Being the Bait

Catfishing is becoming a trend on social media sites - as it is now easier than ever to engage in modes of deception online that include using fake photos, information, identities, etc. Due to the vast increase of web interactions over human ones, it is said to be more common for someone to be catfished by someone in the online dating community.

Online dating is comprised of mostly intimate chatting. Once you fall for someone's "personality" or their deceptive online persona, it's easier to believe that they are who they say they are. It may be a way of self-defense or due to a lack of self-esteem that people go to intensive lengths to be someone they aren't on the internet. Most common lies include information on weight, age, and income.

But, the catfishers have to get their photos from somewhere - stock photos are too obvious. We always focus on the catfisher and the catfishee but hardly ever do we imagine what it's like to be the middle-man in the situation; we don't imagine how it must feel to have your photos be used in hundreds of fake profiles across the internet.

Ellie Flynn has been in this position for the past decade. Her photos, tweets, and personal information have been redistributed all over the internet by people claiming to be her and talking to men using her as their alias. Often, boys will come up to her claiming to know her, to which she has to let them down and prove to them she wasn't the one speaking to them by showing her driver's license.

Ellie said it was just as distressing to be the used personality in the situation as it is to be fooled by the personality. She encounters people who claim to have been on the phone with her for the past two months and are in love. How could you even respond to someone when they tell you that?

Her friend, Chia (who also has had her photos and information used in fake profiles) says that the fake-Chia will message her asking real-Chia why she is pretending to be her. In Ellie's words, it's "utter fucking madness, and really, really confusing."

Facebook... Where The Catfish Run Rampant

            For as long as the Internet has been accessible to the public, people have been using it to communicate with one another. Whether it be just talking to a family member/friend, chatting with someone new that you just met, or talking to a complete stranger that is thousands of miles away, the Internet can help be your communication channel. Recently, one of the biggest places where people get together on the Internet to communicate is Facebook. Facebook has been around for approximately a decade now and has helped to connect the world in ways that no one had previously ever imagined. Facebook has in-depth profiles and features that help people to really get a feel for the person that they are talking to, however, this can be a double-edged sword. There are obvious benefits that come from all of the features that Facebook offers, but there are also cons. People have been exploiting these features to create faux profiles that make it seem as though they are someone that they are not. The act of creating a fake profile to communicate with someone is called cat-fishing.

            As many people have noticed, mostly due to the MTV show Catfish, people have been duping others on Facebook and various social networking sites for years now. These catfish create profiles that represent someone who they believe is appealing, and begin to communicate with others for many reasons. Some people catfish because they fall in love with someone, but fear that there real self is not good enough. Others catfish just to ruin peoples lives, e.g. Manti Teo and many others that have been featured on Catfish. Either way, cat-fishing can be detrimental to both the person getting fooled and the catfish, so be on the lookout next time you are chatting with a stranger online.

            Some ways to prevent cat-fishing can be identified in the article titled, 9 Tips For Identifying Fake Online Profiles. This article gives 9 tips on how to make sure that you are not getting fooled into a relationship with someone who is not who they say they are. Some of these tips include, to 'be wary of profiles whose photos of "themselves" are pictures of models', or to 'be aware of profiles that have few pics at all'. Another useful tip to catch a catfish is to be aware of profiles that do not have much activity with friends, and in fact, profiles that have fewer than the normal amount of friends (which is around 130). This article really brings to light the facts of fake profiles on Facebook and can help someone who is possibly in denial about being cat-fished.

            In my personal opinion, I think that it is ludicrous that people put so much trust into those that they have met on Facebook and other social media sites. After everything that has come to light about  getting tricked on Facebook, people are still continuing to have relationships with users that they have never even met, and in fact, have only seen in a handful of pictures. Some people have even given large amounts of money to these people that they meet, that is ridiculous to me. My final stance on Facebook and cat-fishing is that if you have any doubt that the person that you are talking with is not who they say they are, then you are most likely correct.

Downsides of Facebook

I wanted to share my thoughts about Facebook after reading few articles about downsides of Facebook.

http://friendship.about.com/od/Conflicts_With_Friends/tp/Downsides-Of-Facebook-Friends.htm

http://www.today.com/money/facebook-may-boost-self-esteem-theres-downside-says-study-6C10168070

https://gigaom.com/2011/06/21/the-downside-of-facebook-as-a-public-space-censorship/

https://knoji.com/4-disadvantages-of-using-facebook/

Facebook has more downsides than upsides.

This judgment or view doesn't correspond with the majority opinion, which holds that Facebook has been and still is, a positive tool where people can communicate, post pictures, tell stories and enjoy all the conveniences of long-distance digital contact without the time-wasting disadvantages of other means of communication.
It is an all-in-one mechanism: Skype, Picassa AIM, MySpace and effectively every other social networking and personal information site put together. How can such a miraculous instrument be malicious?

Sociologically speaking, Facebook has come to replace actual personal communication in our lives. Statistics show that more people speak on Facebook now than in real life.This has negative consequences. Since people are no longer speaking as much on the phone, face-to-face, a very important part of being human has been cast aside by the very services that Facebook facilitates. No need to go and talk to so-and-so because Facebook can do it instead. No need to go through the trying process of face-to-face communication: Facebook can do the verbal communication well enough. Unfortunately, people forget that most communication as we have learned in class is tonal, physical and intonation-based, not purely verbal. By talking on Facebook, we are acting only a very small part of the great pageant of shared ideas. So small, indeed, that it can hardly be considered communication in the classical sense.

There is a measure of addictiveness in Facebook’s convenient and fun applications and no age-group is exempt from its magnetic clutch. As an example, Facebook allows us to put minimal effort to catch up with acquaintances.

Like everything, Facebook is good and bad. Its utility and value depend on how it is used. Inherently, it is a valuable tool; practically, it is arguably a dangerous and personally numbing instrument of coercion, merely another item on the extensive list of modern soul-deadening technologies. However, as I mentioned before, I personally think it has more downsides.

Facebook is often necessary. I took down my Facebook for a year and ultimately had to come back to the fold to communicate conveniently with classmates and lab partners. I am morally opposed to it, but I have an account for purely practical purposes.

The Annoyed Facebook Users

Good old Facebook! It use to be the talk of the town when I was in like middle school. When I say old I mean it is not as popular as it was five years ago. Most people that I know are on Instagram and Twitter. Personally I think that Facebook is more or less for the older crowd such as late 20s and up. The only reason I am still on Facebook is to watch the funny videos or to connect with the old folks at my church. Some reasons why I do not like Facebook is because it requires too much effort to maintain and I always get friend request  or messages from creepy people. It is way to easy for people to find you and message you. I still think that Facebook is a really great social networking sight especially for when you get older and in a career and you use it to connect with your colleagues or you are promoting a business.

The main thing I want to discuss today is the issue of “annoying posts.” According to the “An Open Letter from Mark Zuckerberg” posted on Facebook in September 8, 2006, Zuckerberg shared with us his main goal for creating Facebook and that was to “help people understand  what was going on in their world a little better.” Also he wanted to “create an environment where people could share whatever information they wanted, but also have control over whom they shared that information with (Zuckerberg, 2006).” https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook/an-open-letter-from-mark-zuckerberg/2208562130 In class we discussed the different types of post that annoy people and what they are called. Some examples include “The Brag” which is when someone intentionally brags about themselves. “The Cryptic Cliffhanger” is when someone posts something in hopes that you respond to it, and “The Literal Status Update” is when you just simply tell people what you have done or are doing at the moment. I do agree that reading posts such as these over and over can get annoying but if that is the way people want to express what’s on their mind I say have at. Looking back at all the ways to be annoying surprises me because you literally have to be a mute or post nothing in order to not be annoying and it pisses me off when people comment on a post just to say how annoying it is. I found and article on The Huffington Post with the title “7 Ways to Be Insufferable on Facebook.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wait-but-why/annoying-facebook-behavior_b_4081038.html I thought to myself ha ha this seems like a fitting article to use for my blog. It talks about how Tim Urban, the author, was emailed and example of a post that the average person would find offensively annoying. He goes on to explain how awful and unappealing the post was, and it made him think of what is considered terrible Facebook behavior and what isn't. He states that, “A Facebook status is annoying if it primarily serves the author and does nothing positive for anyone reading it (Urban, 2014).” He has his own adjectives for the annoying posters such as: narcissism, attention craving, jealousy inducing, and more. In my head I thought who the heck are you? Did you make the rules of Facebook? Who are you or anyone else of that matter to say what is and isn’t appropriate to post?  I’m not denying that the things people post aren't annoying. I’m just saying it’s their Facebook and they can say whatever they want. Yeah sure it does show up on your news feed if you are friends with one another but if you don’t like it then just delete them. But I bet if you did that for every constant annoying post you would have no friends. It would be a different thing if these people spoke aloud what they were feeling. If that were to happen I would totally complain about how annoying the things people say were. I just feel that we should complain about real issues that actually affect the real world and real people.

The Dark Side Gets Darker: Sites Encouraging Cyber Bullying

            It’s no secret that everyday there are new social networking sites and apps published, but what is new are social network apps that are designed to be anonymous and for mocking and embarrassing others. U-T San Diego tackles the issue in their recent article. The article acknowledges that there is no laws being broken by making these apps and their anonymity, and also touches the issue of posts by the publisher.

            Cyber Bullying laws are in their adolescence, and vary state to state. Along with the First Amendment and freedom to speech and the press, makes it very difficult for the legal system and distributors to regulate what their users post. It’s also becoming increasingly hard for parents to keep up with all of the new sites and apps, as well as knowing what services their kids are using, due to easy access to technology.

            However, the U-T San Diego article does point that the Publishers initial intent when creating their programs. They specifically target the app Burnbook and its creator’s negative intention. The app is based off the movie “Mean Girls’ and is designed for high schoolers where they are allowed to post about others from school. The app encourages users to follow a ‘community’ which translates to your own high school or other local schools allowing you to read gossip and slander about those in your area.

            The app’s initial launch led to cyber bullying, posting of inappropriate pictures, and eventually a threat to a San Diego High School. The Poway Unified School District was forced to release a statement to all of its families informing and warning them of the app.

            These types of apps obviously allow negative uses hence their design. The anonymity allows false presentation where kids can misrepresent themselves and be deceptive in who they are. It also allows lurking and observing without other people knowing, so its hard to see who saw, liked, or upped a negative post about you. Although the sites level of maliciousness isn’t clear, there is no clear precedent for cyber bullying cases, and the cases range widely from simple teasing to severe harassment, which is why website creators should use discretion and responsibility and follow a moral standard when creating cites. 

By Dan Geibler

Cyber Bullying: No Harm No Foul?

In class we discussed cyber bullying, or repeated teasing and harassing that occurs through computer mediated technology.  Some points that were made about cyber bullying are that it is common but difficult to quantify and there are no clear precedents.  In other words, some cases rule in favor of victims or schools while some rule in favor of bullies.  One case we discussed in class involved a high school senior, Sarah Evans, who created a Facebook page untitled “Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I’ve ever had.”  According to the New York Times article, Student Suspended for Facebook Page Can Sue, Ms. Evans repeatedly clashed with her teacher Ms. Phelps and created the Facebook page to vent her frustration.  She invited other students to write what they thought about Ms. Phelps as well, but took down the page after a few days.  Two months later, however, Ms. Evans was suspended for three days because of the page and she decided to sue the school.

To my surprise, the judge would not dismiss the case and one of the lawyers stated the judge’s decision “extended the protection of First Amendment rights to online writings of a nonthreatening manner.”  Although, I agree that the page was not threatening I do think it sets a precedent where kids can cyber bully in a nonthreatening that still may end in tragedy.  If this case would have involved a younger victim or resulted in some kind of physical harm, I think the ruling would have been very different.  I cannot help but think now this case could be used as a defense if a student creates a page similar to the “Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I’ve ever had,” and it ends in suicide or any form of self-harm.

Personally, this relates to my own life because when I was 13 someone created a Myspace page for the sole purpose of bullying one of my best friends.  The page degraded her character and just all around bashed her.  Luckily my friend did not take it to heart and it was the source of constant amusement for us and our other friends.  I think that if my friend did not have a strong support group or high confidence it could have seriously affected her.  To this day we never truly found out who created the Myspace page.  Though, we do have suspicions that it was the mother of a girl we were no longer friends with.  I mean what 13 year old disses your parent’s kitchen wallpaper… lol.

With the growth of communication technologies and different types of social media, cyber bullying as become a huge issue that was not addressed when I began using the internet and social media.  Although I am a firm supporter of free speech, I do think we need more specific laws on what constitutes cyber bullying.  Hopefully, with the focus on anti-bullying programs kids will learn how harmful bullying can be.  Maybe this generation will even take these messages into adulthood and there will be less trollers looking to wreak havoc over the internet (though I doubt that will happen).

Deception in Propaganda

Since discussing different forms of deception in Wednesday's class, I wasn't really sure how I could relate it to material outside of class. Looking at my personal experience, like most people, I had been deceived on many accounts before but not so much online. As I've said in pervious posts before, I've never really been exposed to online dating and don't have any interest in ever getting into it. After searching online to find a decent example, I ran into and interesting idea.

I found an article by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. That may sound very strange at first, but it briefly discuses the opening of a new exhibition called State of Deception: The Power of Nazi Propaganda. It discuses the use of deception in Nazi Propaganda to sway the vote in their favor after World War I, and paint the picture of a utopian world. Everyone knows where that propaganda led during the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler. Hitler is quoted in a writing of 1924, "Propaganda is a truly terrible weapon in the hands of an expert." Anyway, this really got me thinking about early forms of deception like propaganda and how effective it was in deceiving those who read it. When we discussed the topic in class, we compared face-to-face deception and online deception. So, what would propaganda be considered? It certainly isn't online, and it really isn't face-to-face either. Also, what form of deception would this Nazi propaganda be considered? There are certainly lies, but there is some concealment as well. The entire truth as to what was really going on is, for the most part, hidden. Something I really want to touch on for my presentation on Friday is a question specifically addressed towards Nazi propaganda. The definition of deception that we talked about on Wednesday, is that the person has to know the information is false. Well, did Adolph Hitler and the Nazis really believe their opinions to be false?

The article also got me thinking about our government today. One of the things mentioned in the article about the new exhibit is that, "This most extreme case study emphasizes why the issue of propaganda matters and challenges citizens to actively question, analyze, and seek the truth." How many of us actually question what our government tells us? Is media a new type of propaganda? Those are difficult questions to answer, but this article does show a bridging of the gap between old and new. Deception on a national scale is very possible, and I hope to bring this interesting thought to class on Friday.