Facebook By the Numbers

It's been nearly a year since the Facebook IPO that shook Wall Street. And while none of the investors who bought into to the super-hyped IPO are millionaires yet, here's some numbers that should support long-term investment, courtesy of Digiday.

• Facebook collects over 500 terabytes of data every day.  
• One out of every seven minutes spent online is on Facebook.

That is probably all you need to know if you're betting on Facebook funding your early retirement. A few other numbers though support Facebook's role in our online culture, and are subject to interpretation. They undoubtedly are going to make some people rich (or richer). Those with their eye on the 18- to 34-year-old demographic, pornographers (or maybe sex therapists) and divorce lawyers, to name a few.

• One-third of Facebook’s 18-34 aged female demographic check Facebook when they first wake up, even before going to the bathroom.
• 18-24-year-olds on Facebook have 510 friends on average.
• Links about sex are shared 90 percent more than any other link on Facebook.
• Facebook has been linked to 66 percent of divorces in the U.S., with 81 percent of the nation’s top divorce lawyers claiming clients have cited using social networks as damning evidence against their spouses in the past five years.

Meanwhile, Facebook continues to be a landmine for those under 18 to navigate. Kids will be kids after all. Bullying and bad influences are hardly new. What's new for parents is that these activities, which typically took place in the schoolyard, cafeteria, gym class, behind the bleachers and maybe in that ancient fossil known as a diary, now take place online.

• 87 percent of bullied teens were targeted on Facebook.
• 59 percent of parents have talked to their children because they were concerned about something posted to social media.
  
• 43 percent of parents check their children’s Facebook profile daily.

The only stat we came across that really warrants more study is this one:

• 85 percent of women are annoyed by their friends on Facebook. 

Which probably contributes to the 61 percent of Facebook users who have voluntarily taken a break from the social network. But - bullied, divorced or merely annoyed - we keep coming back. All of 1.11 billion of us.


Sources: "12 Alarming Stats About Social Media" from DigiDay; "Number of Active Facebook Users Over the Years" from AP.

Taking Photos of Your Food: Right, Wrong, Annoying and Here to Stay

A couple of months ago there seemed to be a mini-backlash against us amateur mobile food photo junkies taking pics of our meals. This wasn't just at your classy carpaccio-serving joints (pictured at the left), it even happened at a McDonalds!

But it was a backlash against providing a hungry audience with a steady stream of "food porn" that never really went anywhere, for which I'm pretty happy about. I'm taking a much needed break from crazy-busy self-employment (doing 6 weeks work in 4) to take a road trip around the Gulf Coast, New Orleans and then up to Austin, Texas. I intend to take plenty of food photos along the way. (Follow me on Instagram if you like food and road trips!)

Prior to the mini-anti-food-photo revolution-that-wasn't, I had already been questioning my need to take pictures of my food. Was it caused by some childhood Christina Crawford clean-your-plate edict now manifesting in I'm an adult with a camera inside my phone rebelliousness? A need to document eating at some really good restaurants? (But then how do you explain 45 shots of some nachos made at home?) Or just finding food beautiful, like others gorge on landscapes, flowers or babies (or babes)?

I'm guessing that when it comes to taking photos of your food there is no right or wrong (unless your flash is going off in someone's face while they're trying to eat). It most definitely can be annoying, not only to the diner who is being harassed by your flash, but also to your dining companions, especially when you won't let them touch their food until you're finished with your photo essay. (The carpaccio shown above was not mine.)

Yet taking photos of our food has become a part of our online culture. Like the shopper on his cell phone at the supermarket, the baby with an iPad, the noncommittal responses we get (and give) via a text message or to a Facebook invite rather than just saying "No." In the case of taking photos of your food however, someone can actually benefit from this annoying behavior. The restaurants. After all, your photo of their food on Yelp! or FourSquare is free advertising. Even an empty plate can speak volumes.

When Worlds Collide: A Mouseketeer's Death Stops Online Assault on the Iron Lady

Margaret Thatcher died on Monday morning in the UK, which was the dead (pun alert!) of night US time. The former British Prime Minister (1979-1990) was 87 years old and had been in deteriorating health for some time.

Thatcher and her politics were much like those of her contemporary, Ronald Reagan. Which led to a torrent of anti-Thatcher comments making the rounds on the social network channels by the time most Americans were sipping our morning coffee. Americans felt obliged to butt in. Those old enough to remember some of Reagan's less humane policies took the opportunity to pile on and say bad things about Thatcher, who was also known as "The Iron Lady", and in recent memory last year was portrayed on the big screen in an Oscar-winning turn by Meryl Streep.

It reminded me of a quote often attributed to another great actress, Bette Davis, who held fast to the belief that you should never say anything bad about the dead. When informed that one her enemies in the film business had died, la Davis responded with, "Good. She's dead."

No one could say a bad thing about head Mouseketeer Annette Funicello, whose death at the age of 70 later on this same Monday, California time, knocked the Thatcher hate offline for a few hours. It took happy memories - perceived and surreal - from watching Annette on the "Mickey Mouse Club", in all those beach party movies or as head spokeswoman for Jif peanut butter to call off the hounds over here.

And that's the way it should be. Annette Funicello was an American treasure. She was ours. Margaret Thatcher was not. And just because social media didn't exist when Ronald Reagan finally succumbed in 2004, after years spent in the same dementia-laden wilderness Thatcher was exiled to, was no reason for Americans to dump on Thatcher.

Now, it's time to say goodbye...

Will Social Media Win the Australian Federal Election?

Social media surely wins elections in the US. Barack Obama is two for two on the back of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram (well, Instagram was a new addition to the Obama campaign's 2012 arsenal).

But can it do the same in a country of 22 million, where voting is compulsory?

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard (think Obama) is campaigning to hold onto her seat against the leader of the opposition Tony Abbott (think George W. Bush). But the similarities don't end there. Many Australians do not like Gillard, for reasons they find hard to articulate, fairly similar to the Obama haters. Deep-seated prejudice is most likely at the core of both groups (anti-women, anti-black), but in the 21st century it is terribly uncool to be either of those things.

Enter social media to help us sort it out. While Americans got reality broken down for us with a series of memes that showed Obama as a forward-thinking progressive (he supports public television, women's rights and understands you'll never achieve world peace with militia riding roughshod on horseback), Australians are a bit more of a direct lot.

Witness the tweet making the rounds that spells it out for Aussie voters, who by the way, if they don't like what's on their plate can vote for third-party candidates or simply mark their ballots with an "X". As long as you show up and be counted.

The election is five months away. Which gives this campaign a distinctly American feel as far as endurance goes. Australians are used to much shorter election cycles and will have to eat their spinach to keep up with this one.

For a more thoughtful look at the campaign (so far) and the accomplishments of Gillard, Australia's first female prime minister, read "A Fair Go for Prime Minister Julia Gillard." For something on the lighter side, visit the Tumblr blog "Julia Gillard's Shoe."

Traditional Media One Ups Social Media in Marriage Equality Race to the Finish Line

This week's marriage equality cases before the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) have been nothing short of historic. For the generations that have come of age since America's last civil rights victories in the 1950s and 1960s, which is pretty much social media's biggest demographic everybody, the tidal wave of support has been nothing short of phenomenal.

Facebook and Twitter feeds turned into a sea of red and pink, as gays, lesbians and supporters changed profile pictures to a Human Rights Campaign (HRC) logo designed specifically for this week. And, in true social media fashion, silly riffs on the original were fast and furious, with everyone from Martha Stewart to Peeps Easter candy getting into the act. That's social media for you.

So, who can blame some older school ways of getting the word out like digital and print, and namely Time magazine, from wanting a piece of the fast-breaking action? Professional and armchair SCOTUS watchers will tell you that it is nearly impossible to read any court decision based on the brief hearings conducted by the nine justices, regardless of their typical liberal or conservative leanings. But tweets and blog posts coming from Washington were cautiously optimistic that both California's Proposition 8 (which took away the right of gay and lesbian Californians to marry) and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which bans federal recognition of same-gender marriages performed at the state level, were on their way to the discrimination dustbin.

While decisions on either case may not come from the SCOTUS until the end of June, what are remaining print sources supposed to do? Time took a gamble this morning when it issued the digital version of its print magazine (still four days away from newsstands) proclaiming "Gay Marriage Already Won." For good measure, there will be two versions of this cover, one showing two women kissing, the other showing two men.

Granted the subtitle of the four-page digital story claims that while SCOTUS may not have decided the issue yet, the American public has. (Surveys report anywhere from a solid 51% of Americans now favor marriage equality to upwards of 60%.) The younger and more social media-savvy those surveyed, the higher the supporters go - which according to Time makes marriage equality a done deal. New people being born and old people dying is a tradition older than marriage.

All this is good news for equality, justice and a country that claims everyone is created equal yet has an ugly law in place that denies same-sex married couples 1,138 rights afforded to opposite-sex married couples (including Social Security benefits, inheritance laws, joint tax filings and immigration - just to name some of the most devastatingly denied). Of course, should SCOTUS buck the court of public opinion later this year, that will probably be a much more serious story than Time magazine's print edition taking a leap of faith to try beating social media to the finish line with this story.

Which brings to mind another Time magazine cover from 16 years ago next month. Essentially Time scooped all its mainstream competitors back in April 1997 when it detailed sitcom star Ellen DeGeneres decision to out her TV character as a prelude to her own coming out in real life. (Yes kids, life was so much more complicated in those early Internet days). DeGeneres' bold move at the time was worthy of a national magazine cover that (temporarily) ended her television career. I think we all know how that turned out.

Photo credits: Time magazine covers courtesy of Time.com. To see the alternate gay marriage cover featuring two men, click here. 

Peeps for Equality

Is your Facebook newsfeed smothered in a sea of red and pink this week? What's it all about? Well, the original version, a pink equals sign on a red background, is the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) logo (traditionally yellow and blue). It's been turned red and pink for marriage equality.

This week, two ground-breaking civil rights cases are having their day before the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). First up, on Tuesday was California's Proposition 8 case - which took away gay and lesbian couples' existing right to marry in that state. This was followed by a case called United States v. Windsor, challenging the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits the U.S. government from recognizing any marriages performed in states where same-sex marriage is legal.

Getting a seat in the highest court of the land is tough business, and for a lot of us, Washington DC is really, really far away. But, a majority of Americans now favor same-sex marriage (surveys range from a solid 51% to upwards of 60%), and want everyone to know. Posting the HRC-generated logo was a first step on Monday.

As the week moved on, and the arguments before SCOTUS came to a close, social media began to take itself far less seriously as it is wont to do. A number of riffs on the HRC red and pink logo began to emerge, with everyone from Martha Stewart to Peeps Easter candy getting into the act.

Clearly, the court of public opinion has weighed in heavily on the side of equality. Slate.com has a gallery of some of the more creative versions.

Photo source: "The Best Variations on the Red Equals Signs", Slate.com.

Justin Bieber Collapses on Stage, Recovery Instagram Posted Stat

We like a good publicity stunt almost as much as we like a hot Instagram to slap up on our blog.

A breaking story on Yahoo!7 Music reports that teen heartthrob Justin Bieber collapsed at the end of his show in London tonight and had to be rushed to a hospital. "He got very light of breath," said Bieber's manager, Scooter Braun. A rep for the pop star stated that Beiber "fainted".

But forget managers and reps. Fans and social media mavens can get the real story by checking our Twitter and Instagram feeds.

Bieber (@JustiinBieber) has since tweeted: "getting better. thanks for everyone pulling me thru tonight. best fans in the world. figuring out what happened. thanks for the love."

But words are always better with a photo. So, Bieber then took to Instagram where he posted this photo shown here, with the update ""Gettin better listening to Janis Joplin".

We have a feeling Bieber's young fans are going to like his new casually draped hospital gown look. We also think once their parents grandparents explain to them who Janis Joplin is, the late rock star who never knew Twitter, Instagram or Facebook will surge on iTunes.

Source: Yahoo!7 Music, "Justin Bieber Collapses on Stage During Concert in London."
Photo credit: Justin Bieber/Instagram.