There are plenty of articles about Facebook that fall into this category of legitimate news, including ones about the possibilities of mergers with various companies, their attempts to make their ads more lucrative, or the recent brouhaha over changes to their terms of service. I find most of these kind of boring (they're usually on the business page—not my favorite), but hey, they're news.
What bothers me are the articles that discuss defriending people like it's one of the most significant social phenomena around or the ones about the "25 random facts" notes. They always give off the impression that they're written by young journalists who spend half their workday on Facebook and then see their deadline looming, so they write a lame article about what they've noticed in the Facebook world of late. (I'm sure that isn't what's actually happening—with a few exceptions—but it's a little troubling that they give off that aura.) The articles are almost always poorly written, and their sources are never very well selected. It seems like they just ask their own Facebook friends for their defriending rationales or simply troll their friends' notes for examples of the kinds of facts found in the "25 random things" notes. They don't seem to understand or acknowledge that people use Facebook for very different reasons.
I guess I just don't understand what the desired effect is. (I think most of the problem is that they don't either.) Is it to explain to grandparents everywhere exactly what this newfangled Facebook nonsense is and what their grandchildren are doing on it? Is it to inform Facebook users of new happenings on Facebook that they've somehow missed? Is it just to fill their quota of random social articles? By any of these metrics, they fail horribly. They simultaneously manage to make Facebook sound like the most lame, loser-filled it of ridiculousness ever created and like it's a hot new area of social study vital to an understanding of modern youth. Maybe that’s their problem: both of those are kind of true. They want to write about the significant aspects of Facebook use but realize that it sounds kind of dumb when you’re not immersed in it, so they sound perennially sheepish. They try to self-deprecatingly separate themselves from it, but not too far. They take it both too seriously and not seriously enough…in the same article.
If I were a middle-aged or older reader of these articles, I would think my children/grandchildren had fallen into the abyss of a computerized cult. Why would you join this weird thing where people spy on you before hiring you, where stalkers abound, where people you haven't spoken to since kindergarten know what you ate for breakfast, where you have flair boards and friend charts and "What kind of alcoholic beverage would you be?" quizzes?
As a Facebook user / member of this generation, I cringe when I read the attempted explanations for the older crowd. They sound simultaneously patronizing and clueless. Terms like "tag," "post," and "friend" perpetually show up in quotation marks, making them sound much more arcane than they actually are. ("Defriend" and "poke," I can see the merits of using quotation marks for; these are not quite as normal actions on the internet world outside Facebook, but come on, everyone on the internet knows what it means to post something.) I guess I resent the journalistic distance here, where they sound like they're offering to translate for you the dangerous, mysterious world of teen-and-twenty-somethings' life on the internet. I always envision a sort of indulgent smile: "Oh, those silly kids and their internet toys."
A few recent examples:
This commits the sin of over-using quotation marks, of admitting only "six or seven" profiles' worth of research, of sounding holier-than-thou while still obviously being obsessed with Facebook, and of further making Facebook look stupid by implying that all the millions of Facebook members spend their time "sending each other pretend cocktails."
Doesn't seem to understand how Facebook works, despite being on it (people "sent" him their 25 things lists, which he "deleted"—um, no—and doesn't seem to know how to edit his email notification preferences). Implies that one of Facebook's greatest uses is "a Ponzi scheme involving fake vampire bites."
I thought this was actually a decent article.