1. Jourgensen 1
Maddy Jourgensen
CO 300 Huwa
Argument Analysis
October 11, 2013
Connections, Friendship, Capitalism: Is Facebook Doing Its Job?
“With friends like these…” was written by Tom Hodgkinson. The article was
published on January 13th, 2008 to an online news source called theguardian.com.
Thegaurdian.com is a web site displaying a wide variety of stories and news reports
related to the United States but also stories that relate to people in the United
Kingdom. The main argument presented in this essay is that Facebook is becoming a
more well known website that is heavily utilized by people throughout the world.
Hodgkinson states that instead of relying on the Internet for social connections
there is a need to re-learn the old way of connecting with others- talking and
forming meaningful relationships face-to-face.
“I despise Facebook”-These are the first few words that Hodgkinson writes in
his article, “ With Friends Like These…” (1). After expressing his opinion of
Facebook, Hodgkinson goes on to support his statement with various claims of fact,
definition and value. He argues that Facebook really disconnects people from those
around them rather than upholding their duty in connecting people. This
disconnection is because, Hodgkinson says, Facebook merely mediates relationships
that have already been formed (3). He believes that instead of actually continuing to
2. Jourgensen 2
have a personal relationship, Facebook causes people to continue these
relationships with impersonal communication such as simple messages or “likes.”
Hodgkinson then discusses the backgrounds of each of the three board
members at Facebook headquarters. He briefly informs the audience that Mark
Zuckerberg was the main man behind Facebook. Hodgkinson quickly moves on to
Peter Thiel. Thiel is, according to Hodgkinson, a capitalist and a neoconactivist,
someone with the political view of emphasizing capitalism and free market.
Hodgkinson discusses that Thiel’s beliefs and actions could be a reflection on
Facebook itself and its goals. Hodgkinson moves on to discuss Jim Breyer, the third
board member. He says that Breyer is a man really making a difference in America
because he invests in “new, young talent” (Hodgkinson 4). Hodgkinson evaluates the
values of the board members to expand on what the true values of Facebook may
actually be.
After going into detail on the backgrounds of the three board members
Hodgkinson emphasizes the lack of privacy on Facebook. Also noted is the fact that
when on Facebook people become, in a sense, advertisements for certain big-name
companies even if they do not know it. This is because Facebook can take a user’s
information and apply it to the types of advertisements that come up on one’s
Internet feed (Hodgkinson 1-8).
Hodgkinson’s opinion of Facebook is clearly stated throughout the reading.
His reason for writing this article however is not to discuss his hatred for the web
page but is more a call for action from his readers, his readers being those that are
users of Facebook. Hodgkinson discusses the fact that Facebook is causing society to
3. Jourgensen 3
stray away from personal relationships. The exigency of this article is specifically
the fact that society need not rely so heavily on Facebook when making connections.
Instead of using Facebook, Hodgkinson says, it would be more beneficial to go back
to the old conventional way of forming relationships through talking and interacting
like human beings should-in person. Hodgkinson puts emphasis on the fact that
relying on Facebook only benefits the board members of the network, these benefits
include: profit and advertising expansion.
When it comes to audience Hodgkinson is directly addressing current
Facebook users. His reason for addressing this specific audience is because of the
fact that they are falling for the social media “scam” of what he believes is making
money off of friendship. If he can make an effective argument that causes a change
of mind in this specific audience then he can work towards solving his presented
exigence of social networks disconnecting, rather than connecting. The definition of
addressed audience however, includes “catering” to ones audience. When reading
Hodkginson’s article it is very apparent that he does not cater to his audience of
Facebook users in any way. Therefore, his addressed audience and his invoked
audience could be the same in this particular article. This is because he is calling for
action from current users to stop using Facebook, but he is not doing it in a way that
is respectful and specific to them.
As with any article, there are many constraints that come with the writing of
this particular one. One of the first constraints is the fact that Hodgkinson uses
language that could possibly be offensive to some of his readers. Examples of this
being: “…59 million suckers…” or “…relationships mediated through the imagination
4. Jourgensen 4
of a bunch of super geeks…” (Hodgkinson 1). The use of language such as “suckers”
and “super geeks” could cause the audience to dismiss the essay all together because
of the offensiveness of Hodgkinson’s wording. This constraint would mainly affect
the people of his audience that are in fact Facebook users. The Facebook users then,
while reading this article may feel as if these insulting words are direct towards
them specifically. This could cause the users of Facebook reading his article to
become angry and push this article aside almost immediately.
A second constraint that comes from Hodgkinson is one that relates to his
understanding of Facebook. He may not understand Facebook the way that the
general Facebook public does. Facebook users understand it to be a way of keeping
in contact with friends and family even when distance separates them. Hodgkinson
perceives Facebook as a utility that acts as simply a mediator in relationships. These
two different understandings make it hard for the author to create a common
ground with his audience.
An additional factor that possibly limits this essay is the fact that it is
published on a news website. This could be a constraint because of the fact that
people today commonly have little trust in the media. Much of society perceives the
media as a news source that many times, exaggerates situations. Also, there is
contemplation that the media may not use the most reliable and accurate facts and
statistics to portray the whole truth of a situation. This could cause the audience to
dismiss all of the facts that Hodgkinson is presenting. Relating to this, Hodgkinson
does not cite any of his statistics and facts with complete citations of where he got
them. The lack of citations could act not only as a constraint, but could also hurt his
5. Jourgensen 5
ethos. This also, could in turn be another reason the audience may not necessarily
take anything from his writing.
A constraint that commonly arises when discussing essays or other pieces of
writing is one related to the accessibility of it. If people do not come across the piece
of writing it is difficult for an author to make an argument that gets any action out of
a group of people. In relation to this, “With friends like these…” may be one that is
overlooked due to the vast number of news stories on thegaurdian.com. When
entering the webpage one is almost overwhelmed with the amount of information
that is right at their fingertips. It would be easy for some one to skip right over
Hodgkinson’s “With friends like these…” and read one of the many other articles on
the webpage instead. This acts as a constraint on the availability but the constraint
also comes from the preference of the reader scanning thegaurdian.com.
There are also constraints related to the audience related to this article. The
constraint coming from the audience in this case would be if they use Facebook
themselves. The humor that Hodgkinson is using can be insulting if taken the wrong
way or if the audience does not realize that the article is meant to be humerous. For
avid Facebook users this could be an essay that they feel insults them specifically. If
an audience feels as if the article is alienating they will likely without delay, dismiss
the article all together.
Many claims were used in this essay but the most predominate-claim of fact.
Hodgkinson incorporates many claims of fact throughout his essay that are very
powerful and passionate claims. His main claim is “Far from connecting us,
Facebook actually isolates us at our workstations” (Hodgkinson 1). Hodgkinson
6. Jourgensen 6
believes that Facebook in reality does just the opposite of its well-known goal of
connecting people to those around them. He supports this using more sub claims of
fact such as “I am merely sending them little ungrammatical notes and amusing
photos in cyberspace…” (Hodgkinson 1). Hodgkinson’s goal of this sentence is to
emphasize the fact that instead of communicating face-to-face Facebook is used only
to communicate through cyberspace in a very impersonal way.
He then goes on to state claim of definition, which acts as a sub claim to his
predominant claim. Hodgkinson uses a claim of definition when analyzing
Facebook’s privacy policy. He does this by taking pieces from the privacy policy and
changing them into his own words. In other words, Hodgkinson is stating what his
perceived definition of the actual policy statement means. An example of this is
when he changes Facebook’s version, “…We collect this information…to provide you
personalized services.” into “we will advertise at you” (Hodgkinson 7). By including
this claim of definition Hodgkinson is addressing the fact that much of Facebook’s
privacy policy has to do with giving information to big name companies in order for
Facebook to make a profit, while the big name companies can directly advertise
more specifically to each user. The fact that the privacy policy is so focused on
indirect profit to Facebook takes a lot of emphasis off the one goal that Facebook
claims to have-connecting people.
Hodgkinson also includes claims of value in his writing as sub claims for
supporting his claims of Facebook as an evil thing. Most of these value claims
directly relate back to the board members of Facebook. An example of a value claim
he uses is, “ Facebook is a deliberate experiment in global manipulation and Thiel is
7. Jourgensen 7
a bright young thing…with a penchant for far-out techno-utopian fantasies”
(Hodgkinson 4). By including this Hodgkinson is addressing that Thiel is an
advocator for futuristic “improvements” that manipulate and control what people
do. This ideology that Hodgkinson is presenting about Thiel could cause readers to
question Thiel’s values and morals and in turn the values and morals of Facebook.
When it comes to proofs, all three of them are used throughout the essay.
Hodgkinson appeals to logos in his use of statistics and facts throughout his article.
Examples of his use of logos would be, “…Facebook claims 59 million active users…”
or “…7 million in the UK…” (Hodgkinson 2). Many other statistics are used
throughout the essay to support his writing as well.
Pathos is also used throughout the essay to spark emotion in readers.
Hodgkinson’s vivid and expressive language provides a good start to his pathos
appeal. An example of Hodgkinson’s use of pathos would be, “Facebook is a
deliberate experiment in global manipulation” (Hodgkinson 4). Hodgkinson’s use of
global manipulation could evoke a scare factor in the audience because of the fact
that manipulation is something that can control some one without that person even
realizing it.
The appeal that over powers the rest in this article however is ethos.
Hodgkinson incorporates many quotations from various people of authority, which
builds his ethos in subtle ways. Although he uses these quotations effectively there
are many pieces of this essay in which his ethos is broken down. The reason for the
damage to his ethos is mainly due to his language that he uses throughout the
article. These parts of the essay are present right from the beginning with his
8. Jourgensen 8
mention of “super geeks” when referring to the creators and maintainers of
Facebook itself (Hodgkinson 1). Another example of this being, “…trained in
marketing bullshit of the highest order” (Hodgkinson 5). This language may be
offensive to some due to the fact that it is in a sense mocking the board members
inappropriately. The use of offensive language could easily cause some readers to
completely dismiss this entire essay solely because of the way that Hodgkinson
describes people and issues that he has with Facebook. His ethos is also harmed
because he is so heavily opinionated that the audience is only getting one side of the
argument. Hodgkinson does not leave room for the audience to form their own
opinion of the social networking site. Examples of this being, “Facebook is
profoundly uncreative.” or “It makes nothing at all” (Hodgkinson 3).
When evaluating the effectiveness of this article, there is a lot to take into
consideration. Hodgkinson presents claims and supports them with sub claims and
other important evidence very well. He also does a great job of incorporating all
three proofs throughout his writing to engage his audience. Determining the
effectiveness of this article however, relies most heavily on the perception of ethos
coming from this author. The vulgar and insulting language towards the Facebook
board members and Facebook users in general hurt the effectiveness of this article
extremely. The article would have been much more effective if Hodgkinson put
more effort into developing and sustaining his ethos throughout his writing.
