the fact that now rules the visitation order sheet change kind of fact her is an additional fear to make it easier for governments to decide that. >> so, just a pullback to sort of the high-altitude question that the book raises, you know, the book is largely pitched as an american ideas. we are by nature taught from our

second decade of believing that the internet is transforming our world very largely to the good, even perplexing and a selective ways. where do you come down at this point in recognizing you might be evolving to in your views on this? okay, so what's wrong with having an anticorruption website in azerbaijan or an environmental law in russia? are mobilizing people in outside support the protest movement? this clearly is a powerful tool for any kind of political express and organization or activity as we know it you're in the united states. so what's wrong with that? are following prey to a certain extent at the very thing you are critiquing, which is this is a tool after it can be good, can be bad. >> you know, is a little

disclaimer, i also am affiliated on the board of the society of the information program. >> what we do is understand how you actually use neat opening up. so to me, there's really no question that the internet can be useful. so many of the initiatives you answer, you know, one sides more important. what is happening, all of them in themselves. the question really is, from the perspective of someone unlimited source is, you know, and someone also who has a lattice political and historical baggage and is likely to be interpreted in some ways in some countries more than

the other, whether as an american person may not. so my question really is, you know, how do you ask someone who has good intentions, sending to actually maximize the actual internet while minimizing coming up, the impact of previous history of the wonders likely to have a strategy. this is why i'm trying to out i'm a strategy because i think that right now our entire paradigm of thinking is wrong because it's full of assumptions and most of those assumptions are assumptions about how the

internet works. yes, opens up governments for exchange, but if you know nothing about azerbaijan committee he could stand, if you don't know much about the culture or political insults your force of the country, it's unlikely that you'll realize the kind of impact the internet is likely to have on it. so part of my agenda is to transform this to be on the impact of the internet in the abstract to the impact of the internet in the context of the environment. so it hurts to forget because to a large extent, the logic will be shamed by what's happening locally. they need to be much more attentive. if you come to russia and think

they're good guys who are fighting the government and then there are the bad guys and there's nothing in between and you just analyze how the powers covered, which is lose 99% of the changes. so you have to consider how the facts of the role of religion, nationalism versus minorities in russia. i'm actually the guy who's saying that the internet isn't informative. >> it's not always for the good. >> well, it's not everything for the good because many of the processes are not themselves the democratization. so yes, many of them will be amplified, but the sort to get to this point were we can acquaint the dangers of democratization, we first need to examine the exact political

culture or social contact to transform. we are bound to end up with different policies, which now will be able to aggregate. i mean, to me the problem is that there are differences. their institutional and procedural differences in terms of how you can approach this. there is technology to spend days thinking very hard about how technology will transform russia. or we can do the exact opposite and start with something about russia and the region and on the internet will do that. i tend to side with the power and the technologists because there is not so much that the internet does. the transaction cost makes mac's

information that they had a just don't know how that was also the factors are likely to affect the environment and mussina with the environment site. >> well, you know, for most of it a place as any to bring your voices as well and hear what you have to say about this. it think it's one of those conversations that were going to be having five years from now in 10 years from now. >> i hope. >> really struck by in many ways the parallels between the example your comic given the internet facilitates stalin in russia as much as it facilitates -- more than it facilitates western democracy. and look at al qaeda on the internets i think it's a. that fundamentally challenges our fear that the internet is a force for good. well, it also turns out to be an incredibly affect the pool for

facilitating this underground group that wishes to communicate anonymously across countries and continents for their work. and i think we've come to the realization of that over the last two years in a way that wasn't immediately obvious in 2003 and 2004. if we can get your questions, will try to do as many as they can always still have time. we'll start here in the front row of an move backwards as quickly as we can. give us your name. [inaudible] >> hi, robert schroeder, international investors. thank you for the talk in the

book. just today we thought there was a report out that our own government has been requesting the twitter records to see those that may have been looking for information. there is also a report mentioned today that the senate subcommittee is upset that apparently there has been some cyberattacks, cited offense directed by some of our intelligence community against other nations if they were not informed of when these were conducted. we are undoubtedly seen better own government is getting involved in this. you see that there'll be any efforts made to restrain our own government in the future? how would she say this balances out against what you fear other governments might be doing? >> effort by whom? >> the u.s. government.

>> outward in some form. >> i mean, if they tough one. there are definitely signs that there is much more concerned about the impact of the internet and the national security. up until now, wikileaks in part now discovered that there are a lot of people around the globe who with the help of their computer can launch a cyberattack on a site like paypal. that's not organized crime. in new york and elsewhere, people are compassionate about wikileaks. you see the financial threat that the internet, you know, poses. i'm just not sure that the congress is any less generous if

you want to put it in those terms about the internet. i mean, you know, the first actually is extremely i think concerned about the internet, has been calling for an internet kill switch to have a button to turn it off, to prosecute anyone connected to wikileaks to deliver. so i just don't think that this change will come. it will come from contrasts. they appear actually much more aggressive. then the government itself and they are the ones who are viewing the department of justice and the action to a sans. so i think if anything, they change will come probably -- the pressure will come from some of the kids who are not yet part as the companies and are still a load off silicon valley, who are

concerned with the action. and i don't know if the pressure of civil society will be enough. but as lawrence said a few years ago, all it will take a -- i don't think that's a change for the better. if anything it's a change for the worse. you know, so my response is we have much more power to shape that. so i'm not particularly enthusiastic, but he also don't think that there is much pressure you can expect to come. it's not russia or china will be speaking out or the european union more often post privacy

policies. , the day support from the cyberwarfare to the areas of cybersecurity now putting up in the european states. if you actually want to look at the volunteers say bernie during peak times. so they have a bunch of geeks who call themselves an official entity, a say bernie and cyberattacks come to the defense, which may not be a bad idea. but i don't think the europeans are any less, you know, aggressive when it comes to cyberspace than americans. >> the next congress action is the cyberreserve forwards. more questions, please. >> the cyberpeace corps.

>> probably not that one. yes, sir. >> yeah, now the most important issue in the contribution i would like you to suggest what will be the stretches to utilize the internet to their own advantage. and also now, the internet has become the national solvency issue. but that name each country focuses their own information and this is going to be very harmful to the international relation. thank you. >> well, the initial question was about the way in which

opponents, you know, opponents of climate change can use the internet to battle it out. i mean, utc allotted to nihilism have been on issues, not just climate change. some of that sticks around deliberately by areas. on this information and of course that is happening. you remember that the subject of debate in the last 12 months was a bunch of e-mails because of the hack on the server. we'll definitely be seen somewhere after to present the

evidence, but all of that applies universally across many subjects, not just climate change. so in this environment you do need to be much more outfall about the efforts of information. but i think the consequence of this, especially deferring the management can only be one particular party, one particular computer. others will be able to share than and that's an interesting start a week dollars yesterday on the idea of providing the most secure digital rights system. but i don't think anything specific other than, you know, cloud computing because the

servers are generating a lot of energy. other than that, you know, it doesn't do much for connection. >> we have more questions in the back. i can't see him that well. yes, right here. >> i think you agree that the internet is a destructive technology and generally ruled that smaller organizations respond better to disruptive technology than large organizations. in what way is this responding to the challenge of the internet internally to disruptive countries like iran, india and china? >> i think they are much better than i think most of us thought in the past two decades ago. but i have to go with the

assumptions and projections and i think the assumption was that either, you know, cut down the internet for democracy and human rights for the economy collapses because we talk about the information revolution and globalization needs a network in technology and information in order to grow. and i think more or less up until now, it's still very much information, transforming the government. i think the governments have actually been much better in some of it happened because the tele- theatre at the cost of the private sector, so these companies that came to make money in these countries more or

less take on the cost. the private chinese internet companies adapt by law with unlawful content from the website. so the government itself you have two higher end the ones who need to take care of that. the everything had been published which is one of the more provocative ideas in the book is that it is also customization happening right now. we are beginning to see smarter systems emerging to basically make a decision on the spot they used to be centered, not only on the content that is being accessed, but the identity of the user that is trying to access the information. so my prediction is you will be seen in a country like china gil

c. the makers to contribute to the economy and will be able to access any website they want because you can actually monitor the internet years, the "financial times" that represent bloomberg and other investment banker says their friends and they look trustworthy. on the other hand, if you look at what human rights activists, it will be the local government internet. they have neither access of online trends. and of course this will help the government to escape this problem of the dictator's dilemma, where dictators either sign it the internet to basically suffer the consequences. they can still let the internet and, that being much more selective. and all of that is driven by the

same logic that digital advertising contributes. it's all about customization, showing you the app that corresponds. the only difference is still just be the logic will be more or less the same banal about customization and that's one way in which governments manage the environment. >> you need to be a subversive 19 in order to be a democracy activist in the future. i think we have time for probably one or two more questions. okay yes, here.

>> hi, sam dupont from global mobile. i am nearly done with the book and enjoy it very much. my question for you has to do with the ends missteps as you describe it. and i think you do a good job of popping the bubble of utopianism in this technology. and i guess my own feeling about the state department's work is with the been trained to do is introduce an old-fashioned bureaucracy into new type allergy. and the missteps have been caused if anything by assorted access the success and bring this technology to the work of other departments. anything to do a good job of describing the mistakes they've made. and i wonder how you would -- you don't necessarily in the book it too much into

prescription -- [inaudible] >> okay. >> do want to give you the opportunity if you do have ideas about how they could do a better job, how they would go about it. >> i think for me i try to be as much government independence so to say because i think what we need to get right are the principles, not the particulars. so, it's not just america that is trying to do that. you also now have, for example, the dutch government which is extremely trusted and many other european governments are promoted. so the way in which i am that

describing the book is not a description of the bureaucracy and the state department. it's an abstract framework approach. i do believe that much here in the past, whether it is a sent to consider. it was centralized and you have power over decision-making, and making decisions as to whether the internet systems were made in china for azerbaijan or russia or belarus. i think people who are in a much better position to assess natural impact of the internet of those countries than people who know everything about the internet. we can read blogs all day and don't know not to.

so much of it has to do i'm kind of how they actually learn this an ideological stuff and learn the way in which it works in the world. my own experience is the reason why there is so much is because the media area is internal structures from highlighting positive changes, in part because, you know, often it's the pro-western democratic who are the only ones who want to speak to western media. you do not necessarily run into conservative who want to talk to abc. they just announced bbc as imperialist lies. so the stories we get to hear

all have to do with the interest of civil society and secular culture and whatnot. so i think my overarching point is we do move whatever framework we end up deciding on, we do need to be extremely careful about the processes by which we learn, that which we decide to make decisions. i think once we have all those in mind we can then start thinking that needs to get more power and whether we did actually someone will be highlighting the american companies and let american companies do the job of publicizing correction to the u.s. government. so that's sort of the matter. there are many problems outlined in the book by the gross and

cyberattacks and ngos, which are global problems in nature. they do require solutions with multiple internet service providers who inquire much work can be done by the regional unified chain russia and human rights. but they think they will just need perhaps a different mechanism. they do not think that the presence of those four, five, six global problems or to require global solutions will justify an entirely internet savvy approach to thinking about the political power of the internet. >> i think that's probably a good note to end on. i always thought it was absolutely impressive than somebody who comes from belarus and who is that so deeply about

this failed utopia of the 20th century should be guiding us through -- or i should say pushing us against our own utopian when it comes to the story of the next century. >> it's a great hook and you can follow them on twitter. you can follow in foreign policy. he's doing a big up to everywhere. the profile is coming up in the guardian tamayo says will be leading an entire generation towards a new future of cyberrealism. i don't offense true or not. then this bad line. but i think this book is come as you can see from tonight's discussion going to get a lot of attention in a think you can pick up copies they are and thanks once again to our house. thank

>> christine cook. christine is the senior vice president of advertising for "the daily" which is "the daily" newspaper tablet that's been developed and put into market about february 2nd. christine has had many senior sales and markets roles in digital with the "financial times," "market stewart living on the media." delighted to have you here today. [applause] >> clap, clap, clap. right next to her is anthony.

he has been a digital marketer since it began. i've known anthony for quite some time. he's held many different roles, questioning one in double click, which is a pioneer in the digital advertising space. great to you have here as well. >> thank you. >> next to anthony is michael kelley,'s a marketer of adgenesis. i'll let you tell more about it. really just focusing on the paradigm shift in how advertising is delivered to consumer. michael has had a great career with pwc, most recently, he was the chief marketing officer of pwc and worked with some of the biggest brands in the world, including at&t on the digital

strategy. he was also very instrumental in launching hulu which is the video service that is joint owned by a number of media companies. welcome, michael. [applause] >> last, but certainly not least is david steward, gosh, i have known david for a long time. we were colleagues with martha steward on the media many, many years ago. he has built many, many consumer facing brands, working on "people magazine," "martha stewart living" and now an art business. i thought it would be great to tell us about your business to sort of get started. christine, maybe you can -- christine is going to be our aid as well as one the panelist. hopefully you guys can see that.

great. so, you know what i'm going to stand up actually. >> great to see you all here today. thanks for being inside on one the most beautiful days of the summer. nice to have you all here. so i hail from an interesting intersection. the intersection of art and internet. two worlds that have been separate for a long time. the company is 20 x 200. we have a premise that art doesn't have to be expensive to be good. doesn't mean that there's not expensive art that is good. we all know there is. but they are not mutually exclusive. we think a lot of people out there that love art and aren't able to find work that they really like.

part of the problem is the wonderful warm reception that most of us get when we go to a gallery. if you've been to many, this is what you've seen. and the woman not only starts in that position, but she says in that position. and the gallery world in many ways is designed to intimidate, i would argue more than it is an appreciation of art. the founder -- this is the baggage -- a lot of us have a lot of baggage around art because of the way we've been treated in the past. and we often think of art as sort of, you know, the high holies. you know, there's something that goes on. we don't understand it.

we're told it is important. but we are never supposed to really get it ourselves. so jen started, she opened a gallery in 2003. and the gallery business is is an interesting business. we work really hard at making people welcome at the gallery, and educating them about the work that we sell. but the reach of a physical gallery is quite limited. what we do is really move from the world of the gallery, which works for a few, to bringing together the world of artist and the world of consumers through the internet. that's what you see on the right side here. and really using the power of the internet to amass large audiences of consumers and connect them to large numbers of artists. this is a great photo, i think

it's a great photo. but one of the things in -- that happens when you have a lot of context, or a rot of choices is it becomes overwhelming. it's hard to pick what you want. finding art that you like is generally, it's very difficult. either because you are seeing a lot of bad things, or finding a lot of what you don't like. if you look at a lot, a lot of it, after a while, it all sort of looks the same. so some people default to the familiar. i would guess that there probably -- oh know. there have problem been a million of the copies of the dog playing poster -- playing poker poster sold. and it's a sad comment on -- i don't think that everybody that bought this really wanted this. i think if they had found or been able to find better

examples, they would have bought them. but you've got to kind of find your match. what do we do to help turn customers into connoisseurs? how do you get started? if your entry point is, you know, an amazing oil painting, there are only a few people are going to be able to participate. and that's a hard part. so we really start with what we call the gateway drug to the art world. for those of you who don't recognize it, that's a marijuana leaf. [laughter] >> and we work with an amazing range of artists from emerging artist to various established conceptual artist like lawrence weiner. we start with each edition that

we do at a 20 or $50 price point. that's why we call it the gateway drug of the art world. that's okay. and we offer them an abroad array of sizes. and unlike a lot of -- a lot of sites that deal in art. we give people entry points that they are familiar with. how do people get in, how do they get excited? and -- thank you. you weren't in navy club in high school, were you? >> those shoes. no way. >> but, you know, we break a lot of art world traditions at the same time that we try to bring the audiences of artist and collectors together. and one of the examples of that is being able to browse by color. you know, a lot of people that like art buy art based on decor. i'm sorry.

and that's hearsay for a lot of people. we do give them the ability to buy by color. next. did that go -- okay. the other piece of the puzzle is -- there's different kinds of shopping. right? sometimes you know exactly what you want. like i have run out of toothpaste. i want to get another six ounce tube of crest ultra whitening. right? you can go into a place like amazon, type in crest ultra whitening and find it. or google, whenever. most people don't know exactly what they want in the category like art. what is it that you want? what is it that you need? it's a hard thing to search for. we find it important to build a relationship, and really create

an experience, rather than just the transaction. and one the ways we do that is by having a newsletter. and so we have over 50,000 newletter subscribers. each news letter helps people understand a bit more about the artist. a bit more about the work. so that people are getting educated. so they develop an appreciation for the work as well as the person who's creating the work. and this is a provocative, we sell actually a fair amount of text start. this is artist name mike montero and, you know, it comes with a certificate of authenticity, as well as an artist statement. this is a great -- a great designer and artist, paula shaare. some of you may have seen a lithograph of this at union square cafe.

there's a really gorgeous, large, large piece of work. and we worked with paula and we were able to offer the really starting at $50. so that people could experience the art in her own home, even though she would be otherwise beyond their reach. of course, this we all know, happy customers are great marketing. when we get wonder comments from our customers and here's one that we got -- you guys i'm so excited right now. i could see in my pants. that makes us feel really good. it does. it does. i don't know how it makes them feel. but for us it's really wonderful. we all know that one the great ways to build a business is by having really happy customers. so this is basically how we

feel. live with art, it's good for you. thanks. >> great. thank you, david. [applause] >> i want to develop around the horn fast. what is the digital trend, consumer trend that's really getting your attention. who wants to kick it off? >> i think with the launch of spotify and the bending launch of apple cloud base music store with the cloud-base and not having a device, media through the photography or individual, but now media that you have bought through amazon, itunes,

spotify. >> does everyone know what the cloud is is? icloud just launched and store everything to access it from many of your apple devices, rather than having to be tethered to a computer. >> here's two examples. one is idisk, any of you have who apple computer, there's an option to store your pictures, data files, your videos so that they are not stored on your computer, if you went to the web cafe or friends house and log in through a url and have access through your own passwords to your specific information. other example is google, gmail, yahoo! mail that is cloud based, where you are logging into a web site that's particular to you. to underscore that point, google and gmail, which started as more of a personal usage functionality increasingly, i

hear, so many businesses that are using google dox. which is business' ability to store very large files, allow people in multiple locations geographically to access them, without having them stored, storage fees from an operations perspective, or reduced for the company. because google is paying to run all of the computers that are storing all of that information. with that baseline, now you over lay the entertainment services, and any of you that use kindle, if you have an kindle and iphone, you can put a kindle app on your iphone. it'll sink. it knows where you are in your book, whether it's on the kindle itself, or the kindle app. that's using that same type of underlying functionality for you to have an entertainment. i think the presence of entertainment through the cloud is really interesting. >> david, -- i know, david, you have a big music collection.

are you storing your stuff on the cloud? are you buying a lot of music? >> it's funny. in my basement, i live up in springs, i have about 4,000 vinyl disks and probably 2,000cds. ii haven't bought anything physical in probably the past five years. >> what are you doing? >> i buy a few things from time to time via itunes. generally, i have a subscription service, $10 a month, to rhapsody, they have an amazing catalog, i access it via my phone, ipad, i have it hooked up. if i'm on the road traveling, open it up, turn it on, and i got all of my music with me. >> it's great. >> it's fantastic. >> it's great. >> i was going to say it's interesting. i think our virtual lives are a mess.

i have 4,000 photos from the last year on my iphone. >> move closer. >> sorry. is that better? >> yup. >> i have 4,000 photos on my iphone, music on six devices, you talk about consumers trends. i see two, one is education centers. literally will start popping up for people. like me who have no idea what they are talking about. you know, i have no time to go to rhapsody, i think i have no time. actually, i probably could get more time if i had it organized and i was driving here from hampton bays. i saw the cooking schools. we need technology. we need the growth of brands that will help people learn. and speaking of which, i think the most horrible interfaces in the world right now are created by the very brands. i just don't think -- i think there's one person, steve jobs, who is a unique blend of

chromosomes, who can get unique touch with a person like martha, to get in touch. we hear 3d movies aren't doing well. four out of five households make less than $55,000 a year in this country. if you don't think that's an interesting way to live, try doing it for some of you that don't. they can't afford 3d. hollywood is starting to flounder. it would be interesting to bring it back if sony teamed up with google to really improve their user experience, or teamed up with disney, or teamed up with a content company that knows how to entertain. and use navigation. because i can't find half of the things that i hear about. i'm in the business. i think those are the two trends that we're going to start to see. better user experience and actually going out and teaching

people how to do it. >> great. something about -- we all touched on this a little bit. i do work in the video space. it might be self-serving. the whole concept of how we are consuming. i'm a consumer of media, news, journalism, movies, television shows, i probably don't want to mention here that i watch religiously. how we are all watching and consuming those things almost incommerce blue has changed without it noticing how quickly it has happened. i haven't bought a newspaper in probably three years. i read probably five newspapers a day. i haven't watched a television ad, a live television ad in probably three or three years. but i know every marketing campaign that's happening. because i'm consuming that content in different places. when you ask about what the future is, it's how we are consuming this content, and how we are being affected by the

messaging and the marketing and whether i'm watching television and my ipad on the side of a coffee cup, you know, on a billboard somewhere. that's the fascinating piece, the social fabric of how we consume media, we are not huddled around the tvs. we are consuming this in very individual ways. that to me is a fascinating social tie between media, marketing, and people. i hoping it's a positive thing and we can work to make it positive. that to me is really kind of the next ten years. that's a c change that i have no way of predicting what it's going to look like. >> it's not even just content. it's accessing information, social graph. i did a fair amount of research at hearst when we launched a product, a mobile product that allows you to track the things that matter with high quality content sources.

it was like an addiction. we're never unplugged. you know, whether we're on a bus , between meetings, whatever, at the gym in the locker room where we are checking all of these things. i want to ask the audience, i'm just curious, audience participation. what's the first thing that you do in the morning when you wake up. do you brush your teeth and get freshened up? show of hands. check your e-mail? before brushing your feet; right? facebook profile. post to facebook. no? okay. how about saying good morning to the one you love next to you? nobody. one, one -- two. [laughter] >> how many of you have a mobile phone and a land line? okay. of how about you guys?

you do. okay. >> i really wanted to have both. but the land line that we had was battery operated. my whole rational for having that one. if the power went out, i wanted that thing that would be working and when that wasn't available, i just have a cell phone now. >> great segue to the next question. how many battery operated devices do you have on you right now? one? two? three? i saw somebody with three. four? two. okay. very good. how many of you subscribe to newspapers? local or national? both. okay. and my last question: has anyone -- okay, we talked about facebook.

how many of you have facebook profiles? okay. so how many of you go on to facebook once a week? once a day. twice a day? okay. all right. good. and the last question, how many of you have not bought something online? everybody has bought something online. okay. good. next thing i want to talk about is base -- facebook. and social media in general. i think if i was thinking about preparing for this. i personally feel like social media gets a bad wrap. in that it's not just about sending pictures and tweets. it's also about, you know, connecting with business professionals through linkedinand things like that. i wanted to talk to you about things. how are brands and consumers using social media that strikes you as interesting?

>> well, i love that question. because i was originally cynical about social media, especially if facebook became the suppository for people to tell you the things that you didn't want to talk to them about the phone about. i think there are a lot of tools that come into play. i have some of them up here calling social media a form of business and research perspective and making it a lot more sensible. pulse news, flip board, and tweet deck are tools that i use a lot. pulse news and flipboard, pulling in from social media to make sense of what journalist and or voices and curators that i respect are saying. and putting it together in one place that's easy. so hollywood reporter, "vanity fair daily" any kind of news

"huffington post" all of these feeds coming in basically from twitter, but it's presenting it in an interesting way. i like that. flipboard takes a little bit of a another approach by presenting it to look like a magazine. you know, so these are things that ted talks or my own twitter feed, whatever i'm interested in. but presenting it in, you know, kind of an interesting way. so i feel like this is social media. this is a whole nother aspect of social media that actually, you know, is the twitter feed that you are accustom to but is an easier way to look at it in ways that i was accustom to in a magazine. i think the immediacy of journalism now with better cure ration and what an certain extent newspapers have provided

for us is fantastic. these tools allow us to filter out the crap of, you know, blogs that don't really make sense or people that aren't consistent and contributing, as well as bring the best of all of the journalism and the respected sources for entertainment as it maybe that's available. >> a couple of -- i'm sorry, just a couple of stats that i think are pretty wild. if facebook has 150 million users, if it was the considerate, it would be the third largest country in the world. which is amazing. 50% of those users go on to facebook every day. there are over 700 billion minutes spent on facebook per month. 700 billion minutes. it just kind of boggles by mind. >> it'll be a very, very noisy country. [laughter] >> wait, aid owe is -- audio is coming to facebook. >> any other thoughts about

facebook? >> i've been in the digital side of business says michael say '95. although i'm youthful looking, i'm older than i look. i had a company and one the developers came up to me. i had been running the company. he was nervous and came up to me. he was like i don't understand. don't understand what? he said how could you not be on facebook? i was like what are you talking about? of course, i was on facebook. i can't find you. i had made my facebook profile private to the people that i wanted to deal with on a regular basis. that concept was so bizarre and alien to this person who was 20 years younger than me. he just couldn't understand. i tried to make the analogy, i don't want everyone calling me. i don't want everyone that i meet to have my phone number. and that's how i used facebook, as a way to interact with the

people that i wanted to interact with, but i'm the last of that. i mean that doesn't exist for the people coming up. >> i do the same thing. i used linkedin which is like a professional social network. which is a great tool for recruiting people and connecting on a network perspective. that's my business and social. facebook i try to restrict from, you know, colleagues and business associates. so i totally agree with you. >> we really like using facebook at 20 x 200 as a way to get response from our customers. so we do, you know, different sorts of quizzes or contexts from time to time. it's a really easy way to get sort of interactive, if you will with your customers. and that's one the real strengths that we find about it. >> so i have to be honest, my -- i've noticed, you know, the

broad spectrum of behavior on facebook, at least in my life. i have a large group of friends and family members who use it sort of on a regular basis. then i have some that are really afraid to share information. then i have any nephew who is sharing everything about his life to me every hour of the day. every whim, every thought that passes through his mind. it scares me a little bit. and as i know, as i've hired many people over the years, i know that employs look at your facebook, linkedin, they look at what you are tweeting and share as part of the process. how do we deal with this and how do we, you know, start to educate people on what to do with social media? >> >> i became a prolific social networker in my 40s. like a lot of as we were well into adulthood when we learned what appropriate behavior was. we learned what is appropriate to say that --