Im Job we make every effort to conform to a professional image. Things are completely different in social media, where we behave like brains in a data cloud. That's the danger.

Best of HR – Berufebilder.de®

Occupation vs. Social media

Beer is beer and job is job! Or to put it another way: At work we behave – at least mostly like this – like bosses, colleagues and customers expect from us: Namely buttoned up. Private things have in Office nothing to look for. We live it out in our free time, when we lounge around in front of the TV with a bottle of beer, go to the sauna and do similar things that bosses, colleagues and customers don't necessarily need to know about. Or?

In recent years has come through Internet, social networks and mobile phones have already changed a lot and it probably won't stay that way. We may be facing the greatest societal challenges since the beginning of industrialization. Because it is likely that all of us will change in the coming years Information- and communication behavior and, as a result, our way of working and, accordingly, our way of life will fundamentally change.

The boundaries between work and private life are becoming increasingly blurred

Thanks to smartphones, laptops and mobile internet, we are available to bosses practically around the clock. Through social networks and location-related services such as 4square or Google Latitude, day and night we can understand what we are up to. A mobile phone provider even offers corporate customers one Employees- Monitoring package via GPS. HR scour the internet for information about Candidate. Face recognition software also tracks down every embarrassing snapshot of us in photos on the web. And who knows: Maybe terms like leisure and Privacy soon be a thing of the past and we're practically naked on the net?

In the imagination of many People certainly. Sentences like “This internet is really dangerous” and “It’s all too much and too private for me” is what I hear more often when I say that I work with social media. The panic and uncertainty about the Internet are at least as great as the polemics and ignorance with which the topic is faced. Many people have come up with downright conspiracy theories. And yet many people use the Internet somehow.

Internet - practical but dangerous?

It's practical, you do it that way these days or you don't want to be connected professionally verlieren. But you don't really want to deal with it - it takes time. But a bad feeling about what others are now finding out about you remains. Even if its comparison for sure a little lags:

The well-known American journalist and blogger Jeff Jarvis made fun of “these Germans”, with good reason, who make such a mess of their privacy on the Internet, but who expose themselves to total strangers in the sauna. And show with it: Being naked in public can definitely be OK. In the sauna or on the nudist beach. But please not on the net!

Opportunities and risks of social media

Sure, this development can sometimes be Anxiety make. But it also offers opportunities: We find old friends again through social networks, who are all over the world Welt are scattered. We make new contacts with people who like the same things as we do. And if we Company XY buy something or us apply want, we no longer stand stupidly in front of a mystical black box, but look into it: Because other people tell us via social media or in rating forums what the quality of supposed bestsellers is really like, and the service or working atmosphere in a company .

In general, today we can get much more information about everything through the Internet. And because we have not just one or two but a multitude of sources at our disposal, we have become more critical. Even more: Actions such as the Guttenplag wiki, which brought down an entire defense minister because it confirmed the plagiarism allegations against Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg in a voluntary work, show that the Internet is also good for political opinion-making and for democratic processes.

New forms of communication are changing the way we work

The new forms of communication are also changing the way we work: Not only is it becoming faster and more efficient, it is also possible to work from anywhere and at any time. So no longer from 9 to 5 days a day, but more personal freedom: In Germany, too, it is becoming increasingly common that employees are not bound to fixed working hours and places, but can work from anywhere, whenever they want. Internet and social media also help you to create your own job.

Just doing what you like and do best. Finding the contacts you need. Some musicians who have become known through the video platform youtube have successfully demonstrated how to relatively easily create your own, creative ideas realize and be Audience can reach. Because complex, expensive sales structures are no longer absolutely necessary. And social media isn't about having the most followers and the highest number of fans, even if some people think so. Rather, the most important Marketing-Instrument good ideas and own personality. Because what counts is the open, authentic Communication between people.

Whoever responds to customer requests wins

In the end, it is not inevitable who will “win” the most Money has to deal with Advertising on yourself I aufmerksam close. But the one who is on Ask, needs and desires of his fellow human beings. Because social media is not a sales channel, it is a cultural area. One in which we can talk to each other in a relaxed manner and in which we, as real people, increasingly suppress the professional image that we want to convey. Mixing professional and private aspects could help make the world a little more honest and open. Who knows, in the end we might even find it liberating to stand naked on the net - like in a sauna or on a nudist beach.

I admit that there is something idealistic about the idea of ​​a more democratic, open, free and honest world thanks to social media. Because like everyone Innovation the potential for abuse is also great here. Honest, authentic communication might be great, but maybe someone who is super cool and sympathisch what comes across is in reality a squatting bore who just knows how to let loose funny sayings on the net.

Internet as a manipulation machine?

And of course, PR strategists who have washed up the water have long since figured out how they can tell their customers via Facebook and Co. make it appear particularly open and personable - because it simply sells better. It's nice that we have information on the net Companys, Find authorities and politicians; We should definitely use these opportunities to get better information.

But authorities, secret services and companies have of course long since discovered social networks as a source of information in order to examine us more closely. After all, the sunny dream of free, flexible work also has its downsides: Unfortunately, what means flexible often determines Executive and Customer; "Always on", as it is euphemistically called in the internet scene, is not only about laptops and mobile phones, but also about yourself fast on constant inner readiness. The result is permanent stress and overload.

Dangers on the Internet - it depends on your own attitude

Dangers on the Internet – so they actually exist. Perhaps it would be better to describe them as challenges that have arisen as a result of new technologies and which we still have to learn how to deal with. For example, by recognizing the right level of openness and honesty for ourselves, each for himself, and sticking to it. buttoned up, light clothed or completely naked. By seeing through the game of authenticity on the net and using it for our purposes, for example to find the job that we want and that suits us.

By not letting other people tell us which networks are totally popular right now, but instead using social media as we like it and how it suits us. And by learning to deal with the requirements of constant availability, switching off the technology and not being driven by the constant (imagined) need to communicate. Sure, dealing with it means work. But it is necessary, so that one does not feel like government spokesman Steffen Seibert, who once wrote:

"The more I read about twittering, the more difficult it seems to me, so I prefer to work without a theoretical foundation." 

The 10 biggest dangers of social media

Better to remain ignorant, because that Background seems too complicated, none is Solution. But how can we master these challenges?

  1. Peer pressure: everyone is talking about social media and everyone wants to be there. This is exactly where the manipulation begins.
  2. Allways on: Social networks and mobile technologies suggest that we shouldn't miss anything. Some people even show withdrawal symptoms when offline. Those who do not learn to say no and switch off will collapse at some point before being overwhelmed.
  3. Loss of time: Here is another tool because the latest app. The internet and social networks are full of distractions that take our time. If we don't organize stringently, we get bogged down.
  4. uniebook-Depression: Who has the most followers on Twitter and the most friends on Facebook? Tail comparisons are nonsensical and depressing on the net. How do you get out of that?
  5. Loss of identity: On the internet, the boundaries between public and private, between authenticity and self-portrayal are becoming increasingly blurred. If you're not careful, you'll lose yourself.
  6. Data Loss: Mainly Google and Facebook are increasingly aiming to become a full-service provider for a wide variety of communication services for a large number of users. But if you entrust all your data to a provider, you risk losing it.
  7. Loss of image: Whether targeted bullying or simply criticizing yourself - the reputation on the Internet is quickly ruined. It is hardly possible to control this. What can help is sensible reputation management.
  8. Data theft: Anyone who moves in social networks could not only be cleared out of their homes because thieves always know where they are, important data can also be spied on. How can we prevent this?
  9. Surveillance: Face recognition, location data transmitted to companies, Googling HR, undercover agents at Facebook. How do we deal with such dangers?
  10. Manipulation: As a transparent person who surrounds himself with similar thinking friends and puts his collected lifestyle on the net, we also become transparent. That makes us more predictable and manipulable.

Alliens from another star: Social media muffle and Web 2.0 euphoric

The media agency Universal McCann annually carries out the wave study. For the last issue, 37.600 internet users in more than 50 countries were surveyed. This makes Wave 5 the most comprehensive global study on social media worldwide. The results are surprising - or maybe not, if you know what's going on in Germany.

Small test: social media crack or technology muffle?

  1. What does +1 mean? a) A school grade b) The reminder that I still have to buy something c) A button with which I can show in Google+ that I find a contribution particularly good
  2. What does RSS stand for? a) An expression of joy: Really great thing b) Really Simple Syndication: A service with which you can subscribe to the latest content of a website in an RSS reader c) A traffic notice: Right lane hard shoulder
  3. What is a hashtag? a) A sound at Niesen b) A day that was spent stoned with Hasschisch c) A catchphrase (not only) on Twitter, which started with a # (English hash) and which makes it easier to find topics
  4. What does share mean? a) Forwarding articles or posts (not only) to Facebook in the sense of “sharing the information with others” b) I share my property with everyone c) A card game in which everyone has to put their cards on the table when a Shar calls (tell)
  5. What does the abbreviation DM mean? a) Deutsche Mark b) DM - The drugstore chain c) Direct messages, personal messages between two users on Twitter.

Evaluation of the social media test

Answers 1c, 2b, 3c, 4a, 5c are correct.

You have 0-1 correct answers: Congratulations, you are a real grouch on social media. Probably you just haven't had the time or inclination to deal with the topic yet. But: It could Sinn make to take a look at the matter.

You have 2-3 correct answers: You already have a little idea about the topic and have probably already had some experience. You could deepen them a little.

You have 4-5 correct answers: Compliments, you are a real social media crack. Probably tweet and facebookalready on all channels. You can't fool them anymore.

Anyone who is late will be forgotten

The study simply shows that countries with low Internet penetration, such as China and India, have a higher use of social media. It's completely different in Germany: although more than 80 percent of the people here have Internet access, less than 40 percent of those surveyed use social media. This puts Germany far behind in the lower ranks. That becomes even more apparent when you look at how many contacts people maintain on average in different countries. Internationally ahead, with 66 contacts, the Italians, who seem to confirm every cliché. An average American has 53 friendships. In Germany, the number of contacts has increased from 14 to 41 within a year since the last Wave study clear increased. But only the average Frenchman has one less contact.

The reasons for using it are also somewhat different depending on the country. It is true that most of them are looking for Fun and entertainment on the web. For 18,2 percent of the Germans and 17,4 percent of the French, however, self-marketing is also an important aspect - but only for 10,5 percent of the Italians. money to to earn, is an important aspect in China (16,3 percent) and India (20,2 percent), and in the USA it is still a motive for at least 11,6 percent of users. In Germany, France and Italy, this only plays a role for around seven percent of users. In general, people in China, India and the USA seem to have much more active access to the Internet: creative self-realization, the desire to learn new things or to share knowledge and experience are much more pronounced here than in Germany, France or Italy.

Are the differences noticeable?

It may be that such differences cannot necessarily only be determined at national borders. But they can be felt. Example Italy: there is Facebook omnipresent, as I was able to find out for myself on vacation last year. The doorman in the hotel or the wardrobe attendant in the museum pass the waiting time between two guests with it. You can hear people talking about it much more often on the train and subway than in Germany. And instead of internet cafes, I found a bakery in the deepest Italian south that sells bread and - no, not games but almost! - Facebook advertises. Because spreading your own life in front of the facebook-Friends - from vacation and bikini photos to wedding photos to pictures of pregnant bellies and the newborn offspring seems to have become the favorite pastime in Italy. In any case, I always get this impression from new ones when I look at the profiles of my numerous Italian Facebook-Friends look like that.

In Germany, of course, there is that too. But less extreme. The Germans are, especially what Facebook concerned, far more suspicious. This is reflected, for example, in the number of users: Although Facebook According to Google Trends, it is by far the largest social network in Germany with 13 million users Network. However, as the magazine t3n reports, the national distance to other networks such as YouTube, Who-knows-whom or the VZ networks is not as great in this country as it is in international comparison. The Germans have to be careful that they are not left behind in an international comparison!

Brains in the cloud of data

Reasons? Some! The much-invoked German hostility to innovation, the fear of managers and politicians about losing power through too much transparency, the resentment of data protectionists and, above all, the competitive thinking and polemics of the opinion-forming media. Harald Martenstein, among other things editor at Berliner Tagspiegel, in his 2009 column in the newspaper ZEIT, commented on the triviality of tweeting. “If I wanted to, I could communicate non-stop using modern machines, sending low-content mini-texts to people I barely know.” The tenor of his Criticism: What meaningful things can you say in 140 characters? In the same year, the book "Payback: Why we are forced to do what we don't want to do in the information age and how we can regain control of our thinking" was published, in which Frank Schirrmacher, co-editor of the FAZ, confessed that he was overwhelmed by the internet . He writes about systems that are ours Intelligence overwhelmed, inability to concentrate and by a computer capable of our Brain to reprogram.

In doing so, he triggered a heated discussion about the dangers of the Internet, which is still having an impact in 2011: In your book “Digital is better”, the authors Kai-Hinrich and Tim Renner work their way through the internet prejudices of the Schirmacher type. Still better than the journalist Sascha Adamek: he stirs up “Die Facebook-Fall ”literally the fears of his readers, by leaving little differentiated about the most popular social network and its machinations. Because even if Facebook should be treated with caution, the book shows one thing above all: namely that in Germany even today Shop works great with the fear of the bad, bad internet. Bill Keller, editor-in-chief of the “New York Times”, which is actually known for its progressive Internet integration, recently showed how subjective such opinions are, because they are usually based on the personal, emotional experiences of the respective author and are influenced by personal experiences. He had his 13-year-old daughter use Facebook allowed, who then added 171 friends to her profile in just a few hours. For Keller, the shock was as shocking as sticking a pipe full of crystal meth in her Hand pressed. As a result, Keller began to think about the negative effects of the Internet - and came to a devastating conclusion: The Internet dulls and softens people and robs them of basic skills such as information storage, arithmetic or a sense of direction. Because, as Keller argues polemically, outsourcing brains to the data cloud is much more convenient than thinking for ourselves - but that means that we lose a part of ourselves.

Christian Stöcker, head of the Netzwelt department, said that such and similar blanket reviews of the Internet are quite absurd Spiegel Online, very aptly exposed: “Very few of us can still weave baskets, bake bread or till a field with ox, harrow and plow – the latter would overwhelm us physically… The decline of mankind therefore began at the latest with the invention of steam-powered agricultural machinery , if not already with the use of draft horses.”

Aliens in the echo chamber

But how do such prejudices come about? As Eli Pariser, President of the American citizens' initiative MoveOn.org, states, so-called echo chambers are to blame for the fact that many discussions on and about the Internet simply run past one another. Pariser published a book on the subject in the summer of 2011, appropriately titled The Filter Bubble. But how do such filter bubbles arise? The reason is, in principle, a highly human one weakness: As a rule, everyone looks for people who think like themselves – be it in real life or on the Internet. Newspaper readers, for example, usually prefer to subscribe to media that are their own Opinions widerspiegeln. Social networks, however, reinforce this effect, because one is no longer dependent on friends and acquaintances on site, but can quickly and easily search for like-minded people in communities all over the world.

That sounds comfortable, but it can lead to a one-sided perception, because you are not only able to use the RSS reader, Twitter or Facebook-Stream constantly receives messages that confirm their own opinions. No, by linking, liking and retweeting you are also permanently confirmed in your own views. And what's more: Since Google introduced personalized search in 2009, with which everyone only sees results that are precisely tailored to them, information via Google has also been the undisputed No. 1 search engine for most people for inquiries of all kinds , usually pre-sorted. This, by the way, even if you haven't registered with Google at all; then the search queries and clicked websites are stored in a cookie for 180 days by default and you will receive the search results tailored to you based on this data. Why not have fun and compare what comes up for you and a friend with exactly the same search term.

Information and links that really interest me, tailor-made search results - that all sounds very convenient, of course, but it can mean that everyone soon only moves in their own echo chamber, in which what one thinks is constantly reverberating, but in extreme cases is hermetically sealed to the outside, so that new and different opinions have no chance. That is then the reason why many discussions in and on the Internet practically completely pass one another. Everyone stews in their own brew and only talks about instead of each other. Why search for matches when every user can avoid the need for a compromise by entering “his” filter bubble? With Google, the personalized search can still be deactivated on the search results page at the top right by clicking on Settings> Web log. But that doesn't solve the basic problem in the mind.

Gentlemen with anti-social components?

One of the most famous German internet thinkers, Sascha Lobo, found harsh words for this behavior and spoke of fascist tendencies, digital masters and anti-social components. So he wrote in his Spiegelcolumn about that Behavior of the German Internet scene: “[It] is a problem-exacerbating groupthink and isolation. Nowhere is this expressed more clearly than in the enormous hubris of the net people towards everyone else. Not only that we forget far too often that almost half of the population still has nothing to do with the Internet. We also ignore our dependence on the people we scorn and often treat with scorn and contempt. If we pay attention to them at all, the clueless, the internet printers, the offliners.”

I saw what this looks like in reality a few months ago when, at a TAZ media conference that was specifically dedicated to the topic of social media, culturally conservative educated citizens collided with representatives of Internet culture: Whether the internet is ruining culture or not, instead of addressing the real opportunities and dangers that come with the new development, it seems to me as if people are living in two different parallel universes. Well, that is perhaps a little exaggerated: But they are definitely from another planet and they speak different languages ​​too. They didn't learn anything else in their echo chamber. The only question is: who are the aliens?

Bremen psychologyprofessor Peter Kruse has analyzed the discussion about the dangers of the Internet and has come to the conclusion that there are two different groups with completely different values ​​who have difficulties understanding each other at all. Just like aliens! Courses scientifically evaluates the profiles of 200 intensive Internet users with regard to the (unconsciously applied) value patterns and found: According to their values, they occupy two different clusters: On the one hand, there is a group that lives the digital and sees it as an essential part of their socialization - Kruse calls them the Digital Residents. There is also a second group – the so-called digital visitors – who use the internet but ultimately only see it as an instrument and therefore reject the associated social changes. However, according to Kruse, this is exactly what will lead to considerable difficulties, because the changes triggered by the Internet are systemic and can no longer be stopped - except if the Internet were to be switched off. In this respect, according to Kruse, the discussion as to whether the Internet poses a danger is a completely wrong approach, rather it would be a “fundamental rethink” and the farewell to established ones Regulate are required for operation.

The main thing is hipp?

But not only that critic exaggerate, but also the Web 2.0 euphoric. These are the people who basically see social media applications as the panacea for pretty much everything: for companies to acquire new customers, for applicants to find a job, for HR managers to recruit new employees. In short, as a means to happiness. Above all, of course, for your own wallet if you offer inexperienced customers your service as a social mediaAdviser talk them into it: It doesn't matter whether it fits or not, after all it's trendy, hip and hip.

Apart from the countless top tips for social media use, which are not exactly believable in their inflationary mass act, the sometimes frantic desire to do something with the Internet and interaction sometimes bears strange fruit. In April 2011, for example, ZDF broadcast the interactive thriller “Wer rettet Dina Foxx?”, which was supposed to start on TV and be resolved by users on the Internet. However, the quota remained manageable at 670.000 viewers - even though ZDF had made a considerable advertising effort for its experiment and even presented it at the re:publica blogger conference. Anyone who actually wanted to go looking for the murderer was bitterly disappointed because the server from which the hunt for murderers on the Internet was supposed to start collapsed. Two days later, the website “freidaten.org”, which was used for the hands-on thriller, was even the victim of a hacker attack – all data and backups were lost. The creators could only ask the users to register again and start over. Now one might argue about whether ZDF should have stuck to its roots instead of chasing after youth obsession or whether a good idea was just poorly implemented. However, the embarrassing example shows what can happen if you get involved with new forms of communication without really understanding them. And it shows it risks there are, which one should not underestimate despite all enthusiasm for the medium.

Data protection and data security are important aspects. But not the only one. Companies, for example, run the risk of wasting a lot of money or jeopardizing their good reputation due to false expectations in social media. And private individuals can all too easily get bogged down in the dangers of Web 2.0 and waste a lot of time or learn more about it privacy disclose when they are actually right. So time to talk about how to really use social media.

How naked do we want to be on the net?

The Balance When it comes to the internet and social networks, holding is a good keyword in every relationship. Because we can't and don't want to switch off anymore, it's become far too much a part of our lives for that. And just staying outside isn't a solution either: it cuts us off from the flow of information, but it doesn't make us any less vulnerable to attacks from outside. The only solution is that we Things to Learn have to deal critically with the topic of social media as a whole.

The Internet and social networks present us with social challenges that we urgently need to discuss. About whether the separation between work and private life is changing in Future can be maintained at all or whether there will not be a new way of life and work in the future: one that gives us the chance and the freedom to realize ourselves as human individuals instead of being forced into fixed company structures and working hours. Which doesn't turn us into new, universally available slaves of mobile technology and our bosses. And about whether we need to relax existing data protection laws to give young companies economic leeway or tighten them to protect consumers.

Keep control or give up?

Ultimately, this means thinking about the extent to which we want to retain control over our data and our privacy, or whether we want to give it up a bit in the hope of a more tolerant, open one Society, but also the dangers of totalitarianism and  Tampering critical in Eye keeps. Or whether, instead of coming up with new ideas, we continue to stick to existing social thought patterns, as Martin Weigert so aptly criticized when introducing the digital eraser: “The idea of ​​a digital eraser is again one of those pathetic attempts to corset new developments into earlier, unquestioned conventions press instead of seeing the opportunities that arise from the change and the associated transparency.

Nobody has a clean slate. Everyone has made mistakes or done things that he/she regrets. Instead of learning to deal with this realization, people try desperately to maintain the image of the perfect individual. The Problem are not the partying and drinking pictures of teenagers, but the attitude of those who judge people on that basis and therefore do not offer them the job they want, forgetting that they themselves just recently woke up with a bad hangover.”

But each and every one of us also has to individually weigh up how to use social networks. For example, without the constant guilty conscience of missing out on something. Without letting the many big and small unimportant things steal our time. Without being angry or depressed, the other more facebook-Have friends or more followers on Twitter. Without revealing too much about us, but doing so authentic to stay. Without getting completely naked, but at the same time sharing knowledge and information with others.

Eine Frage des Vertrauens

And if this individual path looks like the way Johny Häusler describes it so aptly and ironically in his blog Spreeblick, then it doesn't seem rational at first, but deeply human:

“I don't trust the government, but I do rely on democracy. And although I trust Google a lot, I don't trust Google either, I just leave me ... yes. On what actually? On my good feeling? To the fact that Google won't do anything bad and that the business model I have come to terms with will be maintained forever? That no one will ever hack Google's servers, that no government in the world will legally require access to these servers? That not a single Google employee with database access is ever bribed, having bad fun, or just making a mistake? The truth is: I don't rely on anything. When dealing with Google (and other Internet service providers) I always assume that tomorrow - perhaps just by a stupid coincidence - all of my data will be open. I therefore try to ensure that in such a case my embarrassments would be drowned in the sea of ​​the even more embarrassing ones and I really keep private things to myself. It doesn't go quite as far as ... Eric Schmidt recommends ("If there's something you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't do it in the first place"), but it's enough for me. "

All of this doesn't happen overnight. It requires us to have experiences and mistakes. That we learn from it. That we exchange, discuss, share our knowledge. That we critically question new and old ideas, but without panicking. This is the only way to use the challenges as an opportunity. Fear of the future is not a solution!