Digital Communities Assignment Blog

Brenna Dempsey

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Firewalls and alternative facts

With everything that has been happening recently with Trump, it makes me wonder if the world is heading in the direction of censorship and severe government control as we see in this case study of China. Why else would sales of George Orwell’s 1984 spike as the world discusses Trump’s ‘alternative facts’?

So is China onto something? Or is this level of government control and filtering like something out of 1984?

By controlling the social media market in China and limiting users, all “300 million” of them (Chiu et al 2012), to just one main site (Weibo) China has enabled the market to make an incredibly large amount of money. Recently, Sina invested $160 million into Weibo (MarketLine 2012) and Alibaba acquired an 18% stake in the company (MarketLine 2013). 

However China has noticed a need for more sites than just Weibo and introduced QZone and WeChat among others.

(Picture source)

It is clear that China’s firewall is successfully banning many websites and controlling what its citizens are able to see and experience on the web. But is the firewall also harming China’s business dealings and interactions with other countries? Yup, it is.. 

In his article, Marc Davis (2015), details the many court cases and controversies surrounding China’s unwillingness to adhere to the rules of other countries that it does business with. However there does not seem to be any clear or immediate solution to this stalemate. 

So maybe China is onto something here? It’s easy to control both financially and in terms of keeping an eye on your citizens. I mean, censorship is okay right? So long as it doesn’t interfere with our freedoms? Just like this gif, censorship is good.*

But, the most important question is.. how do the Chinese deal with FOMO about not having access to Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube?

*please note the use of sarcasm in this paragraph

References

Chiu, C, Ip, C & Silverman, A 2012, ‘Understanding social media in China’, McKinsey Quarterly, vol. 2, pp. 78-81

Davis, M 2015 ‘The Great Firewall of China’, ABA Journal, vol. 101, no. 11, pp. 17-18

MarketLine 2012, Sina to invest $160 million in Weibo, MarketLine Advantage

MarketLine 2013, Alibaba acquires 18% stake in Weibo, MarketLine Advantage

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Social gaming, is it actually social?

I personally have no experience with gaming of any sort as I have absolutely no skill or ability when it comes to games (both physical and online). 

However, I know many people who have become somewhat addicted to the world of online gaming and the friendships they have established there. The skeptic in me tries to argue that this is an easy way for the nerds of the world to claim interaction without really interacting. But does online gaming really count as social interaction?

Well, yeah, it does. 

“According to a survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Project (Lenhart et al., 2008), 97% of US teens (aged 12–17) play video games on a computer, with a handheld device, or dedicated games console.” (Kowert et al 2014, p.385)

That’s quite a few people, and that’s only one country. Online gaming is a world-wide phenomena. That’s a lot of people who are supposedly ‘not interacting’ with each other.

However, as Kowert et al. continue to discuss, there may be many issues associated with a growing reliance and dependence on online gaming for social interaction. What happens if young teens begin to swap their real life friends and social connections for those online.. will this have a detrimental impact on their wellbeing and mental health?

“The results indicated that adolescents who play video games report spending less time on school related activities, with parents, and with friends in other activities, than adolescents who do not play games.” (Kowert et al 2014, p.386)

Surely this can’t be a good thing? 

Or can it? According to Kim et al. “the benefits and value of playing MMORPGs are varied and interesting, including social interactions [and] group interactions” (Kim et al 2013, p.11). 

According to Zhang et al “in terms of social network structures, dynamical social gaming networks are closer to real scenarios and beneficial to cooperative behaviors” (2015, p.4)

Maybe we just need to update our understanding of social interaction to include online forms as well as physical forms?

References

Kim, K, Yoo, B & Kauffman, R.J 2013, ‘Valuation of Participation in Social Gaming’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 11-49

Kowert, R, Domahidj, E, Festl, R & Quandt, T 2014, ‘Social gaming, lonely life? The impact of digital game play on adolescents’ social circles’, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 36, pp. 385-390

Zhang, Y, Chen, G, Guan, J, Zhang, Z & Zhou, S 2015, ‘Unfavorable Individuals in Social Gaming Networks’, Scientific Reports, vol. 5, pp. 1-11

[askabusyperson-blog]

Want to know an equivalent social media site in China?

Thanks to: https://informationstrategyrsm.wordpress.com/2013/10/02/the-great-firewall-of-china/ 

[helen-mda20009-blog]

A fantastic infographic about SNS in China

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Social imaging.. does anyone even care what we post?

The posting of photos on social media can generate a significant level of conflict. Do we post photos even if we know that people will feel excluded? Do we tag people in photos even if they are embarrassing? 

Does it even really matter?

According to Eisenberger et al (2003), physical pain and emotional pain come from the same part of the brain. So, distress caused by social exclusion triggers a response from the brain to limit or remove the possibility of further emotional pain. This response is the same for emotional pain and physical pain and as such, suggests that emotional pain is just as important as physical pain and should be dealt with in the same way. 

In a recent study of Facebook profile pictures Rose et al (2012) found that men and women use different techniques when presenting themselves online, these different techniques (or traits) were found to support typical gender stereotypes. These stereotypes included the idea that men are strong, dominant and active whilst women are attractive, dependent and sentimental. So in this way, many users of social media are sticking to their gender stereotypes.. perhaps they aren’t even aware that they are doing so? Or maybe it is just that we care what others think of us and our online presence provides an easy place for others to judge us?

Despite how hard I try to have my own unique and individual presence on social media, I do find myself wanting to fit in and stick to the norm. I find myself posting things in ways that I feel weird about, simply because I know if I write the caption in this way, or pose in that way that it will get more likes. This cannot be a good thing.. right?

Ridolfi et al (2011) conducted research to evaluate whether our body image satisfaction levels change as a result of comparison to social media images and images from peers. Their research suggested that when negative comparisons occur it can be detrimental to how we feel about our own bodies. 

Evidently our newly established selfie culture and increased posting of images on social media is having a negative impact.

References

Eisenberger, N.I, Lieberman, M.D & Williams, K.D 2003, ‘Does Rejection Hurt? An fMRI Study of Social Exclusion’, Science, vol. 302, pp. 290-292

Ridolfi, D.R, Myers, T.A, Crowther, J.H, Ciesla, J.A 2011, ‘Do Appearance Focused Cognitive Distortions Moderate the Relationship between Social Comparisons to Peers and Media Images and Body Image Disturbance?’, Sex Roles, vol. 65, pp. 491-505

Rose, J, Mackey-Kallis, S, Shyles, L, Barry, K, Biagini, D, Hart C & Jack, L 2012, ‘Face it: The Impact of Gender on Social MediaImages’, Communication Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 588-607

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Playing catchup

This is me right now.. I’ve had my wisdom teeth out this week (yup, all 4) and my days have consisted of sleeping and marathoning various shows on Netflix. Luckily I had a reminder set on my phone to make sure I did not forget to write the following blog post for #mda20009

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Crowdsourcing

The concept and use of crowdsourcing is changing from being solely to produce a specific item or get a business off the ground. More recently crowdsourcing has been used to investigate and gain insight into big world events and disasters through the use of civilian photographs and reports. Along with this, many big news events have been broken on Twitter and other social media platforms by users and individuals who happen to see the events take place, news companies are then able to retweet or send their own reporters as a result of these tip offs. News companies are also increasingly using crowdsourcing to “build audience entry points at every stage of the journalistic process” as this helps to increase “audience growth and engagement” (Onuoha et al, 2015). In this way, crowdsourcing not only benefits those who generate the crowdsourcing opportunity, but also those who participate in it.

Crowdsourcing is also beneficial in quickly raising money to generate support during natural disasters or other major world events. In the 48 hours following the Haiti earthquake in 2010, the American Red Cross “received US$8 million in donations directly from texts, which exemplifies one benefit of the powerful propagation capability of social media sites” (Gao, Barbier & Goolsby, 2011).

Crowdsourcing and the use of social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook can also be useful during disaster events to help provide the most up-to-date information and support when websites and phone lines are overused. During the 2011 Queensland and Victorian floods “social media [became] an effective method of disseminating information...  at an unprecedented rate to large numbers of people.” (Bird et al, 2012) with information being published and shared around the country by the police and emergency services as well as individuals. During the 2007 Southern California Wildfires, social media and mobile phones were increasingly used to provide information to individuals as Sutton et al. 2008 discovered in their questionnaire following the natural disaster with 76% of those surveyed accessing information through websites and 38% accessing alternative new sources and individual blogs.

Facebook have even developed the ‘Safety Check’ which allows users nearby to disasters or dangerous events to check in and let loved ones know they are safe. This article details how it works.

This shows how beneficial crowdsourcing is during disaster situations, not only for investigating the details, but also for providing fast and accurate information and raising money to generate increased levels of support. 

References

Bird, D, Ling, M & Haynes, K 2012, ‘Flooding Facebook – the use of social media during the Queensland and Victorian floods’, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 27-33

Gao, H, Barbier, G & Goolsby, R 2011, ‘Harnessing the Crowdsourcing Power of Social Media for Disaster Relief’, IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 10-14

Onuoha, M, Pinder, J & Schaffer, 2015, ‘Guide to Crowdsourcing’, Tow Centre for Digital Journalism, no. November 20th 2015

Sutton, J, Palen, L & Shklovski, I 2008, ‘Backchannels on the Front Lines: Emergent Uses of Social Media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires’, in Proceedings of the 5th International ISCRAM Conference – Washington, DC, USA, pp. 624-632, 2008

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Trolls and conflict

When someone mentions an internet “troll” you might immediately think of something fun and childlike such as this gif below.. however the world of internet trolls is much more sinister and dark. It is a world where individuals can anonymously and almost untraceably comment on or message other social media users with hate, racism and various forms of bullying. Social media provides an easy place for these trolls to belittle something or someone and get away with it.

“The new word for harassment, via communications systems, is called ’trolling’ by the media, who more as storytellers than fact reporters seek to use transgressive narratives to emulate moral panics by convincing their readers that they are living in a science fiction-like dystopia where technology is a danger to those in society.” (Bishop, 2013, p. 301-302)

Dahlberg (2001) sees trolling as aiming to ‘embarrass, anger, and disrupt’ and states that ‘it is often undertaken merely for amusement, but is sometimes driven by more ‘serious’ motives including political goals’

So, Bishop is arguing that there is an element of moral panic in relation to internet trolling especially when news sources detail how young and innocent children have committed suicide as a result of cyber bullying. So how do we know we are getting the full story and what can be done to better understand, support and enforce rules around social media use? Should social media and the internet be able to self regulate or should laws be enforced and how can laws be made to cover many countries?

According to Bishop, many trolls have been able to get away with their behaviour due to a technicality, whereby “messages designed to harm others for the sender’s gratification and others’ discomfort” can be prosecuted in some instances, whereas messages “designed to entertain others for their gratification” become known as “‘electronic message freedoms’, and there is nothing stopping people from expressing free speech in this way.” (Bishop, 2013, p. 302)

Is trolling really as bad as we think it is? Or can it been seen as lighthearted fun that has just been taken too seriously?

Evidently, with the fast-paced changes happening online and within the world of social media, there is an increased need for research and evaluation to establish just how bad these problems are and what, if any, action should be taken in the future. 

References

Bishop, J 2014, ‘Representations of 'trolls' in mass media communication: a review of media-texts and moral panics relating to 'internet trolling'’, International Journal of Web Based Communities, vol 10. no. 1, pp. 7-24

Bishop J, 2013, ‘The art of trolling law enforcement: a review and model for implementing ‘flame trolling’ legislation enacted in Great Britain (1981– 2012)’, International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 301-318

Dahlberg L, 2001, ‘Computer-mediated communication and the public sphere: a critical analysis’, Journal of Computer Mediated-Communication, vol. 7, no. 1

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Activism, a thing of the past? Has it simply become Clicktivism/Slacktivism?

It has become so easy on Facebook to click ‘like’ or “share to show your support for [insert cause here]” but is it really so much easier and more successful to spark change and spread ideas than it was 20 years ago?

Maybe this is merely a cynical view, after all, you just need to spend time on GetUp! or Change.org to see how quickly and easily petitions can be shared and money can be raised for a needy cause. So surely this is a good thing, right? #clicktivism

Well, no not exactly... these petitions aren’t always useful with many cases in the US where petitions aren’t accepted because it is too difficult to ensure robots haven’t been used to boost numbers or that voters haven’t simply made multiple profiles in order to support a cause. According to Coccimiglio in the US the best way to ensure your petition signature is actually counted is to use the offical White House petition website We the People. 

Then there’s this concept of digital citizenship where those with access to the internet and social media can benefit from the knowledge and connection that comes from instant world-wide interaction. However, according to Gurak and Logie such rapid/viral dispersion of information can lead to issues of credibility, the need for fact checking and scams.

However, when it comes to complaining about a company/product or raising awareness it is very easy to reach a large audience in a short period of time through social media and this can often generate a better response from the company in question than would have occurred had the complaint been emailed privately. For example; check out Teg’s video.

In this way, social media can be very useful for increasing knowledge and raising awareness but it’s usefulness with regards to activism is still up for debate with many arguing that clicktivism is a “legitimate political act” (Halpuka 2014, p. 1) whilst Cornelissen et al argue that clicktivism has more to do with an individuals own moral image than their desire to actually support a cause. 

References

Coccimiglio, J 2015, Do Online Petitions Ever Accomplish Anything?, Make Use Of, viewed 30 December 2016, <http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/online-petitions-ever-accomplish-anything/>

Cornelissen, G, Karelaia, N & Soyer, E 2013, ‘Clicktivism or Slacktivism? Impression Management and Moral Licensing’, European Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 10, pp. 244-244

Gurak, L J & Logie, J 2003, ‘Internet Protests, from Text to Web’, in McCaughey, M & Ayers, M D (eds), Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice, Routledge, New York, pp. 25-46

Halpuka, M 2014, ‘Clicktivism: A Systematic Heuristic’, Policy & Internet, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 115-132

[digitalcommunitieswithbekbell]

Although new forms of drama find a home through social media, teens’ behaviours have not significantly changed. Social media has not radically altered the dynamics of bullying, but it has made these dynamics more visible to more people. We must use this visibility, not to justify increased punishment, but to help youth who are actually crying out for attention. Blaming technology or assuming that conflict will disappear if technology usage is minimized is naive. Recognizing where teens are at and why they engage in particular acts of meanness and cruelty is important to creating interventions that work.

It’s Complicated (Boyd 2014, p. 152). (via digitalcommunitieswithbekbell)

I could not agree more. Just because the nature and form of bullying has changed doesn’t mean it’s any more severe or challenging to conquer than it was on the playground in my school days. It’s just not as easy to hide and ignore. This can only be a good thing though, because it is important to acknowledge that such evils exist in the world and once this has occurred it can be possible to deal with the problem, rather than victim blaming or blaming technology.

[helen-mda20009-blog]

(via Social Media Comparison Infographic)

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

This is so cool and interesting!

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Thoughts and responses

For some reason Tumblr won’t let me respond to anyone’s comments on my blog posts... how weird! So I’m making this short post in order to respond to you all and hopefully create a new discussion space where I can actually respond.. maybe? hopefully?

So @newmaj05 everywhere I looked to try and find out what would make online voting secure and reliable all I found was articles about how it can never be used because it won’t ever be secure and reliable. I would have thought it wasn’t too hard to achieve but apparently it is. Yes, the Census was such a major debacle.. I don’t recommend that Australia even attempt to do online voting until another country has attempted it so we can copy them. Haha

@secretprincesshideout I personally like the idea of physical elections - not just because of the sausages - but because I enjoy the whole atmosphere of it. I think this goes back to our earlier discussions in this unit about losing connection with the real world through being always online. Do we really want yet another thing to not have any real world connection? What do you think? I do think it would be super cool if they could do it though - how awesome is technology?!

@superbkoalaheart I think it’s very important for all politicians to keep up with this and get more involved with voters.

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

So, politics and social media.. a good combo or not?

Many politicians have jumped on the social media bandwagon getting heavily involved with followers and promoting themselves during elections. But one politician decided to shake things up a bit by continuing to use his Facebook account throughout his time in politics, not just during the election as a promotional tool. By using his Facebook account regularly Tony Abbott was able to communicate his "personal and political everyday life [to] followers" (Hurcombe 2016, p. 19). Along with this, Hoffman et al. (2016, p. 239) show that the use of social media to interact with voters is important for "political participation" as it helps voters to feel connected to candidates, heard, represented and understood. This is important both during an election and more generally as those who are elected are meant to be representatives of the people - that is the whole point of having a democratic political system after all.

In the future, politics could be so inherently online, that we may even vote in elections online! The Australian Government has discussed trialling this for referendums/plebiscites in the future to see if it can be effectively moderated and controlled. However, in LA, online voting has just recently been put in place for the upcoming local council elections. But it could already be a thing of the past with the council voting to ban online voting “until a report is prepared on the security and effectiveness of the system” (Sklar, 2016). Along with this, Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer has said that “e-voting worked well in [the] plebiscite, but risks must be addressed” (Campbell, 2016). In Canada’s recent plebiscite on electoral reform, 81% of those who voted did so online, but for a simple plebiscite question with little risk involved it was easy to trial an online system of voting, however Gary McLeod believes there are still too many risks involved with conducting a full political election online (Campbell, 2016).

Without physical ballot papers and election booths, how will we get our famous election day sausage in bread?? Will we be forced to consume e-sausages as well? #whatistheworldcomingto??

So, I’ve basically come to the same conclusion as I did in my previous post - social media is great, but only when consumed in moderation. 

References

Campbell, K 2016, Elections P.E.I. not ready to recommend online voting in next election, CBCnews, viewed 7 December 2016, <http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-plebiscite-online-voting-1.3841893>

Hoffman, C.P, Suphan, A & Meckel, M 2016, 'The impact of use motives on politician's social media adoption', Journal of Information Technology and Politics, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 239-256

Hurcombe, E 2016, 'The making of a captain: The production and projection of a political image on the Tony Abbott Facebook page', Communication, Politics & Culture, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 19-38

Sklar, D L 2016, Could online voting be banned in future LA neighborhood elections?, mynewsLA.com, viewed 7 December 2016, <http://mynewsla.com/government/2016/12/02/could-online-voting-be-banned-in-future-la-neighborhood-elections/>

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Why are we ‘always on’?

The more I read and learn about the concept of social media and the importance of having an online presence, the more pessimistic I feel and want to say... but why? Why is technology changing the way we interact and why are we letting it control us? Why are we saying goodbye to privacy, community and connection all for this false sense of presence and connection to an online world? Maybe this makes me sound like my mother, or grandmother... or maybe there is some reason why being always on is so important.

(https://audiense.com/the-era-of-always-on/)

Danah Boyd (2012) suggests that being always-on refers to a constant ability or need to check social media and other applications on one’s phone or laptop to remain connected and in touch with the world of the internet. However, being always-on does not just refer to people, it can also encompass appliances and other devices which constantly drain energy and cost money to run (Loveday et al. 2008). Is it necessary for us and our appliances to be always on, always connected and always draining our ‘batteries’? What cost is this having both financially and in terms of our health? And how does this relate to a changing sense of community within society?

This is where the ideas of Ferdinand Tonnies come into play, because he suggested that the way we view community is changing, the ways in which strangers are brought together and find connection or create meaning has changed. Whilst Ferdinand may not have predicted such a change brought about by social media, he definitely had the right idea. Maybe the digital world is both creating and destroying communities in that it is moving many communities from the real-world to an online sphere? Maybe being always-on is allowing us to better connect with the world around us?

So maybe there are ways to view social media and having an online presence, not as this evil beast controlling us, but as a tool that can be used (in conjunction with real-world connection) for good.

There are many benefits to being connected to the digital world. Is it really such a bad thing to have access to a never-ending stream of information and stay in touch with friends online? Is meeting new people online through social media sites, broadening our understanding of culture and connection and constantly learning, a bad thing? I think not. Yes, it is true that these things should always be used in moderation (shouldn’t everything?). I cannot see a way for social media and related technologies to have anything other than a positive impact on society overall. From making our lives easier, to reshaping and creating new digital communities, to teaching us through short videos, to providing us with new and exciting opportunities to connect. What could possibly be bad about that? We’re not limiting our level of connection and interaction with the world around us, we’re just changing how it occurs and we’re changing how and when this occurs through being ‘always-on’.

(http://www.christianitytoday.com/pastors/2015/april-online-only/building-online-community.html)

References

Boyd, D 2012, Participating in the Always On Lifestyle, in Mandiberg (ed) The Social Media Reader, NYU Press, pp. 71-76 Loveday, D.L, Bhamra, T, Tang, T, Haines, V.J.A, Holmes, M.J & Green, R.J, 2008, ‘The energy and monetary implications of the ‘24/7′ ‘always on’ society’, Energy Policy, vol. 36, no. 2008, pp. 4639-4645

[controlledbytheinterwebs-blog]

Just posting to check that y’all can comment and all is well.