The Amazing Amazon Deal:
Groupon has been on the tip of everyone’s tongues lately, but this week, deal rival LivingSocial made the news. LivingSocial’s deal on Wednesday was 50% off an Amazon gift card – allowing people to get a $20 gift card for only $10. Over one million vouchers were sold. As Mashable pointed out,
“Amazon, clearly interested in helping the startup it just invested $175 million in, will likely take a big hit as a result of the deal’s popularity. The online marketplace will lose millions of dollars — at least $10 per voucher — when LivingSocial members make good on the offer. The company, however, probably sees the loss as a net gain and a worthwhile marketing cost.”
Google Offers:
More daily coupon news: Google will be launching their own deal service, Google Offers. The deal service will work much like Groupon and LivingSocial. Users will receive a deal of the day email and have an allotted time to purchase the deal. Google Offers appears to still be in the testing phases – but look out Groupon – there’s about to be a new coupon deal in town. As many are saying about Google’s failed attempt at buying Groupon (for $6 billion) and their subsequent plan to launch Google Offers, “If you can’t buy ‘em, beat ‘em”.
I love that a movie about social media won a traditional media award. Actually, it won several of them. The Social Network took home four Golden Globes this week for “Best Motion Picture, Drama”, “Best Director, Motion Picture”, “Best Screen Play, Motion Picture”, and “Best Score.”
Google’s CEO Switch:

Google has made some changes to their upper management this week, replacing CEO Eric Schmidt with co-founder Larry Page. Schmidt will still be working at Google as executive chairman. The change came as a surprise to many, and left people wondering, “Why Is Eric Schmidt Stepping Down at Google?” As Mashable reported, Schmidt’s current ownership stake at Google is worth $5.77 billion and he intends to sell half a million shares, the dollar equivalent of $335 million dollars.
Facebook & Feature Phones:
On Wednesday, Facebook launched a mobile app for non smart phone users. The app is compatible with over 2,500 mobile phones, and can be accessed via a data usage plan. For some global users, the first 90 days of accessing the data plan for Facebook will be free. The facts, from All Things Digital:
“Facebook today released a feature-phone app that is designed to be kind of a gateway drug for both Facebook participation and mobile data usage. The company has arranged deals with 13 carriers to give users of the app free Facebook-related data access for 90 days. If you look at the countries where the launch partner carriers are from, you can see where Facebook thinks it can grow: Romania, India, Mexico and elsewhere.”


26
The Future? Transparency.
by FeedbackEvery day, millions of web users censor themselves in order to maintain control over the online image they portray to the world. This censorship takes place on multiple levels, given that we all have multiple audiences we seek to interact with and be accepted by.
Censorship may be the physical act of filtering what we say and removing pictures we deem unacceptable. We may post photos that don’t completely convey what we look like in reality. Or, some people choose not to filter anything at all. Consider the constant need, for those who were recently in college and are trying to find jobs, to remove incriminating photos with alcohol. They aren’t abiding by government censorship, rather, just that of society.
Yet, even the choice to not filter yourself is a form of censorship – you censor the socially acceptable parts of yourself and unleash the ones you think most Internet users will relish.
Outgoing Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently stated that no anonymity and transparency is the future of the web:
We begin searching for our identity when we are adolescents. The online world is greatly contributing to how we as human beings go about doing that. Social media tools in particular are accelerating that process, and it all begins with a name. I’m sure you’ll remember when AIM was a big part of our lives.
Unbeknownst to most of us, our screen name became a part of our identity whether it was “hotchick12,” “animalhousecrazy,” or “susie_johnson.” Each of these accounts says something different about the user and for friends and strangers this affects the conversation topics they enter in to. This transcends to any other username/handle we use for a myriad of accounts we may have. These multiple identities allow people to explore and discover themselves, thus shaping and creating his or her identity of self.
This sense of self and the portion of it we choose to convey affects the content we produce on certain social media platforms. Let me use a personal example.
When my real name is used in my username or handle I have to ensure that that self adheres (somewhat) to the “me” that people see at work, at home and in the general public eye. I filter what I say/post in the hopes that there is no disparity between the person people “know” and think they know. With accounts using an alternate (or anonymous) identity it’s a free for all. Here boundaries are crossed and rules broken, testing the waters of How Far Is Too Far?
Last year, Reporters Without Borders posted an article about the crackdown on anonymous postings in Belarus stating that, “By subjecting online access to an identity check or to prior online authorisation that depends on the content and the applicant, this decree will force people to censor themselves. This is obviously the intention, regardless of the government’s insincerely reassuring comments about online free expression.”
The elusive Anonymous that overruns 4chan, wreaking havoc on all who make the mistake of crossing its path, is one such example. These are the guys that sent innocent little children to porn sites when they tried to watch a Justin Bieber video on YouTube. Anonymity allows for individuals choosing to operate under its guise to abandon the rules of the Internet and post whatever they please, like the uncensored versions of R-rated movies, without suffering the consequences (for the most part).
If Anonymous allows this form of chaos that people seem to want to peddle in, then why do so many people feel the need to censor the content they publish? I think it comes back to the desire for order: Chaos can be fun in moderation for most of us, but we still have a need to fit into a variety of social circles. In order to do so, we censor our image in order to be deemed acceptable. Even when we operate under an anonymous account you adhere to the rules of anonymity, or the rule of that rules don’t exist. Censorship is always happening whether you want to admit it or not. Take a look at your accounts and gauge how you censor yourself. I bet it’ll surprise you.
-Brittney (@bntrim)