As we become more technologically advanced almost daily, people find more and more ways to expose themselves and others on social media. While social media is meant to share personal information and updates on our lives, some people may take it a bit too far. Facebook is one of the most used social media platforms across the globe and like many other platforms, they too have added a “Facebook Live” feature. This feature allows Facebook users to stream live videos for their followers and maybe even the public to see. While some people may stream a live video to get direct and immediate feedback, others use it to show disturbing, harmful, and hard-to-see content like hate speech, violence, pornography, racism, even violence, and suicide. Facebook has admitted in a Forbes article that they have lost control over the content that their users have been posting. Since they feel they have lost control they have placed rules around content like this. This article by CNet goes more in-depth about the rules and regulations of live streaming self-harm on Facebook Live.

E: Forbes itself is a very well-known and trusted magazine and website that mainly focuses on business, technology, lifestyle, entrepreneurship, and investing. In the article linked above they share links that bring the reader directly to Mark Zuckerberg’s blog post on Facebook. They use his name several times in the article to ensure that the information they are sharing in the article is directly linked to the issue at hand and is in fact true. CNet is another website that showcases relevant articles about software, gaming, technology, and product reviews. The article on CNet links to another news website known as The Guardian and also to the very well-known Wall Street Journal. They also directly quote Mark Zuckerberg.

S: Forbes itself is a very well-known and trusted source used by students, businessmen, bloggers, and journalists everywhere. Forbes was founded by Bertie Charles Forbes in 1916. Bertie emigrated from Scotland to the US in 1904 and Forbes was born 12 years later as a finance and business magazine. The main contributor of this article, Zak Doffman, is a frequent writer of the latest technology updates. His most recent article was about a new feature on WhatsApp. Overall, he seems to be a pretty trustworthy author considering what he writes about, the facts he includes, and the links he includes. All the links in this particular article are relevant and prove the points he is trying to make in his article. While I personally have not heard of CNet, the links that they use in their article make them seem to be credible. The author, Steven Musil frequently writes about the latest news on technology with his most recent article being about an ex-employee of Apple who was charged with defrauding the tech giant of $10M.

C: While this story was posted in May of 2019, I think it is still relevant in today’s world because Facebook Live is used and abused by lots of people all over the world. Facebook Live is not the only social media that offers a live-streaming option. Almost all social media platforms offer a live stream option. This article is important because it can bring attention to other social media platforms about these things that can happen. While Facebook is the focal point, this does not mean it hasn’t happened on other social media platforms. This article is aiming to reveal the truth about Facebook and how they are handling and monitoring new aspects such as live streaming. Perhaps this article has helped prevent it from happening on other platforms and has helped stiffen the rules of Live-Streaming. While the Forbes article talks about the lack of rules and regulations surrounding Facebook Live, CNet adds to that and talks about why they have few rules about what users are allowed to stream about. Facebook’s reasoning, according to CNet, is that they do not want to punish these people for self-harming or put them in more distress.

A: I believe the intended audience of this article is geared a bit more in the right-wing direction since this article talks about Facebook’s lack of rule and order on Livestreaming. Overall I believe the audience aimed at reaching is anyone whom this article concerns like Mark Zuckerberg himself. The language is relatively neutral and formal and does contain some loaded or leading words. For example, the title of the article is “Facebook Admits It Can’t Control Facebook Live.” The word “can’t” is leading the reader to agree. While they were not trying to bash Facebook in this article they are certainly telling the truth when saying that Facebook needs a bit more rules and regulations of what people should be allowed to live stream. On the CNet article there is not many pictures, there is really only one at the top of the page. The article is also not as long as others may be. Because it is a bit on the shorter side, the lack of pictures is justified by the fact that it does not need to be broken up as much. The overall story is quite relevant and a bit appalling to know that Facebook is allowing these things to go on. I think their desired audience is rather obvious as they are trying to be informative of what was occurring on Facebook. I think their main target audience is anyone who uses Facebook and perhaps this is mainly targeted at parents of younger users so they can try and shield their kids of the potential horrors of Facebook.

P: The overall purpose of this Forbes article was to address the lack of regulation of Facebook’s newly released Live Streaming option. The article included several examples of inappropriate content that was streamed by Facebook users. Instances of hate speech and self-harm were not taken down or stopped by Facebook. The article was trying to show Facebook realistically and while the overall topic is somewhat negative the article itself was not entirely trying to be negative. The authors main mission of this article is to simply be informative and let Facebook users know what is happening. The overall purpose of this article is to let users know what is happening on their favorite social media platform. Maybe even cause and uproar and a boycott of Facebook.

E: The article is executed in a fashion that is really only made to be read. The entire page is mostly just paragraphs that are only really broken up by ads rather than relevant pictures. the one image that they do have at the top of the page is appropriate. Throughout the entire article, there are basically no grammar or spelling mistakes. The CNet article is broken up into several small paragraphs which I think is appropriate because of their lack of pictures so it makes it easier to read. They provide a lot of important information, all cited with its appropriate links. The entire article has informative tones with some emotional tones as well. I think the combination of these tones in this case is relevant and good tactic to keep people reading and captivate throughout the entire article.