In the article “The Perils of Over-sharing in Social Networks”, Emm (2014) talks about the increasing danger of using the internet. As more of our routine activities have to rely on the Internet today, people begin to feel apprehensive for the authorities and the large companies to spy on their personal lives. However, the author believes that the really dangers are hidden behind the numerous seemingly irrelevant information that we choose to put online, which can be used by some concealed audiences to attack not only ourselves but also our companies. He indicates that these threats are easily to be ignored due to the false sense of security of users. The author also lists some useful security advice to readers.
The concern for the dangers of over-sharing expressed by the author in the article is reasonable and I entirely agree with that. In fact, the dangers are more severe than we thought.
One of the reasons why people have a tendency to overshare on social media, as elaborated by the author, is because the smartphone is not a usual victim of cyber-attack. The other is due to the neglect from the public as they believe that the dangers of over-sharing has been exaggerated and no one will check their social media and digital records out of some special reasons. While in reality, the opposite is the case.
As early as 2010, a new company named Identified has started to collect users data , merely by pulling public information from their social media accounts, and allotted a score to each of them to represent their attraction for potential employers. Someone might have a profile in Identified even if they haven’t signed up for the service. These data obviously have large attractions for some big companies and PEP has already signed with Identified. Those kind of collection may never be observed by these latent ‘users’ , but job hopping will be difficult for them if they have low scores.
They other concealed observers who may regularly pay attention to social media are lawyers and investigators. Nowadays, Facebook has become an efficient tool for lawyers to find evidence. Different from the traditional investigation ways which rely on following and subpoenaing, the personal details posted on Facebook can help lawyers establish a person’s habits and character and photos shared on Facebook will more directly to be used as evidences to show when and where what happened.
Over-sharing on social media will also hurt people’s careers. Threats such as being caught by the boss when someone is loafing on their job are just part of it. More often, the employers will have more in-depth observations of their employees through social media. Doing Google searches and looking through applicants social media pages have become the normal examinations for some companies before they provide interviews. “ Never say anything negative about a current or former employer on your social media pages. Employers will reasonably assume that if you trash-talk your current or former employers, they will be the next ones to be trashed.” human resources consultant Brenda Vander Meulen suggests.
The dangers of over-sharing are hidden in various views of our lives and taking responsibility for what we have posted is essential for us. To prevent some irreparable consequences of over-sharing, following some safety tip to protect ourselves should be started now.
Is the article to which a response is being crafted properly identified with citation information in the first sentence?
ReplyDeleteYes, the in-text citation is well written. However, there is no references. (APA citiation)
By reading the summary, do you have a clear idea of the original article’s main claim?
The structure of the content is good. I have a clear picture of what the original article main claim.
Is there a clear stand (or thesis) regarding some specific area of the original article?
The thesis statement will be better if you can take out the “I”.
Do you consider this an interesting reader response? Are all outside sources correctly documented?
I think that it is quite interesting to read at this article! However, I think the content of your own opinion should be richer.
Is the language in the summary clear?
Generally well used of language. Summary is clear and easy to understand.
By: Teckyi & Cheng Hwok
Is the article to which a response is being crafted properly identified with citation information in the first sentence?
ReplyDelete-->Yes, the in-text citation is well written. However, there is no references. (APA citiation)
By reading the summary, do you have a clear idea of the original article’s main claim?
-->The structure of the content is good. I have a clear picture of what the original article main claim.
Is there a clear stand (or thesis) regarding some specific area of the original article?
-->The thesis statement will be better if you can take out the “I”.
Do you consider this an interesting reader response? Are all outside sources correctly documented?
-->I think that it is quite interesting to read at this article! However, I think the content of your own opinion should be richer.
Is the language in the summary clear?
-->Generally well used of language. Summary is clear and easy to understand.
By: Teckyi & Cheng Hwok
Thanks for this good effort, Zhou Qi. In it you have a good summary and a detailed response. Your thesis is clear, though I would alter it thus:
ReplyDeleteThe concern for the dangers of over-sharing expressed by the author in the article is reasonable and I entirely agree with that. In fact, the dangers are more severe than we thought. >>>
The concern for the dangers of over-sharing expressed by the author in the article is reasonable; in fact, the dangers are more severe than most people imagine.
I like the way you have developed you ideas, using lots of external support info. What surprises me is that you don't use in-text citations. You need those.
You also need to make this essay less **chatty** by avoiding the use of "I" or "we."
The other issues apparent in this work are as follows:
--- talks about > discusses (this is less informal)
--- as more of our routine activities >>> delete **our** (too conversational): as more routine...
--- apprehensive for the authorities and the large companies to spy on their personal lives. >>>
apprehensive about the authorities and the large companies spying on their personal lives.
--- the really dangers >>> the real dangers (use the adjective, not the adverb form)
--- that we choose to put online >>> that users/netizens/those who are plugged (select one) in choose to put online
--- not only ourselves but also our companies. >>> ...not only indivdiuals but also companies.
TAKE NOTE OF THE WAYS TO AVOID PERSONALIZING....
--- the dangers of over-sharing **has** been exaggerated > subject-verb disagreement?
--- a new company named Identified has started >>> tense?
--- PEP >>> ? don't use acronyms the first time
--- Those kind >>> singular or plural?
--- in-text and end-of-text citations?
I look forward to your next draft.