Showing posts with label (...Advocacy - Facebook - Commemts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label (...Advocacy - Facebook - Commemts. Show all posts

January 16, 2012

Data suggests people using pseudonyms leave better comments

This blog uses the Disqus Commenting system which DOES NOT censor anonymous comments.
1-16-2012 National:

Fact or fiction? Online commenters who use their real names will leave higher quality comments.

Before you respond with a “well duh, that’s a fact” retort, you might want to take a look at new data from online conversation startup Disqus.

The company analyzed nearly 500,000 comments made via its platform and found that the digital denizens using fictitious names, or pseudonyms, are actually responsible for the highest quantity and quality of comments on the web.

Disqus determined that 61 percent of its commenters use pseudonyms, 35 percent remain anonymous and just 4 percent log in with Facebook to comment with their real identity.

“The average commenter using a pseudonym contributed 6.5 times more than anonymous commenters and 4.7 times more than commenters identifying with Facebook,” Disqus said.

These partially veiled commenters are also soliciting more “likes” and replies — positive quality signals, according to Disqus — than their anonymous and real name counterparts. Sixty-one percent of comments made by people using pseudonyms showed positive quality signals, while 51 percent of comments from those using their real names and 34 percent from the anonymous types possessed positive quality signals.

Why might any of this matter? Facebook makes a commenting system that pivots around identity and threatens the livelihood of Disqus. The latter’s commenting solution is used on more than 1 million websites, but Facebook’s Comments Box is growing in popularity and now has the support of more than 400,000 publishers. It also just got a lot more mobile-friendly.

It’s in Disqus’ best interest to show publishers that allowing their commenters to choose how they want to represent themselves is the right way to go. As such, take the company’s findings with a grain of salt and expect the identity debate to continue. ..Source.. by SocialBeat

Read More of Article...

December 30, 2011

Facebook Censors Anonymous Commentors: Time picks "Anonymous Protestors" for Person of the Year

Time magazine's Protester cover reminds us of the value of Big Media
12-30-2011 Global:

I'm sure by now folks know that Facebook has a Comments Social Plugin for use by any site, which only allows folks with a Facebook account (or if plugin option is turned on AOL, Hotmail, Yahoo addresses) to post comments on any site using the Facebook Social Plugin. Facebook's intent was to eliminate anonymous comments because they consider them harmful, spam and basically useless to any discussion.

From the Facebook Developers Blog comes this which also gives us an idea of what Facebook is focusing on:
More Social Relevance:The upgraded Comments Box (i.e., Facebook's Social Plugin) uses social signals to surface the highest quality comments for each user. Comments are ordered to show users the most relevant comments from friends, friends of friends, and the most liked or active discussion threads, while comments marked as spam are hidden from view.
It is clear that Facebook is censoring the Internet and only allowing what their "Social Signals" (Undefined) chose. Effectively Facebook is selectively choosing who they consider acceptable to post comments even through other sites which use the Facebook social Plugin. These other sites are opting to use the plugin because of one feature of it, Facebook supposedly only allows accounts from verifiable persons. So these other sites are in effect being slyly tricked into censoring the Internet as well.

The following very questionable comments (updated as we find more) are allowed by Facebook, with no sanction for violating any terms of agreement, and fit the kind of comment Facebook considers acceptable:

DSS employee who was fired for Facebook comments withdraws petition
Police officers sacked over offensive Facebook comments
Facebook comments cause an office ruckus
Teachers resign after Facebook row
Three more jailed for Facebook comments on UK summer riots
Occupy posting leads to demotion
Sturgis residents angry about councilman's Facebook comments
Public servants' pay docked over Facebook comments
Purdue Strikes Down On Negative Facebook Comments
Lowe's deletes 'hateful' comments on Facebook page
Lowe's pulls anti-Muslim Facebook comments after 'American Muslim' ad ban
Dominican Woman Killed Over Negative Comments On Facebook
Dad Jailed for Facebook Duct Tape Pic of Daughter
Police: Large fight began because of Facebook comments
Facebook fight erupts between DJs
Assemblyman Steve Katz's wife blasts Sen. Greg Ball in video over Facebook unfriending
Three more jailed for Facebook comments on UK summer riots
Troy Mayor Janice Daniels' gay slur exposes a bigger issue part 1 of 2
Teen suspended over Facebook comments
Fla. deputy suspended over Facebook comments
Sacked Apple employee loses appeal over negative Facebook comments
Latest Vile Facebook Comments Made by ... NYPD
SHERIFF: Broward deputy's Facebook comments cross the line
Police Computers Searched in Probe of Facebook Comments on West Indian Day Parade
Thailand Warns Facebook Activity Might Slur Monarchy
Facebook comments lead to fight in yard
N.Y.C. Police Maligned Paradegoers on Facebook

Read More of Article...

December 7, 2011

KETV Omaha Nebraska Requires a Facebook Account in Order to Comment: BIG DEAL or not?

12-7-2011 Nebraska:

Recently registered viewers of KETV.com (Omaha Nebraska) received a message from KETV which is very disturbing and may be a trend, the message was:

"We wanted to take a moment to tell you about an important site improvement that will affect the way in which users comment on news stories on our website. Following a site improvement on October 20 commenting on news stories will require signing in through a Facebook account. This improvement will allow even more of the community to engage in news story commenting and provide a better overall site experience for all of our users. Because of the transition, existing commenting accounts will no longer be able to login.

This change does not affect your ability to upload photos and videos to u local with your existing u local account. We encourage you to continue to do so. You will also continue to be able to engage other u local members and comment on media within the u local section using your existing account.

Thank you "
Now, most folks would say, so what, and not comment if they do not have a Facebook account. Remember, Facebook prevents any registered sex offender from having a account, so they will automatically be prevented from expressing their opinions on any news story, especially important are those about sex offender issues which affects registrants.

This issue should not be dismissed lightly, because look who apparently owns KETV.com (at the very bottom of their site) (click on "KETV Jobs" THEN "Hearst Television Inc Careers Home" and see what comes up), this is shocking, dozens of other stations across the country.

The question now is, is this change in "Commenting Policy" just for KETV.com or does it apply to all stations apparently owned by Hearst Television? If there is any doubt that Hearst owns KETV.com just review their "Privacy Policy" and there is nothing in the the "Terms of Use" for KETV.com with respect to a requirement of a Facebook account in order to comment.

Folks may want to contact KETV.com (they say they want to hear from folks) and complain about this apparent selection of who in the public may comment on news stories.

Finally, is this a local Omaha Nebraska Policy or nationwide? Likely only individual registered users of all their stations nationwide will know because they are not making it known publicly.

I would like to hear from folks if this is happening in other areas, please include the paper in question.

Thanks,
eAdvocate

Read More of Article...