Ashley Garcia

coffee enthusiast. romantcizing life (:

[garca755]

When I was a kid, I just thought my mom had a special grocery card. She’d swipe it the total would drop and we’d go home with snacks and dinner like it was nothing. I didn’t realize it was EBT/SNAP, I just knew we always had food. My parents stretched every dollar, and that card made it possible.

Looking back, SNAP didn’t feel like a handout. It just meant we had dinner on the table and I got to grow up eating like any other kid, instead of worrying about groceries. That’s it. Pretty simple, pretty important.

[garca755]

Discussion post due 11/14

1. Why are “safe spaces” so important for marginalized people online?

For many marginalized people, whether based on gender, race, sexuality, or disability, digital communities can offer what offline life sometimes cannot, understanding and validation. These spaces allow users to share experiences, organize, and build confidence in their identities. Hashtags like #DisabilityTikTok or youth LGBTQ+ communities on Tumblr, for example, show how online communities can empower people to speak for themselves and challenge stereotypes. Safe spaces matter because they give people the freedom to exist without judgment or hostility, something not always available in their physical environments.

2. What makes it hard to keep online spaces truly “safe”?

Keeping online communities safe is a constant challenge because the internet’s openness, the quality that makes it accessible and global also makes it vulnerable to misuse. Trolls, hate groups, and bots can easily invade online spaces, spreading harassment and misinformation. Algorithms often make this worse by rewarding engagement, therefore meaning controversial or harmful content gets more visibility. Even platforms that promise to protect users often struggle to enforce their own rules fairly. Marginalized users are more likely to be targeted but less likely to be believed when they report abuse. Additionally, anonymity can blur accountability. While it can protect privacy, it can also allow people to act without consequence. Without clear boundaries, consistent moderation, and ethical platform design, “safe spaces” can quickly become unsafe.

3. How does Hathaway’s discussion of “privilege” help explain why Gamergate supporters resisted conversations about diversity in gaming?

Hathaway (2014) explains that many Gamergate supporters said they “just want to play games” (p.9) without having to think about how those games portray women and minorities. This attitude reflects a lack of awareness about privilege, the comfort of never having to question how media centers one’s own identity while excluding others. For years, the gaming industry mainly catered to white, male audiences, so many players were used to being represented and prioritized. When critics like Anita Sarkeesian began questioning sexist patterns in games, some players felt personally attacked rather than challenged to think critically. Hathaway points out that this reaction is often the first time these players confront privilege. The anger that fueled Gamergate came from discomfort with losing cultural dominance. As Hathaway suggests, the hope is that, over time, these young men can grow out of defensiveness and embrace a more inclusive vision of gaming where everyone belongs.

4. How does McLaine highlight the importance of ethnicity in online communities and its connection to the digital divide?

McLaine (2003) argues that online communities often overlook ethnicity, which limits both individual growth and meaningful access to technology. African American and Hispanic users face disadvantages in Internet access even when income and education are considered (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2000). Communities like BlackPlanet.com, MiGente.com, and AsianAvenue.com try to unite large groups, but in doing so they can oversimplify unique cultural identities. McLaine emphasizes that effective online communities must prioritize purpose over profit by offering culturally relevant content and opportunities for connection. When communities are designed this way, they help bridge the digital divide and empower underrepresented users rather than treating them only as consumers.

Hathaway, J. (2014, October 10). What is Gamergate, and why? An explainer for non-geeks. Gawker. http://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for-non-geeks-1642909080

McLaine, S. (2003). Ethnic online communities: Between profit and purpose. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(1).

[garca755]

Blog post due 11/7

1. How does Black Twitter challenge bias in mainstream media?

Black Twitter has become an important space where Black people and other marginalized communities can speak up about how they are represented in the news and popular culture. Instead of waiting for mainstream media to tell their stories, users on Black Twitter share their own experiences, reactions, and critiques of how race is portrayed. This kind of online community allows people to push back against stereotypes, call out racist coverage, and celebrate Black creativity. For example, viral hashtags and discussions often expose bias in how crimes or protests are reported, forcing traditional media outlets to pay attention.

2. What challenges do users on Black Twitter face when trying to sustain activism online?

Lee highlights that one of the biggest challenges for online activism is its short life span. Social media moves quickly, and public attention often fades before meaningful or lasting change can occur. Hashtags may trend for only a few days before disappearing from focus, and harassment or algorithmic bias can silence or hide the voices of marginalized communities. While Twitter can spark powerful conversations and bring visibility to critical issues, maintaining long term activism and translating it into real-world impact remains difficult. Because Twitter is a corporate-owned platform, users are constrained by algorithms, content moderation, and trolling, which can inadvertently reinforce existing inequalities. Despite these limitations, Black Twitter remains a vital space for challenging bias and building community. It demonstrates how digital platforms can amplify marginalized voices, but also mentions that sustained, effective activism requires bridging online engagement with coordinated action in the real world.

2. What do Vegh’s three categories of internet activism reveal about the structure of online movements?

Vegh’s framework shows that online activism happens in several stages that often overlap and build on one another. The first stage, awareness and advocacy, focuses on spreading information and educating people about an issue through posts or hashtags. The second stage, organization and mobilization, involves bringing people together to plan actions, share resources, and plan events, like protests or online campaigns. Finally, the action and reaction stage is when people take steps like organizing digital protests, hacking to expose information, or demonstrating in person. By breaking activism into these parts, Vegh helps us see that internet movements are more than just “online talk”. They can develop into real collective action. Overall, Vegh’s three categories highlight both the creativity and the tension that come with using the internet as a tool for social change.

4. What strategies do activists use online to coordinate offline action?

Activists use social media in a lot of creative ways to plan real-world events like protests, rallies, or volunteer efforts. They share schedules, locations, and instructions so people know exactly where to go and what to do. Online groups and event pages help connect people who might be far apart. Videos and livestreams give tips on safety and explain the goals of a campaign. Hashtags can also spread the word further, bringing in new participants and creating momentum. Of course, there are challenges too — activists can face trolling, surveillance, or content being taken down by the platform. That’s why many movements combine online coordination with in-person planning, showing that social media is a powerful tool for organizing, but it works best when it’s paired with real-world action.

Lee, L. A. (2017). Black Twitter: A response to bias in mainstream media. Social Sciences, 6(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci6010026 MDPI+1

Vegh, S. (2003). Classifying forms of online activism: The case of cyber‑protests against the World Bank. In M. McCaughey & M. D. Ayers (Eds.), Cyberactivism: Online activism in theory and practice (pp. 71–96). Routledge.

[garca755]

Blog post due 10/31

How does D.K Citron show that the Internet is not a neutral or harmless space? In the introduction of Hate Crimes in Cyberspace, Citron explains that the Internet is not just a neutral tool. It can make harassment worse and more lasting. She writes that online abuse stays visible because “search engines index content on the web and produce it instantaneously” and that harmful posts “have no built-in expiration date” (p. 4). Once someone’s name is linked to lies or hateful posts, those links can follow them for years. This can affect their jobs, safety, and mental health.

Citron’s example of “Anna Mayer” (p. 1–3) shows how anonymous attackers used websites and social media to destroy someone’s reputation. Even after Mayer deleted her blog or tried to hide, her harassers found her again and again. This example makes it clear that digital platforms are not neutral space. They have systems that can give abusers power and make victims more vulnerable. In this way, Citron connects technology design to platform politics, showing that the way platforms are built influences who gets silenced and who is protected.

How does Citron connect online harassment to gender and inequality? Citron makes it clear that online harassment isn’t random, but instead it follows patterns of gender and power. She reports that “60 percent of cyberstalking victims are women,” and that over 70 percent of people who reported cyber harassment to WHOA between 2000 and 2011 were female (p. 13). Citron compares online abuse today to older kinds of inequality, like workplace harassment and domestic violence, which people once ignored or dismissed (p. 22). She argues that online hate is part of a bigger civil rights problem because it repeats the same patterns of sexism and racism found offline. Citron believes online harassment is more than just people being mean. It is a sign of how social media can spread bias and hate faster than ever before. How does the Reddit community’s reaction to Grandpa Wiggly illustrate the power of online platforms to enforce norms and shape discourse? The reaction to Grandpa Wiggly shows that online platforms are not just neutral spaces for sharing ideas. Even though Reddit allows anyone to post and participate, the community itself has rules and expectations about behavior. When users labeled Grandpa Wiggly a “troll,” they were enforcing their own idea of what is acceptable. This label shut down discussions about whether his actions were harmless or creative. It highlights how social media platforms give power to communities to decide what is acceptable, punish those who break the rules, and control which conversations continue. The platform’s design makes these social norms visible and actionable, showing that users and communities play a major role in shaping discourse.

What role does the design of Reddit (karma, upvotes/downvotes) play in influencing political or social discourse within the platform?

Reddit’s design has a major effect on how discussions happen and what kinds of ideas gain attention. The karma system, upvotes, and downvotes give users a way to reward content they like and hide content they dislike, which directly affects which posts and comments are seen by the majority of the community. This creates a kind of social pressure, where popular opinions are amplified and less popular or controversial ones may be hidden or ignored. For example, if someone posts a comment that challenges the majority view, it may be downvoted and collapsed, meaning fewer people will read it. On the other hand, content that aligns with the community’s expectations or humor rises to the top, gaining visibility and influence. These features also shape behavior because users are aware that their contributions are being evaluated by others. People may post what they think will earn upvotes rather than what they truly believe, which can limit diversity of thought and reinforce popular ideas. In the case of Grandpa Wiggly, these features allowed the community to collectively judge his posts and decide whether he was acceptable or a “troll.”

Bergstrom, K. (2011). “Don’t feed the troll”: Shutting down debate about community expectations on Reddit.com. First Monday, 16(8). http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/rt/printerFriendly/3498/3029

Citron, D. K. (2014). Hate crimes in cyberspace. Harvard University Press

[garca755]

Blog due 10/17

1. How do algorithms and online platforms reinforce white supremacy or privilege certain cultural values without openly appearing racist?

Algorithms and online platforms often reinforce white supremacy in subtle and hidden ways. The data used to train algorithms usually reflects existing social biases. For example, over-representing white users, English language content, and Western beauty standards. Because many developers come from similar cultural backgrounds, their perspectives influence what the technology considers “normal”. As a result, search engines might prioritize Eurocentric images, and facial recognition systems may struggle to recognize darker skin tones. These systems don’t have to be openly racist to cause harm. They quietly center whiteness as the default, shaping who gets visibility and whose experiences are overlooked online. This shows that technology isn’t neutral. It reflects the same power structures and inequalities that exist in the real world.

2. How can digital spaces that claim to be “neutral” still carry biases rooted in colonial or Western perspectives?

Even when tech platforms say they’re neutral, they’re usually built around Western ideas and values. Most big tech companies come from the U.S. or Europe, so their designs naturally reflect things like English being the main language and certain beauty standards. You can see it in little details too, like emojis that mostly show lighter skin tones or filters that change how people look to fit Western norms. These design choices might seem small, but they send a message about what’s considered “normal” online. So even though the internet feels global, it often centers Western culture and leaves out a lot of other perspectives.

3. What are some examples of online spaces or technologies that challenge white supremacy and create more inclusive digital cultures?

There are lots of online spaces that push back against white supremacy and create more inclusive communities. Black Twitter is a great example. It uses humor, memes, and activism to uplift Black voices and challenge racist narratives. Similarly, LGBTQ+ online communities, like forums, Discord servers, and subreddits, give queer people a space to share experiences, organize, and build support without being silenced by heteronormative norms. These spaces give marginalized groups the power to define themselves rather than being defined by others and show how online platforms can become tools for social change when diverse voices are celebrated.

4. What steps could be taken to “decolonize” technology and make online spaces more inclusive?

Decolonizing technology isn’t just about adding diverse voices, it means really questioning the systems, assumptions, and values behind how platforms are built. Tech companies need to include people from a variety of cultural, racial, and gender backgrounds in decision-making roles, so design and policies reflect different perspectives. Algorithms and data should be checked for bias, because even “neutral” tech can still push Western norms and reinforce existing inequalities. Ultimately, decolonizing tech isn’t just about making spaces feel fairer, it’s about challenging the dominance of Western, colonial ways of thinking in systems that weren’t created with everyone in mind.

[garca755]

Blog post due 10/10

1. How do dating websites like OkCupid reveal the racial biases built into digital design and user behavior?

Senft and Noble point out that “Although OKCupid is designed to match people based on common interests and values, the site notes that most White men and woman responded almost exclusively to messages from Whites. ” (p. 108). This shows that even when dating platforms claim to be inclusive, users bring their own social biases into how they interact and choose partners. For example, someone might say they’re looking for people with “similar backgrounds” or “shared values,” but these phrases often reflect unspoken racial or cultural preferences. The algorithms then learn from those patterns, reinforcing them by recommending similar profiles. So while OKCupid might seem like a space built on personal choice and compatibility, it also quietly reproduces systemic biases about who is desirable or “compatible.”

2.How do avatars and profile photos shape the way others perceive your identity online, and how can these perceptions reflect racial biases? Avatars and profile photos are often the first thing people notice online, and they communicate a lot about who you are without words. They can show personality, style, interests, or even social status. For example, someone using a professional headshot on LinkedIn might be seen as serious and competent, while a fun cartoon avatar on a gaming platform could show creativity or humor. However, racial biases can affect how others interpret these images. A person of color may be judged differently than a White person even if both use similar photos. Hairstyles, clothing, or skin tone can lead people to make assumptions about someone’s background, personality, or abilities. This shows that even online, where people can try to control how they appear, racial biases and stereotypes can still influence how others see them.

3. Why might people maintain different identities across various digital platforms, and how can this highlight racial inequalities?

People often create different versions of themselves for different platforms because each space has its own expectations and audience. On a dating app, people might highlight attractiveness and romantic qualities, while on LinkedIn they emphasize professionalism and choose to share very different pictures on each platform. For racialized users, these choices can also be shaped by concerns about discrimination. A person might avoid showing certain features, using a more neutral profile picture, or changing the way they present their name to prevent bias. On dating sites or professional sites, for example, some users of color may feel pressure to downplay certain aspects of their appearance because of stereotypes or unequal treatment. This shows that online identity is shaped by social pressures and inequalities.

4. How does Black Twitter demonstrate that users actively perform identity in digital spaces, rather than simply presenting a neutral online self? Black Twitter is an example of how online users actively manage and perform their identities, instead of simply presenting a neutral or generic persona online. Many Black users choose to highlight aspects of their racial identity. As Sarah Florini notes, users “prioritize the performance of their racial identity” (p. 114). This intentional choice allows them to connect with others who share similar experiences, interests, and cultural practices, creating an online community.The performance of identity on Black Twitter can include humor, commentary on social issues, cultural references. By actively performing their racial and cultural identity, Black Twitter users challenge the idea that online spaces are neutral or free from social context. This demonstrates that digital self-presentation is an ongoing, intentional process where users negotiate how they are seen, who they connect with, and how they assert belonging in online communities.

Hunsinger, Jeremy, and Theresa M. Senft. The Social Media Handbook. Routledge, 2014.

[garca755]

Blog Post due 10/3

1. Whose labor is highlighted in technology ads and platforms, and whose work is hidden or erased?

In technology advertising and media, the labor that is shown is usually the polished, creative side. Ads show smiling delivery drivers, influencers making content, or software engineers in modern offices, which makes technology look easy and fun. But the reading shows this hides most of the work behind devices. Foxconn workers, for example, face “withholding of wages, forced and unpaid overtime, exposure to chemicals, harsh management, low wages, bad work safety conditions, [and] lack of basic facilities” (Fuchs, p. 119). This shows that the important work that actually creates devices is mostly invisible, while the visible work is shown in a way that looks easy and glamorous. Media and marketing highlight certain types of labor while erasing the suffering and exploitation behind global supply chains.

2. How does the invisibility of certain types of digital labor affect the way society values those jobs?

When labor is invisible, it is often undervalued. Foxconn workers, for example, face extreme conditions, "Workers are told obey or leave Supervisors yell at workers with foul language. Workers experience pressure and humiliation." (Fuchs p.119).At the same time, highly visible jobs like software engineers at Google or Facebook earn over $100,000 a year (Fuchs, p. 121). Because the dangerous or difficult work is hidden, society often assumes it is unskilled or unimportant, which allows companies to underpay and overwork these employees. This invisibility also keeps consumers from seeing the real cost of the technology we use every day.

3. How might factors like race, global inequality, or location shape which kinds of digital labor are visible versus invisible?

Race, global inequality, and location play a big role in determining which labor is visible and which is hidden. Highly paid software engineers in the U.S. form a “knowledge labour aristocracy” (Fuchs, p. 121), earning high salaries and bonuses, meanwhile workers in China, Indonesia, or Congo face “slave-like conditions” making the same devices and materials (Fuchs p. 120). This contrast shows how global inequality allows some workers to be highly visible and celebrated, while the labor of marginalized workers is mostly invisible. The visibility of labor is shaped by who has privilege and resources, and it often hides the exploitation that keeps global tech industries running.

4. How do companies like Google use culture and ideology to increase workers’ labor, and how is this different from traditional exploitation?

Google doesn’t rely on punishments or strict rules to get more work from employees. Instead, it uses “the company’s culture of fun, playbour, employee services and peer pressure” (Fuchs,p.146). These perks make the workplace seem exciting, but they also push employees to stay longer, blur the line between work and free time, and do more unpaid labor. This is different from the harsh control at Foxconn, where workers are directly forced into long hours. Both models increase exploitation, but Google’s shows how ideology and culture can be just as powerful as strict discipline.

Fuchs, Christian.2017. Social Media: A Critical Introduction. 2nd Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications

[garca755]

Blog post due 9/19/2025

How can memes make fun of or put down certain groups of people in ways that continue unfair treatment?

Memes can target underrepresented communities by turning stereotypes into jokes, which continues cycles of domination. Ruha Benjamin explains how bias is often hidden, showing that “job seekers with White-sounding first names received 50 percent more callbacks from employers than job seekers with Black-sounding names” (p. 22). This example shows how something as basic as a name can be unfairly judged and used to exclude people from opportunities. By turning unfair treatment into a joke, memes can make prejudice seem normal and okay in everyday life.

2. In what ways do memes show both positive and negative effects on culture?

Memes can affect culture in both good and bad ways. On the positive side, they can challenge stereotypes and make people think about unfair treatment in creative ways. They can spread awareness quickly, helping people notice problems in society. But memes can also reinforce harmful ideas. Ruha Benjamin explains how technology can reflect bias: “a study by a team of computer scientists at Princeton…found that the algorithm associated White-sounding names with ‘pleasant’ words and Black-sounding names with ‘unpleasant’ ones” (p. 22-23). This shows that even systems meant to be neutral can reinforce existing inequalities. Memes work the same way, what seems funny can also normalize prejudice and influence culture negatively.

3. How do memes connect to money and business?

Memes and online content are no longer just for fun. They are a big part of social and economic systems. For example, Safiya Umoja Noble describes searching for “black girls” online and finding highly sexualized websites like HotBlackPussy.com (p. 30). This shows how media often profits by exploiting stereotypes and reinforcing harmful ideas about race and gender. Social media works the same way. When memes go viral, companies make money from ads, even though people make the memes for free. Memes can share ideas, but they also show how businesses profit from content while keeping some people at a disadvantage.

4. How does automating public services make inequality worse?

Automated systems, like those used for welfare or housing, can make life harder for marginalized communities. Virginia Eubanks explains in Automating Inequality that these systems are not neutral. They often reflect existing biases. For example, algorithms in child welfare may target Black or low-income families more often, increasing surveillance and control. Instead of helping people, these automated systems can punish them or make it harder to get support. This shows that technology can sometimes make inequality worse rather than better.

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the New Jim Code. Polity Press.

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.

Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press.

[garca755]

Blog post 2

How does the automation of social services raise ethical concerns about treating marginalized communities fairly? Automating welfare can be unfair because as we all know, technology can make mistakes and can prevent people from getting the aid they need. In the reading, Virginia Eubanks personally experienced this when she was flagged by her insurance after her husband's attack. She explains in the reading that people who don't have the same resources, time or expertise to challenge insurance companies or the system may not be able to fight back, leaving marginalized communities at a greater risk of losing the aid they need to survive.

2. How can the government use automated data systems to dominate and exploit marginalized communities?

The government often uses automated data systems to watch and control poor communities instead of helping them. For example, Eubanks explains how Maine’s governor used EBT card data to accuse families on welfare of wasting benefits, even though the data only showed where cash was withdrawn, not how it was spent. By framing poor people as dishonest and irresponsible, the state justified stricter rules, more surveillance, and public shaming. This shows how automated systems dominate marginalized groups by treating them as suspects and exploit them by using their data against them.

3.How can we understand the contradictory role of technology as both a tool for efficiency and a cause of greater inequality?

Technology in welfare is often introduced as a way to make programs more efficient and cost-effective. At the same time, these systems can also create new barriers, such as denying aid because of small errors or making the process harder to challenge. This contradiction shows that while automation promises fairness and speed, it can also increase inequality by punishing those with the least resources to push back, and/or fill out information correctly.

4. How do public assistance technologies spread stereotypes about marginalized communities? Public assistance technologies often make poor people look dishonest. Instead of focusing on helping, the systems track and judge how people use benefits. This spreads harmful stereotypes and makes strict rules and surveillance seem normal, even when they are unfair.

[garca755]

Road To Nowhere

About a year ago, my family went on vacation to Maui in a group of about 20 people. We did the Road to Hana, which has a lot of turns, waterfalls, lots of one way roads and the best part spotty cell service. We had three cars in total and started driving trusting maps and Tik Tok, which had showed us all the must stop places. At first, it was amazing, we stopped at some waterfalls, saw rainbow eucalyptus trees, and even stopped for famous banana bread. However somewhere along the way, our car got separated from the rest of the group. We figured it was no big deal and we’d just call or text to meet back up. Except there was absolutely no signal. We kept driving, assuming we’d see their cars pulled over at the next stop. We started doubting every turn and getting more and more anxious that we were not gonna be able to regroup.

Eventually, we were just out there going straight and hoping we were going the same way my family had gone. No maps, no way to contact anyone, and a long way to go. My dad remembered we had planned to stop at Red Sand Beach, so we decided to just head that way and hope for the best. After what felt like forever and so many turns later we arrived at the Red Sand Beach. At this point I was super car sick, but we finally arrived and we were so relieved to see the cars of the rest of our group.

So if you plan on doing the Road to Hana in Maui make sure you plan well ahead and take an actual map!!!