Session Blog Reviews

Facebook has been making their own rules since they came on the scene. Although they’ve taken more and more heat for their almost-constant privacy changes, it seems like we find a new low every few months. Meanwhile, even the courts are beginning to side with Facebook on advertising issues. Facebook gained a partial victory in the US District court last week in a case on click fraud. Judge Jeremy Fogel decided that advertisers could sue Facebook for charges resulting from “invalid” clicks&madsh;but not “fraudulent” ones. A clause in Facebook’s advertising contract, tentatively upheld by the court, actually protects them from any suits about fraudulent clicks. A fraudulent click might include a competitor’s click campaign designed to drive up the advertiser’s costs. Click fraud is a felony in California (where the case was decided). This class-action suit was originally filed last July . The decision does mean that advertisers can subpoena click information to look for “invalid” clicks they were charged for, and sue Facebook for those. The court did not agree with Facebook’s argument on invalid clicks, though it was quite similar to their argument for fraudulent ones: Facebook argued that the litigation should be dismissed because all cost-per-click advertisers were required to agree to the company’s terms and conditions, which allegedly included the following language: “I understand that third parties may generate impressions, clicks, or other actions affecting the cost of the advertising for fraudulent or improper purposes, and I accept the risk of any such impressions, clicks, or other actions.” Facebook’s latest new venture, a Like button for the whole Internet, may also bring them some serious grief. Developers have revealed that Facebook’s new Graph API had at least one serious privacy loophole : the API allowed developers to see and display all public events a person has said they’d attend, regardless of whether that person is a friend or not. Ka-Ping Yee, a software engineer for Google.org (Google’s charitable arm, as the Guardian describes it), discovered the vulnerability . He was especially concerned that there was no way to block or opt-out of this setting, especially since respondents to events have no control over whether the event is listed as private or public. Although you could see non-friends who have RSVP’ed to a public event on the event’s page, the API loophole allows everyone to see a full list of a single user’s public events, regardless of their connection to you. This vulnerability may have actually been inherited from an old API. However, late last night, Facebook corrected the vulnerability. Shades of Google Buzz, anyone? Ultimately, I think the Graph API will probably face at least a few more privacy challenges, even before the watchdogs, federal government and litigators start in on it. What do you think?

See more here:
Facebook: Where Fraud Isn’t Frauduldent and Privacy Isn’t Private

PR Web (press release) Social Media Marketing Strategy: SoMed plus SEO Delivers Max Results Online PR News (press release) Study reveals a Social Media marketing strategy combined with Search Engine Optimization techniques delivers greater potential results. … Everything You Need to Know About Social Media Marketing CMSWire Social Media Marketing : Top 3 Questions Marketers Want Answered Drop Ship (press release) (blog) 6 Reasons Why Your Social Media Campaign Is Sucking The Business Insider The Drum

Google has announced its latest acquisition , an Israeli company that builds iGoogle and Android gadgets. The Israeli financial news site TheMarker speculates the deal’s value at $25M. While LabPixies does seem like a natural fit for Google, some speculate this is just the latest volley in the building Apple v. Google war. Just last week, Google snapped up Agnilux , a startup founded by former Applers. While the LabPixies acquisition will help Google expand further across Europe, Africa and the Middle East, the most direct threat to Apple is that LabPixies also designs widgets and apps for the iPhone. MediaPost reports: Though a bit player, the fact that LabPixies develops personalized Web gadgets for the iPhone won’t be lost on some analysts who’ve speculated that Google buys companies just to annoy Apple. Who, Google? No way. Google wouldn’t buy the most popular advertising platform on iPhone apps , or a company that doesn’t even seem to have a product or strategy just to bug Apple, right? I mean, they’d just bring out one of the first real challengers to the iPhone , right? What do you think? Is this just another jab at Apple, or is Google more motivated by LabPixies’ actual offerings?

Continue reading here:
Google Acquires LabPixies to Tick off Apple

SINDH TODAY New Services Your Social Media Marketing Road Map OfficialWire These days, more and more businesses are giving social media marketing a try to give their companies new life. Social media marketing experts … Social Marketing Can Be A Breeze OfficialWire Twitter Marketing Service Gives Advertising A New Persona OfficialWire Set Your Business Alight With Twitter Marketing Service OfficialWire OfficialWire

The University of Maryland’s International Center for Media and the Public Agenda conducted a study of college students, depriving them of the Internet, cell phones, and even TV, newspapers and radio for twenty-four hours. Based on the students’ own comments about how much they missed it and were addicted to the Internet, the researchers concluded that the results of one single day were college students are Internetaholics . Oh, I’m so addicted to hyperbole. Feeling dependent on something doesn’t make you actually dependent on it. The students were unwilling to go without media, disliked the experience and claimed to be dependent on and addicted to the Internet and other media—but we’re still a bit short of calling this game. Now, let me say this: the Internet/media may be an addiction. (And I hereby volunteer myself as a prime candidate for a study on that!) However, this study doesn’t do anything to convince me of that. My cell phone has been in the shop for three hours as I write this, and I feel physically disconnected—like I’ve had my antennae clipped. If I had antennae, you know. But that statement does not a scientific or even significant breakthrough make. There are specific chemical centers and reactions and behaviors in the brain that constitute an actual addiction. Until we’re ready to look at something a bit more scientifically, using the term “addiction”—an actual, scientific term—is premature. For the real meat: “students felt most bereft without their cell phones,” says the study’s website . Obviously, these were the devices they used the most to contact their friends and family. Hm… so was it the cell phones, or the friends and family members they couldn’t contact quickly that they missed the most? The quotes they used from the students indicated that the utility of cell phones and social networks were what the students missed most—everything from calling their mom, to planning to meet friends, to taking notes in class, to checking the time. So yes, mobile devices and social networks have become pervasive and well-used—but we’re still using them to do the same things and connect with individuals more efficiently. Bottom line: college students use media a lot. It’s faster and easier—and yes, very deeply ingrained into the way they do things. But nobody actually broke out in a cold sweat over losing their Samsung. Mercifully, the study was short enough that the participants probably suffered few long-term effects, if any . What do you think? Is this a case of exaggeration of the findings? via

Read more from the original source:
Is the Internet (& Media) an Addiction?