Within the past couple of months I have seen how Facebook has taken a new direction for the better. Facebook has joined forces with one of the top political sources on television, CNN. Facebook and CNN have teamed up to help people of the 18-25 age group get involved and become more aware of politics, and at the same time, make it fun and appealing. It makes me kind of wonder if Facebook, and other social networks had anything to do with Obama winning the election, or if it didn’t do anything? Or which age group had the biggest impact on the election? 18-25?
In my eyes I feel that Facebook has been an outlet for voters of a younger age group, because CNN has found ways that young voters can relate by using their statuses as a way to communicate with other voters and give their opinions on what is going on in the world politically. It has been become something to look forward to, and something to promote the fact that social networks do have a positive message, and can actually make a difference in the world. Why do you think CNN chose Facebook to partner with, and not some other company?
People of an older generation are not as technologically equipped an aware to use technology like Facebook to find out what other people are talking about, when it comes to their political views. They rely on things like television and newspapers. That’s why this new way of blogging your political views and all social networks were targeted to younger voters. It’s interesting to me because most people, not just older people rely and trust things like CNN, but when it comes to CNN, and Facebook initially they feel that it would not be as legit, but in actuality it is, because you are getting real honest opinions of people about how they feel with the election and their views, and helping influence others in their own way.
Facebook might just seem like a place to waste time while doing homework, but I think that it has proven itself to be more than just a social network.
In my eyes I feel that Facebook has been an outlet for voters of a younger age group, because CNN has found ways that young voters can relate by using their statuses as a way to communicate with other voters and give their opinions on what is going on in the world politically. It has been become something to look forward to, and something to promote the fact that social networks do have a positive message, and can actually make a difference in the world. Why do you think CNN chose Facebook to partner with, and not some other company?
People of an older generation are not as technologically equipped an aware to use technology like Facebook to find out what other people are talking about, when it comes to their political views. They rely on things like television and newspapers. That’s why this new way of blogging your political views and all social networks were targeted to younger voters. It’s interesting to me because most people, not just older people rely and trust things like CNN, but when it comes to CNN, and Facebook initially they feel that it would not be as legit, but in actuality it is, because you are getting real honest opinions of people about how they feel with the election and their views, and helping influence others in their own way.
Facebook might just seem like a place to waste time while doing homework, but I think that it has proven itself to be more than just a social network.
I wonder if some of that distrust comes from the fact that Facebook is not a public utility, or is not "vetted" by a cable provider, but it rather an internet startup, with an unknown business model? How are they making money? Who contributes to their operating costs? Why should we trust them as the vehicle for our political questions? I think that in a democracy more participation is always a good thing, but mare participation with more transparency is an even better thing.
ReplyDelete