JUST ANOTHER MEDIA & COMMS STUDENT

Media & Communications student @ Swinburne Online | Hobart, Tasmania | Sport | Travel

[ljelliott]

Blog 8: Social Gaming: Playing the Crowd

When you think of online and social gaming the stereotype alarm bell starts to ring, however through the advancement of digital and social technology this wall is slowly being broken, probably without people realising.

Have you played Farmville? World of Warcraft? Call of Duty? Words with Friends?

Then you’re are social gamer. A social gamer isn’t just someone who sits on their computer for endless hours into the dawn of day, or has the super fancy gaming chair with matching headset.

We have seen technology advancements provide the imaginable in terms of communication and in the past few years technology and gaming have realised their combined potential to take advantage of that space. Gaming on computers and consoles have been around for a while, but it is now that mobile is starting to take over that. ‘Building a socially focused gaming ecosystem has been held back largely due to form factor limitations. Older phones had limited processing power and connectivity to power the instant, synchronous interaction that we expect from games. However, that’s changing. New mobile gaming technology is creating exciting new avenues for people to play games with friends (and make new ones)’ (Paradise. 2018).  

Online and social gaming allows people to connect with other gamers all around the world, to participate in and connect and share a mutual passion. When first established it would be a computer opponent, operating off algorithm. Whereas these days, you match, join or invite actual humans to be your online competitors. Massively multiple online role-playing games (MMORG) is the foundation behind todays gaming atmosphere. They provide and facilitate massive player and group connection and interaction for both online and offline human interaction. People come together for social and online gaming seminars and competitions – putting a whole new level on the social side of it.

Like with everything, games have also been modernized and digitized. The originals like Monolopy, Scrabble, Connect Four, Guess Who, have all been digitised into an online and mobile format with still a virtual interaction experience. Modernisation and digitisation is only going to continue to take over and expand the online and social gaming word. Will it bought live to your games room in the form of hologram?

Reference:

Paradise. A , 2018, ‘Social play is transforming mobile gaming’, VentureBeast, accessed February 2018, available from < https://venturebeat.com/2018/01/29/social-play-is-transforming-mobile-gaming/>

[ljelliott]

Blog 7: Visual Communities & Social Imaging

There was song written about it. It made it into the Oxford Dictionary in 2013. It killed more people in 2015 than Sharks. They occur approximately 93 million times a day. ....THE SELFIE!

The word, quite self-explanatory, is best described as ‘an arm’s length mobile phone camera self-portrait shared via social media’ (Swinburne. 2018). Whilst dating back to the early 80’s, the craze of the selfie really hit in society in 2002 and today is a global phenomenon. Most people would experience it on a daily basis. Whether it is as you scroll through your newsfeed, you’re a user of Snapchat, you’re sitting on the bus or reading a trashy news magazine.

Personally, I’m not a big fan – I feel it draws attention both in the capturing and the sharing. That’s just me though, maybe I’m not good at finding the right angle or pulling the right facial expression. Back in 2010/2011 I remember I posted a status on Facebook, and that took courage and it was only text, not a selfie. I posted “Snapchat, making it totally acceptable for people to take selfies”. It popped up on my on this day a couple of months ago and that’s why I remember it – but I ask myself why did I think their needed to be a reason to take a selfie, if that’s what people like doing, if that’s how they like to communicate and share themselves and are not impacting others, then go for it. These days with the concept and features on Snapchat, selfies aren’t always about reflecting your attractiveness. “Snapchat isn’t about capturing the traditional Kodak moment. It is about communicating with a full range of human emotion – not just what appears to be pretty or perfect’ (Bernazzani. 2017). In 2015 Snapchat added lenses, also known as filters, encouraging the self-facing camera (SELFIE ALERT!) to change and add to their look. From puppy ears, face swap, rainbow tongues and more. For me this feature played a crucial part in the rise and establishment of selfies. It offered a different meaning and purpose, with a more fun and silly approach. In today’s society whilst the selfie is definitely still around to promote your latest hair do, outfit or mission out on Saturday night, a lot of people and particularly celebrities are using them to show themselves for who they really are. We all wake up with bed, have pimples or laze around in track pants and a for a while and for some people, they use the selfie culture to display who they wish/want they could be, a false representation, rather than who they really are. We don’t always look as good as our last Instagram post!

(Instagram. 2015)

Reference:

Bernazzani. Sophia, 2017, ‘A Brief History of Snpachat’, HubSpot – Marketing, accessed February 2018, available from https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/history-of-snapchat

Swinburne Online, 2018, ‘Week 9: Visual Communities and Social Imaging’, Digital Communities – Swinburne Online, accessed February 2018, available from https://swinburneonline.instructure.com/courses/77/pages/9-dot-3-networked-visuality?module_item_id=16377

[ljelliott]

Blog 6: Crowdsourcing in a time of crisis

The Boston Bombing, the ISIS attacks, Lindt Café Siege, Queensland Floods and Black Friday. All times of crisis both in our home country and worldwide. In times of crisis we want to spread the word, protect as many people as we can, look out for our loved ones and make sure they’re alright. Crowdsourcing, best described as ‘the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online community’ (Merriam Webster. 2014). In times of crisis crowdsourcing allows and provides the online community to inform and share on the relevant and unexpected event. ‘The public, emergency services, and other media sources have prioritised social media platforms to spread reporting’s and to also gather information of such events’ (Barbieri. 2016). At times of need when information needs to be distributed and spread to the public quickly we turn to social media to facilitate the distribution as the engagement and participation is high and the message is received the fastest.

Mark Zuckerberg and his team continue to keep impressing. In 2014 they launched the Safety Check on Facebook. It works by:

- When the tool is activated after a natural disaster and if you’re in the affected area, you will receive a Facebook notification asking if you’re safe.

- An individual’s location is determined by the city you have listed in your profile, your last location you opted in to nearby friends and the city where you are using internet. If your location is identified incorrectly, you can mark that you are outside the affected area.

- If you’re safe, you can select “I’m Safe” and a notification and News Feed story will be generated with your update.

Zuckerberg describes said ‘it is our way of helping our community during natural disasters and gives you an easy and simple way to say you’re safe and check on all your friends and family in one place’ (Facebook. 2014). 

Whilst crowdsourcing provides a great tool and way of communication, what those people and those countries that do not have access to social media and digital technologies. From those in third world countries (where crisis can be so common) to those of older generations who are not active in online communities. How can we ensure all information that is posted online is true and factual – this is an issue we face on a day to day basis, from an article you read on the Daily Mail through to research for an assignment.

Reference:

Barbieri. S, 2016, ‘Crowdsourcing in Time of Crisis’, Prezi, accessed January 2018, available from <  https://prezi.com/3dua-f5hu1pg/crowdsourcing-in-time-of-crisis/ >

Merriam Webster, 2014, ‘crowdsourcing’, Merriam Webster, accessed January 2018, available from < https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crowdsourcing >

Cottle. P, Gleit. N, Zeng. S, 2016, ‘Introducing Safety Check’, Facebook Newsroom, accessed January 2018, available from <https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2014/10/introducing-safety-check/ >

Zuckerberg. M, 2014, Facebook Post, Facebook, accessed January 2018, available from < https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101699265809491 >

[ljelliott]

Blog 5: Trolling & Social Media Conflict

(Moreau. 2018)

In today’s world the online universe, technology and social media offer the potential for the greater good, for unthinkable connection and communication, something no other generation has experienced. Like always though, there is the good, the bad and the ugly. Digital media’s bad and ugly includes trolling and online bullying. Trolls is not a just an animation produced by Dreamworks, it is a serious issue that approximately 1 in 10 children deal with in Australia. According to Urban Dictionaries, trolling is the ‘art of deliberately, cleverly, and secretly pissing people off, usually via the internet, using dialogue’. To be a successful troll involves convincing the victim that what you say is correct.

Every internet troll has a different background, different backstory, a different reason behind the urge to click, post or share and impact, hurt or ruin someone’s day and in some cases life. There are many psychological reasons behind why they do it. They may be ‘depressed, attention-starved, angry, sad, jealous, narcissistic or some other emotion’ (Moreau. 2018).  Those who thrive off the feeling of trolling have a high level of cognitive empathy – ‘they are good at understanding what hurts people and matched with their high level of psychopathy means they simply don’t care’ (March. 2017).

There are many different types of trolls that you can come across in the online word – all with slightly different tactics. A list of the main types of trolls can be found HERE 

It can happen to anyone, those who put themselves out there and those who do not. An internet troll could start up on this blog. Celebrities are renowned for coping online abuse and trolling. It causes some to shut down their pages and it makes some becomes advocates for the issue. Ed Sheeran had a break from Twitter after receiving a stream of abusive messages.

A list of celebrities that have been trolled can be found HERE

Whilst I’m not qualified to give you advice of how to deal with online trolling, it is important to remember to try and ignore them, we know they want the reaction – it’s the same as when your sibling is annoying you, as I’m sure your mother told you, ignore them and they’ll go away. Try not to take what they are saying as personal, they are the ones that are suffering for some unknown reason and putting it onto someone else makes them feel better.

Reference:

March. E, 2017, ‘Pyschology of internet trolls: They’ll understand what hurts people but simply don’t care’, ABC News, accessed January 2018, available from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-13/trolls-understand-what-hurts-people-but-they-simply-dont-care/8701424

Moreau. E, 2018, ‘Internet Trolling: How Do You Spot a Real Troll?’, Lifewire, accessed January 2018, available from https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-internet-trolling-3485891

Moreau. E, 2018, ‘Internet Trolling: How Do You Spot a Real Troll?’, [image] Lifewire, accessed January 2018, available from https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-internet-trolling-3485891

Moreau. E, 2018, ’10 Types of Trolls You’ll Meet Online’, Lifewire, accessed January 2018, available from https://www.lifewire.com/types-of-internet-trolls-3485894

Urban Dictionaries, 2009, ‘Trolling’, Urban Dictionaries, accessed January 2018, available from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Trolling  

[ljelliott]

Blog 4: Activism & Protest

(Shaw. 2016)

The almighty powerful hashtag. The spreading of an online campaign, the trending of a topic. What spreads better, a hashtag about Kim Kardashian or vegemite on your toast?

Digital activism is “where digital tools (the internet, mobile phones and social media etc) are used towards bringing about social and/or political change” (Rees 2015). We all know the power and participation of the digital word – activism thrives from that participation and hence why the two have now come together to find success. Digital activism has transformed the world and political protest, movements and events and has helped to activate thousands of new enthusiasts.

An online activist campaign, which has occurred in the last few years was the ALS/MND ice bucket challenge. It was a remarkable social media campaign that spread worldwide, form those near and dear to suffers, everyday civilians and celebrities. The ice bucket challenge, which involves:

1. Filling a bucket (or large container) with ice and water

2. Tipping it over your head

3. Challenging/nominating three other people to participate in the challenge within 48hrs

4. If nominees don’t partake in the challenge within the 48 hours they make a donation to a MND charity - or you could do both!

(MND Australia)

To spread the campaign, which was an optional part of the challenge, participators had to film or take a picture of themselves and post it on the relevant social media platforms and tag #icebucketchallenge #MND

Over 60,000 people participated in Australia and more than 3 million dollars was donated to MND Australia and state MND associations. It is known as one of the powerful examples of the influence of social media. Looking at stats for ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis) there donations multiplied by 23 during that same time period, from 5 million to 114 million. (Tufts University. 2014). They also saw extreme changes and improvements in their social media following. When the challenge first began the ‘ALSA had 9000 Twitter followers and 35,000 Facebook likes. Post challenge campaign they have seen 146% increase on Twitter and 849% increase on Facebook’ (Tufts University. 2014). This increase traction and awareness has allowed a significant increase in education about the awareness.

(MND Australia)

Whilst awareness was raised and an increase in donations definitely occurred, it is believed that a good portion of the people were slacktivist – ‘the practice of supporting political or social cause by means such as social media or online petitions, characterised as involving very little effort or commitment’ (Oxford Dictionary. 2018). In saying that though, if the millions of donations helped to find a cure, then it has been for the greater of the good and contributed.

Did you participate in the #icebucketchallenge?

Have a look at some of the best celebrity #icebucketchallenges HERE

Reference:

MND Australia, ‘Ice Bucket Challenge’, MND Australia, viewed January 2018, available from http://www.mndaust.asn.au/MND-Australia-archive/Ice-Bucket-Challenge.aspx

Oxford Online Dictionaries, 2018, ‘Slacktivism’, English Oxford Living Dictionaries, accessed January 2018, available from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/slacktivism

Rees. A 2015, ‘Digital and Online Activism’, RESET Digital for Good, accessed December 2017, available from https://en.reset.org/knowledge/digital-and-online-activism

Shaw. B 2016, ‘Reasons Why Social Media Activism is Effective’, ODYSSEY, available from https://www.theodysseyonline.com/reasons-social-media-activism-affective

Tufts University School of Medicine, 2014, ‘The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge: The impact of Social Media on Health Communication’, Tufts University School of Medicine, accessed January 2018, available from https://sites.tufts.edu/publichealth/2014/09/18/the-als-ice-bucket-challenge-the-impact-of-social-media-on-health-communication/

[ljelliott]

Blog 3: Politics & Civic Cultures

(Khan, 2016)

For me as a 23-year-old, politics and elections is something that goes over my head. I am grateful that I have the power to vote, but as for what and who I am voting for, is something I am not overly educated in. Being of legal age and having the power to vote for five or six years now, I have participated and witnessed a few different elections. In that time frame and the last decade, social media has played a very influential part in the campaigns of the politicians and senators. The most renowned one of recent times which showed strong marketing and participation in the world of social media and technology was the 2016 US presidential campaign between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton.

Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat, create alternative ways to market political campaigns and different ways for candidates and voters to interact. This is smart way to get your Gen Y involved in political campaigns that may not be otherwise interested or privy to the information from the TV and newspapers. Data provided by Pew Research Centre in July 2016, reported that 44% of the US adults got information about the election from social media. With 24% of people getting information from the individual accounts of Trump and Clinton. Trump had almost 10 million twitter followers compared to Clintons seven million (Williams. 2017). Did trump win thanks to social media? Some may say yes, some no – most likely his social media habits were influential and contributed, but it is necessary to remember that follows, likes or views don’t always translate to votes.

Some of the great hashtags from the 2016 campaign can be found HERE 

How does Australian Political campaigns compare to the US? Well we all know the US like to do everything bigger and better than everyone else. In January 2017 Malcolm Turnbull has  972.8K followers, with leader of the opposition Bill Shorten well behind with 291.3K. Research indicates “the number of Australians following politicians on social media sites is growing. In 2016 13% of respondents to the study said they followed politicians and parties on social media. In 2017 the number grew to 20%” (Murphy. 2017).

Katharine Murphy, political editor of the Guardian Australia sat down with Caroline Fisher, assistant professor of Journalism at the University of Canberra to talk about the implications of a study on social media habits and Australian politics. Listen to the podcast HERE

Whilst social media is great and instant and quick with a wide reach, all users, particularly politicians need to be careful. One of the many skills they have is making sure their words never offend anyone, even when taken completely out of context. Therefore, they cannot afford and should be skilled enough to not partake in any spontaneous reactionary posts. Yes, it can be deleted but the power of screenshot is oh so powerful.

Where will we see electoral campaigns in the future? Will voting be done online?

Reference:

Khan, L 2016, ‘Trump v Clinton’, The Hill, viewed January 2018, available from <http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/technology/306175-trump-won-thanks-to-social-media>

Murphy, K 2017, ‘More Australians follow politicians on social media due to mainstream dissatisfaction-report’, The Guardian Australia, June 2017, viewed January 2018, available from <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jun/22/more-australians-follow-politicians-on-social-media-due-to-mainstream-dissatisfaction-report>

Williams, C 2017, ‘Introduction: Social Media, Political Marketing and the 2016 U.S. Election’, Journal of Political Marketing, vol. 16, issue 3-4, pages 207-211, available from <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15377857.2017.1345828?src=recsys&>

[alookintodigicom-blog]

How much is too much?

About a week ago, a friend of mine mentioned that one of her work colleagues was spending just under 2 hours of her week scrolling through her Instagram feed. Surprised and quite perplexed, she explained how she couldn’t understand how someone could spend so much time on social media over a week. “But how did she get that final number?” I thought. Oblivious and obviously not overly tech-savvy, my friend began to explain to me that in the iPhone settings, you can see which Apps your battery is using the most in the last 24 hours and also over the past 7 days. After saying our good-byes I couldn’t help but wonder and question how many hours out of my week was being taken up by mindlessly double-tapping, liking and tagging my friends in funny memes. I jumped on straight away, and I’m glad I didn’t in front of my judgemental friend. 2.9 hours! How could this be? Sure a scroll here and there, a scroll before I hit the pillow, another scroll sitting on the tram passing time. I started to question whether or not this in fact was too much time and if I was starting to have an unhealthy addiction.

Boyd (2012) outlines that to an outsider, wanting to be ‘always-on’ is all too often labelled as an addiction and may seem even pathological. It is assumed, that it is the technology we are addicted to, but on the contrary humans want to interact, connect with others, and are always curious. They take advantage of the affordances that these social media platforms (such as Instagram) provide to their sense of being part of a community, belonging and feeling connected (Boyd 2102).

An Australian documentary by Eva Orner called “It’s people like us” was released in September this year, to expose the dependence Australians have on smartphones and questions how they have developed into an extension of ourselves. The documentary follows five young Australians who agree to be filmed over a week period whilst driving, and the results are more than alarming. Each participant is filmed being drawn to their screens, staring down at their phones with several near-misses caught on tape. Taking selfies, sending snapchats, checking Facebook are all activities these participants were guilty of whilst driving. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnJqHhkvtNs Orner (2017) explains that the film aims to start a community conversation about using mobile phones at inappropriate times, and argues that it is people like us who are doing it, and people like us who can also decide that it’s not okay. Although the concept of being ‘always on’ has many benefits such as connectedness and a sense of belonging, it is key to find a balance between when and how we should use social media and how it is going to affect others. References: Boyd, D 2012, ‘Participating in the always-on lifestyle’, in M Mandiberg (ed) The Social Media Reader, NYU Press, pp. 71-76 Kuss, D 2017 ‘Social Networking Sites and Addiction: Ten Lessons Learned’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 14, no.3, pp.311  Omer, E 2017, It’s People Like Us Documentary, Positive Ape, viewed 1 December 2017, < http://www.itspeoplelikeus.com.au>.

[benjiswinburneme-blog]

Is technology redefining human connection? #1

Well, is it? Of course, it is. Since the launch of technology, we as humans have gradually changed the way we interact and connect with one another, that’s a no brainer. Gone are the days of Pen Pals (what were they again?) nowadays we spend most of our time looking like this.

In Week 1 we looked at the brilliant internet research pioneer and psychologist Sherry Turkle’s “Connected but alone” (TED-Ed 2013) presentation which explored the idea that people who are only connected through technology are ultimately becoming disconnected from their inner and outer lives AKA the real world. As Asano (2017) notes, as the years have gone past the amount of time people spend on social media increases, on average teens now spend up to 9 hours a day on social platforms, that nearly 64 hours a week browsing the likes of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, Twitter, Pinterest. It’s kind of scary to think that some teens only know this digital age we live in, what was there to do before the internet and social media?

 For those baby boomers, social media is often defined to as “the many relatively inexpensive and widely accessible electronic tools that enables anyone to publish and access information, collaborate on a common effort, or build relationships” (Murthy 2013, p. 7-8). Networks like Facebook and YouTube exceed billions of monthly active users, however as Newman (2014) notes, there is only a very small percentage of people who physically see their social connections on a regular basis. This is where the issues come in and what Sherry Turkles presentation highlights, have we lost touch of reality? It’s become seemingly too easy to just send a text or a “wave” in Facebook messenger to check in on a friend rather than physically see them in person (as that would take effort). In doing so as Taylor (2009) suggest, are we substituting real relationships for virtual ones? People can now fulfil many of their needs for connection through online communities without the fear of rejection, as they can present their best faces to their digital circles.

Digital or Online Communities is defined as “a group of people who regularly interact with each online, especially to share information and opinions on a common interest, with users of the internet” (Oxford Dictionary 2017). If you are a part of any of the social media networking sites mentioned above, you are a part of a digital community. Digital communities can be seen as a positive as you can interact with likeminded individuals anytime anywhere 24/7 or as Danah Boyd (2012) puts it, being “always-on”. The downside to being “always-on” is you lack physical stimulation, “there is no substitute for the depth and breadth of real, flesh-and-blood relationships where you can see, hear, smell, touch and sense the other person” (Taylor 2009).

A recent example surrounding the idea of social media and Turkle’s idea of people connected through technology becoming disconnected from their inner and outer lives can see through this interview with Ryan “Fitzy” Fitzgerald – who reveals his dependence on social media is having serious effects on his relationships.

http://www.bodyandsoul.com.au/mind-body/wellbeing/i-have-an-addiction-i-know-i-do/news-story/6cb35c809993e0ea40e49b41fabab9b6

Reference:

 Artotem 2008, “IHOP Cell Phone Meal Family” [image], Flickr, viewed 9th December 17

< https://www.flickr.com/photos/artotemsco/2857720047>

Assano, E 2017, “How much time do people spend on Social Media”, Social Media Today, viewed 09th December 17

https://www.socialmediatoday.com/marketing/how-much-time-do-people-spend-social-media-infographic

 BodyAndSoul 2017, “Ryan Fitzy I have an addiction” BodyAndSoul, viewed 9th December 17

< http://www.bodyandsoul.com.au/mind-body/wellbeing/i-have-an-addiction-i-know-i-do/news-story/6cb35c809993e0ea40e49b41fabab9b6>

 Ellison, Nicole and Danah Boyd. (2013). “Sociality through Social Network Sites.” In the Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies (Ed. William H. Dutton). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Murthy, D 2013, Twitter: Social Communication in the Twitter Age, Wiley, pp. 1-13.

Newman, D 2014, “4 Technology Trends Disrupting How we Communicate” FORBES, viewed 9th December 17 https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2014/05/13/4-technology-trends-disrupting-how-we-communicate/

 Oxford Living Dictionaries 2017, “Online Community” Oxford Dictionaries, viewed 09th December 17 < https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/online_community>

Social Media Today, “How much time do I Spend on Social Media” [image], Social Media Today, viewed 9th December 17  https://www.socialmediatoday.com/marketing/how-much-time-do-people-spend-social-media-infographic> 

TED-Ed 2013, Connected, but alone? - Sherry Turkle, 19 April, viewed 3 August 2016, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv0g8TsnA6c>.

[ljelliott]

BLOG 2: AFFORDANCES

“The value of a well-designed object is when it has such a rich set of affordances, that people who use it can do things with it that the designer never imagines” (Norman. 2011).

It refers to the relationship between the object and the person and what the person can do with the object or what the object can offer the person.

“At increasing rates, technology has produced the means for more efficient forms of communication and a pathway for new forms of expression. For example, with the invention of smart phones, many applications emerged to not only enhance the user’s experience with the devices, but also to create extensions of their physical identity. Many social media platforms emerged to allow these users to create their virtual identities and connect with others” (LUVURSELF. 2017). Lets take a look at some of the affordances of some of our frequently used social media platforms:

Twitter: Originally designed as an SMS-based communication platform, so a group of friends of could keep tabs on each other based on their status updates. When originally released, 140 characters was the limit, that of an SMS, making it creatively constrained. As the platform began to grow and the user capacity began to expand, as did its functionalities, capabilities and therefore affordances. A once one-way communication was now available meaning people were able to communicate with others rather than just provide a statement. The ‘star’ sign was changed to the ‘heart’ to signify like to be on par with other platforms and provide an easier and relatable experience for the user. Users have also created their own affordances, inserting bitly links to full stories, imbedding graphics which capture more information in a more creative setting.

Snapchat: It provided, and still to this day is the only one that does, with users the ability to post a photo for just a very short period of time (10 seconds or less). When the platform began to rein popularity, it began to offer more to its user and strengthen the relationship between the object and the user. It added chat function and group sharing capabilities, adapting to the user and it needs.

Facebook: The book is probably up their with the king of affordances, from it what Zuckerberg originally intended the platform to do and offer, to where it sits today on a global usage scale and the functionalities and capabilities it offers. From the simply profile sharing and meeting new people, now adapting and affording live streams, advertising, polls, businesses, news platforms, event management and more.

Affordances will vary from user to user, dependent on their purpose of activity on the given platform. Affordances need to occur to retain and grow the user base of the platform. It is an expectation of society that the affordances will continue to grow and occur.

The below video, whilst slightly outdated covers affordances in relation to snapchat and Facebook.

References:

LUVURSELF. 2017, The Four Affordances and Instagram’, LUVURSELF Blog, accessed December 2017, available from http://shanicek.com/cmf/the-four-affordances-and-instagram/

Interaction-Design.org 2011, Affordances (Don Norman, 1994), viewed via Swinburne Learning Materials December 2017,  <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK1Zb_5VxuM>.

[ljelliott]

BLOG 1: DIGITAL COMMUNITIES

The concept of ‘digital’ is so diverse and for each individual can represent a different meaning and provide a different purpose, with neither one of them correct nor incorrect.

Community – a more commonly agreed upon term, representing something similar to “a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common” (Oxford Dictionary).

And together, digital communities are everywhere. Combined they are described as ‘communities of interest or place that rely on digital technologies such as mobile phones, the internet or email to communicate, network and disseminate information’ (Foth. 2008).

IF YOU’RE READING THIS – WE ARE ALL OPERATING IN ONE NOW

Two of the most common questions around digital communities and social media are:

1. Is technology redefining human connections?

2. What holds a [online] society together when most of us are strangers?

In a powerful TED video, Tuckle (2013) says ‘our devices are psychologically powerful, they don’t only change what we do, but who we are’. Identity and personality are discovered through DNA and upbringing, they are not meant to be created by digital communities, if they were technology should be solely responsible for reproduction and child upbringing. Not only is it impacting us as who we are, but also putting a whole new dimension on relationships. “New technology has allowed people formerly disconnected to establish relationships that have increased creativity, innovation, productivity and efficiency” (Taylor. 2009). And as we all know, it has enabled us to maintain relationships with friends and family who live a great distance away or travel frequently.

Almost every interaction we have is built on trust – relationships, business, government, even eBay can’t survive without it. But why do we have so much trust when it comes to our digital communities? Do you think you have more trust online then you do in the real-world society? Does trusting strangers mean we are more of a ‘real’ society than we think? Head tilting think worthy, isn’t it. Psychology professor David Dunning did research into why we trust strangers so much online and states that ‘people feel a social duty to respect the other person/people. “You can interpret that as either being a sign of solidarity, an inexplicable sense of belonging to and being a member of a community in which everyone treats everyone with respect, or you can view it in a slightly more cynical way – that people trust others because they think they have to, and are guilted into acting in the more magnanimous way” (Park. 2014).

You all know what a digital community is, how it works and your personal pros and cons – we’re connecting in one right now. Is it right, is it wrong, is it the future, is there more or will it die – that’s all not a debate that can be discussed in 450 words.

Source: Business Wales 

References:

Business Wales, ‘2M Support for the Digital Communities Wales Announced’ accessed December 2017, available from https://businesswales.gov.wales/blog/news/%C2%A32m-support-digital-communities-wales-announced 

Marcus Foth. 2008, ‘Urban Infomatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City’ Queensland, Australia, accessed December 2017, available from https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/digital-communities/7583  

Oxford Dictionary Online. 2017, ‘Community’, English Oxford Living Dictionaries, accessed December 2017, available from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/community

Park, Alex. 2014, ‘We Trust Strangers, Even When It Doesn’t Make Sense To Do So’ TIME, accessed December 2017, available from http://time.com/103396/we-trust-strangers-even-when-it-doesnt-make-sense-to-do-so/

Taylor, Jim. 2013, ‘Technology: Relationships 2.0: How Technology is Redefining How We Connect’ Psychology Today, accessed December 2017, available from   https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-power-prime/200910/technology-relationships-20-how-technology-is-redefining-how-we-connect

TED-Ed 2013, Connected, but alone?- Sherry Turkle, 19 April, viewed 3 August 2016, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv0g8TsnA6c>

[ljelliott]

Them feels about overcoming your fears to make your first tumblr post...