Socialnomics

Idaho Bloggers are better than New York Reporters: When I read this section, I questioned myself "Really? Is this true". I agree with the fact that free blog post can sometimes be more beneficial to readers compare with an official newspaper site which requires subscription fee. But for me, official newspaper sites require subscription fee because they are still better in quality than other bloggers when writing a report. And I believe this for reasons: 1) they use money to pay for professional reporters who have learned to write a professional report, non-bias, or taking side, in a short time (almost considered immediately) after the incident happen in over the country/world. While Jane the Blogger is writing report for fun about Idaho senators because she has a friend who was elected to the senate seat. Jane's interest is valuable but it could lead to bias when she is writing a report (since one of the senator is her high school friend). Her report can be bias in many ways, such as listen from her friend's story, take side to her friend when writing a report related to Julie Patterson... 2) People pay for subscription fee on News site A to read variety of news everyday but not only news about Idaho senators. 3) the case mentioned in the book, when the main reporter of News site A is on vacation then assigned some one else to help write a report which caused the delay in the news 1-2 hours after Jane's post, is not happen everyday with every news. In general I believe they still report news faster than an amateur blogger because it is their professional jobs and they do it for living while Jane is doing it for fun and could set other things like her family or her real job prior to posting blog. Therefore, I still believe that readers and advertisers should value the official News sites more than blog post.

What happens in Las Vegas stays on Youtube: In the first chapter, the author says that new generation nowadays has less privacy than older generation but it is a small price to pay in order to have better communication quality. I don't think so 100%. I meant "yes" it helps us to learn more about other people from our bed, help to keep in touch and get to know more people just by a click but it also has a negative effect and the it is not a small price at all. Think about all of people who are rejected by employers or get fired just because some photos or posts on their personal Facebook pages has been discovered by their co-workers or employers. Or someone who even has been arrested for a video on Youtube (a father who encouraged his son for fighting, or a guys who post a video on Youtube about how fast he can drive his car on free way and get arrested for that). Thing never become as easy as now for people to be caught right from their personal page. This is due to lack of privacy protection and it is not a small price to pay.

The next generation can't speak: I agree with this section, nowadays, the way for daily communication has changed rapidly compare with three-five years ago. Nowadays, people rely more on instant messages, text messages and email because it now becomes so easy to do so. Even easier than commit in a face-to-face communication. People now rely on social media and other online tool to express their feeling to others instead of direct conversation. It could be true that in the future, the next generation can't utilize verbal communication as well as in this generation.