The Facebook Generation Wants Some Boundaries | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Media

The Facebook Generation Wants Some Boundaries

Published

1 year ago

 on

This article was featured in One Story to Read Today, a newsletter in which our editors recommend a single must-read from The Atlantic, Monday through Friday. Sign up for it here.

My baby pictures and videos are the standard compendium of embarrassment. I was photographed waddling in nothing but a diaper, filmed smearing food all over my face instead of eating it. But I’m old enough that the kompromat is safe in the confines of physical photo albums and VHS tapes in my parents’ attic. Even my earliest digital activity—posting emotional MySpace photo captions and homemade music videos—took place in the new and unsophisticated internet of the early 2000s, and has, blissfully, been lost to time. I feel relief whenever I’m reminded of those vanished artifacts, and even more so when I see pictures and videos of children on the internet today, who won’t be so lucky.

In December, I watched a TikTok of two young sisters named Olivia and Millie opening Christmas presents. When the large boxes in front of them turned out to contain two suitcases, Millie, who appeared to be about 4 years old, burst into tears. (Luggage, unsurprisingly, was not what she wanted from Santa.) Her parents scrambled to explain that the real presents—tickets to a four-day Disney cruise—were actually inside the suitcases, but Millie was too far gone. She couldn’t stop screaming and crying. Nine million strangers watched her breakdown, and thousands of them commented on it. “This is a great ad for birth control,” one wrote. (The TikTok has since been deleted.)

Two decades ago, this tantrum would have been just another bit of family lore, or at worst, a home video trotted out for relatives every Christmas Eve. But now, thoughtless choices made years ago—a keg stand photographed, a grocery-store argument taped—can define our digital footprints, and a generation of parents like Millie’s are knowingly burdening their children with an even bigger online dossier.

The children of the Facebook era—which truly began in 2006, when the platform opened to everyone—are growing up, preparing to enter the workforce, and facing the consequences of their parents’ social-media use. Many are filling the shoes of a digital persona that’s already been created, and that they have no power to erase.

Caymi Barrett, now 24, grew up with a mom who posted Barrett’s personal moments—bath photos, her MRSA diagnosis, the fact that she was adopted, the time a drunk driver hit the car she was riding in—publicly on Facebook. (Barrett’s mother did not respond to requests for comment.) The distress this caused eventually motivated Barrett to become a vocal advocate for children’s internet privacy, including testifying in front of the Washington State House earlier this year. But before that, when Barrett was a teen and had just signed up for her first Twitter account, she followed her mom’s example, complaining about her siblings and talking candidly about her medical issues.

Barrett’s audience of younger users are the ones who pointed out the problem, she told me. Her internet friends started “reaching out to me, being like, ‘Hey, maybe you should take this down,’” she said. Today’s teens are similarly wary of oversharing. They joke on TikTok about the terror of their peers finding their parents’ Facebooks. Stephen Balkam, the CEO of the nonprofit Family Online Safety Institute, says that even younger children might experience a “digital coming-of-age” and the discomfort that comes with it. “What we’ve seen is very mature 10-, 11-, 12-year-olds sitting down with their parents, going, ‘Mom, what were you thinking?’” he told me.

In the United States, parental authority supersedes a child’s right to privacy, and socially, we’ve normalized sharing information about and images of children that we never would of adults. Parents regularly divulge diaper-changing mishaps, potty-training successes, and details about a child’s first menstrual period to an audience of hundreds or thousands of people. There are no real rules against it. Social-media platforms have guidelines for combatting truly inappropriate content—physical abuse of minors, child nudity, neglect, endangerment, and the like. But uploading non-abusive content can be damaging, too, according to kids whose lives have been painstakingly documented online.

For parents, posting can be hard to quit. Views, likes, and comments offer a form of positive reinforcement to parents, whose work is largely invisible and often thankless. “The most tangible proof of our work is children themselves,” Sara Petersen, the author of the book Momfluenced: Inside the Maddening, Picture-Perfect World of Mommy Influencer Culture, told me. “And sometimes it’s really just nice to post a cute photo and have 10 or 12 people say, ‘So cute.’”

The likes and comments are one thing. Money is another. Families who document their lives intimately on YouTube or TikTok can amass large audiences, sponsorships, and ad revenue. Currently, no state or federal laws entitle the children of these family vloggers to any of the money earned, although, as The Washington Post recently reported, such legislation has been introduced in states including Washington and Illinois.

Some new parents feel there’s no excuse for subjecting children to invasive public scrutiny. Kristina, a 34-year-old mother from Los Angeles who asked to be identified by only her first name for privacy reasons, has posted just a handful of photos of her daughter, and covers her face in all of them. “We didn’t really want to share her image publicly, because she can’t consent to that,” she told me. Many other adults don’t respect Kristina’s decision. “I had someone basically insinuate, was there something wrong with my daughter? Because I wasn’t sharing her,” she said.

Even if parents have decided to keep their children off social media, they’re not the only ones with phones. Kristina says she’s had to ask friends and family to take down photos they’ve posted of her daughter online. Every person on the street, every parent at a birthday party, has their own camera in their pocket, and the potential to knowingly or unknowingly violate her family’s boundary.

Barrett says she’s still feeling the effects of her mother’s decade of oversharing. When Barrett was 12, she says she was once followed home by a man who she believes recognized her from the internet. She was later bullied by classmates who latched on to all the intimate details of her life that her mother had posted online, and she ultimately dropped out of high school.

She and her mom have no relationship now, in large part because of the wedge her mother’s social-media habits put between them. Even with other people, Barrett says, she’s extremely private and can be paranoid about interacting. “I get afraid to even tell my friends or my fiancé something, because in the back of my mind I’m constantly like, Is this gonna be weaponized against me on the internet?”

 

Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Media

Trump could cash out his DJT stock within weeks. Here’s what happens if he sells

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 23, 2024

By

Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.

Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.

Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.

Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.

Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.

Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.

As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Arizona man accused of social media threats to Trump is arrested

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 23, 2024

By

Cochise County, AZ — Law enforcement officials in Arizona have apprehended Ronald Lee Syvrud, a 66-year-old resident of Cochise County, after a manhunt was launched following alleged death threats he made against former President Donald Trump. The threats reportedly surfaced in social media posts over the past two weeks, as Trump visited the US-Mexico border in Cochise County on Thursday.

Syvrud, who hails from Benson, Arizona, located about 50 miles southeast of Tucson, was captured by the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday afternoon. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed his arrest, stating, “This subject has been taken into custody without incident.”

In addition to the alleged threats against Trump, Syvrud is wanted for multiple offences, including failure to register as a sex offender. He also faces several warrants in both Wisconsin and Arizona, including charges for driving under the influence and a felony hit-and-run.

The timing of the arrest coincided with Trump’s visit to Cochise County, where he toured the US-Mexico border. During his visit, Trump addressed the ongoing border issues and criticized his political rival, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, for what he described as lax immigration policies. When asked by reporters about the ongoing manhunt for Syvrud, Trump responded, “No, I have not heard that, but I am not that surprised and the reason is because I want to do things that are very bad for the bad guys.”

This incident marks the latest in a series of threats against political figures during the current election cycle. Just earlier this month, a 66-year-old Virginia man was arrested on suspicion of making death threats against Vice President Kamala Harris and other public officials.

Continue Reading

Media

Trump Media & Technology Group Faces Declining Stock Amid Financial Struggles and Increased Competition

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 20, 2024

By

Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock has taken a significant hit, dropping more than 11% this week following a disappointing earnings report and the return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the rival social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. This decline is part of a broader downward trend for the parent company of Truth Social, with the stock plummeting nearly 43% since mid-July. Despite the sharp decline, some investors remain unfazed, expressing continued optimism for the company’s financial future or standing by their investment as a show of political support for Trump.

One such investor, Todd Schlanger, an interior designer from West Palm Beach, explained his commitment to the stock, stating, “I’m a Republican, so I supported him. When I found out about the stock, I got involved because I support the company and believe in free speech.” Schlanger, who owns around 1,000 shares, is a regular user of Truth Social and is excited about the company’s future, particularly its plans to expand its streaming services. He believes Truth Social has the potential to be as strong as Facebook or X, despite the stock’s recent struggles.

However, Truth Social’s stock performance is deeply tied to Trump’s political influence and the company’s ability to generate sustainable revenue, which has proven challenging. An earnings report released last Friday showed the company lost over $16 million in the three-month period ending in June. Revenue dropped by 30%, down to approximately $836,000 compared to $1.2 million during the same period last year.

In response to the earnings report, Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes emphasized the company’s strong cash position, highlighting $344 million in cash reserves and no debt. He also reiterated the company’s commitment to free speech, stating, “From the beginning, it was our intention to make Truth Social an impenetrable beachhead of free speech, and by taking extraordinary steps to minimize our reliance on Big Tech, that is exactly what we are doing.”

Despite these assurances, investors reacted negatively to the quarterly report, leading to a steep drop in stock price. The situation was further complicated by Trump’s return to X, where he posted for the first time in a year. Trump’s exclusivity agreement with Trump Media & Technology Group mandates that he posts personal content first on Truth Social. However, he is allowed to make politically related posts on other social media platforms, which he did earlier this week, potentially drawing users away from Truth Social.

For investors like Teri Lynn Roberson, who purchased shares near the company’s peak after it went public in March, the decline in stock value has been disheartening. However, Roberson remains unbothered by the poor performance, saying her investment was more about supporting Trump than making money. “I’m way at a loss, but I am OK with that. I am just watching it for fun,” Roberson said, adding that she sees Trump’s return to X as a positive move that could expand his reach beyond Truth Social’s “echo chamber.”

The stock’s performance holds significant financial implications for Trump himself, as he owns a 65% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group. According to Fortune, this stake represents a substantial portion of his net worth, which could be vulnerable if the company continues to struggle financially.

Analysts have described Truth Social as a “meme stock,” similar to companies like GameStop and AMC that saw their stock prices driven by ideological investments rather than business fundamentals. Tyler Richey, an analyst at Sevens Report Research, noted that the stock has ebbed and flowed based on sentiment toward Trump. He pointed out that the recent decline coincided with the rise of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, which may have dampened perceptions of Trump’s 2024 election prospects.

Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, offered a grim long-term outlook for Truth Social, suggesting that the stock would likely remain volatile, but with an overall downward trend. “What’s lacking for the true believer in the company story is, ‘OK, where is the business strategy that will be generating revenue?'” Ritter said, highlighting the company’s struggle to produce a sustainable business model.

Still, for some investors, like Michael Rogers, a masonry company owner in North Carolina, their support for Trump Media & Technology Group is unwavering. Rogers, who owns over 10,000 shares, said he invested in the company both as a show of support for Trump and because of his belief in the company’s financial future. Despite concerns about the company’s revenue challenges, Rogers expressed confidence in the business, stating, “I’m in it for the long haul.”

Not all investors are as confident. Mitchell Standley, who made a significant return on his investment earlier this year by capitalizing on the hype surrounding Trump Media’s planned merger with Digital World Acquisition Corporation, has since moved on. “It was basically just a pump and dump,” Standley told ABC News. “I knew that once they merged, all of his supporters were going to dump a bunch of money into it and buy it up.” Now, Standley is staying away from the company, citing the lack of business fundamentals as the reason for his exit.

Truth Social’s future remains uncertain as it continues to struggle with financial losses and faces stiff competition from established social media platforms. While its user base and investor sentiment are bolstered by Trump’s political following, the company’s long-term viability will depend on its ability to create a sustainable revenue stream and maintain relevance in a crowded digital landscape.

As the company seeks to stabilize, the question remains whether its appeal to Trump’s supporters can translate into financial success or whether it will remain a volatile stock driven more by ideology than business fundamentals.

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version