Leaderboard

I've also begun to transition away from Facebook. I'm not interacting with as many people as before and it is for the same reason that you are moving away I'm sure... It's not benefiting me business wise. I have not seen any increase in interaction from using any form of social media for any of my businesses. As a writer, I was able to get 300 plus likes on my author's page, but it resulted in maybe 2 purchases of my books. Maybe 2. It also doesn't increase the amount of traffic to my website where at least I could generate ad revenue in some way. Interestingly enough, it did give me a strong baseline for knowing who actually supports my endeavors since i recently started a project and sent over 300 Facebook messages and only 1 person responded from that. Unfortunately, those who are beginning to realize the problems with facebook are not going anywhere which means that I'm not going anywhere either. I simply won't spend a lot of my time promoting anything there. I will become a like button, brief response member. I will continue to click the social share buttons when I post a blog or a new pair of kicks on my sneaker store. I won't however offer paragraph long responses to various statements made on Facebook. I also will not create giant dialogue blocks that contribute to Facebook's bottom line, but do little to promote things that I need to survive. I will be able to see your posts and respond here, giving you a pageview though so Facebook can be useful, but it will take more people to actively comment on posts ON OUR SITES instead of commenting solely on social media platforms.

A recent article by controversial Chicago Sun-times columnist, Neil Steinberg, advanced a theory that he shared with his readers because he wanted to observe Black history month from a different angle. In making his case, Steinberg cited a study that took place over 20 years ago. It was administered by Harvard sociologists and it tested young children to determine the long term effects of an experiment where these kindergarteners were given a choice to accept a single treat right away, or to wait until later and get 2 treats. The testers followed the particpants in this study for 20 years and found that those who waited and got the extra treat, fared better in life than those who didn't. The sociologist also injected a trust factor into the results, determining that those who opted for the first choice for whatever reason didn't trust the promise to get more if patience was exercised. Steinberg then went on to apply this study to the racial situation in America by theorizing that because Blacks have no reason to trust The System, they opt to "get while the gettin is good", But, according to Steinberg, this attitude has proved detrimental in the long run and, according to his postulation, Blacks are so insecure when it comes to the American dream, that this distrust permeates their entire approach to life whether it's a young gang banger impulsively pulling a trigger over a minor slight or a black homebuyer allowing unscrupulous mortage industry to exploit their dreams for homes they couldn't afford, or a loser using drugs to dull the pain. Instant gratification is a bitch! Considering how embedded institutionalized racism is and how uncertain the future is, "a bird in the hand being worth 2 in the bush" is an easy pattern for Blacks to fall into. "In God we trust" may appear on our coins, but when it comes to trusting in America who could blame Blacks if they have a "take the money and run" mind set. Steinberg assumptions can certainly be challenged on the grounds of being generalization and his comparing Blacks to impetuous children reeks with white paternalism, but his contentions possibly contain an element of truth.