>Speaking of, I wanted to ask, if everything is, as Robert said, about
>enjoyment under the gaze of capital then I'm curious about other
>pop culture phenom you characterize as such.
If I get your meaning, I would say that I no longer believe, as I once probably did, that certain pop culture is, by sheer will of its own, autonomous from capital. I think it's difficult to say that anything is autonomous. Instead, it's more interesting to talk about, among other things, the way that capital misses it mark or that it breaks down and how those misses and breakdowns lead to its functioning or nonfunctioning. For me, the relevant part of the article you posted was not about Facebook selling info but that it was having trouble capitalizing on all that info.
I could have misinterpreted Robert's use of the term "gaze," though. I don't usually take it more expansively than "surveillance." If he meant it in that that's the way he meant it, though, I tend to agree. Puttering around on Facebook is a more surveilled activity than buying the new Britney Spears record (which is very good, by they way).