17-year-old CNET summer intern Sabena Suri publishes a startling finding today: there are creepy people trying to befriend random teenage girls on Facebook. Her example, a 40-something guy from another state, added her as a friend on Facebook, despite the fact that they’d never met. Sabena was rightfully freaked out.

Sabena could have looked at this objectively. For example, she might have commented on the fact that we learned earlier this week—sadly, 41% of teens might have accepted this stranger as a friend without even selecting their “limited profile.”

Instead, she looked at this man, deduced that he and all others in his age group must have no real purpose on a social networking site, and dismissed him and all other “old” people. She titled her post, “Ick, old married guys on Facebook,” not “Ick, old married guys on Facebook are trying to see young girls’ profiles.”

It’s bad enough that expecting parents are naming their kids based on Google search results, now we learn they’re giving them Facebook profiles too!

Australian couple Claire Gillis and Luke Waring have set up a Facebook profile for the child–due in 3 months–and are providing updates on the baby’s progress, says Reuters.

“We have friends and family all over the world, so we’re using it for them, to post updates on ultrasounds, scans and what it has been doing all week, so that’s how it started,” Gillis told Australia’s Daily Telegraph newspaper.

The grainy black-and-white ultrasound image of “Bubba Waring” has 29 friends listed, with dozens more waiting to be accepted by “the world’s most famous fetus,” Gillis said.

Due to what appears to be a technical glitch, Facebook published its source code for the world to see and Facebook Secrets was quick to publish it.

Don’t worry if you’ve never heard of Facebook Secrets, the site was created on a free Blogspot blog and has just one post–the one showing Facebook’s source code.

This is extremely embarrassing for Facebook for a number of reasons:

1. Questions are now being raised as to what else might accidentally get published–maybe you’ll see your private data some day.
2. Competitors now have a chance to see what’s under Facebook’s hood and maybe learn something.
3. Hackers might be able to find a weakness in the code and exploit it.
4. Some developers are suggesting the structure of Facebook isn’t particularly sophisticated.

Late last week, Virgin Media, Prudential, Vodafone, Halifax, First Direct Bank and the Automobile Association Ltd. pulled advertising from Facebook for fear of their ads being seen on the same page as the British National Party Facebook group.

With an astronomical number of page views and time spent on site, advertising on Facebook creates the opportunity for a massive number of click throughs. At the very least, it’s a great branding opportunity—if your ad is shown on the right pages.

Controlling your online image is an important part of branding, as is carefully selecting the sites where you advertise. You wouldn’t want your brand associated with a porn site (okay, depending on the brand, I guess). So, when debating whether or not to advertise on Facebook, let me give you one piece of information that may make all the difference to you:

It seems republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul can’t keep out of the news. Unfortunately, he’s not exactly getting coverage for his dominance in the polls, but for his dominance in social media.

Our own presidential candidates search reputation study shows Paul as having one of the best Google reputations, but CNET’s fascinated by his overall social networking presence.

Paul, 71, enjoys about 160,000 mentions on Digg.com, more than the next four most popular candidates combined. Alexa.com’s statistics show Paul’s Web site with a narrow lead over all the Democratic candidates and a sizable one over his fellow Republicans. Similarly, a report by Hitwise puts Paul’s Web site ahead of other GOP candidates in terms of popularity.