This article directly opposes my argument because the whole thing is a story about how much social transparency helped the author out of a rather sticky situation. I think it's great because its not some research article saying "this is why social transparency is great" but is instead just an average person's positive experience when social transparency saved her reputation. It really is a nice story, but I think it shows the idealistic nature of social transparency in general. Most people don't have their reputations restored via the internet. They more often lose their reputations there. So I don't think it's particularly plausible to say that because the author had a postive experience with social transparency we should assume it will be positive for everyone, or even form the better society MZ seems to think it will. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=111&sid=d907321e-aff9-4acb-b6bc-fd3b20fa8b24%40sessionmgr113&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=51469032

Privacy

Through the process of researching for my essay, I've become much more aware of the diversity of effects privacy has on society. That is my topic, and I'm trying to investigate the issues that stem from Facebook's privacy policies and the arguments concering these isues etc. (If anyone has any suggestions or opinions on this topic PLEASE let me know!!! I would be grateful for any and all input!) I think it's interesting though because privacy on facebook doesn't just have to do with keeping people safe from creepers and other such unsafe nuisances. As seen in the chapter in FBE on Privacy, it defines what our internet identities are, what the social norms for transparency have become, and, of course, there is the question of advertising (I feel like everything can be traced back to money, whether profit was the goal or not). If you guys have any opinions or thoughts about this please let me know!