Question: Are social networking sites good for our society?

Title: Social networking sites are good for our society! Content: yeah vote me

Title: debate with yourself Content: Topic- Are social networking sites good for our society? I say that the social networking sites prevent face-to-face communication; waste time on frivolous activity; alter children"s brains and behavior making them more prone to ADHD; expose users to predators like pedophiles and burglars; and spread false and potentially dangerous information. Students who used social networking sites while studying scored 20% lower on tests and students who used social media had an average GPA of 3.06 versus non-users who had an average GPA of 3.82 Having distractions like these in your surroundings have shown difference in the children's mental behavior and studies. They spend most of their time on social sites, reducing human interaction. They think what they are doing is interacting but clicking on your iPhones and iPads is not interacting. Today, a significant number of pre-teens have their mobiles and laptops. Do they even need them? They have 400 friends on Facebook but they know only 50 of them. Interacting is good but they get obsessed with it. So, leave your distractions behind and go and talk up to the people in your lives and then notice how amazing it is to literally talk to people rather than texting or IMing them.

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: I am for social networking sites and I think that they are good for our society. Con must argue against. Acceptance first.

Title: Social networking sites are good for our society! Content: Social networking sites are good for our society!

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Social Networks are basically things like: FACEBOOK, MYSPACE, TAG, ZANGA... - They are good because they increase communication opportunities Nowadays, just calling and text messaging is not enough. There has to be some sort of quick communication occurring online, and that is what social networking does. - They stimulate our economy Social networking websites are able to advertise to their users based on what it looks like they or their friends would like. That comes in handy because it saves consumers money and increases production opportunities. - They allow idividuals to expand their social horizons Normally, becuase we are human, we would want to stick with our "cliques" or circle of friends. Social networking sites reccomend individuals that you are not "freinds" with yet in an effort to increase your friends.

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: To start with, I want to make some clarifications: social networking service: A social networking service is a platform to build social networks or social relations among people who, share interests, activities, backgrounds or real-life connections. * beneficial: Producing or promoting a favorable result; advantageous. ** society: a body of individuals living as members of a community; community. *** Advantges of social networking sites: 1) ALLOW PEOPLE TO IMPROVE THEIR RELATIONSHIPS AND MAKE NEW FRIENDS: 70% of adult social networking users visit the sites to connect with friends and family [1], and increased online communication strengthens relationships.52% of teens using social media report that using the sites has helped their relationships with friends, 88% report that social media helps them stay in touch with friends they cannot see regularly, 69% report getting to know students at their school better, and 57% make new friends. [3] 2) SPREAD INFORMATION FASTER THAN ANY OTHER MEDIA: [5] Social networking sites are the top news source for 27.8% of Americans, ranking close to newspapers (28.8%) and above radio (18.8%) and other print publications (6%). [4] Twitter and YouTube users reported the July 20, 2012 Aurora, CO theater shooting before news crews could arrive on the scene [6], and the Red Cross urged witnesses to tell family members they were safe via social media outlets. 3) HELP STUDENTS DO BETTER AT SCHOOL: 59% of students with access to the Internet report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics and 50% use the sites to talk about school assignments. [7] After George Middle School in Portland, OR introduced a social media program to engage students, grades went up by 50%, chronic absenteeism went down by 33%, and 20% of students school-wide voluntarily completed extra-credit assignments. [8] 4) HELP EMPLOYERS FIND EMPLOYEES AND JOB-SEEKERS FIND WORK: 64% of companies are on two or more social networks for recruiting [10] because of the wider pool of applicants and more efficient searching capabilities. 89% of job recruiters have hired employees through LinkedIn, 26% through Facebook, and 15% through Twitter. One in six job-seekers credit social media for helping find their current job. 52% of job-seekers use Facebook for the job search, 38% use LinkedIn, and 34% use Twitter. [12] 5) HELP SENIOR CITIZENS FEEL MORE CONNECTED TO SOCIETY: According to a 2010 Pew Internet & American Life Project study, the 74-year old and older age group is the fastest growing demographic on social media sites with the percentage quadrupling from 2008 to 2010, from 4% to 16%. [13] Seniors report feeling happier due to online contact with family and access to information like church bulletins that have moved online and out of print. [14] 6) OFFER A WAY FOR MUSICIANS AND ARTISTS TO BUILD AUDIENCES: 64% of teenagers listen to music on YouTube, making it the "hit-maker" for songs rather than radio (56%) or CDs (50%). For example, pop star Justin Bieber was discovered on YouTube when he was 12 years old, and, in 2012 at 18 years old, Bieber"s net worth was estimated at $80 million. [16] The National Endowment for the Arts found that people who interact with the arts online through social media and other means are almost three times more likely to attend a live event. [17] 7) OFFER TEACHERS A PLATFORM FOR COLLABORATION WITH OTHER TEACHERS AND COMMUNICATION WITH STUDENTS OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM: More than 80% of US college and university faculty use social media; more than 50% use it for teaching; and 30% for communicating with students. [18] Educators from around the world interact with each other and bring guest teachers, librarians, authors, and experts into class via social networks like Twitter and social networking tools like Skype. [19]Edmodo, an education-specific social networking site designed for contact between students, teachers, and parents, reached over ten million users on Sep. 11, 2012. [21] 8) INCREASE A PERSON'S QUALITY OF LIFE AND REDUCE THE RISK OF HEALTH PROBLEMS: Social media can help improve life satisfaction, stroke recovery, memory retention, and overall well-being by providing users with a large social group. Additionally, friends on social media can have a "contagion" effect, promoting and helping with exercise, dieting, and smoking cessation goals. [22] 9) LAW ENFORCEMENT USES SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES TO CATCH AND PROSECUTE CRIMINALS: 67% of federal, state, and local law enforcement professionals surveyed think "social media helps solve crimes more quickly. " [23] In 2011 the NYPD added a Twitter tracking unit and has used social networking to arrest criminals who have bragged of their crimes online. [24] When the Vancouver Canucks lost the 2011 Stanley Cup in Vancouver, the city erupted into riots. Social media was used to catch vandals and rioters as social networking site users tagged the people they knew in over 2,000 photos posted to the sites. 10) FACILITATE FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTION: People use social media to network at in-person events and get to know people before personal, business, and other meetings. Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project found that messaging on social media leads to face-to-face interactions when plans are made via the sites and social media users messaged close friends an average of 39 days each year while seeing close friends in person 210 days each year. [27] 11) GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY: Social media sites have created a new industry and thousands of jobs in addition to providing new income and sales. [28] A McKinsey Global Institute study projects that the communication and collaboration from social media could add $900 billion to $1.3 trillion to the economy through added productivity and improved customer service. 12) EMPOWER INDIVIDUALS TO MAKE SOCIAL CHANGE: Social media shares popularized nine-year old Scottish student, Martha Payne, and her blog, "Never Seconds," which exposed the state of her school"s lunch program prompting international attention that resulted in changes to her school and the formation of "Friends of Never Seconds" charity to feed children globally. [31] Jeannette Van Houten uses social media to find owners of photographs and mementos strewn from houses by Hurricane Sandy. 13) DISARM SOCIAL STIGMAS: The Sticks and Stones campaign uses Twitter to reduce stigmas surrounding mental health and learning disabilities. The Stigma Project uses Facebook to "lower the HIV infection rate and neutralize stigma through education via social media and advertising. " [32] 14) PROVIDES ACADEMIC RESEARCH TO A WIDER AUDIENCE: Researchers from a wide variety of fields are sharing photos, providing status updates, collaborating with distant colleagues, and finding a wider variety of subjects via social media, making the research process and results more transparent and accessible to a larger public. [33] 15) INCREASE VOTER PARTICIPATION: Facebook users reported they are more likely to vote if they see on social networking sites that their friends did. During the 2012 presidential election, 22% of registered voters posted about how they voted on Facebook or Twitter, 30% were encouraged to vote by posts on social media, and 20% encouraged others to vote via social networking sites. [34] 16) CORPORATIONS AND SMALL BUSINESSES USE SOCIAL MEDIA TO BENEFIT THEMSELVES AND CUSTOMERS: Small businesses benefit greatly from the free platforms to connect with customers and increase visibility of their products or services. [35] Almost 90% of big companies using social media have reported "at least one measurable business benefit. " For all these reasons social networking sites have become increasingly popular and useful! SOURCES: *. http://en.wikipedia.org... **. http://www.thefreedictionary.com... ***. http://dictionary.reference.com... [1]"People Use Social Networks to Connect with Friends and Family, Sometimes Brands," www. briansolis. com [3]"Social Media, Social Life: How Teens View Their Digital Lives," www. commonsensemedia. org [5]"Social Media as an Advocacy Tool," Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers [6]"Theater Shooting Unfolds in Real Time on Social Media," www. cnn. com [7]National School Boards Association, "Creating and Connecting: Research and Guidelines on Online Social - and Educational - Networking," www. nsba. org [8] "The Case for Social Media in Schools," www. mashable. com [10] "The Essential Guide to Developing a Social Recruiting Strategy," www. jobvite. com [12]"2012 Social Job Seeker Survey," www. jobvite. com [13]"Generations 2010," www. pewinternet. org [14]University of Alabama at Birmingham, "Move Over Youngsters, Grandma"s on Facebook," www. newswise. com [16] "Justin Bieber, Venture Capitalist," Forbes Asia Magazine [17]"NEA Chairman Rocco Landesman Announces New Report on How Americans Use Electronic Media to Participate in the Arts," www. nea. gov [18] "How Social Media Can and Should Impact Higher Education," Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review [19] "Skype and the Embedded Librarian," Library Technology Reports [21]"Edmodo Reaches 10 Million Users," www. blog. edmodo. com [22]"'Flocking' Behavior Lands on Social Networking Sites," USA TODAY, Sep. 27, 2009 [23]"Role of Social Media in Law Enforcement Significant and Growing," www. lexisnexis. com [24]"NYPD Adding Twitter Tracking Unit to Police Force," www. socialnewsdaily. com [27]"Social Media Doesn't Mean Social Isolation," www. usatodayeducate. com [28]"How Social Media Saved the Economy," www. technorati. com [30]"Twitter," www. topics. nytimes. com [31]"Facebook, Public Education and Equity"www. dm [33]"Going Viral: Using Social Media to Publicise Academic Research" www. guardian. co. uk [34]"Social Media and Voting",www. pewinternet. org [35]"How Small Businesses Are Using Social Media," s1. intuitstatic. com

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: I accept.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Social Networking Web Sites defined: http://jcmc.indiana.edu.... (Indiana University) Boyd & Ellison in 2007 The criteria for social networking Web sites are as follows: 1) Construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system 2) Articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection 3) View and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. The nature and nomenclature of these connections may vary from site to site. On Balance defined: Net benefits versus disadvantages Social Networking Sites Are Neutral And Simply Mirror Society. Boyd in 2008, Danah Boyd. [Fellow at Harvard University Berkman Center for Internet and Society]. "Is MySpace Good for Society? A Freakonomics Quorum." Freakonomics – New York Times Blog. February 15, 2008. http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com.... Accessed November 5, 2008. Social media (including social network sites, blog tools, mobile technologies, etc.) offer mechanisms by which people can communicate, share information, and hang out. As an ethnographer traipsing across the U.S., I have heard innumerable stories of how social media has been used to bring people together, support learning, and provide an outlet for creative expression. These sites are tools. They can and have been used for both positive and negative purposes. For homosexual teens in rural America, they can be tools for self-realization in the battle against depression. Thanks to such tools, many teens have chosen not to take the path of suicide, knowing that there are others like them. For teens who are unable to see friends and family due to social and physical mobility restrictions, social media provides a venue to build and maintain always on intimate communities. For parents whose kids have gone off to college, social media can provide a means by which the family can stay in meaningful contact through this period of change. This is not to say that all of the products of social media are positive. We can all point to negative consequences: bullying, gossip mongering, increased procrastination, etc. Our news media loves to focus on these. Even the positive stories that do run often have a negative or sensationalist angle, such as those who used Twitter to track the California fires. Unfortunately, those who do not understand social media look to the news, see the negative coverage, and declare all social media evil. It's easy to look at a lot of elements of today's society and cry foul. It's equally easy to look at the new technology that we don't understand and blame it as the cause for all social ills. It's a lot harder to accept that social media is mirroring and magnifying all of the good, bad, and ugly about today's society, shoving it right back in our faces in the hopes that we might face the underlying problems. Technology does not create bullying; it simply makes it more visible and much harder for adults to ignore.

Title: Social Networking is Causing More Harm than Good Content: I am here to affirm and convince that "Social Networking is Causing More Harm than Good" in today's society. Social networking websites such as popular Facebook and Twitter cause issues with occupations and careers, relationships and marriages, education of our future leaders, and a total breakdown in communication. This is going to be a 5-round debate, and I look forward to challenging my opponent in this controversial topic. May the debate begin!

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: This is following PF rules - Increases physical harm So many teenagers and adults have lost their lives as a result of social networking web sites. Because of a website, mothers have had to bury their children. It does not benefit our society. -Increases emotional harm People say a lot of irresponsible things while online. It results in unneeded and unwanted feelings that get hurt. Most of the users of social networking websites are teenagers. At that age, they are still kids, therefore, unable to determine who their true friends are. As a result, they are linked to the wrong people. So, reconsidering who their friends are would not actually help them. Because the resolution states "That, on balance" that means that the bad has to outweigh the good, or vice versa in order to win the debate. That being said, staying in contact with friends, and so many people dying cannot compare to each other. Thus, I stand Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a negative impact on the United States.

Title: Social Networking is Causing More Harm than Good Content: First of all, let us understand what it is we are debating here. We are debating social networking sites. Not just one or two specific sites, like Facebook, or Myspace, but social websites as a whole. So let us put forth a strong definition to fit the topic.Social Networking Site: Any websites which facilitates communication between two or more individuals.So what we are really talking about here is communication between human beings, online, rather than through any other medium (telephone, letter, face to face, ect.) I will be blunt, it is asinine to propose that something which facilitates communication between human beings could somehow be more harmful than good. Social networking websites allow for human interaction over great distances. They allow people globally to connect with one another, share ideas, express desires, form bonds of friendship, and discuss similar interests. We live in an age where if someone feels alone or isolated, quickly using a search engine like Google could bring you to a forum of people who share your same feelings, alleviating the pain of solitude. Social networking sites allow humans a place to retreat to after a hard days work, or a long day of school. Indeed, the only difference between a social networking site and a gathering of friends in a public space is that using the website makes it easier to connect! Would my opponent dare propose that social interaction is harmful? Then how can they make such blanket statements about the vast array of websites which do just this, but allow you to, say, keep in contact with not just your friends, but you Uncle in a faraway place, or a loved one half-way across the globe? Indeed, the very idea is preposterous.As if it were not bad enough, my opponent, in order to justify their claim of social networking sites bringing MORE harm than good (not simply some harm), only gives rise to TWO potential issue; the first one being the medium is public, and can interfere with employment. This proposition my opponent makes is illogical. Let us observe why.1. This is not the fault of social networking sitesMy opponent seems to think that the actions of third parties can somehow justify attacking social networking websites. But this is illogical. To blame social networking sites for something that others do is misplaced blame. The existence of these websites do not force companies and employers to do what they do, they do it of their own desire. And taking away social networking sites will not prevent this from occurring, employers will simply look elsewhere, as they have done, for information on their potential employee. They'll call relatives and references, and gain information about you that way. And in older times, when communities were smaller, they would ask around the town for information. So the actions of employers to seek out information on their candidates for hire is nothing new, and cannot be blamed on social networking sites. All these websites do is give employers another potential source of information about you. In of themselves, these sites are harmless, and therefore without blame.2. This is not a problem with most networking sitesRecalling our definition of social networking websites, most social networking websites will not give rise to his kind of problem, because most websites allow for the creation of "Usernames", or names specific to an online site. I am sure, for instance, my opponents name in real life is not "szack", nor is mine "The Chaos Heart". These are fake names, or online names, made for a specific online environment. Most social websites you encounter on the web will be structured in such a manner, allowing for someone to construct usernames for themselves rather than use their real names. So this complaint my opponent has put forth is all but negligible.3. You could just not use your real name. There is an easy solution to this "problem" put forth by opponent, similar to the above critique about usernames. You could just lie about what your real name is. This is actually what I do with my Facebook. This method of networking allows you to hide yourself from unwanted attention, and allow permit those who you wish to see your page to view it. It completely renders my opponents proposed argument meaningless.4. The morality of firing someone is questionableThe morality of firing someone simply because they do not enjoy heir job is highly questionable, and I would argue, morally reprehensible. Someone may need a particular job to survive, even if they don't enjoy it. To fire them for simply not liking what they do, even if they may do it well and efficiently, is disgusting. To this end, we should not be defending such actions in any manner, especially not by criticising institutions like social networking sites. It's that companies fire people based on info they find on these sites that is wrong, not that they can access the information in the first place. My opponents argument is the equivalent of saying it is wrong for someone to go outside, because someone might murder them. Going outside isn't the problem, the problem is that there is someone willing to murder you to begin with. So it is with these websites and companies. The problem isn't the websites, it's the companies willing to fire people based on the info they find to begin with.Now my opponent proposes a second potential issue, which is similar in many ways to the first. That is, it interferes with education, both in terms of studies and application to universities. But these too are illogical complaints.1. Connection in education is goodMy opponent argues, "Go to Yahoo Answers and see how many people use networking to try and answer their math homework or the science equation..." But what my opponent fails to point out is how many of these students, as a result of doing this, learn the information and go on to answer future questions correctly, thereby having bettered themselves as students. There is nothing wrong with asking for help, either from professors or peers, and it is something which is often encouraged by educators. Several of these Yahoo Answers give detailed responses on how to solve any particular problem, and are vital resources for which students are able to easily gain the knowledge they need, and further their education. Further more, taking away social networking sites will not prevent this connection to occur; again, like with the example of employers above, students will simply do what they have done in the past. they will form study groups, call one another, discuss things before or after class, ect. Social networking websites then can hardly be held responsible for this behavior, as it is something done without it. Like with the issue above with employment, all these websites do is make getting the information easier.2. The argument of application and universities is the same as before My four above points about employers and jobs can be taken, reworded a little, and used again for this exact argument. This behavior is not the fault of social networking websites, but the fault of universities, who would and have done this with or without these websites. Most of these websites allow for the creation of usernames, and even if they don't, you can simply lie about what your real name is. And finally, the morality of not accepting a student based on something you find on their personal profile is questionable, and therefore, the problem isn't social networking sites, but universities engaging in this behavior to begin with.3. My opponent's own source argues against themMy opponent's edudemic article lists within it 5 major reasons why social networking within schools is a GOOD thing, in addition to the 5 points it makes about the negatives. I do not have enough characters left to quote them, but they are easily read by anyone who clicks my opponent's link.I turn it over to my opponent.

Title: Social networking sites are beneficial Content: Good day, Con, this is the second round, and I hope this debate will turn out very great. Before I state my second and third argument, I will present a rebuttal for your arguments. First of all, I agree with the fact that Social Networking sites are beneficial, but it is also detrimental, since I have seen cyber bullying a lot in these days. But, rethink your first argument. Because of growth of the society and the growth of technology, people likes to post their 'non-exciting moments' too, because they have got time to be in somewhere they can rest. For example, draw a picture in your mind that you're in a nice, cozy cafe. People like to take pictures of themselves resting, and it is very true and real isn't it? They do not use a program to make it all false. Why do they need to when they're just trying to post in a real way? Now I will state my second and third argument. P2: Social Networking sites can be diverse. As I said in the first argument, social networking sites such as facebook, twitter, google+ lets you communicate with millions of people around the globe. Now, as you know, each one of them may have different viewpoints over something. It may be the effect of their religion, culture, environment(etc.). Because of this benefit, we can learn to think about others personalities, understand their viewpoints. For example, It can develop social skills such as understatement of the social economy and skills used in the society. Brendesha M. Tynes, PhD, Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Illinois said that "Online social networking can facilitate identity exploration, provide social cognitive skills such as perspective taking, and fulfill the need for social support, intimacy, and autonomy. Whether constructing their profiles in MySpace, creating a video and posting it on YouTube, or talking in chat rooms, teens are constantly creating, recreating, and honing their identities -- a primary goal of adolescent development. This requires constant reflection on who they are, on who they want to become, and on their values, strengths, and weaknesses. As teens prepare to enter the adult social world, online social environments provide training wheels, allowing young people to practice interaction with others in the safety of their homes." Like this, understanding the viewpoints and the minds of millions of people can only be happened with social medias. You can also learn foreign language in some social medias because of hangouts, or diverse groups of people. P3: Educational benefits of social networking sites The first computer was a big pile of big gears. As the history moves on, everything evolved. The technology has been largely improved over the years, and we have moved on to the 'age of technology'. There are touchable screens, mails that send our message around the globe close to the speed of light, we have nano-sized hardwares and computers and it still moves on. The evolution of technology had a big effect on globalized educations. Unlike the past, teachers and students now can browse infinite amounts of ideas from the internet. The viewpoints are very different, and we learn to look at an object in most ways to understand it better. With technology, people can instantly browse ideas and major documents just in their smartphones. Look at the case of Samsung Galaxy 5 LTE*3. It can instantly download in 0.4 seconds. That is amazing, and think about the way students can browse ideas that fast. It helps students to talk more specifically about their schoolwork. Also, it urges students to try out new technology. In return, they get massive amounts of education skills. The National School Boards Association (NSBA) said that "Almost 60 percent of students who use social networking talk about education topics online and, surprisingly, more than 50 percent talk specifically about schoolwork... With words, music, photos and videos, students are expressing themselves by creating, manipulating and sharing content online... Only a minority of students has had any kind of negative experience with social networking in the last three months; even fewer parents report that their children have had a negative experience over a longer, six-month period." As you see, there are many benefits according to NSBA. Getting a good school experience lets them to have great jobs. And thats not all. Since it can let people who are owning a large company see your educational record fast, they can soon get interested in you. According to Nicole Ellison, PhD, Assistant Professor of Telecommunication, Information Studies, and Media at Michigan State University, "I believe the benefits provided by social network sites such as Facebook have made us better off as a society and as individuals, and that, as they continue to be adopted by more diverse populations, we will see an increase in their utility. Anecdotal evidence of positive outcomes from these technologies -- such as political activities organized via Facebook or jobs found through LinkedIn -- is well-known, but now a growing corpus of academic research on social networks sites supports this view as well... Social technologies never have predictable and absolute positive or negative effects, which is why social scientists dread questions like these. In considering the effects of social network sites, it is clear that there are many challenges to work through -- the increasing commercialization of this space, the need to construct strong privacy protections for users, and safety issues -- but I believe the benefits we receive as a society provided by these tools far outweigh the risks." In a instant moment, social networking sites leads you to success - in the fastest way possible. I hope you answer my argument, and let this debate be a great experience to ourselves! Links 2,3 :http://socialnetworking.procon.org...

Title: All people should join at least one kind of social networking site. Content: Of course it is beneficial since it has influenced our lives in many ways and it has become a part of our life. It lets you get updated with recent activities of your friends and more importantly recent social affairs. It provides you an option for participating in the social activities and a scope to bring a change in the society.

Title: Social networking sites are harmful. Content: Social networking sites are claimed as harmful to people but then why do they still use them. My reasons are as follows: 1. One of the most effective ways to promote your work, organization, or even themselves through social networking sites. There are enough places, such as Linked in and MySpace, where you can promote your business, organization, society and individual talents. The first advantage is that social networking sites will assist in the launch of a comprehensive strategy to promote the brand. 2.Social networking websites to promote friendship, take a break, travel partners, and even a spouse. The main idea is to create a platform where people from counties and cultures can meet and share a part of their lives with other people. "Social networking sites like Orkut, Hi5, Facebook, and has a lot of popularity because people preferred to forget their man-made boundaries and reach approximately a person in a particular community or site. Meanings of words used to describe this topic: Social networking: 'the development of social and professional contacts; the sharing of information and services among people with a common interest.' Good:'excellence or merit' Harm:'physical injury or mental damage' Going off those meanings I would say when people say that 'social networking sites do more harm than good' that if their children or brothers, sisters even go on social networking sites that they are saying that either they have been physically harmed by social networking or they have been mentally harmed which would cause them to go slightly loopy and they wouldn't be able go on the site. So how do you define 'harm'.

Title: Social networking sites cause more harm than good Content: In response to your point as to how social media can be used for bullying- yes, it's true that bullying online does occur. But I find it very hard to believe that they wouldn't bully people anyway, and having the bullying transfer from physical attacks that can actually cause very serious damage to a mere text message is in fact a good thing for society. As well as this, you have to consider the fact that social media does more than just stop bullying being physically damaging- it also is used for good. Friendships can tarnish if you don't see them for extended periods of time, but social media allows people to keep their friendships growing strong. Are you suggesting that ridding society of bullying in a way that can cause permanent damage is a bad thing? Are you suggesting that keeping friendships strong is not worth doing?

Title: Social networking sites boon. Content: In my argument I as (Con) will tell you how social networking is good and beneficial. You stated that "Social networking sites nowadays are used for stalking, committing cyber crimes and other frauds" Now sites such as Facebook, twitter and instagram have privacy settings. This is where you can choose what information about yourself can be publicized. Some people choose to give out there personal info, this is there fault, not the social networking's fault. How is it beneficial? People use allot of social networking sites to connect with people. I will be giving you some examples. *Social networking sites spread information faster than any other media. *Law enforcement uses social networking sites to catch and prosecute criminals *Social networking sites help students do better at school *Social media sites help employers find employees and job-seekers find work These are just a few beneficial examples.

Title: Social Media Content: Although the basic use of social media is imperative to our society, abuse is also apart of the here and now. You say that social media allows us to interact with others we may not be able to see everyday, but it also allows people we don't even know to obtain information about our personal lives. The social networking website, Facebook, is a great way to keep updated on the lives of family and friends who may not be near by, but if you do not set your privacy settings anybody who has a Facebook account can access your information, family photos, your location at the time you posted a status. It is amazing in keeping connected, but is it really worth the risk of letting a stranger know everything about you and your family?

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: You stated: "social networking websites are meant to increase communication" Although the original intentions may have been good, now they no longer increase communication in a good way. You stated: "these sites increase creativity" However, not all of the sites give you the power to use the layout of your choice. You stated: "It could be private or public" Although a person's profile may be private, whatever you put on the internet will stay there forever. That has a negative impact on the United States because it undermines the accomplishments that people have made over the years. For instance, say a kid was trying to run for president. At that time, all of his/her confidential files become a "free for all. " If he/she had made any sort of comment while on a social networking website, that could jeopardize their political career. You stated: "Your friends aren't going to try and lower your self esteem or push you to the brink of suicide and if they do then you need to reconsider if they are really your friends. " However, teenagers, the main users of social networking web sites, are not at the age where they can truly determine who their friends are. Honestly, the rebuttals that you presented make no sense. Because I stated "So many teenagers and adults have lost their lives as a result of social networking web sites. " You stated "Ok to start off I do believe that the amount of deaths isn't even close to the amount of deaths that we face because of other alternatives" The fact that people die other ways, does not mean that many lives have been lost at the hand of social networking websites. Because I stated "Because of a website, mothers have had to bury their children" You stated "mothers have had to bury their children, but mothers have other reasons to bury their children. " Yes, that may be true, but that does no change the fact that children have died because of social networking sites. You stated "Without this form of communication we are entering the future. These websites are the future so why run from the future? " But, not only are we not running from the future, as you so eloquently stated, but we have already seen that success comes without social networking websites, and the death that comes with it, so why bother? You stated "Also many children and teenagers are able to express themselves clearly so why is it that you take away their only form of expressing themselves? " But, teenagers have so many other ways of expressing themselves, email/AIM (which are not social networking websites,) by phone (via text/voice/picture messaging and simply calling. ) So, what was your point again? I stand "Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a NEGATIVE impact on the United States. " You have failed to actually argue on the impact that the social networking Web Sites have on the United States.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Thank you for the challenge, and good luck to my opponent. First of all, I would like to point out that all of my opponent's arguments are copy-pasted from the source which she quotes. Also notable is that the title of this article, as seen in my opponent's citation, is "Social Networking Sites Are Neutral And Simply Mirror Society." However, in order to win, Pro must show how social networking sites are beneficial to the United States; if they have a neutral impact, Pro has not fulfilled their burden of proof, and so Con should win. To address Mrs. Boyd's points... Mrs. Boyd contends that "I have heard innumerable stories of how social media has been used to bring people together, support learning, and provide an outlet for creative expression" as well as that "For homosexual teens in rural America, they can be tools for self-realization in the battle against depression. Thanks to such tools, many teens have chosen not to take the path of suicide, knowing that there are others like them. For teens who are unable to see friends and family due to social and physical mobility restrictions, social media provides a venue to build and maintain always on intimate communities. For parents whose kids have gone off to college, social media can provide a means by which the family can stay in meaningful contact through this period of change." However these claims are not backed up with any statistics. Though I don't doubt the validity of these statements, according to the resolution we are looking to weigh the impact of these points. I would ask my opponent for any statistics that will allow us to weigh this claim. Mrs. Boyd also contends that "Technology does not create bullying; it simply makes it more visible and much harder for adults to ignore." However, what he fails to realize is that these social networking sites are providing a easy venue for these devastating actions to take place. Social networking sites *are* detrimental to the United States. Information put on social networking sites can have far-reaching negative ramifications. 4.5 million web users aged between 14 and 21 are damaging their future education and employment prospects by leaving an "electronic footprint" which could compromise their chances of winning places at colleges and companies. Also, imposters posing as you can destroy your reputation or even get you fired. Social networking provides a major distraction for students and employees alike. Students said they are having a difficult time concentrating on their schoolwork because they are more interested in what the social networking sites have to offer. Many college students would rather check their profiles than listen to the teacher, and can easily do so. Other students are also distracted from listening by the miscreants surfing the web. In business, 233 million hours are lost every month as a result of employees "wasting time" on their social networking. Sexual predation is a big risk in using the social network sites. Children and teens are not the only users of these social networking websites like FaceBook and MySpace; sexual predators, pedophiles, and other criminals use them as well. The Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire found that nearly 1 in 5 kids had received unwanted sexual solicitations over the Internet. In addition, the FBI found that the number of known Internet predators on social networking websites has more than tripled in a single year. Also a major issue is cyber bullying. Over 40-85% of kids have been exposed to digital bullying, 5% so much so that they are afraid for their safety. Bullying online flourishes through its unrestricted growth. As stated by British Broadcasting Company's Teenage Psychologist Expert, Martha Everett, "People think they are a million times stronger because they can hide behind their computer screens." Cyberbullying can even threaten one's life. For example, thirteen year old Megan Meier committed suicide after being cyber bullied/harassed by her neighbor. In addition, Viruses abound on Social Networking Sites. These viruses, such as the Koobface virus, pose as one of your friends and send messages like "You look just awesome in this new movie," and then direct users to a website to supposedly view the movie, where in actuality viruses are hidden. As Chris Boyd, a researcher at FaceTime Labs said "People tend to let their guard down. They think you've got to log in with an account, so there is no way that worms and other viruses could infect them." This makes them much more likely to click on such links, ending in the flooding of their computer with malicious software. 83% of adults who use social networking sites have downloaded unknown files from other people's profiles, potentially exposing themselves to malware as a result. Also, Identity theft is a big issue in social networking sites as people place their personal information on Social networking sites. Research shows one in six 16 to 25-year-olds publishes information about his or herself on the internet that could be used by an identity fraudster. Scott Mitic, chief executive of TrustedID, speaks of social networking sites as a "growing pool of valuable information that at some point thieves may consider more valuable than a credit report." David Porter, head of security and risk at Detica, is astounded by the fact that that people use social networking websites to publish details about their lives, loves, jobs and hobbies to the entire world that they would not dream of sharing with a stranger. As BBC News puts it, social networking sites are the equivalent of a big red target with flashing in respect to identity thieves. Many pundits argue that social networking sites are highly beneficial in every aspect of society. However, these sites pose as big of a threat as they provide benefit. With the further evolution of these sites, more problems will emerge and soon create an uncontrollable international problem. When push comes to shove, social networking sites are merely a distraction where time is wasted. Because my opponent points to relatively insignificant benefits and ignores the plethora of detriments, I ask you to NEGATE the resolution. Thank you.

Title: Social networking sites are good for our society! Content: I will just post something to get a win since he forfeited so yeah due to forfeit I at least win 100% on conduct My argument will be simple I am not gonna waste 115-30 minutes researching and preparing a difficult speech if I have no opponent this will be just a regular speech because that is all I need to win. cont 1: threats from social networking sites A survey on mic.com shows that at least 50% of rapes happen from info posted on social media about where they live. Yes it can be avoided if they hide this info but many teenagers are not considering this, or kind of like your house catching on fire, don't believe it will happen to them. cont 2: Some teenagers make social media their life On fox news they interview some people who stay on as long as 16 hours a day because they feel like social media is their life. Their are even some who get the 2 worlds mixed up and have to go get therapy. Ok that's all I am posting if opponent returns I will add more stuff but its not worth wasting time if no opponent just a argument at all is what I need to win so that's all ima do a simple argument.

Title: that, on balance, social networking websites have had a positive impact on the US Content: I'm sorry, these aren't all my arguments. Intro As technology has evolved, mankind has made means of communication more convenient, efficient, and powerful. Thus, we have reached a new era of expressiveness, and that is why I affirm the resolution that, on balance, social networking websites have a positive impact on the United States. I will prove to you why social networking sites serve as a superb medium of communication that positively impacts social capital among its users, helps the American business as well as provides jobs. Point One: Social Capital What is a social networking web site? It is a revolutionary web service centered around building online communities for people that share common interests. With it, people can first create their own user profiles, and then create their own virtual community, with as many affiliates as they would like. As we live through life, friends come and go, and sadly, some we may never get a chance to see again. However, with social networking sites, friends can stay in touch no matter how far apart they may be. Since people can share as much information as they like with anyone in their online community anywhere that has internet access, social networking websites increases social capital. It's simple logic, if someone has the ability to share as much information as they like with as many people as they like, more time to talk with Point Two: Jobs Since social networking websites are such a convenient, efficient, and powerful tools, people have come to realize that it can be used for more innovative activities than simply socializing with friends. Since many professionals use social networking websites to help them find jobs, social networking websites benefit the American economy. According to Stanford University researcher Mark Granovetter 50%-70% of American jobs are obtained with the help of social networking websites. That's over 100 million American jobs. According to Mark Mehler from CareerXroads, a person using a social networking sites to get a jobs chances increases from 1/500 to 1/35. Point Three: Business According to Robert Half International from a poll of 150 senior executives from the biggest US companies, nearly 2/3 of them will use social networking sites for their hiring efforts.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Unless my opponent has any objections, the parameters for this debate will be as follows: 1. "Social networking websites" are defined as web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. 2. "The United States" will not be contrained merely to a body of government or a geographical region, but to society, businesses, people, etc. One last note: I would urge the consideration of anecdotal accounts to be considered in a logical rather than emotional fashion. Social networking is a thing of the future, a revolutionary concept that will transform the current world. Social networking has evolved from not only a place to meet your friends and mingle, but to a place where businesses are run, deals are made, and contracts are completed. In addition, the networks enhance communication and encourage people from different parts of the world to converse and interact. Also, the network has its educational benefits as well. Students who use social networking learn important skills to help them survive in the 21st century such as managing websites, editing videos, making use of other technological skills. The use of social networking tools as part of everyday working life has led to an increase in efficiency in the workplace. According to Dynamic Markets, Of those employees using social networking tools in the workplace, 65% say that it has made them and/or their colleagues more efficient. And 45% say that it has sparked ideas and creativity for them personally. Businesses use SNS for collaboration sites on intranets, internal forums within the company, company-produced video material shared on intranets, online social networks like LinkedIn and external collaboration sites on the Web and internal blogging sites. Benefits include increasing an individual's knowledge; giving access to products to problems; harnessing the collective knowledge of employees, customers and suppliers; stimulating team building; and better internal collaboration. In addition, businesses like Best Buy who use social networking increase their employee retention rates by making employees feel like they belong. There are far-reaching educational benefits of social networking. Christine Greenhow, researcher at the University of Minnesota, explains that "[S]tudents using social networking sites are actually practicing the kinds of 21st century skills we want them to develop to be successful today." Also, according to a study conducted by Childnet International, teachers and students alike could set-up online "study groups" and students can use them to collaborate together on group projects and assignments. Social networking helps to encourage student engagement and increase participation, encourages online discussion amongst students outside of school, and provides students with a sense of ownership and engagement which often leads to an improved quality of work. Furthermore, Social Networking sites may increase an individual's self-confidence. As BusinessWeek says, "When people are bullied they often don't feel confident about speaking to people face to face about what is going on - whereas doing it online is quite easy." Social networking Web sites can help shy people come out of their shells by teaching them how to interact with others in a safe, online environment. Social Networking has substantial benefits that greatly outweigh and hindrances there might be. Because of this, I ask you to AFFIRM the resolution.

Title: Social networking is good for students Content: With this new medium, have come many new opportunities and new uses. It offers a beneficial place for students to learn about job openings, increase their connection with friends and improves relationships and it helps students learn about society. If students do not know how to use the mediums available now, they will not know how to apply for jobs, or stay connected, or learn about news of the world right at their fingertips.

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Social Networking is defined as a web-based service that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. There are dozens of great things about social networking, but the main positives are the increase in social capital they provide, the political participation it increases, and the staggering learning potential it offers First, there is Social Capital. Social Capital is an economic idea which refers to connections between individuals and entities. Its economically valuable and it helps people link together and people who trust and assist one another are extremely powerful. the better a company understands their possible consumers, the more social capital. Multiple studies from such universities as Northwestern prove that the more usage a company puts into Social Networking sites, the more social capital they receive. not to mention that social networking is a $15 billion market, from advertising alone. Next, these sites such as Facebook and Myspace, and even debate.org, increase dramatically the statistic of political participation according to major academic studies. our new president, Barack Obama, used social networking tremendously during his campaign and he, obviously, won. his main site was Change.gov, but he also used other large sites as a crowd sourcing tool in order to attract even more of the young people vote. In continuation, social networking sites are not just for teenage socializing, it also contains enormous potential to be a learning cornerstone. in a study performed by the University of Minnesota, the social networking sites were helping students learn 21st century skills such as developing a positive attitude towards technology, editing and customizing content, learning online design, practicing safe and responsible use of info, and sharing creative original work. this show the Internet's overall enormous potential. Thank you, and please affirm this resolution.

Title: On Balance, social networking websites do more good than harm Content: Alright, thanks radicalguy for posting an interesting topic, and lets get this started! As a sidenote, I am a bit pressed for time these days, so i'm apologizing in advance for the inevitable brevity of my case. I affirm the resolution resolved, "On balance, social networking websites do more good than harm" I'll start off with definitions. Social Networking Site: "A social network service focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people, e.g., who share interests and/or activities. A social network service essentially consists of a representation of each user (often a profile), his/her social links, and a variety of additional services." My value for judging 'good' and 'harm' will be utilitarianism, a value which we can both meet common ground with. My criteria will be social connectivity/harmony and the spreading of information, both of which are values intrinsic to the betterment of the human race. Without strong communities, and without common knowledge being spread amongst the people, we never could have achieved he technological and sociological wonders that we cherish today. Contention 1: Social networking strengthens social bonds, leading to a myriad of positive outcomes. Sub Point A: The strengthening of social bonds aids the development of social harmony. Sites such as Facebook and MySpace are used as means to build up friendships, have conversations, and compete in small games in a positive atmosphere. This new vehicle of interacting with other people inevitably leads to making better friends and having more people to interact with, allowing people to exchange ideas even when they cannot meet in person. They also make the process of forementioned socialization streamlined and expedient. Sub Point B: These sites allow for international correspondence, leading to international fraternity. Years ago, the standard means of distant communication was by letter. Of course, the obvious flaws were the time involved and the need for a specific address. The advent of the e-mail made messaging instantaneous, but a specific destination was still requisite. With the creation of Facebook and Myspace however, it is possible to link to and find people from all across the globe and communicate in a streamlined manner. Really, all these sites are trying to do is simplify and improve the capability of communication around the globe. The implications are staggering. Bonds of friendship crossing borders, even continents is something our predecessors would not have dared dream of. But it most certainly exists. Also, it provides a medium for communication for distant people who already know each other. For example, I recently moved from MA to CA, and wanted to stay in touch with my network of friends. Would e-mail have been functional? Of course. But Facebook allowed me to stay in touch with friends with unparalleled proximity. In the negatives world, I would have been confined to stiff e-mails instead of Facebook's fluidity. In their world, NO SOCIAL NETWORKING WOULD EXIST. Contention 2: Social Networking Sites Aid in spreading information and current events. Through being updated constantly through the thoughts and musing of others on a live basis, it leads to the assimilatiof knowledge of current events. How I learned about MJ's death? Facebook. Chilean Earthquak? Facebook. Now, while the negative would say that sites like Google News or the New York Times could be used, people go to Facebook much more often just because it has a positive atmosphere. Long have educators attempted to educate the masses while simultaneously entertaining, them, and these sites do just that. They make events which would once have been nerdy to orate about socially relevant and requisite to prosper in the comments section. Sub Point A: Social Networking Sites help spread different opinions and thoughts about an issue, leading to mental diversity. By allowing near instantaneous response and analysis of world events, fresh perspectives and vantage points can be seen, allowing for lively debate and introspection. For example, I have a friend of mine who converted from Christianity to Atheism after a long and philosophical theological discussion. Contention 3: Social Networking Allows and Encourages the creation of grassroots clubs and movements. With the feature of easily being able to find mutual friends and send out messages with intuitive responses, Facebook allows for the expedient creation of clubs and organizations joined together with mutual goals such as spreading political awareness or fund raising. The expediency of recruitment and the ability to organize events and hierarchy are once again improved by social networking. For all these reasons, you must affirm. I am now ready for Cross Ex.

Title: that, on balance, social networking websites have had a positive impact on the US Content: Social network sites are all the rage today. They allow people from every corner of the world to interact with each other by sharing pictures, leaving comments and posts, iming each other and accessing their personal information. Although these new aspects of the social networking sites seem harmless, sexual predators are using these options to assault and harass children and teens all over the world. There have been many lawsuits against these networks for failing to provide adequate security and maintenance and for failing their responsibility of protecting their users. Social networking sites create a pool of private information where criminals can access it and use it to steal identities, or portray as a different person. In addition, social networking sites promote negative behavior, as seen with the pro-anorexia groups on facebook, and the juicy campus gossip site which landed a student in jail. Information put on social networking sites can have far-reaching negative ramifications. 4.5 million web users aged between 14 and 21 are damaging their future education and employment prospects by leaving an "electronic footprint" which could compromise their chances of winning places at colleges and companies. Also, imposters posing as you can destroy your reputation or even get you fired. Social networking provides a major distraction for students and employees alike. Students said they are having a difficult time concentrating on their schoolwork because they are more interested in what the social networking sites have to offer. Many college students would rather check their profiles than listen to the teacher, and can easily do so. Other students are also distracted from listening by the miscreants surfing the web. In business, 233 million hours are lost every month as a result of employees "wasting time" on their social networking. Sexual predation is a big risk in using the social network sites. Children and teens are not the only users of these social networking websites like FaceBook and MySpace; sexual predators, pedophiles, and other criminals use them as well. The Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire found that nearly 1 in 5 kids had received unwanted sexual solicitations over the Internet. In addition, the FBI found that the number of known Internet predators on social networking websites has more than tripled in a single year. Also a major issue is cyber bullying. Over 40-85% of kids have been exposed to digital bullying, 5% so much so that they are afraid for their safety. Bullying online flourishes through its unrestricted growth. As stated by British Broadcasting Company's Teenage Psychologist Expert, Martha Everett, "People think they are a million times stronger because they can hide behind their computer screens." Cyberbullying can even threaten one's life. For example, thirteen year old Megan Meier committed suicide after being cyber bullied/harassed by her neighbor. In addition, Viruses abound on Social Networking Sites. These viruses, such as the Koobface virus, pose as one of your friends and send messages like "You look just awesome in this new movie," and then direct users to a website to supposedly view the movie, where in actuality viruses are hidden. As Chris Boyd, a researcher at FaceTime Labs said "People tend to let their guard down. They think you've got to log in with an account, so there is no way that worms and other viruses could infect them." This makes them much more likely to click on such links, ending in the flooding of their computer with malicious software. 83% of adults who use social networking sites have downloaded unknown files from other people's profiles, potentially exposing themselves to malware as a result Also, Identity theft is a big issue in social networking sites as people place their personal information on Social networking sites. Research shows one in six 16 to 25-year-olds publishes information about his or herself on the internet that could be used by an identity fraudster. Scott Mitic, chief executive of TrustedID, speaks of social networking sites as a "growing pool of valuable information that at some point thieves may consider more valuable than a credit report." David Porter, head of security and risk at Detica, is astounded by the fact that that people use social networking websites to publish details about their lives, loves, jobs and hobbies to the entire world that they would not dream of sharing with a stranger. As BBC News puts it, social networking sites are the equivalent of a big red target with flashing in respect to identity thieves. Many pundits argue that social networking sites are highly beneficial in every aspect of society. However, these sites pose as big of a threat as they provide benefit. With the further evolution of these sites, more problems will emerge and soon create an uncontrollable international problem. When push comes to shove, social networking sites are merely a distraction where time is wasted. Because any perceived benefit of social networking is essentially an insignificant stretch, I ask you to NEGATE the resolution.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: thank you and good luck Now to begin, social networking websites are meant to increase communication. When you use a system such as that you are accepting terms of agreement. These terms cover a whole basis of rules and liabilities. I have recently moved a great distance and these sites such as myspace have helped me keep in contact with my old friends and my new ones. Some of these are even a stress reliever for most kids. Kids will come home and go on and talk with there friends for hours and if they had a bad day, this may just help them with that. Also these sites increase creativity, basically by creating your own profile you are making your own PERSONAL site. It could be private or public. Now about privacy. Not everyone can get into your account if you don't want certain people to get in your account then you put it on private. Your friends aren't going to try and lower your self esteem or push you to the brink of suicide and if they do then you need to reconsider if they are really your friends.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: This is following PF rules - Increases physical harm So many teenagers and adults have lost their lives as a result of social networking web sites. It does not benefit our society. -Increases emotional harm People say a lot of irresponsible things while online. It results in unneeded and unwanted feelings that get hurt.

Title: Social networking sites are beneficial Content: Thanks for judging :)

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Social networking has a POSITIVE impact in the United States. Without it, -our economy would not be where it is today -communication opportunities would be smaller -socially we would be closed to trying new things Going on to refute my opponent.. - although social networking sites are just a tool, without them.. businesses would not be able to assemble as they wish advertisements would not be able to appeal to consumers the general public would be unable to communicate as efficiently - because social networking sites promote people who have brains and can think independently, it can still have a direct effect Although the person has the impact, they would be unable to achieve what they planned to if the tool was not present As a result, PRO should recieve the winning vote

Title: Social networking sites are beneficial Content: First of all, social networking sites can help you gain confidence. Social Networking sites such as facebook, google +, and twitter lets you talk and argue or communicate with millions of people. The ones who cannot gain self confidence in real life could practice their self-confidence in the social networking sites. Since there are more people you can connect and communicate in the social networking sites, you can practice your self-confidence with different kinds of people you can't meet in you neighborhood. For example, I myself practiced my self-confidence in social networking sites, and it helped me greatly.

Title: Social networking sites are beneficial Content: Thanks again, Dicsync for debating this with me, and thanks judges for viewing and critiquing this debate. I'll start right off by further depending my points, and answering my opponents rebuttal. 1st: My opponent agrees cyberbullying is a real problem, and has to be addressed, yet still continues to argue that social media is beneficial. Interesting. 2nd: Regardless of the "excitement" of moments on a persons Facebook, it's the idea that these people tend to hype up their own experiences to yet again value "likes" as acceptance. Also, no basis has been provided that allow you to say "society is growing" and no proof what people like to take pictures of. Regardless of this, it's not about the excitement of posts, but more about the experiences. I believe I miscommunicated, or you misunderstood, when i said "excitement," as I only meant that people would post about their favorite moments, to brag in a way, whether it be at Disneyland, the White House, or simply in a "nice, cozy cafe." The scenario doesn't change in this situation, as different people like different things. However, it is widely known that people will post pictures/posts simply to impress their audience, and reach this satisfaction. Now I'll be refuting my opponents 2nd and 3rd points. REBUTTAL P2: "Social Networking sites *CAN* be diverse.* My opponent uses social media as a simple road to communication, whether it be to meet strangers, learn about others, or simply talk to friends. As this may be good, I ask the judges, is this "social" interaction as valuable as face-to-face correspondence? My opponent uses social media as not a way to simplify meeting others, but rather a way to hide behind a screen, while attempting to be what we define as "social." Now I understand, there are situations in which social media may be good. But the fact of this rebuttal, combined with previous points, and the educational detriments that come with this (which I'll be covering next paragraph), any benefit that sprouts from social media falls when combined to it's numerous detriments. REBUTTAL P3: "Educational benefits of social networking sites" Winston Churchhill once said: "However beautiful the strategy, we should occasionally look at the results." My opponent may try to paint a pretty picture in your head of how beneficial the fast download speed of a smartphone really is in a classroom, but let's think logically and practically about this. As a high schooler, I can confirm that social media is rarely EVER used for educational purposes. The 60% of educational posts most likely sprout from insults to teachers/subjects or even asking for help from others (which would be cheating, another possible problem with social media- but we won't go into that). This percentage is not only ambiguous, but could be inherently flawed. Lastly- all this^ rebuttal was to the intent of that contention, however my opponent did not evaluate "social media" during this contention, but rather technology and smartphones, which are not related. Let me add before I move on: "Connolly cautions that students who use social networking tools might pay significant hidden cognitive costs. Facebook, Google, and other web services simultaneously seize and fragment our attention. They can subvert higher-order reasoning processes, including the kind of focus, concentration, and persistence necessary for critical thinking and intellectual development. Some researchers have correlated heavy Internet use with greater impulsivity, less patience, less tenacity, and weaker critical thinking skills. The need to rapidly shift from object to object online can weaken students" ability to control their attention. Prolonged Internet use exposes students to interactive, repetitive, and addictive stimuli that produce permanent changes in brain structure and function."(1) Remaining argument: My opponent makes the following link: social media > great job. Not only is there no substantial studies or evidence to support this, but it is inherently false, when looking at source (1). My opponent uses professors to support his evidence, using their opinion, and what they "believe." As opinions are great and beliefs are beneficial, no opinion can overcome the substantial evidence of detriments provided in source (1). For all these reasons- vote con. Thank you. (1) http://www.wcer.wisc.edu...

Title: Social Networking Content: I'd like to welcome my opponent to the site; to get better acquainted, I figured that I would take this debate challenge, and observe her debating style for myself; not to mention, I wanted to expand my horizons a bit, and talk about something a bit more lighthearted. To clarify one thing: If it wasn't already known, then social networking sites are things like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, as opposed to dating sites like Match.com, Chemistry.com, etc. To things manageable, I will make only a couple of opening arguments, and I will briefly refute the Con's. I - Social networking is beneficial. Man is, by nature, a social creature; that is, people need people. As technology advances, so does mankind's means of communicating and socializing; for example, we've developed things such as the telegraph/telegram, mail service, telephone/cell phone, video chat, and now, we are looking at social networking sites; thus, we can see that, because social networking has increased the ability of people to communicate and socialize, whether city, state, nation, or even worldwide, social networking sites have clearly had a positive impact on society. II - Social networking sites balance a child's privacy and a parent's right to know. A classic clash always happens when pitting the right to privacy of a child against the right to know of a parent; however, social networking sites find a happy medium, so that neither side is overlooked; for example, on Facebook, a teenager may have private conversations with a friend over the private messaging system, but the parent of this teenager will still be able to keep track of things such as posts made to other friends' walls, pictures posted, etc. Social networking sites give parents the ability to keep tabs on many of their child's online postings, such as pictures and personal information, but without having to directly invade on their child's privacy; this again proves that social networking sites have had a positive effect on society. III - Social networking sites provide a degree of online safety. While all websites and internet users are vulnerable to some degree, the openness and oversight provided by the staff of social networking sites, give or take a few situations, ensures a higher degree of safety than might be found elsewhere on the internet. While these sites don't have to take direct responsibility for their users, there's still a higher sense of security than would be found in unchecked e-mail services, instant messengers, and chat rooms full of shady characters; so, to some extent, social networking sites provide all the benefits of other services, such as IM and e-mail, but without the fear of being stalked by a predator or serial killer [though I can't account for the harmless creepers that tend to accumulate on some sites. :)]. Now, to move on to the Con's sole contention. 1. Social networking is potentially harmful. a. A lot of different things can be potentially harmful; however, simply because something has the potential to be misused does not mean that it has had a negative effect on society; prescription medication, for example, can (and often is) abused by the people to whom it is prescribed; however, this potential for abuse does not mean that we do away with prescription drugs completely, and it is the same with social networking sites. b. In the case with Megan Meier, this girl was already reported to suffer from depression, was on several medications, and since the third grade, had been kept under the careful eye of her psychiatrist [http://en.wikipedia.org...]; as we can see, Megan was already in a fragile condition; as we can see, it was not MySpace that was responsible for Megan's tragic suicide; rather, this unfortunate event can be attributed to Lori Drew, Ashley Grills, and the several other people who aided in operating the account and harassing Megan; clearly, MySpace didn't intend for their site to be used in such a way, and this is evidenced by the fact that Ms. Drew, among others, was brought to trial, not the MySpace staff; for example, if someone is shot in a nightclub, nobody holds the nightclub staff responsible for being unaware that the shooting would happen; they hold the shooter responsible, as he is the one that committed the detestable act; in the same way, MySpace cannot be held accountable for the malicious acts of other people, and this instance, while tragic, is not a negative effect of social networking sites, but merely the misuse of them. I will stand down for the moment, and allow my opponent to chew on my opening arguments for a bit. Good luck, Con!

Title: does social media effect society in a good way Content: Extend

Title: Social networking is good for students Content: Social Networking, I believe, can prove to be a distraction to low-performance students. I understand that SN can be used for productive purposes such as group projects and class communication, but it can also be abused and overused. With the growing digital society today, our current generation of students is highly susceptible to its ever-growing influence. Almost anyone in the urban or sub-urban setting in any population dense area has Internet connection and devices that could make use of such i.e. smartphones, PCs, and laptops. Any student has access to this and can be quite handy research materials(Let's not forget Wikipedia and Google) but can also be a way for the student to deviate from his studies. Of course, not all students are the same. There are those who manage their time and know when and when not to use SN without sacrificing precious study time or any time that involves his education for that matter. But we must also consider the ones whose performance is below average. Sure, SN will certainly help him with communicating with his classmates but this will only come to a productive result if he discusses matters involving projects or anything involving his current education. We must consider that low grade students or any other student can abuse SN. They can talk about mundane matters for hours, concerning their lives and their problems. Not minutes, hours. And one more serious matter: Cyberbullying. SN has become the leading medium for Cyberbullying and we all know that bullying has serious effects over the life of a student, especially those who cannot stand up for themselves. The communication brought about by SN is very quick and so will the negative messages come at the same pace. And not only will these messages come almost instantaneously, it can be published to his fellow peers wherein he will be subject to public humiliation both in cyberspace and in the classroom environment. I say that SN should be given time by the student if he is already finished with the work that he has for the day. SN can both amplify and destroy a student's image in his class. Teamwork and peer connection is a crucial element in a student's life. SN must be used moderately.

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: I understand Pro feels strongly about this issue.I have a facepage account myself and I can tell you that they are not beneficial. For example:i) I experience psychological and mental stress every time it says I have a notification and it turns out to be someone inviting me to play Farmville. I estimate a 90% collapse in my mental well being (non-recovery) every time this happens ii) The people I hate keep bugging me !!iii) I am addictediv) Some nutters get to go on them.v) The Labour party have a fakebook page.VI) FACEBOOK is a social networkVII) FACEBOOK creates barriers in the way of genuine social interaction [1].VIII) FACEBOOK encourages bragging. Every post you do is "look at me, I did this" "look at me, I discovered that if you turn the camera the other way, you can take pictures of yourself" etc etc etc [2]IX) FACEBOOK is the cause of our loss of identity. We constantly feel the need to impress others through our pictures, our statuses, the pages we like, etc. The problem comes when we wear this mask so much that we lose who we really are [3]. Then people only know us for the mask, and to not surprise them, we continue it.End of argument.Source[1] (The first video)[2] ibid[3] ibid

Title: Social networking sites are harmful. Content: Hello and welcome back to the debate; Social Networking Sites are Harmful. EleaDEVILnor has tried but unsuccessfully to convince you other wise. Thank you. I will start with some facts I found whilst strolling the library. 200 University of Maryland students gave up online media as part of a new study in 2011. When asked how they felt during the brief disconnection, students' descriptions of frantic cravings for the technology, anxiety and jitters mirrored those typical of people going through withdrawal from drugs or alcohol. If people have become so addicted to social media, as the Maryland study suggests, it makes you wonder: Is social networking good or bad for us? Bad I say! We have always known that computer networks would destroy the world. We just thought they'd get super-intelligent first. Instead, we got social networks, which act as a stupidity X-ray. You suddenly see through the intelligent people your friends pretend to be to the LOL-ing Farmville players underneath. Some smart people decided to study these networks, and found that they're a big threat to society. At least the rise of those machines forced us to band together and do things. Debate closed. Thank you. EllieBub :) I enjoyed this debate EleaDEVILnor, you are a good component! EllieBub

Title: Social networking is good for students Content: Social networking is good for students because it helps kids do better in school. Half of all "students use social networking to discuss homework assignments" (National School Board Association). According to Georgia Middle School in Portland, Oregon, "grades went up by 50% after students joined a social networking site" (Kessler). 59% of students talk about educational topics online (National School Board Association). Because social media exists, students are "learning practical skills that are necessary for success in today"s wired world," (Huffington). Some people may think social media users have lower grades however, that is only shown as accurate if they are heavy users. Responsible users increase their awareness of news and important events. And as much as it helps in school, it also can help personal relationships. Social networking is good for students because it improves relationships and help students make new friends. Research shows that 70% of adults use social networking to stay connected to friends and family (Solis). Social media can help students "make friends by allowing them to gain familiarity with others and build friendships online" (Huffington). According to a study in 2011, a little less than half of the average Facebook users" friends consist of friends from high school or college (Hampton). Even though some people think that they can lose friends because of social media, "half (52%) of all teen social media users say using such media has mainly helped their relationships with friends, compared to just 4% who say social media use has mainly hurt their relationships. Similarly, more than a third (37%) say social media use has mainly helped their relationships with family members, compared to 2% who say it has mainly hurt them. In addition, a majority of teens say social media help them keep in touch with friends they can"t see regularly (88%), get to know other students at their school better (69%), and connect with new people who share a common interest (57%)" (Common Sense Media). More people use social media sites to stay in contact with friends. It is apparent that social media is beneficial in school and in personal relationships. But there are even other benefits for society. Social media is important because it created a socialistic change. Never before have people been connected in this way. It has caused all ages of people to want to get engaged in the medium. To this day, students are becoming experienced with technology "developing their creative ability, appreciating new and different perspectives and enhancing their communication skills" (Huffington). Because there are so many social media users, people have had to re-learn how to communicate with each other. However, some people think social networking is "ruining the world." People believe that everyone spends less time in face-to-face conversations when there are social media sites where people can interact. However, there are also sites where people can meet new people or reconnect with people. Certainly there are other reasons why people think social media is ruining the world such as cyberbullying and decaying writing skills. Cyberbullying is very serious but if students don"t put themselves in danger or if they tell a trusted adult what was happening, those issues would be less of a problem. Writing skills have changed dramatically because of some of the communication shortcuts encouraged by social media. Students may write "u" instead of actually spelling out the word "you" on school papers. But research shows that social media is actually helping the world and economy. People use social media to find jobs. New media such as Linked In show that 89% of job recruiters have hired employees through this site (HR Focus). Social media sites have also been shown to empower women and help them find jobs. That translates to high school students as well, who learn about job openings and opportunities through Linked In and other sites. It provides a new opportunity for students to learn about job openings.

Title: Facebook: A Boon For the Society Content: Dear Readers, Today I stand for the topic "Facebook: A Boon For the Society". Before to jump to the main body, I would like to make some clarifications: * Facebook: Facebook is a social networking website that was originally designed for college students, but is now open to anyone 13 years of age or older. Facebook users can create and customize their own profiles with photos, videos, and information about themselves. Friends can browse the profiles of other friends and write messages on their pages. * Society: A group of individuals living as members of a community. Reasons for Classifying Facebook as A Boon For The Society: 1. ALLOWS PEOPLE TO LEARN, EXPLORE AND DISCOVER THE WORLD AROUND THEM. Facebook allows people to discover the world present around them. In this rat-race, where people compete each other for money and status; making new friends and discovering new possibilities of relationship is almost impossible (I used the term almost). Facebook provides a quick solution to this problem. It allows people to contact each other from any place- home, houses, schools and others private/public places. 2. ALLOWS VIDEO CONFERENCING: THE NEXT GENERATION INTERVIEWS. Video Conferencing is a feature of Facebook, which allows people from any corner of the world communicate with each other. This communication when is supplemented by voice and video, is termed as Video Conferencing. *** DUE TO SOME PROBLEMS REGARDING MY TIME MANAGEMENT; I END MY ARGUMENT HERE TODAY. BUT I PROMISE TO COME BACK WITH MORE POINTS AND ARGUMENTS IN THE NEXT ROUND. *** Sources: http://www.techterms.com...

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: 'The people I hate keep bugging me !!' Block them.. 'FACEBOOK is the cause of our loss of identity. We constantly feel the need to impress others through our pictures, our statuses, the pages we like, etc.' The same thing happens when you are member of any other social group. For example, at school we constantly try to impress our classmates in order to vote us for president of the class etc. If somebody cares about being popular he/she wants to be popular in every social group thar he/she participates in. If you're interested in being popular you have to try but you should protect your personality and not lose yourself. This is a basic principal you have to respect during your lifetime not only when you spend your time in a social network but in every social interaction. So, this is not a disadvantage enough important to outweigh social netorks' advantages. 'A FACEBOOK encourages bragging. Every post you do is "look at me, I did this" "look at me, I discovered that if you turn the camera the other way, you can take pictures of yourself" etc etc etc' It's not about bragging. SOCIAL networks has this purpose: to create a small society of people who communicate, share their interests, share photos etc. Actually, this is an advantage and not a disadvantage. This is why social networks spread Iinformation faster than any other media. Because soneone can discover something interesting and share it with other people. For instance, someone can be informed about a concert that is taking place or a new TV series that he/she would may find niteresting. ' FACEBOOK creates barriers in the way of genuine social interaction' This is a problem caused only when we don't use socal media wisely. We should be aware of this danger and protect ourselves. When we use them correctly we have the opposite results. We meet with people that we didn't know and we make new friends, we keep in touch with people who live in other cities or even abroad and since the communication is free and easy we speak more often to people we see everyday. All of these things, improce our social life and as I said in round 2, they facilitate face-to-face interactions. 'I experience psychological and mental stress every time it says I have a notification and it turns out to be someone inviting me to play Farmville. I estimate a 90% collapse in my mental well being (non-recovery) every time this happens' This is not a very serious disadvantage. In fact, this is not about social media. This is about your anticipation to hear from someone. You might feel the same thing when, for example, your phone is ringing and when you answer it you realize that they have called you to advertise a product or ask you to participate in a survey. Another example is when you hear the bell ringing and then, when you open the door you see a stranger who wants to sell you some things. 'I am addicted' This is a very frequent phenomenon, but yet again its cause is not social media but the way you ause them. Since you are aware of this danger, you have to put some limits and avoid spending too much time in front of the computer screen. The fact that you have realized the problem is a very positive sign. Here are some things you can do to protect yourself better: 1) Tell your parents to put a time limit to your computer that will allow you to spend a specific amount of time in front of your screen. 2) ask for help by experts 3) regulate your sleeping pattern (so that you ensure that you won't lose sleeping hours-this is a very frequent symptom of the internet addiction- and you will become more organized and self disciplined* 4) make a list of reasons why you will be happier by using the internet less and remind yourself that you can make it!* As you can see there are many ways to avoid getting addicted or to face the problem of addiction. Of course there are some serious dangers but dangers are everywhere. Social media has to offer too many important benefits for someone to claim that the dangers are enough to make them more harmful than useful. In this case the key is to learn how to get protected and not to stop using them. 'The Labour party have a fakebook page' Don't visit it. 'FACEBOOK is a social network' I suppose that you don't like fb so the solution for you is easy: DON'T MAKE A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT Thank you, I'm a genius, I know:P All in all, your arguments are more personal and most of your peoblems can be solved by deleting your account if you have or not making one. Other people don't find them serious or annoying enough to stop using them: As of September 2013, 73% of online adults use social networking sites.** Furthermore, social media do not include only fb. So, if you want to prevent people from inviting you to play games you can sign up another social networking site. Finally, I can't understand something. Firstly, you are against social networks and then you say that you have an account while you find it extremely annoying.. Does not make any sense.. Sources: *http://m.wikihow.com... ** http://www.pewresearch.org...

Title: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States Content: Imagine a place where you realize your importance within the world, providing a sense of identity to live out your wildest dreams. That is the image that social networking sites want you to believe if you sign up. "It's a world where everything moves fast and changes all the time, where relationships are quickly disposed at the click of a mouse, where you can delete your profile if you don't like it and swap an unacceptable identity in the blink of an eye for one that is more acceptable." said Dr. Hinanshu Tyagi, a psychiatrist at West London Mental Health Trust. With lightening fast speeds, you can go just about anywhere on line. However, we seem to have forgotten the issue of safety, the way of communication, and just how fake our "friends" really are. When Tom first created Myspace, was it just a place for friends? Or did he not anticipate the largest social networking site? Point one: Social networking sites are public, whether users realize it or not. The privacy setting are so permeable, and external access to the network is so easy, that the network is effectively an open site. A survey concluded more than 90% of Facebook participants had provided their full name, personal photo, date of birth, gender, and hometown. Just enough for anyone to steal your identity, or a on line predator to find you. Last year Myspace reported discovering the profiles of 29,000 sex offenders. There are about 600,000 convicted sex offenders living in the United States which means at least 5% were on Myspace. A survey of 935 students concluded that when contacted by a stranger, 65% deleted or ignored the contact, 21% of teen responded to get more information, 8% responded to tell the person to leave them alone, but only 3% of students took action such as blocking the individual from further contact. Point two: Social networking sties are used by teen an average of one hour and 22 minutes every day. According to psychiatrists, the generation of young adults growing up with social networking Web sites "are unable to form lasting relationships and are at increased risk of behaving impulsively." Facebook and Myspace encourage the concept that relationships can be formed quickly and with minimal effort, and the same relationships can be ended by simply "deleting" a friend. While, Real-world relationships are more difficult to form as young adults struggle to understand body language, tone of voice, and facial expression. In addition, 56% of all teenagers have posted false information to their on line profiles. Obviously choosing their virtual friends over real friends, creating only relationships rooted in lies. Point three: About 62% of teens on social networking sites have experience on line bullying. One example is the young thirteen year old Megan Meier. Like many teens Megan created a myspace, and soon met an attractive 16 year old boy named Josh Evans. They became friends and exchanged messages almost daily. Josh made Megan feel happy, belonged and beautiful. However, after weeks of messaging, Josh sent one message saying, "Everybody knows how you are. You are a bad person and everybody hates you. The world would be a better place without you." Once reading that, Megan responded saying, "You're the kind of boy a girl would kill herself over." Twenty minutes later, Megan was found dead hanging by the neck in her closet. Six weeks after the tragedy, Megan's parents found out that the "Josh Evans" was really a former friend's mother Lori Drew. In the world where owning a myspace is more common than owning a dog, youth are enslaving their social lives to a computer screen and a keyboard. What they post today can end up somewhere tomorrow, to be used in way that was not intended. The protection of ones emotions and well being cannot be promised when a blog, bulletin, or message is sent. On balance, no one seems to be connected to the real world anymore. But why be shocked, when all you can type is, omg?

Title: does social media effect society in a good way Content: I will give a short rebuttal wich is the fact that ddo is a social networking site. Are these people antisocial? The answer NO they are far from it with many debates on countless topics. The forums where people comunicate about everything there are even ddo hangouts on google+ where people like you and me socialize. Plus we don't spend all day on these sites and a lot of us go to school or work for the most part of the day where we socialize all the time so I disagree with the fact that social media causes antisocial behaviour

Title: Social networking sites are harmful. Content: As The 'Con' has said, I didn't say they 'allowed' people 10+, but 13, honestly, I know that people go on when they are 9- / +! It is disgraceful! Social networking websites are causing alarming changes in the brains of young users, an eminent scientist has warned. Sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Bebo are said to shorten attention spans, encourage instant gratification and make young people more self-centred. The claims from neuroscientist Susan Greenfield will make disturbing reading for the millions whose social lives depend on logging on to their favourite websites each day. But while the sites are popular - and extremely profitable - a growing number of psychologists and neuroscientists believe they may be doing more harm than good. Educational psychologist Jane Healy believes children should be kept away from computer games until they are seven. Most games only trigger the 'flight or fight' region of the brain, rather than the vital areas responsible for reasoning. Sue Palmer, author of Toxic Childhood, said: 'We are seeing children's brain development damaged because they don't engage in the activity they have engaged in for millennia. 'I'm not against technology and computers. But before they start social networking, they need to learn to make real relationships with people.'

Title: social networking is bad Content: Today social networking and internet has become one of the most important part of our life. But is it reakky good for us. I dont think so. According to me social networking has caused many problems in our life. It has harmed a lot than helping us.

Title: Social Networking sites are a boon Content: "Powerful new technologies provide great benefits, but they also change the way we live, and not always in ways that everyone likes. An example is the spread of air conditioning, which makes us more comfortable, but those who grew up before its invention speak fondly of a time when everyone sat on the front porch and talked to their neighbours rather than going indoors to stay cool and watch TV. The declining cost of information processing and communication represents a powerful new technology, with social networking as the most recent service to be provided at modest cost. Through the course of our surfing on the social web. I would first log you in with a thought, and then straight away hit the notifications and give justify my argument's and towards the end I bang up my words with an error 404 i.e. make this august house believe my points and over shadow my complacent virtual socialites on the other side. But will social networking sites really improve the quality of people's lives? The minuses are that all of this sharing can be dangerous, through gossip and potential abuse of the services. Examples include reported suicides linked to malicious gossip circulated on a social network. Some people become addicted to life on the computer screen, and withdraw from personal contact — it's a long way from people sitting on the porch talking to friends and neighbours... Tabbing onto notifications-- 1st notification - Social networking sites are a major distraction from learning. Psychologist Kirschnera told the Daily Mail that his team studied 219 U.S. university students between ages 19 and 54, and found that Facebook users had a typical grade point average of 3.06, while "non-users" had an average GPA of 3.82. The psychologist said the study wasn't about whether Facebook's good or bad, but goes more to the stereotype that younger people are fluid multi-taskers 2nd notification Social networking sites have given rise to online frauds and to paedophilia - children are unknowingly exposed to voyeuristic vultures. As I mentioned earlier, we have become addicts and are just blindly following the herd. There is no more confidentiality or respect for human idiosyncrasies. Playing online games, sharing your private information and photos has become the norm. If you do not participate you are looked as a pariah or an outcast. 3rd notification It is unethical for social network sites to use personal information to enable advertisers to better target you as a consumer. Personal information should not be used for commercial purposes. It is too invasive, and can cause emotional damage. For example, what if your profile indicates that your girlfriend just broke up with you, for example. An ad agency is allowed to obtain this information and use it to send you an advertisement on break-ups. This could do emotional damage. Now moving to facts and figures… The world is seriously obsessed with social networking.. As of 2011 there are 5, 00,000,000 users on Facebook i.e. 1 out of every 13th person in the world. 48/. Of the total users use Facebook right after they wake up! 57/. Of the people talk more online than in their real life. Approximately 2,000 billion notifications all over the social networking world. Now, I let you to ponder ladies and gentlemen will this not bring about disbalance in political, social, economical, so on and so forth aspects of a person's life and the world.

Title: Social networking sites are harmful. Content: こんにちは、 と議論へようこそ。 Hello, and welcome to the debate, Social Networking sites are harmful. Yes they are harmful. I think Social Networking sites are very harmful from cyber bullying. It is absolutely atrocious the amount of people who get cyber bullied. We now live in a digital age, when being wired in seems as normal as breathing. Social networking Websites like Facebook and MySpace cashed in on the computer-toting generation by creating online 'social graphs' that allow younger (10+) to socialize in cyberspace. Now, with thousands of professionals flocking to these sites as well as to business applications like LinkedIn, some feel it's becoming necessary to use social networking sites to stay fresh in a new age of business interaction. The evidence to substantiate this notion, however, is small. Though the number of professionals connecting online surged recently, social-networking sites remain inadequate for successfully making new business contacts.. Unless you've already made previous contact, it's difficult to discern with who you are really dealing with. The computer screen, after all, offers little more than a rï¿½sumï¿½ with a head shot. Social-networking sites prove more of a distraction than a useful tool. The inundation of friend requests and insignificant news feeds on sites like Facebook eat up valuable time that could be spent solidifying contacts in person. "The most effective networking is face to face," says Stanford business professor Jeffrey Pfeffer. "There's no substitute for real human contact. It's less personal online." Plus, sometimes a level of cyber-anonymity is more convenient than total Web exposure. While sites like LinkedIn and others allow old colleagues, acquaintances, and business clients instant access to your contact info, it might be more hassle than help to sift through uncensored blasts from the past. A good old-fashioned handshake or happy-hour cocktail will do more to seal the deal than any MySpace profile or open e-vite. This may be the digital era, but successful business networking online remains a thing of the future.

Title: Social networking is good for students Content: They have embraced it by the billions! 1.35 billion users are on Facebook. 645,750,000 users are on Twitter and 200 million are on Instagram (Hampton). 72% of all internet users are on social media sites. 90% of 13 to 17 year old have some access to social media (Common Sense Media). And social media is growing dramatically each day. Obviously there is power and benefit to being part of the movement. That is part of the reason why social networking is good for students.

Title: Social networking sites are beneficial Content: Greetings pro, and I'm glad I have the ability to debate this with you. I'll start off with first evaluating your main point in this rebuttal, then I'll be going over my own points that allow me to negate the resolution. My opponents first (and somewhat only point) is that social networking sites *can* help you gain confidence. Now as this may be true, and as social networking sites have the ability to boost the self esteem of some, this by no means supports the idea that ALL are benefited by these sites. Not only is this true, but it also must be taken into account that this statement is not always true. When looking at social media today, we see instagram filters used to hide what people really look like, overused editing, and teenagers using "likes" as a form of acceptance. Not only does this lead to a lack of self-confidence, but it only makes people even more insecure, yet again proving social media is not at all beneficial, but rather detrimental. Now, I'll be moving on to my case, we're I'll be highlighting my own contentions. C1: Social Networking sites create a false reality and sense of importance. Since the beginning of sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, users of these social networks have too often posted only their most exciting moments, only post pictures when they are with their friends, etc. This flawed reality we too often create not only hurts these users (by using their amounts of likes to gauge their level of acceptance), but it also hurts the viewers of these posts. When average Joes with ordinary lives (like myself) see posts of only the utmost excitement (out of country, at parties, etc.) it creates the average to believe that their lives are not average, but rather much less than average, because they are not able to post exciting memories and moments on Instagram, like their peers. Going further, according to Cornell University's Steven Strogatz, social media sites can make it more difficult for us to distinguish between the meaningful relationships we foster in the real world, and the numerous casual relationships formed through social media. (1) C2: SN leads to decreases productivity Wired.com posted two studies which demonstrated damage to productivity caused by social networking: Nucleus Research reported that Facebook shaves 1.5% off office productivity while Morse claimed that British companies lost 2.2 billion a year to the social phenomenon. (1) Further, Peter Cohan followed up on the study in a February 2012 piece for Forbes.com, using statistics on Facebook's growth during the interim to calculate that Facebook use within the workplace could lead to a 9.4 percent productivity decrease in companies throughout the U.S., a drop that could collectively cost businesses as much as 1.4 trillion dollars. (2) With social networking leading to a lack of productivity, we see that social networking simply cannot be beneficial in a workplace, and also harms the economy. C3: Cyberbullying Ever heard of the #JadaCounterPose trend that flooded social media? Recent events that have taken place, involving 16-year-old Houston teen Jada, reemphasizes the need for social growth. After being drugged, undressed and raped, while attending a friend's party, Jada dealt with onlookers taunting her with photos, hateful words, and chatter. (3) People have continuously, not sympathized, but rather made fun of Jada, posting mimic photos of her "counter pose," etc. This is what social media spurs. Although extreme, it can't be ignored that lives are ruined every day simply because of the negligence users have on social media. In conclusion, although there may be benefits to social media, the detriments that come along with these sites outweigh the benefits immensely. I look forward to hearing your response. (1) http://smallbusiness.chron.com... (2) http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com... (3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Title: Facebook: A Boon For the Society Content: I do not have any more opening contentions to give. Thus, I will take this round to refute Pro's contentions.R1) Social NetworkingPro argues that Facebook allows people to meet new people and keep contact with friends. However, as I showed in C1, depending on Facebook too much for such purposes is ultimately harmful to society, due to the resulting lack of real life social skills. It is a much better idea to rely more on face-to-face communication whenever possible. Even if an in-person interaction is not possible, it is still better to use forms of communication other than online social media- forms of communication that still require verbal involvement, such as telephone.R2) Video ConferencingPro argues that Facebook's video conference future makes it a boon to society. However, video-conferencing is not anything unique to Facebook. Skype is a popular software designed *solely* for the purposes of video calling. Google Plus is always rising in popularity. Facebook having a useful feature doesn't make it a "boon to society". In order to make such a claim, the feature would have to be something innovative and unique, and I demonstrated it not to be so in this case.R3) AdvertisingPro argues that Facebook giving us access to company advertisement is a boon to society. However, Pro himself notes that many people do not like Facebook's system of allowing companies to have access to their personal information, meaning that Pro has essentially refuted his own argument; something which people generally do not approve of cannot be considered a positive force in society. R4) Educational PurposesPro argues that because Facebook could potentially be used as an online resource for educational purposes, it is a boon to society. This suffers the same problem that his second contention does, except even more so; there are so many other online resources that are specifically designed for education, such as KhanAcademy and EdHelper. Anyways, many of the suggestions in the link provided by Pro are terrible; take the first one on the list: "Instead of trusting Wikipedia, ask the crowd on Facebook." Wikipedia is FAR more reliable as a source of information than Facebook! Wikipedia actually has established contributors, and its pages are frequently reviewed... Facebook's potential "educational" value is completely undermined by the fact that there are much better resources out there. CONCLUSIONI have refuted all of my opponent's arguments, and he has yet to address any of mine. Thus, the resolution is negated.Back to Pro!

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States of America Content: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States" I reserve the right top clarify 1st Round (Evidence and the case) 2nd Round Rebuttal 1. Social Networking web sites Definition www. techlearning. com/story/showArticle. php this is where people develop networks of friends and associates. It forges and creates links between different people. 2. impact- strong effect: the powerful or dramatic effect that something or somebody has . http://encarta.msn.com... An impact could be direct or indirect List of Positive impacts 1. Economy . http://www.usatoday.com... Social Networks are boosting economy through helping businesses advertise. Social networks account for billions of dollars 2. Democracy Social networking web sites help people exchange ideas and ultimately spread their beliefs and in result the democratic beliefs are the ones being spread to places like China. Therefore social networking websites are key to increasing number of democracies Social networking websites also help people organize and politically participate this leads to increased participation in US democracy, past 2-3 election prove 3. Terrorism and wars 1. A better economy is key to battle terrorism . http://www.linktv.org... "(U. S. ) Amin remembers that eight years ago we had a budget surplus-- and now our deficit is huge. If we can solve the economic problem, other problems will diminish. " 2. A strong democracy is key to solve war and terrorism . http://www.foxnews.com... Democracy is the answer (to terrorism). We will solve all the problems. We have a situation. We have issues. We've got problems. But we will solve them and we will rise to the occasion. And, democracies don't go to war with other democracies, so if the number of democracies increases the number of likely incidents around the world decreases.

Title: social networking is bad Content: Yes it allows us to interact with people but also exposes our personal information. For example, the con side just mentioned that we can share our photos with each other but those photos are seen by other people also and some of those people are criminals or you can just can say bad guys who can use to that photo for a bad purpose. Social networking reveals our personal information.

Title: Social Networking Sites are Harmful Content: The 'Pro' is here, And I am a GIRL! I think Social Networking sites are very harmful from cyber bullying. It is absolutely atrocious the amount of people who get cyber bullied. We now live in a digital age, when being wired in seems as normal as breathing. Social networking Websites like Facebook and MySpace cashed in on the computer-toting generation by creating online 'social graphs' that allow younger (10+) to socialize in cyberspace. Now, with thousands of professionals flocking to these sites as well as to business applications like LinkedIn, some feel it's becoming necessary to use social networking sites to stay fresh in a new age of business interaction. The evidence to substantiate this notion, however, is small. Though the number of professionals connecting online surged recently, social-networking sites remain inadequate for successfully making new business contacts.. Unless you've already made previous contact, it's difficult to discern with who you are really dealing with. The computer screen, after all, offers little more than a rï¿½sumï¿½ with a head shot. Social-networking sites prove more of a distraction than a useful tool. The inundation of friend requests and insignificant news feeds on sites like Facebook eat up valuable time that could be spent solidifying contacts in person. "The most effective networking is face to face," says Stanford business professor Jeffrey Pfeffer. "There's no substitute for real human contact. It's less personal online." Plus, sometimes a level of cyber-anonymity is more convenient than total Web exposure. While sites like LinkedIn and others allow old colleagues, acquaintances, and business clients instant access to your contact info, it might be more hassle than help to sift through uncensored blasts from the past. A good old-fashioned handshake or happy-hour cocktail will do more to seal the deal than any MySpace profile or open e-vite. This may be the digital era, but successful business networking online remains a thing of the future. Help from ( http://www.businessweek.com... )

Title: Resolved: On balance, social networking websites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Neilson/Netratings has issued a study showing that the top 10 social networking sites saw traffic growth of 47% and over the last year. Myspace has seen the biggest growth 367% more users. Social networking sites are becoming a way of life as the number of individuals logging on to these sites grow each year. Social networking sites contribute to the economy and education. Therefore I stand (www.socialsoftware.webblogsinc.com/2006/05/17top-10-social-networking-sites-see-47-growth/) Resolved: Social networking sites on balance have a positive effect on the United States For this debate I clarify the following defintions on balance as net result or overall effect (www.investorwords.com/3410/on_balance.html) positive to be admitting of no doubt or irrefutable fact (American Heritage second College edition) 1.Rape, Suicide, and identity theft can be avoided The negative aspects of social networking sites can be easily prevented as well as avoided. The site has resources on it. One example of these resources is blocking your site from the public, ensuring that only your friends can see your see your personal information and pictures. You can also only talk to people you actually know, thus preventing people who do not know you from talking to you. You should only post pictures that do not show your neighborhood and where you live. You shouldn't give any personal information out on these sites such as your address, phone number, email addresses, or other information that can lead to you getting into a bad situation. "It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities." Josiah Charles Stamp once said. With social networking sites people need to be responsible if you're choosing not to be safe then you need to accept the consequences of your actions. If you still think that these sites are bad news then you can choose not to go on them. 2.The use of YouTube and social networking websites has now moved into the realm of educational development Social networking sites can be used in an educational sense. Now online there aren't just teens, these sites have expanded, many colleges are opening up and posting lectures on YouTube and campus life videos. Berkley has posted videos with lectures, tours of campuses, and athletic events. The population on YouTube is increasing and many more institutions are using YouTube for a health outreach. Women's health today and lectures from Mini Medical School and Osher Lifelong Learning Institution, which are popular in today's culture. Women's health Today videos have more than 300,000 views. This is an increase in the reach of this unique and valuable programs said Burstan. (March 2008, Positive Presence on YouTube. 3.People are gaining political knowledge by going on candidate's social networking sites. (Msnbc.com and Foxnews.com) "As the country's most trafficked Website, Myspace will play a power role in the upcoming election. Our digital candidate banners will be the yard signs of the 21st Century and our political viral videos and vlogs are the campaign ads of the future, By empowering our users with easy-to-find information, offered in a way they can relate to it, Impact will ignite their involvement in the political process." Said Chris DeWolfe, Ceo of Myspace. Myspace has influence people all over the world with the 10million plus accounts. Former Presidential candidate Senator Hilary Clinton has a myspace page with 52,000 friends, while Barrack Obama has 100,000 friends. Ron Paul, Joe Biden, John McCain, Mitt Romney, John Edwards, and many other political candidates have my spaces to influence voters. This allows people to get more involved in the political process and activities. This is good for the country because it increases the voter turn out. In many states they had record number of new younger voters that turned and about 77% of people who had a MySpace voted because they were influenced by this candidates' sites on Myspace. (Study done by Fox news late November) Showing that the social networking sites have an influence on the younger generation of America. According to com Scores report (2006) 68% of Myspace users are 25 and older. The average age of a myspace user is 35. Most myspace users are 35-54 and are accounted for 41% of Myspaces users. Teens Only account for 12% of the audience. (mashable.com) 4.Social networking helps the economy Almost all social networking websites are usually run as a business. The person or people who started the site are hoping to make money, usually through advertising. They enable the economy as any business does, through the transfer of money form one person to the other. The consumer may not have been able to meet the product in the real world and we are seeing more products making it into the market place from ads on social networking sites. Social networking sites give a new place for people to advertise and inform people about their product. Companies are asking, 'How can we make our workforce more productive?' " says Kevin Martin, an analyst at market researcher Aberdeen Group. Corporations increasingly are "exploring and experimenting" in the use of social networks to improve business operations, says Gina Bianchini,CEO of Ning, a social-networking site for businesses and consumers. It makes revenue from Google AdSense and premium services. "There's been a definite shift the last two months," she says. "There is a genuine interest now rather than a casual curiosity before." I'm not talking about just sticking an ad on the site, but people are creating a page on the networking site so they can tell people about their product or services. These people can then connect to the product if they want more info and become "friends" or fans on the page. Conclusion On balance social networking sites have a positive effect on The United States due to education, the economy, and voting.

Title: Social Networking sites are a boon Content: Social networking websites are causing alarming changes in the brains of young users, an eminent scientist has warned. Sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Bebo are said to shorten attention spans, encourage instant gratification and make young people more self-centred. The claims from neuroscientist Susan Greenfield will make disturbing reading for the millions whose social lives depend on logging on to their favourite websites each day. Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The popular website has made him a very rich man, but at what cost to human relationships? But they will strike a chord with parents and teachers who complain that many youngsters lack the ability to communicate or concentrate away from their screens. More than 150million use Facebook to keep in touch with friends, share photographs and videos and post regular updates of their movements and thoughts. A further six million have signed up to Twitter, the 'micro-blogging' service that lets users circulate text messages about themselves. But while the sites are popular - and extremely profitable - a growing number of psychologists and neuroscientists believe they may be doing more harm than good. Baroness Greenfield, an Oxford University neuroscientist and director of the Royal Institution, believes repeated exposure could effectively 'rewire' the brain. Girl Using Computer Experts are concerned children's online social interactions can 'rewire' the brain Computer games and fast-paced TV shows were also a factor, she said. 'We know how small babies need constant reassurance that they exist,' she told the Mail yesterday. 'My fear is that these technologies are infantilising the brain into the state of small children who are attracted by buzzing noises and bright lights, who have a small attention span and who live for the moment.' Professor Susan Greenfield Professor Susan Greenfield: Concerned Her comments echoed those she made during a House of Lords debate earlier this month. Then she argued that exposure to computer games, instant messaging, chat rooms and social networking sites could leave a generation with poor attention spans. 'I often wonder whether real conversation in real time may eventually give way to these sanitised and easier screen dialogues, in much the same way as killing, skinning and butchering an animal to eat has been replaced by the convenience of packages of meat on the supermarket shelf,' she said. Lady Greenfield told the Lords a teacher of 30 years had told her she had noticed a sharp decline in the ability of her pupils to understand others. 'It is hard to see how living this way on a daily basis will not result in brains, or rather minds, different from those of previous generations,' she said. She pointed out that autistic people, who usually find it hard to communicate, were particularly comfortable using computers. 'Of course, we do not know whether the current increase in autism is due more to increased awareness and diagnosis of autism, or whether it can - if there is a true increase - be in any way linked to an increased prevalence among people of spending time in screen relationships. Surely it is a point worth considering,' she added. Psychologists have also argued that digital technology is changing the way we think. They point out that students no longer need to plan essays before starting to write - thanks to word processors they can edit as they go along. Satellite navigation systems have negated the need to decipher maps. A study by the Broadcaster Audience Research Board found teenagers now spend seven-and-a-half hours a day in front of a screen. Educational psychologist Jane Healy believes children should be kept away from computer games until they are seven. Most games only trigger the 'flight or fight' region of the brain, rather than the vital areas responsible for reasoning. Sue Palmer, author of Toxic Childhood, said: 'We are seeing children's brain development damaged because they don't engage in the activity they have engaged in for millennia. 'I'm not against technology and computers. But before they start social networking, they need to learn to make real relationships with people.'

Title: Resolved: On balance, social networking websites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: [Before my case is presented, I would like to set the grounds for debate. First round is a reading of cases. The next round is rebuttal and reconstruction, and round 3 is a summary of the case, along with major voting issues, should any be decided by either party. Nearly 110 million unique users log on to social networking sites on a monthly basis, and while there can be many benefits to using these sites, more harm comes from them than good. The resolution states: That, on balance, social networking sites have a positive impact on the United States. Because the negative has the first argument in the round it is the negative's burden to provide necessary definitions for the round, although the only necessary term that needs defining would be the phrase "on balance" which the negative chooses to define as "all things considered and weighed equally". This definition was comprised of multiple sources' definitions to provide a clearer definition for the reader. When we weigh and consider all of the pros and cons of social networking, we can see that the cons outweigh the pros, therefore, social networking cannot have a positive impact on the United States. C1. [Social networking sites hurt employment by becoming a haunting reflection of a teenager's past that can deter employers from getting a job in later life.] Employment is the first major reason that social networking cannot have a positive impact. While it can be good for employers to check web profiles of possible employees before hiring them, it can backfire as well. Anders Albrechtslund, in his article "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance," quotes Ivan Tribble as saying that "When youngsters lead a life in mediated publics, the fear is that their adolescent thoughts, musings and immature actions might become a millstone around their neck, since the information will be embarrassingly accessible later on. One such speculation has to do with getting a job in adult life." Albrechtslund then himself states that Tribble "is convinced that past online social networking will be damaging to an applicant's chances for employment." Qualified workers may be turned down because of their personal life, which should be separate from their business life. An example of this is when a 21 year-old major in public relations at Baylor University had her name surface on a social networking site called JuicyCampus and was called the "biggest slut on campus." She said she was trying "to get a job in business," and the last thing she wanted was "maliciousness and lies" about her all over the Internet. C2. [Social networking sites are nearly impossible to regulate or control by outside sources, and current moderation is inadequate.] Another reason that social networking is a problem stems from the fact that we cannot regulate it or control it, seeing as it is an ever-evolving media. Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Elisabeth Hirschhorn Donahue conclude in their article "Introducing the Issue" that "government rulemaking that regulates some, but not all, types of media" makes it "difficult to enact laws...that keep pace with rapidly changing technology, much of which is outside the purview of government control... and as technological convergence becomes the norm, regulating a specific media form, such as requiring V-chips in televisions, becomes somewhat meaningless." There is also little legal consequence for social networking sites' content. The aforementioned JuicyCampus that nearly ruined a college student's chance for a job, is completely legal. Richard Morgan says in his article "A Crash Course in Online Gossip" that it is "immune, no matter what it runs on its site from users, just like AOL is not responsible for ...content in their chat rooms.... JuicyCampus is not encouraging people to be themselves, it's encouraging them to be the worst version of themselves." And since these sites are protected by the Communications Decency Act of 1996, they are also immune to bigotry, hatred and other insulting comments. Therefore we have no one to blame but the owners of the social networking companies alone for not keeping a firmer grip on the actions of its members. C3. [Social networking sites' amount of harassment and bullying can drive teens to depression and suicide, and human lives are being morally valued under online lives.] While social networking can be a problem for the older crowd and employment, it becomes an even bigger problem because of harassment and bullying on these social networking sites. THe complete openness and legality of these sites makes it easy for harassing messages and cyberbullying to occur without recourse. Kaveri Subrahmanyam and Patricia Greenfield did a study in 2005 showing 9 percent of young Internet users reporting being harassed online in the previous year. Since then, with the coming of more sites, advancing technology, and more ways to bully online, that number jumped dramatically to 43 percent in the next year, in a study done by Harris Interactive. While this often brings feelings of anger and depression in teens, sometimes this harassment drives teens to suicide, such as in the case of Megan Meier, who was reportedly being harassed via the social networking site Myspace. The next day, she had hung herself in her own bedroom. Now while those who support social networking say that we are allowing kids to communicate, and also adding to the economy through supporting these social networking companies, they are ignoring the most important aspect of all: the value of a human life. We cannot put a list of internet friends or the growth of a company or the popularity of a person ofer a human life. Recently in Wales, according to Switched.com, 17 suicides in a single networking were linked to social networking sites alone. Things like this are happening worldwide and we cannot let it happen here again (such as in Megan Meier's case) by promoting social networking anymore. When we see that social networking causes problems not only when we put a person's personal lives over their business lives, but when we put their online lives over their human lives. The cons of situations like these outweigh the pros dramatically, and that is why I urge a negative ballot.

Title: Social Networking Content: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Today, I am against the resolution, Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Social networking sites have had a negative impact on the United States. My first conjunctions is as followed; --Social Networking is potentially going to harm to persons using them. One example of this is Megan Meier, who took her life after an old friends mom posed as a boy on myspace and began harassing her. When a social networking site does nothing to protect users of it's site, we see it as unfit. Just as we would see a mother unfit to raise a child if she didn't protect it from danger. ** I can't wait for someone's reply**

Title: social networks are more harm than good Content: People have come to treat social networks as a new means for communicating with others. When we contact others via Twitter, Facebook or any other site, we expect that we’ll hear back from those people or companies just as we do when we send an email or leave a voicemail. The problem is that many people and companies don’t. I see it all the time in my personal use of these networks. You get bad service or need to get in touch with a person/company and find them on a social network. You then contact them and wait to hear back — often you never get a response. In other cases, you may hear back days or weeks later. These folks did their part and set up accounts to promote their business, but in being unresponsive, they just did themselves a great deal of harm. If you’ve got a profile, people will expect that you are going to be responsive on that network.

Title: Social networking sites On Balance have had a positive impact on the United States Content: Social Networking sites are a tricky thing to debate because of the various pros and cons. I decided to take this debate on however. First off, many people are reunited through social networking site. Second, many people find life long companions through dating websites. Third, people can keep in touch with family from all across the world. These are a few of the pros.

Title: is social networking sites really a boon or bane Content: Seeing as my opponent forfeited (and I feel they shall again), I shall not put too much here. 1) Social Networks allow us to connect with all our old friends and family that we lose contact with.2) Social Networks gave way for the innovation of "social gaming". Gaming like Farmville could only come about through social Networks.3) Social Networks allow New social movements (NSMs) to form. NSMs are political movements which put huge pressure on the government in order to act in certain ways, usually reactionary to go against laws. They also work against many corporations as well. For example, the 2009 charts led with "Killing in the Name", which only came about due to facebook campaigns, and the general pro-piracy movements.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web Sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Line-by-line: "Our economy would not be where it is today"--> 1. There is no evidence for this. Or analysis for that matter. But if you think about this logically, you will see that the advertisements that ‘increased the economy' would have been used in other places. 2. This would only show that in THIS case, it was used properly. So the hammer built the house (if you will), but you're forgetting about the people who have been cyber-bullied or even pushed to the point of suicide. This just shows how it can be used good and bad and therefore it can't be determined if it is a positive impact or a negative impact. "Communication opportunities would be smaller"--> 1. All tools have their benefits. Even a gun. EVEN A NUCLEAR WEAPON. But that does not mean that there is an automatic positive effect. 2. I'm not advocating elimination of Social Networking Sites. 3. You can still call someone! This debate just goes to show that with great power comes great responsibility. But you can not just up and vote PRO because some people use that responsibility properly. 4. Communication increase in a computer to computer basis increases blatant bullying. This is because it is easier to type what you think rather than to say it. Look to the girl that was pushed to suicide because of social networking sites. And this was all made possible by an ‘increase in communication.' AGAIN, it is how you use it. "businesses would not be able to assemble as they wish advertisements would not be able to appeal to consumers the general public would be unable to communicate as efficiently" -Businesses can always assemble over the internet OR in real life (sorry if I come off as old fashioned.) -TV advertisements still exist. -The efficiency is as good as it can be bad. All it takes is a click of the send message before I just told someone how much I hate them. AGAIN, it is how you use it. No direct effect (impact) happens from something that doesn't have a brain. The people with the brains have the actual effect. Whether they call someone, or use a social networking site, or whether they make fun of someone on facebook, or in real life. It is the PEOPLE with the impact. Therefore, vote CON! Thanks for this debate!

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Thank you.

Title: Social networks are beneficial to our society! Content: "Block them.."But if I do that, then I won't have anyone left to annoy"The same thing happens when you are member of any other social group"No! Facepage and twotter are different. Everything you post, and everything you do, you do to impress EVERYONE. I expect pro did not watch the video! "It's not about bragging"RUBBISH! Everything you post is going to be read and seen by everyone, so you are must have to brag. "LOOK THAT LOOK THIS" etcetera etcetera "This is a problem caused only when we don't use social media wisely"a.k.a, 100% of us. Ole! [1] "This is not a very serious disadvantage"I will have you know that it is extremely serious! LOOK AT THIS GUYS, SHE'S WRITING OFF MY MENTAL TRAUMA AS NOTHING!!!!!!!"This is a very frequent phenomenon"GAME SET AND MATCHMost people aren't responsible enough to put those stupid measures in place. They are young, after all !!"Don't visit it. [The Labour Party facepage page]"But where will I go when I need a laugh?"I suppose that you don't like fb"Yes but I am addicted just like if I were on drugs. Oh, the struggle. [2]NOW FOR MY OWN FACTS#1 ADVERTISING IS BADYOU SAY ADVERTISING IS ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF FACEPAGE AND THAT, but I disagree. Advertising is torture that we have to endure every single day of every single one of our lives :(. NOBODY has the permission to make me feel bad about myself psychologically if I don't buy their product. [3]#2 STUDENTS ARE LIARS"% of students say they use social networking for homework, getting a 6 pack, and saving the day" - NO WAY HOSE! They are just saying that because they are addicted but do not want to feel bad about themselves! [4]#3 PEOPLE JUST BELIEVE ANY OLD RUBBISH THAT THEY SEE ON THEIR FACEPAGE FACE FEED[5]#4 ALL OF THE POINTS I MADE IN ROUND ONEPro refuted ZERO of them :) ---#5 THE LABOUR PARTY HAS FACEPAGE#6 FARMILLE PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAUMA EFFECT#7 ANNOYING PEOPLE ARE ON THERE#8 FACEBOOK CREATES BARRIERS IN THE WAY OF GENUINE SOCIAL INTERACTION#9 FACEPAGE IS ALL ABOUT AND PROMOTES AND ENCOURAGES BRAGGING#10 FACEPAGE CAUSES THE LOSS OF OUR IDENTITY ---#11 FACEPAGE MAKES PEOPLE DUMBER[5]#REFUTATIONS"INCREASE VOTER PARTICIPATION"Those people are probably really dumb and will make ill-informed decisions if the only reason they're voting is because they saw someone on their face page face feed do the same. They might even vote for the green party !! (what madness !!)"DISARM SOCIAL STIGMAS"Yeah, but for every one thing like that there's a million things that promote ignorance [6]"PROVIDES ACADEMIC RESEAR...."That's what the news is for."empower individuals to make social change"That also works the other way, as I've proven several times in this round..."GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY"Not for the average joe's pocket, though! I like people, not corporations."FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTION"You get a good amount of that in real life too !!"CATCH CRIMINALS"No, that's exposing idiocy, which is really mean and quite offensive to feminists everywhere."REDUCES RISK OF HEALTH PROBLEMS"Rubbish! Every hour staring at one of those screens causes you to lose 22 MINUTES OF YOUR LIFE !!"OFFERS TEACHERS A PLATFORM"Like a table does?**table is not a social network"OFFER A WAY FOR MUSICIANS AND ARTISTS TO BUILD AUDIENCES"i) Music is rubbish anyway, so I don't see why you're even comprehending that to be a good idea.ii) Justin Bieber was found there, that's obviously an argument against it because Justin Bieber is an absolute pratt [8]."HELP SENIOR CITIZENS FEEL MORE CONNECTED TO SOCIETY"I think you are lying because the people on my feed are 99% teenagers."HELP EMPLOYERS"Please, don't be a slave to the machine."HELP STUDENTS..."Please, refer to my earlier point in this round."SPREAD INFORMATION"Yeah, but most of the time that information is bollocks. Solar Freakin' Roadways, anyone?"ALLOW PEOPLE TO IMPROVE THEIR RELATIONSHIPS"Refer back to the video I posted a link to in the previous round. It will explain why that claim is a load of rubbish.-------------------------Right, that's it, all of her bogus claims refuted and mine still stand and I posted some more.Victory!Thank you.Sources[1] https://safely.yahoo.com...;[2] https://www.google.co.uk...;[3] http://adsoftheworld.com...;[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...;[5] https://www.facebook.com...[6] http://www.youtube.com...[7] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...[8] Look up "Bieber" in the news

Title: social networking is bad Content: actually social networking is a superb thing. it keeps us in touch with our relatives in foreign and also helps to interact with our friends. it also allows us to share pics of our life and to share the joy!!!!!!!

Title: Social Networking Content: Good Morning, and thank you for welcoming me. To begin the second round of our debate, I will first demolish my opponents case, then move on to my own. I- My opponents first conjunction what that Social Networking Web Sites are beneficial to Americans. I do agree with my opponent that people need people. But long before we had social networking sites we had other ways of communicating. We picked up a phone, or wrote an actual letter. Have Americans become so lazy that they can't do this? II- The second conjunction of my opponent's case was that social networking is a balance between child's privacy and the parents right to know. Every parent wants to think that their child is smart enough to know what to post and do online. Unless you plan to sit with your child every time they use the computer, and watch their every move you can't insure they are doing exactly what they say. Another fact is that, if you don't allow your child access to the internet at home, they may be getting online and using social networking sites at friends' houses. --As my opponent brought up, a child can receive private messages online from anyone. On facebook and/or myspace, you don't have to have a person as a friend to send them messages. III- My opponents last point is that social networking provide a degree of online safety. As many people seem to forget, social networking sites allow you to search any name, place, or group. It is a lot easier for you to search a random name, or look for a person in your area on a social networking site because they give you results. As for IM, you have to know a persons complete address to add them. You can't just type in a name and get their email. So social networking sites allow easier access to persons information. While we are talking about gaining persons information, social networking sites have many categories that you fill out, along with name (first and last), age, and where you live/hometown. This allows shady characters to find you, and follow you. And they could potentially steal information about you. Now to move on to my case. I- Social Networking Sites effect children's education. With more and more social networking sites being created, children are using them more. When children get home one of the first things they do is log into their "space" or profile and begin chatting. This is effecting their school work, because they aren't spending enough time or giving their all. Along with not spending enough time on work, students are spending time at night online and not sleeping. Without the sleep required by their body, they have a harder time paying attention in class or do not complete work. II- Social networking sites allow sexual predators easy access to persons' information. With over 250,000,000 users on Facebook a vast majority of them are sexual predators. In the year 2007 Facebook deleted 90,000 sexual predator accounts. Those being the ones reported to traced. And since May they have deleted 5,585 accounts. These sexual predators use social networking sites because they are easy access and you can lie easily on them. You don't have to put your actual name, age, or picture. This makes it very convenient to gain trust from somebody and use it against them. III- Social networking sites can harm your computer and cost money. Both Myspace and Facebook (along with others) have disclaimers telling you to beware or odd friend requests and about opening messages from people you don't know. They can harm viruses, and other computer glitches. Unmarked emails can hold trackers that allow the sender to hack your account, take information, or use the information against you. Trackers may also allow that person to follow what you do online, like visit the website of your bank. Which gives them more access to your accounts and passwords. IX- Social networking takes massive amounts of time. Like any hobby, social networking sites need to be maintained. Constantly updating your account, checking to see which friends are online, and seeing what everybody is doing takes a great amount of time. This can cut into time used to do something more productive or beneficial, such as exercising or reading a new book. We need to face the fact that Americans (some) are along the most obese persons. Although this is important (maintaining health), it is not one of my mom important points. X- Social Networking sites allow simple information to be used against you. As talked about on HLN this morning, information you post can be used against you. Simply saying that you are going on vacation can allow others to take advantage of the situation and break into your house. Not only are you losing your possessions, but you will lose money replacing them. I would like to apologize to my opponent for taking so long to reply, I've been working on my boxes for extemp. Good Luck Aff.

Title: Expression Through Social Media (good/bad) Content: Your point 'rather the fault of the user', but what does that mean. Social networking has changed the people. It encourages people to be more open about themselves and let go of all their information. Speaking of privacy and your other point 'used the way the user wants it to be used', it is ridiculous. More than 95% of the people who use social media don't read the terms and services for more than 10 seconds. The website is free to do whatever it wants with its users and their private information can be leaked to the website's sponsors.

Title: social networks are more harm than good Content: i will start by saying this . have a fair and fun debate. i do believe that social networks help and that in the end of the day: they help!!! they help get jobs and friends

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: First of all, I didn't realize that I posted the wrong case. Please disregard the earlier arguments. Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Social Networking Web Sites defined: http://jcmc.indiana.edu....... (Indiana University) Boyd & Ellison in 2007 The criteria for social networking Web sites are as follows: 1) Construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system 2) Articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection 3) View and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. The nature and nomenclature of these connections may vary from site to site. On Balance defined: Net benefits versus disadvantages Social Networking Web Sites positively impact the United States economically Reuters in 2008 http://uk.reuters.com...... -Social networking Web sites allow businesses to assemble as they wish. Since people go on vacations and business trips, they may not always be able to assemble freely with the rest of their company because they are far away. Social networking sites allow that to occur, and therefore stimulate their business. -Social networking web sites give advertisements that pertain to their users based on their searches. Therefore, social networking web sites definitely help our economy. Social Networking Web Sites positively impact the United States politically Milliken in 2008 http://www.boston.com...... -In this past 2008 election, The Democratic National Party decided to use social networking web sites like Facebook and Myspace as a means of campaigning. Social networks are so popular among the younger generations. As a result, in the general election, Barack Obama received about 2/3 of the vote of younger voters. Social Networking Web Sites positively impact the United States constitutionally Legal Information Institute in 2008 http://www.law.cornell.edu...... (Cornell University) - The first amendment to the constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Therefore, social networking websites not only allow such things, but they also promote it, as evidenced by the different groups that people decide to join while they are on such sites. Social Networking Web Sites positively impact the United States socially Valenzuela, Park, & Kee in 2008 http://online.journalism.utexas.edu...... (University of Texas) -If social networking web sites did not exist, people would not be as socially diverse as they are today. Social networking websites like Facebook, recommend people that you may know based on who your own friends are. As a result, you are able to expand your social horizons. -Social networking web sites like Eharmony and Chemistry, allow single individuals to socialize with individuals that the websites feel they might be compatible to, by the way that they answered their questions. Social networking websites like such have the potential to change lives. Since social networking web sites not only positively impact the United States economically, politically, constitutionally, and socially; they also allow the people of the United States to enhance their democracy everyday which is the true essence of the United States of America. Social networks are becoming increasingly popular not only in the United States, but all over the world as well. That is why in a study taken by Indiana University, 88% of respondents used social networking websites. This obviously goes to show that they are far more beneficial than they are accredited for. Responding to my opponents contentions: 1. "Information put on social networking sites can have far-reaching negative ramifications. 4.5 million web users aged between 14 and 21 are damaging their future education and employment prospects by leaving an "electronic footprint" which could compromise their chances of winning places at colleges and companies. Also, imposters posing as you can destroy your reputation or even get you fired" -However, that is not the fault of the social networking site. Once they are used correctly, they have a more than positive impact on the United States of America (as a people, economy, as well as a government.) 2. "Social networking provides a major distraction for students and employees alike. Students said they are having a difficult time concentrating on their schoolwork because they are more interested in what the social networking sites have to offer. Many college students would rather check their profiles than listen to the teacher, and can easily do so. Other students are also distracted from listening by the miscreants surfing the web. In business, 233 million hours are lost every month as a result of employees "wasting time" on their social networking" - As I stated earlier, once the site is used in the right context with the necessary safety precautions, it has a positive impact. For clarification purposes, wasting 233 million hours is not using the site within the right context. Using the site at an inappropriate time also does not qualify as using it in the right context. - My opponent has given no source to support this claim. 3. Sexual predation is a big risk in using the social network sites. Children and teens are not the only users of these social networking websites like FaceBook and MySpace; sexual predators, pedophiles, and other criminals use them as well. The Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire found that nearly 1 in 5 kids had received unwanted sexual solicitations over the Internet. In addition, the FBI found that the number of known Internet predators on social networking websites has more than tripled in a single year -Social networking sites are NOT for kids. Most sites set a minimum age like 13-15. Therefore, this point doesn't belong in this debate. [http://signups.myspace.com...] 4. Also a major issue is cyber bullying. Over 40-85% of kids have been exposed to digital bullying, 5% so much so that they are afraid for their safety. Bullying online flourishes through its unrestricted growth. [My opponent has given no source to support these statistics. He has not spoke about where these kids he is talking are located, nor has he given an accessible link or citation. If anything, I have reason to believe that his entire case is referring to children in the UK.] As stated by British Broadcasting Company's Teenage Psychologist Expert, Martha Everett, "People think they are a million times stronger because they can hide behind their computer screens." Cyberbullying can even threaten one's life. For example, thirteen year old Megan Meier committed suicide after being cyber bullied/harassed by her neighbor. [My opponent has given no source to support this scenario] 5. In addition, Viruses abound on Social Networking Sites. These viruses, such as the Koobface virus, pose as one of your friends and send messages like "You look just awesome in this new movie," and then direct users to a website to supposedly view the movie, where in actuality viruses are hidden. As Chris Boyd, a researcher at FaceTime Labs said "People tend to let their guard down. They think you've got to log in with an account, so there is no way that worms and other viruses could infect them." This makes them much more likely to click on such links, ending in the flooding of their computer with malicious software. 83% of adults who use social networking sites have downloaded unknown files from other people's profiles, potentially exposing themselves to malware as a result. - My opponent said, "potentially exposing themselves to malware as a result." This is the fault of the individual and not the site.

Title: Social Networking Sites are Harmful Content: I am ever so sorry for doing this. our arguments were very good.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Also, the links my opponent posted lead only to the homepage of their respective sites, I would appreciate it if she would repost the correct ones next round. "Social networking Web sites allow businesses to assemble as they wish. Since people go on vacations and business trips, they may not always be able to assemble freely with the rest of their company because they are far away. Social networking sites allow that to occur, and therefore stimulate their business. " First of all, this claim is not backed by a statistic. Similar to one of my opponent's contentions in Round 1, in order for us to weigh this impact, we need to have a sense of the relative impact that this is having. Without these statistics, we are forced to judge from an uncertain viewpoint. In addition, these "effects" that social networking sites have are not unique. They can be replicated with phones, IM, chat rooms, fax, email, etc. The exchange of communication that my opponent describes could just as easily have been done with any of the aforementioned methods, rendering this actual impact little-to-none. "Social networking web sites give advertisements that pertain to their users based on their searches. Therefore, social networking web sites definitely help our economy. " Based on their searches? In context, it would be more apparent what this means, but due to the bad link I'll assume that you are referring to advertisers digging into the personal files of a record, ignoring the user's privacy, in order to attempt to further their business. In actuality, these advertisements are not very effective. According to adweek. com, just 57% of social networking users report clicking on an ad over the past year. In comparison, 79% of all web users report clicking on an ad. Also, adweek. com shows that the online ads on social networks pulled in only 11 percent of users for purchases (as opposed to 23 percent for the web overall). Also, users "who frequents a site for 150 pageviews per session several times per week will get accustomed to the ads, layout, etc… and ignore them (adotas. com). " "In this past 2008 election, The Democratic National Party decided to use social networking web sites like Facebook and Myspace as a means of campaigning. Social networks are so popular among the younger generations. As a result, in the general election, Barack Obama received about 2/3 of the vote of younger voters. " To understand the fallacy of this argument, it is important to know to difference between causation and correlation. Simply put, causation is when there is an action that has an effect of something else, while correlation is an action which is followed by an event/action/whatever. When correlated, the first thing does not necessarily cause the other; the event following the first may just be a coincidence. In context, this means that Barack Obama winning the younger vote does not directly result from social network usage. It could very well be from the age difference between Obama and McCain, or from a completely different cause such as heavier advertising on teen-frequented channels on TV. Also, when evaluating the impact of this, one must also consider that an extra method for a politician to campaign that is useful once every four years does not have a large impact in the grand scheme of things. "- The first amendment to the constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. " Therefore, social networking websites not only allow such things, but they also promote it, as evidenced by the different groups that people decide to join while they are on such sites. " The legality of social networking sites is of no relevance in this debate. "-If social networking web sites did not exist, people would not be as socially diverse as they are today. Social networking websites like Facebook, recommend people that you may know based on who your own friends are. As a result, you are able to expand your social horizons. -Social networking web sites like Eharmony and Chemistry, allow single individuals to socialize with individuals that the websites feel they might be compatible to, by the way that they answered their questions. Social networking websites like such have the potential to change lives. " There is the same lack of statistics in this contention as well. Without any statistics (like how many lives were changed? how much expansion of one's social horizon is there? ) we cannot validly consider this argument. "Social networks are becoming increasingly popular not only in the United States, but all over the world as well. That is why in a study taken by Indiana University, 88% of respondents used social networking websites. This obviously goes to show that they are far more beneficial than they are accredited for. " The popularity of social networking websites also has no relevance in this discussion. To support my own contentions. .. My opponent seems to have one thematic problem with my points - that social networking sites aren't at fault, but that the users are at fault. However, it is actually irrelevant whose fault it is. The resolution calls for the impact of the existence of these sites. The fact is, if these sites did not exist, all of these detriments would not exist. Whether or not users have been using the sites as intended is not important; what is important is what is happening. 1. "However, that is not the fault of the social networking site. Once they are used correctly, they have a more than positive impact on the United States of America (as a people, economy, as well as a government. )" The reality is that they are not being used correctly, and are not having a positive impact. 2. "- As I stated earlier, once the site is used in the right context with the necessary safety precautions, it has a positive impact. For clarification purposes, wasting 233 million hours is not using the site within the right context. Using the site at an inappropriate time also does not qualify as using it in the right context. - My opponent has given no source to support this claim. " It may not be used in the right context, but the fact is that it is still used, and it is still having ahuge impact. Here is the source - . http://www.cnn.com... The idea of that statistic is to get a general idea for how much business time is wasted. 3. "-Social networking sites are NOT for kids. Most sites set a minimum age like 13-15. Therefore, this point doesn't belong in this debate. [. http://signups.myspace.com......] " Even though they may not be for kids, the reality is that kids *are* going on such sites and *are* being negatively impacted 4. "My opponent has given no source to support these statistics. He has not spoke about where these kids he is talking are located, nor has he given an accessible link or citation. If anything, I have reason to believe that his entire case is referring to children in the UK" "My opponent has given no source to support this scenario" . http://www.isafe.org... . http://safety.lovetoknow.com... I am confused as to specifically which scenario as I mentioned a few. Here is the Megan Meier source: . http://abcnews.go.com... 5. "My opponent said, "potentially exposing themselves to malware as a result. " This is the fault of the individual and not the site. " Again the sites are impacting the users, no matter whose fault it is. In summation, I urge a Con ballet because my opponent has not provided any substantive rebuttals to my contentions a

Title: social networks are more harm than good Content: I accept.

Title: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States Content: I have argued that social networking sites have only created an "illusion of privacy". Sites deserve blame for the widespread release of personal information. Why these security settings are so easy to get around is because strict privacy settings inhibit growth. The wider the access to information, the great the commercial value of the site. Also, that hour and 22 minutes a day adds up. While teens are online, they are slowing breaking down their own communication skills. They can bounce around to any social networking site and "lol" all they want. While slowly any relationships they have formed in the real world begin to diminish. I noticed in my opponent's speech as she stated the "schedule" of a teenager. I failed to see that she mentioned time with friends, or socializing. That one hour and 22 minutes is the only socializing that seems to be getting done. My opponent also brought up that social networking sites are good for businesses. However, according to a security company based in Australia, "if a single employee spends one hour of company time on Facebook everyday, it will cost his employer $6,200 per year. For Australia, that translate to a productivity lost of $5 billion annually. That impact in the United States would be even greater as Facebook usage in the United States is more widespread. Again, no matter what they claim, security on social networking sites are not as strong as they appear. People, strangers can still get access to your information. Young people of today are destroying social attributes, slowly losing the basis of communication. If an hour of Facebook, can really cause a company to lose that much of it's money, it would have a more negative impact on our already struggling economy. On balance, we are showing more and more of what social networking sites are doing to our community, and it is not in a positive way.

Title: Even sites that appeared innocent have had a devastating effect on society. Content: Some governments, such as the Vietnamese government[1], have already seen sufficient cause to ban social networking sites such as Facebook. Recently in the UK, many major cities witnessed devastation and destruction as social networking sites were used to co-ordinate wide-scale riots which rampaged over London, Manchester, Birmingham, Worcestershire, Gloucester, Croydon, Bristol, Liverpool and Nottingham[2]. Rioters contacted each other through Facebook and blackberry instant messenger to ensure that they could cause maximum damage[3], which resulted in the destruction of property[4], physical violence towards others[5], and even the deaths of three young men[6]. These events prove that seemingly innocent Internet sites can be used by anybody, even apparently normal citizens, to a devastating effect which has caused harm to thousands[7]. To protect the population and maintain order, it is essential that the government is able to act to censor sites that can be used as a forum and a tool for this kind of behaviour when such disruption is occurring. [1] AsiaNews.it, ‘Internet censorship tightening in Vietnam’, 22 June 2010, http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Internet-censorship-tightening-in-Vietnam... 09/09/11 [2] BBC News, ‘England Riots’, 8 February 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14452097 on 09/09/11 [3] BBC News, ‘England riots: Two jailed for using Facebook to incite disorder’, 16 August 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-14551582 on 09/09/11 [4] Hawkes, Alex, Garside, Juliette and Kollewe, Julia, ‘UK riots could cost taxpayer £100m’, guardian.co.uk, 9 August 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/09/uk-riots-cost-taxpayer-100-million on 09/09/11. [5] Allen, Emily, ‘We will use water cannons on them: At last Cameron orders police to come down hard on the looters (some aged as young as NINE)’, Mail Online, 11 August 2011, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024203/UK-RIOTS-2011-David-Came... on 09/09/11. [6] Orr, James, ‘Birmingham riots: three men killed ‘protecting homes’’, The Telegraph, 10 August 2011, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8693095/Birmingham-riots-th... on 09/09/11. [7] Huffington Post, ‘UK Riots: What Long-Term Effects Could They Have?’, 10 August 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/08/10/uk-riots-cleanup-could-co_n_9... on 09/09/11.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: Reflecting on my opponent's arguments, I consider my position is untenable and I feel I must concede this debate and duly urge the voters to Pro. Thank you.

Title: Social networking sites boon. Content: Social networking sites nowadays are used for stalking, committing cyber crimes and other frauds.

Title: Social Networking sites are a boon Content: Social Networking sites are boon as I know from100% people in world 85% of people uses social networking sits It may affect to many people . CHILDREN ARE USING MORE THAN ADULT As we know childrens having more interest in this type of work.They are using more social networking account and some are also below 18 years some people talk in bad language also,about sex f they listen this there mind goes to the bad things. It is affected also by skin diseases,hacking,blackmailing etc

Title: Social Networking Sites are Harmful Content: :D Hope this is going to be fun. ==DEFINITIONS==Well, seeing that the PRO has not defined the topic yet, I will take it into my own hands. I define Social Networking Sites as a website for gregarious humans to find communities and companionship. .. Just to clarify, social networking sites do not include dating websites, such as eharmony. com, match. com, etc, as the websites only support 1 on 1 close relationships, as compared to social which pertains to a gathering or community. I define harmful as causing physical/mental damage, or moral injury, evil, wrong. ==REBUTTALS==Con states "These Social Networking sites are bad for the young ones under 14, I think they shouldn't lie. But as they do, they get Cyber-bullied! It is wrong! "His argument is based on the premise that children under 14 get on social networking sites. 1) According to Time, Facebook kicks off 20,000 underage users everyday. . http://newsfeed.time.com...2) Most people on social networking sites are adults who are capable of making their own choices as to what to do.3)People are responsible when it comes to who their friends are, and taking it up with the proper people if they are being cyber-bullied on social networks. Nowadays, most schools are open to help children who are being cyber-bullied. ==ARGUMENTS== 1) Large social networking sites are constantly monitored by staff members, and when you take into consideration that there are plenty of dangerous chat rooms and instant messengers filled with suspicious people, isn't it clear that these social networking sites provide more online safety?2) There exists a balance in privacy between Parents and teenagers, and this is critical as teenagers deserve their own privacy and peace of mind from the micromanagement of some parents, while parents still do hold the right to monitor what their children are doing. Take facebook as an example and its many uses. Private Messages aren't available to outside people, while parents can easily monitor their children and their children's friends' walls to keep track and monitor them. This balance is crucially needed in today's world, as more and more teenagers are becoming social.3) Health. The human mind needs social activity. In fact, in schools nowadays, teachers are teaching students about the three parts to health. This includes your physical health, your mental/emotional health, and finally your social health. Human beings need friends; they need people they can depend on and talk to in times of need. Facebooks helps people socialize and adds an important "happiness" factor in their lives. 4)Social networking sites allows friends and family to keep in touch more easily, as they can instantaneously share information about their lives, such as events, photos, videos and more, with their friends and family, even if they are far away. Forgetting your old friends or distant family members is less likely to happen when you see their faces and updates every day on websites such as facebook.5)Self-Determination Groups. Social networking sites have many benefits. One of them allows people with similar beliefs to connect with one another and stand up for a cause. Take Egypt for an example. Recently, when Egypt fought for democracy, self-determination groups used communication methods such as Facebook. With this I bring my arguments to a close. I shall expand and make new ones, if necessary, in future rounds. =====================================================I await Pro's response. :)!

Title: Social networking sites cause more harm than good Content: I believe that social networking sites cause more harm than good because studies have proven that people (generally teenagers) are more likely to bully through social media than other forms of media or the more traditional methods of bullying. SOURCE: http://www.meganmeierfoundation.org...

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: It is because I see through the facade of social networking websites straight to the many obvious hazards in the business that I urge a negative ballot on the resolution at hand. Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. ============================================================================ Contention I: Social Networking Web sites have little security built into them. ============================================================================ SUBPOINT A- HACKING IS PREVALENT ON SOCIAL NETWORKING WEB SITES, AND THIS LEADS TO IDENTITY THEFT Brian Krebs of the Washington Post writes in August of 2008, "Social Networking sites such as Facebook, Myspace, Youtube, and LinkedIn are fast emergiing as some of the most fertile grounds for malicious software, identity theives and online mischief-makers." Think of the ways that these social networking can be used as a focus for identity theft. The majority of the useres post their birth date and other personal information, items commonly asked by banks to determine a person's identity. Combined with the full name and things like pet names, Mother's maiden name, and other such information, it isn't difficult to work out the rest. According to the Department of Justice in October 2006, "There has been a sharp 34% increase of Social Network users reporting having personal information stolen over the internet in the past year." With so many hackers targeting social networking websites every day, these site are part of the problem towards helping Identity theft. SUBPOINT B- IDENTITY THEFT HARMS THE ECONOMY According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission in a September 2003 report on Identity Theft, "1 in 30 Americans surveyed reported having a personal account on the Internet taken over. The average los from the misuse of a victim's personal information [was] $4,800." The same report explains that this amounts to approimately $48 billion removed from the economy every year. Given the current state of our economy, when money is precious, this 48 billion could not come at a steeper cost. ============================================================================ Contention II: Social networking sites are destroying technological innovation. ============================================================================ While it might seem easy to view the Internet in the abstract, as some ethereal object, the truth is, its not. The internet only exists because of the physical infrastructure provided by private investors. For every byte of information sent on the internet, there exists a physical server that hosts the memory storage for that information. These servers are bought and paid for by a number of actors, the majority of whom are private investment companies. The contention that I bring up is the internet's need for storage capacity is drastically increasing; requiring a drastic increase in the amount of money diverted to purchase infrastructure needs. This is because of social networking websites. SUBPOINT A- THE INTERNET IS REACHING THE LIMITS OF ITS CAPACITY, AND SOCIAL NETWORK WEBSITES ARE CAUSING THIS TO HAPPEN. Without investment, the Internet's current network architecture will reach the limits of its capacity by 2010. The "unprecedented new wave of broadband traffic" would increase 50-fold by 2015. Eight hours of video is loaded onto Youtube every minute. Five hours of video is loaded onto Facebook and Myspace every minute. Video will be 80 percent of all traffic by 2010, up from 30 percent today. [The internet] is a finite service upgraded and maintained by private investors: without necessary investment, it will run out of room Websites like Myspace, Facebook and Youtube all suck up precious bandwidth through uploading massive amounts of pictures and video. There are no other places on the Internet that contain the same amounts of massive files, nor engender such uploading by making it easy and socially desireable. The choice for the internet is to crash, or significantly increase investment in physical infrastruture. Obviously, because of the value provided by the internet, investors will not allow it to crash. What that will mean, however, is that they will be forced to bottleneck their precious resources into creating physical memory storage devices to keep pace with the amount of memory storage. Imagine the internet without major contributors such as "amazon.com" or ebay. Most people in today's economy spend most of their time on these types of websites just to earn a living. Furthermore, imagine the world without google. Pure chaos. It is because I believe anything that harms both the American People and the American economy so much outweighs any positive aspects of social networks, that I urge a negative ballot today.

Title: Sharing of personal details for commercial gain by social networking sites be made punishable by law Content: Arguments: Social networking sites are places where people 'share' or upload details of their personal life to the world wide web , in order to connect better with their friends or personal contacts. Under such circumstances social networking sites become ware houses for large amounts of pervading information into the life of its members which includes photographs, email and other contact details. This information is usually uploaded by members solely for the Eyes of their own contacts. Social Networking sites may find it difficult to maintain huge establishments merely through online applications and add generated revenue. They hence often find themselves compelled to cash in at other places. Multi-national co-operations and sometimes people with malafide intent are willing to pay money in exchange for personal contact details including personal preferences of ordinary people, these details are often used against the best interest of uncanny victims usually for marketing purposes, but sometimes for the more vicious credit card and other monetary frauds. The sale of contact details of millions of such social network users generate enormous income for companies, and grievous injustice and harassment of users. For the above stated purposes , I propose that it will be in the best interest of the users of such networking sites,if governments make it a punishable offense for companies to share private details of individual users for commercial gain.

Title: users under 18 using Facebook Content: Thank you for instigating this interesting topic. I’d like to point out as a clarification for the readers that the issue at hand is whether users under 18 should be allowed to use Facebook. My opponent will be negating the resolution and I will be affirming it. For this debate, I will be arguing that Social Networking Sites like Facebook have enormous benefits and contributions to society and modern communication. I’m under 18 who is studying in Europe away from my parents and I have Facebook. Why? Because it’s mainly to connect and communicate to my family and friends overseas. Not only that, I use it for reference and educational purposes. I’m subscribed to news and political pages to get some information about current events. With FB, school life is also easier since I can communicate with my classmates to get updated with assignments and exams (what to review, etc). Also, FB has apps and games for entertainment and leisure time to kill boredom. It very much gives a positive impact on life. FB also helps people overcome social anxiety and be healthier by expressing themselves online. Anything’s possible in FB, people can express their opinions, ideas and interests here which makes it very popular. Next, I’d like to point out that billions of people are connected online. Banning underaged kids from Facebook is not only unnecessary, but it’s also unfeasible. Basically, all my opponent argued in R1 are shallow hypotheticals and minor boo-boos of Facebook inhabited by the young generation. Facebook is for kids 13+. By this age, most kids know what they are doing. So, we shouldn’t ban underaged kids just because they troll around, and if cyber bullying occurs, we need to discipline the parties that are involved and responsible. We need to make anti-bullying laws stricter. Banning FB from minors won’t do any good since it will seriously harm the majority. We must consider the benefits of this popular Social Networking Site because it superiorly overrides its disadvantages. I will let my opponent elaborate her contentions further next round then I will explain my premises more accurately after. Thanks and good luck!

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: As my opponet forfeited his round all my points stand. Go CON.

Title: Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: I would like to extend my thanks to my opponent for challenging me to debate this interesting topic and I duly accept his parameters for the arguments. As my opponent pointed out, there are some limited benefits that may accrue from social networking sites and I certainly agree that under the supervision of a teacher, forums can be set up within which students from geographically remote locations can exchange ideas and knowledge. What is more difficult to accept is that employees accessing these sites for personal use during working hours makes them more efficient. Would an employee who spends their time chatting on the phone to their friends instead of getting on with their work be considered more efficient? I doubt it. That is why many companies limit the use of both phones and computers for non-business reasons. http://www.net-security.org... http://mashable.com... I must also disagree with the Businessweek journalist's assertion that these sites help shy people to increase their self-confidence within a safe environment. The best way to increase one's self-confidence is to go out and actually meet real people and talk to them in person. In addition, getting out and about is much healthier than sitting indoors in front of a computer screen! As regards security, social networking sites are much favoured by paedophiles who use them to "groom" their victims. http://www.dailymail.co.uk... Shall we consider Debate.org, for example? It can act as a quasi-social networking site through its forums. This site is, I hope, safe from sexual predators as it is very well moderated in that respect. However, there are no age restrictions and many members are younger than 18 years old – although I'm not. As it happens, on my user profile I quote my real name and age and display a recent photograph of myself, but there is nothing to stop a sex pest from setting up an account and lying about his age and name and using a photograph of someone much younger than himself in the hope of luring one of the younger and more impressionable members into a face-to-face meeting. It would be hard to do on this site, but Facebook and MySpace provide ample opportunities for computer-literate kiddy-fiddlers. So, although these sites do have some positives and access to them certainly shouldn't be restricted (except, perhaps, in some workplaces) on balance, social networking sites do not have a positive impact on the United States. Thank you.

Title: debate with yourself Content: con has merely listed some 'cons' to networking sites. overall, there are more benefits. con says time is wasted on frivilous activity. but like hte wise saying goes "time that you enjoy wasting is not wasted time". people may not be as productive as they could otherwise be, but we dont always measure things by economic output. they still get their work done, by and large. society is not suffereing. face to face communication. while it has hindered face to face, it has opened a new door for us. much like texting is good fo some purposes, not good for others, and does hinder phone skills. but that just means more time needs to be given to both avenues, and ultimately, we are the better for it that we have the options at our disposal given some things are btter approached oen way or the other. children shouldn't be on the internet too much. this is common knowledge. if it's to the point of altering brain waves, it's too much. people might get exposed to predators, but this is just life. gong to a bar, or out in publc exposes you to danger too. we just need to follow common sense procedures for ourselves, but especially for our kids. your cite about GPA is pretty radical. 3.82 GPA just because you didn't use networking cites? this wasn't a common grade even befor the internet. these claims are so far fetched by con, that surely he needs some stat to back it up. it's pretty obvious this stuff is made up either way though.

Title: It teaches social responsibility Content: The vast majority of young people in schools use social media and social networking sites, whether they like to keep in touch with old friends or make new ones, they are vastly popular, and no amount of scolding from teachers will deter them. They've heard it all before. Having a Facebook account or what have you teaches young people the importance of internet safety. It teaches them to be responsible with the amount of information they put up, the photos they publish, the things they write, etcetera. However, some children only learn this the hard way- perhaps, when they or someone close to them has been a victim of online identity theft. If social media was part of the curriculum they would learn the importance of it right from the beginning, and not wait until something forces them to.

Title: All people should join at least one kind of social networking site. Content: You can't say like that. These sites have influenced our lives so much that people always read bools also only which saves their money. We can consult to doctors abroad through video chat. These sites are very helpful to us so we should see them as a good sign of the progress of the nation. But I also agree with your point that it is killing people as some children use these sites for bad purposes but what can we do? We can do that parents of these children should keep a check on them and then you see how these social networking sites will appear as important as they are now.

Title: Social Networking Content: I would also like my opponent to know that I am very new to this and apologize for my shortcomings. Concerning arguments: On much deliberation concerning the merits of certain social networking sites, I realize that factors are present in the process of communication via internet that allow for not only a "good" interaction, but also a "better" one. When in a conversation with someone on a social networking site, one is presented with the opportunity to think before he speaks(that is type). This website is a prime example, when a person enters a debate he is not forced to respond immediately but can search for evidence with which he can make his point or points(assuming he knows how to do this). One is given the opportunity to speak freely with peoples of other nations, though it could be argued that this is not better by my opponents definition of the word, it is much less expensive and far easier due to the easy accessibility of online translators. It is easier to be more eloquent when given the time to consider what to say or post. Again will I apologize, for due to the shortness of time, I must post this now.

Title: Social networking sites are harmful. Content: I would like to say as much as children should be kept away from the computer it can be used for learning! Meaning that it is not all bad and that quote of what she said isn't right it is just a opinion no supporting evidence in that statement. As sad as it may be you say that some scientist thinks that it may be bad for your brain I want proof of this and if your going to say that. You have no evidence of this and I want proof if your going to say this. Many people may log on at home after they get home what if they forgot what their homework was you can't exactly go ring up your teacher and ask what the homework was you could just ask someone in your class online, so much easier than getting in trouble the next day. Many people believe that t.v's and to much computer can rot your mind and I fully back them up on that statement because it does but do people say the same thing with cell phones no they think it is good that you can text people without the worry of having to call them or walk down to them. Cell phones do most of the same things that social networking sites do like you can communicate with others, play games, make calls and listen to music, so why do people believe that cell phones are good but social networking sites aren't one of the only differences between the two is that cell phones are portable and you can get facebook on their for free. Surely if you think cell phones are good for you then social networking is to. I now rest my case.

Title: Social Networking Sites are Harmful Content: As much as I want to say no, I must say Yes. I found the group/person EleaDEVILnor

Title: do we have less face to face interaction because of facebook and whatsapp Content: In my opinion"Facebook is a place where friends go to make meaningful connections," . "This regional campaign celebrates those connections and the different kinds of friendship that enrich our lives both on and off Facebook." There"s no doubt that Facebook has impacted the societies we live and operate in through various ways and degrees. The social network phenomenon gained even greater prominence in our collective psyche this month due to the new movie, The Social Network, which chronicles the origins of Facebook on the Harvard campus. Having now spread far beyond the realm of college students to include people of all ages in countries throughout the world, Facebook and other social networking sites represent a new way of connecting with friends, colleagues, acquaintances, friends-of-friends, and even people we don't know who want to "friend' us via the internet. But when we communicate online, whether it's on Facebook or through email, or when we tweet or text, what's missing? What specific elements do we miss out on when we trade face-to-face communication for connecting through our computer or blackberry? It may seem obvious to some, but I think we tend to forget about the importance of body language, voice inflection, and the simple act of looking someone in the eye during a conversation. Granted, technologies such as Skype can provide us with the screen image of the person to whom we're talking. But is eye contact as palpable on a screen as it is in person? And how "undivided' is our attention when we're reading someone's email message, as opposed to when we're sitting across a table from them? Can a text message convey the nuance of a facial expression? I've had young clients tell me about serious disagreements they've had with friends when text messages and emails are misunderstood. We've discussed how easily words can be misinterpreted when they are isolated from body language, and how texts and emails can convey the wrong messages about how you really feel. There is something stilted about online conversations because a certain dimension of emotion is missing, a dimension that only exists when two people are face to face. Body language, facial expression, and the tone and inflection of our voice all play a part in communicating our feelings. I've suggested that my clients try this exercise, which demonstrates how important in-person factors are in communicating your true emotions. I have them speak the same sentence three times, each time expressing a different attitude or emotional tone. For example, if you have to break a date with a friend, you might say, "I'm sorry I couldn't make it but something else came up.' That sentence could be stated with frustration, sarcasm, or compassion. One could speak the words while smiling, scowling, or putting one's arm around the friend's shoulder. When clients try this simple exercise, they realize how the message changes depending on how the words are spoken and what gestures are used. Our facial expression, physical gestures, and the emotional tone in our voice alter the meaning of our words, which is why it is very difficult to express ourselves fully and authentically in an email or text-or even in front of a Skype screen. So when we forego face-to-face encounters in favor of screen-speak or emailed or text words, our friends receive only a partial message. What's missing are the feelings that inform the words.

Title: Society has created mental illness. Content: Even though society has created pictures of how people look, It's our choice whether we listen to it or not. Social media plays a big part in what we say and do, But its our own choice whether we want to fall into the trap of society opinions or make our own. Good health starts where we live, Where we work and learn, And where we play, And it's our choice whether the society we live in is effected in a good or bad way. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 24. 6 million Australians have media platform, Facebook. It has been linked to mental health issues, Mainly suicide and depression. These only happens because of the way that people think. It is their choice as to what they think and say. The internet has made way for mental health problems, Yes, But society has just continued to talk about what has already been said. Mental illnesses go way back before the internet and social media, It isn"t something that has just been developed. Our views on society need to change.

Title: On Balance, social networking websites do more good than harm Content: Hey guys. I am radicalguy44 and in this debate I will prove that social networking websites do more harm than good. I would like the PRO to start, and please make this an LD style debate! Good luck PRO!

Title: Social Networking Sites are Harmful Content: Well, Arguments extended. .. I thank PRO for this debate. .. very interesting for the time that it lasted.

Title: On Balance, social networking websites do more good than harm Content: Well, seeing as how i'm the only one who posted, it seems pretty simple who you should vote for.l

Title: that, on balance, social networking websites have had a positive impact on the US Content: I affirm the resolution.

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Content: He again forfeits!

Title: that, on balance, social networking websites have had a positive impact on the US Content: As my opponent has not rebutted any of my arguments, I shall rebut his and advance my own. 1. Social Capital This contention has two major flaws: it is not unique to social networking sites, and its impact is relatively insignificant. First of all, all of the benefits my opponent just listed can be equally enjoyed through IM, texts, chat rooms, calling someone, etc. Social networking sites have not created these benefits, they have just created yet another place to experience them, minimizing their impact to very little. This brings me to my next point: the impact of this is relatively insignificant. When compared to any of my contentions, simply being able to talk with someone who is far away is not even close to the same magnitude. 2. Jobs "According to Stanford University researcher Mark Granovetter 50%-70% of American jobs are obtained with the help of social networking websites. That's over 100 million American jobs. " This is actually false, and is an attempt by my opponent to change a fact for his own benefit. Here is the actual quote from . http://www.tuboston.com...: "Stanford University sociology professor Mark Granovetter recently conducted research that supports the value of making new connections. He found that between 50 and 70 percent of new jobs are discovered by reaching out to people job seekers only know vaguely. " This does not mean 50%-70% of American jobs are obtained with the help of social networking websites. It means 50%-70% of American jobs are obtained with the help of weak ties, which *might* be established using social networking sites. As such, this statistic should be discounted from consideration. "According to Mark Mehler from CareerXroads, a person using a social networking sites to get a jobs chances increases from 1/500 to 1/35. " As for this statistic, I would ask for an accessible source to view this. Though I cannot say for sure without an accessible source, I would like to note that "CareerXroads" is a site designed to help the unemployed find jobs, and as such there is a high probability that my opponent has miquoted a figure intended for that specific site, among other possibilities. 3. Business "According to Robert Half International from a poll of 150 senior executives from the biggest US companies, nearly 2/3 of them will use social networking sites for their hiring efforts. " To "use social networking sites" that could mean merely hiring a single employee whose job includes glancing over resumes online. Thus, this point has almost no impact unless backed up by significant statistics.

Title: That, on balance, social networking web sites have a positive impact on the United States of America Content: Thanks for this debate and good luck: DEFINITIONS: -Impact -From: Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com......) -"To have a direct effect or impact on." Resolutional Analysis: The burden of proof lies with pro. -Within this debate, it is pro's job to prove that there is some sort of positive impact on the United States. Therefore, if I prove negative effect or neutral effect, I ought to win. -Therefore, my claim is simple: That social networking websites have a NEUTRAL impact on the United States. A. Social Networking Sites are simply a tool. - Since Social Networking Sites are generally meant for friends meeting up with each other and sharing information, you will see that these sites are simply a tool for people to use. Thus, this debate asks the question, does the tool have an impact? And the answer is no. You see, it is the PEOPLE THAT USE THE TOOL that determines what kind of impact exists. A person could use these sites well and nothing bad could happen, OR someone could anonymously abuse someone to the point of suicide on these same sites. For example: A hammer is a tool. A person could use the hammer to build a house. But a person could also use the same hammer to murder someone. Do either of these actions determine the impact of the tool? No… Therefore, it is the PEOPLE that determine whether it will impact anyone positively or negatively. B. Definition (of impact) places no impact on Social Networking Sites. -How can something have a ‘direct effect' on something when it doesn't have a brain? It doesn't think. And it therefore can't positively or negatively impact anything. In the end of this debate, ask yourself… Does a hammer build a house or does a person build a house with a hammer? Does a hammer kill someone, or does a person kill a person with a hammer? Does a gun kill someone, or does someone kill a person with a gun? Does a gun protect a family from a robber, or does someone protect a family from a robber with a gun? Since the answer to all of these is the latter of the two, you will see that it is the PERSON that has the impact, not the tool. ====================================================== Onto my opponents case: 1. I accept the definition (of Social Networking Site) as a way Social Networking sites could be viewed. Although, there can be multiple interpretations, I will not be abusive and I will accept this as the general purpose of a Social Networking site. 2. I will urge the voters to use both definitions of impact. Use my opponents as the "how much" and use my definition as the "how." In other words, his points out to a strong effect while mine points to a direct effect. And since these are mutually inclusive, use them both to determine if PRO has met both of them. Onto the arguments now: 1. Economy (and the business advertisement argument)--> A) The economic benefits simply transfered. -You have to acknowledge the simple fact that Social Networking Sites bring in revenue to other companies (debate.org being one of those). However, this revenue transfered from previous popular advertisement locations (such as newspaper and billboards). And although those are still used, they have decreased in popularity while Social Networking sites have balanced it out. Therefore, the economy really didn't benefit as much as my opponent claims. The article (of the link below) shows how search engines may die because of social networking sites, which is a huge amount of income. B) If anything, the economy got worse. -What happens when one location begins to receive all advertisement revenue? Simply, they begin to dominate the market. AND, they begin to pocket it. Both of these have a negative effect since dominating the market will simply lead to people only going there to advertise. This will increase the amount of revenue they get, thus they can begin to 'save' it for whatever reason. Once they save it, the flow of money seizes and the economy actually suffers. C) If it did get better, it is because people used the tool well. -The biggest argument my opponent will have to deal with is the fact that "social networking sites" did not have a direct impact on the market, rather the intelligent businessmen did. Social Networking Sites are something we made up, a simple tool of possibility, but as we all know, Social Networking Sites can be used for bad as well. For example: -From PC MAGAZINE ONLINE, July 22, 2008, pNA, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, Expanded Academic ASAP -QUOTE: "With more and more kids communicating online, Internet bullying has become a larger issue. About 22 percent of kids said they have friends who have been bullied online." Also: -From Jessica S. Groppe; Catholic U. Law School; COMMLAW CONSPECTUS; 2007; ONLINE; LEXIS-NEXIS; p. 218 -QUOTE: "In over half of these incidents solicitors request photographs of youth, and in twenty-seven percent of such occurrences solicitors ask for sexual photographs. These pornographic depictions involve abusive activities that "exacerbate the already vulnerable status of children" who consequently become mere sexual objects in pornographic work. Compliance with solicitor's pornographic requests often results from youths who lack the prudence or maturity to understand the implications or consequences of such pictures. Children's meager knowledge of the nature of sexual acts bolsters the fact that children cannot meaningfully consent to participating in child pornographic activities, and thus, suffer harm from its production." From this you can see that the economy is little to no benefit. ESPECIALLY when you weigh it against the benefits of sexual predators and how they can use it as a tool to further abuse the children of America. Just ask the father of the raped daughter what he thinks about the better economy that we got because of a social networking site. Again, it's all how you use it. 2. Democracy--> -Here is just one example of how it could be used as a good tool. However, on top of this, you also have a HUGE increase in the abuse of the candidates. For example, Obama got made fun of and slandered against. And McCain was a war monger because of videos that were put up on the internet. OH... and maybe people even PMed each other with a plot to kill them. All made possible because of Social Networking Sites. 3. Terrorism (and 1/2 under it)--> -Also, a good parent-child relation is good for fighting immature adolescent behavior. However, because of social networking sites, we don't have that either. -From Kaveri Subrahmayam & Patricia Greenfield; Professors of Psychology at Cal State U. and UCLA; THE FUTURE OF CHILDREN; Spring 2008; p. 119 -QUOTE: "Qualitative evidence is starting to accumulate that social networking sites such as MySpace are ausing serious parent-child conflicts and loss of parental control. Rosen's interviews with parents revealed several typical problems. For example, a boy who failed to do his homework before midnight because he was on MySpace reacted to his parent's efforts to curtail his use of MySpace by sneaking back online." -Not to mention that I have already proven that the economy is not necessarily better because of Social Networking Sites. Furthermore, you will see that the economy is bad BECAUSE of the War on Terrorism (in part anyway): -From: http://www.cfr.org... -QUOTE: "By contrast, the Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee, which estimated a $3.5 trillion cost through 2017, say the war will cost the average U.S. family $46,400. Per person, the total cost, given these estimates, would be $11,627, or $830 per year." Through this, you will see that my opponents arguments are irrelevant. It ALL depends on use. Therefore, I urge you to vote CON! Thanks for this debate!

Title: Social networking sites On Balance have had a positive impact on the United States Content: For this debate I clarify the following defintions on balance as net result or overall effect (www.investorwords.com/3410/on_balance.html) positive to be admitting of no doubt or irrefutable fact (American Heritage second College edition) I being the con must negate the resolution that on balance Social Networking sites ON BALANCE have had a positive impact on the United States. I am negating the resolution when I say that I am neutral. Meaning there are good things and there are bad things about social networking websites but neither can outweigh the other and with all things considered are equal and neutral. To clarify the word negate means to show to be false wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn By going neutral I am proving the resolution false. To begin the debate I concede all affirmative points 1.Young people don't know how much information they're putting out and no one needs to prove their identity, even sex offenders. According to a study conducted by the University of Dayton, 23% of college students intentionally misrepresent themselves on a social networking website to be funny. Not all people are pretending to be someone else for the sake of a joke. On August 22, 2002, as part of his official duties, Detective Frank Warchol of the Portsmouth, New Hampshire Police Department signed on to a chat room on America Online, posing as a fourteen-year-old girl. We all know what happened next. A man named Roland MacMillan also signed on to the chat room, and solicited what he believed to be the 14-year-old for sexual acts. Shortly thereafter Mr. MacMillan was arrested. Young users are often naï¿½ve about the information they put out on the Internet that is made public. Adults can send inappropriate pictures of themselves to minors. "A concerned parent" made the profile on Facebook of a 15-year-old girl who doesn't exist except for online. The girl joined many group dealing with sexuality and ended up becoming "friends" with some of the adults that sent her inappropriate pictures. 2. Social networking sites are unregulated On Social networking sites, there is an age requirement. They are usually 14 or 18. But who's checking who really is of age? There is no doubt there are 10 years old on these sites when they are not allowed to be on them. The sites trust users are whatever age they say they are by checking a box upon registering. Letting your children use a social networking site is like dropping them off in RiverSquare park at midnight and expecting them to be alright. 3. Social Networking sites hurt the workplace The Results of an exclusive MessageLabs survey conducted in September 2007, reveal that approximately 75% of companies said the number of visits their employees were making to social networking sites had increased over the previous six months. About 60% thought this had damaged productivity; while over. 75% believed corporate reputation could be seriously threatened if staff members posted negative comments about their organization online. No wonder over 70% of respondents said they were thinking of restricting employee access to social networking sites. (http://www.compliancehome.com...) 4. online social networking sites have become targets for hackers When you're online, your computer is under attack, and more hackers are hunting for prey on social-networking sites. For the past three months a virus dubbed "Koobface" has targeted Facebook's 120 million users. It uses the social network's messaging system to infect PCs, then it tries to raid your personal information. "If you're connected to the Internet, you're almost always under attack," said Brad Lindsay, KSL system security expert. From an infected computer, Koobface sends notes to friends. You may get a message from a trusted friends account with a subject header like: "You look just awesome in this new movie." It directs you to a Web site and instructs you to download an update of Adobe's Flash player. At that point, you're infected and you get sent off to contaminated sites "Some of the really bad ones can actually take over your computer and be used to attack other computers. Others will sit quietly, record information and send it back to the hacker," Lindsay said. (http://www.ksl.com...) Once these sites were virus free zone, but the same thing can not be told now about these websites. So, social networking websites are now vulnerable to severe malware or virus attack as proven. It is obvious social networking websites are an easy hunting ground for all these malicious viruses. The danger is real, according to a study conducted by CA and the National Cyber Security Alliance (NCSA). In October, the alliance issued its first social networking study examining the link between specific online behaviors and the potential for becoming a victim of cybercrime. 67 percent of people who use social networking sites admit to worrying about becoming a victim of cybercrime. Therefore with the affirmative acting as the counter balance and proving why they are positive I stand neutral on the REsolution Social Networking sites on Balance have had a positive impact on the United States.

Title: Facebook is good for democracy Content: Social networks aid our society on multiple levels, one of them being the democratic process. This happens both in autocracies, where the democratic process is basically nonexistent and in western liberal democracies where Facebook acts as a megaphone for the will of the population. Firstly, when talking about oppressive regimes, Facebook allows the population to organize themselves in massive protests which can, in time, overthrow the government. This is of particular importance as the population cannot organize protests "offline" in the real world, because government forces would quickly find them and stop the protests before they even started. These people need a safe house, where government intervention is minimized, so that they can spread the news and organize the protests. The online environment is the best options. We have seen this happening in the Arab Spring(1), Brazil (2), Turkey(3) as well as for protests in democracies as in Wisconsin(4) For western liberal democracies too Facebook plays a very important role in aiding the democratic process. Even in a democracy the government often engages in unpopular policies. Unfortunately, as we are talking about countries with tens of millions of people, citizens often feel they can’t make a difference. Luckily, here's where Facebook comes in. It connects all the people who share the same disapproval of government actions, removing the feeling that you can do nothing as there is no one backing you. Millions can come together to voice their opinions. Therefore there is more likely to be dissent. Moreover, the internet allowed individuals to start massive campaigns of online petition gathering, which they will later use as an irrefutable argument to the government showing the desire for change. There are a lot of sites, one of the biggest being Avaaz.org which facilitates this process, which use Facebook as a medium through which the petition is shared and so grows. (1) Sonya Angelica Diehn “Social media use evolving in Egypt”, DW , 04.07.2013 http://www.dw.de/social-media-use-evolving-in-egypt/a-16930251 (2) Caroline Stauffer “Social media spreads and splinters Brazil protests”, Reuters ,June 22, 2013 http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/social-media-spreads-splinters-brazil-protests-6C10418084 (3) “Activists in Turkey use social media to organize, evade crackdown As protests continue across Turkey against the government” http://fsrn.org/audio/activists-turkey-use-social-media-organize-evade-crackdown-protests-continue-across-turkey-aga (4)Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_social_media_in_the_Wisconsin_protests

Title: Parental control on sns or other social networking should be banned Content: Thank you for the argument. I really appreciate it. I agree that children might not know well about safety. However, these days, social networking is the most powerful and comfortable way for the children to communicate with other friends. For some children, small communication with other friends might give encouragement and happiness beyond the academies and enormous homeworks. Also, social networking does not only give disadvantage to the children. Social networking allows the children to know better about what is happening in the society. I think that children also has their own privacy. Also, parental control may make the relationship between the parents and children to get worse. Many fights are happening between families about the parental control. Additionally, the children do not like their sns to be controlled by parents. They want their privacy to be kept, and the thoughts of the children should be also respected, not only the adults' and parents'.