There are certain things you just don't share with everyone!

An article published by Jacquielynn Floyd in the Dallas Morning News titled "On Facebook, Biggest Threat to Your Private Date May Be You" deals with privacy concerns when it comes to social networking sites, specifically talking about Facebook. Floyd is very ironic, yet serious. Statements such as “Don’t confide that you have two spleens or that you threw up at your junior prom (…) It’s not that I don’t care about you. It’s just that, if I want you to know that stuff [about me], maybe it would be nicer to tell you in person over a glass of wine than to send out a buckshot bulletin to 200 people online” conceal a valid point, even if presented in a slightly humorous way. Floyd goes on by voicing her opinion about the outrage over the “term of service” changes Facebook had recently instated. She concludes that “people are fooling themselves if they depend on a company – any company – to guarantee privacy information voluntarily posted in a place that, by definition, is extremely public”. Furthermore she seems convinced that if you “don’t want that creepy guy from the mailroom to be your “friend” you have to reject him”. I very much agree with this statement, since it almost a declaration of war not to accept someone as your friend on Facebook. Floyd also voices her worries that eventually we will “lose our ability to distinguish between our public and our private selves”.

I find this article very well written. It utilizes humor and seriousness to make a point. The two decades of writing experience Floyd has racked up by now probably helps, she has been writing articles for the Dallas Moring News since 1990. I do agree with her views though. She makes valid points, that I have thought about myself in the past too. We seriously cannot blame Facebook for violating our privacy, if we are the ones volunteering the information in the first place. Seeing that this article is more of a personal opinion topic, rather than a full research topic, I don’t mind that she does not give any sources, or seems to use any, besides the “terms of service” statement from Facebook.

I Need Energy!!

         What is the easiest way to boost your energy these days? Well if you don't have time for a nap, my guess is you're going to stop by the next gas station and buy a Red Bull, a 5-hour Energy Shot, a Monster, or whatever your poison may be. Most energy drinks taste pretty good and make you feel more alert within minutes. Unfortunately they can do a lot more than that.        According to the article "Energy Drinks Pose Serious Health Risks For Young People" by Emma Hitt PhD, energy drinks can have serious side effects on the human body, especially in teens and young adults. The article explains energy drinks are classified as "nutritional supplements", which is why they are allowed to have so much caffeine in them; the main ingredient that "wakes" us up when consumed. The Food and Drug Administration has set a limit of 71mg of caffeine per twelve fl oz for soda and requires the same safety tests and labeling as for pharmaceuticals. But since energy drinks do not fall in this same category, they can contain anywhere from 75mg to 400mg of caffeine per container. In 2007, there were 5448 caffeine overdoses in the U.S. alone, of which 46% occurred among children and young adults up to the ages of 19.
         Other countries such as Germany, Australia, and New Zealand have already associated conditions such as liver damage, kidney failure, psychotic disorders, or seizures with regular and/or excessive consumption of caffeine. Other studies have added eating disorders, confusion, agitation, diabetes, and cardiac disorders to the list of consequences of energy drinks.  
        So if this is really true, then my question is why the has the FDA not put any restriction on these drinks yet? In my opinion there should be at least an age limit for buying energy drinks. A 14 year old can't buy cigarettes or alcohol. Caffeine is just as addictive as either of these substances, possibly even worse. I urge you to get more rest, or snack on some brain food like nuts, raisins, or even a candy bar the next time you're feeling "drained". It would be a lot healthier and more gentle on your body.

Pretty Girls

Beauty does not depend on what size pants you wear, or how many calories you eat a day. The article "Social Lubricant: How a Marketing Campaign Became the Catalyst for a Social Debate" by Rob Walker deals with the new marketing strategy of Dove. According to Walker Dove recently started advertising with "Dove Girls". These girls have been the reason for a new, heated social debate about beauty. This is because these girls are not ultra-thin or fabulously beautiful. They are simply regular everyday women. Walker states that this campaign "began with a "global study" commissioned by Dove, that posed questions about beauty to thousands of women in many countries". This study revealed that women thought the media was pushing unrealistic beauty standards.
Now you might be wondering why this is such a big deal. Well it isn't really. Personally, I think we have known for a long time, that the media has been shaping our perception of beauty to be nothing less than "perfect". Dove is a huge corporation with an even bigger marketing budget. This means their message, that you do not have to be perfect to be beautiful, is reaching many people all over the world.
I think this is a great message, which needs to be heard and said. The result of the dove study  clarifies most women believe, "happiness and kindness" (pg. 266) is what makes a woman beautiful. This message is important and I sincerely hope it reaches all the young girls beating themselves up over a pimple or two, or are becoming bulimic to be able to wear a size zero. By portraying beauty as perfection, the media has won a lot of control over society. Millions and millions of dollars are spent on beauty products and plastic surgeries every year, unnecessarily. In my opinion Dove deserves an award for this advertising campaign, because this company is taking a step in the right direction. It is not trying to bash women to buy their beauty products, but displays them as a supplement to a woman's natural beauty.
Furthermore I dare to say beauty is nothing more than personal opinion. What one person perceives as "absolutely beautiful", another would not waste a second look upon. We do not characterize people based on what color car they drive, but that is exactly what we do to people based on what pant size they wear. I am not saying it is okay to be over weight or to not shower, since it is common knowledge that obesity and lack of personal hygiene can lead to serious health issues. I am saying that labeling people as ugly, because they are not a size zero or because they do not go to the salon once a week to get their hair and nails done, is wrong.