"Free" App

"I am Rich"
 Cell Phone App

In 2007, Apple launched the first iPhone.Since then, iPhone apps have flooded the market, and  now occupy every tidbit of our free time. Apps come in all shapes and sizes: potentially for men, women, children, and even pets. There was even the short-lived and ridiculous  $1000 "I am Rich" iPhone app that uselessly

displayed a glowing red jewel on the iPhone screen. 

After the angry outcry of a gullible customer revealed the worthlessness of this application, Apple swiftly took action to end the public outrage (the money was returned to the customer, and the app was no longer available for sale). Oddly enough, this app received the patronage of only 8 "curious aristocrats" before being taken down. Although nothing can compare to the function-less-ness of the "I am Rich" app, an outlandishnew app is creating outrage among parents. 

A Washington Post article published Tuesday, featured free iPhone apps geared toward children that are utilizing subversive tactics to charge users. After downloading these free apps and playing the games, the children are prompted whilst playing to buy in-game upgrades or special content. These purchases are then charged to the accounts of their parents, often unknowingly (purchases are password "protected").  This article raises an important question  about the role of parental monitoring in technology consumption.

These iPhone apps, downloaded onto the parents' phone,are often given to the child to play with as a type of "babysitter." Although the concept of preoccupying a child with another task is not new, the recent phenomenon of creating applications specifically tailored to a younger audience is. This trend has gained momentum, as seen in blogs such as the "Touchscreen Preschool Games" blog which reviews the latest iPhone apps released for young children.However, unlike physical babysitters which receive thorough background checks or undergo intensive interviews, parents conduct a cursory examination at best, when downloading these iPhone apps.

So, should parents be more vigilant or should companies clearly publish their hidden charges? 

Although I feel parents ought to monitor the iPhone apps to which they expose their children, I do agree these subversive business practices are exploiting parents. Children are not able to comprehend fully the consequences of in-game purchases and the $99 charges "for items such as barrels of Smurfberries." These companies capitalize on a child's inability to discern the real-world consequences of their actions as they play these games, scamming parents.Nonetheless, this story ought to serve as a wake-up call to parents who allow their children unmonitored and often unrestricted use of these types of technologies.

However, I have noticed a growing trend among social technology users who attempt to shirk responsibility. The realm of social technology has become a fast-paced world in which the users' sense of self dominates. iPhone apps I have downloaded are exploitative, charging me through my children; Facebook is phishing for my publicly posted "personal" information; Google is tracking my search history. While these feelings of persecution are, to some extent, cause for worry, how much do our feelings of being 'ripped-off' or invaded result from our own decision to download these applications and visit these websites? 

 Before jumping to conclusions, caving into public pressure and buying into the delusions of persecution, we must recall that we may have started it by exposing ourselves to this technology in the first place.   

Socially, but Culturally Connected?

Mark Zuckerberg

 Mark Zuckerberg, creator and founder, crowned as Time Magazine's Person of the Year 2010, achieved such success with his social networking site--all in less than seven years. With over five hundred million users worldwide, Facebook is a global force. Though not unique as a social networking site, Facebook enjoys phenomenal and unprecedented usership (over 700 billion minutes are spent on Facebook a month). 

However, despite its success connecting users from all corners of the globe, there remains one small unconquered island relatively free of Facebook. Japan. Ironically, though home to big name companies like Sony, Panasonic, and Toshiba, Japan has not caught on to Facebook. In a recent New York Times article titled "Facebook Wins Relatively Few Friends in Japan", reporter Hiroko Tabuchi explains how less than 2% of the online Japanese community uses Facebook, while the bulk of online users prefer anonymity on social networking sites. While Facebook is used by many as an extension of self, in Japan, social networking is often shrouded in anonymity, with "Web users, even popular bloggers, typically hide behind pseudonyms or nicknames."

With so much private information showcased and packaged by users on Facebook, Japanese users are often suspicious. Japanese culture, traditionally closed, is not use to the openness of Facebook. The very nature of Asian culture, collectivist and deeply concerned about 'saving face', is at odds with the open airing and self-promoting nature of Facebook. However, despite these culturally differences, Facebook is making great strides to bump up usership in Japan. Will it work?   

As Facebook continues to grow, I must wonder if the social force of Facebook  will be powerful enough to break a cultural force. If indeed possible, can this create a new, global culture? And if not, has the influence of Facebook been overstated?

-Eleanor