Why, Helen A.S. Popkin?

Before I die I would like to meet Helen A.S. Popkin for two reasons. The first is that I think Helen A.S. Popkin is the name for a bot MSNBC created which combines links to stupid stories about internet culture with stereotypical phrases "the kids today" say (G4 hosts speak, as it were). The second reason is that if Helen A.S. Popkin is an actual person I want to be the one who helps pay for her to finally obtain her G.E.D.

The latest half aborted shit child article to be ejected from her dilapidated idiot womb is entitled, "Is Facebook still all up in your business?" or "Lord God I am a gigantic fucking tool!" The focus, in the liberal sense, of the article is on the Facebook / Moveon.org spat about privacy which I'm sure you all already know of and find incredibly interesting and important. Helen's opinion on this matter is that, well, I'll let Helen speak for herself:

"And as anyone who ever raised and/or dated one knows, nobody is guiltier of the insincere apology than dudes in their early 20s.

(Ladies, am I right?)"

It's the use of "dudes" and "Ladies, am I right?" that lets me know deep down that she deserves her writing gig.

You see, the CEO of Facebook is Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg is 23 years old and male. So, according to Helen A.S. Popkin, Mark Zuckerberg can never, in any way, be sincere in his apology. For more on this sensible world view I direct you to feministing.org. Or was it .com? I can't remember. You see, I'm a 24 year old male. I am accident prone and find honesty to be in all ways elusive.

In addition to her flawless utilization of the ad hominem style of argument, Helen A.S. Popkin cites a recent event in which Facebook attempted to have documents regarding Mark Zuckerberg removed from a website. Because somehow Facebook selling user information and trying to restrict the circulation of information regarding its CEO is apparently problematic. Given that I don't share Helen A.S. Popkin's Kool Aid (I can make pop-culture references too!) I am not entirely sure what the actual problem is. I think the perceived "problem" for Helen is somehow related to this little nugget of joy:

Then Zuckerberg continues to (metaphorically speaking) urinate on our heads and tell us it’s raining. “We were excited about Beacon because we believe a lot of information people want to share isn't on Facebook, and if we found the right balance, Beacon would give people an easy and controlled way to share more of that information with their friends.”

OMG! How is that so not a lie? Does Zuckerberg mean to imply that Beacon was not born first and foremost a money-generating marketing program, designed specifically for marketers, with cursory consideration toward the marks?

Newsflash: Companies exist to make money.
Newsflash: In the attempt to make money compies will lure consumers into a false sense of security by offering free services which, in turn, allow the company to make more money.

I can understand out-of-touch octogenarians being shocked into a late grave by the news that companies exist to make money. But Helen A.S. Popkin? She is hip! She is "with it"! She writes MSNBC's "Netiquette" column! She's not allowed to feign ignorance of the manner by which Internet based companies accumulate vast sums of money. Though, I will admit that it is probably the case that none of Helen A.S. Popkin's ignorance is, in fact, feigned.

My favorite part of this article, though, is the end:

"Now, if only users could learn the same thing. The facts are these: Despite the big media dust up, Facebook didn’t lose many profiles in its wake. The MoveOn Facebook protest collected only 70,000 members — barely a drop in the bucket compared to the site’s 50 million users, most of which really couldn’t care less."

I love endings like that. It contains that twist of irony in that the "victim" is also the enabler. You see, even though Mark Zuckerberg is male his ability to profit off of Facebook users is fundamentally the result of the users themselves. The users of Facebook, knowing that Mark Zuckerberg is collecting, selling, and profiting off of their personal information continue to use Facebook! Helen A.S. Popkin, the faux savior of the Facebook community, has tried to incite the mass exodus required to rectify this most unjust of situations but her audience, her flock, the people to whom she communicates her message of truth are uninterested; they "really couldn’t care less".

And that's the final jab. Helen A.S. Popkin knows that in spite of her eloquence and the underhanded, completely reasonable business practices of Mark Zuckerberg the users of Facebook will continue to use Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg will continue to profit off of Facebook users, and nothing will really ever change.

Which leaves me with the following question: WHY THE FUCK DID SHE BOTHER TO WRITE THE DAMN ARTICLE?!