As social networking gains in popularity so does concerns about privacy. One of the most widely adopted sites, Facebook, offers a lot of customization when it comes to who sees what on a member's profile. Recently, Facebook gave users the option to open up their profiles and allow any section to be visible by everyone on internet. They also added a publisher control so users could modify who is able and not able to see content published on their profiles.
On my Facebook profile, everything was set to either "Friends of Friends" or "Only Friends" except anything that had to do with promoting my blog. The website was visible by everyone who visited my profile as well as any announcements about new blog entries. My default publisher control setting was set to "Only Friends" and I selectively choose when something was supposed to be publicly available. Personal status updates that had nothing to do with my site had a tiny lock icon under the post indicating only friends were allowed to see it.
After I upgraded to the Facebook 3.0 iPhone app, I noticed that status updates via the app did not have the tiny lock under the post. At first, I figured these updates would follow my default publisher control setting and would only be viewable by friends. Eventually, my curiosity got the better of me and I created a dummy account to see what my Facebook profile looked like to non-friends. To my surprise, every update made via the iPhone app was visible on my wall and did not follow my privacy settings. Since there are no privacy controls on the Facebook iPhone app, the most logical thing would be for any update to follow the default publisher control setting unless given the option to choose otherwise.
After my discovery, I felt my only option was to lock down my Facebook profile and make all my status updates visible by only friends until Facebook allows me to have more control over who sees posts made via my iPhone. I conclude with a word of caution for those using the Facebook iPhone app: If your profile privacy is set to "Everyone" yet you want to selectively control which updates are visible on your wall by non-friends, just keep in mind any updates made on the iPhone offer no privacy control and are all public.
UPDATE: 9/8/09 - According to TechCrunch, Facebook has resolved this bug with a server-side fix, although I have not tested it myself. The article also addresses other privacy bugs on the Facebook iPhone app.
UPDATE: Poll Results 9/2/09 - 9/9/09
How open is your Facebook profile?
00% Open to everyone
40% Visible to friends only
60% Customized privacy
00% I don't use Facebook
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Friday, August 7, 2009
My Love-Hate Relationship With iTMS
iTunes Music Store, why can't I quit you? Since the beginning, I have had a love-hate relationship with you and your ways. I put up with paying the price you ask in exchange for ease of use and the ability to quickly find and download tracks I want. Your seamless functionality with my iPhone makes me forget that you sometimes only carry partial albums of the electronic music I love so deeply. I tolerate your lower audio quality and DRM in exchange for your music recommendations and guilt-free listening enjoyment knowing that did not jip my favorite artists out of a few bucks.
With all your good qualities like the App Store, movies, and podcasts how can a girl not be satisfied? Well, dear iTMS, let me tell you why you're in the dog house. I paid for a collection of children's music for my son and when I tried to burn a MP3 CD of the songs to play in my car, you denied me. You jumped up and down in the bottom of my screen and alerted me the tracks I purchased from you could not be burned to an MP3 CD. How dare you!
Yes, I know I could burn a bunch of individual audio CDs of the music, but have you ever had to listen to the same 10 children's songs in the car over and over again? It is torture! A second option is to take the time to burn audio CDs and reimport the music as MP3s and then burn them yet again to a single MP3 CD. Exhausting! Furthermore, explain to me why it is easier to illegally download music and burn a MP3 CD in less steps than music I legitimately paid for using your service? Why are you making me jump through hoops? Even if you're business model is to sell iPods and iPhones, I'm curious why your top priority would not be making me and your many other loyal customers happy.
I've given you my support and my hard earned money, but you spit in my face and tell me I cannot do what I want with the music I purchase from you. But alas, I cannot quit you because I am entangled in your evil web of hardware and software that I cannot live without, so for now, our love-hate relationship will go on.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention the children's music was purchased before iTMS went DRM-free, and of course I can update the music in my library at a cost. I checked and DRM-free tunes can be converted to MP3, and I assume they can be burned to MP3 CD. However, I don't feel I should have to pay extra money to convert songs I paid for in the first place.
UPDATE: Poll Results 8/7/09 - 8/14/09
Do you love or hate the iTunes Music Store?
50% Love it!
25% Hate it!
25% It's ok.
00% I've had better.
With all your good qualities like the App Store, movies, and podcasts how can a girl not be satisfied? Well, dear iTMS, let me tell you why you're in the dog house. I paid for a collection of children's music for my son and when I tried to burn a MP3 CD of the songs to play in my car, you denied me. You jumped up and down in the bottom of my screen and alerted me the tracks I purchased from you could not be burned to an MP3 CD. How dare you!
Yes, I know I could burn a bunch of individual audio CDs of the music, but have you ever had to listen to the same 10 children's songs in the car over and over again? It is torture! A second option is to take the time to burn audio CDs and reimport the music as MP3s and then burn them yet again to a single MP3 CD. Exhausting! Furthermore, explain to me why it is easier to illegally download music and burn a MP3 CD in less steps than music I legitimately paid for using your service? Why are you making me jump through hoops? Even if you're business model is to sell iPods and iPhones, I'm curious why your top priority would not be making me and your many other loyal customers happy.
I've given you my support and my hard earned money, but you spit in my face and tell me I cannot do what I want with the music I purchase from you. But alas, I cannot quit you because I am entangled in your evil web of hardware and software that I cannot live without, so for now, our love-hate relationship will go on.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention the children's music was purchased before iTMS went DRM-free, and of course I can update the music in my library at a cost. I checked and DRM-free tunes can be converted to MP3, and I assume they can be burned to MP3 CD. However, I don't feel I should have to pay extra money to convert songs I paid for in the first place.
UPDATE: Poll Results 8/7/09 - 8/14/09
Do you love or hate the iTunes Music Store?
50% Love it!
25% Hate it!
25% It's ok.
00% I've had better.
Twitter Attacked To Silence One Or Silence All?
Yesterday, many social networking and blogging sites, including Twitter and facebook, were brought to their knees because of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack. According to CNet, the cyber attack was implemented by Russian hackers to silence an outspoken pro-Georgian blogger who goes by the name "Cyxymu."
I have never even heard about Cyxymu or his blog until today, therefor I have my doubts that an individual with little influence in the rest of the world would be the target of an attack this momentous. Number one, a DDoS attack would only cripple a site for a short period of time, so if the hackers' intention was to single out this blogger and silence him, it wasn't very effective. Number two, the attack brought so much media attention, Cyxymu will gain numerous more followers and supporters now making the scheme counter-productive on the hackers' part.
This whole scenario just doesn't add up to me. Either the hackers who launched this attack were amateurs, or the attack was not focused on silencing one person but to temporarily silence us all. Many attacks like this have no motivation other than to prove it can be done.
I'm curious what your feeling are on the DDoS attacks yesterday. Could it be politically motivated or just random? Are we making too big of a deal about social media being shut down for a few hours? Please share you thoughts.
I have never even heard about Cyxymu or his blog until today, therefor I have my doubts that an individual with little influence in the rest of the world would be the target of an attack this momentous. Number one, a DDoS attack would only cripple a site for a short period of time, so if the hackers' intention was to single out this blogger and silence him, it wasn't very effective. Number two, the attack brought so much media attention, Cyxymu will gain numerous more followers and supporters now making the scheme counter-productive on the hackers' part.
This whole scenario just doesn't add up to me. Either the hackers who launched this attack were amateurs, or the attack was not focused on silencing one person but to temporarily silence us all. Many attacks like this have no motivation other than to prove it can be done.
I'm curious what your feeling are on the DDoS attacks yesterday. Could it be politically motivated or just random? Are we making too big of a deal about social media being shut down for a few hours? Please share you thoughts.
Friday, July 3, 2009
My iPhone 3GS Diary
On June 19, I paced the halls at work and had a constant eye on the front door as I waited for UPS to deliver my new iPhone 3GS. Around 10:00 AM, I saw that beautiful brown truck pull into in the parking lot, and I ran to greet the driver. When he handed me a single flat envelope, I said, "That's not my iPhone." The driver told me that he didn't have any more deliveries at my address, but someone at the business next door was getting one, and he was the only truck scheduled to stop there for the day. My beaming smile faded from my face.
The driver went outside to check the iPhone designated to go next door just to make sure, then he returned and handed the box to me after he saw it was addressed to my name. Apparently, when my job relocated to a new building a few months ago, everyone was given the wrong address, and no one thought to later inform all the employees of this oversight. But it didn't matter, I had my iPhone in hand.
I ran back to my office to unbox my new most prized gadget. I took the iPhone out of the box and carefully removed the screen protective cover. In awe, I held the phone in my hand, but what was this? I rubbed my finger along to narrow sides around the case. It was not smooth like my vintage 2G iPhone. Where the silver met the plastic back (in my case black), there was a raised, slightly sharp edge. This did not set right with me. In fact, the new iPhone felt cheap. This was supposed to be a day of joy, but I was starting to regret my $299 purchase. I LOVED my 2G iPhone. I was even a little teary-eyed about replacing the original iPhone with the 3GS. That thing was a tank and had been so good to me, and here was this cheaply put-together device mocking me.
I thought, maybe I was just being overly picky and tried to accept the new iPhone. I went home from work and plugged the iPhone into my iMac to activate it and set it up. However, I couldn't stop rubbing my fingers along the edge. I could feel it as I held the phone in my palm, and my disappointment had not diminished. When my husband got home, I asked him to take a look at my 3GS, and he agreed it didn't look or feel right.
Feeling justified in my complaint, I decided to call Apple support. After a ten minute hold time, I got on the line with an agent. I explained the problem and was quickly informed it was a factory defect and to take my iPhone 3GS to the nearest Apple Store for an exchange. The agent scheduled me an appointment at the Genius Bar for Sunday. I let out a sigh of relief knowing in a couple of days my iPhone woes would be woos.
On (Father's Day) Sunday, I went on a field trip to the Apple Store with high hopes of leaving with a perfect iPhone 3GS. I waited for over a half hour only to kindly be told that they can't swap out my iPhone because they do not have any replacement units in the stock yet for online orders, and I would need to call Apple support again to have a new unit mailed to me. My smile faded again. What a waste of time! Plus, I lost a valuable jump start on the shipping process.
On Monday, I called Apple support again and got another friendly agent who arranged my iPhone replacement by mail. The new phone would be shipped overnight priority and he waved the $29 fee. The only catch was I had to provide a credit card number so Apple could secure they would get an iPhone (or the cost of an iPhone) back, and a hold for the non-subsidized price of $699 was placed on my card. That was enough to make me gulp but not enough to keep me from getting a perfect iPhone.
The next day and a half was painful as a waited for my replacement iPhone. I never bonded with defective one and I couldn't wait to finally have my iPhone. Plus, I was tired of babying the thing because if anything happened to it, I would be stuck with it.
Then finally, my delivery showed up while I was at work on Wednesday, June 24. I immediately did the unboxing, and was thrilled to run my fingers along the silky smooth edges of my new iPhone 3GS. It was beautiful and love at first sight. As soon as I got home, I synced my new iPhone, put on my Mindbender Gelaskin, and prepared the defective phone to ship back to Apple.
As I played with my perfect 3GS, I knew this was the beginning of a beautiful relationship. I was loving it! That was until yesterday (July 2) when I discovered a scratch on the screen. A tiny millimeter hairline scratch at the bottom of the screen. I couldn't believe it! I was so careful with my iPhone. It stayed in my pocket all alone. I've never dropped it. I even lined its assigned cup holder in my car with tissues to make sure my iPhone stayed safe and secure.
Was the oleophobic coating on the screen to blame? I stuck by my decision to not degrade the picture quality by using a screen protectant film, as I discussed in my blog: Do iPhones Need Screen Protectors? The post included a link to a video of an iPhone endurance test that showed how scratch resistant the iPhone 3G screen was. Not to mention, I used my 2G iPhone for two years and never got a scratch on it. So how was it possible that I got a scratch on my iPhone 3GS screen in less than two weeks of ownership? The only physical difference was the addition of the oleophobic coating.
The scratch was extremely minor and was not even visible when using the phone, so eventually I will get over it. The first scratch on any new device is always the hardest. However, this minor imperfection made me wonder if I should buy a screen protector. I'm waiting for someone to do scratch test on the 3GS to confirm if it's more prone the scratches or not.
My first two weeks with the iPhone 3GS have been a roller coaster of emotion, but in the end, I'm happy with my new phone. I'm curious about other iPhone owners' experiences. Has it been painless or eventful? And has anyone else noticed any scratches already on their 3GS and would you recommend using a screen protective film?
UPDATE: Poll Results 7/4/09 - 7/11/09
Which iPhone(s) do you own?
66% 2G (Original)
50% 3G
66% 3GS
16% No iPhone
Does your iPhone wear protection?
00% Screen protector only
14% Case only
00% Case & screen protector
14% Skin or sticker
42% No protection needed
28% No iPhone
The driver went outside to check the iPhone designated to go next door just to make sure, then he returned and handed the box to me after he saw it was addressed to my name. Apparently, when my job relocated to a new building a few months ago, everyone was given the wrong address, and no one thought to later inform all the employees of this oversight. But it didn't matter, I had my iPhone in hand.
I ran back to my office to unbox my new most prized gadget. I took the iPhone out of the box and carefully removed the screen protective cover. In awe, I held the phone in my hand, but what was this? I rubbed my finger along to narrow sides around the case. It was not smooth like my vintage 2G iPhone. Where the silver met the plastic back (in my case black), there was a raised, slightly sharp edge. This did not set right with me. In fact, the new iPhone felt cheap. This was supposed to be a day of joy, but I was starting to regret my $299 purchase. I LOVED my 2G iPhone. I was even a little teary-eyed about replacing the original iPhone with the 3GS. That thing was a tank and had been so good to me, and here was this cheaply put-together device mocking me.
I thought, maybe I was just being overly picky and tried to accept the new iPhone. I went home from work and plugged the iPhone into my iMac to activate it and set it up. However, I couldn't stop rubbing my fingers along the edge. I could feel it as I held the phone in my palm, and my disappointment had not diminished. When my husband got home, I asked him to take a look at my 3GS, and he agreed it didn't look or feel right.
Feeling justified in my complaint, I decided to call Apple support. After a ten minute hold time, I got on the line with an agent. I explained the problem and was quickly informed it was a factory defect and to take my iPhone 3GS to the nearest Apple Store for an exchange. The agent scheduled me an appointment at the Genius Bar for Sunday. I let out a sigh of relief knowing in a couple of days my iPhone woes would be woos.
On (Father's Day) Sunday, I went on a field trip to the Apple Store with high hopes of leaving with a perfect iPhone 3GS. I waited for over a half hour only to kindly be told that they can't swap out my iPhone because they do not have any replacement units in the stock yet for online orders, and I would need to call Apple support again to have a new unit mailed to me. My smile faded again. What a waste of time! Plus, I lost a valuable jump start on the shipping process.
On Monday, I called Apple support again and got another friendly agent who arranged my iPhone replacement by mail. The new phone would be shipped overnight priority and he waved the $29 fee. The only catch was I had to provide a credit card number so Apple could secure they would get an iPhone (or the cost of an iPhone) back, and a hold for the non-subsidized price of $699 was placed on my card. That was enough to make me gulp but not enough to keep me from getting a perfect iPhone.
The next day and a half was painful as a waited for my replacement iPhone. I never bonded with defective one and I couldn't wait to finally have my iPhone. Plus, I was tired of babying the thing because if anything happened to it, I would be stuck with it.
Then finally, my delivery showed up while I was at work on Wednesday, June 24. I immediately did the unboxing, and was thrilled to run my fingers along the silky smooth edges of my new iPhone 3GS. It was beautiful and love at first sight. As soon as I got home, I synced my new iPhone, put on my Mindbender Gelaskin, and prepared the defective phone to ship back to Apple.
As I played with my perfect 3GS, I knew this was the beginning of a beautiful relationship. I was loving it! That was until yesterday (July 2) when I discovered a scratch on the screen. A tiny millimeter hairline scratch at the bottom of the screen. I couldn't believe it! I was so careful with my iPhone. It stayed in my pocket all alone. I've never dropped it. I even lined its assigned cup holder in my car with tissues to make sure my iPhone stayed safe and secure.
Was the oleophobic coating on the screen to blame? I stuck by my decision to not degrade the picture quality by using a screen protectant film, as I discussed in my blog: Do iPhones Need Screen Protectors? The post included a link to a video of an iPhone endurance test that showed how scratch resistant the iPhone 3G screen was. Not to mention, I used my 2G iPhone for two years and never got a scratch on it. So how was it possible that I got a scratch on my iPhone 3GS screen in less than two weeks of ownership? The only physical difference was the addition of the oleophobic coating.
The scratch was extremely minor and was not even visible when using the phone, so eventually I will get over it. The first scratch on any new device is always the hardest. However, this minor imperfection made me wonder if I should buy a screen protector. I'm waiting for someone to do scratch test on the 3GS to confirm if it's more prone the scratches or not.
My first two weeks with the iPhone 3GS have been a roller coaster of emotion, but in the end, I'm happy with my new phone. I'm curious about other iPhone owners' experiences. Has it been painless or eventful? And has anyone else noticed any scratches already on their 3GS and would you recommend using a screen protective film?
UPDATE: Poll Results 7/4/09 - 7/11/09
Which iPhone(s) do you own?
66% 2G (Original)
50% 3G
66% 3GS
16% No iPhone
Does your iPhone wear protection?
00% Screen protector only
14% Case only
00% Case & screen protector
14% Skin or sticker
42% No protection needed
28% No iPhone
Friday, June 12, 2009
What About The Children?
The state of California is in a financial mess, and numerous cuts have to be made to save the state money. Sadly last month, Los Angeles Unified School District, and other school districts around the state, announced they were cutting summer programs. Many parents depend upon summer programs for child care while they are at work. My son is not old enough to attend public school yet, but he does go to daycare. I was told by the daycare owner that her phone is ringing non-stop with parents desperately searching for an alternative to the no longer active summer programs. Unfortunately, she is unable to take on the extra load of children.
We live in a society where, in most cases, both parents have to work. Daycares and nannies are expensive. My husband and I shell out well over $10,000 a year on child care for our son. Not unlike many other parents, we have no family members close enough to help watch our son when needed. These cutbacks on summer programs will cause a major strain on many parents, as well as, set back students who use summer school to get ahead.
To me, education cuts do not seem like the answer. Even if slashing the summer programs saves California hundreds of thousands of dollars, how much will we be sacrificing in our future? A good education is the key to ensuring better, higher paying jobs for our children which in turn means more money collected by the state in the form of taxes. I am deeply concerned about what shape the education program will be like in the next couple of years once my son is attending public school.
I'm curious, what your thoughts are on cuts in education in California or where you live? Do you feel it is a mistake or can compromises be made?
UPDATE: Poll Results 6/9/09 - 6/16/09
Should summer programs be cut to save your state money?
85% No, education is important
14% No, childcare is expensive
00% Yes, if the state is in debt
00% Summer school sucks anyway
00% Meh
We live in a society where, in most cases, both parents have to work. Daycares and nannies are expensive. My husband and I shell out well over $10,000 a year on child care for our son. Not unlike many other parents, we have no family members close enough to help watch our son when needed. These cutbacks on summer programs will cause a major strain on many parents, as well as, set back students who use summer school to get ahead.
To me, education cuts do not seem like the answer. Even if slashing the summer programs saves California hundreds of thousands of dollars, how much will we be sacrificing in our future? A good education is the key to ensuring better, higher paying jobs for our children which in turn means more money collected by the state in the form of taxes. I am deeply concerned about what shape the education program will be like in the next couple of years once my son is attending public school.
I'm curious, what your thoughts are on cuts in education in California or where you live? Do you feel it is a mistake or can compromises be made?
UPDATE: Poll Results 6/9/09 - 6/16/09
Should summer programs be cut to save your state money?
85% No, education is important
14% No, childcare is expensive
00% Yes, if the state is in debt
00% Summer school sucks anyway
00% Meh
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Places I Would Not Want To Be During An Earthquake.
Since two minor earthquakes have rattled Los Angeles so far this week, it's made me think more about earthquake safety and preparedness. It's also reminded me of all the places I would not want to be during a major earthquake. I put together my list of top 10 places I would not want to be in an earthquake:
I'm curious, what is the top places you would not want to be during an earthquake?
UPDATE: Poll Results 5/20/09 - 5/27/09
What natural hazard are you scared of most?
00% Earthquake
20% Volcanic eruption
00% Flood
00% Tsunami
00% Blizzard
00% Drought
00% Tornado
20% Hurricane
00% Fire
20% Disease Epidemic
20% Supernova
00% Other
20% Meh
10. The little-bitty bathroom stall at work - Guaranteed concussion from hitting my head on the walls of this small space.
9. The tattoo shop - This could leave a permanent reminder of the big quake.
8. At the dentist - Dental work and earthquakes don't mix.
7. At The Aquarium Of The Pacific - I don't know how strong that glass really is.
6. The Lamps Plus store - A place that sells nothing but lighting fixtures is no place to be during an earthquake.
5. Walking on or standing under a glass stair case - They have these in some Apple Stores and as much as I love being in the Apple Store, I would not want to be on or under the glass stair case.
4. Costco - At first I thought Costco would be the ideal place to be after a natural disaster because of all the supplies you would have at my disposal, but a place with high shelves full of heavy items is not where I want to be if the ground is shaking.
3. In the shower - Besides slipping and falling, there's the problem of not being clothed which could be potentially embarrassing.
2. Elevator - Aside from the fear of being trapped in a small enclosed space for an unknown amount of time, I always contemplate what would happen if you had to go to the bathroom.
1. The BART Transbay Tube - Riding the train through an underwater tube during a major earthquake? No thanks.
I'm curious, what is the top places you would not want to be during an earthquake?
UPDATE: Poll Results 5/20/09 - 5/27/09
What natural hazard are you scared of most?
00% Earthquake
20% Volcanic eruption
00% Flood
00% Tsunami
00% Blizzard
00% Drought
00% Tornado
20% Hurricane
00% Fire
20% Disease Epidemic
20% Supernova
00% Other
20% Meh
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Is Facebook A Place For Tweets?
It was brought to my attention that Facebook friends might not appreciate you allowing Twitter to update your Facebook status if you are a heavy tweeter. This news concerned me because I would never want to annoy my friends and be thought of as a post whore.
I'm not sure if I'm really a heavy tweeter, but on average I update my status about 18 times a day, not including any extra links or photos I may post on Facebook. My thought were, I like being able to update my status in one place instead or two (or three if you count Brightkite). I don't say anything on Twitter that I wouldn't also say on Facebook, and if I do, I delete that post on Facebook. Also, I figured if a Facebook friend didn't like what I had to say or how much I post, they have the option to hide my updates from their news feed. I posed a question on Facebook to get my friends' opponions on this matter and only got one response saying he didn't mind, so maybe all my friends have blocked my updates. LOL! Anyway, Facebook is trying their hardest to be like Twitter, so isn't it fitting to link your updates between the two sites?
One drawback could be seeing the same updates if you're friends with someone on Twitter and Facebook and they link their updates. I have a handful of friends that fall into this catagory. An easy solution I use to get around this is creating group lists in Facebook that exclude anyone whose updates I already see on Twitter. With some quick and easy tweaks in Facebook, I can't understand why anyone would have to be irritated because of a friend's quantity or quality of updates. Besides, I have plenty of friends who update their Facebook status as much as I do that don't even use Twitter.
So I'm curious, how do you feel about Facebook/Twitter linking? Does it bother you if someone posts a lot whether from Facebook or Twitter?
UPDATE: Poll Results 5/3/09 - 5/10/09
Do you allow Twitter to update your Facebook status?
30% Yes
38% No
15% It's annoying
15% Meh
I'm not sure if I'm really a heavy tweeter, but on average I update my status about 18 times a day, not including any extra links or photos I may post on Facebook. My thought were, I like being able to update my status in one place instead or two (or three if you count Brightkite). I don't say anything on Twitter that I wouldn't also say on Facebook, and if I do, I delete that post on Facebook. Also, I figured if a Facebook friend didn't like what I had to say or how much I post, they have the option to hide my updates from their news feed. I posed a question on Facebook to get my friends' opponions on this matter and only got one response saying he didn't mind, so maybe all my friends have blocked my updates. LOL! Anyway, Facebook is trying their hardest to be like Twitter, so isn't it fitting to link your updates between the two sites?
One drawback could be seeing the same updates if you're friends with someone on Twitter and Facebook and they link their updates. I have a handful of friends that fall into this catagory. An easy solution I use to get around this is creating group lists in Facebook that exclude anyone whose updates I already see on Twitter. With some quick and easy tweaks in Facebook, I can't understand why anyone would have to be irritated because of a friend's quantity or quality of updates. Besides, I have plenty of friends who update their Facebook status as much as I do that don't even use Twitter.
So I'm curious, how do you feel about Facebook/Twitter linking? Does it bother you if someone posts a lot whether from Facebook or Twitter?
UPDATE: Poll Results 5/3/09 - 5/10/09
Do you allow Twitter to update your Facebook status?
30% Yes
38% No
15% It's annoying
15% Meh
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Is The Workplace A Place For Friends?
I am a very social person and love making new friends. I highly value my friendships and want friends who return the sediment. After becoming a mom, my social activities reduced greatly making it harder to hang out with old friends or meet new cool people. The easiest solution seemed to be making friends with coworkers since that's where I spend the majority of my time these days. But, is the workplace the best place to be making friends? Are coworkers trustworthy enough to be considered friends when you're working in a competitive environment? Or, should work and personal relationships be kept separate?
Personally, I tend to get too comfortable around my coworkers and I say things I probably shouldn't. I think I'm talking to people who are my friends but who actually might be just looking out for their own best interest.
I'm curious, have you ever run into a scenario where workmate friendships turned ugly? Would you recommend making friends at work? Are you friends with coworkers and is it same as the friendships who have outside the company?
UPDATE: Poll Result 4/30/09 - 5/7/09
Do you make friends with coworkers?
28% Close friends
72% Acquaintances
00% No
00% Meh
Personally, I tend to get too comfortable around my coworkers and I say things I probably shouldn't. I think I'm talking to people who are my friends but who actually might be just looking out for their own best interest.
I'm curious, have you ever run into a scenario where workmate friendships turned ugly? Would you recommend making friends at work? Are you friends with coworkers and is it same as the friendships who have outside the company?
UPDATE: Poll Result 4/30/09 - 5/7/09
Do you make friends with coworkers?
28% Close friends
72% Acquaintances
00% No
00% Meh
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Why Talk When You Can Text?
Over the past couple of years, I have found myself communicating more through SMS and email and spending less time talking on the phone. Less than 5 years ago, I was struggling to keep from going over my minutes, yet now, I have the lowest amount of minutes possible on my AT&T plan and forking out the extra money for more SMS messages. The only people I still call on a regular basis are my parents.
Reasons for my distaste in talking on the phone include:
1. When someone calls me, the conversation takes place during the best possible time for the caller; however, it may not be the best time for me. I work, I have a toddler, I have my own stuff going on so how can I give the person on the other end of the line the courtesy of all my attention when I'm on the phone if it's not the best time for me?
2. I hate small talk. I like to cut out the extra motions and get right down to business. SMS and email allow me to get right to the point without the small talk.
3. Talking on the phone takes too much time. Sometimes I don't answer the phone because I just don't want to carry on a lengthy conversation at the time. I can check an email or a text message when I have a few seconds to spare and respond back quickly. More often than not, it is quicker to get ahold of me sending a SMS or email rather than calling me.
I say: If someone calls me, they don't really know me very well. I'm curious, what ways to you prefer to communicate? Is the old fashioned phone call dead?
UPDATE: Poll Results 4/18/09 - 4/25/09
How do you prefer to communicate?
16% Phone call
33% Text message
00% Email
16% Face to face
16% Social networking site
16% Meh
(I realized I should have added "Instant message" as a choice in the poll. If that would have been your choice or any other communication tool, please leave it in the comments. Thanks!)
Reasons for my distaste in talking on the phone include:
1. When someone calls me, the conversation takes place during the best possible time for the caller; however, it may not be the best time for me. I work, I have a toddler, I have my own stuff going on so how can I give the person on the other end of the line the courtesy of all my attention when I'm on the phone if it's not the best time for me?
2. I hate small talk. I like to cut out the extra motions and get right down to business. SMS and email allow me to get right to the point without the small talk.
3. Talking on the phone takes too much time. Sometimes I don't answer the phone because I just don't want to carry on a lengthy conversation at the time. I can check an email or a text message when I have a few seconds to spare and respond back quickly. More often than not, it is quicker to get ahold of me sending a SMS or email rather than calling me.
I say: If someone calls me, they don't really know me very well. I'm curious, what ways to you prefer to communicate? Is the old fashioned phone call dead?
UPDATE: Poll Results 4/18/09 - 4/25/09
How do you prefer to communicate?
16% Phone call
33% Text message
00% Email
16% Face to face
16% Social networking site
16% Meh
(I realized I should have added "Instant message" as a choice in the poll. If that would have been your choice or any other communication tool, please leave it in the comments. Thanks!)
Monday, April 6, 2009
Social Networking Or Social Notworking?
Recently, there has been lot of coverage about a study by the University of Melbourne that states the casual usage of sites like Twitter and Facebook increases productivity at work. The study shows that short breaks allow the mind to rest and thus increase the total concentrate on the days' assignments. While this study makes me feel better about all the times my boss has caught me online, I'm curious what has happened to old fashioned water cooler talk at work?
Would we rather spend our escape from the daily grind catching up on tweets or playing a quick round of Mob Wars instead of having a little face to face conversation with the people we spend 8 hours a day with?
Personally, I enjoy chatting it up with coworkers, but in the age of the iPod, it's hard to find anyone who isn't pumping music into their ear at a ridiculous volume and virtually unable to hear the phone on their desk ring much less engage in idle conversation. Therefor, I get my mental break online as do a lot of employees who have a computer and Internet access. This raises another question: What will become of our social skills? Do we lose the ability to strike up conversation without being in front of a screen? Are we more or less social when our main form of communication with our friends is Facebook?
One factor may be more people these days are keeping their personal and business lives separate and not thinking of the workplace as a setting for making new friends. As I do, more people are eating their lunches at their desks and avoiding the break room in order to do personal browsing. While all this social networking may be good for productivity, is it the best thing for us?
UPDATE: Poll Results 4/6/09 - 4/13/09
Do you feel social networking makes you more productive at work?
55% Yes, it helps
11% No, it interferes with work
33% My job restricts sites
00% Meh
How does social networking affect our ability to communicate in real life?
11% Has no effect
22% People are more social
22% People are less social
44% Meh
Would we rather spend our escape from the daily grind catching up on tweets or playing a quick round of Mob Wars instead of having a little face to face conversation with the people we spend 8 hours a day with?
Personally, I enjoy chatting it up with coworkers, but in the age of the iPod, it's hard to find anyone who isn't pumping music into their ear at a ridiculous volume and virtually unable to hear the phone on their desk ring much less engage in idle conversation. Therefor, I get my mental break online as do a lot of employees who have a computer and Internet access. This raises another question: What will become of our social skills? Do we lose the ability to strike up conversation without being in front of a screen? Are we more or less social when our main form of communication with our friends is Facebook?
One factor may be more people these days are keeping their personal and business lives separate and not thinking of the workplace as a setting for making new friends. As I do, more people are eating their lunches at their desks and avoiding the break room in order to do personal browsing. While all this social networking may be good for productivity, is it the best thing for us?
UPDATE: Poll Results 4/6/09 - 4/13/09
Do you feel social networking makes you more productive at work?
55% Yes, it helps
11% No, it interferes with work
33% My job restricts sites
00% Meh
How does social networking affect our ability to communicate in real life?
11% Has no effect
22% People are more social
22% People are less social
44% Meh
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Facebook's Facelift.
Now that Facebook has switched everyone's profiles over to the new interface, I'm curious how everyone feels about the changes.
As I had mentioned in my previous post, Facebook has implemented these changes to compete with the micro-blogging site Twitter. As a huge fan of Twitter, I see the changes to Facebook as a mild improvement but it's not going to make me dump Twitter and start using Facebook exclusively. Also, I have not heard many positive things from my friends on Facebook. It seems a lot of them are not too happy with these changes, as well as the chatter around the social networking circles has been predominately negative.
As far as I see it, Facebook is competing against a social networking site that most of their members don't care about, otherwise they would already be using sites like Twitter. I think both Facebook and Twitter serve a purpose and meet the needs of different breeds of social networking folks. For instance, Facebook members sign up mostly to keep in touch with close friends and family and find old classmates.
People on Twitter will continue to use Twitter because of what it is, and I highly doubt anyone will start using Facebook more because of these changes. Maybe Facebook should stick to what it's good at and not make such drastic changes that it upsets members who are there to just to communicate with their friends and family.
EDIT: 3/19/09
I'm actually taking back my statement that the changes to Facebook are an improvement. If the only items that showed up in the News Feed were status updates and maybe links, it would be fine. However, I do not care about who gave who a virtual hug or a virtual drink. There is no need to fill my News Feed with every little thing friends do in apps that I have ignored and do not use. I even tried blocking some apps but even that doesn't stop the flood of insignificant posts.
I'm giving Facebook a big FAIL in their attempt to win the social networking war. If you want to find me, I'll be on Twitter!
UPDATE: Poll Results 3/18/09 - 3/35/09
Do you like the new changes to Facebook?
00% Yes, it's an improvement
25% No, but I'll get used to it
25% No, change it back
50% Meh
As I had mentioned in my previous post, Facebook has implemented these changes to compete with the micro-blogging site Twitter. As a huge fan of Twitter, I see the changes to Facebook as a mild improvement but it's not going to make me dump Twitter and start using Facebook exclusively. Also, I have not heard many positive things from my friends on Facebook. It seems a lot of them are not too happy with these changes, as well as the chatter around the social networking circles has been predominately negative.
As far as I see it, Facebook is competing against a social networking site that most of their members don't care about, otherwise they would already be using sites like Twitter. I think both Facebook and Twitter serve a purpose and meet the needs of different breeds of social networking folks. For instance, Facebook members sign up mostly to keep in touch with close friends and family and find old classmates.
People on Twitter will continue to use Twitter because of what it is, and I highly doubt anyone will start using Facebook more because of these changes. Maybe Facebook should stick to what it's good at and not make such drastic changes that it upsets members who are there to just to communicate with their friends and family.
EDIT: 3/19/09
I'm actually taking back my statement that the changes to Facebook are an improvement. If the only items that showed up in the News Feed were status updates and maybe links, it would be fine. However, I do not care about who gave who a virtual hug or a virtual drink. There is no need to fill my News Feed with every little thing friends do in apps that I have ignored and do not use. I even tried blocking some apps but even that doesn't stop the flood of insignificant posts.
I'm giving Facebook a big FAIL in their attempt to win the social networking war. If you want to find me, I'll be on Twitter!
UPDATE: Poll Results 3/18/09 - 3/35/09
Do you like the new changes to Facebook?
00% Yes, it's an improvement
25% No, but I'll get used to it
25% No, change it back
50% Meh
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Why Facebook Can't Compete With Twitter.
Today, Facebook held a press conference to discuss new products and changes to the social networking site. One of the items addressed at the press conference was how Facebook was going to compete with the growing popularity of Twitter. For those unfamiliar with Twitter, it is a social networking and micro-blogging service that allows users to send and receive updates that are 140 character or less. As a huge fan of Twitter, I commend Facebook for trying but good luck competing with Twitter.
Even after reading about the changes Facebook is implementing, I don't think the site's developers get the reason why people like Twitter. It's all about simplicity. People are busy and need a quick way to create an account and start using a site. This is exactly what Twitter offers. New members create an user name and password and they're ready to roll. The only information Twitter asks for is an email address, and the only profile information Twitter asks for is optional and includes: name, location, website, and a short bio. This makes users more comfortable connecting with friends as well as new people beyond their circle of friends.
Facebook is much more complex and has tons of information it asks for in order to connect members with people. Which is fine for connecting only with people they know, but because of all the information on members' profiles on Facebook, many of them will continue to keep their profiles more closed. Then, once members find all their friends on a site like Facebook, the new wears off and they eventually move on to the next new social networking flavor of the month.
The beauty in Twitter's design is it creates a simple way to keep up with friends, meet new interesting people, and follow news stories as they happen all on one page. Although Facebook's new interface looks like a move in the right direction, I don't feel it can compete with Twitter.
Facebook has a banner up on their site saying "Changes to the Home page are coming soon" with a link to preview what the new home page will look like. I'm curious how other Facebook users feel about these changes. And if anyone uses Twitter as well, how does Facebook compare with Twitter? Please share your thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 3/4/09 - 3/11/09
Do you like the new changes to Facebook?
25% Yes
00% No
75% Meh
What is your favorite social networking site?
25% Twitter
37% Facebook
00% Myspace
37% Brightkite
00% Other
00% Meh
Even after reading about the changes Facebook is implementing, I don't think the site's developers get the reason why people like Twitter. It's all about simplicity. People are busy and need a quick way to create an account and start using a site. This is exactly what Twitter offers. New members create an user name and password and they're ready to roll. The only information Twitter asks for is an email address, and the only profile information Twitter asks for is optional and includes: name, location, website, and a short bio. This makes users more comfortable connecting with friends as well as new people beyond their circle of friends.
Facebook is much more complex and has tons of information it asks for in order to connect members with people. Which is fine for connecting only with people they know, but because of all the information on members' profiles on Facebook, many of them will continue to keep their profiles more closed. Then, once members find all their friends on a site like Facebook, the new wears off and they eventually move on to the next new social networking flavor of the month.
The beauty in Twitter's design is it creates a simple way to keep up with friends, meet new interesting people, and follow news stories as they happen all on one page. Although Facebook's new interface looks like a move in the right direction, I don't feel it can compete with Twitter.
Facebook has a banner up on their site saying "Changes to the Home page are coming soon" with a link to preview what the new home page will look like. I'm curious how other Facebook users feel about these changes. And if anyone uses Twitter as well, how does Facebook compare with Twitter? Please share your thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 3/4/09 - 3/11/09
Do you like the new changes to Facebook?
25% Yes
00% No
75% Meh
What is your favorite social networking site?
25% Twitter
37% Facebook
00% Myspace
37% Brightkite
00% Other
00% Meh
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Can I get Another Hit Of Internet?
Last weekend our cable modem died, and we had no broadband connection for three days. As a modern day wired family, no Internet created quite a disturbance. My son was unable to play online games on Noggin.com or NickJr.com, my husband was unable to search for parts to construct his dream car, and I was forced to use Edge on my iPhone to do all my everyday tasks like check my email, balance the checkbook, and Twitter. My husband and I were actually anticipating going to work on Monday just so we could get our fix of high speed Internet.
Once I exchanged the defective cable modem and we were back online at home, my husband proceeds to tell me that he thinks we are addicted to the Internet. I laughed at the very notion, but he was serious and pointed out how hard the past three days had been on us. Yes, it was torture, but I assured him we did not have a problem. I confessed, sure we abuse the Net but that does not mean we are in fact hooked.
Fascinated by the topic, I did as any Internet junkie would do and did some online research. The first Google search result pointed me to an Internet Addiction Test. I took the test and was happy to find I was indeed not out of control. According to my test results:
w00t! :-p
I assume it is possible to be addicted to anything including the Internet. However, I'm sticking to my story and my test results to prove I do not have an unnatural obsession with cyberspace.
I'm curious if you feel there is a such thing as Internet addiction. Do you think you are addicted or know someone who may be addicted to the Internet? Please share your thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 2/19/09 - 2/26/09
How long do you think you could go without Internet?
60% Hours
20% Days
20% Weeks
00% Meh
Once I exchanged the defective cable modem and we were back online at home, my husband proceeds to tell me that he thinks we are addicted to the Internet. I laughed at the very notion, but he was serious and pointed out how hard the past three days had been on us. Yes, it was torture, but I assured him we did not have a problem. I confessed, sure we abuse the Net but that does not mean we are in fact hooked.
Fascinated by the topic, I did as any Internet junkie would do and did some online research. The first Google search result pointed me to an Internet Addiction Test. I took the test and was happy to find I was indeed not out of control. According to my test results:
You are an average on-line user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
w00t! :-p
I assume it is possible to be addicted to anything including the Internet. However, I'm sticking to my story and my test results to prove I do not have an unnatural obsession with cyberspace.
I'm curious if you feel there is a such thing as Internet addiction. Do you think you are addicted or know someone who may be addicted to the Internet? Please share your thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 2/19/09 - 2/26/09
How long do you think you could go without Internet?
60% Hours
20% Days
20% Weeks
00% Meh
Friday, February 13, 2009
Can A Recession Make You Fat?
I've seen reports that predict the economic recession will cause a rise in obesity. The thought is, people will buy cheaper, less healthy food to save money. More people will turn to fast food to feed their families. Basically, it's a consensus that it costs more to eat heathy. I'm curious if this is true.
Recently, my family eats out less and cooks at home more. We hardly ever go out to sit-down restaurants these days, and we eat fast food maybe twice a month at most. At the grocery store, I save money by making more stuff from scratch. Pre-packaged meals can't compete with a home-made meal. We have a deep freeze and I buy meat when it's on sell and freeze it. A lot of produce, like onions and bell peppers, can be chopped and frozen too so it's easily accessible to quickly cook up a nice meal. I even started making pizza at home which is a lot cheaper than delivery pizzerias, not to mention healthier and a lot of fun to make. And yes, some days I feel lazy and we just make spaghetti.
Buying breakfast and lunches during the work week can account for a huge chunk of the budget. We managed to cut those expenses too without cutting back on taste. Either my husband or I have managed to cook breakfast almost every day. Before work, I make breakfast sandwiches on whole wheat bread with egg and turkey with a side of fruit. My husband and I also make lunches to take to work usually consisting of leftovers from the night before or a sandwich or salad.
I feel my family has been eating better since we started being more conscience of our spending habits. It may be a little more work, but I think it's worth it. I don't feel that the recession will cause any weight gain in this household.
I'm curious, how has the economic downturn changed your eating habits? Are you eating less or eating lower quality foods? Or has it caused you to rethink how to feed yourself and your family? Please share you thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 7/13/09 - 2/20/09
Do you think the recession will cause a rise in obesity?
25% Yes
25% No
50% Meh
Recently, my family eats out less and cooks at home more. We hardly ever go out to sit-down restaurants these days, and we eat fast food maybe twice a month at most. At the grocery store, I save money by making more stuff from scratch. Pre-packaged meals can't compete with a home-made meal. We have a deep freeze and I buy meat when it's on sell and freeze it. A lot of produce, like onions and bell peppers, can be chopped and frozen too so it's easily accessible to quickly cook up a nice meal. I even started making pizza at home which is a lot cheaper than delivery pizzerias, not to mention healthier and a lot of fun to make. And yes, some days I feel lazy and we just make spaghetti.
Buying breakfast and lunches during the work week can account for a huge chunk of the budget. We managed to cut those expenses too without cutting back on taste. Either my husband or I have managed to cook breakfast almost every day. Before work, I make breakfast sandwiches on whole wheat bread with egg and turkey with a side of fruit. My husband and I also make lunches to take to work usually consisting of leftovers from the night before or a sandwich or salad.
I feel my family has been eating better since we started being more conscience of our spending habits. It may be a little more work, but I think it's worth it. I don't feel that the recession will cause any weight gain in this household.
I'm curious, how has the economic downturn changed your eating habits? Are you eating less or eating lower quality foods? Or has it caused you to rethink how to feed yourself and your family? Please share you thoughts.
UPDATE: Poll Results 7/13/09 - 2/20/09
Do you think the recession will cause a rise in obesity?
25% Yes
25% No
50% Meh
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Camera Shy?
Sorry about the delay in writing a new blog post! It's been a crazy couple of weeks as the latest flu bug has passed through our house. Everyone is feeling better now and it's back to business as usual :-)
Last Sunday was my husband's birthday as well as The Big Game, so naturally, we threw a party. It was blast! I love hosting and enjoy good food, good drinks, and good friends.
I was hoping to take a few photos to capture the day and share on Facebook. However, my friends did not seem to be as enthusiastic about having their photos taken as I would have thought. Most of my photos were of the back of people's heads because no one was interested in smiling for the camera. In fact, one friend grabbed my iPhone to look at every photo with him in it and proceeded to delete the ones he didn't like. At the end of the day, I was a little sad as I looked over all the photos I had taken. I was hoping for a few more exciting photos. Maybe a couple of goofy shots and some showing people having a good time.
I'm curious, in this day when almost everyone has a camera on them from a cell phone camera to a digital SLR, how do people really few about candid photos taken of them?
UPDATE: Poll Results 2/4/09 - 2/11/09
How do you feel about having your picture taken?
00% Love it
33% Don't mind
66% Sometimes
00% Please don't
Last Sunday was my husband's birthday as well as The Big Game, so naturally, we threw a party. It was blast! I love hosting and enjoy good food, good drinks, and good friends.
I was hoping to take a few photos to capture the day and share on Facebook. However, my friends did not seem to be as enthusiastic about having their photos taken as I would have thought. Most of my photos were of the back of people's heads because no one was interested in smiling for the camera. In fact, one friend grabbed my iPhone to look at every photo with him in it and proceeded to delete the ones he didn't like. At the end of the day, I was a little sad as I looked over all the photos I had taken. I was hoping for a few more exciting photos. Maybe a couple of goofy shots and some showing people having a good time.
I'm curious, in this day when almost everyone has a camera on them from a cell phone camera to a digital SLR, how do people really few about candid photos taken of them?
UPDATE: Poll Results 2/4/09 - 2/11/09
How do you feel about having your picture taken?
00% Love it
33% Don't mind
66% Sometimes
00% Please don't
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
It's Complicated?
On Facebook & many other sites there is a wide variety of relationship status options one can pick from to list on their profile. Facebook gives the following choices:
When it comes to relationship status, I am curious what "It's Complicated" means. As far as I know, you're either in a relationship or not.
Is this a choice for those actually in a relationship but still want to keep their options open? Maybe it's for divorsed couples who still live together to make ends meet. Why not just say you're single or in an open relationship? And why would someone want to hookup with someone who is in a complicated point in their life?
Can someone please share a good reason for selecting the "It's Complicated" relationship status?
UPDATE: Poll Results 1/20/09 - 1/27/09
Do you have a good understanding of the "It's Complicated"
relationship status?
40% I have first hand experience
00% I understand what it means
60% I don't get it
00% Meh
• Single
• In a Relationship
• Engaged
• Married
• It's Complicated
• In an Open Relationship
When it comes to relationship status, I am curious what "It's Complicated" means. As far as I know, you're either in a relationship or not.
Is this a choice for those actually in a relationship but still want to keep their options open? Maybe it's for divorsed couples who still live together to make ends meet. Why not just say you're single or in an open relationship? And why would someone want to hookup with someone who is in a complicated point in their life?
Can someone please share a good reason for selecting the "It's Complicated" relationship status?
UPDATE: Poll Results 1/20/09 - 1/27/09
Do you have a good understanding of the "It's Complicated"
relationship status?
40% I have first hand experience
00% I understand what it means
60% I don't get it
00% Meh
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Whole Grain Bread Is A Lie!
With the start of the new year, I made a conscience effort to try to eat healthier and buy and cook healthier foods for my family. Step one was to add more whole grains to our diet. In the bread isle at our local grocery store, I looked for breads that were labeled "whole grain" and didn't give a second thought as I put the so-called "whole grain" bread into my cart. The following week, I felt good as I ate my breakfast sandwich with my "whole grain" bread. Funny thing was around 9:30 AM I already found myself incredibly hungry. Before, when I was eating my breakfast sandwich on plain white bread, my hunger was kept at bay until around 11:30 AM. I was very curious as to why my "whole grains" were not satisfying my hunger longer as I was under the assumption that whole grains are digested more slowly than refined grains. I started doing some research and discovered I had been duped. My so called "whole grain" bread contained no whole grains at all, but instead contained enriched flour and caramel coloring. Lesson learned, and from now on I'll be reading the ingredients list to make sure "whole wheat flour" is the first item listed.
However, I am surprised at the amount of deceit that food manufacturers are allowed to put on labels and even in the nutritional information listed on the foods we eat. For instance, did you know the FDA allows food manufacturers to round down to zero any ingredient that accounts for less than 0.5 grams per serving? This means any product claiming to be "0 grams of trans fat" may very well contain trans fat. While 0.5 grams per serving does not seem like a significant amount, over time it could add up, especially when you take into consideration very few people actually only eat one serving. So, how do you tell if a food item truly has 0 grams of trans fat? You have to look at the ingredients list. If it lists hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated then trans fat is there.
In this day and age, people are trying to eat healthier. We're told to add more whole grains and eat 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables a day. Picking healthy foods is hard enough without worrying about food manufacturers taking advantage of you. But, who can blame them for trying to profit off the new healthy food trends?
Eat smart and be smart! Read the labels closely and check the ingredients list.
UPDATE: Poll Results 1/12/09 - 1/19/09
Do you think food manufacturers are misleading on food labels?
83% Yes
16 % No
00% Meh
Do you think there should be stricter guidelines on nutrition labels?
83% Yes
16% No
00% Meh
However, I am surprised at the amount of deceit that food manufacturers are allowed to put on labels and even in the nutritional information listed on the foods we eat. For instance, did you know the FDA allows food manufacturers to round down to zero any ingredient that accounts for less than 0.5 grams per serving? This means any product claiming to be "0 grams of trans fat" may very well contain trans fat. While 0.5 grams per serving does not seem like a significant amount, over time it could add up, especially when you take into consideration very few people actually only eat one serving. So, how do you tell if a food item truly has 0 grams of trans fat? You have to look at the ingredients list. If it lists hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated then trans fat is there.
In this day and age, people are trying to eat healthier. We're told to add more whole grains and eat 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables a day. Picking healthy foods is hard enough without worrying about food manufacturers taking advantage of you. But, who can blame them for trying to profit off the new healthy food trends?
Eat smart and be smart! Read the labels closely and check the ingredients list.
UPDATE: Poll Results 1/12/09 - 1/19/09
Do you think food manufacturers are misleading on food labels?
83% Yes
16 % No
00% Meh
Do you think there should be stricter guidelines on nutrition labels?
83% Yes
16% No
00% Meh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
