In the eternal search for attention and access to market, businesses now turn to "influencers" to reach specific target and promote their products. Influencers are people that have strong following on social network and that are ready to spread a good word for a product/service/brand in return of some incentive. They are literally selling their word of mouth.
One more twisted way to use / manipulate people into buying stuff. I suppose it's fair game to use any mean necessary to get someone to buy. Still, I have a problem with the idea that someone I follow and probably trust would be "paid" to influence me. How can I trust anything said by anyone if there is always a probability that they are paid to write good comments.
I'm sure most of the influencer will only promote product that they actually like but there is certainly some that will push for products they don't necessarily like. At the end, it's all about credibility for those who doubt. But just like the for TV advertisements of the 50s few doubt. They had to put rules and laws about advertisement because marketer exploited the credulity of the people to lure them into believing anything. TV advertisement was a relatively simple medium to regulate but how to do that on social media?
Annd there is more, a recent study found that more people, mostly the new generations, get their news from social media. I'm getting nervous by the minute...
Aucun message portant le libellé INF-6107. Afficher tous les messages
Aucun message portant le libellé INF-6107. Afficher tous les messages
mardi 4 avril 2017
jeudi 30 mars 2017
The coming cyberwar
In his book Cyberspies - The Secret History of Surveillance, Hacking, and Digital Espionage, Gordon Corera present a thorough timeline of espionage form the great nations of the world. From the first code breaker of World War I to the hackers of today. Since all government are good secret keepers the more you go back in time the more you have access to declassified information. For the actual reality, he relies on leak information and extrapolation but it is still very relevant and credible.
According to the BBC journalist, the next war will likely fought not only on terrain but also in cyberspace. In fact the war is already started in someway. All the great nations are equipped with armies of hackers searching for weaknesses, placing logic bombs all around waiting to strike. The link between cyberworld and real world is becoming stronger by the day. The next wave of innovation will likely be in the form of Internet of Thing. All devices connected to the Internet...
By linking our houses, our building, our critical infrastructures to the Internet, we open the door to the script kiddies, the small hackers but also to the state-sponsored hackers. In case of a major conflict between two states it is likely that attacks would be made on domestic and public targets. The overall lack of security in networks puts us all at risk of becoming a target.
As for now, not unlike the arms race of the cold war, every body is planning and looking for weakness but no one wants to make the first move knowing that an attack would like be answer to the Nth level. The cyberworld is still a bit more tricky because of the pseudo anonymity. The attacker must be identified before any reply and that may not be easy to do.
According to the BBC journalist, the next war will likely fought not only on terrain but also in cyberspace. In fact the war is already started in someway. All the great nations are equipped with armies of hackers searching for weaknesses, placing logic bombs all around waiting to strike. The link between cyberworld and real world is becoming stronger by the day. The next wave of innovation will likely be in the form of Internet of Thing. All devices connected to the Internet...
By linking our houses, our building, our critical infrastructures to the Internet, we open the door to the script kiddies, the small hackers but also to the state-sponsored hackers. In case of a major conflict between two states it is likely that attacks would be made on domestic and public targets. The overall lack of security in networks puts us all at risk of becoming a target.
As for now, not unlike the arms race of the cold war, every body is planning and looking for weakness but no one wants to make the first move knowing that an attack would like be answer to the Nth level. The cyberworld is still a bit more tricky because of the pseudo anonymity. The attacker must be identified before any reply and that may not be easy to do.
mardi 28 mars 2017
Social Media in an Orwellian world
In his classic novel "1984", Georges Orwell presented a dystopian world where everyone was watch at all time by the all knowing Big Brother. This entity controlled the though of all citizen ensuring the good of the society.
The witty writer would have marvel at the social media networks and ubiquity of surveillance in our world. All for the sake of security, all major communications an social tools are subjected to government "spying". The government does not intervene as strongly as in the novel, still it is scary to see how our information can be use against the population.
Often more aggressive than governments are the corporations that profile online users to present the best marketing strategy. Just by looking at the "likes" of someone on Facebook, it is possible to deduce some personality traits. From there a marketer can build a solid profile by looking at the purchases made, items searched in the last month, etc.
With almost every online activities logged, what your are looking for can easily be determined. The catch is that almost everyone willingly grant access to all that information. No one is forced to "post", "search", "like", etc. online. We do it to be part of something bigger. To be recognized by our peers, to be "in". And quite often we like having the right advertisement at the right time. Who cares how they guessed what I need if it save me the hassle of searching.
The witty writer would have marvel at the social media networks and ubiquity of surveillance in our world. All for the sake of security, all major communications an social tools are subjected to government "spying". The government does not intervene as strongly as in the novel, still it is scary to see how our information can be use against the population.
Often more aggressive than governments are the corporations that profile online users to present the best marketing strategy. Just by looking at the "likes" of someone on Facebook, it is possible to deduce some personality traits. From there a marketer can build a solid profile by looking at the purchases made, items searched in the last month, etc.
With almost every online activities logged, what your are looking for can easily be determined. The catch is that almost everyone willingly grant access to all that information. No one is forced to "post", "search", "like", etc. online. We do it to be part of something bigger. To be recognized by our peers, to be "in". And quite often we like having the right advertisement at the right time. Who cares how they guessed what I need if it save me the hassle of searching.
mardi 21 mars 2017
Wikileaks
In the turmoils of fake news and media blaming, one site still keeps bringing the truth.
Wikileaks was build to unveil the the truth about back office deals and hidden agenda of political groups around the world.
It is paradoxical that one of the most respected site and awarded for its transparency and openness about the source is aiming to make state secrets public. In this case, the credibility of the site is its main characteristic. All document posted on the site are thoroughly authenticate by multiple sources. Without this process, the site would lose the trust of its readers and its main goal.Still, it proves that even in an era of misinformation there is a way to promote truth and inspire trust.
Wikileaks was build to unveil the the truth about back office deals and hidden agenda of political groups around the world.
It is paradoxical that one of the most respected site and awarded for its transparency and openness about the source is aiming to make state secrets public. In this case, the credibility of the site is its main characteristic. All document posted on the site are thoroughly authenticate by multiple sources. Without this process, the site would lose the trust of its readers and its main goal.Still, it proves that even in an era of misinformation there is a way to promote truth and inspire trust.
lundi 20 mars 2017
"WireTrump"
More and more the use of social media to promote political agenda is eroding the trust in the online information.
Earlier this month, president Trump accused the previous administration and president of wiretapping his phone line during the presidential campaign. While President Trump maintain the accusation, no proof have been presented. What would follow is a series of public exchanges and requests aiming at discrediting the other party. While it is common place in politics to claim and disclaim all sorts of pseudo fact, in the social world things are generally more subtle.
Don't get this wrong, there is plenty of false statements on social network but they don't affect a nation security nor they are officially framed to attack the previous president. By using the social network to manipulate the public opinion, President Trump, bypass the traditional news outlet and flood the public with posts that are both entertaining and political. The negative impact of this strategy is a diminished trust in information in the social network.
We live in a society where information is front and centre of everything. If we cannot trust the news media or our social network (friends, colleague, family, etc.) how to find the truth? It is necessarily somewhere hidden behind some lies.
A survey by Environics found last year that less than 30% of respondents trust the information on social network which not far behind the less than 50% for broadcasting news. Even if we know the information may be false, the message stick if it is repeated. A poll by the news channel WJHL hint at a 25% believing the president. This poll is on a voluntary base and may not well reflect the general opinion. Still 25% is a lot of people backing the president on an accusation for which he has provided no proof.
Earlier this month, president Trump accused the previous administration and president of wiretapping his phone line during the presidential campaign. While President Trump maintain the accusation, no proof have been presented. What would follow is a series of public exchanges and requests aiming at discrediting the other party. While it is common place in politics to claim and disclaim all sorts of pseudo fact, in the social world things are generally more subtle.
Don't get this wrong, there is plenty of false statements on social network but they don't affect a nation security nor they are officially framed to attack the previous president. By using the social network to manipulate the public opinion, President Trump, bypass the traditional news outlet and flood the public with posts that are both entertaining and political. The negative impact of this strategy is a diminished trust in information in the social network.
We live in a society where information is front and centre of everything. If we cannot trust the news media or our social network (friends, colleague, family, etc.) how to find the truth? It is necessarily somewhere hidden behind some lies.
A survey by Environics found last year that less than 30% of respondents trust the information on social network which not far behind the less than 50% for broadcasting news. Even if we know the information may be false, the message stick if it is repeated. A poll by the news channel WJHL hint at a 25% believing the president. This poll is on a voluntary base and may not well reflect the general opinion. Still 25% is a lot of people backing the president on an accusation for which he has provided no proof.
mardi 28 février 2017
To comment or not comment
Since its
beginning, blogs have been a way to communicate to people, get feedback and
promote discussion. At first it was only logical, since blogs were, at the
time, the option to replace old fashion BBS and Usenet. As time passed by, new tools
emerged and the discussion migrated to more social tools than some simplistic
comments to a blog. Nowadays, you want your comment to be instantly visible to
all you network. Not just those reading the blog. And rightly so, if you
commented, it's because you wished to convey an idea to the world.
Furthermore,
comments on a blog are challenging to manage and maintain because they must be
moderated, cleaned, and so on. Removing them is a bit of relief but you still
want a way to interact.
What can
a blogger do?
More and
more we see news outlet
replacing the comment section on their blogs by pointing to other social media
tools like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, etc. This way, they can
reach more people and even create a buzz. This approach is only the natural
evolution of the blog positioning itself in the social web universe. It serves
to present an opinion or a position while somehow backing it with other sources
of reference. A blog is richer than a Tweet or Facebook post. It is more
structured.
To get to your readership you must levied all the networking power of social media. It is through those channels that you relate to your audience. This should be reciprocal.
mercredi 15 février 2017
Fausses nouvelles ou nouvelles faussetés?
Dernièrement, le thème de "fausses nouvelles" est devenu très à la mode. Google et Facebook
sont par ailleurs en réaction face à ce fléau. Certains diront que les
fausses nouvelles ont influencé les élections américaines de Novembre
dernier...
La situation a pris une telle envergure que plusieurs chercheurs et éditorialistes y vont de leurs opinion et supposition éclairées quant à la racine du problème et la cascade d'impact en découlant. De l'effet papillon à l'indifférence tout un chacun a son opinion. Et bien en voilà un de plus...
J'aimerais toutefois offrir une autre perspective à la situation. Les fausses nouvelles sont elles-mêmes de fausses nouvelles. La désinformation était omniprésente dès le début de la communication organisée entre les humains. "T'aurais dû voir le mammouth, il avait deux fois ma hauteur et était trop large pour entrer dans la grotte!" La désinformation fait partie intégrante du discours et de l'histoire. La perception de la réalité est basée sur les stimuli captés par les sens et interprétés par le cerveau. Celui-ci, construit ensuite une scène complète indépendamment de la qualité de l'information. Ainsi, les éléments manquants sont extrapolés (ou imaginés) à partir de l'expérience et du contexte. Les souvenir sont donc influencés par les pensées autant que par la réalité. Une étude réalisée en 2004 a démontré qu'il est même possible d'induire des faux souvenir d'une situation précise.
Dans notre univers "individuo-social [1]", la valeur sociale d'un individu dépend de l'exclusivité ou de la primeur d'une information. L'humain est presque programmé pour exagérer dans sa course à l'intéressement et l'amélioration de sa valeur sociale. À l'ère pré-urbaine, toute histoire nouvelle ou divergente était reçu avec doute et scepticisme. Outre certaines classes sociales dirigeantes (politique, religion, médecine,etc.) l'étalement sur la place publique d'une nouvelle idée demandait nécessairement une validation par plusieurs tiers idéalement indépendants. Tout le monde connaissait le sens profond du dicton : "À beau mentir qui vient de loin." Aujourd'hui plus personne ne vient de loin mais personne n'est du "coin".
Ainsi, la racine du problème est peut-être plus dans la difficulté à exercer une pensée critique face à une information que dans la diffusion de matériel de qualité douteuse. Le problème est en plus exacerbé par la compréhension de plus en plus approfondie de la pensée, des mécanismes de décision et des mouvements sociaux. Les communicateurs et influents sont en mesure d'exploiter les faiblesses de l'humain pour mieux camoufler la désinformation et surcharger l'esprit d'informations tout en pressant l'action rapide.
L'information qui nous est fournie est rarement complète et exacte. Bertrand Russell disait: "Lorsqu'un homme vous affirme qu'il connait la pure vérité à propos de quoique ce soit, vous pouvez assurément déduire que cet homme est dans l'erreur... Il est par ailleurs curieux d'observer que la certitude subjective est inversement proportionnelle à la certitude objective." (Traduction libre Skeptical Essays) Il est de notre responsabilité à tous de douter, réfléchir et former une opinion sur l'information présentée. Il faut également faire cet exercice en toute humilité et ignorer son égo pendant celui-ci. Et tout cela, en quelques secondes si on ne veut pas manquer la nouvelle suivante.
[1] Individuo-social n'est pas un vrai mot mais il illustre le paradoxe de notre société. Les humains sont de plus en plus interconnectés à travers différentes plateformes d'échange mais ces connexions ne créent pas nécessairement de liens émotifs ou d'engagement. Ils servent plutôt de vitrine où chacun expose une image idéalisée de sa personne et ou de sa vie. Au-delà des communications, l'utilisation des médias sociaux est de nature très personnelle: j'exhibe ma personne, mes connaissances, mes expérience, etc. et/ou je regarde, contemple, espionne la vie des autres dans l'unique but de satisfaire mon égo.
La situation a pris une telle envergure que plusieurs chercheurs et éditorialistes y vont de leurs opinion et supposition éclairées quant à la racine du problème et la cascade d'impact en découlant. De l'effet papillon à l'indifférence tout un chacun a son opinion. Et bien en voilà un de plus...
J'aimerais toutefois offrir une autre perspective à la situation. Les fausses nouvelles sont elles-mêmes de fausses nouvelles. La désinformation était omniprésente dès le début de la communication organisée entre les humains. "T'aurais dû voir le mammouth, il avait deux fois ma hauteur et était trop large pour entrer dans la grotte!" La désinformation fait partie intégrante du discours et de l'histoire. La perception de la réalité est basée sur les stimuli captés par les sens et interprétés par le cerveau. Celui-ci, construit ensuite une scène complète indépendamment de la qualité de l'information. Ainsi, les éléments manquants sont extrapolés (ou imaginés) à partir de l'expérience et du contexte. Les souvenir sont donc influencés par les pensées autant que par la réalité. Une étude réalisée en 2004 a démontré qu'il est même possible d'induire des faux souvenir d'une situation précise.
Dans notre univers "individuo-social [1]", la valeur sociale d'un individu dépend de l'exclusivité ou de la primeur d'une information. L'humain est presque programmé pour exagérer dans sa course à l'intéressement et l'amélioration de sa valeur sociale. À l'ère pré-urbaine, toute histoire nouvelle ou divergente était reçu avec doute et scepticisme. Outre certaines classes sociales dirigeantes (politique, religion, médecine,etc.) l'étalement sur la place publique d'une nouvelle idée demandait nécessairement une validation par plusieurs tiers idéalement indépendants. Tout le monde connaissait le sens profond du dicton : "À beau mentir qui vient de loin." Aujourd'hui plus personne ne vient de loin mais personne n'est du "coin".
Ainsi, la racine du problème est peut-être plus dans la difficulté à exercer une pensée critique face à une information que dans la diffusion de matériel de qualité douteuse. Le problème est en plus exacerbé par la compréhension de plus en plus approfondie de la pensée, des mécanismes de décision et des mouvements sociaux. Les communicateurs et influents sont en mesure d'exploiter les faiblesses de l'humain pour mieux camoufler la désinformation et surcharger l'esprit d'informations tout en pressant l'action rapide.
L'information qui nous est fournie est rarement complète et exacte. Bertrand Russell disait: "Lorsqu'un homme vous affirme qu'il connait la pure vérité à propos de quoique ce soit, vous pouvez assurément déduire que cet homme est dans l'erreur... Il est par ailleurs curieux d'observer que la certitude subjective est inversement proportionnelle à la certitude objective." (Traduction libre Skeptical Essays) Il est de notre responsabilité à tous de douter, réfléchir et former une opinion sur l'information présentée. Il faut également faire cet exercice en toute humilité et ignorer son égo pendant celui-ci. Et tout cela, en quelques secondes si on ne veut pas manquer la nouvelle suivante.
[1] Individuo-social n'est pas un vrai mot mais il illustre le paradoxe de notre société. Les humains sont de plus en plus interconnectés à travers différentes plateformes d'échange mais ces connexions ne créent pas nécessairement de liens émotifs ou d'engagement. Ils servent plutôt de vitrine où chacun expose une image idéalisée de sa personne et ou de sa vie. Au-delà des communications, l'utilisation des médias sociaux est de nature très personnelle: j'exhibe ma personne, mes connaissances, mes expérience, etc. et/ou je regarde, contemple, espionne la vie des autres dans l'unique but de satisfaire mon égo.
S'abonner à :
Messages (Atom)