1 in 5 Divorces Blamed on Facebook

[androticus]

DO YOU HAVE NO SHAME, TOM'S?????

The headline for this article is TOTALLY FALSE AND MISLEADING. Nothing about the facts support it. 1 in 5 divorce applications MENTION Facebook -- to then go on and say "1 in 5 Divorces **Blamed** on Facebook" [my emphasis] is utter and completely irresponsible and false.

DO YOU PEOPLE HAVE ANY WISH TO RETAIN ANY JOURNALISTIC CREDIBILITY WHATSOEVER????

 

[BartG]

LAME! the media must be desperate for real news which isnt LAME

 

[croc]

...And in other news, 5 out of 5 divorces are caused by marriage.
One of the major factors of bankruptcy is caused by divorce.
Bankruptcy is one of the major causes of suicide.

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]androticus[/nom]DO YOU HAVE NO SHAME, TOM'S?????[/citation]
I can't speak for Tom's

But I can say that reporters do take Journalistic Liberties a little too far and I can say this from personal experience.

I remember one time while I was still working, me and a few of my co-workers were interviewed as an article was being written about my work site.

Later when the article showed up in the paper, (think it was the NY Times) we read the article and found that Journalistic Liberties had been taken a little too far. Stuff had been written about us which was never said by anyone and which was entirely untrue, just for the sensationalism of the article itself.

 

[shamgar]

guess people should just stick to playing crysis instead!

 

[gmcboot]

[citation][nom]joebob2000[/nom]LOL @ statistics."Facebook was named in one out of five American divorce petitions""I was really surprised to see 20-percent of all the petitions""he discovered 989 instances of the word in 5,000 petitions"Any other ways you care to say that the petitions contain a 1:5 ratio of facebook to facebook-free text?How about explaining the likelihood that "Divorce-Online" gets most of their web hits from ads they take out on Facebook? It's pretty darn disingenuous to say "one in five of ALL divorces blamed on facebook"; a less misleading title would be "of people who share their divorce stories on 'Divorce-Online' one in five cited facebook as chief scapegoat". I bet at least half of everyone who uses 'Divorce-Online' is a regular facebook user, and currently has their relationship status set to "it's complicated".[/citation]

Couldn't have said it better. It funny how we now take as fact anything anyone post on a BLOG. A BB LL OO GG !!!! We don't investigate anything anymore. As long as it is online and some douche says it in his blog it must be true.

Divorce Online? This is where we get our national statistics on marriage. Some online service that allows you to file for divorce while sitting in your torn undies, eating pop tarts and drinking red bull and peppermint schnapps. Really everyone.. really...

 

[wiyosaya]

IMHO, if people spent time doing more constructive things rather than wasting their time with such online distractions, the world would be a better place. Except for the reasonably useful LinkedIn, I have not joined the online social networking revolution as I have better things to do.

I agree with the comments about the blame-game. We create our own realities, and, as such, we are responsible for our own problems - not someone else or any social networking site.

 

[lamorpa]

Why keep commenting? This story is made up (or at least based on made up information). Who could not tell this?

 

[Guest]

Um wait...they scanned a database of 5000 divorce petitions and found the word "Facebook" almost 1000 times? Um, what if a divorce petition used the word more than once? Unless the article was written poorly, this in no way shows that Facebook factored in 1/5 divorces.

 

[brendano257]

Wow...if your that desperate for a little sexy chat on Facebook. You'll get it one way or another. It's your fault, and not to mention the person your talking to. People have an odd way of being stupid and blaming it on the technology that let them do it.

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]Jerther[/nom]I say 1:4[/citation]

Nice catch! It did dawn on me after posting that the second part was 'facebook-free petitions' instead of 'all petitions' and that it needed to be 1:4... I am glad that I'm not the only pedantic one around here!

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Does anyone remember the old days when being unfaithful to the wife was because your stuck your cock in the neighbours daughter?Ahh, the good old days....Of course now we have the internet and Facebook it's all so much more efficient, lots more divorce but not nearly enough fumbling for your underwear as her husband is banging on the bedroom door and you try and climb out the window...[/citation]

LOL!!! Stay classy, Paedobear! Sorry the internet is such a downer. Hey, look at it this way, thanks to the internet you don't have to resort to having an of-age mistress if none of your neighbors have kids; sites like Myspace makes it a snap to 'connect' with people all around the world!

 

[mlopinto2k1]

People want to trust their spouse and Facebook puts a whole new meaning on the word "trust". The fact of the matter is that most of these interactions happen to people that just started getting into "Social Networking". Kinda like the kid who wants to play with fire then gets burned, usually will never do it again. When I was younger and I first found out about Microsoft Netmeeting, it was like I was in a whole new world. It was awesome.. now, I could give a shit less about any of this chat, voice, video crap.

 

[chechak]

i dont have facesh**t account and i dont have time 4 this ..faces***t is for people that dont have a life or thay have a life and wana show it to others that he\she have a life .....

 

[Guest]

Agree with article. I am divorced after discovering a secret myspace account. Very sad. She went crazy. The social networks isnt the main reason for the divorces but it gives the weak spouse a very easy cheat button.

 

[Guest]

the article says 989 instances of "facebook" word in 5000 divorce petitions, is it limited to max of 1 "facebook" word per divorce petition? otherwise, there might be 100 "facebook" word reference in 1 divorce petition.

 

[kal326]

[citation][nom]Renegade_Warrior[/nom]Later when the article showed up in the paper, (think it was the NY Times) we read the article and found that Journalistic Liberties had been taken a little too far. Stuff had been written about us which was never said by anyone and which was entirely untrue, just for the sensationalism of the article itself.[/citation]

Most people wouldn't call that journalistic liberties. Most would call that libel. Rewording something or only using part of a statement to change the intention of the phrase is one thing. Saying something completely unsubstantiated about a person or on the behalf of a person is quite another.

 

[Guest]

It is sad are the so ignorce to note that facebook is an open book that is why it is called facebook everything is in the open they should wake up if they value their relationship and so having expensive fun on facebook because at the end of the day they will not meet those people anyway.