social networking

Facebook couples, ctd

Sarah Bruning in Time Out New York:

The thing is, as automated as the whole “Us” page is, it’s still based on real relationships, the foundations of which are innately emotional. And call me crazy, but anything emotional is going to trigger a big response, especially when it relates to something you can’t necessarily control. (We all know how stellar Facebook’s privacy settings are…)

That’s exactly why I like it. Yesterday I spent some time looking at the page for me and my friend Kate and was like, oh, remember the time we took that picture? Remember when we ate at the restaurant? Remember when we took that vacation together? It triggered emotions, sure, but why do they have to be bad ones? I like Kate, that’s why we’re in so many status updates and pictures together. Why does it make Emma Barnett want to wretch to see her relationship with her husband laid out so succinctly? It couldn’t have anything to do with a journalist hyping a fake controversy, could it? But, forcefully ejecting your stomach contents is apparently the standard or appropriate response here, because Facebook’s friend pages made the Gloss’ Jennifer Wright also want to vomit. I’d love to see more male opinions, because I’m sensing a bit of trend…

Jean Hannah Eddlesten, though, makes my point, in the Guardian:

For while I have never yet published my relationship status on Facebook in the seven years I’ve had a profile, I live in the hope that one day I might meet someone with whom I share such a profound connection that I can post photo after photo that we’ve taken of ourselves on holiday, snogging in front of Unesco world heritage sites or on beaches that everyone knows are expensive to get to.

The one thing they’re all getting wrong, though. These pages aren’t new. I want to say that again. There’s nothing new here. Friend pages have been around for a long while and if you hadn’t discovered that until a day or so ago, maybe you’re not enough of an expert on Facebook or social networking in general to be literally posting your “gut” reactions for the world to see. Just a thought.

Another day, another out-of-proportion Facebook news story

Emma Barnett takes issue with Facebook’s couple’s pages.

And that is what I love about Facebook and always have: that ability to easily share images and information with those you care about and celebrate big events in a large digital group.

However, please take note Facebook executives: I enjoy being able to share the information I wish and curate in the way I want. I have no desire for your technology teams to help me organise my photos – nor do I wish to have a shared ‘couples’ Facebook profile with my other half on which you automatically curate our relationship.

Over the weekend I discovered I had just that – but only through a friend telling me. I didn’t receive a notification from Facebook informing me that their squat team in Palo Alto, California, had taken the liberty of creating me a joint digital profile with my husband.

Here’s what Emma doesn’t understand. These are search pages, just special ones that you are automatically created—not curated—when you type a special URL into your web browser’s address bar. Just add and=username after your own profile URL and you’ll get a timeline of activity shared with any of your friends. /us is a special alias that will divert to the search page between you and your significant other on Facebook. There’s nothing creepy here, that I can see, just more out of proportion reactions to something new, different and innovative. It’s no different, really, than typing your name into Google and seeing your face and other personal details from social networks mashed up in a sidebar.

What I wish is that people would take a little more time to understand things, rather than dashing off their first, and often ill-informed opinion. I mean, if your best headline is that something makes you want to wretch, maybe it’s a sign you need to take some time to digest.

More

-Facebook Couples, Ctd.