General News

With all of the recent studies regarding the growing popularity and effectiveness of online dating (more than one in five married couples have met online), online dating sites are spending more money than ever to attract new users.

Among the top spenders are two of the most well-known sites: Match.com and eHarmony. In just the first five months of 2014, online dating sites have already matched the total category spending on national TV ads in 2013, according to data from research firm iSpot.

TV ads aren’t cheap, even though ratings have drastically dwindled the past few years thanks to on-demand services like Netflix and streaming video on YouTube. Still, Match.com spent over $71 million so far this year on TV ads, mostly to air during shows like Real Housewives on Bravo, and to capture more of the male population, ESPN and Comedy Central. eHarmony’s spending hasn’t been too shabby either. Through the end of May, they have spent over $59 million for ads aired on TNT, CNN, and TBS on shows like Anderson Cooper 360 and NBA Basketball games.

According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, of the online dating market’s 14 brands, the top five dating sites account for nearly 95% of the $214 million spent on ads so far in 2014. In comparison, dating sites spent $241 million on national TV ad placements for all of last year. TV ad spending for the industry last year was also heavier in the August-December period than in the first part of the year.

Unless you scroll through all the commercials on your DVR, you’ve probably seen at least one of Match.com’s 14 TV ads this year. They have created many different campaigns to attract users, and earlier this year, hired Perez Hilton and Patti Stanger to host a conference discussing the results of their “Singles in America” study about what singles are looking for today. The company spent $19 million on one 15-second spot called “Why not?” which featured female members, but their most popular has been its “Nikki and Joey; Kindergarten” spot, which starred a shy kindergarten teacher looking to get back into the dating world. That spot has aired more than 2,000 times since its Feb. 5th debut, and generated more than 40,000 online views and nearly 500 tweets, likes and shares.

eHarmony on the other hand, spent $18 million on one ad to share with audiences how many marriages have occurred through members who met over eHarmony (higher than any other dating site). But their most popular ad digitally was a spot that included the founder’s granddaughter, sharing how she advised her teacher to find “hot babes” on eHarmony instead of other dating sites. It had 6,000 online views and more than 1,200 social actions.

By the looks of things, Mark Zuckerberg is pretty much determined to take over the entire Internet.

Facebook has dabbled in just about everything, from email to a digital newspaper. There's been talk before of Facebook entering the online dating market, but a new update makes that possibility look closer than ever.

In some ways, Facebook has always inadvertently been a dating site. From the very beginning, it’s been a place to stalk exes, reconnect with old flames, bond with semi-strangers, and confess to crushes. Some thought that the introduction of Facebook's Graph Search heralded a new era of the social network as a barely disguised dating site, but the idea never really came to fruition. Now Facebook is taking things a step further, with a new button that allows users to ask people without a declared relationship status if they're single.

The “Ask” button appears next to the Relationship Status section of the Facebook profile. Clicking it brings up a dialogue box with text that reads “Let [your friend] know why you're asking for [his/her] relationship status.” If you receive such a request and choose to reply, you can opt to share your answer with all your friends or just the asker. Ask buttons had already been introduced for other aspects of the Facebook profile, like hometown and phone number.

"This feature provides an easy way for friends to ask you for information that's not already on your profile," Facebook spokeswoman MoMo Zhou told CNN. "For example, a friend could ask where you work or for your hometown. If you choose to answer, this information is then added to your profile. By default, only you and your friend can see it, and you also have the option of sharing it with others, too."

That explanation pointedly steers clear of mentioning dating, but there's no doubt Facebook has the potential to be a disruptive force in the online dating industry. Facebook made nearly $8 billion in 2013 revenue, a massive jump on the comparatively small $2 billion in revenue made by the online dating market. On top of that, Facebook already has a large global customer base and next to no need to spend money on customer acquisition. And then there's the fact that Facebook is free, which gives it an enormous advantage over the many online dating sites that charge for membership.

Facebook doesn't appear to be in a hurry to explicitly make the transition to online dating service, but that is likely working in its favor. Under-the-radar Facebook could subtly siphon business away from traditional dating sites, providing the exact same services without the stigma associated with online dating.

To find out more about the best way to use this social network as a dating tool you can read our Facebook review.

A recent article in Time Magazine focuses on the so-called “hook-up culture,” which has become a subject of much concern and debate. Particularly from older Americans who graduated from college a while ago. Now, the students and twenty-something are speaking out.

The writer of the Time article complained about the media coverage of a college professor in Boston named Kerry Cronin, who requires her students to go on a “real date” as part of their class credit. “No thanks,” the writer says in her article, “I’m here to inform that professor that we 20-somethings don’t need help, thank you very much.”

She goes on to reference statistics to disprove that hook-up culture is an epidemic, citing less than 15% of college students have more than two hook-ups per year. Also, “hooking up” means anything from sharing a kiss to having sex, so the lines are a little blurry as to how much people are engaging in risky behavior.

She also argues that it’s much more natural to socialize with people and get to know them in groups and at parties where it feels more organic, rather than over coffee and forced conversation. While she makes good points, she also admits that it is easier for her generation to hide behind a screen, especially when it comes to being rejected. Text is the preferred method of interacting, rather than asking someone out face-to-face as Professor Cronin argues they should.

Her points are valid, but there is definitely room for improvement. While college students (at least in the past couple of generations) have engaged in a higher level of casual sex and hook-ups than at other times in their lives, there does seem to be a shift in college students’ thinking today. Because they are attached to their smartphones, pulling them out at parties or in dorm rooms instead of engaging with the people sitting next to them, they aren’t really learning how to be alone together, to engage in conversation without distraction. This doesn’t help them learn to communicate better in relationships.

Also, there is the drinking that goes on at college. Much of the hooking up takes place after indulging at parties, which means people aren’t making the best decisions when it comes to their bodies.

But does all this mean they aren’t prepared for dating?

I think that college provides a good backdrop for learning how to interact and flirt. There are plenty of single, available people who you have something in common with – which likely you wouldn’t encounter again. So why not experiment with dating in a group setting, among your friends?

All of the formal asking out will happen once they graduate. And even then, hook-up culture exists in even more removed ways – through dating apps like Tinder. Dating is still part of growing up, no matter how you try to avoid the particulars.

San Diego-based dating service It’s Just Lunch has been ordered by a U.S. judge in New York to face a class-action lawsuit filed by some of its former clients.

The plaintiffs in the case are arguing that the company fraudulently misled them about their services, charging $1,000 per year for services that they did not deliver. This includes falsely promising clients (many affluent and highly educated women) that its staff would “hand select” appropriate matches for dates.

Judge Sidney Stein of the U.S. Court in New York wrote this of the lawsuit: "In short, virtually all evidence in the record indicates that during the period at issue, IJL staff relied on a uniform script to inform prospective customers during initial interviews that IJL already had at least two matches in mind for those customers' first dates regardless of whether or not that was true.”

While their argument got approved to go to trial in New York, the judge did refuse to certify a nationwide class-action lawsuit, citing that there were too many differences in the laws of individual states in regard to this particular case.

While the plaintiffs consider this a victory, It’s Just Lunch has yet to respond to the charges.

According to Courthouse News Service, It's Just Lunch sales staffers have an "info-call script" during their training at "First Date University" to guide them through calls with potential customers, the complaint alleges. They were not allowed to deviate from the script, according to President Melissa Brown’s admission to the court. At the heart of the issue for the judge is the part of the script says, “Ok, so far I have 3-4 ideas for your first date,” meaning matches that would be suitable for the client, even if the call center employee didn’t have any matches at the time.

IJL offers an initial client interview, the selection of a potential partner based on a client's desires, goals and motivations; and the arranging of lunch at a restaurant, or alternatively an after-work drink or a weekend brunch.

It’s Just Lunch proclaims itself to be “the world’s #1 personalized matchmaking service” on its website.

“You’ll find It’s Just Lunch is very different from online dating,” the website states. “Our professional matchmakers are genuinely interested in understanding you and finding out what kind of person you are looking for. Our process works and we have proved it over and over again. With over 20 years, 2 million dates and thousands of dating success stories to show for it, we can honestly say we have the experience required to improve your chances for dating success.”

If more ex clients join this class-action lawsuit, IJL might have to reconsider their marketing along with their business decisions.

Most women will agree that they prefer equal partnership when it comes to romantic relationships. This mean they each have equal say and an equal role to play in things like finances, child care, household chores, and major decisions like where to live or whether to start a business.

It makes sense in our culture, as the majority of women are pursuing both careers and families. They want a partner who respects and supports their ambitions.

But what if the reality is different from our post-feminist ideal of equality in relationships?

New research by New York University doctoral candidate in sociology Ellen Lamont is challenging the way many women still seem to accept certain elements of “the man’s role” both in terms of dating and marriage.

Maybe some of this rings true for you: Lamont found that when dating, women seem to prefer the man to ask them out and to pay for the date, a more traditional role. Also, women like to leave it to the man to make decisions about the trajectory of their relationship. That is, they wait for him to say “I love you” or to commit to being serious first. Essentially, this puts the man in control of the relationship.

It seems dating and courtship play a big role in how women view long-term relationships. If during the dating process, women put the man in the driver’s seat (so to speak) and let him decide where things are headed, then how is it possible to easily transition to an equal partnership once they are in a long-term, committed relationship?

“[Women] want traditional courtship and egalitarian marriages and I just don’t think that will be possible,” she said. “Their justifications for traditional courtship are based on beliefs in essential biological differences between men and women and they reinforce these beliefs in their dating practices.”

Lamont chose to study women who had some form of college education to better understand women who are balancing both career aspirations and wanting a love relationship. Even with education and ambition, many of the women still subscribe to “traditional gender norms,” according to Lamont.

“Women were supposedly so desperate to get married, while men were supposedly so reluctant,” Lamont said. “I wondered if women’s so-called desperate behaviors that are so frequently highlighted in the media were actually the result of the powerlessness they feel about the process of getting engaged.”

It’s an interesting point, and maybe one worth considering as we move forward into a bigger and more technologically advanced dating pool.

The women surveyed ranged from 25 to 40 years of age.

If you tried to access PlentyOfFish on May 20^th, you may have run into a major roadblock. The site’s 503 page simply said “The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. Check back shortly!" Behind the scenes of the service outage, something a little more sinister was going on.

Around 7am that morning, POF received a warning of an impending DDoS attack. It isn't unusual for large websites to receive similar threats that turn out to be fake, but in this case the threat was real.

The DDoS (distributed denial of service) attack hit just before 8:15am. Such attacks are launched from thousands of computers around the world that have been infected with malware. Without the owner's knowledge, each computer repeatedly sends false requests to a site until it’s overwhelmed. The initial attacks took down the Plenty of Fish website, followed later by the company’s mobile apps on iPhone, iPad and Android.

POF was quick to note that although the attack was large, it did not compromise anyone's data in any way. “That said,” the POF blog noted, “these requests can overload our servers and can even cause ISP problems, so we quickly worked with our ISP to identify the offending traffic and tried various means to block it.”

Later in the day, another message was sent to POF, this time asking for money in exchange for ending the DDoS attack. POF refused to negotiate, and by 1pm they had successfully blocked the attack and returned all services to normal.

“We’re still on high alert and working hard to respond to attacks like this more quickly in the future,” concluded the blog post about the attack, “but in the meantime I’m happy to report that all of you are back to doing what you do best; sending messages, going on dates, and forging meaningful relationships. Thanks for your patience today.”

DDoS attacks are becoming increasingly popular and increasingly powerful, thanks to new methods being used by attackers. The attack on Plenty of Fish was 40 Gigabits in size, making it much larger than the attack that took Meetup.com off-line for nearly 5 days last month (which was “only” 8 GBps). The list of companies that have been attacked in this manner is increasing all the time, including Basecamp, Vimeo, Bit.ly, and Moz.

The good news is, that although DDoS attacks are irritating for users and even more frustrating for the companies who fall victim, they do not put users’ data in danger.