In this article the author brings up a hot topic from a
couple of years ago. The central argument focuses on Facebook and some issues
with personal privacy that was a significant issue at the time. The author’s basic thesis is that if you are
stupid enough to post things on Facebook that you really want to keep private,
then that is your own problem. Apparently
there was a change in the terms of service slightly sometime during 2009. Analysts believed this was an advance towards
breaching our personal information, and overall privacy. Her support is that anything that you don’t want
on Facebook you can delete. She also
states that if there are any people you don’t know well enough you can get
delete them as a friend or deny their friend request. You have the option to use discretion when adding
personal information because you should realize that it is exposed to your
friends. On the whole, it is our job to
protect our own information because Facebook doesn’t have to. This topic hasn’t
been as pressing since 2009. It seems
that most people agree with our author on this issue. Facebook supplies you with the tools to
protect yourself and you should be responsible for implementing those tools for
your own use. The author uses extreme
sarcasm, at one point you could even call it paranoia. However this does strengthen his argument
because it gives the reader the impression that any other viewpoint is rather
silly. Overall the author expresses her
view through sound logic and it is very well written.
Tyler, you have some good observations here. However, what this post is lacking is a thesis. You need to make a claim, early in your post, about the overall effectiveness of the author's argument and then give reasons to "prove" your thesis.
ReplyDelete