Showing posts with label social network. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social network. Show all posts

Friday, 30 October 2015

StumbleUpon: The Social Media Underdog [INFOGRAPHIC]

Do you believe in your content? Do you want free traffic from social media? Do you want direct traffic to your website or blog?
If the answer to all of the above three questions were an astounding ‘YES’ then StumbleUpon is your best bet.
In big social media sites like Twitter & Facebook, you are competing for people’s attention. If the users see your updates they still have to click to view your content. In StumbleUpon the users are sent directly to your site. You are not competing for attention or clicks.
Beware, StumbleUpon does not boast the same user volume like the big boys but that should not discourage you from using it. With 30 million active monthly users - a small percentage of traffic is still huge. The social life of a Stumble & Pin can last for years unlike Twitter & Facebook where the attention span only lasts a mere 24 if not 48 hours.

Why Stumble?

  • The social network that delivers the highest traffic is (you guessed it) Facebook but did you know StumbleUpon is the 4th highest traffic driver?
     
  • Getting to the 1st page in Reddit can deliver some knockout traffic but the next day the traffic dries out. Did you know StumbleUpon can deliver 3 times more traffic than Reddit
     
  • StumbleUpon can deliver more traffic than Google+ & LinkedIn combined. Surely, that must be something.
     
  • StumbleUpon can bring in viral traffic like any social media but the overhead here is very less, which is worth the effort. The key to success is people have to like or vote for your content.
     
  • StumbleUpon also has a paid discovery which is super targeted. You can specify gender, age, country, interest or category and device type. The best part of the paid traffic is you can get ongoing free traffic even after the paid campaign is over.
Of course, StumbleUpon may not work very well for everyone; brands and influencers who have a huge Facebook and Twitter following might not need StumbleUpon traffic.
Here is an infographic which shows how to use StumbleUpon created by YourEscapeFrom9to5.com to get the best out of this social media underdog.

stumbleupon-image
Infographic Source: YourEscapeFrom9to5.com

One More Handy Tip

If you are submitting your post or page to StumbleUpon, don’t use the StumbleUpon share button as you will get a default category assigned based on the content which can be a bit of a hit and miss. For example, I had a post on SEO which was classified as Marketing although; this was not way off the mark. I could have gone to StumbleUpon and manually added the page and selected a more accurate category of ‘SEO’. Selecting the right category can make or break your post going viral.

Let’s Stumble, shall we?

StumbleUpon is like a life line especially for new bloggers and new websites – who else delivers free traffic to your door step for such little effort? You can either be a small fish in a big pond or a big fish in a small pond; StumbleUpon allows you to be a big fish admittedly in a smaller pond but there is plenty of food for the king in the pond. 

Sunday, 1 February 2015

Twitter Adding Features: Will it Change the Social Network?

Recently Twitter announced the rollout of new features, most notably the ability to have group messages.
Being interested not just in technology, but also having a keen interest in unintended consequences, I was intrigued by this. You see, up until now when you wanted to communicate on Twitter you had three options, you could send a private message to one user, assuming they were following you, you could post publicly or you could set your entire tweet stream to private and only share it with approved followers. The end result of that, was that Twitter became sort of a public market, for better or worse. As an event unfolded, for example, you could use a hashtag to follow along with others thoughts, jokes, etc. and contribute to that public conversation, or you could just watch it go by. But it was occurring out in the public space that has become Twitter. How will that change now that Twitter has a less public space available?
Now don’t get me wrong. I understand why they are adding the group message feature. Other social networks have it, and social networks are absolutely an “adopt or die” industry. People have been asking for it, and I’m sure they’ll make good use of it. What I can’t help wondering, however, is if that will change the nature of how we use Twitter. Rather than having the public space to comment on whatever topic you feel it necessary to comment on, will many of these discussions start to take place in private? On Sunday, for example, will there be a bit less public discussion of the Super Bowl, and the advertisements of course, or will people be more likely to start a group message thread with the small group of friends for a freer discussion? Will political discussions become closed echo chambers, where I can gather a list of friends who think like I do, and we can tweet just to one another?
You see, I think all of these things will happen, slowly, and people who are so inclined will move their frank discussions to the more private setting. How will that change the user experience in the public space? Will it start to become more dominated by those who want the attention of the larger public, or have we gotten so used to that public discourse that group messaging will not have any impact on the overall experience other than adding an option for some things that we aren’t putting into the public space of Twitter now?
Time will tell, but for now, what are your plans? Do you plan to change how you use Twitter and take more discussions to a group instead of the public space?

Sunday, 4 January 2015

Could Facebook be a factor in the next election?

Voters Take To The Polls In European and Local Elections



Studies in America suggest that the social networking site has the tools to 
influence voter turnout

There are two things about 2015 of which one can be reasonably certain: there will be a general election in May and it’s unlikely to produce an overall majority for either of the two big parties. In those circumstances, small, localised events might have big implications: a Ukip candidate shoots his mouth off about, er, non-white people; a Labour candidate turns out to have an embarrassing past; a Tory garagiste cannot differentiate between sexual harassment and bum pinching. The kind of stuff, in other words, that could affect the outcome in a finely balanced constituency.
Which brings us to social media and the question of whether the 2015 general election could be the first one in which the outcome is affected by what goes on there. Could Facebook, for example, be a factor in determining the outcome of some local constituency battles?
Far-fetched? Maybe. But the question is worth asking because in the 2010 US congressional elections, Facebook conducted an interesting experiment in social engineering, which made some of us sit up. The company collaborated with some political scientists to see if a social network could persuade apathetic American voters to get off their butts and vote. And the answer was yes.
The methodology used was simple enough. Sixty-one million Facebook users were shown an icon containing a link for looking up polling stations, an “I voted” button to click to announce they had voted, and the profile pictures of up to six of their Facebook friends who had indicated they’d already done the same. The icon and button were inserted in the newsfeeds of tens of millions of users, while others were shown either a generic get-out-the-vote exhortation or no message at all. Then the researchers cross-referenced their subjects’ names with the day’s actual voting records from precincts across the country to measure how much the Facebook voting prompt actually increased turnout.
The Harvard law professor Jonathan Zittrain summarised the findings thus: “Overall, users notified of their friends’ voting were 0.39% more likely to vote than those in the control group, and any resulting decisions to cast a ballot also appeared to ripple to the behaviour of close Facebook friends, even if those people hadn’t received the original message. That small increase in turnout rates amounted to a lot of new votes. The researchers concluded that their Facebook graphic directly mobilised 60,000 voters, and, thanks to the ripple effect, ultimately caused an additional 340,000 votes to be cast that day. As they point out, [in 2000] George W Bush won Florida, and thus the presidency, by 537 votes – fewer than 0.01% of the votes cast in that state.”
Advertisement
In itself, the experiment was innocuous: after all, in a democracy encouraging people to vote can only be a good thing. But Facebook is a big data company and what such companies do is experiment on their users all the time. Most Facebook users probably have no idea that what appears on their newsfeeds is determined by algorithms, which are constantly making guesses about what they might want to see – and determining what Facebook wants them to see.
So far, so unremarkable: that’s the manipulative reality of social networking services. What’s more interesting is that some of these ongoing user “experiments” may have emotional or political dimensions. In one such study, for example, an experiment involving 660,000 Facebook users showed that “emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness”. It provided “experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient) and in the complete absence of non-verbal cues”.
So Facebook can influence the emotions of its users. Could it also influence their interest in politics? Micah L Sifry, the co-founder of Personal Democracy Media,reports that in the months leading up to election day in 2012, Facebook made a change to the newsfeeds of 1.9 million users in order to see whether it could influence those users to become more interested in political activity: it did this by increasing the number of hard news items that appeared at the top of a user’s newsfeed. The results were a “statistically significant” increase in the amount of attention users paid to government-related news.
None of this amounts to any kind of smoking gun. But, given that social media clearly influence behaviour in many other areas of life, it seems implausible to imagine that when it comes to politics, they don’t have any impact. Which means they now wield power of an unaccountable kind. In an election period, we fiercely regulate broadcasters’ coverage of the campaign to ensure “balance” and “fairness”. Should we now do the same for Facebook? More importantly, could we?

Thursday, 1 January 2015

In Russia, the political impact of social media varies by platform


Flag-waving and chanting demonstrators in December 2011 call for a disputed parliamentary election to be rerun in Russia. (Denis Sinyakov/Reuters)

The following is a guest post from Ora John Reuter , an assistant professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, and David Szakonyi, a doctoral candidate in political science at Columbia University.  Follow Szkonyi on Twitter @dszakonyi.

Ever since online social networking became widespread in the mid-2000s, observers have been bullish about the ability of social media to bring about democratic change.  Drawing on examples from around the globe — Iran in 2009, EgyptTunisia and Russia in 2011-2012; and Ukraine and Hong Kong in 2014 are among the most commonly used — pundits and social scientists have argued that social media can help citizens access free information in unfree media environments and, when the moment is right, help anti-government protesters organize.  At the same time, there have been some detractors, who point out that social media may actually help dictators gather information on opponents and cut off the flow of information between activists.
In a recently published article at the British Journal of Political Science, we use survey data from the December 2011 parliamentary elections in Russia to examine one aspect of this debate.  Specifically, we look at how usage of different social networks affected users’ awareness of electoral fraud in those elections.  That question is important because the mass protests that broke out after those elections, the largest in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union, were organized primarily in response to allegations of fraud.  Hence, belief in electoral fraud was an important determinant of protest participation.
Our findings indicate that the ownership structure of social media sites matters greatly.  Controlling for a range of possible confounding factors, we find that users of Western networks like Facebook and Twitter were more likely than non-users to believe that there was significant electoral fraud during the elections.  And yet, users of VKontakte and Odnoklassniki — Russian-owned social networks that each have four times more users in Russia than Facebook does (in 2011, only 5 percent of Russians were on Facebook) — were no more likely than non-users to believe that fraud had taken place. The reason for this discrepancy, we argue, is that opposition activists politicized Facebook and Twitter with accounts of electoral fraud, but refrained from doing the same on domestic networks, which were more vulnerable infiltration by the regime.
Russia is one of a small, but important, group of countries — China and Iran being two others — where domestic social networks still draw more users than Facebook. In these countries, we suspect that the effect of online social media on regime change may be muted.  After all, when nondemocratic governments have leverage over the content and structure of social networks, users lose the ability to access independent points of view and learn about government malfeasance. Not only is information sharing monitored and potentially blocked, but democracy activists avoid networks connected with government authorities for fear of reprisals.
The story of VKontakte, Russia’s largest social network, illustrates this point well. Following the 2011 elections, pressure mounted on VKontakte to limit opposition activity on the site. The authorities were especially concerned about activities related to protest coordination. The company’s founder, Pavel Durov, was reportedly questioned by the FSB (Russia’s internal security service) over opposition activity on his site.
Accusations again arose in March 2013 that the company had been sharing data with security services about how opposition groups utilize the social network to coordinate their online and offline activities. Durov claimed that VKontakte had resisted these entreats, but suspicions flew that the site had been shutting down opposition “groups” and disrupting private communication between opposition figures. The very next month two key partners sold their 48 percent share in VKontakte to individuals thought to be well-connected to the Kremlin, intensifying pressure on Durov to play by the government’s rules.
The final straw for Durov appears to have been requests from the FSB to report on Ukrainians who were publicly critical of the Russian government on the site. Durov refused to comply, instead publishing the FSB requests online and further drawing attention to the censorship being applied.
On top of all this, VKontakte does not allow users to register anonymously as Western networks do. In order to create an account, users must verify their identity with a cellphone number, which can be linked to the passport information that must be supplied in order receive a SIM card in Russia.  In fact, identity verification on all domestic social networks is now required by law in Russia.
VKontakte’s vulnerability to state pressure seems to have led many opposition activists to focus their social media strategy on Facebook and Twitter.  In 2011-12, Alexei Navalny, Russia’s most popular political blogger, maintained an active public Facebook page and Twitter account, which he used to spread hundreds of YouTube videos, photographs and anecdotes documenting electoral fraud, and yet Navalny maintained only a token presence on Vkontakte and no presence on Odnoklassniki.
And yet, we do find that usage of Facebook and Twitter increased awareness of electoral fraud, and usage of these social networking platforms is on the rise in Russia.  So aren’t there grounds for believing that social media, especially Western social media, may still become a problem for regime leaders in Russia?
Recent events in Russia leave some room for doubt.  A draft law that will take effect Jan. 1, requires any companies that collect data on Russian citizens to store it in data centers located within Russia. Major Western providers, fearful of losing access to the Russian market, appear ready to comply.  It seems unlikely that this data will be safe from the prying eyes of Russian security agencies, who have become deeply involved in drafting regulations on data encryption and storage.
More troubling still, Facebook and Twitter seem increasingly willing to comply with foreign government requests to restrict the flow of information on their networks.  In June, Twitter admitted to removing certain politicized accounts at the request of the Russian government. And in December, after activists flocked to Facebook to organize a demonstration in support of Navalny, Russian’s Internet monitor Roskomnadzor requested that Facebook take the event page down. Facebook complied with the order almost immediately, raising ire among activists who accused of it of caving to government pressure too easily. The tech company reversed course several days later when requested to remove a replacement event page that had popped up in the original’s place. The Russian government has yet to take action in response against Facebook, but an outright ban on it operating in the country is not out of the question.
In our view, the impact of social media on authoritarian survival remains uncertain. Domestic social networks, which can be controlled by authoritarian governments, may be as useful to autocrats as they are to the opposition.  Facebook and Twitter, meanwhile, may be better positioned to bring about regime change, but if these networks are blocked, infiltrated, or otherwise compromised by authoritarian governments, then their effect on regime change may be muted. The degree to which Western social networks are able to resist this government pressure remains to be seen.

Tuesday, 30 December 2014

Jump on Board Now! Snapchat’s Influence Growing in Marketing

If you thought that Snapchat was just for teenagers, think again. This social media site is rapidly gaining influence in the marketing sphere. Brands that are not already including Snapchat in their marketing campaigns could be missing out on significant opportunities.
Many marketers have remained somewhat confounded by Snapchat and how to deploy it for marketing purposes. Snapchat certainly does not function like other social media sites. Users are able to take pictures and videos and then send them to their friends using Snapchat. Where the app takes a distinctive divergence from other sites is that once the video or image has been opened and viewed, the message is then deleted—forever. Users are able to establish a specific timeframe for each video or image that is sent, thus providing the recipient with a limited amount of time for viewing the message before it disappears. While most other social media networks offer lasting messages and impressions, Snapchat does not. This may make things a bit more complicated in terms of marketing, but it would be a mistake to completely ignore Snapchat.
According to MarketingProfs, 50 percent of adult smartphone owners between the ages of 18 and 24 in the U.S. have installed the app. Furthermore, that represents a significant jump in year-over-year usage, when only 30 percent of the same demographic used Snapchat. Older Millennials, between the ages of 25 and 34 are also using the mobile messaging app, with 20 percent using Snapchat, an 8 percent increase from last year.
Clearly, Snapchat is growing in terms of market penetration, but you may still be asking yourself how your brand can tap into that influence, given the limited time constraints of this app. Several brands have found unique approaches that are working with Snapchat. MobileMarketer reports that Marriott and Macy’s are two leading brands that have integrated Snapchat into their marketing strategies. For instance, Macy’s provided customers with a glimpse of their “Black Friday” specials using Snapchat. This is actually a brilliant marketing strategy because it is built on the foundation of what sets Snapchat apart from other social media sites-limited time messages. Macy’s campaign was able to tap into the ability to give customers an insider’s glimpse while whetting their appetite for more. The message did not need to live on for any longer than it took the customer to view it. MobileMarketer points out that the fast window of time in which the customer was able to view the image may have actually assisting in driving impulse purchases during what is the busiest shopping season of the year.
Marriott took a slightly different approach by releasing an interactive series on Snapchat. The hotel chain opted to utilize the social media platform as a storytelling tool in the hopes of creating an emotional connection with consumers. The series was designed to support Marriott’s “Travel Brilliantly” campaign.
Not sure how to implement Snapchat in your own marketing campaigns? Consider the following strategies:
  • Take advantage of the “stories” feature on Snapchat for sending a video or image-based story to customers, similar to the way that Marriott launched their interactive series. This can be a great way to give your customers a behind the scenes glimpse into your upcoming products. Be sure to create multiple stories that will span the course of several days to make the most impact. At the end of the series, direct your Snapchat followers to other social media channels, or a specific landing page to keep them engaged.
  • Contests are another great way to drive interest using Snapchat. This is a method that has proven to be particularly well suited for all marketing platforms, and it is ideal for use with Snapchat. Remember to create a sense of urgency that plays into the limited window of time on Snapchat.
Due to the limited availability of videos on Snapchat, it is also perfect for sending promotional videos. Keep in mind that your videos should both be tightly focused and entertaining. Provide insider’s tips. Show customers how to obtain a special offer, or preview an upcoming product.
As Snapchat continues to make inroads with consumers of almost all age groups, the time is now to ensure your brand is in the lead.

Monday, 15 December 2014

Get the Silver Surfers on Facebook: Experts say using social media can help prevent decline in elderly's health

  • People aged 65-95 took part in the study by the University of Exeter
  • The group felt more confident and sociable after using the internet
  • Using Skype and email to contact relatives among their favourite usages
  • Experts said the results could help stunt loneliness among the elderly

Older people should use Facebook and other social media websites to prevent their health declining, a study has found. 

Pensioners who spend time online do not feel as lonely as others their age, which could stunt deterioration of physical and mental health, according to the research. 

The results of the study, carried out among 65 to 95-year-old's by researchers at the University of Exeter, could help cope with the health problems of an increasingly ageing population, experts said.


The study, carried out among pensioners aged 65 to 95, found using the internet improved the group's social skills and competence (file image)
The study, carried out among pensioners aged 65 to 95, found using the internet improved the group's social skills and competence (file image)

Among ways to use the web to improve mental health was video calling and using social media via touch screen computers. 

A group of pensioners from 31 residential care homes across the UK were followed as part of the study funded by the EU. 

Those trained to use the technology felt more self-competent, were more sociable and showed improved cognitive abilities.
The project's leader, Dr Thomas Morton, said the findings highlighted how loneliness among the elderly can contribute to poor health. 

'Human beings are social animals, and it’s no surprise that we tend to do better when we have the capacity to connect with others.

'But what can be surprising is just how important social connections are to cognitive and physical health. 

'People who are socially isolated or who experience loneliness are more vulnerable to disease and decline.'

One participant said learning how to navigate her way through the internet had 'changed her life'. 

'Having this training changes people's lives and opens up their worlds, invigorates their minds and for lots of us gives us a completely different way of recognising our worth as we age,' said Margaret Keohone.  


'I was just slipping away into a slower way of life.' 

Emma Green, one of the carers from Somerset Care Ltd, one of the homes taking part in the survey, said: 'As the training programme developed with my participants their confidence grew and they were keen to tell me how family members had emailed back, Skyped or "liked" a comment or a picture on Facebook. 

'Seeing the smiles on my participant's faces when they Skyped a family member in the UK or abroad was such a special moment.'

Thursday, 11 December 2014

How the NYPD is using social media to put Harlem teens behind bars

The untold story of Jelani Henry, who says Facebook likes landed him in Rikers



The Henry brothers, Asheem and Jelani, were born exactly one year apart to the day, in the warm Junes of 1991 and ‘92. “I always felt there was something special about that,” says their mother Alethia. “A little bit of magic.” The two grew up together in their mother’s small apartment on the corner of 129th Street and Malcolm X Boulevard in New York’s Harlem neighborhood.

As young children, the brothers were good friends with kids from all over Harlem. But as they matured into adolescent young men, a set of once-invisible rivalries began to surface. The True Money Gang from the Johnson Houses was at war with the Air It Out crew from the Taft Houses. Crews from Grant and Manhattanville projects exchanged gunfire in the streets. As he grew up, Jelani looked forward to leaving the neighborhood for school, “So I didn’t have to look behind my back every two seconds to see if someone about to bash me in the head,” he says.

When Asheem was 13 and Jelani was 12, the Henry boys began running with a crew based on 129th Street between Fifth Avenue and Lenox. The Goodfellas was a clique that offered the boys camaraderie, cache, and protection from other crews. “If you in another crew’s area, without your boys, those niggas will jump you,” explains Asheem.

THE MOUNTAINS OF DIGITAL MEDIA POSTED ONLINE ARE A TANGLED WEB OF CONNECTIONS

In November of 2011, the crew life caught up with them. Asheem was arrested on conspiracy charges as part of gang raid that targeted the Goodfellas. Five months later, Jelani was arrested and charged with a double attempted murder charge following a shooting in the neighborhood. Social media evidence was at the center of the older brother’s case, and the the family says online activity figured into the arrest of the younger brother as well.

The story of the Henry brothers highlights a new reality for teenagers growing up at the intersection of social media, street gangs, and mounting law enforcement surveillance. For those coming of age in gang-saturated areas, the mountains of digital media posted online are a tangled web of connections that can be used to lock up violent perpetrators—but can also ensnare the innocent along with them.


Alethia Henry raised her boys as a single mother, maintaining a steady job as a case manager for an organization supporting people with developmental disabilities. She made sure her two sons had a good education and wore the latest clothes. Her home was a welcoming place, and Asheem and Jelani’s friends would gather at the Henry house to play video games and get a full meal. "My mom, she always opened the door to other kids," says Asheem. "She kind of made our place a safe space to hang."

As kids, the brothers felt comfortable walking the streets of their neighborhood—Asheem played pick-up basketball games at courts all around Harlem. But as the brothers turned 12 and 13, they became increasingly aware of a violent map of territories and rivalries. Jelani says that sometimes he was afraid to go to the grocery store. Certain friends the boys had known for years suddenly became enemies because of where they were from.

THE BROTHERS BECAME INCREASINGLY AWARE OF A VIOLENT MAP OF TERRITORIES AND RIVALRIES

New York City’s murder rate has been falling for two decades, recently hitting lows not seen since the 1960s. But that trend isn’t true in Harlem, where gun violence began climbing during the boys’ teenage years. At the heart of this violence was a back and forth cycle of vengeance between youth crews that exploded in number during the Henry boys teenage years.

Harlem, like many poor urban areas, had experienced its shares of notorious gangs like the Bloods and Crips. But the crews that the Henry boys grew up with were mostly small and local in nature, with no connection to a larger, national organization. Like an increasing number of such groups across the country, these crews consisted of a loose group of a dozen or so teens from the neighborhood. Sometimes they controlled nothing more than a single corner. "You could live on the east side of a project, and have problems with them dudes on the west side, one block away," says Asheem.

"You roll up to a spot with your boys, you wanna feel safe, you wanna impress the girls," he explains. Goodfellas was never meant to be a criminal organization — more of a neighborhood clique. But over time, the crew found itself in violent rivalries with other crews in the area. "The first time someone robbed me for my jacket, I let it happen," Asheem says. "The second time, I fought back and got my ass whooped. The third time, I got a weapon to defend myself."

More so than his younger brother, Asheem fell deeply into the Goodfellas crew and its conflicts. Jelani, meanwhile, managed to stay removed from these local struggles. As a young teen, he began attending Leake & Watts, a special needs school based in Yonkers, outside the city. But as Asheem’s younger brother, Jelani remained a background member of the crew by default.

"I knew them all my life, and we always had each other’s back. Somebody mess with you, they mess with all, that was my perspective. Just friends hanging out, chasing after girls," says Jelani. "I didn’t think of it as a gang, I thought of it as family." He was aware of the violence that the crew was involved in, but says he never participated, save a few scuffles in the street. For the most part, Jelani says, "what they was doing, I wasn’t doing."

Like many teens, the Henry boys were avid users of social media, posting content about themselves and their crew. They appeared in Goodfellas rap videos on YouTube, and had accounts on MySpace and Facebook where they appeared in Goodfellas jackets or in images tagged with "Goodfellas" and "GF." It was clear to both of them that the reputation they projected online was not just fun, but as critical to their safety as not walking alone at night. (Picture: The Goodfellas. Jelani can be seen at top right)

"The streets be watching, you know that saying?" says Asheem, echoing the words of Jeff Lane, an assistant professor at Rutgers University in the School of 
Communication and Information who came to know the Henry boys well. Lane spent several years living in Harlem, working on violence prevention and writing about street life. Even good kids who prefer to spend time with family and in the classroom often find it necessary to act "hard," says Lane. In tough neighborhoods, displays of violence and bravado are not a choice, but a survival tactic. "Teenagers these days need to worry not just about how they act in real life, but also how they are perceived on the digital street."

For those not deeply involved in crews but who, like Jelani, were connected by family and proximity, the same kind of scrutiny applied. "People are looking to see how you respond," Jelani explains. There might be a fistfight, for example, and a video would be posted online to Facebook or YouTube. "If you don’t ‘like’ that post," he says, "people are gonna ask you why."

As crime in New York City has fallen, law enforcement has focused on the pockets of violence that remain. Over the last five years, the New York City police department and Manhattan prosecutors office have ramped up their efforts to understand, oversee, and infiltrate the digital lives of teenagers from crime-prone neighborhoods like Harlem. They track the activity of kids through services like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram, going so far as to create fake accounts and spark online friendships to sidestep privacy settings. A recent indictment discusses activity of crew members as young as 10, and arrested several 15-year-olds following a four and half year investigation.

"We are coming to find you and monitor every step you take," Joanne Jaffe, the department’s Housing Bureau chief, told The New York Times in 2013. "And we are going to learn about every bad friend you have."




In Harlem, the social media busts emerged around 2011 with a crack down on a group of 14 crew members. Asheem’s case followed shortly thereafter, with 19 defendants. In April of 2013, another Harlem raid took down 63 crew members. Many of these operations have been organized under the rubric of Operation Crew Cut, a police strategy combining a focus on crews and social media in an effort to curb gun violence.

The most recent Crew Cut raid took place this past June, just after dawn. Helicopters circled low over the Grant and Manhattanville housing projects in West Harlem. Hundreds of officers swarmed into the buildings as members of the press, tipped off beforehand, watched from the wings. In all, 103 defendants, many between the ages of 15 and 20, were indicted. (The word "Facebook" appears more than three hundred times in theseindictments.) It was the largest gang raid in the history of New York City, part of an escalating pattern of mass arrests that used social media evidence and conspiracy statutes to arrest larger and larger numbers of defendants.

The district attorney leading the case accused rival crews who lived in the housing projects of two homicides and 19 non-lethal shootings, pointing to a wealth of evidence gathered from reviews of over 1 million social media pages where feuds played out.  "IM GOOD BRO THEY SHOT ND MISS WE SHOOT TO KILL" read one Facebook message. "NOW IMAA REALII KILL SOMEONE" read another.

"THE MIX OF SOCIAL MEDIA AND CONSPIRACY STATUTES CREATES A DRAGNET THAT CAN BRING ALMOST ANYBODY IN"

Though the New York City Police has declined to comment for this piece, in the past the department has touted Operation Crew Cut as a success. "Strategic enforcement and proactive policing combined with strong prosecutorial partnerships, including attention to the new battleground of social media, have resulted in lives being saved in New York City, mostly young minority men," former police commissioner Raymond Kelly said in a 2013 press release. The NYPD says statistics show that during the first year of Operation Crew Cut, homicides among young people ages 13 to 21 fell 50.6 percent in the areas targeted by the operation.

But critics say that while violence may have fallen, the number of arrests during each raid has not. "The mix of social media and conspiracy statutes creates a dragnet that can bring almost anybody in," says Andrew Laufer, a New York City attorney who has worked on numerous cases involving teenagers wrongly arrested by police. "It’s a complete violation of the Fourth Amendment and the worst kind of big brother law enforcement." To build the case for the Harlem raid, police had begun social media surveillance of children well before they had built up a serious criminal record.

Affiliation with a crew, even a tangential one, can be a deciding factor in getting locked up. "I find it disturbing and scary," says Christian Bolden, a professor of criminology at Loyola University. "In many states, if police see you together with someone three times — and this can be in real life or in a picture they find online — that is enough to prove conspiracy. That puts the onus on young people to be smart and careful about who they are with and what they post. And if we know one thing about teenagers, it’s that they are rabidly social and often quite reckless." It was this exact mix of neighborhood affiliations and social media that entangled the fates of the Henry brothers.


In 2008, Asheem was arrested for weapons possession. He had never fired the gun in question—the indictment showed that it didn’t even work—but he admits to obtaining the weapon illegally. When I visited him at Elmira Correctional Facility, a maximum security facility four hours northwest of New York City where he was serving his sentence, he wore a dark green prison uniform and clean white sneakers. His hair was still in the stylish waves he was known for in Harlem. "I was running around with a gun because—not because I was a gangbanger," he says. "You get caught out your neighborhood, you get jumped."

"YOU NEED TO COME HOME," HIS MOTHER TOLD HIM. "THE POLICE ARE LOOKING FOR YOU."

Asheem pleaded guilty to the charge and got five years probation. Determined to fly straight, he kept a clean record after that, graduating high school and heading off to college at William Paterson University in New Jersey. As a freshman, Asheem had finally put some distance between himself and his troubled neighborhood. But in the week of his first midterm exams, his mother called him. "You need to come home," she told him. "The police are looking for you."

The 129th street indictment was one of the earliest in a string of cases that the Manhattan DA has brought against 16 crews in the last four years. These operations have leveraged the potent combination of social media evidence and conspiracy statutes. Asheem was charged with conspiracy in the third degree. The evidence was the gun charge to which he had already pled guilty, and photos, which he says dated back to the time when he was 14 and 15, showing him and other boys under the banner of Goodfellas.

The Goodfellas. Jelani can be seen top right

One image showed Asheem and friends at an older girl’s Sweet Sixteen party — their arms draped over one another’s shoulders. Alethia says the picture was used as evidence to show participation in a criminal conspiracy. His mother had been at the party as a chaperone. "I didn’t see gangsters," she says, "I just saw some kids."

But even though these photos were posted online when Asheem was still a minor, they were fair game for the prosecutor when bringing charges against him as an adult. Along with his previous confession to the gun charge, it was enough to prove he belonged to a violent crew. "So I asked them, ‘Yo, is that no form of double jeopardy?’ And they said, ‘No, because you pled guilty to the weapon, it opens up [the conspiracy charge]," recalls Asheem. "And because you got pictures with these other guys, they’re saying you guys all knew what was going on."

"I DIDN’T SEE GANGSTERS," HIS MOTHER SAYS. "I JUST SAW SOME KIDS.

"We were just young dumb kids running around, and we just happened to run under the one name," he tells me. "There wasn’t no hierarchy, there wasn’t order." But the nature of some conspiracy statutes, especially when defendants are identified as gang members, doesn’t require that teens be aware of a specific plan or crime in order to be found guilty.
According to Chris Lawson, a prosecutor in San Diego, three ingredients must be present to bring a conspiracy charge against gang members in his state: knowledge of a gang’s criminality, active participation in the gang, and intent to further the gang’s overall goals. Prosecutors can glean evidence for all of this off social media. "If you go out and represent yourself as a members of the Crip killers, and if shortly after you make threats online, a Crip is killed—even though we don’t know who pulled the trigger—we can hold you legally responsible for conspiracy to commit those murders."

Alethia says that in Asheem’s case, the judge told him he was looking at a possible sentence of 15 to 30 years. It was a frightening length of time that convinced Asheem to take a plea deal that could range from 16 months to 4 years instead. While he was incarcerated, the police matched his DNA to another gun recovered near the scene of a gang altercation. Though this gun was operable and loaded, it had not been used in a murder or violent conflict. But Asheem, knowing his record would look bad before a judge, decided to take another plea, adding six more years onto his current sentence. He is now scheduled for release in 2017.

Photo taken by local event company at a Sweet Sixteen party. Asheem is farthest left

Had it not been for the social media evidence, it’s likely Asheem would not have been pulled into the conspiracy indictment. California has introduced a new law that would allow teenagers to wipe clean their online presence when they turn 18, erasing youthful indiscretions. And in Europe, major governments have forced Google to remove links that users feel keep them unfairly associated with their past. But for now, in most US states, social media creates a time capsule that can come back to haunt you. Asheem was a minor during the period when the pictures were taken. But when the conspiracy indictment came down, he was old enough to be charged as an adult.

IN MOST US STATES, SOCIAL MEDIA CREATES A TIME CAPSULE THAT CAN COME BACK TO HAUNT YOU
Individuals who work closely with at-risk youth in Harlem and strive to keep them out of the prison system admit that the surveillance of social media and operations like Crew Cut are a necessary response to gun violence among youth. "Nobody wants to see 14- and 15-year-old kids getting locked up," says Chris Watler, Project Director at the Harlem Community Justice Center. "But if a kid is picking up a gun, or shooting other kids, we need to stop them from doing that. If you have a kids posing online with a gun, what is the obligation of law enforcement? There is a legitimate public safety concern."

To his family and friends, Asheem’s case is tragic. They saw a a high school graduate and aspiring college freshman, a young man who had pled guilty to his crime and then tried to leave that life behind. But belonging to the Goodfellas was also a crime—and Asheem was admittedly guilty of it. He would become among the earliest of more than 300 crew members who have been convicted over the past four years by the Manhattan DA on conspiracy charges.

But what happened next came as a shock: the police came for Jelani as well.

A line up of suspects in Jelani's case. Jelani is at bottom right.

Five months after Asheem’s indictment, in April of 2012, the police arrested Jelani at his girlfriend’s home in the Bronx. At first he thought it was for something minor: he had jumped a subway turnstile earlier that year and failed to show up in court for his summons. But he quickly learned that he was under arrest for two counts of attempted murder and other charges.

A few weeks prior, a girl had been spit on by members of a local Harlem crew. The next day, someone shot the spitter and his friend in retaliation. The gunfire broke out in front of Kings Deli on 129th Street and Frederick Douglass Boulevard, two blocks west of the Henry household. Jelani, the police said, matched an eyewitness description of an individual fleeing the scene: a tall, light-skinned black male.
In the interrogation room, two detectives grilled Jelani about Goodfellas gang rivalries in the area. "All my friends are in jail," he told them. "I don’t hang out with nobody."

Jelani had never been convicted of a crime, but at the arraignment, the District Attorney’s office described him as a known member of a violent gang. As evidence, Jelani and Alethia say, she pointed to posts about Goodfellas that he had "liked" on Facebook. The judge denied Jelani bail, instead sending him to Rikers Island, one of the nation’s most notorious jails. The district attorney offered him 20 years if he pled guilty, but Jelani refused. He was certain that a trial would prove his innocence. Days went by, then weeks, months, a year. The trial never came.

"ALL MY FRIENDS ARE IN JAIL," JELANI TOLD THE POLICE. "I DON’T HANG OUT WITH NOBODY."

During the time he was imprisoned, the DA refused to share almost all the evidence with Jelani or his lawyer. He had no access to the testimony or physical evidence against him and therefore no way to argue that his indictment and detention should be overturned. What little his lawyer did know showed the case to be a shaky one. Two men were seen running from the scene of the shooting. One eyewitness said the dark skinned man held the gun. Another said it was the light-skinned man. An eye witness picked Jelani out of a lineup, but another failed to do so.



"Because of them pictures, the DA said I was affiliated, that I know what’s going on in the hood," Jelani remembers. On Facebook, Jelani had appeared in pictures with the crewmembers, and he had liked images linked to Goodfellas on Facebook. Again and again, Jelani says, the district attorney pressed him to take a plea bargain, pointing to the evidence on social media. But he refused. "Those are people I would call my friends, but what they was doing, I wasn’t doing. To her, I’m part of them. I’m a monster."

Every so often Henry would be shuttled to the courthouse in Manhattan, and every time, the district attorney delayed the start of the trial. In New York, a defendant is entitled to a trial, and a felony suspect is supposed to be freed on bail after six months without one.

But the district attorney convinced a judge that most of the time Jelani spent in jail shouldn’t count towards that release. She argued that days spent gathering more evidence, delays in testimony by a police officer who was on vacation, or instances where she was unprepared to make her case did not figure into the six-month period. The judge agreed. In a bit of Kafka-esque arithmetic, 19 months became 83 days. Instead of finishing trade school, Jelani celebrated his 20th and 21st birthdays in a cell.

Because of the serious charges and the assertion that the crime was gang-related, Jelani was kept in the George R. Vierno Center, among the most violent housing facilities at Rikers Island. There he was forced into close proximity with inmates from rival areas of Harlem, leading to several fights. The violence changed him. "My experience on Rikers Island, that’s when I had to show, like not just be myself," he says. "I had to turn into a beast."

IN A BIT OF KAFKA-ESQUE ARITHMETIC, 19 MONTHS BECAME 83 DAYS


Jelani fought with other inmates and was was punished with solitary confinement. "I did nine months straight in the box," he remembers. That meant 23 hours a day in a 6 x 8 foot cinder block room, his meals pushed through a slot in the door. "For a while, I kind of lost my mind in there."

Henry said he struggled at times to avoid taking the guilty plea. "I’m like, God’s not listening to my prayers." Thinking of his brother’s plea helped him to stay strong. "I knew sooner or later, [God’s] gonna be like, aight, you suffered enough."
Meanwhile, the district attorney kept dragging her feet. "She definitely thought we would crack if she kept him up in Rikers long enough," says Alethia. But Jelani and his mother refused to cut a deal. "They took one of my boys, but you can’t have them both," she says.

Alethia finally convinced her lawyer to file a speedy trial motion and in November of 2013 Jelani was given bail. Four months later, with no move by the DA to proceed, his case was finally dismissed, almost two years to the day it began. The DA has refused to share the document that outlines the reason for dismissing Jelani’s case with him or his lawyer. To day, there has been no explanation and no apology for Jelani’s detention.

"THEY TOOK ONE OF MY BOYS, BUT YOU CAN’T HAVE THEM BOTH."

After leaving Rikers, Henry moved in with his grandmother in West Harlem. He has tried to steer clear of old neighborhood conflicts. "My head is all over the place these days," he says, walking along Harlem River Drive.

Gone is the skinny kid who appears in Goodfellas group photos on MySpace. He is a young man now, with a mustache goatee and a layer of muscle he put on in prison. "I want to be a DJ, a bartender, maybe write a book. I just feel like I’m making up for the lost time, and there is a million things I could do." He hopes to return to school, this time for a degree in automotive repair.


As for social media, and socializing in general, he says he mostly avoids it. "I prefer to just be in the house, not do nothing, be bored out my mind, instead of being outside and being a part of something, which I’m not really." He is hypervigilant about what he posts and what pictures he appears in, but says he doesn’t think the big takedowns of crews have changed the behavior of the average Harlem teenager. "People post things just to get likes to be popular," he says.

Because Jelani’s case was dismissed, the Manhattan District Attorney legally cannot discuss it in any way. But the office stands by the work it has done on social media and the cases it prosecuted based on Operation Crew Cut raids.

"When we first start, a crew might have hundreds of people in it. We then start to narrow, and we focus, like a laser, the worst of the worst," says Chief Assistant District Attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo. "We are very careful to make sure that we have evidence that we can prove at trial, that these weren’t just kids who like to hang out with the gang [but] members who are really a part of the violence."



kJelani’s case wasn’t caught up in one of the big conspiracy indictments — his was one ripple farther out from those takedowns. While she wouldn’t discuss Jelani directly, Agnifilo spoke in broad terms about the risk-and-reward dynamic of this new style of policing. "With big gang raids, there is collateral damage that spills over and affects the families," she says. "The criminal justice system is not the answer. This is a social and economic issue. But when there is violence, we are prosecutors, and there are only so many options."

Unfortunately, Henry’s troubles from the arrest aren’t over. He is now facing assault charges stemming from a fight in prison. "He was innocent when he went in there, and now he might come out with a charge for defending himself," says Alethia. His family plans to sue the city over his arrest and to have the charges stemming from his time in Rikers dropped.

Alethia is committed to getting his story out there because she believes the policies of police and prosecutors have to change. "Jelani was brought in over nothing. Because he was Asheem’s brother. Because he was friends with people from the hood on Facebook." Well before the arrest of either boy, she had gone to the local police, begging them to intervene in the deadly neighborhood conflicts. "We asked for help, and we got an indictment instead," she says sitting in her kitchen, tears wetting her eyes. "People don’t understand why it’s so dangerous to put yourself out there on social media. You know what my son is guilty of? Being born on 129th Street."

Photography by Bryan Derballa
Map by Ryan Mark and Josh Laincz
Additional reporting by Chaim Gartenberg