Posts Tagged ‘social media’
For the most part, complaining online, in public, is rather unseemly. However, sometimes, people feel like they’ve no other option and take to Facebook and Twitter for a moan.
And so, to Jennifer Bennett who posted a complaint about a restaurant in Chorlton, Manchester.
She’d booked a meal at a place called Lusitano, and when she arrived to eat, she found that it was closed. On the company’s Facebook page, she wrote: “Had a table booked for Friday at 7:30, turned up and you were closed?! I’ve emailed you about it and still awaiting a response and there’s no answer when I call.”
“After spending £6.50 on a taxi to Chorlton we ended up having to eat elsewhere so it was not the cheap night out we had hoped for!
“And having read some recent reviews on here I’m not even sure if I actually want to redeem my Groupon voucher now … Although Hotspot Ess Paradies round the corner was a good find so not a completely wasted evening.”
As you can see from the image above, the response from the restaurant was a bit on the impolite side.
Talking to the Manchester Evening News, she said: “You just don’t expect it, especially when I was going to be a paying customer. I was really shocked to be spoken to like that. I thought their Facebook account might have been hacked so I tried to call the restaurant again but there was no answer.”
“It looked like it was locked up. The sign on the door said something about being closed for repairs, but we had called up two days previously and they had made no mention of it or called to tell us. We were hungry so we found a little German restaurant around the corner. It turned out okay in the end but it was not the cheap night we had hoped for.”
“I’m not annoyed because they were closed. I’m sorry if they’ve gone out of business. If they had just replied to my original email asking when they were reopening it would have been fine. I don’t expect an apology – I just can’t tolerate bad customer service.”
BW rang Lusitano, but alas, no answer. Looks like they’ve f*cked off.
On Twitter, you can open your direct messages to complete strangers and now, those very people can rile you up, woo you and abuse you over 10,000 characters, rather than the usual, piddling amount.
Great news for those who like to drunkenly ramble to someone they fancy, eh?
Twitter announced this months ago, but they’ve finally got around to doing it, presumably in a bid to go toe-to-toe with Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp and a load of other messaging services.
Sachin Agarwal, Twitter’s DM product manager, said: “We believe that private messaging is a core part of the twitter experience. Where we see our advantage [over apps such as WhatsApp] is that there’s so much amazing content on Twitter already, that we want to enable people to have private conversations about those things.”
The reason this took a while, according to Agarwal, is to get all third-party apps up to speed as well: “What we didn’t want was for it to be enabled for one client but not for others.”
He continued: ”One of the really interesting uses of DM is talking to business and getting customer support, and those are using third party clients. We have a number of partners that build clients for these businesses and so we wanted to make sure they had the time to update and be ready.”
“Let’s say that I’m talking to a business and I write them a direct message that is 160 characters long and that business doesn’t read the last 20, for me as a consumers that’s a really bad experience. And that was how we looked at it, the users’ perspective, making sure they have a really great experience.”
As well you know, big businesses are an incredibly needy bunch. They pester you with text messages and mailshots and, if you’re canny, you can play them off against each other.
And so, to Dan May from Twitter, who replied to a promotional tweet from O2, after they’d promised to send pizza to anyone who replied to them with their address. Giving your address away in public on Twitter? Whatever floats your boat mate. Anyway, Dan didn’t get his free grub and decided to register his disappointment, threatening to join Three instead.
Then, Three piled in, and ended up sending him five pizzas and fours tubs of ice cream (through Pizza Hut). You can see that here.
O2 weren’t having any of that, and said that Dan could have free pizza every week for the rest of the year if he went with them instead. And O2 were good on their promise too.
From his DMs…
Talking to Metro, Dan said: “I couldn’t believe it. I only sent out a couple of tweets and they both went all-out to compete against one another. It’s a great marketing campaign, it really worked. I was really impressed with 3 after being disappointed by O2 but they certainly won the customer back.”
Dan there, talking like he works for a marketing company.
An O2 spokesperson, only too happy to chip in, added: “We often like to surprise and delight customers and we’re pleased that we were able to put a smile on @dpmay’s face by giving him free pizza until the end of the year.”
‘Surprise and delight’. Honestly. Anyway, if we can learn anything from this, it is this – always try and pit companies against each other. It might not work, but for the price of half a dozen tweets, it is certainly worth a punt.
Facebook won’t let you have a nickname, and have been sued by thousands over personal privacy, and now, the social network is being lambasted for their lackadaisical approach to security. Why? Well, a software engineer discovered that he was able to harvest a load of personal information about thousands of FB users, with little more than some phone numbers.
With a number of people’s names, photos, location settings and phone numbers leaking through the flaw, Facebook clearly need to tighten things up. Whether they actually care or not, is another matter entirely.
So how was this done? Well, the information was mined using the search feature where you can look for people using their phone number. The software engineer wrote an algorithm which generated thousands of numbers, and after processing them through Facebook’s API, they soon had a load of user profiles and personal data.
Of course, the problem here is that there’s no limit to the amount of data you can get as you can do unlimited searches for people. This loophole means that cyber villains could get info about millions of Facebook users.
Reza Moaiandin, technical director of Leeds-based company Salt.agency and the person who found this exploit, said: “By using a script, an entire country’s (I tested with the US, the UK and Canada) possible number combinations can be run through these URLs, and if a number is associated with a Facebook account, it can then be associated with a name and further details”
Moaiandin alerted Facebook, and the spokesperson replied with: “We do not consider it a security vulnerability, but we do have controls in place to monitor and mitigate abuse.”
So, if you are bothered about this, and trust the tools Facebook has in place, you might want to change your privacy settings.
Twitter’s shares are having a lousy time, losing 10% of their worth while the social network looks for a new boss, after the departure of Dick Costolo. When he resigned, the news that Twitter’s co-founder Jack Dorsey would be replacing him temporarily hasn’t exactly set the market alight.
Seems Twitter are good at getting users and being the media’s go-to social network, but when it comes to competing with the big boys at the stock market, they’re left wanting.
This poor performance isn’t just because of Costolo leaving the company – he himself saw Twitter’s share value dropping by almost a third in the two months before he quit his job.
Of course, another problem Twitter has, is getting people to be active on the site – some people just don’t get how the platform works, while others think it moves far too quickly when they’ve got things to do. And then, there’s those who are getting bored of the fact that Twitter won’t leave the platform alone, forever tinkering with it and prodding members with regular neediness.
For all the problems it has, Facebook is still king. You can’t use it with a nickname, it’ll ravage your personal data and has hugely problematic attitudes to privacy – yet, it is still hanging Twitter its behind by generating 71% more revenue per active user than Twitter in the three months to June 30th.
Twitter shares finishing the stock session last night at a record low of $28.48 per share, which is marginally higher than the price they were getting when they first kicked off with their initial public offering price of $26 in 2013. Since a peak share price in December 2013, almost $30bn has been erased from the value of the company.
Celebrities get preferential treatment – we all know that. However, it is usually kept behind closed doors, so us plebs don’t get our noses rubbed in it. When it is open and brazen, some of us shrug, while others kick-off.
Well, over to British Airways, who have dropped a clanger by sucking up to Davina McCall on Twitter, being accused of double standards in the process.
One passenger called Graham Drew, was cheesed-off with a long queue, and decided to tell British Airways as such, via Twitter. As you can see below, Graham was told that no-one at BA would be able to ring him, and if he held the line, he’d get through eventually.
Makes sense. There would be a lot of people trying to get through to BA, right?
However, it is a different story if you’re the ex-host of Big Brother and Street Mate.
TV presenter Davina McCall tweeted about having a similar issue and, whoomp! there it is, someone from British Airways was all over it and offering to slide into her DMs.
Seems that ordinary people don’t get a phone call, but if you’ve done a keep-fit DVD and talked to your pretend mother on a Nutrisse commercial, suddenly, British Airways do have the staff for callbacks.
When the Metro called BA, they said: “Our customer service teams offer support and advice to hundreds of customers every day, often calling or emailing customers direct to resolve their issue as quickly as possible.”
This is either double standards, or British Airways have just found out that Lucy from their workforce does her job properly, while Gareth is a complete good-for-nothing.
Some people think Facebook are being heavy-handed, while in more extreme cases, users think Facebook are jeopardising people’s safety (such as those who have abusive ex-partners and the like). A lot of people are very, very irritated by the move, locked out of their accounts for using pseudonyms that everyone knows them by.
In Germany, Facebook have been prevented from stopping users creating accounts under nicknames and name’s that aren’t on their passports.
The Hamburg data protection authority said that Facebook could not change people’s chosen usernames or ask them to provide any official ID. You see, Facebook not only ask you to use your real name, but also prove it by sending them copies of your passport, driver’s licence and other photo ID. Obviously, a lot of people aren’t keen on sending a company like Facebook anything like that.
“The use of authentic names on Facebook protects people’s privacy and safety by ensuring people know who they’re sharing and connecting with,” the company said. Zuckerberg recently said that, if everyone knows you by your nickname, then you should be able to use it as your main name on Facebook – however, they’ve not provided any way of users doing that.
The German watchdog said making users sign up under their real names violated an individual’s privacy rights, and on top of that, rejected an argument from Facebook, where the social network said they didn’t have to listen to the Germans because they’re based in Ireland, so should be subject to Irish law.
Hamburg’s commissioner for data protection, Johannes Caspar, said: “Facebook cannot again argue that only Irish data protection law would be applicable. Anyone who stands on our pitch also has to play our game.”
So, for now, it appears that you can’t have a nickname and be on Facebook, and, if you want to change it to your real name, you’ll have to provide the social network with images of your photo ID and the like.
When you die – and you definitely will at some point – you might not have the time or wherewithal to sort out what happens to your social media accounts. You might not care. For those that do, Facebook have launched their legacy feature for people in the UK.
Basically, you can appoint an ‘heir’ who can decide what happens to your account once you shrug off your mortal coil and join the choir invisible.
Facebook describes your heir as “someone you choose to look after your account if it’s memorialised.”
With this feature, those of you who are over 18 years old, will be able to appoint a Facebook friend or family member to get the admin rights to your account. They’ll be able to send out one last message on your behalf or “provide information about a memorial service,” as well as being able to update the cover and profile photograph, and all that.
In a darkly comic turn, Facebook will get your corpse to try and win them more customers, as your heir will be able to add “old friends or family members who weren’t yet on Facebook”.
Your legacy contact will also get the opportunity of being able to download the photo archive, an archive of posts and profile details shared on Facebook. Facebook say that this contact won’t have the rights to change existing friends and settings, remove or edit posts or see your private messages, which is something.
Of course, you could just write your passwords down and stick them in an envelope to be opened on your demise, if you prefer, but then people will be able to read everything in your inbox.
If you want in, go to “Settings”, then “Security” and then hit the “Legacy contact” option.
Are you the kind of person who likes to review things on Amazon? Well, you might not want to after a rather serious allegation has been made against the online vendor. They’ve been accused of spying on reviewers’ social media profiles.
The kicker is this: a blogger from New York called Imy Santiago, wrote a book review on Amazon, and it was censored on a number of occasions, saying that she’d violated the rules of the site. Imy questioned Amazon’s decision and found that she had been blocked from reviewing the book in question, because they thought she knew the person who wrote it.
Amazon said: “We cannot post your Customer Review for (book title deleted) by (author name deleted) to the Amazon website because your account activity indicates that you know the author.”
“Customer Reviews are meant to give customers unbiased product feedback from fellow shoppers… we encourage family and friends to share their enthusiasm for the book through our Customer Discussions feature or Editorial Reviews feature.”
The problem was, that Santiago doesn’t know the author at all. So, how did Amazon jump to this conclusion? Well, it has been suggested that Amazon are snooping around reviewers’ social media profiles, looking for connections between those leaving reviews and authors.
On her blog, Imy wrote: ”The Big Brother mentality Amazon is employing is appalling, and crosses an ethical line of unfathomable proportions.”
“What quantifiable and verifiable ways is Amazon using to determine if I know the author of a book, or not? The fact that they refuse to elaborate as to how I ‘know the author personally’ is highly concerning.”
She added: “I applaud Amazon for trying to curb unethical positive/negative reviews from being posted. What I don’t find congruent is them monitoring social media activity as basis to determine associations, because as an indie writer I use social media to network and promote my books, like thousands before me. I never consented to that in their terms and conditions. If Amazon is data mining, we deserve to know, and I stand my ground in saying I do not know this author on a personal level as Amazon claims.”
Facebook are growing ears and want you to talk to them, as they become the latest company to get their own version of Siri. Of course, Siri wasn’t the first of its kind, but it is the most famous, so shut up moaning about it, alright?
The social network wants to make their own digital assistant, which will apparently be called ‘Moneypenny’. You’ll be able to ask it things like ‘why won’t you show me posts from pages I’ve signed-up to see?’ and ‘how can I stop Brenda from work being such a massive racist?’
Now, there’s got to be a difference between Moneypenny and the rest of the pack, so what’s the deal?
Well, unlike Siri, Facebook’s version will let you get information and assistance from real people. Almost like you could just message someone who knows about these things, already. It is thought that users will be able to ask for help researching and ordering stuff and other services.
Of course, there’s no release date as yet, and information about Moneypenny is thin on the ground.
How it’ll be better than asking people through the existing channels, is anyone’s guess, but rest assured, if there’s some money to be made and some data to be mined, Facebook will be all over this like a virtual rash.
Don’t mess with people’s tea. Seriously. Cups and pots of tea are more valuable and cherished than family members to most people, which Marks & Spencers found out recently.
One lady ranted about the strength of the tea offered to her elderly mother at a Marks & Spencers. And she wasn’t messing about. Her spleen, which you can see below included the line “SHAME ON YOU”, as well as the typical threat of ‘and me and absolutely everyone I know or have ever met will never shop at any of your stores for as long as we collectively live’.
Now, you might thinking that everyone else on Facebook would’ve laughed and pointed out that there might be an overreaction afoot… but that wasn’t the case at all.
Turns out everyone else is really good at summoning disgust at the drop of a hat.
One person spat: “Marks and Spencer you should hang your head in shame, disgraceful behaviour to anybody never mind their age, how much is a tea bag compared to good customer service?”
Another chipped in with: “The sad thing is if the staff member gave the tea bag he or she would of losing there job for a tea bag. A company that has forgotten how to treat staff and there customers. [sic]“ Someone jumped in: “That’s me and my family finished shopping in your store. Your deeds have been despicable to say the least. Shame on you.”
An eyewitness charged in too! “Marie I was standing there when your mum asked and I couldn’t believe this, neither could she, it’s an absolute joke as some people like tea strong and a tea bag costs less than 1 cent and I can’t see their reason for not giving her an extra one”
Naturally, some people mocked the whole reaction, which, if you’d like to see the venting and shrieking, you can click here to see the M&S Facebook TEA SCANDAL.
For a world that is meant to be dying, there’s a lot of people wanting to throw money at the music industry. 2015 saw Apple muscling in on the action, with Google, Spotify, Tidal and Amazon already doing their thing.
And now, Facebook wants to join in the fun.
We’ve seen the social network getting busy with videos, which they’re all set to monetise, and now, Music Ally have reported that Facebook are looking at doing deals with the music industry to provide an audio service, as well as a video service for them.
Once they’ve gone toe-to-toe with YouTube, it appears that they’ve got their sights set on Spotify et al. Seeing as everyone else is trying to recreate the social element of music, Facebook are obvious well versed in that and have the upper hand if anything.
And of course, seeing as FB want to keep as many people on their network as possible, getting them to listen to music through it is a sensible area to look at. For the social network, it also means they can keep tabs on even more of that lovely data you generate. If you’re walking around, listening to music when you wouldn’t normally be using Facebook, this could be very valuable to them indeed.
Basically, Facebook don’t want people linking to third-parties if they can help it. From now on, they’re going to try and persuade users to host music and video through them, rather than linking to YouTube or Spotify playlists.
Naturally, Facebook will be able to make loads of money out of it all, if they play it right and people actually want to use their services.
Facebook haven’t made an official statement about any of this, so obviously, this could be little more than rumour, but the whole thing makes sense when you break it down. Really, it’d be more weird if Facebook weren’t looking into this field. They’ll be going after Netflix too, if this works out.
Selfies are great. It is nice to see people having the self-confidence to show themselves off. Besides, generations before them were forever checking themselves out in shop windows and the like.
That said, selfies aren’t very good if you’re a thundering idiot.
In Russia, the police have launched a campaign which warns people against taking unsafe self-portraits, after over 100 injuries happened last year, thanks to idiots with cameras on their phones. They’ve even made some logos to help them out, in case reading words or listening to spoken advice isn’t effective enough.
“A cool selfie could cost you your life,” say the interior ministry, warning that “a selfie with a weapon kills”.
The reason they’re telling people about this is to show how badly things can go if you’re a complete nincompoop. This year, a woman accidentally shot herself in the head while taking a selfie with her pistol. Earlier in the year, two dimwits died when they thought they’d take a selfie while holding a hand-grenade which had the pin pulled out.
Another gasping dunce took a photo of themselves while climbing on a railway bridge, and came into contact with live electrical wires. The phones might not be the problem here.
“Unfortunately we have noted recently that the number of accidents caused by lovers of self-photography is constantly increasing,” said Yelena Alexeyeva. “Since the beginning of the year we are talking about some hundred cases of injuries for sure.”
“The problem really exists and leads to very unfortunate consequences.”
“Before taking a selfie, everyone should think about the fact that racing after a high number of ’likes’ could lead someone on a journey to death and his last extreme photo could turn out to be posthumous.”
Are you massively paranoid and demand to know exactly who has deleted you from social media? One clue is that people who aren’t talking to you, don’t really like you. If that isn’t enough for you, then there’s some technological help for you.
Now you can be told when you someone has unfriended you. You won’t know why they’ve done it, but you’ll know they’ve done it. If you were annoying beforehand, you can get really annoying by learning these facts and then tapping out loads of passive aggressive updates like; “Looks like some people are two-faced” and whatnot.
If you use Google Chrome, you can get the extension called Who Deleted Me. Of course, there’s loads of apps and add-ons like this, but this one links in with Facebook, and not many do that.
How to find out if someone has deleted you on social media
On Facebook, the Who Deleted Me extension has been growing in popularity (so much so that the site keeps going down thanks to the volume of traffic). It won’t tell you who has deleted you historically, rather, it’ll alert you to the people that delete you after you’ve installed the extension.
You log-in to Facebook via the app, and hit the ‘Show Me Who’ button and you’ll get all manner of information you don’t need.
On Twitter, you can try the Unfollowers.com service. It will also tell you who isn’t following you back, should you be crazy enough to care. Go to the site, add your Twitter account and put your details in. You have a range of options you can choose to maximise your paranoia.
If you’d like to know the comings-and-goings on your Instagram account, again, Unfollowers.com is your best bet. You use it in the same way you do with your Twitter account above.
If you want to know who has unfollowed you in real life, ask them if they fancy going for a drink a few times and if they keep blowing you off, then chances are, they hate you.
Anyway, there’s a lot of videos that get millions of shares on the social network, and now, it looks like you’ll be able to try and make some money on it all, just like you can on YouTube. Facebook are going to be trying out a new feature called ‘suggested videos’, and it will appear in your newsfeed and will show videos from people who have paid a lot of money to get placed adverts in your eyeline.
Remember when your newsfeed was a linear timeline that you could work out and see what you wanted, rather than the mess it is now?
Anyway, it looks like Facebook will swipe 45% of the revenues, with partners taking the remaining 55% and the NBA, Fox Sports, Funny or Die and some other people we haven’t heard of are first in the trial. ”We’ve heard consistently from media companies and other video creators that if they were able to make money from their videos, they would publish more,” Facebook’s vice president of partnerships Dan Rose told Variety.
Looks like Facebook have cottoned on to the fact that celebrities and business are embedding YouTube videos into Facebook, when the social network would prefer everything in-house, where partners can upload more videos directly. Knowing Facebook, they’ll tinker with their algorithms so that their own videos take greater prominence over links to YouTube vids.
Of course, this could meet some friction as people won’t want to hamstring their income from their YouTube videos.
Facebook have some things to sort out too – a lot of content creators have complained that Facebook is hosting too many videos that have been ripped by others, which means the people who want to monetise it can’t, and lose control of their product. This is galling if a video is doing the rounds, with 1bn views and the person who created it isn’t seeing a penny.
While YouTube has Content ID, which helps people to identify when their copyrighted content is being swiped, Facebook (at the moment), does not.