What’s do you think is wrong with Facebook? Does the newly
added timeline seem to be more of a hassle and overwhelming rather than a cool,
new, exciting way to display your life on a website? Or maybe you are one of the
long-time users who have found Facebook’s lack of a good filter to keep
unwanted friends or family members away from “friending” you as problem? These
two cases are very common amongst users worldwide, but this problem extends
more to just this networking sites. It extends to the Internet as a whole. Are
the websites with too much gadgets, tabs and unwanted videos (YouTube) too much
for you, or does the unwanted spam reaching the thousands in your Yahoo! folder
becoming an atrocity? Either way society is facing two problems that need to be
taken care of a.s.a.p. But which one should be handled first?
It’s should,
or logically would, be whichever is perceived to be a larger problem, and to
me, it’s filter failure? I think of it in this way. Going back to the Facebook
example, which one seems to be more of the hindrance: all the timeline
information and links you can click on, or the possibility that your boss or
family members may read some of the very personal information you release on
your status or during the changing of your relationship status? I think Clay
Shirky from the “It's Not Information Overload. It's Filter Failure.” video
would definitely agree that filter failure is a bigger problem just from his
similar story present in his speech. Those clickable links and timeline
information are only a nuisance when you not interested or not in needed of
whatever they offer. You don’t care about the link to change your privacy until
you actually need it to change your privacy, so until that time comes, it’s in
the way. So in this situation, information overload may not be such a bad
thing. On the other hand though, there is no way to cope with personal information
somehow getting out to the crowd of people it’s not intended for. Some could
say that you should make that privacy link less of a irritation and change your
privacy to keep certain people out (or simply be more careful when sending out
precious information). But what about the world wide web, where there isn’t any
universal “privacy links” or consistently successful filters of information?
Maybe that’s
the answer to this problem of how to solve filter failure. A tool that is
attached to Internet Explorer or Google Chrome that keeps certain individuals
blocked from all information that you release to the world (Yes, I know it’s kind
of harsh). Maybe Facebook should think about adding a way to selectively block
certain friends you are forced to have from information you are posting at any moment
in time. Or maybe the answer is that there isn’t an answer at all. Filter
failure is a problem of unwanted or too much information being displayed when
only a smaller amount of information was assumed to pop-up upon requested. So how
can we limit the amount of information that we received without limiting the
creator of the information in the first place? Isn’t the internet suppose to be
a playground for the mind and a canvas for the web blogger who want to make
something that they feel as though is necessary? If there was a way, and I’ll
reiterate that I don’t think there is, it definitely won’t be done through legislation
anytime soon because wasn’t that what the whole SOPA and PIPA scare was all about?
Clay Shirky's "It's Not Information Overload. It's Filter Failure"
http://blip.tv/web2expo/web-2-0-expo-ny-clay-shirky-shirky-com-it-s-not-information-overload-it-s-filter-failure-1283699
Clay Shirky's "It's Not Information Overload. It's Filter Failure"
http://blip.tv/web2expo/web-2-0-expo-ny-clay-shirky-shirky-com-it-s-not-information-overload-it-s-filter-failure-1283699
This post has many interesting points that i would have never of even thought of, but just like you added at the end i think it is impossible for something like this to happen. Obviously SOPA did not pass because there are just way too many people against it. Also dealing with the thought of being able to block people on Facebook, that is possible under security setting, but putting a security setting on Google Chrome or websites like that is taking it too far, in my opinion. The things that need to be blocked by certain people probably should not be on the internet to begin with. Other than that the article was written very well and it kept me intrigued at all times.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this blog post, and agree that with all of the Information Overload we face with today's technology, we begin to lose more and more of our privacy. As a Facebook user, I still fail to understand the benefits of its new "Timeline." Although I have not yet been forced to utilize it, Facebook will be requiring all of its users to adopt it as their new profile. What happened to just using sites like Twitter and Facebook purely for the social networking they were made for? Why all of a sudden do we feel it necessary to not only experience A Day in the Life of Everyone, but now we are required to display these lives down to the date and time??
ReplyDeleteI think ^Jon^ makes a good point the the main reason SOPA/PIPA couldn't pass was because "way too many people" were against it. However, I'm not sure what you mean that a security setting on Google Chrome and the sort is "taking it too far." These sites already have security features, and every web user knows it will always be impossible to completely rid the internet of extraneous uploads that probably should be blocked.
This post was very interesting and insightful. During this week, my opinion about filter failure and information overload has been changing by the day. As of yesterday, I was on the fence but after reading this article, I am back to pointing the finger at filter failure. I appreciate the usage of Facebook in the passage because it makes the article relevant to young adult readers like me.Seeing as though I have a Facebook page I can relate to the wrong people viewing my postings. This article was also very well written.
ReplyDelete......Filter failure sucks!!!!
You brought up a very controversial instance: Facebook and the intrustion of "privacy" a user may suffer at the hands of an employer or potential employer. To me, there is a very black and white answer as to whether or not I'd try to prevent this or instead merely ensure that I wasn't bombarded with irrelevant Facebook capabilities. My answer would 100% be to maintain success of my filters by keeping personal information away from an unintended audience. The other option is not so monumental as this one but rather a huge "nuisance," as you put it and as I would, too, put it. Maybe this example says something about filter failure vs. information overload -- that filter failure may potentially have much more drastic consequences than failure to address the overload of information.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that filter failure is a huge problem that society faces. However, I believe information overload is the real problem.
ReplyDeleteInformation overload is causing many people to fall behind in their lives, and deal with ridiculous amounts of stress. In an article I read that was published in The Seattle Times (you can check it out here http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012049123_webmultitask07.html), a man named Kord Campbell has let technology overtake his entire life. It has come to the point where he can't even function properly unless he is surrounded by his laptops and iPad. He, like many other people in today's society, are being consumed by need to always be updated.
Also, I'll address the issues that you brought up with Facebook. There is in fact a way to block certain people from viewing your status updates, wall posts, and photos (I did this with my mom and dad freshman year of high school haha). You can even block individuals from Facebook chat. This can all be found under the privacy settings. So, Facebook is not failing us there. But, even if they were, why would someone even post information that could come back to haunt them? Better to keep it clean, and save the good stuff for your non-virtual friends.
Good post though. You're argument is very respectable.