Wednesday, 13 March 2013


When you sign up on a social networking site, isn't 'social' the operative word?

I don't seem to understand all the brouhaha about privacy settings - who can see which picture, who else can comment on stuff updated, and how the neighbour's dog also adds his own two woofs to the 'likes'. The thing is, somewhere (in those reams of fine digital print that we didn't bother to read at sign up) in the race to mark our presence on these platforms, we do wave goodbye to some amount of privacy.

Sure, I wouldn't want my photograph flashing on say a dating site or *shudder* worse, but having said that, does it really matter if a friend of a friend knows where I was on vacay, soaking up the sun? Yes? Then here's a suggestion - maybe an online web album, with almost obsessive privacy settings is more the deal. That way, you share the link with just the people you want, and you're good to go. No random stranger (a.k.a. friend of a friend of a friend of a friend tagged) is poking pins into voodoo dolls, green with envy that you were in the Bahamas while s/he was at work, at that extremely stimulating (not) desk job.

Speaking for myself, I do use privacy settings, yes. But no, I don't have a coronary just because a photo was liked/ commented on/ shared by someone in my 'friend list'. The thing is, it was put up knowingly, right, with my being aware of that very possibility? So.

No? Still doesn't appeal? Then maybe it's time to pull out scented notepaper, pen and postage stamps. Stay in touch, the extinct good old fashioned way. Carrier pigeons need a job too.

No comments: