Digital Communities EXploreD @dgdigitalcommunities - Tumblr Blog

Social gaming – playing the crowd in EVE Online

The large user base of social networking sites and its networked structure has seen the creation of games that, with internet access, can be played with anyone, anywhere in the world. Many have taken to social gaming and it generates billions of dollars in revenue (Johnson 2014).

One such game is EVE Online, a multi-player online role playing game that takes place in a sci-fi universe. In this complex game, developed by CCP Games, players interact and participate in aggressive, piratical games. EVE is about humans ‘living’ in a digital world and enjoyment comes once they find their niche in the community (Groen 2014). Johnson also points out that EVE is far more than a game and that social media is its “precious lifeblood”, as the “fiction of the game is lived out in real-time by its players across all social networks”.

What particularly interested de Zward and Humphreys (2014) about EVE in their article “The lawless frontier of deep space” was the unique relationship between EVE’s players and the platform managers. Players have formed a self-governing body, the Council of Stellar Government (CSG), to communicate, raise issues and negotiate with the game’s developers, CCP but also to help settle disputes between players. Tensions have arisen over a number of incidents that have put the spotlight on both CCP and player behaviour – a key member of the CSM was given a thirty day ban for breaching the terms of service by making comments about another player outside the game environment (Zward and Humphreys 2014); in the monoclegate micro-transaction debacle CCP without consultation launched game-affecting virtual goods for purchase that it was felt by many gave an unfair advantage to some players (Evil Avatar 2011); and, a user who forgot to pay his virtual bill caused the overnight destruction of hundreds of costly spaceships that took months to develop (Thornhill 2014).

Players accept the terms of service and though the platform provider can intervene in disputes between players they rarely do so (Zward and Humphreys 2014). This means players can push the boundaries of the rules and social norms, but “this tension between control and creativity” also “keeps the game space interesting”. Given that rewards are gained by merciless gameplay that include “murder, sabotage and piracy” this makes controlling this space very interesting. Further discussions on social media and other forums mean the boundaries become even more difficult to control.

According to Suzor & Woodford (2013) resolving disputes requires an understanding of the “social norms of the community”. Players have differing moral codes which some think should not apply anyway in a game. An examination of the EVE community highlights the complexity of the continuously evolving online environment and what is acceptable behaviour. Suzor and Woodford (2013) say that regulatory frameworks need to be able to cover both the rules as per the terms of service but also community standards of acceptable behaviour.

EVE Online is make believe. But it illustrates that game play is an avenue for real interaction where strong social ties form between those with a common interest, but also conflict, and needs some form of effective resolution.

References:

de Zwart, M & Humphreys, S 2014, “The Lawless Frontier of Deep Space: Code as Law in EVE Online”, Cultural Studies Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 77-99.

Groen, A 2014, History of the Great Empires of Eve Online, viewed 26 January 2018, <https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sciencegroen/a-history-of-the-great-empires-of-eve-online>.

Johnson, J 2014, “Is EVE Online a videogame or a social network?”, Kill Screen, 16 June, viewed 24 January 2018, < https://killscreen.com/articles/eve-online-videogame-or-social-network/>.

Suzor, N & Woodford, D 2013, “Evaluating consent and legitimacy amongst shifting community norms: An EVE Online case study”, Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1-14.

The EVE Online "Monoclegate" Peace Accord 2011, Evil Avatar, viewed 24 January 2018, <http://wwe.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147507>.

Thornhill, T, 2014, “The online videogame battle that cost $300,000: Gamers see hundreds of costly spaceships destroyed after user forgot to pay bill to defend their base”, The Daily Mail, 29 January, viewed 24 January 2018, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547908/EVE-online-sees-biggestbattle.html>.

#social gaming

Google Art and Culture app where you can match up your selfie with a work of art!

Selfies

Images have always been important as a form of self-expression and to act as useful memory aids to recall past events. However, images have taken on a new significance in the digital age with the advent of social media and transformed the way we represent and promote ourselves. These “practices and politics of self-representation” are still evolving (Vivienne & Burgess 2013 p.280). The ‘selfie’, or self-portrait photo, is one type of self-expression that now has widespread use.

The ‘selfie’ is inherently attention seeking and the projection of that image, or self-identity, is initially in the hands and control of the subject of the photo. They are a means of connecting to other people, to create affinity. Lange (2009, p.73) says whilst this desire to connect is often is a display of openness to interact with others the need to get attention is far more important in mediated environments. This is supported by Brown et al (2017) who quotes Frosh (2015, p.1609) saying “selfies say not only ‘see this, here, now’, but also ‘see me showing you me’” and is a communicative action. Sayej’s (2018) describes selfies as “almost an art to make something look like its authentic when it’s staged”.

Actress Cara Delevingne’s Mona Lisa selfie

This projection of self-identity is causing some issues. More than 300 people have died from selfie-related accidents trying to get the shot they are after (Sayei 2018). Some people have become so obsessed with taking selfies that the term ‘selfitis’ has been coined to describe the obsession. Recent research by Nottingham Trent University and Thiagarajar School of Management has found those suffering from this condition were generally wanting to boost their confidence, seek attention, improve their mood, make memories, show conformity with their social group and be socially competitive (Downey 2017). Whilst there has always been a bit of competition around to take the best photos the ‘selfie’ has taken this to a whole new level.

In addition, though the control over taking the self-portrait has not changed, its display and ownership has become murkier and with wide digital distribution more open to comment and scrutiny. Some of this scrutiny has caused real problems for those who have used selfies as an avenue to connect on social media, particularly for those whose confidence may not be as it seems. Education and regulatory measures need to be put in place that facilitate visual expression in this digital age but also help protect the young and vulnerable.

As more research is done on selfies and the visual communities that form and evolve we may find they reveal far more about our culture than at first thought.

References:

Brown, J et al 2017, Visual communities [Prezi presentation], viewed 8 January 2018, <https://prezi.com/qfesqjekcclt/visual-communities/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy.

Downey, A 2017, “Being obsessed with taking selfies is a genuine mental condition”, The Sun, 18 December, viewed 24 January 2018, < http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/mind/being-obsessed-with-taking-selfies-is-a-genuine-mental-condition/news-story/a2792a9991bdca95c4dfddf9209841b4>.

Lange, P 2009, ‘Videos of Affinity on YouTube’, in P, Snickars & P, Vonderau (eds), The YouTube Reader, National Library of Sweden, Stockholm, pp. 70-88.

Sayej, N 2018, “’Art can be for everyone’: behind the scenes at the Museum of Selfies”, The Guardian, 23 January, viewed 24 January 2018, <https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/jan/23/museum-of-selfies-los-angeles-interview>.

Vivienne, S & Burgess, J 2013, ‘The Remediation of the Personal Photograph’, Journal of Material Culture, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 279-98.

#selfies

How the MTA used social media to keep New Yorkers informed during the Superstorm Sandy

Crowdsourcing and crisis

Crowdsourcing is the term used to describe the practice of asking for help and input into a task, project or problem, beyond employees and suppliers, to the expanded number of people that are now available online. One area utilising ‘crowdsourcing’ is crisis and disaster management. Social mapping platforms have great potential to help deliver information, resolve issues, organise action and aid the recovery process. This article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review helps gain an understanding of mapping via crowdsourcing:

https://ssir.org/articles/entry/a_different_view_of_mapping

In the Haitian earthquake of 2010, where sadly over 230,000 people were killed, Ushahidi an open-source crisis-mapping software was used that provided a way to capture, organise, and share critical information directly coming from Haitians via social media and mobile phone text messages (Jeinzelman & Waters 2010). Reports of medical emergencies, persons trapped, food and water needs and other information were received and plotted on maps that were “updated in real time by an international group of volunteers”. The social mapping platform allowed this information to be shared with international agencies that could provide emergency assistance and relief for survivors and importantly could direct resources to where they were needed most. Some disasters can significantly affect the local geography which make existing maps outdated immediately. Using a collaborative model means the map can be updated rapidly and accurately.

One of the challenges though is ensuring information is accurate as misinformation can be as damaging as no information at all. In the Haiti disaster of the 3,500 messages published on the crisis map, only 202 messages could be verified. Still, the time lost responding to inaccurate reports is far outweighed by the net benefits. At the end of a two month operation the Crisis Map looked like this:

Volunteers at Blakeley Hall, The Fletcher School (Tufts University), monitor social and mainstream media for relevant, mappable content. Credit: Carol Waters.

Source both images: https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2012/07/02/how-crisis-mapping-saved-lives-in-haiti/

Social mapping systems still need to be improved and enable information to be checked and verified so that those needing assistance and relief the most can be prioritised. Mostly this needs to be done by those on the ground. According to Ford (2012) in some crisis situations, such as human rights abuses, sexual abuse and uprisings, another difficulty that needs to be overcome is building local support and trust with those affected so they are willing to provide information. Only then will crowdsourcing platforms be used more effectively by emergency service authorities and humanitarian organisations to “help and support ordinary people in times of crisis” (Ford 2012, p.39).

References

Ford, H 2012, 'Crowd Wisdom', Index on Censorship, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 33-39.

Heinzelman, J and Waters 2010, “Crowdsourcing crisis information in disaster – affected Haiti”, United States Institute of Peace, Special Report 252, October, viewed 10 January 2018, <https://www.preparecenter.org/sites/default/files/crowdsourcing_crisis_information_in_disaster-affected_haiti.pdf>.

#crowdsourcing

Parents must get tough about social media use after the tragic death of 14-year-old Amy 'Dolly' Everett, a leading Australian child psychologist says.

#stopbullyingnow

Digital citizenship – Trolling and social media conflict

Examining online conflict helps broaden our understanding of digital citizenship by looking through the lens of society’s behaviours and norms and how we handle, or should handle, those that step ‘out of line’. Social media as a tool to facilitate participation of individuals that can potentially benefit society will involve conflict and varying views. Society itself involves conflict and is not always harmonious. But generally there are rules and regulations to guide or force the standards that are expected. The anonymous capacity of social media though encourages more individuals to participate with more malice and vigour.

Source: John Gabriel’s greater internet d-wad theory (2012) <http://bit.ly/1rLHLPD>.

There are varying degrees of anti-social behaviour online. Flaming, or ‘to flame’, is to attack someone verbally online and particularly common when “discussion involves ‘hot’ topics such as “politics, elections, religion, immigration and climate change” (Gil 2017). In addition Gil says it is common on YouTube for user comments to incite bigotry and hate. However according to McCosker (2014) provocation can also band people together to present a more positive view sometimes equally aggressively. Trolling on the other hand is a term that covers a wider set of online activities. According to Cruz et al 2017, trolling can be devised of “three social practices: learning, assimilating and transgressing.” They say the impact of trolling transgression can be both “pro-social and anti-social”. Factors such as the sender’s intent and the meaning of the message need to be taken into account though this is sometimes difficult to do. Messages are often misunderstood and it may just be a poor attempt at humour. However, in many cases the sender’s intent is to harm and abuse. Anonymity makes it difficult to gauge. Either way it can be destructive.

Young people particularly are less likely to see the distinction. Danah Boyd (2014) says the technology or platform should not be blamed. She points out that whilst the perception is that social media radically increases bullying, the data suggests otherwise. But it has made it more visible. The way forward is to understand “where teens are at and why they engage in particular acts of meanness and cruelty”, provide an understanding on how not to bully and maliciously provoke online, and help settle personal conflict when it gets out of hand. In Australia an eSafety Commissioner has been created under the Enhancing Online Safety for Children Act 2015. The Commissioner has been given wide power to enhance online safety for Australian children and put in place legally binding penalties. It remains to be seen how effective it will be.

Website with advice on cyber-bullying: http://blog.kidsemail.org/tag/cyber-bullying/

References

Boyd, D 2014, 'Bullying: Is the Media Amplifying Meanness and Cruelty?', in It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, Yale University Press, New Haven, USA, pp. 128-52.

Cruz, GB, Seo, Y and Rex, M 2017, “Trolling in online communities: a practice-based theoretical perspective”, The Information Society, p.1-12, 27 December 2017, viewed 4 January 2018, <https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2017.1391909>.

Enhancing Online Safety for Children Act 2015 (Cwlth), viewed 4 January 2018, <https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00187>.

Gil, P 2017, “What is ‘flaming’”?, Lifewire, 20 September 2017, viewed 4 January 2018, <https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-flaming-2483253>.

McCosker, A 2014, “Trolling as provocation: YouTube's agonistics publics”, Convergence, vol. 20, no.2, pp. 201-217.

#stopbullying

Mobile lovers by Banksy

amnestyusa

Today is #HumanRightsDay and you can take action now for people around the world who need our help. All you need is 2 minutes. Use the power of the pen & #Write4Rights! http://bit.ly/W4RSignUp

Online activism now means creating alternative ways to work, communicate and protest.

Taking advantage of new technologies to provide an alternative way of organising society and the economy

Digital citizenship – Activism and protest

Social media is often used to rouse people to collective action in the case of protest and activism, but Zeynep Tutekci, a Turkish writer, academic and techno-sociologist explains why, in a TED Talks video, online social change is easy to organise, hard to win. Here is a link to her video as it is 13 minutes:

https://www.ted.com/talks/zeynep_tufekci_how_the_internet_has_made_social_change_easy_to_organize_hard_to_win?utm_campaign=tedspread--b&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare

Digital citizenship describes the use of new digital and social media tools to facilitate participation of individuals that potentially benefits society (Mossberger 2008 in Swinburne Online 2017). How well equipped they are to do so is termed ‘civic culture’. It can be on a local or global scale.

Whilst it is clear that new media has meant greater awareness for many causes and has the potential, according to Swinburne Online (2017), to help:

build and sustain communities

gain greater visibility and voice

provide a means to resist and talk back

provide a means to present an alternative or marginal view

removes barriers to entering into the debate

it is yet to make a significant contribution to digital citizenship that transitions into change and may have only introduced a “new passivity to activism” (Swinburne Online 2017).

Slacktivism is a form of culture jamming, which disrupts resistance, and combined with clicktivism, the number of supportive clicks, it is claimed make it easier to access the masses for activism and protest without having any lasting impact to make significant change. Dery (2010) says slacktivism may be a “socially sanctioned release valve” for class resentment and pent-up dissent that has found its way to social media. This short video on slacktivism makes this point.

Of course, it must not be forgotten that social media is also being used by “reformers, revolutionaries, and authoritarian regimes” as well to serve their political goals as well as it is for the commercial interests of platform owners (Youmans & York 2012, p.315). They also point to the constraints of social media platforms on collective action such as social media corporations limiting anonymity, prohibiting certain content and reliance on community policing and governments wanting to “pursue strategies of infiltration and surveillance” (p.324).

Tutekci says activism is not easy and whilst new media has made many activities easy, often with just a click, people also need to step up and take an active role in activism to affect lasting change. Time will tell if new media helps make us better digital citizens.

References

Dery, M 2010, Culture Jamming: Hacking, Slashing, and Sniping in the Empire of Signs, Shovelware, viewed 29 December 2017, <http://markdery.com/?page_id=154>.

Swinburne Online 2017, ‘Week 6: ‘6.1 This week’s focus’, MDA20009 Digital Communities, learning materials on Canvas, viewed 2 January 2017.

Swinburne Online 2017, ‘Week 6: ‘6.2 Local digital activism’, MDA20009 Digital Communities, learning materials on Canvas, viewed 2 January 2017.

Youmans, W, & York, J 2012, 'Social Media and the Activist Toolkit: User Agreements, Corporate Interests, and the Information Infrastructure of Modern Social Movements', Journal Of Communication, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 315-329.

#activism

Social media and digital citizenship

As social media usage becomes more widespread participation in democracy, politics and ‘civil society’ or digital citizenship has increased. One manifestation of this is the use of social media platforms by political parties, politicians and their supporters to campaign, communicate and connect with their communities. How effective is the use of social media in this way and does it foster greater political participation?

Many politicians jumped on board and use social media as a way to bypass traditional media, broadcast and print media, to reach potential voters. They have raised their profiles and grown their followers. Today it is used more than to just broadcast policies and reach young voters. Social media is used to develop data profiles of voters to target, help lower profile politicians campaign on a shoestring (Wordsworth 2016) and to raise funds.

Social media platforms have also facilitated an abundance of political commentary by ordinary citizens and as in days past they are still the butt of comedy. However social media, where two way conversation is possible, at times has facilitated a more trivialising dig at democracy to a wider audience than in days past, but it also reflects the negative view that many have of politics and politicians today.

The content of social media for risk-averse politicians is often filtered whilst commentary by ordinary citizens is not. According to Jericho (2013) only a few politicians have developed a co-ordinated strategy to use social media. It requires engagement. David Kirkpatrick in his book, The Facebook Effect, relays examples of the ability of social media to bring people together. Russian politician Mr Navalny is an example of one doing just that. As he cannot get on television and the regular anti-corruption protests he organises are not reported, he has used YouTube in his quest to become President. Two million followers, who in turn are viewed by tens of millions, has raised his popularity, particularly with young voters, as he has targeted corruption and the astonishing wealth of the current President Mr Putin’s inner circle, even using a drone camera it is reported to gather evidence (Campbell 2017). It remains to be seen whether it will get him elected. Pew Research Center in the USA analysed how the candidates differed in their use of social medial in the 2016 presidential election.

http://www.journalism.org/2016/07/18/candidates-differ-in-their-use-of-social-media-to-connect-with-the-public/

Similarly the 2017 November election illustrated the growing power of social media in politics.

Moisés Naím, a distinguished fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writer and author, discusses social media's influence on politics with David Kirkpatrick, a technology journalist and author (9 February 2015).

ebonymccabe1-blog

Seems familiar … <https://medium.com/alt-ledes/stop-sharing-this-photo-of-antisocial-newspaper-readers-533200ffb40f>

dgdigitalcommunities

Interesting article Ebony – thanks for sharing. I think the internet has, as Leccese and Lanson (2015) has subtitled their book, expanded the conversation of journalism. Blogs are one example. Tumblr alone as at August 2017 hosted 359 million blogs. According to Cross (2011, p.38) many are started as a means of personal expression and the chance to comment and converse with others. It is just the interaction is not face to face. Blogs cover a whole raft of topics by a wide range of people, traditional journalists included. This is supported by Cross (2011, p.50) who says they have given a voice to the countless that have previously been unheard and to the “microcultures of news, politics, business and opinion”. At the very least blogs offer a far greater range of conversation topics than traditional newspapers ever have.

References:

Cross, M 2011, Got Blog, in Bloggerati, Twitterati: How blogs and Twitter are transforming popular culture, Praeger, Santa Barbara.

Leccese, M and Lanson, J 2015, The elements of blogging, Focal Press, Safari Tech Books Online, viewed 4 December 2017, <http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/book/web-applications-and-services/social-media/9781317694236/2-two-models-the-reporter-blogger-vsdot-the-op-ed-blogger/ch02_xhtml?uicode=swinburneu>.

tundihun-blog

Empty Engagement

Social Media, in all its various shapes and forms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Blogs), claims to provide a platform in which users can connect, build relationships, make new friendships and nourish old ones. However this relationship building process is not a true representation of the relationships we build in our offline lives but more so a type of virtual relationship that carries less weight and value (Centola 2010). In essence how much value can one really place on a relationship where at the end of the day you can simply unplug and carry on with your regular life.

It would seem that social media sets online relationship goals that users should strive to achieve and these benchmarks once achieve provide the user with some sense of social status or satisfaction. For example many social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram have a “friends” count, where anyone choosing to connect with or “follow” a user will form part of a connected “friendship” group (Kietzmann et. Al. 2011). Using the term friends likens these people to our friends in our everyday life, however when this number starts to reach into the hundreds is it really fair to call all of them friends, especially ones that you had never met in real life?! Nonetheless users find it rewarding to see their friends list grow, despite the lack of connection with many of them. So the value in social media friendships is placed more on the quantity rather than the quality of the relationships being developed. This is reinforced even more so by users celebrating reaching a certain number of “friends” or “followers” and by companies choosing to sponsor users with the highest followings.

Another of these relationship goals created by social media is “engagement” otherwise known as the interactions between users and their online friends or followers. Facebook, Instagram and Blogs all encourage online users to utilize comments, likes and shares as a way to interact with each other. However unlike a conversation with your friend on the telephone where you discuss your daily activities then lead into more emotional, personal and in-depth topics, online interactions often are very short, meaningless and sadly in some cases are just for self-promotion (Moon et. Al. 2016). Instead of explaining why you loved the video of your friend’s wedding so much, it seems that a like followed by a love heart emoji <3 is sufficient to express your entire thoughts and feelings. Or on Instagram for example users will like and comment on posts not for the content itself but in the hope that you might return the favour in liking their page or content.

It is sad to think that many of our relationships, instead of being nourished have in fact on analysis been reduced by social media to a daily achievement or simple acknowledgement of each other.

Centola, D 2010, The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment, Science, vol. 329, no. 5996, pp.1194-1197.

Kietzmann, JH, Hermkens, K, McCarthy, IP and Silvestre, BS 2011, Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media, Business horizons, no. 54 vol. 3, pp.241-251.

Moon, JH, Lee, E, Lee, JA, Choi, TR and Sung, Y 2016, The role of narcissism in self-promotion on Instagram, Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 101, pp.22-25.

“The Death of Friendship”

dgdigitalcommunities

Thought provoking post from Tunde which reflects on the all too often shallowness of the relationships formed via social media. I was fortunate to see a beautiful film today, The Staging Post, which demonstrated that social media can also be used in a powerful way to connect. The film was about “building a community in the middle of an unknown journey”. Asylum seekers in limbo in a refugee centre in Indonesia are reaching out via the film and social media – Facebook, Twitter and YouTube – as well as a blog, to draw attention to more positive stories about refugees. The film also reinforced for me that how someone chooses to use social media plays a part in the relationships formed. In this case it is being used to connect a community.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Digital Communities EXploreD