https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdaJRJFMty8

It says in capital letters, TRUE CRIME CASE, so I was taken in for a split second. But, as I’ve written in a recent blog entry, I am a bit of a sick puppy, so surely in all my twisted web searches I’d have come across a little girl who likes to collect eyeballs. I mean, how could I have missed that? So I did a Google search, and sure enough, the ONLY hit is for this guy’s video. And not a thing on Wikipedia, either.

I decided to look into this guy’s list of other videos. A lot of “TRUE CRIME CASES” popped up. These included “The Killer Santa”, “The Spam Murders”, “The Sofa Corpse”, and “The Lesbian Bride Murder”. Actually, they’re worth a peek, because once you figure out they’re bogus, they’re kind of fun to watch. The guy’s got the kind of warped imagination that appeals to me. But what disturbs me are the comments. People actually fall for this stuff! They think they’re true. He could have advertised them as jokes, and I’d still have watched them, and I would have had much more respect for him.

The thing is, this is becoming more and more of a trend. It’s so easy to communicate with the world these days that people with questionable integrity are taking advantage of it. We saw that, in particular, with Hurricane Sandy. Some bozo decided to tell the world that the New York Stock Exchange was under 3 feet of water, and that spread quickly through Facebook and Twitter, and before all was said and done, it was even reported on CNN. If it had been true, it could have had worldwide financial implications, so spreading that kind of bs is, at best, irresponsible.

I have even found myself unintentionally participating in the misinformation movement. I once posted a link to Sokoblovsky Farms on my Facebook page. For the uninitiated, this was a really cute prank web page for a supposed miniature giraffe farm. It even had a “live” webcam of its “petite lap giraffes”.

I thought it was cute and funny, but I never in a million years expected that people would BELIEVE that there are actually miniature giraffes out there. Within 24 hours, half my friends list was desperately searching for a way to own one! Good grief. I had to explain, and then I felt horrible about disappointing them. It kind of makes you wonder about the gullibility of the internet viewing public. Now if you do a search of Sokoblovsky Farms, what you find is a lot of links to people asking “Does this place really exist?” So sad.

There are generations of adults now who have lived with the internet their whole lives. I fear that that will engender in them an unhealthy level of trust in this type of media. It takes a lot of effort to double check every fact you come across, but please, at the very least, go to www.snopes.com or www.factcheck.org before spreading misinformation. Not a week goes by without my receiving some hysterical, cautionary and FALSE e-mail in my inbox, which I am able to debunk through Snopes in a matter of seconds, but when I point this out to the sender, I rarely see them sending out a follow up e-mail that says, “oops…”.

Misinformation is easy to spread. I’d like to think most of it is unintentional. But it has to originate somewhere. If you’re an originator, thanks for the laughs, but SHAME on you.

A steaming hot cup of hypocrisy.

Grabbing a cup of (post-trauma) coffee this morning after dropping my screaming kiddo off at nursery school, I overhear a woman talking about how emails are not technically a “green concept.”

Intrigued, I creep down the counter so I can get a better listen (making sure not to engage this lunatic in eye contact), pick up a magazine and pretend to read it.  Mind you, we’re the only ones in the cafe not preoccupied by work.

She continues to explain her theory — which is really not a theory at all, and has some statistical significance according to (BAH HA HA!) Snopes.com.

It’s about to get really good, so don’t stop reading now.

She proceeds to explain, in a great fury, how “absolutely important it is to edit the extra space out of an email… You know, on the top or bottom of the email where there might be a paragraph of blank space, as well as an old AVG that has been scanned..” etc. She continues to rant about how natural resources are wasted when we send all this blank space over the Internet and how she’s even scolded her kids and the people she knew over their “waste.” It’s just “unconscionable!!!!”

REPENT! TURN AWAY FROM SIN.

We Have The Data

We live during the information age with surprising amounts of data right at our fingertips. Nevertheless, because we process that data through our own biases and desires, we often reach foolish conclusions. Here are some examples, and as the list goes on it gets worse.

• In Liberal Worldview: Businessmen Are Crooks & Politicians Are Altruistic Public Servants, steve at motorcitytimes.com tells us about the silly biases of a reporter.
• Voting American states the case more directly in You know you live in a Country run by idiots when….. There is only one “error” in samiam60‘s lengthy list. Well, at least Snopes.com (National Capital) thinks it is an error, but World Net Daily (Ten Commandments stunner: Feds lying at Supreme Court) argues otherwise.
• Freedom, by the way also states the case unambiguously in It’s Not Going to Be Status Quo. It’s Going to Get Worse. Prepare Now. She argues that in the last election we voted like fools.
• Avik Roy, at Forbes observes On the Fiscal Cliff, Republican Rebels are Right: No Deal is Better Than a Bad Deal. Why?
  

  Remember that continuing to spend money we don’t have isn’t free. Deficit spending is a tax increase on our children and our grandchildren, and on people who have done the responsible thing and built up their savings. Going over the cliff means that the accounting gimmicks are over. No more “temporary” this and “temporary” that, so that Congress can pretend to be more fiscally responsible than it’s actually being. Going over the cliff means that a broad swath of Americans will be required to pay for the enlarged government that they voted for in November. I don’t think that’s such a bad thing

  Because the Senate is unwilling to acknowledge its frivolous spending, it not has not produced a budget in years. So we borrow almost half the Federal Budget and burden our children with debt. Yet instead of reducing spending, our leaders fight over who to tax.

• Check out Fathers disappear from households across America and Missing dads is a problem 
not only in poor 
homes at the Washington Times. We live in a land where too many men behave like boys, and too many women have no self-respect. Therefore, we no longer regard marriage as an important, life-long commitment that must come before sex. So we let our children grow up without fathers.
• Because we are becoming so indifferent towards each other, children do not even make it out of the womb alive. Although our leaders promise to make abortion safe and rare, there are well over one million every year. Check out the US Census Bureau ‘s data (here). See what the Center For Disease Control and Prevention has to say (here). Peruse what the National Right to Life has to say (here). The information is at your fingertips.

What Does It Mean To Be A Fool?

What makes a people behave foolishly? The Bible has a simple answer. The Book of Proverbs, in particular, is devoted to wisdom, the opposite of foolishness.

What does it mean to be a fool?

Proverbs 28:26 Amplified Bible (AMP)

He who leans on, trusts in, and is confident of his own mind and heart is a [self-confident] fool, but he who walks in skillful and godly Wisdom shall be delivered.

Ultimately, the fool denies the sovereignty of God.

Psalm 14:1 Good News Translation (GNT)

Fools say to themselves,
“There is no God!”
They are all corrupt,
and they have done terrible things;
there is no one who does what is right.

Can you imagine the Lord’s chosen people becoming so indifferent to God, their Creator, that they would forget all about His Word? It happened. 2 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 34 record that it happened. The Jewish people became so evil they turned away from God. And so they lost the Book of the Law in the temple.

And us? Most Americans have in their homes Bibles they have never read, much less studied.

What did those foolish Jews do? How did they rediscover the Book of the Law. After they had begun to repent, God allowed them find the Book of the Law. When the Jews turned back to God, God restored his Word. Proverbs explains:

Proverbs 1:23 Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

²³ Turn back at my reproof, lo, I pour forth to you my spirit, I make known my words with you.

When we behave as a fool means we must repent and turn back to God.

What Does Repentance Involve?

What does repentance involve?

repent

v 1: turn away from sin or do penitence [syn: atone]
2: feel remorse for; feel sorry for; be contrite about [syn: regret, rue]

Repentance requires us to honestly regret the evil we have done. Repentance allows us to turn back to God and beg for his forgiveness.

What evil have we done? We have ignored God’s command to love Him and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves (Matthew 22:34-40). Are we under the Law as the Jews were before Christ Jesus died on the cross? No. Nonetheless, we must practice the faith that works through love (Galatians 5:6).

Galatians 5:14-15 King James Version (KJV)

¹⁴ For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

¹⁵ But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.

We have not loved our children. We have put politicians devoted to secularism (ignoring God) in charge of their education. So when we look at our children–and ourselves–we should not be surprised that we vote the way our government-appointed teachers have taught us to vote.

The quality of our education system also explains why journalists can write the most pathetic nonsense, and we still take them seriously. What is sad how difficult it will be to undo the damage — if we can.

We need to turn back to God; we need to let God pour His spirit into our hearts. We need a revival. Because revival begins with repentance, we must repent. We must admit we have failed to love our neighbor as we love ourselves.

We have failed to love our own children! Instead, when politicians promised to love our neighbors for us (even to educate our children), we took the easy way out. We foolishly believed those politicians. Even though we say we do not trust politicians, to our shame we trusted politicians with trillions of dollars of what they said would be our neighbor’s money.

It is time to stop being fools–to stop believing the lies of self-serving politicians.

Proverbs 14:15 Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

¹⁵ The simple giveth credence to everything, And the prudent attendeth to his step.

Who Should You Trust?

Do you really want to trust these people with the education of your children? What makes you think you can trust these people not to abuse all the power they want? Have they kept their oath to support and defend the The United States Constitution? Have you read the Constitution?

If we want children to grow up to be decent people in a decent nation, we must insist parents take charge of their own children’s education. If we love someone, we will not leave them to the mercies and caprices of conniving politicians.

But here’s the thing: I know how my mother works, I know how she thinks, and I know what she’s thinking more than half the time. We have a bond that goes beyond your normal mother-daughter bond. We are synced in ways that scare me a lot of times. If I have a particularly bad headache for no good reason, chances are it’s because my mother is having some kind of headache as well. We’ve proven this on so many occasions that I don’t have to second-guess anymore. I take it for granted.

Emails that come from our friends and trusted acquaintances, and even from some respected officials are in “black and white”. They are comparable to the “written word”. If it came from my church pastor, it’s got to be legit – right? Especially since this person is normally a intelligent person. And for most people, that’s enough for them.

The problem is that my parents, whether deliberately or inadvertently, taught me to question everything. And I do mean everything. I take absolutely nothing at face value unless my husband, father, or mother is telling me about it in a situation where long deliberation and research is unattainable or ill-advised. (And even then, sometimes, I have to go looking for information after the fact, just to quell the noise in my head.)

When you’ve been playing around online as I have for as long as I have (I think I might be just past my second decade), some things become familiar. Anything sparkly and colourful online is likely to be an advertisement or rubbish designed to look like gold.

And by the way: another thing my parents taught me: all that glitters is not gold.

So when an email comes to me designed in bright colours, with multiple images, and emphasis in places (like red, bolded fonts to make a statement stick out) I am immediately suspicious. Solid verifiable information online is usually boring black and white sans-serif text on a white background; couple that fact with my instinctive desire to question everything, and what you get is a snotty bitch who thinks she knows everything.

My response to Mom’s email: a reply-to-all (I considered replying just to her, but the probative value outweighed my feel-good instinct) which said “Not all entirely true and some of it misleading and sensationalist in nature.” with a link to the explanation on snopes.com.

Yes; bitch I am indeed. Though no malice was intended, nor did I want to sound arrogant and egotistical. I simply wanted to say “Thanks; appreciate the thought. Here’s me thinking about you in return: get your facts straight before you spread ‘em.”

And all that to say this: just because it makes its way into your inbox/snail-mailbox/front stoop from some trusted friend, family member, or official does not make it gospel. Question everything. Let everyone know you aren’t easily fleeced. Say “I don’t believe it”; then go read up and say “I should have believed you; you were right” or be able to say “I was right;  it isn’t to be believed.”

Know for sure; then make it known to others. Sounds like a good motto – no?

Somehow the photo imbued those words with a godlike acumen that transcended all racial, economic, and spiritual barriers. Within seconds one out of every one-and-a-half Facebook users was forwarding the words and picture to everyone in striking distance under the assumption that they naturally had something to do with each other. No need for fact-checking, no verifying sources, no asking why Freeman would release a public statement as if he’s an official White House spokesman — someone they knew forwarded it to them, so it had to be true.

What you saw probably resembled this, except more professionally cobbled together and without my modified attribution:

So many people appreciated the message that not nearly enough of them questioned the veracity of the composition. As of this writing, Twitter users are still passing it along like a royal decree. As usual, though, Snopes.com was on the case, concluding by Sunday afternoon that the quote, however eloquent it was, was not sourced from Freeman himself. Freeman’s own representation confirmed Monday that Snopes was correct.

As soon as the first five or six renditions popped up in my Facebook feed, I noticed immediately that no one was citing a source. Everyone, at best, knew a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy who’d heard of Morgan Freeman. It sets a weird precedent that future hoaxers and pranksters will be more than happy to employ at their whim: if you slap a photo of Morgan Freeman on anything, people will buy into it.

Benign versions, friends kidding other friends, might look like this:

The Gettysburg Address never sounded so suave, did it? All thoughts of Daniel Day-Lewis are erased from memory because, according to this slapdash .jpeg, we now know that those words came from the Morgan Freeman.

I’m personally taking this one step further and slapping Freeman’s face on anything I publish whenever I need to convince skeptics that what I’m saying is inerrant truth to be immediately accepted and obeyed.

…and once I’ve used Freeman’s charming mug to enslave untold millions, every so often I might get capricious on a whim and see if I can induce a nervous breakdown in a follower. When faced with the choice of trusting in reality or trusting in Morgan Freeman photos, where will their allegiance lie? Will they even be able to decide for themselves, or will their mind snap like a twig?

To be fair to the sly dog who begat all this, Freeman was a smart choice. His essay wouldn’t land the same impact if it were juxtaposed with, say, a photo of Lindsay Lohan:

See? Extremely different impact.

And if he’d gone too far in that direction, we’re no longer being punk’d. It becomes just another interchangeable Photoshop gag, as if Facebook weren’t already choking to death on those.

Before forwarding anything that you didn’t personally write to your nearest five hundred Internet users, asking yourself three simple questions can prevent the spread of so much misinformation, the perpetuation of unfunny hoaxes, and eye-rolling mockery at America’s expense:

1. Was it forwarded to me from someone else?

If so, there’s a 99% chance it’s a hoax. Forwards have been a viral carrier of pestilential practical jokes and paranoid urban legends since the 1990s, when they were confined to email. Facebook, Twitter, and other social media have only accelerated the contagion process for those unwitting carriers who still don’t know better after all these years.

2. Is there a source cited?

A real source, I mean, with a link and professional credentials and an actual reputation and everything. Most forwards have no link. Those few that do, tend to link to crackpots. Either way: red flag.

3. What does Snopes.com think about it?

Snopes.com has been the Internet’s primary debunker of hoaxes, rumors, forwards, and urban myths for over a decade. When you catch sight of a forward that seems too wild to be true — or worse, too believable to be false — plug a few key terms into their search engine, and presto: instant knowledge. Whether it’s “AOL/Microsoft merger”, “Facebook to start charging fees”, or “Osama owned Citibank”, Snopes is a handy anti-panic filter ready to serve you, safeguard you from manipulation, and prevent exasperated essays such as this one from having to be written over and over again.

If I have to, next time I’ll attach two photos of Morgan Freeman to my response.

(Freeman photo credit: CynSimp via photopin cc)

Could it really be this easy to identify if the produce I am buying in the grocery store really has been genetically modified?  The good folks at Snopes.com laid it out pretty succinctly:

“a five-digit code beginning with 8 signifies a genetically modified product, a five-digit code beginning with 9 signifies an organically grown product, and a five-digit code beginning with 0 (or a four-digit code) signifies a non-qualified (i.e. conventionally grown) product.”

I guess it really is that easy.  Hmmm…

Furthermore, you can Produce Marketing Association’s web site and search for particular PLU codes.  The amount of information that the codes contain can be quite amazing and tell a lot about the food we buy at the grocery store.

A couple of weeks ago, our eldest niece, Ashley, messaged me about a little boy who was fighting for his life with Cystic Fibrosis.  She sent me a note with his story. This is what she wrote:

I saw this posted in one of the groups I’m in and I thought you may be interested .I will be getting cards for each of us in the unit to send him but thought I would let you know of it. -Ashley

Hello Everyone….I am asking you all for a big favor. My cousin’s nephew is 9 years old with 4th stage Cystic Fibrosis. The doctors have sent him home because there is nothing more they can do. When they brought him home 2 weeks ago, they gave him only 2-4 days to live. He knows he is going to pass and he has told him mom it’s okay, he said he is ready to go home because he is tired…of being poked with needles all the time. One of his wishes is to see how many Christmas cards he could receive before the Lord takes him home. This is where you come in, if you could just send a card and if you don’t know what to say put your families name and the town you live in. He received 500 one day last week and he read everyone of them.He is trying to beat the Guiness’s World  record which is 35,000 and so far the total he has is 23,000. Let’s pay it forward. Please continue to pray for his family. I known his grandpa and he is a wonderful well known preacher that would desire your prayers. Please send a card today to…thanks so so much!! Amy Please share this on your facebook or groups. I am determined and have the faith to see him meet this goal….

Dalton Brandon Dingus

H.C. 62 Box 1249

Salyersville, Ky 41465

Ashley attends college, so her plan was to have all the girls in her unit send cards to this little boy. Immediately, my “protective Aunt sensors” went off and I worried that this was yet another internet hoax. I went to Snopes.com but couldn’t find any information. I went to the Guinness World Book of Records site and looked up records for the most Christmas cards. I talked to some friends in the local CF community who were also skeptical at first glance; let’s face it, I just didn’t believe it. So I advised her to hold off on buying and sending the cards until I could do “a little more digging.”

I was dead WRONG about it all and it just breaks my heart. Not only did I almost miss the opportunity to do something kind for this little boy who is dying from the same disease I struggle with every day, but I also stifled that spontaneous love and generosity in my niece who looks up to me as a role model and was prepared to have her whole unit purchase cards to send him to help him break this record. Of course all of that can still be amended, but I’m ashamed, really ashamed that I let my jaded mind get in the way of what I keep writing about, heart and God’s love. A well-respected, fellow blogger wrote on his FB page (paraphrasing here) this is not a hoax and even if it was, you’re out the cost of a card and a stamp.  He’s right. It’s not like they were asking for money or for anything else, just a card. I thought today about when I’m standing before God one day is He going to care about how diligent I was about checking Snopes or how often I passed along His love and goodness.  Sigh. So officially and formally, I’m sorry God, I’m sorry Dalton and I’m so sorry Ashley, for not believing in something you were passionate about.

Please consider sending a card to this little boy and let’s pray that God will help us all to discern the good from the bad in our lives, on the internet and with each other.

It’s a cool story but according to Snopes it’s not true.

Although the photographs are real, the claim about the giant furnishings’ having originated as a way of skirting the law is a bit of fiction: the structures were built to serve the dual purpose of providing some shelter for the equines and serving as a visual advertisement for their owner’s business.

I haven’t had a chance to do this in a while but here’s some advice for when this story starts to show up in your inbox with lots of FWs in the subject line. Hit reply all and link back to the story on Snopes. It’s kind of a jerky thing to do — it’s just a story about horses! — but every time you do it one less email gets sent out about autism being linked to vaccines, Barack Obama being born outside of the states, or whatever nonsense is being spread around right now. I don’t really know. I don’t get these emails anymore.

That said, I wish the story was true. The real story kind of sucks.

The above images appeared in my Facebook newsfeed many, many times in the past few weeks. Because both posts are examples of Facebook scams, I’m going to briefly get on my soapbox and discuss how you can avoid being the butt of a scam and how we can all keep everyone’s newsfeed a cleaner, scam-free place.

• Consider the source – I realize that Facebook is a network of friends and acquaintances, but ask your “friend” where they got the information or look where they shared it from. Is this a trusted source? Do they typically share valuable information, or are they the type to share every photo of a “sick” child who will get a donation to their heart surgery with every Like?
• Google it (or Bing it, if that is your thing) – Take a moment and do a little research. A quick google or snopes.com search to get more information about a post you’ve seen.
• Gut check – do you really think that an individual who won the lottery would offer to give $1 million to a random Facebook stranger? Do you really think that a Facebook status is a legally binding declaration that gives you sweeping copyright protection? If your gut says, this sounds a little far fetched – it likely is. Facebook, social media and the internet at large should not be excluded from the same common sense filters you apply to information you get via other avenues in your daily life. 
• Report the photo – If you’ve confirmed that a photo is in fact a scam or spam – report it to Facebook. In the vein of the Smokey the Bear wildfire campaigns – only YOU can prevent Facebook scams.

And please don’t use the excuse “better safe than sorry.” Because if you choose to share, participate in, or otherwise perpetuate a scam, you’re part of the problem. I hate to sound harsh, but being mindful about such scams helps make Facebook and other social networks much more enjoyable and useful for all members.

Just the other day, I got an email from someone which stated that from a VERY credible source, they learned Obama dismissed a female soldier who supposedly told him that the flag on his lapel was upside down, and that because she corrected/helped him, he had her dismissed. Furthermore, it indicated he wears it purposefully upside down as a sign of solidarity to Muslim radicals, because he doesn’t love America.

For the love of all that is holy, if you’re one of the people spreading this nonsense—STOP!

The people at Snopes do a masterful job dispelling this junk every day, but it just keeps coming in droves. So if you’re not sure about the latest Obama conspiracy email you received, try a simple internet search before you become part of the ignorant conspiracy theory crowd and forward it on.

Do you have any idea what kind of nonsensical idiots you make us conservatives look like when you spread such nonsense? Much like we associate radicals like Michael Moore with the left, people associate these conspiracy nuts with us, and it makes all of us look bad. If you care about the image of the conservative movement, then don’t forward these ridiculous emails, post them on Facebook, or even bring them up at your next soirée. If you’re really responsible, you reply back with the disprovenance (FYI: I know I just made up that word) so they get the hint that you’re not into spreading lies and BS. I do this quite often.

Think about this for a second. Every conspiracy you spread was started by someone who knew it was a complete fabrication; they made it up after all, right? Then they counted on you, and many others like you, being ignorant enough to believe it and spread the word. In doing so, you’re allowing yourself to be a tool for someone who doesn’t respect you enough to assume you’ll make intelligent decisions on your own. Prove to them that you’re not by exercising healthy skepticism when you’re faced with any fantastic tale. Just because you hope it’s true, doesn’t mean it is.

Please remember that independents decide elections. Every time you do something that makes conservatives appear ignorant, you drive an independent into the arms of our opposition who do everything in their power to convince people that they alone are the ones capable of intelligent critical thinking.

The other dishonest tactic is a little more subtle, but a lot more rampant. That is feigned outrage. People who are apoplectic about Obama playing golf or taking a vacation for instance are a good example. Every person deserves to take time to de-stress by engaging in a hobby or sport, and the president is no different. He has a job to do, but also has a right to spend time with his family and friends, and to clear his mind. Do you really think the presidency isn’t so stressful that he shouldn’t need to unwind every once in a while?

So do me a favor. Ask yourself these questions next time you lash out at the president in a fit of rage:

If my candidate were in office and did the same exact thing, would I be equally as upset? Is what this person really doing actually going to affect us negatively in any way? Is what they are doing immoral, unconstitutional, or unjust?

If your answer to these questions is no, yet you’re thinking of teeing off on them anyway, then again, for the love of all that is just in this world—STOP!

Sadly, I see members of congress, media pundits, and other prominent figures engaging in this behavior far more often than should ever be tolerated. How many times have we seen our opponents do this in regards to candidates we support, and each time think to yourselves, “You’re playing for the camera because no one would be that upset about this, now shut up and sit down!” Yet somehow, we’ll do it ourselves with no compunction whatsoever.

I think most of us on the right believe our current president joins Carter as of one of the most unsuccessful presidencies in our lifetimes, by economic standards anyway. He has a myriad of honest criticisms that can be leveled at him using facts, history, logic, and reasoning. It is imperative to stick to those and only those if we are going to be the winners in the upcoming election.

Spreading lies and disinformation only serves to ruin our credibility once those lies are vetted. And feigned outrage is just like the proverbial crying of wolf. Since we know much of the media is biased against us, and more to the point, love trying to catch us in a lie, it behooves us to be extra diligent about the information we spread, and the genuineness of the emotion behind our message so we don’t seem hypocritical. If you are going to sling mud, make sure you can’t or won’t be proven wrong later. Otherwise, bite your tongue.

Even though I am a Libertarian, since we’ve never had a Libertarian president, the closest person to one in my lifetime has to be Ronald Reagan as far as I’m concerned. I remind all of you to remember any Reagan speech you ever saw. When he attacked someone, he often did it in a light hearted way you couldn’t help but like. He didn’t spread lies and nonsense; he focused on good policy and a bright future. Our current crop of politicians focus so much on content, they sometimes forget that the delivery is equally important. So attention all conservatives, look to Reagan for inspiration on policy AND on delivery, and maybe we can stop the tyranny that is slowly oozing onto us like the blob.

But one excerpt just tickles me:

While many Facebook and Twitter posts snickered about the hubbub, concerns about online privacy linger.

“It may have been a hoax, but it did not hurt!” wrote one Facebook user.

Yes, in an article about Facebook privacy, and in connection with a quote from someone sufficiently concerned about it to post the fake notice, CNN publicly linked to the profile of “one Facebook user” Ira Goodman. Now, I imagine CNN asked for permission before quoting him (lest it risk a violation of the Rome Statute), but my favorite part about all this: Goodman’s profile appears completely public. I see his original post, I see what CNN quoted, I see his other status updates, I see his ongoing kitchen renovation, I see dead people.

Basically, I see everything.

His concern, coupled with his wide-open profile, makes for a perfect illustration of the inherent contradictions of Facebook: you share because you want to, and you hope to share with only the right people — but you know it’s impossible to keep what you publish inside the protective bubble of your privacy settings. Some things will get out to Friends of Friends. Some things will get out over someone’s shoulder. Some things will get out when your account is hacked. Some things will get out when a potential employer also employs one of your friends.

One way or another, things will get out. Information wants to be free.

The real threat to your privacy on Facebook isn’t Facebook itself — I promise Mark Zuckerberg isn’t poring over your newsfeed — it’s those Friends of Friends, those over-the-shoulder glancers, those hackers (duh), those employers. There’s no use pretending that anything you post online can be truly private.

But we also want control. Or, we want to feel control.

I don’t think the hoax capitalized on fear, as CNN suggested, but on the desire for control. When you know anything you post on Facebook will eventually get out — moreover, when know there’s nothing you can do about it — you resort to “the law” in an attempt to control Facebook the only way you can, even if Facebook itself is the wrong target, and ” the law” is powerless to protect you.

As Israeli social media mastermind Sacha Dratwa put the problem two years ago:

Facebook is basically an enormous avenue on which every user opens a shop with a window display on their private life. With all the information you upload onto the platform — photos, interests, occupation, hobbies, favourite books, films and music, marital status, political leanings, dress sense — you’re handing over your electronic DNA….

We no longer have a private life. We’ve reached a stage where our bosses can find out what we do at home, where our children can follow our adult relationships, our colleagues can spy on us and advertisers can find out exactly what makes us tick. We’ve lost our freedom and the ability to do the things we like without anybody’s knowing about it.

The quote comes to me by way of an overly-lengthy ‘expose’ in the New York Times regarding an online photograph of Dratwa posing in blackface “Obama style” he once shared publicly — where else? — on Facebook.

The veracity of the rumor is a small bit complicated, only because the technology to enforce this sort of system exists. However, no bank in the USA uses this technology at the moment and most likely never will, as, according to snopes, people have a hard enough time constructing their PIN backwards without adding the stress of a hold up.

I read the snopes report, which stated that the rumor was a falsification, and then researched other sites, including blackmediascoop.com and hoaxorfact.com–both of which corroborated the conclusion of snopes.

Snopes.com is an easy to use site, as it rates the truth of a rumor on a scale of five ratings: true, multiple truth values, false, undetermined, or unclassifiable veracity. This makes it easy to research items based on their authenticity, such as whether information you received in an email are worth passing on to ten people.

In response to the new Facebook guidelines I hereby declare that my copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention).
For commercial use of the above my written consent is needed at all times!  (Anyone reading this can copy this text and paste it on their Facebook Wall. This will place them under protection of copyright laws. By the present communiqué, I notify Facebook that it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate, or take any other action against me on the basis of this profile and/or its contents. The aforementioned prohibited actions also apply to employees, students, agents and/or any staff under Facebook’s direction or control. The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of my privacy is punished by law (UCC 1 1-308-308 1-103 and the Rome Statute).  Facebook is now an open capital entity. All members are recommended to publish a notice like this, or if you prefer, you may copy and paste this version. If you do not publish a statement at least once, you will be tacitly allowing the use of elements such as your photos as well as the information contained in your profile status updates.

The approach Facebook, et al, took in debunking the validity of this message was to provide the public at-large with a basic lesson in licensing law – e.g. Facebook is granted, by you, a license to “use, distribute, and share the things you post, subject to the terms and applicable privacy settings.”  Is a lesson on licensing rights sufficient?  How is Facebook, as the licensee, able to dictate the terms upon which you, as the licensor, must abide with your intellectual property?  Is there something to the essence of the Hoax?  I know.  I know.  If you don’t like, then don’t use it. 

Alternatively consider this, Facebook, and other Cloud-based service providers, want absolutely nothing to do with the ownership of your content.  Reason being, there is too much inherent risk in owning user-submitted content.  The regulatory menagerie would be very oppressive to an organization’s bottom-line.  This is a very simple message, and one in which the public can easily understand. 

Simply put, Facebook, et al, should come out and say that owning user-submitted content would subject us to regulatory oversight that would make business operations oppressive; and our core-business function is not the “stuff” you put in our Cloud, but the “things” you do once you are in our Cloud.  That’s where the Golden Egg is for Facebook and other cloud-based service providers.  The more “things” you do in our Cloud, the better we are able to analyze that data and service you. 

Out of college, I worked for an e-media storage company, and our service agreements expressly limited our liability for loss of client data to the price of the media itself, not the content contained within.  The rationale was simple, the more e-media stored in our vaults, the more money we made.  Why have the headache of knowing/owning what was contained in the e-media?  The message above is an ascertainable answer that will put the public at ease, and not generate panic and paranoia.

It is a made up storie. But in the Snopes article there was a line… “Ronald Opus never lived, but his death will never die.”

It’s a good line… and it reminds me of another good line, “All stories are true.”

And this is a thing I think about. About the truth of stories and the lack of a true truth.

In relation to the line about Ronald, I think about what the definition of living is. About a science class I had when I was younger that listed criteria for life. About a page in “The Andromeda Strain” that used those same rules in a new way. About Discworld books… “All things strive.” And I wonder if its fair to say that Ronald Opus never lived.

Certainly more people know of him than of me. They know a bit of his life and all about his heartbreaking death.

But it’s not a true truth. Sheldon Cooper would accept none of these arguments, but, of course he is not real either.

I read once that the word buddha actuallie means “one who sees the truth”. I don’t even know if that is true, but then truth is almost a paradox and if you think about it too long your head hurts and you start to wonder if there reallie is any such thing.

Donna Boyle once wrote that “perception is realitie”. And perhaps someone more famous said it first, but she said it too. And I go with that, for the most part.

The truth is true… Fact. And so are manie things.

Fact.

This is the actual post we got from Gawker that people are putting on their Facebook walls:

“In response to the new Facebook guidelines I hereby declare that my copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, crafts, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention).

For commercial use of the above my written consent is needed at all times!

(Anyone reading this can copy this text and paste it on their Facebook Wall. This will place them under protection of copyright laws.)

By the present communiqué, I notify Facebook that it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate, or take any other action against me on the basis of this profile and/or its contents. The aforementioned prohibited actions also apply to employees, students, agents and/or any staff under Facebook’s direction or control. The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of my privacy is punished by law (UCC 1 1-308-308 1-103 and the Rome Statute).

Facebook is now an open capital entity. All members are recommended to publish a notice like this, or if you prefer, you may copy and paste this version. If you do not publish a statement at least once, you will be tacitly allowing the use of elements such as your photos as well as the information contained in your profile status updates…”

Here’s what the Facebook Newsroom says about the situation:

“There is a rumor circulating that Facebook is making a change related to ownership of users’ information or the content they post to the site. This is false. Anyone who uses Facebook owns and controls the content and information they post, as stated in our terms. They control how that content and information is shared. That is our policy, and it always has been.”

According to Snopes, as part of your agreement when you signed up with Facebook, you gave them the right to use anything you post.  The only way around them using your pictures and posts is to delete your account.

So here’s the deal, your personal copyright is already attached to anything you post on Facebook and they acknowledge that.  However, when you upload content, you simply grant Facebook the license to use and display that content.  So, do you need to post this ridiculous legal statement on your Facebook wall?  No, it’s a bunch of bull and a lot of people fell for it.

Enjoy! ~D

http://www.snopes.com/food/prepare/produce.asp

The website http://www.snopes.com just keeps getting better. A recent article on charitable compensation is what I chose for further research. The article released several incomes of top executives from many charitable organizations. However, the article was “mostly outdated and inaccurate.” This could be important to those who give to charities. How the charitable organizations handle their money may or may not impact those who give to to them. If lies are told about people’s incomes and finances then those who donate may or may not be likely to give to that particular organization. Maybe the President’s income from Salvation Army or the American Red Cross would not affect your donation to those organizations but it would affect mine. I plan to see what else I can dig up on charitable organizations and whether or not incomes and finances are often fabricated and deceived or truth told and believed. I wonder what other sites in the fact-checker realm have also looked at this topic. I will soon find out with further research.

Because even though I’m tired, irritable, and ready for bed, I’m still ready to write more on my NaNo novel.

For Snopes, because I can easily find out if something is a scam or a hoax. And there’s always some new hoax making the rounds. If you don’t know about Snopes, you can find it here: http://www.snopes.com/ 

For the sound of very young children laughing – it’s infectious. We should enjoy a good belly laugh at least once a day, more is better.

Another picture was published of a giant wave crashing into the Statue of Liberty.  That picture was actually photoshopped to appear as it did.  Again a fraud.

So be careful what you post on Facebook.  Check things out before you begin spreading false information.  For more examples of the errant stories coming out of Sandy, check out Snopes.com.