FOUR REASONS THE VERIZON IPHONE LAUNCH FAILED

Article first published as Four Reasons The Verizon iPhone Launch Failed on Technorati.

The battle between AT&T and Verizon has officially begun, but so far it hasn’t been much of a fight.

Thursday marked the long-awaited arrival of the Verizon iPhone. While millions of customers are no doubt happy to see the handset available on another carrier with different monthly plans than those currently offered by AT&T, the introduction of the CDMA iPhone seems anticlimactic. Sure, it’s only been a day, but the public response seems lukewarm at best. A lot of hype and buildup for nothing. What’s behind the phone’s lackluster launch? I’ve got four theories.

1. Timing: Verizon likely wanted the phone to launch around Valentine’s day hoping to capitalize on the consumerism of the holiday driving up sales. The problem is that the iPhone 4 launched almost a year ago. The iPhone’s next incarnation is likely to be introduced in early June and if consumers are going to spend money on a new iPhone, CDMA or GSM, they want the latest and greatest, not a model that’s going to be outdated in less than four months.

2. The Hype: The “If you build it they will come” mentality may have backfired. While it’s no secret that Verizon customers have pleaded for the iPhone again and again, when the official announcement was made, Verizon’s advertising efforts were somewhat nauseating to watch. One campaign spot in particular, thanking Verizon customers for their patience as the clock ticked down to arrival day made me cringe. True, some customers may have been watching the clock, but some weren’t. Nobody likes to think of themselves as being so easily manipulated and persuaded. Then again, the iPhone 4 launch last June caused plenty of chaos, so maybe I’ll just concede that point.

3. The Hassle of The Switch: So, you’ve got AT&T and now you’re thinking of switching to the Verizon iPhone? You could, if you want to deal with potential contract hurdles, early termination fees and the headache that comes with joining a new carrier. The cost-benefit analysis isn’t worth it for most users. AT&T has already revamped its calling and data plans to compete with the Verizon launch. As an added bonus, current AT&T iPhone customers are being enticed to stay with AT&T with the promise of an additional 1000 rollover minutes.

 4. The Competition: The iPhone is one of the most popular handsets, but it isn’t the only one. The openness of the Android platform offers its own advantages over the iPhone and is appealing to many who like to have control over their own handsets. Not to mention that Android hasn’t endured months of bad press. No Antennagate, issues with the proximity sensor, or easily shattered glass. And let’s not count out Windows Phone 7 in light of their newly-established partnership with Nokia following the death of the Symbian platform.

What are your thoughts on the Verizon iPhone launch?

A LITTLE BARNES & NOBLE HOLIDAY CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURE

Article first published as A Little Barnes & Noble Holiday Customer Service Failure on Technorati.

Every consumer’s worst nightmare when calling a customer service number for support is hearing the following: “Due to abnormally high call volume, you may experience longer than usual hold time to reach a representative.” Whenever I hear that I think, “The reason you are experiencing abnormally high call volume is likely because your service or product is infuriating.” 

Everyone has dealt at some point with having to call a company’s customer service number for something. Maybe AT&T has dropped your call for the last time, (ironically many of those dropped calls come while waiting in the queue to talk to an AT&T representative) or you’re a Comcast customer without a connection. Perhaps, as was the case with me, Barnes & Noble’s website was making holiday shopping a little less merry and a lot more stress-inducing.

I admit that the majority of my online shopping is done on Amazon. They’re ranked number one in customer satisfaction according to a recent survey and there’s good reason for that. The process is quick, easy, painless and I believe that their slogan (Amazon, and you’re done) is a true reflection of how user-friendly they make the experience. Should you need help at anytime they have friendly support 24/7 and returns couldn’t possibly be any easier. Plus, they have everything. All of the above have made me a loyal Amazon customer.

However, I had accumulated a few gift-cards to Barnes and Noble throughout the year and opted to take care of some holiday shopping while taking advantage of the savings. Mistake number one.

Many online retailers allow their customers to save their gift-cards into their online account and store them for future use. This is useful if you have more than one but don’t want to spend them simultaneously, or if you want to guard against losing them before they’re spent by keeping them stored online. These practices are a welcome safeguard to consumers in such cases.

Unless you’re dealing with Barnes and Noble.

According to Barnes and Noble, gift-cards that are digitally stored can only be used for the purchase of e-books. That’s great if (a. I want to purchase e-books and b). I have a Nook, which I don’t. So I called B&N customer service to see what they could do. What I got was a lesson in customer service, or rather the lack of it and the absurdity of the Barnes and Noble online shopping experience.

After 20 minutes on hold, I explain my situation to the representative. I am simply trying to apply my gift-cards which are stored and clearly visible within my B&N online account to my order. Her initial response filled me with hope.

B&N Rep: I can help you with this. Go ahead and place the order online. Then under payment options, select “Pay by phone.” Once the order is placed, we can apply the gift-cards to your order.

Me: Great. I’ll go ahead and place the order now.

B&N Rep: Orders take approximately 20 minutes to reach our system. You may want to call us back once your order hits our system. Then we can apply the gift-cards on your account.

Keeping in mind that I have already waited 20 minutes to get to this point, I was flabbergasted by her suggestion that I call back. However, I agree. I’ve already made it this far. Mistake number two.

I endure another 20-minute wait on hold (after waiting the requisite 20 to call back) and retell the story to the next representative I speak with. She informs me that the previous representative misspoke. I’m reminded that per B&N policy, digitally stored gift-cards are eligible for e-book purchases only. Without having the full card number to enter manually at checkout, I’m out of luck.

I plead with her that there must be a solution. She asks if I mind being put on hold while she “investigates.” Before I can even answer, I’m on hold for another 20 minutes. While on hold, I’m hoping someone is listening to my mounting frustration and monitoring my call for “quality assurance purposes” as they claim to do.

Her final solution had me laughing.

B&N Rep: Thank you for your patience. What I can suggest is that you purchase e-books with your gift-cards through our online store, then once they’re ordered, you can call us back, request a refund and then we will then be able to retrieve the full gift-card number for you. Then, you can go ahead and place a new order for the items currently in your cart and use the gift-card toward that order.

Me: Are you kidding?

She wasn’t. Maybe I could have gotten somewhere with a supervisor, but by now I’ve spent well over an hour trying to place my order through B&N and use my gift-cards to save some money only to now be left utterly frustrated. I thanked her for her help, hung up the phone and went to Amazon.

The whole process took under two minutes.

Amazon, and I’m done. Sometimes you don’t know how good a company is until you meet their competition. Thank you, Amazon. I knew there was a reason you ranked #1 in customer satisfaction.

Barnes and Noble will never beat Amazon now matter how hard they try. They may, however, surrender to Borders.

HOW THE FLAWED TSA PROCEDURES AFFECT THE DISABLED

Article first published as How The Flawed TSA Procedures Affect The Disabled on Technorati.

If you like to fly, raise your hand. Go ahead. Think about it. Take your time. I’ll wait.

Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Sure, if I’m invited to the Royal Wedding next summer, I’ll go. Or, if Sir Paul McCartney wants to invite me over to smoke pot with him and Dana Carvey while explaining how the Beatles were finally able to settle their differences with Apple and come to iTunes, of course I’ll accept the invitation. I mean, it’s Paul McCartney. Those exceptions aside, I hate flying.

Admittedly, as a wheelchair user I do get certain perks at the airport. I’m automatically moved to the front of check-in and security lines, I get to board the plane first to avoid being completely run over by frustrated travelers, who once I’m on the plane sitting comfortably in bulkhead, are pushing and shoving as if their seats will disappear completely, forcing them to stand for the duration of their flight.

Having the fast pass at the nation’s airports and prime seating on the plane is nice, but don’t delude yourself into thinking that I’ve got it made when I travel. Getting on the plane and through security is hardly a seamless process thanks to the agency now dubbed Transportation Sexual Assault by some travelers in light of new security measures. 

Putting the privacy issues and the radiation concerns raised by the new TSA security measures aside, the full body X-ray machines and “enhanced” pat-downs that made Jon Tyner walk out of the airport in San Diego earlier this week in protest are not new to myself or any other disabled passenger for that matter. Most disabled passengers know what they’re in for when they travel. We undergo these enhanced pat-downs each and every time we fly. There is no “random selection” prior to our screenings, and that’s understandable.

After all, we come equipped with our own metal chairs, and because of their varying sizes, they provide lots of real estate to hide potential weapons and other forbidden items. All of these factors make the metal detectors at the airport ineffective and useless security measures, making the full body pat-down a indisputable reality. Unfortunately, despite how nice the TSA agents can be (and more often than not they are), they too are useless and ill-prepared to effectively screen disabled passengers. From my experiences with TSA, screeners don’t undergo nearly as much training as they should when it comes to screening disabled passengers and that doesn’t inspire confidence.

Let me set the scene for you. The process usually goes something like this:

I wheel to the security checkpoint. After checking my ID and boarding pass, I am directed to a designated wait area where I am told a male TSA employee will be along “momentary” to conduct a full body pat-down (and yes that includes a groin check). Sometimes they arrive quickly, sometimes it takes two to three reminders by another TSA employee as they shout that they need a “male assist” to come over. I, meanwhile take delight in humming the Jeopardy theme. Depending on my mood, I’ll either do it out loud or in my head.

When the TSA agent finally comes over, he runs through his practiced script very methodically as he alerts me to how the search will be conducted. He asks about sensitive areas on my body before telling me when to lean forward, backward, sideways, essentially every direction possible to ensure every inch of me has been searched. I stretch my arms, move my legs and half expect that he’ll soon ask me to juggle three balls in the air with one hand and wheel with the other. He checks both me and my chair for prohibited items, finding nothing out of the ordinary. Then he again asks if he should be made aware of sensitive areas just prior to using the back of his hands to do the groin check. Yup. I have a groin. Check. Then he stops, and looks at me puzzled like he’s forgotten his own name.

What he’s really forgotten is the protocol which he recited to me from memory only moments before. Oops. If I can paraphrase a famous Seinfeld sketch and adapt it to the situation in question, “You know how to explain the procedure, you just don’t know how to do the procedure. And that’s really the most important part of the procedure, the doing.”

Part of me just wants to pretend we’re done, say thank you, collect my stuff that I’ve put through the X-ray machine and move on, but we both know he’s forgotten something. I know what it is. He clearly doesn’t. Like an encouraging teacher to a struggling student, I try and help him along.

“Don’t forget the wheels,” I tell him, reminding him to swab the wheel with a cloth and run it through the X-ray machine to check it for explosive chemicals. Then I show him my hands, hoping he’ll pick up on the next clue, “And the gloves, swipe the gloves.”

“Right,” he says, before following my directions and thanking me for the reminder.

Now, I’m not Macgruber. I don’t know how I would or could cause any sort of trouble with nothing more than a set of detachable wheels and a presumably explosive chemical sprinkled throughout, which if it were truly explosive, I certainly wouldn’t want to be touching with my half gloved hands all day as I push around. However, the fact is, it is TSA procedure, and the majority of TSA agents don’t remember it, or how to follow it correctly. All of this leads me to wonder, what else are they forgetting? More importantly, when will the training improve so that passengers like myself aren’t walking TSA employees through their own rules and regulations?

I’ve asked it before and I’ll ask it again: Anyone? Anyone? I would honestly like to know the answer.

APPLE EXTENDS ITUNES SONG SAMPLES, BULLIES LABELS INTO COMPLIANCE

Article first published as Apple Extends iTunes Song Samples, Bullies Labels Into Compliance on Technorati.

 Being Steve Jobs is difficult. So was being his boss, when he had one. The Apple CEO keeps a busy schedule that probably makes his iCal look like a rainbow-colored war zone. When he’s not busy creating innovative products, or defending Apple patents, or firing off curt e-mails to consumers, or costing someone their job, he likes to boss around the record labels. All in the name of improving the consumer experience, of course. 

Late yesterday, TechCrunch broke the story that Apple is planning to extend the length of iTunes music samples from the current 30 seconds to a generous 90 seconds for songs longer than 2:30 hoping the end result is an increase in sales. Consumers will get more sample time, and Apple and artists alike will make more money. What could be wrong with that?

Not much. Except Apple didn’t exactly ask. Instead, the “iTunes Store Team,“ who by all appearances have the grace and skill of seasoned PR professionals sent off a letter to record label representatives about the new “pleasing” development.

“We are pleased to let you know that we are preparing to increase the length of music previews from 30 seconds to 90 seconds on the iTunes Store in the United States. We believe that giving potential customers more time to listen to your music will lead to more purchases.”

The email also notes that by continuing to offer their music through the iTunes Store, labels are opting-in to the new terms. If they don’t like it, tough. They can leave. Given that the iTunes store continues to dominate the world of digital music distribution giving artists both big and small a platform to connect with new audiences, the likelihood of that happening isn’t very high.

The central premise of Apple’s argument for increasing song length is debatable. Sure users will appreciate having longer samples to listen to, but it remains to be seen if doing so increases sales. Many users who buy songs through the iTunes Music Store probably aren’t doing so after a first listen of a 30-second sound sample. They’ve heard the whole thing on Pandora, or the latest episode of Glee, or their friend sent it to them, and now they cruise over to iTunes for a quick (and legal) purchase.

Still, the move is likely to be appreciated by music lovers just the same. Even if what they’re really waiting for is music in the cloud. They were close once with Lala, but as the saying goes, “If you can’t beat them, buy them, and shut them down.” Something like that.

What do you think? Will the new extended song samples make users any more likely to purchase songs through iTunes, or like Ping, will anyone care?

FACEBOOK LOBBIED TO KILL PRIVACY LEGISLATION AND THAT’S A GOOD THING

Article first published as Facebook Lobbied to Kill Privacy Legislation and That’s a Good Thing on Technorati.

Facebook and privacy issues seem to go together like Bert and Ernie, Superman and Clark Kent, Batman and Robin, Charlie Sheen and allergic reactions.

Marketwatch first reported Wednesday that Facebook spent more than $6,600 on lobbying efforts in California between April and June of this year in an attempt to “work behind the scenes” killing the Social Networking Privacy Act.

The bill, introduced in the state Senate in February, would restrict social-networking sites from displaying the addresses and phone numbers of minors. Any social media site found in violation would be fined up to $10,000 for each infraction.

The California bill was introduced by Sen. Ellen Corbett and passed by the California State Senate in April before ultimately meeting with opposition in the California State Assembly, according to Marketwatch.

The bill has merit. On the one hand, parents understandably want to protect their children from online predators. On the other, Facebook is protecting its own interests. Both are valid and the latter is not inherently evil. Nick Brown, of the Silcon Angle defends Facebook’s lobbying efforts arguing that while the bill may be well intentioned, the execution leaves much to be desired. 

If a bill like this were to pass in California, Facebook could potentially lose tons of money for a variety of reasons. They could be fined for something they didn’t or don’t have the ability to catch. They could be fined for people lying. And they could be forced to enter into countless lawsuits to try to defend themselves. All avenues lead to Facebook losing money.

Mr. Brown is absolutely correct. To borrow a line from House M.D. on his assessment of the human condition; “Everybody lies,” and Facebook shouldn’t be responsible for monitoring the behavior of its underage users to determine if they’re being truthful about the information they post. The current language in the bill opens a Pandora’s box that could potentially cost Facebook an enormous amount of money. Money that could be much better spent on the development of innovative additions that enrich the overall user experience, like today’s launch of Friendship Pages.

Facebook has every right to lobby against this legislation. Even President Barack Obama, in his recent interview with the nation’s most influential man, Jon Stewart, acknowledged lobbying as part of our democracy.

One more argument that is worth repeating is this: If users are concerned about how certain data of theirs is potentially used and shared, don’t post it. Facebook, or any social media network for that matter, can’t share information it doesn’t have. Yes, social networking is meant to be social, that doesn’t mean that those concerned about their information can’t proactively take steps on their own to prevent its disclosure.

Since the legislation in question is aimed at protecting minors, the underlying takeaway is the importance of education for both parents and young adults to help them make smarter decisions about what they post online. That education is the responsibility of all involved. Relying solely on legislation to provide that protection is naive at best, and potentially detrimental at worst.

Facebook is doing the smart thing by looking out for themselves and protecting their interests. We should all do the same for ourselves on social networks.

FACETIME FOR MAC REVEALS HUGE SECURITY HOLE

Article first published as Facetime For Mac Reveals Huge Security Hole on Technorati.

I feel bad that I’ve been picking on Steve Jobs so much lately but for all his recent verbal sparring with Google and RIM over the “mess” of their respective platforms, Jobs would be wise to check his inflated ego at the door.

Less than 24 hours after the much anticipated “Back To The Mac” Keynote that saw the merging of OS X with iOS, and the announcement of the Mac App Store, Engadget is reporting on a rather gaping security hole in the recently released Facetime for Mac Beta that puts your personal data, including account security questions, answers, and even your date of birth on public display.

According to reports, anyone with access to your laptop can easily change your password and/or  security question for your account without having to know the answers to either of the above to begin with. Signing out of Facetime provides no peace of mind either since the app generously stores your password, and recalls the information once you’re logged in, making it all too easy for would-be hackers to sign in to your account with relative ease and wreak havoc.

So much for that Walled Garden mentality.

MacLife’s J Keirn-Swanson, who reported on the security lapse, offered this bit of advice for those of us camping out at our local Starbucks:

Now, granted, someone has to have physical access to your computer to see this information, but looking over your shoulder in a coffee shop isn’t that hard to pull off. And with this information, they can change your password and lock you out of your own account while they run rampant. Apparently, you can even reset your password in FaceTime without being first prompted to enter the original password.

Ouch. And if you think that’s bad, completely independent of Apple, developer Zach Holman has brought a whole new layer to the saga with his newest endeavor. To describe it, I’ll paraphrase Jobs’ comment about the marriage of iOS and OS X from the Keynote yesterday. “What would happen if Facetime and Chat Roulette hooked up?” The answer? Facelette.

I don’t know what’s worse: the aforementioned security hole, or the idea of chatting with random strangers on Facetime while such a security hole compromises and exposes your personal data. Though to be fair, if Chat Roulette has taught us anything since its 2009 inception it’s that exposing yourself, however you look at it, isn’t exactly new territory.

I’m just sayin.’

TOO SEXY FOR YOUR TEXT? APPLE PATENTS ANTI-SEXTING TECHNOLOGY

Article first published as Too Sexy For Your Text? Apple Patents Anti-Sexting Technology on Technorati.

You’ll have to forgive me. I can’t help but think of the Oogachaka Baby dancing around to Right Said Fred’s “I’m Too Sexy For My Shirt” right now.

The new question though is: “Too Sexy For My Texts?”

And Apple apparently thinks so.

Fresh off the heels of their newly acquired trademark for their popular marketing slogan, “There’s an app for that,” the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted Apple a new patent Tuesday that could put an end to the practice of “sexting” and improper text slang as we know it. The technology works as a filter preventing the user of the handset from sending and receiving sexually explicit texts. Presumably achieved by comparing the message in question against a list of offensive words and expressions, the filter may also censor content based on a user’s age in an effort to make the content more “user appropriate.”

The technology does not, according to early reports, address the issue of images. I’m sure Brett Favre and Tiger Woods are lamenting a technology that came too little too late.

The fact that Apple pursued such a patent could be hailed as an innovative attempt at giving parents more control over the content their teens send with their device.

There is however a much more basic question: Why is the conversation focused on the filtering technology itself and not on parental intervention about discussing what’s appropriate? If this technology is all that’s standing in the way of teens sending and receiving such material, (and parents are reliant on it), maybe it’s time to reconsider if they should even have a phone at all. 

As TechCruch author Alexia Tsotsis pointed out when she first reported the story, the technology is hardly foolproof.

….those interesting in “sexting” will probably find some clever workaround to express how much they want to bang, screw, hit it or a myriad of other words that don’t immediately set off the censorship sensors.

News of the patent led me to envisioning just how the implementation would work. The  clip below is from last week’s episode of the CBS sitcom, Two And A Half Men: 

AN ENGLISH LESSON FROM QUINTESSENTIAL BILL

I’ve said it before, and I will say it again. I’m an English nerd. Language fascinates me. I love language so much in fact, that I have begun subscribing to The Language Log, an English language blog that is the brainchild of a few English faculty at the University of Pennsylvania. Today, they had an article that posed the age-old question that has plagued college students everywhere for centuries: What Is The Plural Of Syllabus? 

According to the article, the word “syllabus” didn’t even exist initially. The beginning of the word can be traced back to having been improperly transcribed from the original Latin word “syllabos” in early editions of the OED.

So basically, the word exists because the people who are responsible for the Bible of all things English, didn’t proofread. Kind of ironic. Isn’t it? But that’s OK. Who has time to proofread?

Social media and our need to truncate everything into 140 characters or less has led to the complete erosion of proper grammar and spelling anyway. The situation is so beyond repair that we’ve given up teaching English in high school altogether. Exhibit A: The new A&E reality series, Teach: Tony Danza. To quote Olivia, “Yeah. That happened.”

But I digress. Unconvinced by the OED explanation (because why would an English major trust the OED anyway, right?) I knew there had to be an answer to the question that took into account the fact that despite the failed transcription that led to the word’s newer spelling, we had in fact adopted it. My thought led me to e-mail the article to a former professor of mine for his take on the whole thing. His response, which is quoted verbatim below, is shared with his consent.

“The word used to be ‘flutterby,’ but we say 'butterfly.’” People used to say, “a napron” [which morphed into “an apron”] but you’d sound like a fucking idiot if you said, 'Hand me that napron; I want to catch that flutterby.’“

-Bill Kupinse 

Thanks, Bill. You may not find what you said particularly funny, but those who know you will recognize our favorite character in your writing: Quintessential Bill. Not only can we say, “This sounds like Bill,” many of us, myself included, can hear your voice perfectly in our heads as we read your reply. There is a reason that many of your former students kept such copious notes during your lectures. Sure, we all wanted to do well on the midterm, but we were also frantically scribbling down your off the cuff unexpected one-liners, your “Billisms,” if I may be so bold. You are hilarious, and it is precisely why I sought your permission to post about our exchange on my blog. Thanks for being such a great sport.

However, since your reply did not address the question explicitly, (namely, what is the plural of syllabus?) I can only guess that you are siding with the OED on this one and rendering the question moot. Fair point. For those of us playing the home game, that’s now OED 2, Ryan, 0. Nice work. 

I think I will quit while I’m behind.

FACEBOOK’S NEW “DOWNLOAD YOUR DATA” FEATURE JUST MIGHT TEACH US SOMETHING

Article first published as Facebook’s New “Download Your Data” Feature Just Might Teach Us Something on Technorati.

Fact: 92% of U.S. toddlers have an online presence by the time they’re two years old, Mashable reports. Everything from a single photo upload to an online photo album to a full-fledged online profile.

Fact: Twenty-five percent have some form of an online existence before they’re even born.

Fact: I just threw up a little.

We’ve just gone from social networking to the newest reality show: “Pimp My Kid.” OK. Maybe that last one's a stretch. Then again, maybe not.

Imagine these kids being able to give their parents their digital footprints for the holidays. The ceramic ones we made for them in grade school of our actual prints? So last century. 

Among the study’s other key findings; the degree to which adults’ own online data trail extends into cyberspace.

Smith said he found it “shocking” that most 30-year-olds have an “online footprint stretching back 10 to 15 years at most, while the vast majority of children today will have online presence by the time they are two-years-old — a presence that will continue to build throughout their whole lives.

The above may or may not surprise you. One indisputable reality is that everything we do online lives forever. For better or worse. The Internet is like an annoying elephant. It never forgets. Don’t believe me? Ask Christine O’Donnell. Bazinga.

Enter Zuckerberg and Co.’s recent announcement that users are now able to download their Facebook data right to their computer. Yup. You read that right. Every wall post, photo, message, party invite or chat log is now yours to keep and cherish forever, if you care.

In the scheme of things, this concept is is nothing all that new. Many of the major blogging platforms have long enabled users to download and archive their posts along with the accompanying data. However, this new feature is a big step toward allowing users of social networks to do the same. For those who are into the idea of a digital scrapbook chronicled via Facebook, rock on. I have no doubt there will be many people taking advantage of this feature. Sometimes it can be fun to look back and realize how much we’ve changed. Or not.

Depending on when you joined and just how social you are, you’re potentially looking at up to six years worth of information. Ouch. Of course, If you think six years of Facebook data is a scary reminder of just how unforgiving the Internet can be, image what these kids will have to contend with in the future. And it’s not just Facebook. It’s the whole World Wide Web.

Not that we should be paranoid. Absolutely not. Just careful. Cognizant of the fact that everything we do online has consequences. For that reason, social media and digital literacy is essential for everyone, kids and adults alike.

This is especially true for parents, who are creating their child’s digital footprint at a time when they are too young to understand what that will mean for them down the road, or have any control for that matter. The responsibility to be mindful of the long term effects falls to parents. And, as I’ve talked about before, it’s also imperative that teens and young adults understand the importance of reputation management for themselves when interacting online.

When I stop and think about it, six years of data seems like a steal. I grew up with the Internet. Today’s kids are growing up on the Internet. That’s a distinction with a very marked difference. A difference I am very thankful for, and I’m thankful that the latter is not a battle I have to fight.

FOUR EXPRESSIONS THE WEB HAS OFFICIALLY RUINED

Article first published as Four Expressions The Web Has Officially Ruined on Technorati.

Confession time. I’m an English nerd. Maybe even a snob. I love language and I have fun with it. When I’m writing, sometimes I get so obsessed with finding the perfect word or sentence to describe my thought that the mere idea of creating a simple draft of something can take forever. I know. That’s counter-intuitive to the notion of the word “draft.” I’m a perfectionist. Sue me.

When I write, I frequently consult a thesaurus in an attempt to sound smarter while simultaneously thinking, “How can I obliterate the English language today?” Then, I find the prefect four syllable word and rejoice.

When I’m not writing, I take the time to study the language carefully so that I can appreciate it and hopefully become a better writer. My secret? I read a lot. I also listen to George Carlin’s “7 Words You Can Never Say On Television,” or “The Evolution of the F-Bomb” for inspiration. You know, educational stuff.

So it should come as no surprise that one of my biggest pet peeves involves words and expressions that are overused and misunderstood. English snobs like myself have long discussed the expressions and clichés that annoy us to no end, and thanks to social media and all things Web 2.0, that list is growing. Certain words have crept into our vocabulary and are being used ad nauseam. Consequently, I have been trying to hire a hit man to have these words shot and killed. Make it look like an accident if you have to; I’ll throw in an extra $1,000 if they suffer a little, but the following words and phrases need to die.

Here are my top four in ascending order.

Epic: I don’t know how this happened, but somehow a word that used to carry a lot of shock and awe suddenly became the go-to word for all things thought to be amazing and life changing. Suddenly, it seems like this is the only word people can find in their mind when they’re searching for a description of something presumably indescribable by any other word. “Dude. I saw The Social Network this weekend. It was epic.” You should see this sunburn I got. Epic. I bought this new phone. Epic. (Side note: Seriously, Sprint?) No. It wasn’t. None of that was epic. You want to know what was epic? Dinosaurs.

Fail/Major Fail: A close friend of “epic” and often found piggybacking off of it, as in “Epic fail.” Fail used to mean, “I failed my driver’s test,“ or “I failed my final exam.” These events had real consequences and you made every effort specifically to avoid failure at all costs. Now? It’s being thrown around so melodramatically as a slang term meant to express disbelief at some minor travesty. “Facebook went down again today? FAIL.” “I locked myself out of the house again! Major fail.” The only true failure here is that this word continues to be overused and has slowly begun losing its influence.

F@#$ My Life: There’s something about reading other people’s published misfortunes that can help put one’s own life in perspective. When the site launched in 2008 it was funny. Maybe even therapeutic. After two years? Not so much. What makes it worse are the people who append the phrase to every single perceived mishap in their daily lives. “I can’t believe I have to go into work on my day off! FML.” “I can’t believe my girlfriend broke up with me. FML” Maybe she broke up with you because you were constantly complaining about the world’s most mundane events and she wanted to give you a reality check. How about, TYG? Thank Your Girlfriend.

LOL & “K”: First it was AIM, then text messages. You’re texting with a friend who says something they think is funny. You text back, “LOL “ almost without even thinking about it. This creates two problems: 1. Odds are you weren’t really laughing at the joke anyway, so you’re lying. 2. Your friend still thinks their lame jokes are funny because you responded with positive reinforcement. Shame on you. You’re helping nobody here. Who’s laughing now?

Then there are those who affirm everything with the famous one-letter reply. What happened? Two letters became too much? Clearly that’s not it since there is that segment of the population that replies, “KK.” What the eff does that even mean? On top of that, I don’t need you running up my cell phone text message bill with single letter texts. K? Thx.

Before we officially bid these expressions a final farewell, let’s just get it out of our system right now with one last mega sentence. Leave your best shot in the comments below, along with other words and phrases I may have missed.