Facebook is a very popular social networking tool in Trinidad and Tobago - in fact, it's the most viewed website from Trinidad and Tobago. It's a great way to keep in touch with friends - I use it myself. I have nothing against it. But, people, it's not the Internet.
Yesterday, one of my acquaintances on Facebook posted a link to some pictures of another one of their acquaintances that showed the living conditions of the Chinese workers who protested last week because of poor living conditions, amongst other things. The photos were good, though I must admit that I've seen people living under worse conditions within Trinidad and Tobago. Even so, I can't share these images with you because they're on Facebook - not where they could be visible by everyone.
Like a broken record/scratched CD, I once again pointed out that the images would be better off on a photo sharing site like Flickr (I'm partial to Flickr because I've been using it for years. There are others!). And the response I got was, "He doesn't know how to upload them to Flickr. Do you want to upload them?"
I bit back my first and second responses because Flickr's sole purpose is for people to upload pictures. I'm supposed to be an old man compared to the generation coming up: I'm supposed to be the one complaining that I don't know how to do things. What's wrong with you children? Get with it!
Registering a free account on Flickr couldn't be easier; uploading the images can be (arguably) easier than dealing with Facebook's uploading of images. What it boils down to is that (1) he didn't know better and (2) he was uncomfortable with a website which is remarkably simpler than Facebook. I can do nothing about the second but I can address the first.
First, let's talk about Facebook.
The Walled Gardens
Facebook is what we call a 'walled garden'. To Trinbagonians, the concept is similar to that of a gated community. Within the confines, things are well defined and so forth - Facebook has tried to address this in the past and will probably continue to do so, but the fact is that if you post information on your profile... only your friends can see it. If your privacy settings are as loose as my fifth girlfriend, their friends can see it to. But to spread it around is slow - if it is spread.
Broken down for the youths out there: Facebook is a fete where you have to drive around all day to chase down an invite. The Internet is an all inclusive. Facebook, despite what you may think, is not the Internet.
Photo Sharing
Using a photo sharing site like Flickr exposes your images to the general public. And if you really want to, you can post links to those pictures on Facebook - achieving the same goals as showing your friends the images - while allowing others to view the pictures. There's even an application on Facebook which adds a tab to your profile where your recently uploaded pictures can be seen.
So, if you want to share the pictures of living conditions of Chinese Workers, you upload your images to Flickr to your account (create one if you don't have one... did I really need to write that?) and then post links to the pictures on your profile.
Two things happen now: Your friends see the pictures, and other people see the pictures. You can tag the pictures on Flickr, you can't on Facebook - and that means that search engines will find your pictures. Wouldn't it be really cool if some of your pictures showed up in a Google Search? Of course it is, I know - and all I've done differently is... exactly what I'm telling everyone to do. Is it hard? No. Will it hurt? No.
So why aren't you doing it already?
There is a bonus, too - if your images are seen by someone who wants to use them, they may contact you and pay for a license to use them. And if you use a Creative Commons copyright license, as I mentioned in this post, people may use your images in non-commercial ways so that it's more likely to be seen by someone who wants to pay you to use it.
So - your pictures are more easily shared on Flickr and sites like it, you have a chance of making money and... you're posting your images in a walled garden? In what warped version of reality does that make sense?
Video Sharing
I don't know as much about video sharing because I haven't done it that much - but YouTube is the most popular site for it. The accounts are free - just register. Upload the video. Then people can share it across a broader range of media, not just walled gardens.
In Closing
If you don't think your images or video are good enough to share with the general public, by all means - keep posting them in the walled gardens. But if you think that they are good or that they should be spread so more people know about a topic, you shouldn't be posting them in a walled garden like Facebook.
In fact, if you have a good photo under a Creative Commons license that applies to something written about on KnowTnT.com... you may get your photo used. ;-)
Comments
Pingback
October 20, 2009 by A Social Media Example: Looking For V.S. Naipaul | KnowTnT.c (not verified), 45 weeks 3 days ago
Comment id: 19
[...] 20, 2009 by Taran Rampersad In the heels of my last post about Facebook being a walled garden, I decided to play around a little last night. The muse was Karel McIntosh's post on Caribbean [...]
Pingback
October 20, 2009 by Twitter Trackbacks for Facebook, Social Media and Trinidad (not verified), 45 weeks 3 days ago
Comment id: 18
[...] First Tweet 13 hours ago knowprose Taran Rampersad People in #TrinidadandTobago need to understand that #facebook isn't the #internet: http://www.knowtnt.com/node/9 view retweet [...]
yep...
October 19, 2009 by Ian Ramjohn, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 11
I was thinking about contacting the same guy to see if he would be willing to upload those photos somewhere that wasn't FB. In fact, I was thinking about those pictures as I read your posts extolling the virtues of CC-by-NC. (Of course, anyone who's spent as much time on Wikipedia as me hates CC-by-NC because it's a tease. Almost usable...but no, not quite.
Actually what's needed for those pictures is a dedicated website...
CC by-NC
October 19, 2009 by Taran Rampersad, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 13
CC by NC - I take it you mean 'Non-commercial use'. No, it's not a tease. It means that if there is a commercial gain by use of the photo, the commercial use has to be negotiated with the entity that owns the copyright. Everyone else pays.
Wikipedia's use of CC licensing is a bit different in that they want people to give up their images for free - for example, all my images are not compatible for use with Wikipedia. I have chosen on occasion to bend my license for Wikipedia, but I don't see why I should. If someone takes my image and profits from it, I think that I have a right to some of the proceeds or that I should at least be approached about it. Wikipedia image contributors are happy to have their images used by everyone.
In a way, the NC aspect is a bit like the GPL in that enforces content not being stuck in something proprietary and sold. That gets into the BSD-like vs. GPL open source license debate. You probably guessed I firmly advocate the GPL and tolerate BSD-like licenses for much the same reason. If a company will profit off of my code by sticking it in a proprietary package, I think I should get a part of the proceeds.
I suppose that it could be seen as being selfish, but hey - I'll share content, but no one helps me pay my bills, you know?
Oops...
October 19, 2009 by Ian Ramjohn, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 14
Sorry, I should have been clearer. It was clear in my head what I meant!
The main reason I hunt for images is to use them in Wikipedia articles. So when my eye falls on the CC icon, I feel a surge of hope. Which is promptly deflated when I get to the third icon, the NC. I personally prefer to make things freely available only for non-commercial use, but that would be impossible for Wikipedia text, since it really is a collaborative effort, and no one would be able to grant permission for reuse of the text. Images are an entirely different issue.
By the way - what do you think of "NC-ND" - non-commercial, no derivative work? It sometimes strikes me as overly restrictive, since it seems like that would mean that you can't reuse say, a crop of an image. On the other hand, I wouldn't be too thrilled if someone modified an image of mine into something I found offensive.
NC-ND
October 19, 2009 by Taran Rampersad, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 16
Hmm. I don't like NC-ND, but that's really a personal thing I think. I like people taking stuff I do and changing it into other things. There have been some awesome results with some of my photos that had me taking more of an interest in Gimp and other things, for example.
The point about the 'spirit of use' isn't lost on me. I've had images used in ways I don't particularly like... but they were in places that I could comment, so I said something diplomatic that pretty much said, "I never thought the image would be used this way... kind of disappointing. Oh well, maybe someone will do something better with it." :-)
CC released a study on the way non-commercial is perceived. I'll have to dig it up again and read it.... If I find it again, I'll toss you a link to it. You may appreciate it.
Well...
October 19, 2009 by Taran Rampersad, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 12
Honestly, the last 2 posts were intended to be the base for this one - I had it planned out.
It would have been extremely easy for me to upload those pictures to my Flickr account, but I'm pretty tired of doing that. It's so easy that there's really no excuse for others not to do it.
A dedicated website for those pictures? I disagree, and I'll explain why.
First, bandwidth. Flickr eats the bandwidth when you use images from Flickr - therefore, your hosting bandwidth uses less which effectively means you pay more for less. That's a big deal. I went to a Flickr Pro account years ago because of that. The amount you save in disk storage and bandwidth alone makes my $25/year well spent.
Second, image resizing can be done on a site but takes up CPU time. While Flickr doesn't dynamically resize, it has presized images stored for use. Amazingly simple to do. All you do is copy and paste HTML from Flickr.
Last, but not least - Flickr gets indexed better by search engines, it seems, than many other sites. I imagine other photo sharing sites have the same ability.
So, by outsourcing image hosting, you save money and spread things faster. And on top of that, Flickr has a solid community that looks at each others pictures and shares them as well.
A dedicated site for pictures would easily get bogged down eventually. With Flickr and sites like it, they just keep adding servers.
true...
October 19, 2009 by Ian Ramjohn, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 15
You're right. Poorly thought-out idea. My brain jumped ahead to "this deserves to be documented by something more than just the pictures", thereby forgetting the whole point of virality and the internet. Sorry, have a cold, brain isn't working as well as it should :)
Bah. Don't Worry. :-)
October 19, 2009 by Taran Rampersad, 45 weeks 4 days ago
Comment id: 17
A lot of people seem to think that way and part of the post was to address things like that. So I should thank your cold brain for being cold... it made me answer something that I left out. :-)