I am not of those fervent fans of social networking. Use sparingly. I know they are useful and interesting, professionally grew up with them, I give talks about. But I also know that are whirlpools of time. And my day is usually quite full.
I have my blog for 10 years and do not hesitate to take a break when my health so requires. I chose to use it not as a source of income, but a showcase of my work and a place to share information for pleasure, not obligation.
I have an account on Twitter since the beginning of the service, which I won for the convenience, speed and especially intimacy with the “mobile way of life.” But I’m no time or no subject without fear juice. I have a profile on LinkedIn. Took me to enter the Foursquare because no use, and only I joined when I saw that helped me find cool places to eat and walk around while traveling. I have won a lot discount and free dessert and thanks him. Today much like the list feature to plan trips.
But what really took me to dive head was Facebook. Once inside, it did not cost anything to join Google+ as well. The youngest is the ResearchGate that use to accompany academic research in the health area. And it arrives.
My relationship with Facebook is emblematic. I kept off even when it was mainstream, and only gave up even an obligation, when I joined the Papotech and all podcast discussions began to be there.
Late last year, I created a profile but soon turned into fanpage to avoid the problem of people limit. I had at no time intended to use Facebook as a personal network, but as an extension of the work you already do on the web. Still I prefer more personal social relationships the old fashioned way: true friends speak personally with each other, or by phone, or at most SMS. Or WhatsApp also go there.
The problem is that I had to make a new profile to be able to participate in discussion groups. Did not intend to use this profile, just wanted something to manage the system yourself. And then began the headaches: how Facebook has become Orkut, friendsnon-tech and relatives (near or far) did not understand that stuff I did not add anyone, and ask that instead curtissem my fanpage. Soon gained fame unsympathetic. Alas, alas. For the sake of family relationships, cedi. But just for them. Soon to appear current, the photos where I was marked not agree, and charges to post more personal things instead of professional…
Heavens, how people take this seriously Facebook! Some people are not speaking because of posts, photos in which they are ugly, or repentant because they photographed drunk or inappropriate attire. There periguetes showing false intimacy to get back at ex. And we have the ubiquitous nudges – those with indirect outburst tone that now and then someone does not name names, but makes almost everyone wearing the shoe.
It was hard to explain to my family because my enthusiasm with social networks will only to a point, but over time the staff understood. I went from unsympathetic just eccentric.
Some even heeded my advice. They stopped to put their residences as venues. They stopped to expose their children to the school uniform. They stopped to show that daily make a particular route home-work carrying gazillion gadgets in the bag. “Ah, but only my friends are watching!” Oh yeah? Who guarantees?
Over time flexibilizei I. But just a little. Either more personal photo is there. Because I think so, if you go out in the rain, it is to get wet. That’s why all this discussion about Facebook privacy gives me a bit of laziness. You do not want to show up? Simple: do not have Facebook account. Do not want to be pestered, do not want bisbilhotem your profile, you do not want to do gossip? Exit the network. Yes, you can lock your posts and limit their views to certain groups, but I just do not believe in privacy in online little world. And remember: before entering the Zuckerberg of the universe, you must agree to the rules that it imposes.
You can make an analogy with the recent episode involving the Duchess of Cambridge. Not to appear on magazine covers with peitolas out? Simple, do not do topless. Yes, she was in a private place, is a right she has. But it was open. And the paparazzi do not give truce. As hackers can circumvent security in Facebook profiles or Twitter, photojournalists can take advantage of the ultra – modern drones. I repeat: it was his right, in its intimacy. But being the wife of royal heir, she has time, money and plenty of power to prosecute those who want it if their privacy is violated. And we, ordinary mortals?