essay uses of facebook

Home — Essay Samples — Business — Corporations — Facebook

Essays on Facebook

Facebook has become an integral part of our daily lives, influencing the way we communicate, socialize, and consume information. As a result, it has also become a popular topic for essays across various disciplines. Whether you're an aspiring journalist, a social media marketer, or a sociology student, choosing the right Facebook essay topic is crucial for a successful paper. In this guide, we'll discuss the importance of the topic, provide advice on choosing a topic, and offer a detailed list of recommended essay topics, divided by category.

Writing an essay about Facebook can provide valuable insights into the impact of social media on society, the psychology of online interactions, and the business strategies of a tech giant. The right topic can help you explore these themes in depth and offer new perspectives on the role of Facebook in our lives. Additionally, choosing a relevant and engaging topic can make your essay stand out and capture the reader's attention from the start.

When choosing a Facebook essay topic, consider your interests and the specific focus of your assignment. Are you writing for a psychology class? A communications course? Or perhaps a business management program? Tailoring your topic to your discipline can help you delve into the subject matter more effectively. Additionally, consider the current trends and controversies surrounding Facebook, as these can inspire thought-provoking essay topics.

30 Facebook Essay Topics for Different Occasions and Interests

Psychology and sociology.

• The impact of Facebook on self-esteem and body image
• Online friendships and social capital on Facebook
• The psychology of online interactions: anonymity and self-disclosure
• The role of Facebook in social movements and activism
• Facebook addiction and its psychological effects
• The influence of Facebook on relationships and communication

Marketing and Business

• Facebook's advertising algorithms and targeting strategies
• The impact of Facebook on consumer behavior and purchasing decisions
• Brand management and reputation on Facebook
• The role of influencers and sponsored content on Facebook
• The ethical implications of data mining and user privacy on Facebook
• Facebook's role in digital marketing and social media campaigns

Media and Journalism

• The influence of Facebook on news consumption and media literacy
• Fact-checking and misinformation on Facebook
• The role of Facebook in shaping public opinion and political discourse
• The impact of Facebook's algorithms on content visibility and news distribution
• The future of journalism in the age of Facebook and social media
• Facebook's role in shaping the public narrative and agenda setting

Law and Ethics

• Regulatory challenges and legal issues surrounding Facebook
• User rights and data protection on Facebook
• The ethical implications of targeted advertising and data collection on Facebook
• The role of Facebook in shaping public discourse and freedom of speech
• Comparative analysis of Facebook's privacy policies and practices
• The intersection of antitrust laws and Facebook's market dominance

Technology and Innovation

• Facebook's impact on technology and digital innovation
• The future of virtual reality and Facebook's involvement
• Facebook's data collection and privacy concerns in the age of AI
• Comparing Facebook's features and evolution with other tech giants
• The role of Facebook in shaping the future of communication and connectivity

With these recommended essay topics, you can explore the multifaceted impact of Facebook on society, business, and culture. Whether you're interested in psychology, marketing, journalism, or ethics, there's a wealth of compelling topics to choose from. By selecting a topic that aligns with your interests and expertise, you can craft a well-researched and insightful essay that contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding Facebook and its influence on our lives.

Dangers of Facebook

The complex relationships between tech giants and governments, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Leadership Style of Mark Zuckerberg

Evolution of social media in modern marketing, benefits and disadvantages of concerning using facebook, the popularity of facebook and reasons to use it, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Assessment of The Pros and Cons of Facebook as a Social Platform

Pros and cons of social media: analysis of facebook, the understanding of university students toward fake news on facebook, disadvantages of adolescent communication on facebook, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Social Media Echo Chambers: Good Or Bad

Mark zukerberg's entrepreneurial story, facebook and its effect on female representation, mark zuckerberg: co-founder of the social-networking website facebook, facebook: how a college experiment changed the world, positives and negatives of the facebook analytica scandal, facebook’s algorithm: code to the new bible, technologies of labour and the politics of contradiction, a report on facebook social networking corporation, the youngest billionaire mark zuckerberg, two ways to attract activity from facebook to your organizations, own cryptocurrency should be launced by facebook, a case study of analyzing facebook posts of different bangladeshi newspapers, my attitude to the advertising on facebook, facebook's war on free will, facebook and the use of uncertainty reduction theory, effect of facebook on our emotional state, why facebook should be banned: the case of indian teenagers, self-disclosure in digital and interpersonal communication, the impact and future of facebook, relevant topics.

• Comparative Analysis
• Madam Cj Walker
• Advertisement
• John D. Rockefeller
• Time Management

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Essay On Facebook For Students

Table of Contents

Essay On Facebook: In today’s digital age, Facebook has become an integral part of our lives. Whether you’re a casual user or a dedicated enthusiast, this social media platform has left a significant mark on our society. In this article, we’ll explore Facebook through the lens of essays of varying lengths—100, 200, 300, and 500 words—to provide you with insights into its history, impact, and relevance.

Fill Out the Form for Expert Academic Guidance!

Please indicate your interest Live Classes Books Test Series Self Learning

Verify OTP Code (required)

I agree to the terms and conditions and privacy policy .

Fill complete details

Target Exam ---

Long and Short Essays on Facebook

Whether you need a short, concise 100-word essay or a more descriptive 500-word lengthy essay, this page is all you need to refer to. Check out some of the sample essays on Facebook below.

Short Essay on Facebook of 100 Words

Facebook, launched in a Harvard dorm room in 2004, has grown into a global phenomenon. With its user-friendly interface and features, it connects people across continents. Users can post updates, photos, and videos, and engage with others through likes, comments, and shares. The platform has not only transformed personal relationships but also become a vital marketing tool for businesses.

However, Facebook has faced criticism for privacy breaches and the spread of misinformation. Data privacy concerns led to regulatory scrutiny, prompting the company to make changes. Moreover, the propagation of fake news has raised questions about the platform’s role in shaping public opinion.

In conclusion, Facebook’s impact on society is undeniable. It has brought people closer and facilitated global communication. Yet, it faces challenges related to privacy and content integrity, underscoring the need for responsible use.

200 Words Essay on Facebook

Facebook, a brainchild of Mark Zuckerberg and his college roommates, was launched as a social networking platform in 2004. Over the years, it has transformed from a simple college network to a global giant with over 2 billion monthly users.

One of Facebook’s defining features is its ability to connect people worldwide. Users can share text, photos, videos, and links with friends and family, fostering personal connections and providing a platform for self-expression.

From a business perspective, Facebook has become an essential marketing tool. Companies leverage its extensive user data to target advertisements effectively, reaching a vast audience. This has revolutionized digital advertising, making it more targeted and cost-effective.

Despite its many benefits, Facebook has faced its share of controversies. Privacy breaches and data misuse have eroded user trust, leading to increased scrutiny from governments and regulators. The platform has also grappled with the spread of fake news and misinformation, which can have real-world consequences.

In conclusion, Facebook’s impact on society is undeniable. It has redefined how we connect, communicate, and do business. However, it also faces challenges related to privacy and content integrity, highlighting the need for responsible use and vigilant oversight.

Essay on Facebook of 300 Words

Facebook, born in a Harvard dorm room in 2004, has evolved into a global juggernaut that has transformed the way we communicate, connect, and conduct business. At its core, Facebook is a social networking platform that enables users to create profiles, share updates, photos, videos, and connect with others through friend requests and follows. With over 2 billion monthly users, it has redefined how we maintain relationships, bridging geographical divides and allowing us to stay connected with loved ones across the globe.

From a business perspective, Facebook has revolutionized marketing and advertising. Its sophisticated algorithms and extensive user data allow businesses to target their advertisements with pinpoint accuracy, maximizing their reach and impact. This has democratized advertising, giving even small businesses the opportunity to compete on a global scale.

However, Facebook has not been without its challenges. One of the most significant issues it faces is concerns over user privacy. High-profile data breaches and the unauthorized sharing of user data have eroded trust in the platform. Governments and regulatory bodies have responded with increased scrutiny and regulations to protect user information.

Another pressing issue is the spread of fake news and misinformation on the platform. Facebook’s algorithm-driven content delivery system has been criticized for creating echo chambers and facilitating the dissemination of false information, which can have real-world consequences.

Despite these challenges, Facebook remains a dominant force in the digital landscape. It has expanded its ecosystem with acquisitions like Instagram and WhatsApp, further solidifying its position in the social media realm.

In conclusion, Facebook has left an indelible mark on our society. It has revolutionized how we connect, communicate, and conduct business. While it offers numerous benefits, it also faces pressing issues related to privacy and content integrity. As users and society at large, it is our responsibility to navigate these challenges and ensure that Facebook continues to be a force for positive change.

500 Words Long Essay on Facebook

Facebook is a social media platform that has revolutionized the way people connect and interact with each other. With over 2.85 billion monthly active users, it has become the most popular social networking site in the world. In this essay, I will discuss the various aspects of Facebook, including its impact on communication, privacy concerns, addiction, and social activism.

Firstly, Facebook has greatly improved communication by providing a platform for people to connect and share information instantly. Through features such as posting status updates, sharing photos and videos, and sending private messages, users can easily stay in touch with friends and family, regardless of their physical location. Facebook has made it possible to reconnect with long-lost friends and foster new relationships, all within the virtual realm.

However, along with the benefits of communication, Facebook also brings about privacy concerns. The vast amount of personal information shared willingly by users makes them vulnerable to security threats and identity theft. Moreover, the constant tracking and data collection carried out by Facebook raises concerns about the misuse and exploitation of personal data. It is crucial for users to be cautious about the information they share and be aware of the privacy settings provided by Facebook to protect their personal data.

Another aspect of Facebook that has gained attention is addiction. The addictive nature of social media platforms, including Facebook, has been widely researched and debated. The constant need for likes, comments, and validation fuels a cycle of gratification that can lead to excessive use and detachment from the offline world. The constant scrolling and engagement with virtual content can result in reduced productivity, anxiety, and social isolation. It is essential for users to maintain a healthy balance between their online and offline lives to prevent addiction and its negative consequences.

Lastly, Facebook has become a powerful tool for social activism and raising awareness on various issues. The ease of sharing information and organizing events has enabled activists to reach larger audiences and mobilize support for their causes. From political campaigns to fundraising for charitable organizations, Facebook has provided a platform for individuals to engage in meaningful dialogue and create social change.

In conclusion, Facebook has revolutionized communication and connected people like never before. However, it is important to navigate its usage responsibly and consider the privacy concerns and addiction risks. With its immense reach, Facebook can also be leveraged for social activism and bringing about positive change. As we continue to navigate the digital world, it is crucial to be mindful of the impact that platforms like Facebook have on our lives and society as a whole.

FAQs on Facebook Essay

What is facebook.

Facebook is a popular social networking platform founded in 2004, allowing users to connect, share content, and communicate with friends and family online.

Who created Facebook?

Facebook was founded by Mark Zuckerberg and his college roommates in 2004.

How has Facebook impacted society?

Facebook has transformed communication, connecting people globally and revolutionizing digital marketing for businesses.

What is the few lines about Facebook?

Facebook is a popular social networking platform founded in 2004, enabling users to connect, share content, and communicate with friends and family online.

What is the importance of Facebook?

The importance of Facebook lies in its role as a global communication tool, fostering personal connections, and serving as a powerful marketing platform for businesses.

What is the summary of Facebook?

Facebook is a leading social media platform with over 2 billion users, connecting people worldwide and revolutionizing digital marketing.

What is the main purpose of Facebook?

The main purpose of Facebook is to facilitate online social interaction, allowing users to connect, share, and communicate with others, whether they're friends, family, or businesses.

Most Popular

10 days ago

Inspiration vs Plagiarism

How to write a synthesis essay.

11 days ago

How to Cite a Bill

How to write a 5 paragraph essay, openai prepares to launch web search feature for chatgpt, rivaling google and perplexity, the pros and cons of using facebook essay sample, example.

Facebook is a great way to keep in touch with people who are far away. According to surveys, friends who reside in different countries and use Facebook to communicate with each other display a more optimistic mood and feel calmer about those who are close to them, compared to those who do not use any social networks, or use only email (IFR Database). People who use Facebook tend to feel like they are in touch with the rest of the world regardless of distances, and this sensation makes them feel better.

Facebook is a reasonable option for people who want to stay updated with the news of the topics that are of interest to them. Joining various communities regarding all kinds of activities, and receiving updates from them turn Facebook into an easy-to-use, completely-customizable newsline. Hence, Facebook can be a useful tool for those who need to receive operational and fresh information.

At the same time, Facebook is known to be a factor that distorts one’s perception of reality, declines the satisfaction of one’s life and personality, and negatively affects relationships between people. According to the research held by Ethan Kross of the University of Michigan and Philippe Verduyn of Leuven University, people who use Facebook often display a growing dissatisfaction with their lives, whereas respondents who use Facebook infrequently and socialize with peers in real life felt happier and healthier (The Economist).

The same research showed how the most common emotion experienced by people who regularly use Facebook is envy. This is due to the fact that people usually do their best to make their lives look better than they are in reality, and at the same time believe in the reality of “virtual lives” created by other Facebook users.

Facebook can be dangerous for teenagers and children. Parents who would like to protect their children from negative information on the Internet should consider how Facebook is full of links to other media resources, some of which can be explicit. Whereas it is possible, to some extent, to control a child’s use of Facebook, it is impossible to predict where browsing these links could lead them (TheOnlineMom). Due to the same reason, parents have a right to feel worried about the friends of friends. One can know all the friends of their children, but these friends have other friends, who can have a negative influence on these children.

Facebook is a tool which should be used with caution. Though it is a convenient way to stay in touch with friends and acquaintances who live far away, and to stay updated about events which are of interest for a particular person, it can also have negative impacts on one’s personality. For example, Facebook causes its regular users to feel envious about the lives of other people; it can also provoke dissatisfaction with one’s own life, especially compared to people who socialize more in real life rather than online. The relationship Facebook has with the world is bittersweet: but we may witness its relationship turn for the worse in the coming decades.

“Get a Life!” The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 17 Aug. 2013. Web. 07 Mar. 2014. <http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21583593-using-social-network-seems-make-people-more-miserable-get-life>.

“The Pros and Cons of Facebook for Kids.” TheOnlineMom. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2014. <http://theonlinemom.com/secondary.asp?id=1275>

“What’s Wrong About Facebook?” IFR Database. 25 Jun. 2011. Web. 07 Mar. 2014.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Comments are closed.

More from Analytical Essay Examples and Samples 2024

Nov 28 2023

Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory

Nov 27 2023

Another Brick In The Wall Meaning

Themes in The Crucible

Related writing guides, writing an analysis essay.

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Conflict Studies
• Development
• Environment
• Foreign Policy
• Human Rights
• International Law
• Organization
• International Relations Theory
• Political Communication
• Political Economy
• Political Geography
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Sexuality and Gender
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Security Studies
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Using facebook as an educational resource in the classroom.

• Carolyn M. Shaw Carolyn M. Shaw Strategic Enrollment Management, Wichita State University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.114
• Published in print: 01 December 2015
• Published online: 20 November 2017
• This version: 20 November 2017
• Previous version

Facebook is a social networking site created in 2004 which has since obtained over a billion users, and it has the potential to facilitate learning in the classroom. With the widespread use of Facebook in society, it simply makes sense to look into ways it might be used in higher education. In fact, a number of studies have been done by scholars in different disciplines regarding the use of Facebook (in general and in academia). These include studies by scholars in library science, education, media and communication, psychology, management information systems, business, political science, marketing, instructional technology, and commerce and accounting. Students come to school wired and are willing and eager to use technology, but higher education has a well-established trend toward non-adoption of new technologies. A variety of studies on the use of Facebook, however, indicate that there are a wide number of potential benefits to using Facebook as an educational tool. There are four inter-related potential benefits: creating a sense of community and promoting collaboration, enhancing communication between instructors and students, developing computer literacy and language skills, and incorporating current student culture into the learning environment. In addition, Facebook is particularly well suited for sharing and discussion of current events in the news.

• social media
• higher education
• educational tools
• learning environment
• educational resources

Introduction

As instructors in higher education seek new ways to connect with their students in order to facilitate learning, they are increasingly experimenting with a variety of new technologies in the classroom. One technology that has been incorporated to only a limited extent, but that has potential, is the use of the social networking site Facebook. Facebook was created in 2004 specifically for use among students at Harvard University but quickly became available to universities across the United States, and eventually to the general public around the world in 2006 . Use of Facebook has since skyrocketed from 100 million users in 2008 to 1.3 billion users in 2014 (Facebook Statistics, 2014 ). There are many other similar technologies, such as Google+, MySpace, LinkedIn, and Twitter, but only Twitter approaches the high number of users that Facebook has. In March 2014 , 82% of Internet users worldwide had Facebook accounts. Because of its wide usage, Facebook provides a readily accessible platform that can be adapted for educational purposes, given thoughtful planning and curricular design. There are many other online applications that can enhance learning, such as blogs, wikis, and discussion boards, but the focus here is specifically on the use of social media in the classroom. For a good discussion of blogging and wikis, see Lawrence and Dion ( 2010 ) as well as the track summaries of Teaching with Technology from the annual APSA Teaching and Learning Conference.

The potential benefits and possible drawbacks to using Facebook in an educational context will be explored. Facebook is briefly described in terms of its functionality and common terminology. Previous studies about the uses of Facebook, broadly as well as in an academic setting, are reviewed. Specific examples of different options for incorporating Facebook as a pedagogical tool are presented.

Description of Facebook Functionality and Terminology

Components of Facebook for those who are not familiar with the platform are described, but note that Facebook functionality changes frequently and some of these descriptions may not remain entirely accurate in the future. New functionality might not be included in this description. In order to use Facebook, all users must create their own account and profile. Profiles contain basic information about the user including name, birthday, relationship status, contact information, group associations, and a photo, as well as background information about “favorites” such as books, movies, music, etc. Users can choose to provide very minimal profile information, or can be quite detailed. Users can choose to post status updates regularly, which might include a simple text statement (e.g., I am really busy today!) or a photo with or without text (e.g., picture of my cat lying on my laundry). Users can also share links to other web pages or to postings that other users have made. All of these posts can be viewed in a user’s news feed .

In order to create a network of people to interact with on Facebook, a user can search for other users by name and send a friend request to them. When this request is approved, the user can view postings by them and vice versa. There are a number of privacy controls that allow users to select how much of their information is shared with different friends. Communication between friends can take a variety of forms including messaging (similar to sending an email), chatting (instant messaging), posting comments on a user’s wall (publicly viewed space for each user), liking a post made by someone else (signaling that you have viewed and like their post), or commenting on a post (making a response to a statement, photo, or link).

In addition to personal profiles, Facebook also provides for the creation of pages and groups . Facebook page s are often associated with businesses, organizations, or institutions. In this context, a common Facebook page might be affiliated with a university or an academic department. Pages are public and visible to all users on Facebook. Users can choose to like the page and will receive status updates that are posted by that organization. Pages are often used to communicate upcoming events and other news to large numbers of people who have an interest in the organization or institution. Groups are designed to create communities of people who share a common connection, allowing them to organize, discuss issues, post photos, and share related content. Group settings might be open , allowing anyone to join, or closed , requiring an invitation from the group administrator. Settings also allow the administrator to determine whether postings to the group page are private, to be seen only by group members, or public. Groups have slightly more functionality in terms of sharing information. Members can create and share files and pose survey questions to the group. All posts made on the group page appear in the members’ newsfeed. More discussion about how to use these different Facebook tools is found in the section “Using Facebook in the Classroom (and Beyond).”

Brief Overview of Scholarly Literature

A number of studies have been done by scholars in different disciplines regarding the use of Facebook (in general and in academia). Sources include studies by scholars in library science, education, media and communication, psychology, management information systems, business, political science, marketing, instructional technology, and commerce and accounting. One unexpected discovery was that a large number of librarians seem to be exploring the possibilities of Facebook and other social network sites. Many studies are based on surveys of students and faculty regarding their usage of and attitudes toward Facebook. One of the most comprehensive reviews of these recent studies is by Hew ( 2011 ), who looks at 36 separate empirical studies that include surveys as well as content analyses. Drawing on all of these sources, he divides his findings into two categories: (1) a Student Facebook Usage Profile, which includes motivations for usage, usage patterns, and privacy settings, and (2) the Effects of Using Facebook, which includes self-disclosure effects, online discussions, academic performance, and student attitudes. Based on data from these 36 studies, the results reveal that students mostly use Facebook for social interaction to maintain existing offline relationships (77% reported none of their Facebook friends originated online). Very little content is related to education (4% of total postings). A large majority (91%) reported that they had never contacted academic staff using Facebook. On average, students spend about 40 minutes per day on Facebook and have between 150 and 350 friends in their network. Disclosure and privacy settings varied, with students more willingly sharing their birthdays, hometowns, and email addresses than their phone numbers and physical addresses.

One of the challenges in drawing on the insights of Hew and other studies is that statistical survey data rapidly becomes outdated when discussing technologies such as social networking sites (SNS). There has been a rapid evolution in societal perceptions and uses of the Internet since the early 2000s (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, & Witty, 2010 ). In addition, many of the experiments that have been conducted have had a fairly narrow scope and thus cannot answer all of the questions raised about usage of social networking sites. For example, one study tested student attitudes about an instructor’s Facebook profile with the instructor being a female under 40. It seems likely that were this repeated with a male faculty member over 40 the results might vary notably (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2009 ). There is thus room for many more studies in order to gain a more complete understanding, as well as to follow the most recent trends in usage and social attitudes. It is also important to look at the data results specifically, not just the author’s interpretations, because some draw negative conclusions from data that others view as positive. For example, one study indicates that over 60% of students are willing to “friend” teachers (Sturgeon & Walker, 2009 ). This could be characterized as “a majority” of students are willing to friend their instructors, or could be framed as “barely half” are willing to do so. People must draw their own conclusions about whether a glass is “half empty” or “half full” based on the data available.

Overall, the numerous studies that have been conducted provide useful insights to instructors for moving forward and considering the potentials for incorporating Facebook into the classroom.

Potential Benefits to Using Facebook as an Educational Tool

With the widespread use of Facebook in society, it simply makes sense to look into ways it might be used in the classroom. Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, and Witty argue students come to school wired and are willing and eager to use technology, but “higher education has a well-established trend toward non-adoption of new technologies” ( 2010 , p. 134). A variety of studies on the use of Facebook, however, indicates that there are a wide number of potential benefits to using Facebook as an educational tool. Four inter-related potential benefits: (1) creating a sense of community and promoting collaboration, (2) enhancing communication between instructors and students, (3) developing computer literacy and language skills, and (4) incorporating current student culture into the learning environment are explored. Facebook is particularly well suited for sharing and discussion of current events in the news. Note that these benefits do not imply that Facebook should be used primarily to deliver content, but it could be used supplementally to promote student reflection on content delivered through other teaching methods.

Creating Community/Promoting Collaboration

Some of the most obvious potential benefits to incorporating the use of Facebook into the classroom stem from the basis that Facebook is designed as a social networking site (SNS). For instructors who see teaching as establishing a relationship with students, Facebook may be an effective way to connect (Roblyer et al., 2010 ). There are many challenges to building relationships with students, including constraints that limit students’ discretionary time on campus due to part-time work, children, or long commutes, as well as online courses that limit face-to-face time (Schwartz, 2009 ). With decreased time on campus, Facebook has the potential to be a “new commons . . . a place where the diverse parts of a community . . . come together and hold a conversation with a shared sense of participation and responsibility” (Dales et al. as cited in Schwartz, 2009 ).

The most common reason Facebook users state for using the site is to connect with friends (Hew, 2011 ). Although users interact most frequently with those whom they already know, Facebook can be used to extend their network to people in their classes whom they have not met previously. Schwartz ( 2009 ) also writes about the potential for Facebook to create space for mentoring between instructors and students. She cites a model developed by Jean Baker Miller that describes “mentoring episodes,” brief interactions that build relationships. Five factors that strengthen mentoring relationships are episodes that increase energy and well-being, increase potential to take action, increase knowledge of self and others, give a boost to self esteem, and promote an interest in more connection. Not all Facebook interactions meet these criteria, but sometimes they can.

Facebook can create a sense of community among users, which can lead to greater collaboration and sharing of ideas that promote learning. Muñoz and Towner ( 2011 ) refer to social constructivist learning theory, noting that learning is actively constructed by comparing material to what individuals already know. Thus the more opportunity for dialogue and sharing of ideas, the more learning can take place. This can be done through formal learning with clear curricular structure, or through informal learning with fewer or no guidelines.

Similarly, Ractham and Firpo discuss learning within “communities of practice.” These are “a method for helping create the authentic situations, activities, and contexts for generating and sharing tacit knowledge. Communities of practice are groups of people who share a common concern or passion and seek to learn it better through interaction with others within the group. Communities of practice help foster a culture of learning in which learners share their prior experience and learn from the experience of others” ( 2011 , p. 2).

Creating a learning community is particularly challenging and important for hybrid or online courses where students don’t have the opportunity to meet face-to-face often or at all. The online format can also benefit socially shy students who find it difficult to engage in person, but who are willing to make contributions in an online venue. (This has been recognized through the use of discussion boards in course management tools such as Blackboard.) Developing technologies (Web 2.0) allow students who might be less involved, introverted, or simply unable to show up to class, to be engaged. If only 20% of students in a given classroom are willing to participate, technologies can be used to break down the participation barriers for the other 80% (Ractham & Firpo, 2011 ). This is described as the “long tail” phenomenon, with the head being the 20% of active students and the tail being the 80% of inactive students.

None of this is meant to suggest, however, that students will voluntarily engage in such social interactions without being required to do so for a grade. Although a few might take full advantage of such opportunities to interact, most will require a further incentive to engage in dialogue and an exchange of ideas with their peers.

Enhancing Communication

A similar potential benefit to that of creating community is using Facebook to enhance communication. Any resource that helps instructors and students communicate more clearly or more frequently is likely to be beneficial to the educational experience. To the extent that Facebook can increase the quantity or quality of communications between instructors and students and between students and their peers, it should be considered as a possible teaching tool. A survey by Roblyer et al. ( 2010 ) indicates that students communicate as frequently with Facebook as they do with email, whereas instructors are far more likely to rely exclusively on email for communication. Libraries recognize that they need to connect to their patrons before they can offer services to them. Students often prefer to ask their reference questions online by email or Facebook (if offered) than face-to-face (Roblyer et al., 2010 ). In a survey by Mazer, Murphy, and Simonds ( 2007 ), students specifically suggested that instructors use Facebook as a way of communicating with their students. Similarly, Sturgeon and Walker ( 2009 ) note that students appear more willing to communicate with instructors if they already know them through Facebook. More students agreed that they communicate more often with instructors if they have a Facebook account, and that they have an additional connectedness in the classroom as a result of Facebook connections (Sturgeon & Walker, 2009 ). Facebook also has a high convenience factor, as a student at one institution noted “I usually use my mobile phone to answer the question in the discussion forum . . . I can do it on the go” (Ractham & Firpo, 2011 , p. 9). With email usage by students falling in recent years and use of social networking sites (SNS) and text messaging increasing, the potential for increased communication through Facebook seems high. Facebook can be used by instructors to enhance their accessibility to students by placing themselves in the space where students are: online with SNS.

Some studies show that instructors can even enhance their own credibility and connection with students through their use of Facebook. Muñoz and Towner ( 2011 ) note that Facebook profiles can increase a user’s social presence and facilitate more personalized interactions, making instructors more accessible and relatable. Mazer et al. ( 2007 ) further reveal that Facebook profiles that are high in self-disclosure have the potential to increase students’ motivation and affective learning, based on a survey of students who viewed instructor profiles that were more or less revealing. A follow-up study revealed that students tended to perceive instructors with high disclosure profiles as more caring and trustworthy (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2009 ).

Facebook can also be used by students to communicate with their classmates about their courses. Lampe, Wohn, Vitak, Ellison, and Wash ( 2011 ) note the potential for students to collaborate on Facebook in order to “reduce ambiguity” in a class, in other words, to seek clarification on assignments and class expectations. Facebook and similar technologies can also be used by students working in groups to engage in “collaborative sense making,” using technology to build on each other’s knowledge and search for additional information (Lampe et al., 2011 ). Beyond simply clarifying assignments, collaboration might also include arranging to meet for a group project, to study for an exam, or to get help on an assignment. Lampe et al. ( 2011 ) conducted two studies examining which factors influenced student propensity to use Facebook for classroom collaboration. They discovered that intensity of personal usage and the willingness to contact an instructor through Facebook were both positively correlated with the likelihood of using Facebook for collaboration in a class. Some studies indicate that students prefer Facebook to other course management software (Chu & Meulemans, 2008 ). Schroeder and Greenbowe ( 2009 ) have discovered that students posted four times the number of posts in a Facebook discussion forum than they did in a WebCT site. A study by Karlin reports that 60% of students using social network sites talk about education online, and 50% talk about specific school work ( 2007 , p. 7). Students indicate that Facebook would be “convenient” for classwork (Roblyer et al., 2010 , p. 136). All of these studies suggest that Facebook is an effective medium for communication in the university setting.

Developing Skills

Another potential benefit to employing Facebook in the classroom is to promote computer literacy skills. Muñoz and Towner ( 2011 ) note that literacy practices are “moving well beyond the printed medium to embrace the digital realm,” with new terms emerging such as “new media literacy,” “digital literacy,” and “ twenty first century literacy.” They also note the need for students to learn “e-professionalism,” distinguishing between their personal and professional identities. When Facebook is incorporated into the educational setting, all of these skill areas can be developed.

In addition to teaching computer literacy skills, Facebook can also be used to help students develop their writing and communication skills. A study by Greenhow and Robelia ( 2009 ) indicates that students using social networking sites are creative in their self expression and consciously differentiate their communication choices based on audience, thus using many of the same editing and proofreading skills emphasized in the classroom. There is also considerable potential with regard to developing language skills for non-native English speakers. Kabilan, Ahmad, and Abidin ( 2010 ) conducted a survey of 300 undergraduate students at a university in Malaysia in 2008 inquiring about the suitability of Facebook as a tool for improving students’ English-language skills. Reflecting on their personal use of Facebook for socializing, over 70% of students agreed that Facebook enhanced their confidence in reading and writing in English. It also increased their motivation to learn English (pp. 183–184). Open-ended questions revealed that student interactions on Facebook were effective at building new vocabulary. When students saw new words, they would look them up and often use them later themselves. Kabilan et al. emphasize that Facebook allows for incidental learning, learning that occurs as an unplanned result of engaging in other activities (academic or non-academic). They note that learning can take place in informal settings as long as there are meaningful interactions between learners that lead to knowledge construction (p. 181). Facebook allows for authentic communication, where users are focused on meaningful communication, not the formal mechanics of language learning. The casual writing in Facebook allows creativity and expression without as much pressure for perfection sometimes demanded in the classroom. Kabilan et al.’s study notes the potential, but does not actually examine how Facebook might be deliberately incorporated into an educational setting.

Incorporating Culture

A final potential benefit of using Facebook is the opportunity to incorporate contemporary student culture into the classroom. By being online with Facebook, teachers become more aware of the current pop culture references to which their students are exposed. This awareness can be used to incorporate current events and culture as examples to help students connect with the course materials (Sturgeon & Walker, 2009 ). Placing abstract concepts in a real-life context can deepen students’ understanding of difficult course material. Teachers may also enhance their credibility with students by showing how they understand current cultural contexts.

Challenges and Limitations to the Use of Facebook

Despite the many potential benefits of using Facebook, there are also some challenges and limitations to be considered. Many of these concerns are manageable if one is aware of the limits and seeks to proactively address them.

Professionalism

One of the concerns raised most frequently by both instructors and students when considering the use of Facebook in an educational setting is the potential erosion of professional boundaries (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007 ; Muñoz & Towner, 2011 ). It is important that instructors understand how to interact with students in a way that promotes a positive perception of the teacher and classroom environment while not engaging in behaviors that might be perceived as harmful. The term “creepy tree house” has been used to describe an environment where students feel insecure because instructors are encroaching on their online space (Muñoz & Towner, 2011 ). Several scholars have conducted surveys asking student opinions about the appropriateness of instructors using Facebook. The results are ambiguous, varying from survey to survey. Mazer et al. find that 33% of students report that teacher use of Facebook is somewhat inappropriate , 35% report somewhat appropriate , 4% agree that it is very inappropriate , and 6% report very appropriate ( 2007 , p. 10). Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, and Witty found that 26% would “welcome the opportunity to connect with teachers on Facebook” and 22% felt that “Facebook is personal/social—not for education” ( 2010 , p. 138).

In an effort to identify which types of interactive behaviors are considered most appropriate, Teclehaimanot and Hickman ( 2011 ) conducted a survey of 52 undergraduate and graduate education students at the University of Toledo. They categorized interactions as passive (reading profile information, viewing photos, watching videos that someone else has posted) or as active (sending a message, commenting on photos, sending a “poke” to engage another user). Surprisingly, Teclehaimanot and Hickman ( 2011 ) do not include the action of “liking” another user’s post in their category of behaviors to analyze. “Liking” a post is obviously an active behavior, but is perhaps not as intrusive as posting a comment. “Liking” also seems to be the most common response to many posts, so it would be useful to understand how this action is perceived by students and instructors. Teclehaimanot and Hickman also categorized interactions as student-initiated or teacher-initiated. The most accepted behaviors were student/passive behaviors, followed by teacher/passive, student/active, and teacher/active engagements. Students tend to want to be in control of online interactions with instructors. For example, instructors are not as welcome to “friend” students as students are to “friend” their instructors. There are boundaries to be drawn between being a professor and being a student’s friend. Analysis also indicated a gendered result, with more men agreeing that student-teacher interaction on Facebook was appropriate than women. Teclehaimanot and Hickman ( 2011 ) conclude that engaging in passive Facebook usage may be the safest practice, allowing students and instructors to get to know each other better, but to let that translate into more positive learning outcomes in the classroom rather than in an online environment.

Students have also offered advice to instructors with regard to their Facebook content, suggesting that teachers be cautious about what others say on their wall, and recommending that they avoid putting anything about politics on their pages. This recommendation with regard to politics might be more challenging in some disciplines than others. Students even recommended that instructors avoid posting content that students might make fun of them about (Mazer et al., 2007 , p. 12).

Privacy/Security

A similar concern to the issue of professionalism is addressing concerns about privacy and security. This is true on the part of both instructors and students. There are both instructors and students who refuse to create a Facebook account because they simply don’t want to expose themselves to the risks of having an online profile. For those instructors who do have Facebook accounts, they often do not want to share too much of their personal lives with students; and similarly, students do not want teachers to spy on them, or lecture them about what they find on the students’ Facebook pages (Mazer et al., 2007 , p. 12). Although popular media sometimes portray that young people do not care about privacy and are not careful about what they post, some studies have shown that students are well aware of the need to limit what they post to avoid negative impacts on future employment. Facebook does have specific privacy settings that allow users to distinguish between different groups of “friends” in terms of what content is shared. Younger users, in fact, make more adjustments to their privacy settings than do older users. However, not all users are familiar or comfortable with the privacy settings in Facebook. Those who are less confident are less likely to impose privacy restrictions on their account (boyd & Hargittai, 2010 ). One way to address privacy issues for the most cautious students is to allow them to create special accounts for class usage only that contain minimal information. A recommendation similar to this is suggested for instructors: that they create a simple professional profile that is used academically but not as their personal Facebook page. The one drawback to this minimalist solution is that self-disclosure is lower, which may affect some of the other potential benefits previously noted.

As with any online environment, users need to be aware of the potential for meanness, bullying and harassment. Students do not tend to encounter this type of behavior often, however, reporting instead that negative experiences most frequently include information that is misinterpreted, people trying to communicate with others who are not interested in doing so, and inappropriate pictures or messages posted on walls. Twenty percent of students reported that they were stalked (constantly messaged by an individual) once or twice a year, and that sexually provocative messages or references to partying were rare (Hew, 2011 , p. 667).

Facebook as a Distraction

Anecdotally, instructors believe that Facebook is a serious distraction to their students and can harm their academic performance. Hew’s ( 2011 ) review of the literature is inconclusive on this concern. If students’ average daily time online is between 10 and 60 minutes, then this suggests that students should still have plenty of time for their academic studies. A study by Kirschner and Karpinski ( 2010 ), however, shows a correlation between lower GPAs and high Facebook usage. Facebook users report spending fewer hours studying per week (1–5 hours) than non-users (11–15 hours). This study does not show causation but does indicate a need to be aware of potential problems.

Access and Navigation Skills

The use of technology in education is constantly evolving, and instructors need to be aware of the level of access students have to it, as well as their skill levels in using technology. One of the reasons that Facebook is a relatively easy technology to adopt is because a majority of students already use it. It can place students at a disadvantage, however, if they have limited Internet access, or have not previously established a Facebook account. (This is true for other online tools as well, such as Blackboard or Moodle.) In some developing countries, such as Brazil, the government has spearheaded a progressive push to extend Internet access across the country, putting nearly 100 million Brazilians online, even in the remote rainforests (Holmes, 2013 ). If individuals do not have Internet access at home, it is important that the university provide computers for student use so that using this technology in the classroom does not widen the digital divide.

Students who do not have a high sense of self-efficacy with regard to technological skills may not collaborate as frequently using Facebook for communication. In particular, students who are not confident about managing their privacy settings on Facebook are less likely to collaborate in this setting (Lampe, Wohn, Vitak, Ellison, & Wash, 2011 , p. 342).

Another challenge related to access is that Facebook is not integrated with other educational platforms such as Blackboard or Moodle. This means that students and instructors must log in to at least two different platforms in order to access course content and communication software. This is less of a challenge for students than faculty because they are on Facebook more frequently (Roblyer et al., 2010 ).

Assessing Student Performance in Facebook

Assigning grades based on student use of Facebook for course work can also be difficult. Because Facebook does not provide a word count function, or any kind of automated grading system, instructors must consider how to assess work done in the Facebook environment in a way that will not take excessive time. One simple way is to provide points based on participation. Facebook groups can be searched by name and will list all of the postings by one person together for a simple tally. If an instructor wants to grade based on quality of content, this would take more time to read all of the posts, but this is true for discussion board postings within university course software as well.

University Culture/Administrative Restrictions

One last challenge worth noting is the possibility of restrictive university administration policies regarding the use of Facebook. Before incorporating any aspect of Facebook into the classroom, instructors should be aware of what policies are in place at their institution regarding the use of social networking sites.

It is also important to recognize the culture of the university where an instructor is teaching. Some institutions place a much higher value on connectedness, availability, and openness to students than others do (Sturgeon & Walker, 2009 ). If such values are not part of the institutional culture, an instructor might be stepping beyond the norms of university community by incorporating Facebook into the classroom and should do so cautiously.

Using Facebook in the Classroom (and Beyond)

Given the variety of potential benefits as well as possible challenges to using Facebook in the higher education setting, instructors should give careful consideration as to why they want to use Facebook as an educational tool and how they will incorporate it into the structure of a class. Very basic ideas for use of Facebook are presented, as well as some more extensive possibilities, depending on the identified goals of the instructor.

Creating a Professional Facebook Profile

If one of the instructor’s goals is to connect effectively with students beyond the classroom, the most basic strategy is for the instructor to create a Facebook profile that his or her students can view at their own discretion. Studies show that students respond positively to instructors who provide some degree of self-disclosure (either in the classroom or online) (Mazer, Murphy, & Simonds, 2007 ). This is a passive strategy that may make a small positive difference in the way that instructors are perceived by their students.

A further step that can be taken that still places students fully in control of the interaction is for instructors to hold online office hours on Facebook, letting students know that they will be available. Students can either message or chat with a professor synchronously rather than relying on asynchronous emailing. In addition, students can initiate these communications without taking the step of becoming a Facebook friend with the instructor. Schwartz ( 2009 ) notes that “students appreciate my accessibility and without question, respect my boundaries . . . even this surface level contact is important, helping us maintain and strengthen our connection until the next big question arises.”

Creating a Facebook Page for Classroom Management

Facebook pages are often used by institutions to communicate campus events and activities to students and to try to promote campus engagement, but they can also be used in individual classes as a classroom management tool. Students use Facebook more consistently than they access course management software such as Blackboard, so it makes sense to provide online content in a location that students access frequently (Loving & Ochoa, 2011 ). Instructors can create a class Facebook page and invite students to “like” the page so that they receive announcements, current events news, and updates on class projects, etc. Students can engage with the instructor or with their peers through posting comments and replies on the page. Librarians have experimented with this option to a greater extent than many instructors, seeking to push out helpful library resource information to students (Loving & Ochoa, 2011 ). It should be noted that pages are publicly viewable, so while the content may be class specific, others can still view it. This can pose a problem if the goal is to encourage students to participate candidly in an online discussion.

Creating a Facebook Group

For greater functionality, an instructor can create a Facebook group for the class, allowing students to share documents and engage in discussions in a less public setting. This option could be particularly beneficial for fully online or hybrid classes (part online/part face to face). Trying to get students to feel connected to each other when in an online environment can be a challenge, but increased engagement does help with learning. For online or face-to-face classes, students could be encouraged to simply use Facebook as a discussion board on a regular basis, commenting on assigned topics or current events through the group page, or engaging in live chat sessions. A Facebook group might include all members of a class, or it might consist of subgroups within the class who are perhaps assigned to work together on a course project. The document sharing function for groups is helpful in organizing a group project. One drawback is that Facebook groups do not have the grading or online testing features that course management software does.

One example of how a Facebook group was used is described by Ractham and Firpo ( 2011 ). They sought to form a “community of practice” as a supplement to their university course in 2009 . For their Introduction to Management Information Systems (MIS) class, Ractham and Firpo created a Facebook group of 69 students with two goals in mind: (1) enable instructors to build and maintain strong connections with and among the first-year students and (2) create an informal learning environment where students collaborate and learn from each other. The instructors adopted a pedagogy that invited students to fully participate during class discussions, and then encouraged these discussions to continue online through Facebook. Students were expected to provide content on the group Facebook page through wall posts, by posting videos and photos, and by commenting on each other’s posts of course topic–related news. Students were encouraged to ask questions and to answer the questions that were posed by others. Discussion was mandatory and linked to weekly assignments. The authors’ content analysis, following the conclusion of the class, was based on a total of 2,640 posts in the Facebook group as well as surveys completed by the students. Students posted on average twice a week and were most likely to use comments, followed by discussion postings. Posting photos was also a popular activity. The survey indicated that 78% of students believed that Facebook was useful as a supplemental learning tool for class. They thought the discussion and photo features were most useful for learning, while comments and private messages were more useful for communication. Videos, fun quizzes, and tagging were viewed simply as fun activities (p. 8). One variation to this structure would be to assign a “lead” role to different group members throughout the semester to post relevant content for viewing and discussion.

Groups might even include members beyond a single class, perhaps bringing together multiple course sections on campus for a greater peer to peer exchange, or even connecting with students from other institutions. In one experiment, students from Japan, Canada, the United States, and Brazil were connected via a Facebook group to share postings on their understandings of common terms in international politics (Shaw, 2013 ). The purpose of this collaboration was to expose students to the perspectives of their peers in other countries in order to understand that not all terms are understood in the same way around the world. In this international collaboration, over 100 students were assigned six key concepts, such as “development,” “globalization,” and “peace,” and were instructed to come up with an image that illustrated that concept to them personally. They were told to post the image as well as a brief explanation for why they thought that image was illustrative of the key concept. For example, one student posted a picture of a McDonald’s in Japan to illustrate globalization and explained that globalization meant that multinational corporations sold their products all around the world. On some topics postings were quite similar by students from different countries, but on others there were clear cultural or regional differences. The topic of development, in particular, led to postings that were clearly from the “Global North” or the “Global South” (developed vs. developing countries).

Another international collaborative project used Facebook groups to simulate peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine (Ben-Yehuda, Naveh, & Levin-Banchik, 2014 ). The facilitator recruited teachers from schools around the world to participate in an experimental Facebook simulation. They were each assigned different key actors in the Israeli-Palestinian talks and placed in regional blocks (EU group, U.S. group, Palestinian group, etc.) The regional blocks were instructed to come up with their own priorities and strategies for the talks (this was done asynchronously several weeks in advance by posting on the subgroup’s page). Then, all of the players logged in for two hours for a synchronous negotiation session. The facilitator created several thematic threads for the negotiations (e.g., Status of Jerusalem, settlements, etc.) and participants began posting their positions and trying to work out compromises. The project faced one challenge that is very real with students, not just teachers: not everyone participated at a high level (or at all). This led to some awkward negotiations (Hamas spoke for all Palestinians because Fatah was not present) and was a little bit frustrating. The other challenge that was perhaps unique is that the participants were from many time zones, so the synchronous negotiations required some participants to be up very early and others to be up very late. Overall, Facebook provided a simple, functional platform for this collaborative experiment.

Connecting with Students Abroad and with Alumni

An additional suggestion regarding the use of Facebook for education is to use it to link with students studying abroad as well as alumni (Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, & Witty, 2010 ). Students who are studying abroad gain a wealth of experience through their travels that could be very valuable to share with students at home. By encouraging them to post their experiences on Facebook to share, many others can benefit. This might also have a positive side effect of helping students abroad cope with homesickness by connecting them to their peers through sharing their experiences. By using Facebook to connect with alumni, universities are able to maintain a network of relationships with former students. Many alumni are willing to assist current students or recent graduates with internship opportunities, job hunting, and career development. Institutional Facebook pages or groups can provide a useful platform for these interactions to take place.

Cultural Context

There is clear evidence that Facebook is not a North American phenomenon but has been widely adopted around the world. International usage data from 2013 shows that 75% of Facebook users are outside of the United States, with 250 million in Europe, 254 million in Asia, and 200 million in Central and South America (compared to 184 million in North America) (Internet World Stats). Facebook is now available in 70+ languages. A review of the existing literature regarding Facebook usage in the classroom, however, reveals a clear North American bias. Most of the studies that involve survey data focus almost exclusively on U.S. university settings and students. Hew ( 2011 ) in fact argues that future research should be conducted with students and teachers from different countries in order to better understand whether and how different sociocultural and geographical contexts may influence the use of Facebook compared to the Anglo-American focus of research to date.

Countries with the greatest potential might include Brazil, India, and Russia, where Facebook usage is increasing significantly. Commentators have suggested, in fact, that Brazil, with over 70 million Facebook users, has become the “social media capital of the universe” (Chao, 2013 ). Facebook vice president Alexandre Hohagen suggests that Brazilians are inherently social people, finding usage of social network sites quite attractive (Holmes, 2013 ). He notes that this is not a uniquely Brazilian trait, but that other conditions have come together to make Brazil a particularly dynamic market for social networking sites such as Facebook. Both Horst ( 2011 ) and Holmes ( 2013 ) note that social media has a true democratic quality in Brazil, where there is growing access to mobile phone service. Through digital inclusion efforts such as LAN houses (Internet café–like settings) and digital inclusion points (DIPs), Brazil is managing to bridge the digital divide between the rich and poor with regard to Internet and SNS access. In addition, use of Facebook seems to extend beyond a mere social pastime, to serve as a professional connective network (similar to LinkedIn). This may make the use of Facebook even more beneficial in education, allowing connections between current and former students, and potentially developing mentoring or employment opportunities.

Suggested Practices

Given the wide range of uses for Facebook in an academic setting, and the balance that individuals have to find with regard to professionalism and privacy, there are not many guidelines that fit all situations. However, there are some suggestions that emerge based on the survey data and experiments noted. One recommendation is that instructors provide clear instructions for using Facebook, especially the privacy settings, before incorporating it into the classroom. Instructors should also give clear guidelines regarding boundaries of use (when they will respond, types of postings that are acceptable within a group, etc.). This addresses some concerns about professionalism as well as navigation skills. It is also a good practice to share with the students the reasons for selecting Facebook as a classroom tool and what learning objectives the instructor hopes to accomplish through its use.

Another recommendation that also seeks to address concerns about navigation skills and access, as well as privacy concerns, is that use of Facebook in the classroom should be made optional or supplemental, not mandatory. This is a trade-off, however; if the purpose is to build community, then having some members who don’t participate weakens attainment of that objective. Also, given students’ busy lives, they may choose to opt out of anything that does not have a graded component. One compromise would be to make Facebook engagement one of several graded alternatives, thus letting students self-select into the activity that is most comfortable for them.

Conclusions/a Look to the Future

The literature on Facebook usage in educational settings has been presented, recognizing that there is still research to be done in a non–North American context. This literature points to a number of potential educational benefits, including: creating community and promoting collaboration, enhancing communication, developing computer literacy as well as language skills, and incorporating pop as well as foreign cultures into the classroom. Some of the recognized challenges include privacy concerns, maintaining professionalism, guaranteeing access, preventing distractions to learning, and operating under university restrictions. Depending on the instructor’s specific pedagogical goals, Facebook can provide a setting where students can get to know their instructor better, receive clarification on assignments and engage in discussions with their classmates, and even connect with students beyond the campus (in study abroad and from other institutions). It can even be used as a platform for negotiations in a simulation. Facebook clearly provides room for flexibility and creativity in the classroom.

Given the ever-evolving state of technology, however, it is unlikely that Facebook will remain the predominate social network site forever. Surveys of teens reveal a global decline in usage of Facebook as a “one-stop” site (GlobalWebIndex) and wider usage of multiple apps with more narrow functions (such as Tumblr, Instagram, Pinterest). There are also competitive regional apps such as Qzone (in Chinese) (Smith, 2013 ). Despite challenges from these other apps, Facebook is far from obsolete and remains a useful platform for use in the classroom. In addition, many of the benefits and lessons noted here in reference to Facebook can also apply to using other online social apps. Students will likely have the same concerns about privacy and professionalism if Google+ is incorporated into a class as they do with Facebook. This constant shifting usage of social apps presents a real challenge to instructors who tend to be slow to incorporate technologies into the classroom in the first place. Faculty need to continue to be open to experimenting with new things at the margins to see what brings value to the educational experience and what does not.

• Beck, M. (2014, May 13). Facebook & Twitter slide slightly in global usage, while Instagram & Tumblr Soar . Marketing Land .
• Ben-Yehuda, H. , Naveh, C. , & Levin-Banchik, L. (2014). From virtual to real: Simulating conflict dynamics in a global information age . Presented at International Studies Association Annual Conference. Toronto.
• boyd, d. m. , & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 13 , 210–230.
• boyd, d. m. , & Hargittai, E. (2010). Facebook privacy settings: Who cares? First Monday , 15 (8).
• Chao, L. (2013, February 4). Brazil: The social media capital of the universe. Wall Street Journal .
• Chu, M. , & Meulemans, Y. (2008). The problems and potential of MySpace and Facebook usage in academic libraries. Internet Reference Services Quarterly , 13 (1), 69–85.
• Facebook Statistics . (2014). Statistic Brain . Global Web Index. Retrieved from http://blog.globalwebindex.net/chart-of-the-day/where-are-the-facebook-teens-going/ .
• Global Web Index . Retrieved from http://blog.globalwebindex.net/chart-of-the-day/where-are-the-facebook-teens-going/ .
• Greenhow, C. , & Robelia, E. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication , 14 (4), 1, 130–131, 161.
• Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior , 27 , 662–676.
• Holmes, R. (2013, September 12). The future of social media? Forget about the U.S., look to Brazil . Forbes .
• Horst, H. A. (2011). Free, social, and inclusive: Appropriation and resistance of new media technologies in Brazil. International Journal of Communications , 5 , 437–462.
• Internet World Stats . Internet World Stats .
• Kabilan, M. K. , Ahmad, N. , & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education , 13 , 179–187.
• Karlin, S. (2007). Examining how youths interact online. School Board News , 73 (4), 6–9.
• Kirschner, P. A. , & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior , 26 , 1237–1245.
• Lampe, C. , Wohn, D. Y. , Vitak, J. , Ellison, N. B. , & Wash, R. (2011). Student use of Facebook for organizing collaborative classroom activities. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 6 , 329–347.
• Lawrence, C. N. , & Dion, M. L. (2010). Blogging in the political science classroom. PS: Political Science and Politics , 43 (1), 152–156.
• Loving, M. , & Ochoa, M. (2011). Facebook as a classroom management solution. New Library World , 112 (3–4), 121–130.
• Mazer, J. P. , Murphy, R. E. , & Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook”: The effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education , 56 (1), 1–17.
• Mazer, J. P. , Murphy, R. E. , & Simonds, C. J. (2009). The effects of teacher self-disclosure via Facebook on teacher credibility. Learning, Media and Technology , 34 (2).
• Muñoz, C. L. , & Towner, T. (2011, December 5). Back to the “wall”: Facebook in the college classroom . First Monday , 16 (12).
• Ractham, P. , & Firpo, D. (2011). Using social networking technology to enhance learning in higher education: A case study using Facebook. Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 707–716).
• Roblyer, M. D. , McDaniel, M. , Webb, M. , Herman, J. , & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. Internet and Higher Education , 13 (3), 134–140.
• Schroeder, J. , & Greenbowe, T. J. (2009). The chemistry of Facebook: Using social networking to create an online community for the organic chemistry laboratory. Innovate , 5 (4).
• Schwartz, H. L. (2009). Facebook: The new classroom commons. Chronicle of Higher Education , 56 (7).
• Shaw, C. M. (2013). Connecting students cross-nationally . Presented at International Studies Association Annual Conference. San Francisco.
• Smith, C. (2013, November 29). The planet’s 24 largest social media sites, and where their next wave of growth will come from . Business Insider .
• Sturgeon, C. , & Walker, C. (2009). Faculty on Facebook: Confirm or deny? . Paper presented at 14th Annual Instructional Technology Conference. Murfreesboro, TN.
• Teclehaimanot, B. , & Hickman, T. (2011). Student-teacher interaction on Facebook: What students find appropriate. TechTrends , 55 (3), 19–28.

Related Articles

• Assessment of Active Learning
• Computer-Mediated Communication Technology and Cross-National Learning
• Designing and Using Simulations and Role-Play Exercises
• Model UN and Model EU Programs
• Teaching with Technology: Active Learning in International Studies

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, International Studies. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 24 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|81.177.182.159]
• 81.177.182.159

Character limit 500 /500

Question and Answer forum for K12 Students

Facebook Essay | Essay on Facebook for Students and Kids in English, Is Facebook Good or Bad?

Facebook Essay: Facebook is a long-range interpersonal communication site that associates individuals from one side of the planet to the other. It has made the planet earth a worldwide town. With only a single tick, you can associate with somebody living abroad.

Facebook has become one of the most popular people-to-person communication destinations. Notwithstanding, it accompanies its own arrangements of advantages and disadvantages. While it has helped a ton of people and businesses to make their image, it is likewise being utilized for wrong exercises.

It expects to unite the world with the force of the local area. You can likewise become more acquainted with what is happening all throughout the planet. You can even pen down your musings on that stage.

You can read more  Essay Writing  about articles, events, people, sports, technology many more.

Essay on Facebook Benefits and Disadvantages

The Internet has brought a big revolution to society and the communication world. Facebook is a piece of it. Facebook is for the most part known as the main online media. It is an online stage where we can get associated with individuals and can cooperate with them. It has made the world little and simple to get to. Anybody can get associated with anybody now. It has opened another entryway for business, correspondence, and relationships.

There are huge provisions that Facebook has. Anybody can join there for nothing. You need a web associated versatile or PC. You can join with your email or telephone number. When you joined, you will discover loads of individuals’ records there who you know, all things considered. Facebook consistently energize adding individuals that you know. Then, at that point, others will discover your record of their feed and will send you a companion demand. In the event that you acknowledge their companion demand, they will go to your companion list. An individual who is in your companion can make an impression on you.

At the point when you share a photograph or compose something on your profile or timetable, individuals of your companion rundown can see these. Not just see they can respond to them. Indeed, even they can remark on their viewpoint in the remark box. Facebook has a decent element named bunch. You can make a gathering and can add your companions there. It is an extremely simple and basic technique to make online home bases or offer things to a designated crowd. You can make a page for your business to advance on the web. Pretty much every business has a Facebook page now. They advance their items online with individuals. Counting all, there are heaps of provisions of Facebook that you can appreciate.

Benefits of Facebook

Facebook is encountering sensational development presently where the quantity of clients has arrived at one billion. It accompanies a ton of advantages like video calling with your nearby ones and transferring your photographs and recordings without charge.

Above all, it permits you to reach out to individuals from the opposite side of the world without spending a penny. It is additionally an incredible method to associate with old school companions and school companions.

Further, you can likewise make new companions through this stage. At the point when you associate with individuals from everywhere the world, it opens ways to find out with regards to new societies, qualities and customs from various nations.

It additionally gives you includes for a bunch of conversations and visits. Presently, Facebook additionally permits clients to sell their items or administrations through their site. It is an incredible method of expanding deals and setting up your business on the web.

Disadvantages of Facebook

Other than this load of good sides, there are a few disservices of Facebook. Facebook has turned into a period killing machine for understudies. In an understudy life, you need to stay away from web-based media like Facebook or Twitter. The youthful age is being dependent on Facebook. They are going through quite a while with it. What’s more, it has been an integral justification for their investigation hamper. The gatekeepers ought to know about this. They should restrict their child’s Smartphone utilizing time. Something else, that could be truly downright awful is their schooling.

Conclusion on Facebook Essay

To summarize it, in the event that we use Facebook to the right extent and with legitimate consideration, it very well may be an integral asset for anybody. In addition, it tends to be extraordinary for promoting and systems administration. Further, any business can likewise use its ability to make its business achievement. Be that as it may, it is fundamental to recollect to not allow it to turn into a fixation.

Small Essay on Facebook

Facebook is among the most famous online media organizing locales in the present occasions. Facebook is profoundly famous because of its different applications and the simplicity of correspondence it offers to the client. It permits clients to share pictures, occasions and situations with a solitary stage.

Facebook has various advantages like the capacity to shape gatherings, talk with companions and discover data on different points. Facebook is likewise profoundly instructive because of the different pages on a large group of points including yet not restricted to wellbeing, schooling, science, practice and so forth

It is likewise an optimal correspondence stage for family members, companions and individuals from a family who can remain associated with a solitary stage.

A later expansion to the online visit program is the video calling highlight which has acquired monstrous ubiquity. Not exclusively would one be able to converse with individuals yet in addition see them live with the assistance of this video talk highlight.

One more vital element of Facebook is the internet gaming gateway that it offers to its clients. There are a huge number of games on Facebook which one can play at some random time. The intriguing angle is the capacity to play these games with companions.

Facebook is turning into an exceptionally fruitful stage not just for making new companions and discovering old ones, however forgetting worldwide and nearby news also. The greater part of the news and media organizations have dispatched their Facebook pages.

FAQ’s on Facebook Essay

Question 1. Why do you like Facebook?

Answer: Individuals Are Addicted To Facebook Because It Is A Social Network platform. Having Facebook causes you to feel like you are very much educated with regard to everything everywhere. Facebook allows you the opportunity to stay in contact. You can stay in contact with your loved ones.

Question 2. What is Facebook?

Answer: Facebook is an interpersonal interaction webpage that makes it simple for you to interface and offers with loved ones on the web. Initially intended for undergrads, Facebook was made in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg while he was selected at Harvard University.

Question 3. What are the uses of Facebook?

Answer: Facebook is a site that permits clients, who pursue free profiles, to interface with companions, work associates or individuals they don’t have the foggiest idea, on the web. It permits clients to share pictures, music, recordings, and articles, just as their own considerations and feelings with anyway many individuals they like.

Facebook Company Analytical Essay

Introduction, pestel analysis, tows analysis, conclusions.

Facebook Corporation was established by the current chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg in 2004. In its inception days, the Facebook Corporation membership was limited to Harvard students though it was later expanded to other institutions in the city of Boston (Veer, 2011, p.271). The company operates as a social networking site connecting users with friends who work, live and study around them.

People use Facebook to keep up with others, upload photos, share videos and links as well as understand the situation about people they meet. Of all social networking sites Facebook has the widest regional coverage with over 700 million active users (Facebook Inc, 2011, p.36).

Since the establishment of Facebook Inc, the company has been facing legal proceeding in regard to the use of the social networking idea. The company has been accused of interfering with the privacy of the users.

This resulted in declining traffic in key markets until the company introduced powerful controls for sharing personal information. Although they claim to reinforce the law on users, case of hacking confidential information still affect the company’s business (Facebook, 2009, pp.1-11).

Another political factor could be the copyright policies. Considering the scattered nature of Facebook users, most of them are not aware of these policies and end up violating them. The social network site is also affected by bans in certain countries. For instance, the company had been banned operating in China since 2009 (Facebook, 2011, p.36).

Children welfare associations affect the company as a result of exposing detrimental materials to children. Indeed, the office of the New York Attorney General stepped up warnings against the company saying that Facebook might face a consumer fraud indict for misrepresenting how the site is safe for children.

The growing of Asian and Latin America economies is an economic factor that has the highest leverage on the business. In fact, the company fiscal 2011 plan is to expand to the Asian countries such as China.

The company plans to launch in China and abide by the laws of the corporation by partnering with the Chinese search engine Baidu. These growing economies increase the income of the people and are able to access computers more. The rising literacy level especially in the developing nations is a factor influencing the business.

The number of people who can use computers effectively is growing dramatically. For example, statistics indicate that 60% of the Indians are computer literate and 90% of them have daily access to the computer. This is the very reason why India has the highest number of people socializing through Facebook and other social sites. The other economic factor is employment which is associated with internet accessibility.

People working tend to have ample access to computers and are able to socialize more through the social sites. Facebook is ranked at the top when considering the preference of the working community to social networking sites.

Like other internet sites, age demographic is the major influencing factor of Facebook business (Taylor et al., 2003, p.237). Youths tend to be the major users of the site when connecting with their peers.

The minors are increasingly using Facebook to socialize posing risks to the business. In reality, the company has not devised effective measure to filter underage uses out of the site. Religion is also a factor that is affecting the company’s business especially in the Arab countries.

Facebook has been unable to penetrate many of the Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan due to religion restrictions. In addition to these, gender and marital status could leverage the networking business.

Males have been the dominant users of the social networking sites though females have picked the same pace. Unmarried individuals tend to use Facebook more than married individuals perhaps due to time limitations or benefits sort.

Technological factors affecting Facebook business include mobile growth. Nearly 35% of the total Facebookers access the social site from a mobile device. This trend has even moved the mobile market for products like Apple’s iPad and iPhone.

New software technologies have enabled the company to add new features on their site which are attracting more consumers (Kwon, 2010, p.257). In terms of these features, the chat option is the biggest attraction to the site followed by the sharing option.

Advancement in space technology is also expanding the market for the business. Many remote areas have accessibility to information technology through the use of space equipment. Furthermore, connectivity speed has improved very much and people can socialize fast and effectively.

Some new technologies such as third-party medial plug-ins have expanded the use of Facebook credits thus enhancing e-commerce. Besides, technology allows for business transactions to be conducted through Facebook site and therefore attract a new segment of consumers. Undeniably, technological advancement is the key enabler of Facebook business.

SWOT Matrix

TOWS Alternative Matrix

Weaknesses and threats (WT)

A company with great weaknesses has to route to a survival strategy (Stokes & Wilson, 2010, p.225). Facebook should consider the option of joint operation with Baidu and other search engines in difficult markets. Another alternative would be to withdraw from the challenging markets altogether.

But, the challenges of the company must not have to route to a survival strategy due to the company’s strengths. Consequently, better strategy would be to attempt to develop weaknesses into strengths.

Weaknesses and opportunities (WO)

The rising internet usage has resulted in using more the social network sites. Yet Facebook essentially follows a one-model policy which presents a problem if other designs of site features become obsolete. The company has to introduce new features to reach a wider spectrum of users. This will allow using the same site for a range of needs ranging from business to dating.

Strengths and threats (ST)

One of the biggest threats to Facebook is the customer privacy issues. There has been continued criticism that the company does not offer the standard confidentiality demanded in a social networking environment.

The company should reduce such issues using the many applications available that can ensure maximum confidentiality. Another strategy for avoiding competitive pressure is to differentiate the site through easy user interface.

Strengths and opportunities (SO)

Generally, Facebook can build on their strengths by taking the advantage of the opportunities. The company’s strength in global coverage and popularity becomes evident. This strength can enable the company to develop a consumer relationship that attracts regulatory restricted environments.

Eventually, the strength will enable the company to open operation in China and Arab countries. Thus Facebook can benefit from considerable concessions offered by the governments to attract the company.

Facebook Company is certainly operating in a tricky environment due to the changing nature of communication and networking environment. The environment is tricky because there in increasing preference for social networks yet the technology responsible cannot meet the intrinsic demand of the consumers. Policies regulating social medial works have requirements beyond the ability of technology.

This attracts other groups of interests while regulations in some countries cannot be fully satisfied. However, the growing economy and advancement in technology promise a brighter future for the company.

If Facebook can exploit the opportunity of rising usage of the internet through its global coverage, there is a chance of attracting policy makers in other countries and maybe adjust regulations. There is a chance to develop the weaknesses into new strengths once the company is better positioned in the market.

Since the market of social media environment is quite demanding, Facebook must focus on its core resources and competencies. In this case, integration of features and ease of use are distinctive resources that can enable effective differentiation in the competition.

When combined with the threshold resource of regional coverage, the competencies can leverage the brand name in the face of consumers as well as policy makers. It is therefore recommended that the company should:

• Use the status updates to provide targeted adverts
• Focus on monetization to improve valuations
• Provide local advertising based on customer location
• Enable controlled application
• Improve in storage and archival
• Engage in mergers with search engines
• Solve the problem of privacy

Facebook Inc. 2009. Facebook law enforcement guidelines . Web.

Facebook Inc. 2011. Private Company financial report . Web.

Kwon, O. & Wen, Y. 2010. An empirical study of the factors affecting social network service use. Computers in Human Behavior , 26(2), pp.254-263.

Stokes, D. & Wilson, N. 2010. Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship . Florence, KY: Cengage Learning EMEA.

Taylor, W. J., Zhu, G. X., Dekkers, J. & Marshall, S. 2003. Socio-economic factors affecting home internet usage patterns in Central Queensland. Information Science Journal , 6, pp.233-244.

• Million Dollar Tort Case: Construction Negligence Lawsuit
• The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
• Legal Responsibility in Mental Disorders
• Mountain Man Brewing Company
• Major Global Corporation: Toyota
• House of Fraser and the United Kingdom’s Department Store Industry
• Toro Company S'No Risk Program
• Hewlett-Packard Company Analysis
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, July 11). Facebook Company. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-company/

"Facebook Company." IvyPanda , 11 July 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-company/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Facebook Company'. 11 July.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Facebook Company." July 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-company/.

1. IvyPanda . "Facebook Company." July 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-company/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Facebook Company." July 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-company/.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Social Media Use in 2021

A majority of Americans say they use YouTube and Facebook, while use of Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok is especially common among adults under 30.

Table of contents.

• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

To better understand Americans’ use of social media, online platforms and messaging apps, Pew Research Center surveyed 1,502 U.S. adults from Jan. 25 to Feb. 8, 2021, by cellphone and landline phone. The survey was conducted by interviewers under the direction of Abt Associates and is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, education and other categories. Here are the  questions used for this report , along with responses, and  its methodology .

Despite a string of controversies and the public’s relatively negative sentiments about aspects of social media, roughly seven-in-ten Americans say they ever use any kind of social media site – a share that has remained relatively stable over the past five years, according to a new Pew Research Center survey of U.S. adults.

Beyond the general question of overall social media use, the survey also covers use of individual sites and apps. YouTube and Facebook continue to dominate the online landscape, with 81% and 69%, respectively, reporting ever using these sites. And YouTube and Reddit were the only two platforms measured that saw statistically significant growth since 2019 , when the Center last polled on this topic via a phone survey.

When it comes to the other platforms in the survey, 40% of adults say they ever use Instagram and about three-in-ten report using Pinterest or LinkedIn. One-quarter say they use Snapchat, and similar shares report being users of Twitter or WhatsApp. TikTok – an app for sharing short videos – is used by 21% of Americans, while 13% say they use the neighborhood-focused platform Nextdoor.

Even as other platforms do not nearly match the overall reach of YouTube or Facebook, there are certain sites or apps, most notably Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, that have an especially strong following among young adults. In fact, a majority of 18- to 29-year-olds say they use Instagram (71%) or Snapchat (65%), while roughly half say the same for TikTok.

These findings come from a nationally representative survey of 1,502 U.S. adults conducted via telephone Jan. 25-Feb.8, 2021.

With the exception of YouTube and Reddit, most platforms show little growth since 2019

YouTube is the most commonly used online platform asked about in this survey, and there’s evidence that its reach is growing. Fully 81% of Americans say they ever use the video-sharing site, up from 73% in 2019. Reddit was the only other platform polled about that experienced statistically significant growth during this time period – increasing from 11% in 2019 to 18% today. 

Facebook’s growth has leveled off over the last five years, but it remains one of the most widely used social media sites among adults in the United States: 69% of adults today say they ever use the site, equaling the share who said this two years prior.  

Similarly, the respective shares of Americans who report using Instagram, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Twitter and WhatsApp are statistically unchanged since 2019 . This represents a broader trend that extends beyond the past two years in which the rapid adoption of most of these sites and apps seen in the last decade has slowed. (This was the first year the Center asked about TikTok via a phone poll and the first time it has surveyed about Nextdoor.)

Adults under 30 stand out for their use of Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok

When asked about their social media use more broadly – rather than their use of specific platforms – 72% of Americans say they ever use social media sites.

In a pattern consistent with past Center studies on social media use, there are some stark age differences. Some 84% of adults ages 18 to 29 say they ever use any social media sites, which is similar to the share of those ages 30 to 49 who say this (81%). By comparison, a somewhat smaller share of those ages 50 to 64 (73%) say they use social media sites, while fewer than half of those 65 and older (45%) report doing this.

These age differences generally extend to use of specific platforms, with younger Americans being more likely than their older counterparts to use these sites – though the gaps between younger and older Americans vary across platforms.

Majorities of 18- to 29-year-olds say they use Instagram or Snapchat and about half say they use TikTok, with those on the younger end of this cohort – ages 18 to 24 – being especially likely to report using Instagram (76%), Snapchat (75%) or TikTok (55%). 1 These shares stand in stark contrast to those in older age groups. For instance, while 65% of adults ages 18 to 29 say they use Snapchat, just 2% of those 65 and older report using the app – a difference of 63 percentage points.

Additionally, a vast majority of adults under the age of 65 say they use YouTube. Fully 95% of those 18 to 29 say they use the platform, along with 91% of those 30 to 49 and 83% of adults 50 to 64. However, this share drops substantially – to 49% – among those 65 and older.

By comparison, age gaps between the youngest and oldest Americans are narrower for Facebook. Fully 70% of those ages 18 to 29 say they use the platform, and those shares are statistically the same for those ages 30 to 49 (77%) or ages 50 to 64 (73%). Half of those 65 and older say they use the site – making Facebook and YouTube the two most used platforms among this older population.

Other sites and apps stand out for their demographic differences:

• Instagram: About half of Hispanic (52%) and Black Americans (49%) say they use the platform, compared with smaller shares of White Americans (35%) who say the same. 2
• WhatsApp: Hispanic Americans (46%) are far more likely to say they use WhatsApp than Black (23%) or White Americans (16%). Hispanics also stood out for their WhatsApp use in the Center’s previous surveys on this topic.
• LinkedIn: Those with higher levels of education are again more likely than those with lower levels of educational attainment to report being LinkedIn users. Roughly half of adults who have a bachelor’s or advanced degree (51%) say they use LinkedIn, compared with smaller shares of those with some college experience (28%) and those with a high school diploma or less (10%).
• Pinterest: Women continue to be far more likely than men to say they use Pinterest when compared with male counterparts, by a difference of 30 points (46% vs. 16%).
• Nextdoor: There are large differences in use of this platform by community type. Adults living in urban (17%) or suburban (14%) areas are more likely to say they use Nextdoor. Just 2% of rural Americans report using the site.

A majority of Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram users say they visit these platforms on a daily basis

While there has been much written about Americans’ changing relationship with Facebook , its users remain quite active on the platform. Seven-in-ten Facebook users say they use the site daily, including 49% who say they use the site several times a day. (These figures are statistically unchanged from those reported in the Center’s 2019 survey about social media use.)  

Smaller shares – though still a majority – of Snapchat or Instagram users report visiting these respective platforms daily (59% for both). And being active on these sites is especially common for younger users. For instance, 71% of Snapchat users ages 18 to 29 say they use the app daily, including six-in-ten who say they do this multiple times a day. The pattern is similar for Instagram: 73% of 18- to 29-year-old Instagram users say they visit the site every day, with roughly half (53%) reporting they do so several times per day.

YouTube is used daily by 54% if its users, with 36% saying they visit the site several times a day. By comparison, Twitter is used less frequently, with fewer than half of its users (46%) saying they visit the site daily.

• Due to a limited sample size, figures for those ages 25 to 29 cannot be reported on separately. ↩
• There were not enough Asian American respondents in the sample to be broken out into a separate analysis. As always, their responses are incorporated into the general population figures throughout this report. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Social Media
• User Demographics
• Social Media Fact Sheet

Teens and Social Media Fact Sheet

More americans are getting news on tiktok, bucking the trend seen on most other social media sites, how americans view data privacy, life on social media platforms, in users’ own words, most popular, report materials.

• 2021 Core Trends Survey

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Essay on Social Media for School Students and Children

500+ words essay on social media.

Social media is a tool that is becoming quite popular these days because of its user-friendly features. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and more are giving people a chance to connect with each other across distances. In other words, the whole world is at our fingertips all thanks to social media. The youth is especially one of the most dominant users of social media. All this makes you wonder that something so powerful and with such a massive reach cannot be all good. Like how there are always two sides to a coin, the same goes for social media. Subsequently, different people have different opinions on this debatable topic. So, in this essay on Social Media, we will see the advantages and disadvantages of social media.

Advantages of Social Media

When we look at the positive aspect of social media, we find numerous advantages. The most important being a great device for education . All the information one requires is just a click away. Students can educate themselves on various topics using social media.

Moreover, live lectures are now possible because of social media. You can attend a lecture happening in America while sitting in India.

Furthermore, as more and more people are distancing themselves from newspapers, they are depending on social media for news. You are always updated on the latest happenings of the world through it. A person becomes more socially aware of the issues of the world.

In addition, it strengthens bonds with your loved ones. Distance is not a barrier anymore because of social media. For instance, you can easily communicate with your friends and relatives overseas.

Most importantly, it also provides a great platform for young budding artists to showcase their talent for free. You can get great opportunities for employment through social media too.

Another advantage definitely benefits companies who wish to promote their brands. Social media has become a hub for advertising and offers you great opportunities for connecting with the customer.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Disadvantages of Social Media

Despite having such unique advantages, social media is considered to be one of the most harmful elements of society. If the use of social media is not monitored, it can lead to grave consequences.

Thus, the sharing on social media especially by children must be monitored at all times. Next up is the addition of social media which is quite common amongst the youth.

This addiction hampers with the academic performance of a student as they waste their time on social media instead of studying. Social media also creates communal rifts. Fake news is spread with the use of it, which poisons the mind of peace-loving citizens.

In short, surely social media has both advantages and disadvantages. But, it all depends on the user at the end. The youth must particularly create a balance between their academic performances, physical activities, and social media. Excess use of anything is harmful and the same thing applies to social media. Therefore, we must strive to live a satisfying life with the right balance.

FAQs on Social Media

Q.1 Is social media beneficial? If yes, then how?

A.1 Social media is quite beneficial. Social Media offers information, news, educational material, a platform for talented youth and brands.

Q.2 What is a disadvantage of Social Media?

A.2 Social media invades your privacy. It makes you addicted and causes health problems. It also results in cyberbullying and scams as well as communal hatred.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Find anything you save across the site in your account

The Meta Narrative: What We’ve Learned from the Facebook Papers

By Andrew Marantz

In the past few weeks, you may have noticed that your news sources—the papers you read, the broadcasts you watch, and, let’s be honest, the social-media feeds you constantly, furtively refresh—have been even more replete than usual with stories about how Facebook is bad for the world. You’re not imagining things. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s a “consortium.” In mid-September, under the rubric “The Facebook Files,” the Wall Street Journal began running a series of blockbuster articles based on thousands of internal Facebook documents that a whistle-blower had leaked to the Journal , the Securities and Exchange Commission, and members of Congress. One of the articles cited Facebook’s own unpublished research to suggest that “Instagram is toxic for teenage girls”; another showed how, even as Mark Zuckerberg pledged to use Facebook to amplify “authoritative Covid-19 information,” such posts were trailed by “cesspools of anti-vaccine comments.” In early October, in an interview with “60 Minutes,” the whistle-blower identified herself as Frances Haugen, a former Facebook employee who now lives in Puerto Rico (and who, we later learned, had struck it rich, or at least comfortable, by investing early in crypto). Two days later, she testified before a Senate subcommittee—one of the rare congressional hearings to get significant pickup beyond C- SPAN . Still, according to the tech-news site the Information , “Haugen felt there were more stories to be told.” So she arranged for the same set of documents to be leaked to a new set of journalists—reporters from “more than a dozen news organizations as diverse as the Associated Press, CNN, Le Monde, Reuters and the Fox Business network”—who then formed an “unusual reporting consortium.”

The reporters started a Slack group, using the self-conscious name Apparently We’re a Consortium Now. (Because whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light, the Slack messages were later leaked to the Times .) The reporters were competitors, but they tried to work together. They agreed to publish their stories no sooner than Monday, October 25th. (This agreement soon fell apart, and some of the stories trickled out a few days early.) A reporter from the Times worried that continuing to use the “Facebook Files” rubric would constitute “free advertising for the Journal series”; a reporter from the newsletter Platformer suggested using “The Leftovers” instead. Most of the outlets ended up settling on “The Facebook Papers.” In the ensuing week, reporters from the consortium published more than a hundred stories. “How Facebook Users Wield Multiple Accounts to Spread Toxic Politics.” “How Facebook Neglected the Rest of the World.” “How Facebook Failed the World.” It’s impossible to know for sure, in part because we increasingly receive our information from hyper-personalized feeds, but, anecdotally, the surround-sound coverage appeared to do the trick: even people who were trying to tune out the news seemed dimly aware that the Democrats were having trouble passing their agenda, Alec Baldwin was in trouble, and Facebook was undergoing a reputational crisis.

Soon enough, even Facebook didn’t want to be Facebook anymore. Last week, the company announced that, although the so-called big blue app will still be known as Facebook, the parent corporation will henceforth be Meta, a name that sounds like “dead” in Hebrew, seems impossibly on the nose to anyone who has read too much post-structuralist theory, and means very little to most everyone else—which may be part of the point. Meta is short for “metaverse,” a coinage from a dystopian sci-fi novel in which people retreat into virtual life to avoid their grim physical reality. The name change was announced in a video that was by turns creepy, cringey, and darkly comic; on the bright side, if Meta does follow through on a plan to divert billions of its own dollars into developing the metaverse, at least that’s billions of dollars that it won’t spend driving user growth on Facebook.

As with any widespread cultural phenomenon, the Facebook Papers occasioned a backlash, or at least a minor round of reconsiderations. Is Instagram really more toxic than TV or magazines, or are the studies’ sample sizes too small to be meaningful? Is it really Zuckerberg’s fault that his pro-vaccine posts were swarmed by anti-vaccine commenters, or is that a necessary by-product of empowering everyone to participate in the marketplace of ideas? “Social media is being held responsible for issues that run much deeper in society,” Nick Clegg, a British politician turned Facebook spokesman, claimed in the Wall Street Journal . “If Facebook didn’t exist, these issues wouldn’t magically disappear.” This was both narrowly correct and broadly beside the point. Even if it were possible to get rid of social media, no one believes that this would immediately eradicate teen-age anxiety or vaccine hesitancy. The relevant question is whether, on net, big social-media platforms make life on this planet better, as Clegg and hundreds of other P.R. professionals are paid hefty salaries to argue, or whether they make it worse.

Recently, I got access to the so-called Facebook Papers. Around the same time, a tech reporter from the Verge told the media-gossip newsletter Off the Record that, for all intents and purposes, the consortium had been “dissolved”; nonetheless, new tranches of documents were still being added to the Google Drive nearly every day. As long as I was there, I decided to have a look around.

The first thing to understand about the Facebook Papers is that a lot of them aren’t papers at all. They’re fragments of conversation. The company formerly known as Facebook hosts a shadow social network called Workplace, modelled on its public-facing software but open only to employees. Haugen got her documents by trawling through Workplace and capturing whatever she found useful—charts, drafts of slide decks, memes, specialized discussion threads about “discoverability prevention” and “complex entity enforcement.” To dodge Facebook’s corporate surveillance, she didn’t save the documents on her work computer; instead, she used her phone to take pictures of her laptop’s screen. Many of the Facebook Papers, therefore, are blurry photos taken at skewed angles, sometimes featuring a patch of screen glare or the silhouette of a stray hair against the glass.

To its credit, Facebook seems to have fostered a workplace culture, or at least a Workplace culture, that tolerates candor and constructive disagreement. (Even this can be interpreted as a cynical attempt at self-preservation; last year, a former Facebook employee told me that Facebook’s management allows some dissent internally in order to keep it out of public view.) People post on Workplace for more or less the same reasons that people post on Facebook: to be seen, to be liked, to procrastinate, to test out ideas that they may not fully believe. “Anyone can just comment about anything at any time, and it’s encouraged,” an anonymous employee told Platformer in a recent piece of Meta meta-commentary. “And people who work at Facebook are very sure of themselves, so it can be hard to tell the difference between someone who knows what they are talking about and someone who does not without more context.” A slide deck is a piece of input, not the final word; a draft of a presentation doesn’t tell us how the higher-ups in the room reacted. The just-the-facts style of a hard-news exposé—or a hundred of them—reduces the Facebook Papers to their juiciest scoops, and there are plenty of scoops. But the leak might be even more useful when considered as a whole corpus—a sprawling anthropological artifact that gives us a qualitative sense of how Meta employees talk when they think that no one is listening.

The documents indicate that almost any question can be asked on Workplace—“Why don’t consumers unfollow ‘bad’ Pages?”; “Have we made people addicted to Facebook?”; “Haven’t we had enough time to figure out how to manage discourse without enabling violence?” But there is one core question that can’t be asked directly—or, at least, can’t seem to get traction at the company’s highest levels: On the whole, are we really doing more good than harm? “The internal narrative is that the platform is by and large good,” Brian Boland, a former vice-president at Facebook, told the Wall Street Journal . People may pose provocations or alternative theories, but the dominant narrative always seems to prevail. On August 21, 2020, Andrew Bosworth, a Meta executive with a long history of writing notes on Workplace that inadvertently reveal the company’s id, posted a short essay called “Demand Side Problems.” “As a society we don’t have a hate speech supply problem, we have a hate speech demand problem,” he wrote. “Online platforms work on the supply side because they don’t control the demand side.” Facebook could and should continue trying to moderate hate speech, he argued, but “we should temper our expectations for results” because, at bottom, hate speech on Facebook wasn’t really Facebook’s fault. The problem lay on the “demand side”—in other words, the problem was Facebook’s users.

The post received six hundred and seventy-nine reactions, all “like”s and “love”s, and a hundred and twenty-five comments. Bosworth’s argument had plenty of flaws—for example, it seemed to assume that people have some incorrigible drive to seek out white-supremacist memes on the Internet, rather than assuming that people’s innate desires for camaraderie, novelty, and dignity could be met in other ways if they spent their time in healthier online spaces—but many of these flaws went unaddressed.

“In practice, we do have control over demand, because we run the marketplace,” one commenter replied. (In the Facebook Papers, the names of all non-executive employees are redacted.) This comment received just two likes, and Bosworth only replied to it in part.

“What if—and just hear me out here—what if Feed ranking might generate ‘hate speech demand’?” someone else wrote. This got twelve reactions, but neither Bosworth nor anyone else replied to it.

“I think reducing the demand side can reduce the supply side,” another commenter wrote. No reactions, no replies.

The majority of the comments were flattering to Bosworth, even obsequious. “will you please do an internal master class for us?” a commenter asked him.

“This is very bad for my ego,” Bosworth responded.

In July, 2020, in a different Workplace thread, called “Just Flagging and Comms Feedback,” an employee posted a link to a joint investigation by two muckraking newsletters, Popular Information and Heated: “Fact-check of viral climate misinformation quietly removed from Facebook.” A few days earlier, the Daily Wire, a conservative site, had published a piece arguing that climate change is “not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.” The piece was evaluated by Science Feedback, an independent fact checker doing contract work for Facebook, which rated it “partly false.” Facebook, following its own protocols, added a warning label to the article and slowed its viral spread. After the writer of the piece complained that he was being “censored” and a Republican congressmember intervened on his behalf, Facebook reconsidered. An internal e-mail, sent to several top communications executives, concluded that the fact-check was accurate, but nonetheless assessed whether Facebook should “reach out to Science Feedback and ask them to amend this rating.” A little while later, with no explanation, the fact-checking label was removed.

On Workplace, the link to the Popular Information article got eighty-three reaction emojis, including several “angry”s and “sad”s. “We never got an internal explanation about what happened with this, right?” an employee wrote.

“What the F****!” another wrote. “Are we not seeing in real time the impact of letting science mis-information ravage our country?”

Liz Bourgeois, who was then a Facebook communications executive, joined the thread and tried to offer a partial explanation (“We’re working to make our guidelines clearer on this going forward”), but the employees were not assuaged.

Elsewhere in the thread, one contrarian employee—whose job title appeared to be Environmental Program Manager—tried to mount the old free-speech-above-all defense: “Is there something wrong with us having an open platform where people can post arguments for either side of an issue and then people make up their own minds for themselves?” Although this is the argument that Zuckerberg tends to deploy in public to justify Facebook’s business model, the rest of the employees weren’t buying it. “Anthropogenic climate change is causing real harm, and beliefs to the contrary perpetuate it,” one of them wrote. Another pointed out that Facebook’s policies already prohibit “content that poses an immediate threat to human health or safety”—what good were such policies if “immediate threat” was defined so narrowly that contributing to the destruction of the planet didn’t count? (“As a company, we have every commercial and moral incentive to try to give the maximum number of people as much of a positive experience as possible on Facebook,” a Meta spokesperson told me. “The growth of people or advertisers using Facebook means nothing if our services aren’t being used in ways that bring people closer together.”) One employee wrote that a question about climate denialism “should be in the top 5 questions for Zuck tomorrow”—that is, the five questions that are posed to Zuckerberg during his appearance at the company’s weekly all-hands meeting. It’s not clear whether such a question was asked or, if so, whether the employees got a satisfactory answer.

“This is incredibly frustrating to read and puts me into a really awkward position where I have to side with leakers,” an employee wrote elsewhere in the thread. “It appears that the pressure from the outside is indeed the only way to get an answer or drive any meaningful change.”

New Yorker Favorites

• Why the last snow on Earth may be red.
• When Toni Morrison was a young girl, her father taught her an important lesson about work .
• The fantastical, earnest world of haunted dolls on eBay .
• Can neuroscience help us rewrite our darkest memories ?
• The anti-natalist philosopher David Benatar argues that it would be better if no one had children ever again .
• What rampant materialism looks like, and what it costs .
• Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Sarah Stillman

By Benjamin Wallace-Wells

By Emily Nussbaum

By Emily Witt

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Behav Addict
• v.3(3); 2014 Sep

The uses and abuses of Facebook: A review of Facebook addiction

Tracii ryan.

1 School of Health Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

ANDREA CHESTER

2 School of Design and Social Context, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

SOPHIA XENOS

Background and aims: Recent research suggests that use of social networking sites can be addictive for some individuals. Due to the link between motivations for media use and the development of addiction, this systematic review examines Facebook-related uses and gratifications research and Facebook addiction research. Method: Searches of three large academic databases revealed 24 studies examining the uses and gratifications of Facebook, and nine studies of Facebook addiction. Results: Comparison of uses and gratifications research reveals that the most popular mo- tives for Facebook use are relationship maintenance, passing time, entertainment, and companionship. These motivations may be related to Facebook addiction through use that is habitual, excessive, or motivated by a desire for mood alteration. Examination of Facebook addiction research indicates that Facebook use can become habitual or excessive, and some addicts use the site to escape from negative moods. However, examination of Facebook addic- tion measures highlights inconsistency in the field. Discussion: There is some evidence to support the argument that uses and gratifications of Facebook are linked with Facebook addiction. Furthermore, it appears as if the social skill model of addiction may explain Facebook addiction, but inconsistency in the measurement of this condition limits the ability to provide conclusive arguments. Conclusions: This paper recommends that further research be performed to establish the links between uses and gratifications and Facebook addiction. Furthermore, in order to enhance the construct validity of Facebook addiction, researchers should take a more systematic approach to assessment.

Introduction

In the last decade, the use of social networking sites (SNSs) has grown exponentially. For example, statistics provided by Facebook ( 2014 ) reveal that as of March 2014 there were 1.28 billion active users on the site per month, and at least 802 million of these users logged into Facebook every day. With statistics such as these, it is not surprising that Facebook is the most popular SNS in the world (see Figure 1 ). It is also one of the most popular websites on the Internet, second only to Google in global usage ( Alexa Internet, 2013 ). As a result of this popularity, social scientists have recently begun to examine aspects of its use (for a detailed review of this topic see Wilson, Gosling & Graham, 2012 ). However, limited research has examined the potential for Facebook use to become addictive ( Griffiths, Kuss & Demetrovics, 2014 ).

Active users of ten popular social networking sites

SNS addiction

SNS addiction has been defined as a failure to regulate usage, which leads to negative personal outcomes ( LaRose, Kim & Peng, 2010 ). While a growing number of researchers accept the possibility that the use of online applications can become addictive, the concept is contentious ( Griffiths, 2013 ) . In fact, despite over 15 years of Internet addiction research, the most recent version of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5 th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) failed to include it as an addictive disorder.

While the exclusion of Internet addiction from the DSM-5 may create the perception that online addictions are not legitimate mental disorders, there is a large body of literature that suggests otherwise (see Kuss, Griffiths, Karila & Billieux, 2014 , for a more extensive review of this topic).

Note: Usage statistics in Figure 1 are current as at December 2013, and were sourced from the webpage “How Many People Use 340 of the Top Social Media, Apps & Services?” by Craig Smith, 1 December, 2013. Retrieved 9 December, 2013, from http://expandedramblings.com/index.php/resource-how-many-people-use-the-top-social-media .

In addition, a member of the DSM-5 working group suggested that inclusion of Internet addiction in future iterations of the DSM is possible, but is contingent upon the results of more rigorous research studies ( O’Brien, 2010 ). Unfortunately, at this point, there remains a sense of conceptual confusion associated with Internet addiction ( Meerkerk, van den Eijnden, Vermulst & Garretsen, 2009 ). For instance, a recent systematic review identified that there is no gold standard measure of this condition, nor is there any widely accepted theory ( Kuss et al., 2014 ).

One emerging theory of online addiction is Caplan’s ( 2010 ) social skill model of generalised problematic Internet use. This model states that individuals who prefer to communicate in an online environment are at greater risk of experiencing negative outcomes related to excessive online use. These individuals, who demonstrate deficient self-regulation of Internet use, tend to engage in online social communication as a means of escaping from negative mood states, such as loneliness or anxiety. Communicating online alleviates negative moods (known as mood alteration ), which then reinforces online use. Given the social focus of SNSs, this theory has the potential to explain SNS addiction. However, despite the popularity of SNS use, empirical research examining addiction to these online social platforms is currently lacking.

In 2011, Kuss and Griffiths performed a comprehensive literature review to examine the legitimacy of SNS addiction. In their paper, they focused on six areas associated with SNS addiction: usage patterns, motivations for SNS use, personalities of SNS users, negative consequences of SNS use, empirical evidence of SNS addiction, and co-morbidity. At that time, the authors were only able to locate five studies of SNS addiction. As a result, they were limited in their ability to ascertain the status of this potential disorder. While they were able to recognise that excessive use of SNSs can be linked to negative outcomes, they concluded that more extensive research was required to prove the existence of this disorder.

Three years later, Griffiths et al. ( 2014 ) performed another review of SNS addiction, this time locating 17 studies. This increase in the extant literature highlights the perceived salience of this topic of investigation. However, despite the larger body of research available for review, Griffiths et al. were not able to offer any more substantial conclusions. While they did find preliminary evidence for some symptoms of SNS addiction (e.g., preoccupation, withdrawal, and negative consequences), methodological issues associated with the majority of studies precluded the ability to form any conclusions regarding the legitimacy of SNS addiction. As a result, they proposed that the question of whether addiction to SNSs exists remains open for debate.

Griffiths et al. ( 2014 ) also made the valid point that describing SNS addiction is not a clear-cut process. In particular, they posit that becoming addicted to the social aspects of SNS use may represent “cyber-relationship addiction” ( Young, Pistner, O’Mara & Buchanan, 1999 ), while addiction to SNS games, such as the popular Facebook application Farmville, should fall under the classification of “gaming addiction” ( Griffiths, 2012 ). In the present paper, we argue that this notion should be taken one step further; just as the Farmville addict may differ from someone who compulsively posts social content on SNSs, so too may the motivations of the Facebook addict differ from the Twitter addict. As will become clear, this point is supported by research relating to the gratifications of SNS use.

Uses and gratifications of SNSs

Commonly, when researchers choose to examine the motivations associated with particular forms of media, they do so by employing a uses and gratifications approach. Uses and gratifications theory states that one of the keys to understanding the popularity of mass media lies in the identification of the factors underlying its use ( Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1973 ). One of the first studies to examine the uses and gratifications of SNSs was performed by Raacke and Bonds-Raacke ( 2008 ). After surveying a sample of university students from the USA, these authors reported that the primary motivations for Facebook and MySpace use was to form and maintain social connections. Since that time, numerous studies have reinforced the importance of relationship maintenance as a key reason for Facebook use (e.g., Joinson, 2008 ; Sheldon 2008 , 2009 ; Valentine, 2012 ). Indeed, Kuss and Griffiths ( 2011 ) argue that relationship maintenance is the main motivator for all SNS use.

However, studies looking at the uses and gratifications of SNSs other than Facebook tend to indicate that Kuss and Griffiths’ ( 2011 ) argument may be somewhat misleading. For example, Dunne, Lawlor and Rowley ( 2010 ) report that one of the most important uses and gratifications for Bebo use among teenage girls was impression management. In addition, research relating to video and image sharing SNSs (such as YouTube and Pinterest) indicate that the use of these sites is primarily influenced by the need for self-expression and entertainment ( Gülnar, Balcé & Çakér, 2010 ; Mull & Lee, 2014 ). Given the varied features of different SNSs, these findings are hardly surprising. As Chen ( 2011 ) notes, “multiple media compete for users’ attention”, and “active users select the medium that meets their needs” (p. 759).

The results of these studies show that, while it is true that all SNSs serve a similar purpose - to facilitate social interaction through the efficient dissemination of information to a desired audience - the specific features of each individual site are often varied ( Boyd & Ellison, 2007 ). For this reason, it is unwise to assume that the results of a study that focuses on one particular SNS can be generalised to every SNS that is currently in existence ( Panek, Nardis & Konrath, 2013 ). Furthermore, important differences in SNS usage might be undetectable when data from different sites are combined ( Hargittai, 2008 ). Therefore, in the case of literature reviews such as those performed by Kuss and Griffiths ( 2011 ), it seems that the assumption of SNS homogeneity might be misguided. On the contrary, we argue that the need to separate out results from specific sites is crucial to understanding the development of SNS addiction.

Uses and gratifications and SNS addiction

Earlier, the point was made that the gratifications of a Facebook addict may differ from those of a Twitter addict. This example highlights the need for SNS addiction researchers to consider the motivations behind the use of addictive SNS platforms. According to Papacharissi and Mendelson ( 2011 ), “online media serve as functional alternatives to interpersonal and mediated communication, providing options or complements for aspects of an individual’s environment that are not as fulfilling” (p. 214). In certain circumstances, Internet users may lose control over use that was originally motivated by “active consideration of the gratifications of online behaviour” ( Song, LaRose, Eastin & Lin, 2004 , p. 390).

While the relationship between uses and gratifications and SNS addiction was previously recognised by Kuss and Griffiths ( 2011 ), limited research has been performed in this area. One of the first empirical studies to examine the relationship between SNS addiction and uses and gratifications was performed by Wan ( 2009 ). She studied use of the campus-based SNS Xiaonei.com amongst a sample of 335 Chinese college students. The results revealed that Xiaonei.com addiction was significantly associated with the motives of socialisation and relationship building. Similarly, another study based on a Greek sample of 1971 adolescents ( Floros & Siomos, 2013 ) found that the motivations of seeking friendship, relationship maintenance, and escapism, along with impulsive use of the Internet, predicted more frequent SNS participation.

While the two studies mentioned above support the notion that SNS use can be associated with a desire to socialise and form relationships online, findings from other studies indicate that this is not always the case. For example, Huang ( 2012 ) examined SNS use among 1549 adolescents, and found that entertainment gratifications were the strongest predictor of SNS addiction. In another study, Chen and Kim ( 2013 ) revealed that there was a positive relationship between SNS addiction and using SNSs for diversion and self-presentation. Of course, given that all of these studies (with the exclusion of Wan, 2009) measured aggregated SNS use, it is possible that these contrasting results reflect different types of SNSs used by each sample. If so, this would contribute to the argument that SNSs researchers should focus on specific sites rather than SNS use in general.

Rationale and scope of this review

As outlined above, the development of SNS addiction is likely to be linked to the gratifications associated with use of the particular site. The aim of this paper was to clarify this relationship by synthesising literature relating to the motivations for SNS use and SNS addiction. In doing so, the present paper builds upon a previous review of SNS literature by Kuss and Griffith ( 2011 ). Based on the issues outlined above, we argue that this review is necessary for two main reasons. First, although only three years has passed since Kuss and Griffiths’ original review was conducted, Griffiths et al. ( 2014 ) recently demonstrated that the extant literature has grown substantially in this time period. Second, previous reviews of SNS addiction have failed to examine results from particular social networking sites in isolation. As argued above, this approach may have obscured important results relating to the particular motivations of SNS use and SNS addiction. In contrast, the present review expands on the previous work by focusing only on research related to a single SNS: Facebook.

There were two main reasons for selecting Facebook over other SNSs. First, Facebook is considerably more popular than other SNSs (see Figure 1 ). The widespread acceptance of Facebook suggests that there maybe unique factors associated with this SNS that are working to gratify the needs of a large number of Internet users. Second, in their review of SNS addiction, Griffith et al. ( 2014 ) demonstrated that empirical studies based on Facebook outweigh studies focusing on any other SNS.

The synthesis of literature provided in this review should not only clarify the findings related to Facebook addiction, but will also help to address questions regarding the particular motivations of Facebook users, and whether these motivations are linked to the development of Facebook addiction. Furthermore, by performing a review of Facebook addiction literature at such an early stage, inconsistencies with the conceptualisation and assessment of this disorder can be identified. Through this process, recommendations for future research can be made, which should hopefully fortify the construct validity of this potential condition. If this can be achieved, Facebook addiction research would avoid the conceptual confusion that has consistently plagued Internet addiction research.

A literature search was performed using the academic databases ProQuest (including PsycInfo), ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. These databases were selected as they provide access to a large number of scientific peer-reviewed journal articles and theses from multiple disciplines. Two types of research studies were of interest in the current study: those relating to the uses and gratifications of Facebook, and those relating to Facebook addiction. Searches for uses and gratifications studies were performed using the terms ‘Facebook’, ‘social networking sites’, ‘social network sites’, ‘motivations’, and ‘uses and gratifications’. Searches for studies of Facebook addiction were performed using the terms ‘addiction’, ‘problematic’, ‘abuse’, ‘compulsive’, ‘excessive’, ‘social networking sites’, ‘social network sites’, and ‘Facebook’.

Uses and gratifications studies were included in the review if they measured the motivations of Facebook use in general; therefore, studies were excluded if they only focused on specific features of Facebook (i.e. a particular Facebook game). Furthermore, given that the present review was focused on the uses and gratifications of Facebook, rather than those of other SNSs, studies were excluded if they measured aggregated uses and gratifications for multiple SNSs (even if they included Facebook). According to LaRose, Mastro and Eastin ( 2001 ), “uses and gratifications researchers typically start with descriptions of common media uses, obtain ratings of the frequency or importance of those uses, and factor analyse the results to obtain gratification factors that are then correlated with media use” (p. 396). However, as this systematic review was interested in identifying all of the possible uses and gratifications of Facebook use, studies were included even if they had not reported evidence of factor analysis. In cases where factor analysis had been performed, the percentages of variance explained by each factor were recorded where available. This information was included in order to ascertain whether certain motivators of Facebook use are more important than others.

In regard to Facebook addiction literature, studies were excluded if they focused on addiction to SNSs in general (even if this included Facebook) and only provided combined results from these multiple sites in an aggregated format. As explained above, this criterion was necessary to ensure that results relating to other SNSs were excluded. For similar reasons, studies considering the role of Facebook use in relation to Internet addiction were also excluded.

Results and Discussion

Within this section, the results of the literature searches are presented, followed by a review of the common findings identified within the extant literature. Uses and gratifications studies are discussed first, including a section dedicated to a discussion of the variables associated with particular uses and gratifications. This is followed by a review of Facebook addiction studies, including an examination of the various instruments that were used to measure this construct.

Uses and gratifications

Twenty-four studies were identified that examined the uses and gratifications of Facebook and met the criteria identified above. For ease of comparison, the results of these studies are displayed in Table 1 . When the uses and gratifications factors are compared, some clear patterns emerge. In 14 out of the 16 studies where the percentage of variance for each factor was reported, the factors accounting for the majority of the variance relate to either relationship maintenance or passing time . In this context, relationship maintenance involves interacting with members of an individual’s existing offline social network ( Sheldon, 2008 ). Clearly, many Facebook users view the site as a useful tool to facilitate social interaction with existing friends and family. In this regard, Facebook differs from many older online social applications, such as discussion boards and newsgroups, which were primarily used for the formation of new relationships. Instead, Facebook appears to have an offline-to-online social focus ( Ellison, Steinfield & Lampe, 2007 ).

Systematic review of studies of the uses and gratifications of Facebook

a As these results originate from conference papers, they may be of a lower quality than the other reported studies.

b Individual variances for each factor were not provided.

Similar to the results presented here, Kuss and Griffiths ( 2011 ) also found that relationship maintenance was an important motivation for SNS use. As those authors did not look at specific SNSs independently from each other, it is unclear whether all SNSs have this focus, or whether these authors primarily discussed results from predominantly Facebook-related studies. The latter explanation is possible as, due to the popularity of the site, Facebook-related research tends to be more prominent than research relating to other SNSs. Clearly, researchers should endeavour to determine whether the uses and gratifications of other popular SNSs are similar or different to those associated with Facebook. In doing so, it would establish whether the popularity of Facebook is tied to unique factors.

In regard to the popular gratification of passing time, the findings appear to reflect the habitual use of Facebook to occupy time when bored, or to procrastinate from other activities ( Foregger, 2008 ; Sheldon, 2008 ). Using Facebook for this purpose may involve such activities as checking the News Feed for new updates or playing games. Papacharissi and Mendelson ( 2011 ) refer to such use as ritualised, and indicate that it reflects “the addictive nature of the genre” (p. 226). Based on this, it is possible that the gratification of passing time may be related to Facebook addiction, but further research is required.

If the remaining factors in Table 1 are compared, it is apparent that entertainment, companionship, and escape appear across multiple studies. Although these factors tend to account for less variance in their respective analyses than relationship maintenance and passing time, they are also worth discussing briefly, as they may be related to the development of Facebook addiction.

Fifteen studies in Table 1 include a factor relating to the use of Facebook for entertainment purposes. This factor encapsulates using Facebook to engage in socially passive activities, such as looking at user-generated content on the site, or playing games. In essence, the entertainment factor appears similar in nature to the more popular passing time factor. However, the latter appears to be motivated more by task avoidance, procrastination or filling time, while the former reflects planned usage for the purposes of pleasure seeking. In Sheldon’s ( 2008 ) study, the entertainment factor had a high mean score, which highlights the importance of this motivation for Facebook use in certain populations.

In regard to companionship, this factor was present in six out of 24 studies. Companionship taps into the use of Facebook to avoid loneliness and gratify interpersonal needs. Similarly, two other studies included motivations that related to decreasing loneliness ( Balakrishnan & Shamim, 2013 ; Teppers, Luyckx, Klimstra & Goossens, 2014 ). Given that there is a link between loneliness and the development of Internet addiction ( Caplan, 2010 ), it is possible that factors such as these may also be related to Facebook addiction. It is interesting to note that in Valentine’s (2011) study, top-loading items in the companionship factor related to the use of Facebook to escape from worries and problems. Such items may be suggestive of mood alteration, which, as mentioned earlier, is linked to addiction of online social applications ( Caplan, 2010 ; Lortie & Guitton, 2013 ). However, none of the uses and gratifications studies reviewed here explicitly referred to this dimension. Instead, they appear to use the term escape , which was included in four out of 24 studies.

Variables linked to uses and gratifications

Several of the 24 studies in Table 1 also identified variables that are commonly linked to the uses and gratifications of Facebook. A discussion of these variables was deemed to be germane to the current paper, as it sheds light on the types of people who may be at risk of Facebook addiction. This discussion taps into three main variables: gender, frequency of use, and duration of use.

Of the studies presented in Table 1 , five examined the association between gender and uses and gratifications of Facebook ( Hunt, Atkin & Krishnan, 2012 ; Joinson, 2008 ; Sheldon, 2009 ; Spiliotopoulos & Oakley, 2013 ; Teppers et al., 2014 ). In all of these studies, women were more likely than men to use Facebook for connecting with existing contacts. In contrast, Sheldon ( 2009 ) found that men were more likely than women to be motivated by making new friends or forming new romantic relationships on Facebook. Although Facebook has changed since Sheldon’s study was published, a recent study by Spiliotopoulos and Oakley ( 2013 ) also found that men prefer to use Facebook to engage in social network browsing.

The above results point to a fundamental difference between women and men in their uses and gratifications of Facebook; women prefer to use the site to maintain their existing social networks, while men prefer to use it to expand their social networks. Given that past research has linked Internet addiction with a tendency to prefer communicating with new online friends (e.g., Morahan-Martin & Schumacher, 2000 ; Young, 1998a ), it is possible that men may be more likely to fail to regulate their online communication and become addicted to Facebook. However, recent research has found that women are heavier users of Facebook than men ( Foregger, 2008 ). In light of these conflicting results, it is clear that researchers should examine the difference that gender plays in the development of Facebook addiction. In fact, it may be the case that there are multiple pathways to addiction, and these are mediated by different communicative motivations.

In Joinson’s ( 2008 ) study, frequency of Facebook use - that is, returning to Facebook multiple times per day - was found to be associated with what he called surveillance gratifications . This involves looking at user-generated content, such as photographs and status updates. Similarly, Hart ( 2011 ) reported that the entertainment gratification was a significant variable in a model predicting the frequency of Facebook use in both undergraduate and high school students. These results imply that passively engaging with social or entertainment-related content on Facebook can motivate users to return to the site frequently. This kind of use may be associated with checking for real-time updates on the News Feed, as content will generally be updated regularly. Such behaviour may be tapping into what is anecdotally referred to as fear of missing out or FoMO ( Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan & Gladwell, 2013 ); however, this warrants further investigation.

Interestingly, Papacharassi and Mendelson ( 2011 ) found that people who used Facebook more frequently developed a greater affinity with the site, especially when they used it to escape from negative emotions. As already discussed, the use of online applications for mood alteration is associated with deficient self-regulation and negative outcomes ( Caplan, 2010 ). Therefore, it is possible that this aspect of the social skill model of generalised problematic Internet use is relevant to the use of Facebook. While more in-depth research is required to support this theory, it is plausible that lonely or socially anxious individuals may feel more connected with others when checking the News Feed for recent updates, or when receiving messages or comments from friends. If so, this may lead such users to check the site frequently, in order to attain the negative reinforcement of mood alteration.

Joinson ( 2008 ) also found that the duration of time spent on Facebook per day was predicted by what he referred to as content gratifications, which involve engaging in non-so- cially oriented Facebook activities (i.e., playing games, searching applications, and completing quizzes). Similarly, Foregger ( 2008 ) found that using Facebook to pass time led to more time spent on Facebook per day. Taken together, these findings suggest that individuals who spend a lot of time on Facebook per day may do so for different reasons than those who check Facebook frequently. For example, rather than passively engaging with posted social content in the way that frequent users do, heavy users may be gratified by non-social activities such as game playing.

In contrast to the assumption above, Hart ( 2011 ) discovered that using Facebook for entertainment and relationship maintenance significantly contributed to a model predicting the amount of time spent on Facebook per day. This opposing result can potentially be explained by changes made to Facebook after 2008. In particular, Facebook added the real-time synchronous instant messaging application ‘Chat’ in April of that year ( Wiseman, 2008 ). This feature may have encouraged some Facebook users to spend more time on the site for social purposes, such as chatting with their friends and family. Furthermore, Alhabash, Park, Kononova, Chiang and Wise ( 2012 ) reported that Facebook intensity was predicted by the desire to share personal information via status updates. These results suggest that socially active Facebook applications, such as Chat and status updates may be associated with heavy Facebook use. One potential explanation for this trend is that the use of these applications increases the chance of receiving comments and messages from other users. For some individuals, such as those who are lonely, receiving this type of feedback could provide relief from feelings of social isolation and reinforce the use of these applications. In support of this, Yang and Brown ( 2013 ) reported that the use of status updates was associated with higher levels of loneliness, while Teppers et al. ( 2014 ) found that lonely adolescents were more likely to use the socially interactive applications of Facebook than non-lonely adolescents.

Facebook addiction

Nine studies measuring Facebook addiction were located through the literature searches (see Table 2 ). The results of these studies suggest that Facebook addiction is associated with being male ( Çam & İsbulan, 2012 ), being a heavy Facebook user ( Hong, Huang, Lin & Chiu, 2014 ; Koc & Gulyagci, 2013 ), and being in a higher year level at university ( Çam & İsbulan, 2012 ). Facebook addiction was also linked to certain psychological variables, such as relationship dissatisfaction ( Elphinston & Noller, 2011 ), depression ( Hong et al., 2014 ; Koc & Gulyagci, 2013 ), anxiety ( Koc & Gulyagci, 2013 ), subjective happiness, and subjective vitality ( Uysal, Satici & Akin, 2014 ). In terms of the symptoms of Facebook addiction, support was found for the existence of preference for online social interaction, mood alteration, deficient self-regulation, negative outcomes ( Lee, Cheung & Thadani, 2012 ), salience, loss of control, withdrawal, relapse ( Balakrishinan & Shamim, 2013 ), and tolerance ( Zaremohzzabieh, Samah, Omar, Bolong & Kamarudin, 2014 ).

Systematic review of Facebook addiction studies

a As these results originate from a conference paper, they may be of a lower quality than the other reported studies.

Only one study directly examined whether there was an association between the uses and gratifications of Facebook and Facebook addiction. Sofiah, Omar, Bolong and Osman ( 2011 ) reported that Facebook addicts were more inclined to use Facebook for social interaction, passing time, entertainment, companionship, and communication. These findings support the assumptions made earlier following the systematic review of uses and gratifications studies. Despite the lack of direct examination of the motivations of Facebook use by addictions researchers, the results of the studies included in Table 2 tap into three distinct themes that were also apparent in the uses and gratifications research: habitual Facebook use, excessive Facebook use, and mood alteration. The following section will discuss these results in more detail. Following this, a discussion relating to the measurement of Facebook addiction in these studies will be provided.

Habitual Facebook use

In the study performed by Elphinston and Noller ( 2011 ), the three items on the Facebook Intrusion Scale with the highest individual mean scores were ‘I often use Facebook for no particular reason’, ‘I feel connected to others when I use Facebook’, and ‘I lose track of how much I am using Facebook’. Likewise, Sofiah et al. ( 2011 ) reported that the items with the highest mean scores on their measure of Facebook addiction were ‘Facebook has become part of my daily routine’, ‘I find that I stay on Facebook longer than intended’, and ‘I feel out of touch when I haven’t logged onto Facebook for a while’. These results highlight the propensity for Facebook use to lead to deficient self-regulation through habitual and unmonitored use.

The results of the study by Sofiah et al. ( 2011 ) also revealed that the gratification of using Facebook to pass time accounted for 17.3% of the variance in scores from their measure of Facebook addiction (described in Table 3 ). Further, using Facebook for the combined motives of passing time, entertainment, and communication accounted for 23.9% of the variance. Therefore, habitual use of Facebook for passing time may put users at risk of Facebook addiction through the development of deficient self-regulation. As discussed above, passing time on Facebook appears to be predominantly associated with task avoidance and procrastination ( Foregger, 2008 ; Sheldon, 2008 ). As these types of gratifications are not socially focused, it seems that Caplan’s ( 2010 ) social skill model may not be adequate to explain these particular results. Further research is warranted to explore this supposition.

Facebook Addiction Assessment Instruments

a These measures have been subjected to factor analysis.

b This paper was not included in Table 2 as it is an instrument development study rather than a Facebook addiction study.

Excessive Facebook use

Two of the studies listed in Table 2 reported that higher levels of Facebook use were linked to Facebook addiction ( Hong et al., 2014 ; Koc & Gulyagci, 2013 ). These results are not surprising, given that online addictions researchers have previously pointed to a link between heavy Internet usage and addiction (e.g., Tonioni et al., 2012 ). In fact, many scholars have used the term “excessive Internet use” interchangeably with the term Internet addiction. This trend is most likely due to the popular belief that spending a large amount of time performing a particular behaviour, such as exercise or eating chocolate, is an indicator of the presence of addiction ( Leon & Rotunda, 2000 ); however, there are mixed views on this argument. Both Caplan ( 2005 ) and Griffiths ( 1999 ) have pointed out that excessive time spent online does not automatically qualify an individual as addicted. There are many non-problematic Internet behaviours that would involve extended periods of time online, such as study or work-related research. However, while not all people who spend large amounts of time on Facebook per day are necessarily addicted, due to the role that deficient self-regulation is thought to play, it makes sense that Facebook addicts would generally be heavy users.

Research relating to the uses and gratifications of Facebook has indicated that time spent on Facebook per day is related to content gratifications ( Joinson, 2008 ), passing time ( Foregger, 2008 ), and relationship maintenance ( Hart, 2011 ). Frequency of Facebook use has also found to be associated with using Facebook for entertainment ( Hart, 2011 ) and surveillance gratifications ( Joinson, 2008 ). This suggests that there are several different gratifications associated with both heavy and frequent Facebook use, and again, not all are socially focused.

Mood alteration

Lee et al. ( 2012 ) assessed whether Caplan’s ( 2010 ) social skill model applied to Facebook addiction. The results revealed that having a preference for online social interaction, and using Facebook for mood alteration, explained 35% of the variance in scores measuring deficient self-regulation of Facebook use. In turn, deficient self-regulation of Facebook use had a direct impact on the experience of negative life outcomes. While not measuring mood alteration directly, two other studies ( Hong et al., 2014 ; Koc & Gulyagci, 2013 ) provided evidence to support a relationship between low psychosocial health (depression and anxiety) and Facebook addiction. These findings may indicate that depressed and anxious people turn to Facebook to find relief and escape.

In regard to the link between these findings and uses and gratifications, evidence suggests that lonely people use Facebook to gain a sense of companionship ( Foregger, 2008 ; Sheldon, 2008 ), and to help them escape from their worries and problems ( Valentine, 2012 ). Papacharassi and Mendelson ( 2011 ) found that people who use Facebook to escape from unwanted moods use the site more frequently. They also tend to enjoy Facebook use more than non-lonely users. In 2007, Caplan reported that loneliness is associated with Internet addiction, and that this relationship is mediated by social anxiety. Therefore, it seems that the findings reported here partly support Caplan’s ( 2010 ) social skill model.

Measuring Facebook addiction

Due to the fact that Facebook addiction is an emerging field, different researchers have taken varying approaches to the measurement of this potential disorder. This is illustrated in Table 3 , which provides a summary of existing Facebook addiction instruments. As can be seen, scholars have tended to either create their own measures based on research from related addiction fields, or they have borrowed and modified existing measures of Internet addiction. A similar process also occurred when researchers began to create measures of Internet addiction ( Lortie & Guitton, 2013 ). Most Internet addiction instruments seem to be based on other addictive disorders, such as pathological gambling or substance-related addiction. This approach has led to confusion surrounding the appropriate criteria with which to measure Internet addiction, and has contributed to the underlying sense of conceptual chaos in the field ( Meerkerk et al., 2009 ). As a result, applying a similar approach to the measurement of Facebook addiction should be avoided.

In support of the above argument, examination of the Facebook addiction instruments that have been subjected to factor analysis (see Table 3 ) highlights inconsistency in measurement. For instance, both The Facebook Intrusion

Questionnaire ( FIQ; Elphinston & Noller, 2011 ) and the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale ( BFAS; Andreassen, Torsheim, Brunborg & Pallesen, 2012 ) include factors tapping into salience, withdrawal and relapse; however, that is where the similarities between these measures end. Likewise, there are more differences than similarities between the Generalised Problematic Internet Use Scale ( GPIUS2; Caplan, 2010 ) and the BFAS, although both include a mood-related factor (mood alteration/mood modification) and a negative outcomes factor (negative outcomes/conflicts). These examples underscore a lack of construct validity surrounding Facebook addiction. Moreover, they highlight the inconsistencies underlying behavioural addictions research in general.

As Facebook is an application of the Internet, it could be argued that the manifestation of Facebook addiction would have more in common with Internet addiction than it does with other forms of addiction, such as pathological gambling. In support of this claim, Caplan ( 2010 ) argues that preference for online communication is the key factor associated with the development of problematic use of online forms of communication. Given that Lee et al. ( 2012 ) found this factor was also relevant to Facebook addiction, it seems that preference for online social interaction is a factor worth including in ameasure of Facebook addiction. The modified version of the GPIUS2 therefore possibly presents the best option for measuring Facebook addiction out of all of the measures in Table 3 ; however, it also has limitations. For example, it does not provide a cut-off point for recognising problematic use ( Spraggins, 2009 ), nor does it measure how long the use has been problematic ( Griffiths, 2000 ).

Another point to consider is that, in light of the unprecedented popularity of Facebook with Internet users across the world, it is possible that there may be unique aspects associated with the development of addiction to this site. For example, past research has linked Internet addiction to the desire to communication with new online acquaintances, but uses and gratifications research has shown that the main motivation of Facebook use relates to maintaining existing online relationships. In this way, Facebook may be different to other forms of social media; however, this has yet to be determined.

Furthermore, if it is true that maintaining existing online relationships leads to Facebook addiction, it is important to be clear about what ‘existing relationships’ means. Does it refer purely to current and strong existing offline relationships, or does it take into account relationships from the past that have been rekindled through Facebook? One way of answering such questions would be to conduct in-depth exploratory research with Facebook addicted individuals. As opposed to borrowing and amending measures from conceptually related disorders, proceeding with research in an exploratory direction could enhance the construct validity of Facebook addiction and its associated measures.

Conclusions

The aim of this paper was to extend the work of Kuss and Griffiths ( 2011 ) by synthesising literature relating to the uses and abuses of Facebook. By examining this research, several important and previously unreported points have been highlighted. First, researchers have recognised that the main uses and gratifications of Facebook are relationship maintenance, passing time, entertainment, and companionship. Some of these gratifications appear to be more common among particular groups, such as women and younger users. Although there is limited empirical research examining the links between uses and gratifications and Facebook abuse, it is possible that these motives may cause Facebook use that is habitual, excessive, or motivated by a desire to escape from negative moods.

Second, in regard to Facebook addiction, the findings discussed here paint the following picture: individuals with low psychosocial wellbeing, such as loneliness, anxiety or depression, are motivated to use Facebook to find social support or to pass time. The lift in mood that this provides (also known as mood alteration) leads to deficient self-regulation, possibly due to negative reinforcement. In severe cases, this can eventually lead to negative life consequences.

For the most part, this description appears to support Caplan’s ( 2010 ) social skill model of generalised problematic Internet use. On the other hand, it is also possible that there are multiple pathways to Facebook addiction; for instance, those triggered by non-socially motivated use or fear of missing out. Unfortunately, at this point in time, inconsistency in the measurement of Facebook addiction makes it difficult to propose compelling arguments regarding this condition. It seems, therefore, that researchers should focus on strengthening the assessment of Facebook addiction before examining alternative pathways to the development of this condition. Further research should also aim to explore Facebook use within the general population, rather than focusing primarily on university students.

Furthermore, the offline-to-online social interactions that appear to motivate most Facebook users may be different to other forms of social media. Therefore, when measuring Facebook addiction, it is important to use an instrument that takes into account the potentially unique symptoms of the condition. At present, the existing measures described within this paper fail to achieve this, as they are primarily based on research from other areas of addiction. While the inclusion of the core symptoms of addiction is important, researchers in this area should also aim to conduct detailed exploratory studies of Facebook addiction, using either qualitative or mixed methods. This process should facilitate the development of more focused instruments of Facebook addiction, which, in turn, should provide more concrete evidence to support the legitimacy of this addictive disorder.

Limitations

Prior to concluding this paper, it is worth mentioning the possibility that performing a meta-analysis rather than a systematic review may have led to greater understanding of the uses and gratifications of Facebook and Facebook addiction. It should be mentioned, however, that a lack of consistency in regard to Facebook addiction measurement made a metaanalytic approach difficult.

Broader implications

It appears as if there is some evidence to support the notion that the uses and abuses of Facebook are linked. At this point in time, however, research addressing this salient area is still in its infancy. While some tentative steps forward have been made with this review, it is clear that the construct validity of Facebook addiction and its associated measures must be strengthened before research continues.

In addition, there is a strong need for a systematic method of item development when measuring emerging forms of addictive behaviours. As demonstrated in the present review, researchers currently tend to take a haphazard approach, which could end up resulting in conceptual confusion. Until a more systematic process is established, behavioural addictions researchers should think carefully when borrowing criteria or items from other addictive disorders. Ideally, researchers should endeavour to perform exploratory research in the first instance. This would offer more clarity in regards to which symptoms are relevant to the addictive disorder in question. Furthermore, an exploratory approach would provide opportunities for the identification of unique symptoms, which should improve construct validity.

Funding sources

No financial support was received for this study.

Authors’ contribution

TR and AC are responsible for the study concept and design. JR and SX performed study supervision. No data is included in this review.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

This review did not involve human and/or animal experimentation.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their insightful contributions to this paper.

• Aboujaoude, E. Koran L. M. Gamel N. Large M. D. Serpe R. T. Potential markers for problematic Internet use: A telephone survey of 2, 513 adults. CNS Spectrums. 2006; 11 :750–755. Retrieved from http://mbldownloads.com/1006CNS_Koran_CME.pdf . [ PubMed ]
• Aladwani A. M. Gravitating towards Facebook (GoToFB): What is it? And how can it be measured? Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 33 :270–278. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexa Internet. Alexa Top 500 Global Sites. Alexa.com . 2013 Retrieved July 25, 2013, from http://www.alexa.com/topsites .
• Alhabash S. Chiang Y. Huang K. MAM & U&G in Taiwan: Differences in the uses and gratifications of Facebook as a function of motivational reactivity. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014); 35 :423–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alhabash S. Park H. Kononova A. Chiang Y.-H. Wise K. Exploring the motivations of Facebook use in Taiwan. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2012; 15 :304–311. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association; (2013). American Psychiatric Association. [ Google Scholar ]
• Andreassen C. S. Torsheim T. Brunborg G. S. Pallesen S. Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychological Reports. 2012; 110 :501–517. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balakrishnan V. Shamim A. Malaysian Facebookers: Motives and addictive behaviours unraveled. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29 :1342–1349. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyd D. M. Ellison N. B. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2007; 13 :210–230. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown R. I. F. C. R. Hollin. A theoretical model of the behavioural ad- dictions – Applied to offending. In: J. E. Hodge., editor; M. McMurran., editor; Addicted to crime. Chichester, UK: John Wiley; 1997. pp. 13–65. [ Google Scholar ]
• Çam E. Isbulan O. A new addiction for teacher candidates: Social networks. The Turkish Online Journal of Education Technology. 2012; 11 (3):14–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Caplan S. E. A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal of Communication. 2005; 55 :721–736. [ Google Scholar ]
• Caplan S. E. Relations among loneliness, social anxiety, and problematic Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2007; 10 :234–242. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Caplan S. E. Theory and measurement of generalized problematic Internet use: A two-step approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 26 :1089–1097. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen G. M. Tweet this: A uses and gratifications perspective on how active Twitter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior. 2011; 27 :755–762. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen H. Kim Y. Problematic use of social network sites: The interactive relationship between gratifications sought and privacy concerns. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2013; 16 :806–812. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheung C. M. K. Chiu P. Lee M. K. O. Online social networks: Why do students use Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior. 2011; 27, :1337–1343. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dunne A. Lawlor M. Rowley J. Young people’s use of online social networking sites – A uses and gratifications perspective. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing. 2010; 4 :46–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellison N. B. Steinfield C. Lampe C. The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2007; 12 :1143–1168. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elphinston R. A. Noller P. Facebook intrusion and the implications for romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 14 :631–635. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Facebook Company info: Facebook newsroom. news-room. fb.com . 2014 Retrieved May 20, 2014, from http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/
• Floros G. Siomos K. The relationship between optimal parenting, Internet addiction and motives for social networking in adolescence. Psychiatry Research. 2013; 209 :529–534.. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foregger S. K. Uses and gratifications of Facebook.com (Doctoral thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3331906) 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Giannakos M. N. Chorianopoulos K. Giotopoulos K. Vlamos P. Using Facebook out of habit. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2013; 32 :594–602.
• Griffiths M. D. Internet addiction: Internet fuels other addictions. Student British Medical Journal. 1999; 7 :428–429. [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths M. D. Internet addiction – Time to be taken seriously? Addiction Research. 2000; 8 :413–418. [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths M. D. Facebook addiction: Concerns, criticism, and recommendations – A response to Andreassen and colleagues. Psychological Reports. 2012; 110 :518–520. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths M. D. Social networking addiction: Emerging themes and issues. Journal of Addiction Research & Therapy. 2013; 4 :118. [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths M. D. Kuss D. J. Demetrovics Z. Social networking addiction: An overview of preliminary findings. In: K. P. Rosenberg., editor; L. C. Feder., editor. Behavioral addictions: Criteria, evidence, and treatment. London: Academic Press; pp. 119–141. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gülnar B. Balcý S. Çakýr V. Motivations of Facebook, You Tube and similar web sites users. Bilig. 2010; 54 :161–184. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hargittai E. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2008; 13 :276–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hart M. A study on the motives of high school and undergraduate college students for using the social network site Facebook. (Doctoral thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3439733) 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hollenbaugh E. E. Ferris A. L. Facebook self-disclosure: Examining the role of traits, social cohesion, and motives. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 30 :50–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hong F. Huang D. Lin H. Chiu S. Analysis of the psychological traits, Facebook usage, and Facebook addiction model of Taiwanese university students. Telematics and Informatics. 2014; 31 :597–606. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huang H. Social media addiction among adolescents in urban China: An examination of sociopsychological traits, uses and gratifications, academic performance, and social capital. (Doctoral thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3514530) 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunt D. Atkin D. Krishnan A. The influence of computer-mediated communication apprehension on motives for Facebook use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 2012; 56 :197–202. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joinson A. N. ‘Looking at’, ‘looking up’ or ‘keeping up with’ people? Motives and uses of Facebook. Presented at the CHI 2008, Florence, Italy. 2008 Retrieved from http://portal.acm org/citation.cfm?id=1357213 .
• Katz E. Blumler J. G. Gurevitch M. Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly. 1973; 37 :509–523. [ Google Scholar ]
• Koc M. Gulyagci S. Facebook addiction among Turkish college students: The role of psychological health, demographic, and usage characteristics. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2013; 16 :279–284. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuss D. J. Griffiths M. D. Excessive online social networking – Can adolescents become addicted to Facebook? Education and Health. 2011; 29 :68, 71. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuss D. J. Griffiths M. D. Karila L. Billieux J. Internet addiction: A systematic review of epidemiological research for the last decade. Current Pharmaceutical Design. 2014; 20 :4026–4052. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• LaRose R. Kim J. Peng W. Social networking: Addictive, compulsive, problematic, or just another media habit? In: Z. Papacharissi., editor. A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis; [ Google Scholar ]
• LaRose R. Mastro D. Eastin M. S. Understanding Internet usage: A social-cognitive approach to uses and gratifications. Social Science Computer Review. 2001; 19 :395–413. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee Z. W. Y. Cheung C. M. K. Thadani D. R. An investigation into the problematic use of Facebook. Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International conference on System Sciences. 2012:1768–1776. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2012.106.
• Leon D. T. Rotunda R. J. Contrasting case studies of frequent Internet use. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy. 2000; 14 :9–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lortie C. L. Guitton M. J. Internet addiction assessment tools: Dimensional structure and methodological status. Addiction. 2013; 108 :1207–1216. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meerkerk G. J. van den Eijnden R. J. Vermulst A. A. Garretsen H. F. The Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS): Some psychometric properties. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2009; 12 :1–6. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morahan-Martin J. Shumacher P. Incidence and correlates of pathological Internet use among college students. Computers in Human Behavior. 2000; 16 :13–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mull I. R. Lee S. “PIN” pointing the motivational dimensions behind Pinterest. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 33 :192–200. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Brien C. P. Commentary on Tao et al. Internet addiction and DSM-V. Addiction. 2010;2010; 105 :595. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pai P. Arnott D. C. User adoption of social networking sites: Eliciting uses and gratifications through a means-end approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29 :1039–1053. [ Google Scholar ]
• Panek E. T. Nardis Y. Konrath S. Mirror or megaphone?: How relationships between narcissism and social networking site use differ on Facebook and Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29 :2004–2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Papacharissi Z. Mendelson A. Toward a new(er) sociability: Uses, gratifications and social capital on Facebook. In: S. Papathanassopoulos., editor. Media perspectives for the 21st century. Oxon, UK: Routledge; 2011. pp. 212–230. [ Google Scholar ]
• Przybylski A. K. Murayama K. DeHaan C. R. Gladwell V. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29 :1841–1848. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raacke J. Bonds-Raacke J. MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2008; 11 :169–174. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheldon P. The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and students’ Facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications. 2008; 20 :67–75. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheldon P. Maintain or develop new relationships? Gender differences in Facebook use. Rocky Mountain Communication Review. 2009; 6 :51–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shoenberger H. Tandoc Jr., E. Updated statuses: Understanding Facebook use through explicit and implicit measures of attitudes and motivations. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies. 2014; 4 :217–244. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smock A. D. Ellison N. B. Lampe C. Wohn D. Y. Facebook as a toolkit: A uses and gratifications approach to unbundling feature use. Computers in Human Behavior. 2011; 27 :2322–2329. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sofiah S. Omar S. Z. Bolong J. Osman M. N. Facebook addiction among female university students. Revista De Administratie Publica Si Politici Sociale. 2011; 2 :95–109. [ Google Scholar ]
• Song I. LaRose R. Eastin M. S. Lin C. A. Internet gratifications and internet addiction: On the uses and abuses of new media. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2004; 7 :384–394. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spiliotopoulos T. Oakley I. Understanding motivations for Facebook use: Usage metrics, network structure, and privacy. Paper presented at CHI 2013, Paris, France. 2013 Retrieved from http://tasos-spiliotopoulos.com/publications_assets/CHI13-Spiliotopoulos-FacebookMotivations.pdf .
• Special W. P. Li-Barber K. T. Self-disclosure and student satisfaction with Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior. 2012; 28 :624–630. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spraggins A. Problematic use of online social networking sites for college students: Prevalence, predictors, and association with well being (Doctoral thesis) 2009 Retrieved from http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0024085/spraggins_a.pdf .
• Teppers E. Luyckx K. Klimstra T. A. Goossens L. Loneliness and Facebook motives in adolescence: A longitudinal inquiry into directionality of effect. Journal of Adolescence. 2014; 37 :691–699. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tonioni F. D’Alessandris L. Lai C. Martinelli D. Corvino S. Vasale Fanella F. Aceto P. Bria P. Internet addiction: Hours spent online, behaviors and psychological symptoms. General Hospital Psychiatry. 2012; 34 :80–87. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tosun L. P. Motives for Facebook use and expressing “true self” on the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior. 2012; 28 :1510–1517. [ Google Scholar ]
• Uysal R. Satici S. A. Akin A. Mediating effect of Facebook addiction on the relationship between subjective vitality and subjective happiness. Psychological Reports: Mental & Physical Health. 2014; 113 :948–953. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Valentine A. Uses and gratifications of facebook members 35 years and older. (Master’s Thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 1511466) 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wan C. Gratifications and loneliness as predictors of campus – SNS websites addiction and usage pattern among Chinese college students. (Master’s thesis) 2009 Retrieved from http://pg.com.cuhk.edu.hk/pgp_nm/projects/2009/Wan%20Sisi%20Candy.pdf .
• Wilson R. E. Gosling S. D. Graham L. T. A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives in Psychological Science. 2012; 7 :203–220. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiseman J. Facebook Chat: Now We’re Talking. facebook.com . 2008;(6) Retrieved October 31, 2013, from https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook/facebook-chat-now-were-talking/12811122130 .
• Yang C. Brown B. B. Motives for using Facebook, patterns of Facebook activities, and late adolescents’ social adjustment to college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2013; 42 :403–416. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Young K. S. Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 1998a; 1 :237–244. [ Google Scholar ]
• Young K. S. Caught in the net: How to recognize the signs of Internet addiction – and a winning strategy for recovery. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1998b. [ Google Scholar ]
• Young K. S. Pistner M. O’Mara J. Buchanan J. Cyber disorders: The mental health concern for the new millennium. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 1999; 2 :475–479. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zaremohzzabieh Z. Samah B. A. Omar S. Z. Bolong J. Kamarudin N. A. Addictive Facebook use among university students. Asian Social Science. 2014; 10 :107–116. [ Google Scholar ]

• Writing services
• Proofreading
• Math/Science
• Copywriting
• Dissertation services
• Admission services
• Our Writers

Writing a Persuasive Essay About Using Facebook

Table of contents:

• Introduction
• Body paragraphs

Whether or not to use Facebook can be a controversial topic of debate. When you’re writing a persuasive essay, either for or against Facebook use, it’s important to be aware that there are a lot of nuances to the situation, and many points of both agreement and disagreement.

In your introduction, make sure to set out your thesis clearly, but it may be too harsh if you imply, for instance, that people are morally right or wrong to use Facebook. Be decisive but not aggressive. It may help to admit to some advantages or disadvantages of using Facebook right away.

Introduction examples

Pro: Facebook is a great way of keeping friends and family of all ages in touch, of building communities based on common interests and/or location, and a good way to keep up with current events as long as you keep your wits about you.

Con: Facebook is no longer relevant for our times, because it’s now full of spam from companies you don’t care about, advertisements, and fake news, rather than being a place for friends and family to keep in touch.

As you move on into the body of your persuasive essay, touch on all the arguments against your thesis, as well as for it, that you can think of. It’s good to have a full defence ready to go, as missing out any mentions of either benefits or negatives, depending on which side you’re taking, can make your argument look weak.

Body paragraphs examples

Pro: It’s true that there are some who try to exploit Facebook to spread total falsehoods, or marketers who use Facebook primarily as a way of advertising to their customers rather than listening to them and building a community with them. However, this isn’t the majority of the content on Facebook, and you can clear the clutter from your own feed quite easily. Facebook gives you the tools to do this by hiding things you’re not interested in, or giving you the ability to unfollow groups, pages, and even acquaintances you’ve lost interest in. At heart, Facebook still retains the benefits it always had, allowing you to easily talk with, share pictures and video with, and play games with, people you know.

Con: At one point, certainly, Facebook had a lot of benefits as a social media site. However, since then, it’s become a wasteland full of maniacs, advertising, and people pretending their lives are better than yours. Facebook changed the order you see your feed in so that you see “Top Stories” rather than the most recent updates, defeating the point of having a feed in the first place. You can now see updates with a lot of activity multiple times while never seeing the update from your friend that you really needed to see, because it was lost in the mania. It’s a popularity contest taken virtual, and there’s really no point to it anymore.

Your conclusion should then be a brief, succinct summary of your main points, followed by a request for the reader to do something, even if just to consider what you’re saying with an open mind.

Conclusion examples

Pro: Facebook isn’t perfect, but it’s not exactly a howling wasteland either. It has both good and bad points. Let’s improve the bad points rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Con: When considering the pros and cons, it’s easy to just maintain the status quo rather than say: “This isn’t good enough, and I can’t take it anymore,” and move on from there. There are many other social media sites on the Internet, and most of them are a lot better than Facebook.

• Essay samples
• Infographics
• Essay writing
• Crafting a Powerful Essay on Political Polarization
• Oral Health Overview Essay: Preventing Tooth Decay in Australia
• How to Write a Good Expository Essay About Macbeth
• How to Write An Expository Essay About Love
• How to Write a Great Expository Essay About Life

Price per page

Total price:

Limitless Amendments

Bibliography

Plagiarism Report

Get all these features for A$93.12 FREE

If you don't know exactly what type of paper you need or can't find the necessary one on the website - don't worry! Contact us and we'll help you out!

• Terms of Use
• Money Back Guarantee
• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Write My Essay
• Custom Essay
• Essay Writer
• Do My Essay
• Type My Essay
• Pay For Essay
• Cheap Essay
• Write My Paper
• Write My Assignment
• Assignment Writer
• Buy Assignment
• Assignment Help
• Do My Assignment
• Nursing Essay Writing Service
• Management Essay
• Business Essay
• Law Essay Writing Service
• Education Essay Service
• Marketing Essay
• Accounting Essay
• Sociology Essay

Before continuing to use our service please make sure you got acquainted with our Cookie Policy and accepted it by clicking OK

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

What You Don’t Know About How Facebook Uses Your Data

By Natasha Singer

• April 11, 2018

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, went to Capitol Hill this week to explain to members of Congress how the detailed personal information of up to 87 million Facebook users ended up in the hands of a voter-profiling company called Cambridge Analytica.

What Mr. Zuckerberg got instead, as he testified before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday, was a grilling about Facebook’s own data-mining practices .

Representative Debbie Dingell, a Democrat from Michigan, for one, wanted to know about Facebook’s use of different types of tracking software to follow consumers’ activities on millions of non-Facebook sites all over the web.

“It doesn’t matter whether you have a Facebook account,” Ms. Dingell said to Mr. Zuckerberg . “Through those tools, Facebook is able to collect information from all of us.”

Facebook meticulously scrutinizes the minutiae of its users’ online lives, and its tracking stretches far beyond the company’s well-known targeted advertisements. Details that people often readily volunteer — age, employer, relationship status, likes and location — are just the start.

Facebook tracks both its users and nonusers on other sites and apps. It collects biometric facial data without users’ explicit “opt-in” consent.

And the sifting of users can get quite personal. Among many possible target audiences, Facebook offers advertisers 1.5 million people “whose activity on Facebook suggests that they’re more likely to engage with/distribute liberal political content” and nearly seven million Facebook users who “prefer high-value goods in Mexico.”

“Facebook can learn almost anything about you by using artificial intelligence to analyze your behavior,” said Peter Eckersley, the chief computer scientist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights nonprofit. “That knowledge turns out to be perfect both for advertising and propaganda. Will Facebook ever prevent itself from learning people’s political views, or other sensitive facts about them?”

Many other companies, including news organizations like The New York Times, mine information about users for marketing purposes. If Facebook is being singled out for such practices, it is because it is a market leader and its stockpiling of personal data is at the core of its $40.6 billion annual business.

Facebook uses a number of software tools to do this tracking. When internet users venture to other sites, Facebook can still monitor what they are doing with software like its ubiquitous “Like” and “Share” buttons, and something called Facebook Pixel — invisible code that’s dropped onto the other websites that allows that site and Facebook to track users’ activity.

Ms. Dingell asked Mr. Zuckerberg how many non-Facebook sites used various kinds of Facebook tracking software: “Is the number over 100 million?” He said he’d have to get back to her with an answer.

“There are common parts of people’s experience on the internet,” Matt Steinfeld, a Facebook spokesman, said in a statement. “But of course we can do more to help people understand how Facebook works and the choices they have.”

While a series of actions by European judges and regulators are trying to curb some of the powerful targeting mechanisms that Facebook employs, federal officials in the United States have done little to constrain them — to the consternation of American privacy advocates who say Facebook continues to test the boundaries of what is permissible.

Facebook requires outside sites that use its tracking technologies to clearly notify users, and it allows Facebook users to opt out of seeing ads based on their use of those apps and websites.

That has not stopped angry users from airing their grievances over Facebook’s practices.

In 2016, for example, a Missouri man with metastatic cancer sued Facebook . The suit, which sought class-action status, accused the tech giant of violating the man’s privacy by tracking his activities on cancer center websites outside the social network — and collecting details about his possible treatment options — without his permission.

Facebook persuaded a federal judge to dismiss the case. The company argued that tracking users for ad-targeting purposes was a standard business practice, and one that its users agreed to when signing up for the service. The Missouri man and two other plaintiffs have appealed the judge’s decision.

Facebook is quick to note that when users sign up for an account, they must agree to the company’s data policy . It plainly states that its data collection “includes information about the websites and apps you visit, your use of our services on those websites and apps, as well as information the developer or publisher of the app or website provides to you or us.”

But in Europe, some regulators contend that Facebook has not obtained users’ explicit and informed consent to track them on other sites and apps. Their general concern, they said, is that many of Facebook’s 2.1 billion users have no idea how much data Facebook could collect about them and how the company could use it. And there is a growing unease that tech giants are unfairly manipulating users.

“Facebook provides a network where the users, while getting free services most of them consider useful, are subject to a multitude of nontransparent analyses, profiling, and other mostly obscure algorithmical processing,” said Johannes Caspar, the data protection commissioner for Hamburg, Germany.

In 2015, for instance, the Belgian Privacy Commission ordered Facebook to stop systematically using “long-term and uniquely identifying” codes to track nonusers without their “unequivocal and specific consent.” The agency subsequently sued Facebook. In February, a judge in Brussels ordered Facebook to stop tracking “each internet user on Belgian soil” on other websites.

Facebook has appealed the decision. In his comments in the House hearing on Wednesday, Mr. Zuckerberg said Facebook tracked nonusers for security purposes — to ensure they could not scrape public data about Facebook users.

But, in one presentation on the case, Belgian regulators wrote: “Tracking nonusers for security purposes is excessive.”

And on Friday, the Italian Competition Authority said it was investigating Facebook for exercising “undue influence” by requiring users to let the company automatically collect all kinds of data about them both on its platform and off.

“Every single action, every single relationship is carefully monitored,” said Giovanni Buttarelli, the European data protection supervisor , who oversees an independent European Union authority that advises on privacy-related laws and policies. “People are being treated like laboratory animals.”

Regulators have won some victories. In 2012, Facebook agreed to stop using face recognition technology in the European Union after Mr. Caspar, the Hamburg data protection commissioner, accused it of violating German and European privacy regulations by collecting users’ biometric facial data without their explicit consent.

Outside the European Union, Facebook employs face recognition technology for a name-tagging feature that can automatically suggest names for the people in users’ photos. But civil liberties experts warn that face recognition technology could threaten the ability of Americans to remain anonymous online, on the street and at political protests.

Now a dozen consumer and privacy groups in the United States have accused Facebook of deceptively rolling out expanded uses of the technology without clearly explaining it to users or obtaining their explicit “opt-in” consent. On Friday, the groups filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission saying that the expansion violated a 2011 agreement prohibiting Facebook from deceptive privacy practices.

Facebook sent notices alerting users of its new face recognition uses and said it provides a page where they can turn the feature off.

Facebook has other powerful techniques with implications users may not fully understand.

One is a marketing service called “Lookalike Audiences,” which goes beyond the familiar Facebook programs allowing advertisers to target people by their ages or likes. The look-alike audience feature allows marketers to examine their existing customers or voters for certain propensities — like big spending — and have Facebook find other users with similar tendencies.

Murka, a social casino game developer, used the feature to target “high-value players” who were “most likely to make in-app purchases,” according to Facebook marketing material .

Some marketers worry that political campaigns or unscrupulous companies could potentially use the same technique to identify the characteristics of, for instance, people who make rash decisions and find a bigger pool of the same sort of Facebook users.

Facebook’s policies prohibit potentially predatory ad-targeting practices. Advertisers are able to target users using the look-alike service, but they do not receive personal data about those Facebook users.

Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a nonprofit group in Washington, however, warned that this look-alike marketing was a hidden, manipulative practice — on a par with subliminal advertising — and said it should be prohibited.

Follow Natasha Singer on Twitter: @natashanyt

Essay on the Uses and Abuses of Facebook

You know Facebook has become the most used social and communication site. There are both uses and abuses of it. I’m gonna write essays on the uses and abuses of Facebook for students. Advertisement So,…

You know Facebook has become the most used social and communication site. There are both uses and abuses of it. I’m gonna write essays on the uses and abuses of Facebook for students.

So, let’s learn the essay. After reading the paragraph, you will be able to learn,

What is Facebook

• What are the advantages of Facebook?
• How does it help a student in his study?
• What are its disadvantages?

Uses and Abuses of Facebook in 350 Words

Facebook is the most popular social networking website. It is now the best communication medium in the world. Here, people can connect to their friends, family members and other people living in the world. It has created a virtual community, where people can communicate with one another and share their joys and sorrows.

Read: Paragraph on Facebook

Advantages and Uses of Facebook

Facebook has brought many benefits to us. There are a lot of uses of Facebook. On Facebook, we have to create an account with our email or phone number. Then we can add known people to our friend list. We can communicate with our family, friends and relatives by sending messages or making a call easily without any cost. We can also know about the activities of friends. We are able to store and share our photos and videos on Facebook.

It is made various opportunities for the business world. A businessman can easily promote his products or services to potential customers through a Facebook page. Customers and buyers also find it easy to search for necessary products and know about them. Traditional marketing has already changed to digital marketing.

In education, Facebook is a good platform, where students can connect to other students and teachers. They can share their learning and find their answers from other students or teachers. They can connect with great educators, teachers and inventors who always share new things. Thus students can learn new and good things from Facebook.

Read: Why a student should use Facebook

Disadvantages and Abuses of Facebook

On the other hand, there are some abuses of Facebook too. It kills our valuable time. It is now seen many youths use Facebook without sleeping at night. Addiction to using Facebook is injurious to our health.

People share wrong, false and hateful status or news that causes violation to other people. Sometimes, cybercriminals cause harm using your private information.

Through Facebook, people know about the different cultures of different communities. Sometimes, people forget their own cultures. They start practising other cultures. Thus Facebook may cause a cultural assault breaking our own cultures.

Though the usefulness of Facebook is more than its abuses of that, we must be careful of using this social media.

Its is very helpfull for me. Thank you so much

Its a nice paragraph for all classes.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Sign me up for the newsletter!

TechRepublic

Cloud and Hybrid Cloud: Differences and Use Cases

Account Information

Share with your friends.

Your email has been sent

Modern digital infrastructures, where companies run business-critical operations, are possible thanks to cloud computing.

There are different types of cloud computing; they might be private or public, or combine edge and cloud technologies. These classifications can often lead to confusion about what a cloud computing infrastructure is and how it differs from a hybrid cloud operation.

This analysis, written by Ray Fernandez for TechRepublic Premium, will do a deep dive into cloud and hybrid cloud technologies, explaining their differences and use cases.

Featured text from the download:

THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HYBRID CLOUDS

Hybrid clouds also have different kinds of models. Let’s look at what tiered hybrid, edge hybrid and cloud bursting are.

Tiered hybrid: In this type of hybrid cloud, frontend applications are deployed on public clouds; usually, these are customer-facing, while backend applications run on on-premises or private clouds. This type of cloud is deployed to increase efficiency, security, ownership and reliability.

Edge hybrid: Edge hybrid clouds are deployed when a company needs to bring the data closer to the user to reduce latency or prevent downtime of business-critical operations in case there is no internet connection. These can be deployed, for example, in ocean logistics operations, factories, power plants or point of sales.

Cloud bursting: The cloud bursting model involves using a private computing environment for the baseline load and bursting the cloud temporarily when extra capacity is needed. These types of hybrid models are commonly used by companies or organizations that experience peak surges in traffic and use public cloud resources to meet those demands.

Enhance your cloud knowledge with our in-depth nine-page PDF. This is available for download at just $9. Alternatively, enjoy complimentary access with a Premium annual subscription. Click here to find out more.

TIME SAVED: Crafting this content required 18 hours of dedicated writing, editing and research.

Subscribe to the TechRepublic Premium Exclusives Newsletter

Save time with the latest TechRepublic Premium downloads, including customizable IT & HR policy templates, glossaries, hiring kits, features, event coverage, and more. Exclusively for you! Delivered Tuesdays and Thursdays.

Resource Details

* Sign up for a TechRepublic Premium subscription for $299.99/year, and download this content as well as any other content in our library. Cancel anytime. Details here .

Create a TechRepublic Account

Get the web's best business technology news, tutorials, reviews, trends, and analysis—in your inbox. Let's start with the basics.

* - indicates required fields

Sign in to TechRepublic

Lost your password? Request a new password

Reset Password

Please enter your email adress. You will receive an email message with instructions on how to reset your password.

Check your email for a password reset link. If you didn't receive an email don't forgot to check your spam folder, otherwise contact support .

Welcome. Tell us a little bit about you.

This will help us provide you with customized content.

Want to receive more TechRepublic news?

You're all set.

Thanks for signing up! Keep an eye out for a confirmation email from our team. To ensure any newsletters you subscribed to hit your inbox, make sure to add [email protected] to your contacts list.

Billing Information

Payment information.

Your total Single Purchase Charges

• USD $ 99.00 Subtotal
• USD $ 0.00 Tax, GST, or VAT
• USD $ 0.00 Discount

Upgrade To A Subscription And Save

• USD $ 299.00 Subtotal

A credit card or PayPal account is required for purchase. You will be billed the total shown above and you will receive a receipt via email once your payment is processed.

A credit card or PayPal account is required to activate your subscription. You will be billed $299.00/year and you will receive a receipt via email once your payment is processed. You may cancel your subscription with at least 10 business days notice prior to the expiration of your current subscription by accessing the Premium tab in your TechRepublic Profile and selecting "Cancel Subscription."

TechRepublic Premium is the fastest, smartest way to solve the toughest IT problems. Subscribe to access our full library of resources and gain benefits from:

Quick access to expert analysis from IT leaders, original research and surveys, comprehensive guides on hot topics, and eBooks from TechRepublic.

Ready-to-go policies and initiatives, downloadable templates and forms you can customize, and hundreds of time-saving tools, calculators and kits.

The law firm Gowling WLG created an AI-powered tool to tackle brand infringement — it could be a game changer

• Gowling WLG specializes in brand protection, which is usually a laborious task.
• The firm uses a proprietary AI system called Saturn to identify trademark and brand infringement. 
• This article is part of " CXO AI Playbook " — straight talk from business leaders on how they're testing and using AI.

For "CXO AI Playbook," Business Insider takes a look at mini case studies about AI adoption across industries, company sizes, and technology DNA. We've asked each of the featured companies to tell us about the problems they're trying to solve with AI, who's making these decisions internally, and their vision for using AI in the future.

Gowling WLG is a multinational law firm headquartered in Ottawa, Canada, with more than 1,500 lawyers in 20 offices worldwide.

The firm was formed in 2016 after the merger of a Canadian company with a history dating back to 1887 and a UK-based law practice. One of the firm's specialties is brand protection, which involves tracking down and stopping infringements on businesses' trademarks, brands, or designs.

Situation analysis: What problem were they trying to solve?

Corporations need to protect their trademarks , but not all instances of infringement are equal, and different cases require different responses.

"Reputation is key for global brands, and businesses need to avoid the risk of negative PR that can come from pursuing smaller infringers or overzealous fans," John Coldham, a partner and the cohead of Gowling WLG's global trademarks, brands, and designs team, told Business Insider.

But that process is extremely labor intensive. "Traditionally, trainees, articling students, or new associates would search the internet looking for online infringers , submit individual takedown notices, and enter everything manually throughout the process," Coldham said. "It took forever and could only address a few transgressions at a time."

Speeding up the process and making it more efficient would help the firm scale its work. The company concluded that the best way to accelerate tasks would be through using AI — so it developed a system called Saturn.

Key staff and partners

The Saturn project was led by the Gowling WLG's trademarks, brands and, designs team and Khemi Salhan, a principal associate on the UK team.

The system was developed with a third-party provider that Gowling WLG declined to name. Now that it's live, the service is coordinated and overseen by Gowling WLG's intellectual-property lawyers.

AI in action

Coldham told BI the idea for Saturn came about after a Gowling WLG associate was appointed the brand-protection manager for the 2022 Commonwealth Games in Birmingham, England. "They saw directly from the client side how difficult, onerous, and expensive brand protection can be," Coldham said.

Saturn not only automates the process of searching for content infringement online but improves upon it by adding legal analysis and strategy to those results.

"It is a subscription product where the tech helps identify when clients' products and marks are being used illegally," Coldham said. Gowling WLG's lawyers can then advise a company on the best course of action after it's identified infringement.

The Saturn system can also scan the worldwide IP landscape and offer suggestions to owners of copyrights and trademarks about where to devote their time, effort, and money.

Did it work, and how did leaders know?

Coldham said early tests of the system have proven successful.

"The technology learns how to identify likely infringements of each brand better, leading to improved search results over time," he said. "It can perform global searches, provide reports, gap analysis, and issue takedowns centrally rather than one by one."

Beyond that, the system can also identify fake web shops , the infringement of domain names and brands on social media, and search for infringing and counterfeit products, Coldham said.

What's next?

Collaboration with clients is key to Saturn's future success, Coldham told BI. "As this is a recently launched service, we are working closely with clients to gather their feedback to implement new features," he said.

While implementing new features will be a work in progress, Coldham said Saturn has demonstrated its adaptability to integrate changes and improvements.

We want to hear from you. If you are interested in sharing your company's AI journey, email [email protected] .

• Main content

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

• My View My View
• Following Following
• Saved Saved

Amazon, AI startup Hugging Face pair to use Amazon chips

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Stephen Nellis in San Francisco; Editing by Michael Perry

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Technology Chevron

EU industry chief urges US to pass new tech rules, foster shared digital market

The European Union's industry chief has called on the United States to pass new technology regulations, in the hopes of fostering a cohesive digital marketplace across the Atlantic.