In his article “Don’t Trust Facebook With Your Love Life”, Charlie Warzel argues that we should not trust Facebook with our intimate romantic data. However, it is unfair to single out Facebook in this regard because the benefits of modern-day social media can only be reaped by sacrificing your privacy to some extent. As a privacy concerned user of social media myself, I know firsthand that Facebook is not alone in its poor handling of sensitive user information. For example, this past May it was discovered that Snapchat’s employees were spying on their users through a backdoor tool. Furthermore, sites such as Twitter share Facebook’s reputation for data breaches, Twitter having major breaches in both 2018 and 2019. The 2018 breach potentially leaking all the sites 330 million user’s login credentials. If we can’t trust Facebook, then who should we trust? When it comes to choosing a social media platform to use, you are almost forced to pick your poison. Perhaps the only way to ensure our privacy is to meet people in real life, no internet connection required.
Log in to Wordpress here
Hits to date
- 19,552 potential critics
David Hodges
-
I like to be called David, but “Mister Hodges” and “Professor” are popular choices. My ESL students’ charming alternative, “Mister David,” is my favorite by far.
ahntkd99
carahall
andrewbecharaa
athenapup4
bane1900
bestbaker123
bmdpiano
comp0327
compclass8
cynicalwordsmith22
doglover441
drippydoughnut
drpaleontology
gcatt310
givemeclouttokens
hershey515
iamsleepy01
imagination4421
influenza123
jackso23
Jayv23
kraemercali
lazybear8
lelebxby
lg102015
lovericeandnoodles
lucbe219
morra2024
mpsj13
roses0102
Sub2MigzFilms
smellycat23
tenere84
thefrontbottom
voxpopuli75
whosyourcookie22
yankeefan25
Newspaperlessness 
My first reaction, Vox, is that you need paragraphs to identify your main ideas (one per paragraph). If you have only one main idea, and therefore need only one paragraph, then your post will surely fail for lack of material. So, let’s see if we can agree on where to break your work first, then I’m going to advise you to expand each paragraph meaningfully to make or support your argument.
Here goes:
1. In his article “Don’t Trust Facebook With Your Love Life”, Charlie Warzel argues that we should not trust Facebook with our intimate romantic data.
2. However, it is unfair to single out Facebook in this regard because the benefits of modern-day social media can only be reaped by sacrificing your privacy to some extent.
3. As a privacy concerned user of social media myself, I know firsthand that Facebook is not alone in its poor handling of sensitive user information. For example, this past May it was discovered that Snapchat’s employees were spying on their users through a backdoor tool. Furthermore, sites such as Twitter share Facebook’s reputation for data breaches, Twitter having major breaches in both 2018 and 2019. The 2018 breach potentially leaking all the sites 330 million user’s login credentials.
4. If we can’t trust Facebook, then who should we trust? When it comes to choosing a social media platform to use, you are almost forced to pick your poison.
5. Perhaps the only way to ensure our privacy is to meet people in real life, no internet connection required.
Your letter breaks down nicely into these clearly-defined sections, three of them represented by a single sentence each. Organization is no problem; rather, thoughtful readers are going to wonder why you skimmed over several points without support of consideration.
Does Warzel, do you, have a reason to distinguish “romantic data” from any other sort? Does he single out Facebook because it’s notoriously lax about guarding our security, or because it’s such an easy target? Since he offers no alternative himself, does he mean to caution us from using ANY website to share our personal information? For example, would he be comfortable using online banking? Or is he utterly disengaged from sharing anything with the internet, and if so, how does he function in modern society? Is data insecurity a reasonable trade-off for the chance to make a lifelong love match? These and several other questions could be addressed in your reaction to Warzel.
In your best paragraph you offer significant examples of breaches at other sites that amount to evidence that facebook is not alone in having trouble guarding our secrets, but you don’t truly draw a conclusion.
You’re coy about your own attitude, Vox. Suggesting that we might rather just meet in the physical world could be your actual conviction, or it could just be a cop-out to avoid making the bold choice that would make for a better letter.
I hope you find these Notes helpful and not too intrusive, Vox. You can certainly benefit from expanding your piece with additional material.
Please let me know how you feel about the feedback. Much as I like to give advice, I very quickly start to ignore students who don’t keep the conversation going.
1. Respond to this feedback with a Reply.
2. Open your post in Edit and make revisions.
3. Update your post without creating a new one and without changing its title.
4. Leave me another Reply to alert me that you’ve made changes.
LikeLike
Thanks for the feedback, I’ll make sure to include these changes in my revision. I definitely agree that my paper would benefit greatly if I added more support to my arguments and that I should make my point of view more defined. Thanks again for the insightful feedback
LikeLike
Just finished making the changes you recommenced. Thanks again for the feedback.
LikeLike