Mediaboss Marketing

Social networking goliath Facebook (FB pending) announced today that it would "encourage" users to advertise their organ donor status on their home page. While not legally binding, advocates hope the initiative will lead users to register themselves as official organ donors the next time they renew their driver's licenses.

According to Organdonor.gov, more than 114,000 people are waiting for an organ donation, 18 of whom die every day. It's unquestionably a good cause, but with Facebook set to raise more than $10 billion, it's hard not to take a somewhat jaded view of the announcement.

In the attached video, Breakout welcomes our Daily Ticker colleague Henry Blodget to discuss Facebook and the possible motives behind founder Mark Zuckerberg's announcement.

Blodget says the project itself is unambiguously about the social good, but it's also something of a warning, or at least a reminder, to would-be Facebook shareholders. As Zuckerberg wrote in history's most famous S-1 filing, Facebook serves a social, not a financial, mission.

"That is the opposite of most companies," says Blodget. "That letter is really a warning to shareholders that Zuckerberg is going to be doing the social mission thingnot the business." Public company or not, "Facebook is still a Mark Zuckerberg production."

Zuckerberg's total control is a mixed bag for shareholders. Citing Amazon, where Jeff Bezos has a similar power, Blodget says it's no coincidence Amazon was one of only a handful of companies to survive the dot-com era. With Bezos running Amazon in accordance with his vision rather than that of Wall Street, he was able to steer the company away from the trap of short-term thinking. (Note: Jeff Macke owns shares of Amazon and wrote about the company last week.)

If you're a long-term shareholder, by which Blodget means five to 10 years, "you can't ask for a better ownership structure," according to Blodget. Zuckerberg has clearly proven "he's the right guy for the job."

The timing of the initiative, coming as it does on the eve of the IPO, may be a PR stunt with a twist. Zuckerberg could very well be hitting the rounds not to hype the stock but to demonstrate one final time that he's not going to be taking his head out of the sand for publicity, to talk up the company, or for any reasons other than his own social agenda.

Shareholders looking to ride along with the enigmatic Zuckerberg and his Facebook are going to be welcomed aboard once the company goes public. If they don't like the direction Zuckerberg takes the company, they can't say they haven't been warned.

More here:
It’s Zuckerberg’s World, Facebook Shareholders Just Live in It

You might just be able to make a federal case out of an employer askingto snoop around your social networking account if a new bill wends its way into becoming law.

The Social Networking Online Protection Act, or SNOPA, was introduced late last week by Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).

If passed, SNOPA would "prohibit current and potential employers for requiring a username, password or other access to online content," according to a news release on Engel's website. These constraints would also apply to schools from kindergarten through university level.

This comes amid renewed focus on the intersection of privacy and technology when it comes to private life in the public online square. The heat was turned up on the issue after the Associated Press published a report on an incident in 2011 in which an employer had required password access to an applicant's Facebook account.

In response in March, Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged the Justice Department look into whether such practice violates the Stored Communications Act or the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Maryland recently passed a bill banning the practice. It awaits Gov. Martin O'Malley's signature to make it law. Similar bills have been introduced in California and Illinois.

Many civil rights and privacy advocates have described employers' asking for social networking passwords as being akin to requiring applicants and employees to hand over the keys to their homes and consent to an in-home search.

"Passwords are the gateway to many avenues containing personal and sensitive content-- including email accounts, bank accounts and other information, said Engel.

Engel went on to say, "We must draw the line somewhere and define what is private. No one would feel comfortable going to a public place and giving out their username and passwords to total strangers."

Legal experts have pointed out that requiring password access to an applicant or employee's accounts is not just a violation of the applicants privacy but a potential violation for every "friend" attached to that person.

Visit link:
SNOPA bill seeks to keep employers out of private social networks

Given the rise in popularity of social networking, this should come as no surprise: the percentage of email that is spam has dropped slightly, but junk marketing and malware spreading through social networking sites are on the rise.

According to Symantecs Internet Security Threat Report, which was released today, while the volume of malicious attacks is on the rise, spam is less of a factor than it used to be.

Weve seen spam volumes go down in 2011, Sean Kopelke, director specialist solutions for Symantec, told Lifehacker. On a global level, they were 75 per cent of all email in 2011, they were 86% in 2010 So thats down a considerable amount.

While legal action against some major spamming infrastructure providers played its part, the report fingers the shift in our communications habits as a major issue. Were seeing a shift of attackers moving to social network platforms, instead of trying to get people to click on a link through a random name in email, Kopelke said. People have become a little more conscious of that, and I think anti-spam tools have been effective in reducing the impact. So were seeing a movement to social network platforms. Because its a social interaction with friends, people are a bit more relaxed around security processes.

Kopelke also highlighted the widespread misconception that targeted attacks are exclusively aimed at large businesses. So many people think this is a problem for large institutions while a small business isnt going to get attacked. That is simply not true. Organisations of all sizes are getting attacked. Fifty per cent of all attacks were aimed at businesses with fewer than 2500 employees, and 18 per cent of those were aimed at companies with fewer than 250 staff. Many of these businesses are targeted because while small themselves, they are often part of the supply chain connected to much larger organisations. Youre going to look for the weakest chain in that link.

While Facebook, Twitter and other social networking platforms incorporate security measures, a cautious attitude to clicking on links goes a long way. To ensure you dont become a victim of social attacks, check out our guide to staying safe on social networks.

Symantec

See the article here:
Email Spam Slips As Social Networking Spawns New Security Threats

Consumers are increasingly turning to social networks to access information and manage their health care, according to a new survey by the Health Research Institute at PwC US.

The survey found four in 10 respondents say they research health-related consumer reviews online. On a more personal note, one in three consumers has looked for information from other patients on their experiences with a disease, and one in four has posted their health experiences on the Internet.

The survey polled more than 1,000 U.S. consumers and 124 members of the eHealth Initiative (eHI), a national association of industry organizations focusing on health information and technology and found that one-third of consumers are now using Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and online forums to find medical information, track and share symptoms and report how they feel about doctors, treatments, medical devices, drugs and health plans.

The results show that online reviews have a powerful impact: 45% of consumers report social media would affect their decision to get a second opinion, while 41% say it would impact their choice of a specific doctor, hospital and health facility. And when it comes to medications, 34% report social media would impact their decision about taking certain drugs.

Since the Internet gives people real-time access to information, its not surprising that 72% of consumers say they would like the ability to schedule doctor appointments via social media channels. And close to half say they would expect a response within a few hours.

Predictably, more than 80% of respondents between ages of 18 and 24 are willing to share health information, and close to 90% of that age group say they would trust the information online. Only 45% of people between the ages of 45 and 64 are willing to share health information through social networking websites.

According to John Edwards, director, healthcare strategy and healthcare business intelligence practice at PwC, patients are using websites like Facebook to share their doctor experiences, express health-care concerns and voice concern when they feel they arent being treated fairly. According to Edwards, positive posts and comments about health-care experiences slightly outweigh the negative sentiment online at the moment.

The use of Internet to research and manage health care is only expected to grow among patients, but the survey found that many doctors, hospitals and insurance providers dont have a robust strategy when it comes to using social media to connect with consumers.

According to PWC, social media activity by hospitals, health insurers and pharmaceutical companies was fractional compared to activity on c ommunity sites. The survey found that eight in 10 health care companies had a presence on social media sits, but that community sites had 24 time more social media activity than corporate websites.

The expectations of consumers are changing in how they get health care information and how they use these social networking , says Edwards, and medical providers that dont embrace it are missing an opportunity to engage with consumers.

See the rest here:
New Use for Social Networking: Managing Your Health

W hat is a social network? If you look up the definition of network, you will find it is a group of interconnected people or things. And that is exactly where we are now.

Let me back up. When we first discovered electricity, it opened limitless opportunities for communication. Starting from the phone, and on and on. Today we live in a world where anything we want posted or watched can be seen by millions in a matter of seconds. Now think of the sheer power we all hold.

For example, remember the show TRL? The MTV show was the best way in the early 2000s for artists to promote their music and get in touch with their fans. Then MySpace, Facebook and Twitter came and rendered the show useless because people can promote their stuff through computers.

Those are some of the positives of this network, but is it really social? What I mean is, doesnt it feel that with all this accessibility to one another we still seem isolated from one another?

When people didnt have phones and they wanted to talk to someone, they got up and walked to the persons house. Now when people want to do something, they call the person or text a message. It takes away a bit of the social part of the so-called social network.

So is it just a network that gives people the illusion of communication when its really just more isolation (I know tone it down over-thinker, but thats just an extreme viewpoint I wanted to through out there). What the network is going to evolve to next I have no idea (hopefully teleportation machines that beam us where we want to go like an email), but who knows? If youre still reading and havent moved on to the next page (thanks), you might have noticed I just showed the negative effects of the social network. Everyone knows the positives because we use it every day. You have to look at it from both sides.

So next time youre on Facebook, Twitter or whatever else is included in the social network, think about where its going and if it will benefit us? Or will it set us back?

Max Fisher is a junior at Leonardo DaVinci High School.

More here:
Is social networking good or bad?