and got 20 percent off their purchase, I might go to.
That is, if I had Foursquare. Or even Internet on my phone. I feel like I need a break from technology every once in awhile. If I had Internet on my phone, I would never get a break. I guess I don’t care to be connected to my e-mail and Facebook 24/7. And I don’t have a Twitter or Foursquare account.
Which brings me to my next point. Why do people care about other people so much? I’ll admit that I probably go on Facebook at least two or three times per day to see what others are up to. But why do I do that? Why do I care that an old acquaintance from high school got married, or that a person I used to know in college had a baby out of wedlock? Maybe I want to compare my life to theirs? That might be a subject for a whole different blog.
I think Foursquare brings the caring about what other people are doing to a whole new level. Seeing that an old friend got married is a little different than caring what they’re eating for lunch. I feel like an old fart for not seeing what the appeal of it is and feeling like I don’t want to broadcast my day-to-day tasks to the world. Not too long ago my parents didn’t see the appeal of Facebook and now they both have accounts. Maybe I’ll change, but for now I’ll just stick to good ol’ Facebook.
I used to be a journalist. That's right, an actual reporter who covered city council and school board meetings, elections and day-to-day feature stories. I worked on deadline and I remember on election nights not getting home until 3 a.m. I did this for almost two years, then on Dec. 30, 2008, I got laid off.
I was only a reporter for a short time, but it was during that time I saw the journalism industry take probably the largest economical hit ever. The newspaper I worked at laid off their first reporter ever (me), but they suffered one of the least. About a month or so after I was laid off, a paper in Battle Creek, Mich., laid off half their staff. Battle Creek is about 20 minutes from Kalamazoo — where I received my undergraduate degree. The Detroit Free Press decided it couldn't afford to deliver the newspaper to homes during all days of the week. As of March 30, 2009, they now only deliver it on only Thursdays and Fridays.
Of course newspapers in Michigan hit home the most for me because that's my home state, but other newspapers nationwide were laying off staff, or worse — closing. Perhaps the most substantial news I remember hearing regarding newspaper downturns is the closing of the Rocky Mountain News, a paper with a circulation of more than 250,000, on Feb. 27, 2009.
Getting to my point: Why didn't journalists see this coming? Or maybe we did, but why didn't we try to catch up with changes in media?
It goes back to college, I think. I was never taught ways to tell stories through video, or ways to enhance stories online. I know colleges are trying to implement courses that teach these skills now, but why didn't it happen earlier? The only attempt of adapting to "new media" I saw was newspapers regurgitating their content verbatim online. What's the point of buying a newspaper then? I think it is partly my fault, too, because I never took a computer class of any kind to strengthen those skills. But I didn't know I needed to. Looking back now, I wish an adviser would have told me to do so, but none of this would have prevented me from getting laid off.
So now journalists must learn how to shoot video, write in a blog and update Twitter and Facebook. They must find time to do this in addition to their other daily tasks, and some must complete everything in fewer hours due to budget cuts. Ouch.
To me, newspapers should have slightly different content online than what subscribers see in print. Maybe a video explaining things using sights and sounds, something a print story can't do. Or have a link to a blog a staff member wrote about the topic, or a link to a discussion about the article on a Twitter or Facebook page. A lot of newspapers are starting to do this, but why are they just starting?
I don't mean to place the blame on just newspapers. Even just five years ago I don't think anyone knew how fast media was going to change. I think newspapers have been trying their best to adapt, but it has been a slow process. No newspaper has given me a reason to subscribe when I can easily get the news I want online, and in better form in my opinion.
I guess my point to all of this is that if newspapers and colleges adapted to new media, or "emerging media" quicker and more easily, then maybe newspapers wouldn't be in the state they're in now. Maybe I wouldn't have gotten laid off. But if I hadn't gotten laid off I wouldn't be in Milwaukee, or grad school. Or even writing in this blog. I digress.
Journalism will continue, it's just a matter of how and in what form.
Overall I love Facebook. I love being able to see pictures of a friends recent trip, or seeing that a friend I knew in high school or college got a new job, or got married. I love the friendly debates and status updates that make me laugh. However, there are some aspects about Facebook I don't like. Below are some personal pet peeves about the social networking site itself and how people use it.
Status updates
I'm sorry, but no one wants to know that your child eating better now that he/she got off of breast milk. Maybe when I have a child I will care but for now, spare me the details. I also don't care to know what you ate today, or that you have a 20-page paper due tomorrow. If you have a big assignment like that due, then why are you on Facebook? I also find it strange when people put how much they love their significant other in their status. I like to just tell the person myself.
Political rants
Since when did Facebook become the place to get in heated debates about the president or political issues? Yes, I am aware about the first amendment, but can't we simply agree to disagree? Everyone has their own opinion and it is not going to get changed.
Stupid profile pictures
Good for you for chugging that beer or for doing a shot. Is this really what you want people to see when they look at you? Also, nice body, but please put more clothes on.
Constant profile picture changes
Make up your mind already.
Farmville, Mafia, etc.
To each their own, but don't expect me to join or to help your farm. Also, no offense, but I'm hiding Farmville, Mafia and any other mini-feed clogging game from my news feed.
Bad spelling and grammar in status updates and profiles
There is a difference between your and you're, as well as their, there and they're.
With that being said, I wish there was a way to edit status updates and wall posts once you share them. I've noticed types in mine and it would be nice not to have to type the entire post over again.
Please don't be offended by any of this. This is my personal opinion and I'm sure everyone has their own views and their own Facebook pet peeves.
|
RSS Feed