living like a millennial

Exploring what it means to be a part of a digital world. How do we interact? What platforms do we use? How can we make our voice heard? Watch as we experience life living like a millennial...

[kengalvin-blog]

The collective nature of the crowd

Crowdfunding has become a bit of a buzzword over recent years, so firstly let’s look at what is crowdfunding? It’s a fundraising practice that utilises connections much like networked publics to gather funding in support of a specific project (Doan & Toledana 2017, p. 38). To put this practice into a fun pop-culture perspective we can look at a successful crowdfunding campaign instigated by Kevin Roberts in 2013. Veronica Mars, a detective drama following the adventures of a high school/college student by day and teen detective by night was revitalised as a feature-length film through networked crowdfunding seven years after the series was cancelled from network television (Yahr 2014). Roberts employed the help of Kickstart.com, a website dedicated to helping raise funds for creative projects. Roberts initially requested $2 million dollars for the project but by the end of the crowdfunding campaign, he had raised a staggering $5,702,153 (Hills 2015, p. 2). If you consider that this project targeted a very specific niche demographic it highlights the impact and possibilities of using networked publics to generate connections by utilising the affordance of spreadability to link dispersed individuals who can come together to fund a common goal, it also tells me that teen detective dramas are wildly more popular and I may be missing out on quality television.

Veronica Mars (Shellstropaljamil 2016)

If it’s possible to not just generate involvement but to exceed expectations for the value of entertainment, can we take the same basic principle of using online networks collective nature and converge in collective democratic action? This is exactly what the developers of Ushahidi proceed to do in the aftermath of the 2007 Kenyan elections. Post-election protests turned into widespread violence, which leads Kenyan blogger Ory Okolloh to make a public appeal to her followers asking for ideas of how it may be possible to collect information regarding the names of Kenyan citizens who lost their lives in the violence throughout this turbulent period. Approximately twenty develops came to the aid and offered their time and labour to develop a tracking system via SMS and an online platform, and in a week Ushahidi was born (Ford 2012 p. 33-34). Ushahidi was developed through the collective nature of crowdsourcing, crowdsourcing goes beyond the collective funding, crowdsourcing commodity is people power, its a collective of individuals and their skills sets brought together to create and find solutions to a task or problem (Shepherd 2012, p. 11).

Crisis Mapping Japan (Ushahidi 2011)

Ushahidi’s success is its ability to utilize networked publics affordances of direct participation, as Henry Jenkins eloquently states, “crowdsourcing is about shifting the power relations between audience and producers” (2013 p. 248). The collective nature of Ushahidi promotes the co-creative involvement of collective groups establishing a bottom-up networks (Zorina 2016, p. 85). Since the turbulent Kenyan election of 2007, countless Ushahidi maps have been developed in over 159 countries (Hyman 2014, p. 28) to track an abundance of social, political and environmental issues. Ushahidi is a constantly evolving platform with users embracing the affordance of crowdsourcing collaborative nature helping to stimulate a worldwide social consciousness “to help improve the bottom-up flow of information” (Ushahidi 2018).

Ushahidi’s Crisis Mapping in 40 seconds (99 Faces TV 2011)

Reference List

Aljona, Z 2016, ‘From a competing to a collaborative crowd: Tactics for co-creation with innovative bottom-up communities: Tactics for co-creation with innovative bottom-up communities’, Organizational Dynamics, vol. 45, no. 2, pp.80-93.

Doan, M & Toledano, M 2018, ‘Beyond organization-centred public relations: Collective action through a civic crowdfunding campaign’, Public Relations Review, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 37-46.

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

Hills, M 2015, ‘Veronica Mars , fandom, and the ‘Affective Economics’ of crowdfunding poachers’, New Media & Society, vol. 17, no. 2, pp.183-197.

Hyman, P 2014, ‘Peace Technologies’ Enable Eyewitness Reporting When Disasters Strike’, Communications of the ACM, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 27-29.

Jenkins, H,  Ford, S & Green, J 2013, Spreadable Media - Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture, NYU Press, Ebook Central (ProQuest).

99 Faces TV 2011, Ushahidi’s Crisis Mapping in 40 seconds, 24 March, viewed 17 May 2018, <https://youtu.be/SakTPDHs6iI>.

Shellstropaljamil 2016, ‘Veronica Mars Amazing’, [image], Tumblr, viewed 17 May 2018, <https://78.media.tumblr.com/9da1690a02ecc1f6ca8281bddd9588ae/tumblr_nmjn88Iuo11rohg16o3_250.gif>.

Shepherd, H 2012, ‘Crowdsourcing’, Contexts, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 10-11.

Ushahidi 2011, ‘ Crisis Mapping Japan’, [image], Ushahidi, viewed 17 May 2018, <https://2ee8a9b674d3b6a52133-b7785f8c6e03b0b67de30b88e1b0fcb9.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/2011/04/sinsai-500x348.png>.

Ushahidi 2018, About Ushahidi, Ushahidi, viewed 15 May 2018,<https://www.ushahidi.com/about>.

Yahr, E 2014, ‘Veronica Mars’ creator Rob Thomas explains how his canceled show rose from the ashes for a groundbreaking movie, The Washington Post, viewed 15 May 2018, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2014/03/13/veronica-mars-creator-rob-thomas-explains-how-his-canceled-show-rose-from-the-ashes-for-a-groundbreaking-movie/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d3b70ae07666>.

[florenciablogs-blog]

Show, don’t tell.

As the saying goes, a picture says a thousand words.

And in a time where there is no time that could not prove truer.

As technology morphs we grow less impatient while our capacity to concentrate withers. Like children, we focus on the bright, bold and loud shifting to the new craze that will stimulate our senses.

Our forms of communication through technology have become so broad that we have replaced much of them with images in the form of selfies, gifs, memes, bitmojis and emojis. There is virtually nothing an image can’t express and if anything using them adds layering words cannot. This human expression or emotional depth an image can provide is the fuel that has propelled its everyday use. 

These visual references allow for common associations, ones that transpose geography, language and age groups to lace individuals together with affinities. An affinity is a point of interest where we find a common link, “network users that share an affinity with the ideas that are being visually projected" (Vivienne & Burgess 2013).

In an interview with Jason Farman, Nathan Yugensou discusses the conceptual change of meaning behind a picture. Where before the photo would be the ends today the photo is the means to communicate a message. The photo itself often becomes secondary or unimportant, mere symbolism driving an idea further.

This ephemeral communication has allowed Instagram to grow to universal status and birthed snapchat.

The means of a picture is such that often we feel we need this image to validate our social encounters.

Remember the most beautiful place you last visited? When you arrived, did you have the urging desire to grab your phone and take a picture, video or story? A need to capture the moment, to share it with your friends? So then, why did this picture not simply stay in your camera roll, for you?

Why did you share this?

To some degree knowing/unknowingly we do this to cement social stance, to remind people that we’re out there living? Because fundamentally if this was not true, we wouldn’t share it on social media platforms. That is not to say this is good or bad- humans are social animals and as such we crave communication but when we are posting faster than we are thinking we need to pause and restart. 

Time to read more Dalai Lama quotes instead of posting them.

 References

Hjorth, L 2011, ‘Mobile spectres of intimacy: the gendered role of mobile technologies in love – past, present and future’, in R, Ling & S, Campbell (eds) The Mobile Communication Research Series: Volume II, Mobile Communication: Bringing Us Together or Tearing Us Apart? Transaction Books Edison, NJ , pp. 37-60.

Jason Farman 2014, Photography, Self Documentation, & Social Media: An Interview with Nathan Jurgenson, 16 June, viewed 14 May 2018, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnPtZ5lKDHo>.

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.

Mizuko, I 2008 ‘Introduction’, in K, Vamelis, ed. Networked Publics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1-14.

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

[oksanarazo-blog]

Blog 7: Visual Communities and Social Imaging

In this modern age personal photography and later video have become embedded into our everyday lives. With huge developments in cameras and mobile phones we have notices a huge jump in person and social imaging. The term networked visuality is becoming an integral part of the formation and maintenance of social networks. Snapshots are becoming a common part of communication and even self-designated imaging communities.

The rise of selfie culture with is a self-portrait at arm’s length shared via social media is a prominent component of social imaging (Swinburne Online, 2018). One of the primary platforms used is SnapChat. By removing the permanence of the image in the visual community it works to overcome self-consciousness as discomfort of your personal image being stored. Snap Chat is a great way to share your day to day experiences without posting it anywhere public. It allows you to control who sees the image and how long for. Snap Chat is being used by all ages as a great way to keep in touch ad updated with friends and family. SnapChat also allows you to apply filters to your face to make it more fun and interactive.

Social media platforms such as Facebook and SnapChat have increased interpersonal relationships. If a relationship improves over social media, it’s been shown to improve face-to-face as well (Velten, J & Arif, R 2017, pp. 16). Through the experimental phase of a relationship - messaging apps allow people to ask questions they may not feel comfortable asking face-to-face initially (Velten, J & Arif, R 2017, pp. 16). It also appeals to the self-disclosure stage of a relationship – as it allows other people to see only what you want to see and maintain and ideal appearance.

Taking Selfies using snapchat has been found to be a great tool to reinitiate family/friend relationships. When one is less likely to call they are more likely to communicate through images.

With all these positives there are many negatives that come with social images. The nature of images disappearing could push people to take risky images. But many people forget these images can still be saved using a screen shot (Velten, J & Arif, R 2017, pp. 27). The other perceived risk is people adding you and sending you snaps when you may not know them. Snapchat is an excellent platform – but with all social media there Is a risk. Using it appropriately and with people you know is the safest option.

[mo2scallywags]

Politics and civic cultures

The 2010 Federal election has been described as the “The Twitter Election” due to the increased level of use of social media but, that it was not so much the use by politicians of social media in their individual campaigns that was of note but rather the higher level of engagement with political ideas and debate by the Australian people and the media that was significant.  The 2010 election was notable more so for the way everyday Australians took up social media to become more politically involved than by the acceptance of social media by politicians.

Why Do Politicians Use Social Media?

Politicians can use social media and the audiences that social media sites provide to:

·         gather support

·         push policies

·         create a personable image

·         organize campaign

·         attack opponents

·         create personal connection with voters

·         provide a real-time information

·         show that politicians understand society

·         Interact in online debate

·         reach particular voter groups

·         surveillance of citizens by government

A research report by Theresa Sauter and Axel Bruns about social media in the media reported that there was a shift towards real-time focus, interaction and online debate in 2010 and 2012 which may be because of the increased use of Twitter as a public real-time social media platform.  They also found that the percentage of politicians incorrectly using social media was decreasing, which would indicate that politicians have become better at using social media and that there is less anxiety about how to use it properly.  Social media is now integrated into our everyday lives and also into the professional practices of politicians.

When I think of politicians and social media I immediately recalled the story of Cathy McGowan and her stunning victory as an independent in the former liberal held safe seat on Indi. Indi had been held by the conservatives since 1931 and in 2012 a young group of former residents or “Indi expats” as they became to be known created the Voice for Indi, where they started to gather information about what was concerning people in the electorate.  The indi expats were able to use their knowledge of social media use as Twitter and Facebook to raise awareness and crowdfunding software to raise money.

Cam Klose, Cathy’s media liaison reported that they maintained an active social media presence throughout the election campaign and states that part of the success of the campaign was their ability to convert social media followers into volunteers

“What was particularly important for me was the involvement of young people,” she said. “The work of the younger generation was critical to the success of the campaign and especially the vibrant online presence we were able to create.” Cathy McGowan (2010)

References

Evans, B, 2014, ‘The insurgent from Indi’, Inside Story, 30 April, viewed 22 April 2018, <http://insidestory.org.au/the-insurgent-from-indi/>

Cathy McGowan Independent Member for Indi, c 2018, The Story, Cathy McGowan, viewed 22 April 2018, <http://www.cathymcgowan.com.au/the_story>

Burgess, J, Bruns, A. (2012), ‘Not the Twitter Election: The Dynamics of the #ausvotes Conversation in Relation to the Australian Media Ecology’, Journalism Practice, Vol 6(3), pp. 384-402.

Bruns, A, Sauter T, 2013,  ‘Social Media in the Media: How Australian Media Perceive Social Media as Political Tools’, ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation.

[jessicaellisblog-blog]

Interesting Blog! Really enjoyed the read!

It’s so crazy how social media is now having such a huge impact on politics. 

I was reading an article by Tom Murse on how social media has changed politics and how campaigns now go viral! 

Twitter and Facebook have become instrumental in organizing campaigns. They allow like-minded voters and activists to easily share news and information such as campaign events with each other. That’s what the “Share” function on Facebook and “retweet” feature of Twitter are for.

Donald Trump used Twitter heavily in his 2016 presidential campaign. “I like it because I can get also my point of view out there, and my point of view is very important to a lot of people that are looking at me,” Trump said.

Social media is having a huge impact impact on politics and it’s hard to see if there are more advantages than disadvantages.

Great work again

Jess

[joelblogshere-blog]

Post 1A (1) - Are we connected but alone - further analysis

I’m going to start this blog journey by reflecting on week one “Are we connected but alone”.

Above video: Professor Tracy Alloway says that “social media has changed our attention, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing” (TEDx, 2016)

Sherry Turkle, a Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology believes that whilst Facebook helps us keep in touch with friends, it is also used too much to substitute spending face to face time with them (New York Times Upfront, 2014 p. 23). Sherry continues to suggest that due to people feeling the need to keep up with their friends’ online activities, people have forgotten how to disconnect and enjoy alone time. In the same article, Sree Sreenivasan believes that it is ridiculous to blame Facebook for people being lonely, and that social media only amplifies who you are in real life – if you’re a lonely person in general, social media will only make you more lonely.

There is a lot of interesting studies about the link between connectedness and loneliness. A study on older adults found that technology can be an enabler (Ballantyne et al 2010 p. 30), and that the internet and social media sites can help bring long distance family members together. It’s also important to note that this particular study was conducted on a one on one basis in the individuals own homes, creating a supportive environment, and that without that support older individuals may not understand the technology well enough to be able to participate. Melbourne University philosopher Damon Young suggests that older people who haven’t been saturated with information may be more able to enjoy their own company compared to Generation Y who grew up in a connected world (Griffin, 2011).

Above image: It’s interesting to note that whilst different sources suggest the birthdates of Generations are different, that the understanding of generation beliefs is pretty much the same. (Consultancy UK 2015)

What does all this mean though? Are Generation Y – those of us who were born from the late 1970’s-1994 and went through their teen years as the world wide web started to develop, and Generation Z – those born from 1995-2012 and even more internet savvy than Gen Y (WJSchroer, n.d.), are we too much connected via the internet and social media than Gen X and the Boomers who have been around longer than us and weren’t exposed to online environments until they were much older? Is wanting to communicate through a computer or a mobile device because people are more comfortable something that needs to be dealt with, a condition that needs to be labelled, and a fix/cure found for? Personally I don’t think there’s one single answer to this. We all come from different backgrounds – different life experiences, different cultures, different medical conditions that may affect how we communicate. Our backgrounds also affect how we manage social conflict too.

I think most people wish they had more friendships, and face to face encounters. Do you agree?

Above image: “Social Media is like Ancient Egypt, writing things on walls and worshipping cats” - George Takei (Sahakians 2016)

References

Ballantyne, A., Trenwith, L. Zubrinich, S. and Corlis, M. 2010, ‘I feel less lonely’: what older people are saying about participating in a social media website”, Quality in Ageing and Older Adults, vol. 11, no 3., pp. 25-35, viewed April 2 2018 <https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/10.5042/qiaoa.2010.0526>.

Consultancy UK 2015, ‘So who are the different Generations?’ [image], in Consultancy UK – Generation Y less satisfied than other Generations, Consultancy Network, viewed 2 April 2018, < https://www.consultancy.uk/news/2061/generation-y-less-satisfied-than-other-generations>.

Griffin, M 2011, ‘Generation Y is so connected, but oh so lonely: survey”’, The Age, 20 July, p.8, viewed 2 April 2018 <http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A278112330/AONE?u=swinburne1&sid=AONE&xid=0f2042de>.

New York Times Upfront, 2014, Is Facebook making us lonely? Some say social media keeps us connected. Others argue that it breeds loneliness., New York Times Upfront, 17 March, viewed April 2 2018 <http://link.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/apps/doc/A361711282/AONE?u=swinburne1&sid=AONE&xid=232f82ea>.

Sahakians, S 2016, ‘…like ancient Egypt’ [image], in Buffer Social - 20 Metaphors That Explain Social Media Perfectly, Buffer Blog, viewed 2 April 2018, <https://blog.bufferapp.com/what-is-social-media>.

TEDx Talks 2016, Facebook Fearless: How social media can be good for you: Tracy Alloway, 12 December, viewed 2April 2018 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkqaQ-0bCpM>.

[mackbruce96-blog]

But first... let me post this photo so everyone knows I’m here!

Growing developments in digital and camera technologies, social media, and mobile phones have paved the way for a new era of photography. The power is now with the people.  Anyone with a smartphone now has access to a camera and along with it, the ability to capture just about anything. Social media has also played an integral role in the rise of personal photography as well as in the formation of visual communities. Whilst beneficial in sharing and pushing creativity, these technologies have led to adverse effects on users. This new way of photography and social interaction is here to stay, so let’s delve further into the world of ubiquitous photography.

Advancements in digital technologies have allowed photography to be a much more shared experience and thus created visual communities. Hjorth (2011) likens the rise of visual networks is in conjunction with the embrace of camera phones from society. This also correlates with the surge of popularity amongst visual social media platforms such as Instagram and Snapchat. In Australia alone, Sensis (2017) reports that of all social media users, 46% use Instagram and Snapchat trailing closely behind at 40%. The way society interacts with these platforms and the use of digital photography has been of much debate in recent times. Socialization now takes place simultaneously in the ‘real world’ and online. Scholars suggest that digital photography and the platforms they feature on are now ‘becoming part of the ways that environments and socialities are experienced’ (Hjorth & Pink 2013). They later go on to discuss the coexistence of the offline and online worlds, suggesting that they are the very same place (Hjorth & Pink 2013). This can be seen in the ways visual communities use social media during concerts and live performances. Coexistence is evident in the way that whilst audiences are at a concert live, they are also uploading personal videos and photography to social network platforms. The concert experience has shifted from a solely offline live experience to one that incorporates both the offline and online with the assistance of social media platforms. This new type of sociality has allowed a greater connections between users and has greatly shifted the concept of personal imagery. Whilst enhancing experiences and connections, visual communities also harbour adverse effects on users.

Watch this video of Justin Bieber on Ellen and examine the way audiences are experiencing the performance.

Recently there has been much interest in the authenticity and reality of users on visual communities like Instagram and other social media platforms. The sharing and distribution of personal video and photography can now be monetised which makes this interest valid. Essena O’Neill, a former Instagram model, famously chose to expose the truth behind this type of participation in visual communities. Recaptioning countless posts, O’Neill wanted to reveal what actually happened during the process of capturing images she posted on Instagram (Hunt 2015). The young Australian uploaded posts in sexualised positions used to promote brands and as she claimed, was ‘contrived perfection made to get attention’ (Hunt 2015). Instances like this display the effects that visual networks can have on the user themselves but also on their followers. Displaying false body types, such as seen in Essena O’Neill’s posts, can be detrimental to the networks they post to. As O’Neill has shown, whilst visual networking can cause detrimental effects on multiple levels, these technologies provide the perfect platforms to make social commentary.

References Hjorth, L 2011, ‘Locating the online: Creativity and user-created content in Seoul’, Media International Australia Incorporating Culture and Policy, Sage Publications, California, pp. 118 – 127.

Hjorth, L, Pink, S, 2013, ‘New visualities and the digital wayfarer: Reconceptualizing camera phone photography and locative media’, Mobile Media and Communication, Sage Publications, California, pp. 40 – 57.

Hunt, E 2015, ‘Essena O’Neill quits Instagram claiming social media ‘is not real life’’, The Guardian, 3 November, viewed 21 June 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/03/instagram-star-essena-oneill-quits-2d-life-to-reveal-true-story-behind-images

[mackbruce96-blog]

Tweet, Tweet, Tweet! I have information to share...

The emergence and growing shift of society forming digital communities has greatly shaped the effectiveness of crowdsourcing. Accessing digital technologies such as social media and other online platforms have been pivotal to this success. In times of crisis, individuals and organizations have used these mediums as a way to reach the most amount of users, or digital citizens, as possible. The success of crowdsourcing can be attributed to several central factors; the most prominent being immediacy. Analyzing this factor reveals the importance digital communities have had in effective crowdsourcing scenarios.

Modern crowdsourcing has successfully accessed digital platforms and social media; effectively removing all barriers that interfered with connectedness. Crowdsourcing leverages social media and online platforms capabilities to attain information and use it for a greater purpose (Rahman & Yadav 2016). Merriam Webster Online (2018) also describes the process as a way of obtaining information and other content from online communities, rather than via traditional methods like inhouse or company research. This method of gathering information has increased the speed in which content is received, which can be seen as an effective asset in times of crisis. Where traditional news broadcasts may take an entire day to reach information and report on it, accessing crowdsourced content allows immediate coverage. Recent research suggests that crowdsourced information, with the assistance of social media and online platforms, has the ability to reach millions of eyes within minutes (Koswatte, McDougall & Liu 2015). In disaster situations like floods, bushfires, and tsunamis, this can be a crucial tool in providing assistance and targeting areas in need.

During the 2011 Queensland Floods Twitter posts, featuring the #qldfloods hashtag, were an effective tool in gathering disaster information. Tweets spiked up to 1100 entries per hour during the event and had a continued presence over the days following (Bruns, Burgess, Crawford & Shaw 2012). This amount of information and the speed it was delivered greatly impacted disaster relief organisations ability to act on the situation, and the comprehensiveness of news coverage (Bruns et. al 2012). Whilst this example displays the effective use of Twitter for crowdsourcing information in times of crisis, many other social media platforms allow for this type of immediacy. The effectiveness greatly relies on the formation of digital communities and the increasing use of social media. Siapera (2012) suggests that society has a necessity to share information. This need is exploited in crowdsourcing events for positive effects. Crowdsourcing effectively access digital technologies to gather information in times of crisis.

Images that detail the disaster of the 2011 Queensland Floods can be found here

References Bruns, A, Burgess, J, Crawford, K & Shaw, F 2012, #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods, Arc Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation, viewed 19 June 2018, <http://www.cci.edu.au/floodsreport.pdf>.

Koswatte, S, McDougall, K, Liu, X 2015, ‘SDI and crowdsourced information management automation for disaster management’, Survey Review, Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp. 307 – 315.

Merriam Webster Online 2018, 'crowdsourcing entry', viewed 19 June 2018,<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crowdsourcing>.

Rahman, Z, Yadav, M 2016, ‘The social role of social media: The case of Chennai rains 2015’, Social Network Analysis and Mining, Springer, Berlin, pp. 1 – 12.

Siapera, E 2012, ‘Socialities and social media’, Understanding New Media, Sage, London, pp. 191 – 208.

[mackbruce96-blog]

Pokémon GO(ing) to make me social and healthy?

Continuing to grow in popularity, gaming has become an integral part of the modern media industry. Advancements in digital technologies have led to a shift into communicative online gaming, known as social gaming (Kroger, Quandt 2013). These new technologies have also paved the way for ‘lighter’ games to be created on platforms like Facebook, as well as attracting wider audiences to the media form (Kroger, Quandt 2013). Social gaming places emphasis on interaction between players and the formation of online communities. With social gaming growing in prevalence what effects does it put on the users of the games? Additionally, what guidelines are in place to maintain a thriving environment for players? Let’s look into the health benefits related to social gaming.

In recent years we’ve seen a developing area of social gaming on mobile devices. Allowing you to play just about anywhere, a regular cell phone can now be a gaming hub (Oaks 2015). Pokémon GO has taken complete advantage of this technology and created a social game that encourages players to improve their health. Users of the game must walk to catch and level up their creatures online, additionally players can evolve Pokémon and compete in battles and raids (Reynolds 2018). With increased amounts of physical activity overtime (Behnke, Dziekan, Guzik, Kaczmarek & Misiak 2017), players of Pokémon GO had essentially lowered their risks cardiovascular disease and type two diabetes, as well as promoting a healthier wellbeing (Department of Health 2017). Social gaming, although typically characterised as playing in front of a television or computer, is influential in the development of better health.

References Behnke, M, Dziekan, M, Guzik, P, Kaczmarek, L & Misiak, M 2017, ‘The Pikachu effect: Social and health gaming motivations lead to greater benefits of Pokemon GO use’, Computers in Human Behavior, pp. 356 – 363, viewed 17 May 2018, https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0747563217303527.

Department of Health 2017, Physical activity, viewed 17 May 2018, http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/phy-activity.

Kroger, S, Quandt, T 2013, ‘Social aspects of digital gaming’, Multiplayer: The Social Aspects of Digital Gaming, Routledge, Abingdon, pp. 3 – 46.

Oaks, J 2015, ‘How mobile gaming changed and where it’s going’, Social Media Today, 28 February, viewed 18 May 2018, https://www.socialmediatoday.com/technology-data/2015-02-28/how-mobile-gaming-changed-and-where-its-going.

Reynolds, M 2018, ‘Pokemon GO raids – raid bosses, counters, level requirement, how EX raid battles, raid rewards, and raid passes work’, Eurogamer, 6 March, viewed 19 May 2018, https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-03-06-pokemon-go-raids-raid-battles-raid-bosses-raid-passes-raid-rewards-4819.

[mackbruce96-blog]

Politicians on social media!? What’s up with that?

Social media platforms provide users an online environment to share content, discuss issues and be involved in a community. Members of parliament see to capitalize on the immense popularity of social media and often use it as a place of discussion and commentary on relevant issues. Additionally politicians now access these platforms to enhance election campaigning and interaction with local communities (Bruns, Moon 2018). Examining digital technologies impact on public interaction with politics is highly relevant. Discussing the ways in which politicians use social media to make commentary is also necessary. Let’s look at the shifting ways politicians communicate with the public and the benefits to social media.

Increasingly, social media is playing a central role in the campaigning of politicians in elections and in everyday political discussion. The notion has become normalized and ultimately led to heavily constructed and targeted social media presence and campaigns (Bruns, Moon 2014). Whilst this is common among a vast spread of politicians globally, there are several factors that vary. Campaigning methods will differ depending on locality and social context as well the social media platforms they access. For example, in Australia Facebook and Instagram are the top two most used social media platforms, as opposed to Twitter and Snapchat which feature less Australian users (Sensis 2017). Taking this information into consideration, an Australian politician would benefit most from using Facebook and Instagram to interact with the public. This is a reflection on the Australian demographic and if compared to America, for example, may differ. Using social media platforms that voters access is key in reaching those voters.

Politicians access social media platforms in a variety of ways, some successfully, others… not so much. Notorious for uploading twitter posts, President Trump highlights the power social media has in connecting politicians to the public. Even commenting on the issue himself Trump (2017) wrote, ‘I use Social Media not because I like to, but because it is the only way to fight a VERY dishonest and unfair “press”’. Whilst he may not prefer this method of communication with voters, he sees it as the only way to truly comment on and discuss issues with the public. Another basic example of using social media to connect with voters is Ex-Prime Minister Tony Abbotts use of YouTube. Abbott used the platform to issue messages to the public as well as showcase his involvement with community. Mentioned previously, the use of social media is ultimately reflective of the social context. Each leader chose the respective social media platforms that would best enhance their political message and interactions with voters.

References Bruns, A, Moon, B 2018, ‘Social media in Australian federal elections: Comparing the 2013 and 2016 campaigns’, Journalism and Mass Media Quarterly, pp. 425 – 448.

Sensis 2017, ‘The must-know stats from the 2017 Sensis social media report’, viewed 6 June 2018, https://www.sensis.com.au/about/our-reports/sensis-social-media-report.html

Trump, D 2017, 31 December, viewed 5 June, https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/947235015343202304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fpolitics%2Fla-pol-updates-everything-president-1514673945-htmlstory.html

[mackbruce96-blog]

Dear Troll, this isn’t funny anymore...

While creating an environment to share, form communities and interact with others, social media is also plagued with trolling and other conflict. In Australia alone trolling, or more broadly – cyberbullying, affects up to one in five young people (Reach Out 2018). This highlights the need for education in managing these types of issues and how to diffuse them. Examining the responsibilities of a digital citizen and the role we play as interactants and bystanders of online conflict is also relevant. So what is trolling?

With trolling affecting a vast majority of young Australians there is a necessity for further education on the matter. Trolling refers to the ‘deliberate, deceptive, and mischievous’ behaviours of online users towards others (Papez, Veer 2017). Seen on a number of different social platforms, including YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, there are countless users accessing these sites with antisocial behaviours. The effects of these behaviours on others are greatly impacting, often leading to issues with self-esteem and mental health (Katz, Keeley, Spears, Taddeo, Swirski, & Bates 2014). Knock-on effects include emotional harm and even suicide (Manuel 2011). With the detrimental effects social media has had on minors, surprisingly there is little continued support for adolescents and adults available (Manuel 2011). As users of social media and digital technologies this questions our position and interactions with others on online spaces.

With social networks and online spaces widely available to all users this creates immense space for trolling and cyber bullying to occur. This increased space means a larger audience may come into contact with online bullying (Holfeld 2014). Often these onlookers can be described as bystanders and play an interesting role in the scenario. Although not immediately involved, they do have the power to alter the situation. A YouTube video uploaded in 2012 featured a women making racial slurs to another bus commuter. Filmed from the point of view of a bystander they later went on to release this video and, in keeping with the previous post, called for change. This bystander became active in the situation and not only assisted the victim but also the countless other victims of racial bullying. Whilst this bullying didn’t occur on a digital platform, it perfectly exemplifies how powerful a bystander on social media can be.

Social media conflict and trolling is a continuing issue on platforms across the internet. Educating children about how to cope with cyberbullying and maintaining a healthy wellbeing and resilience is highly important. Existing documents assist in this process but further development of resources for adolescents and adults is needed, as this is a worldly issue. Realizing the importance of your voice in digital society is also highly relevant. Becoming an active bystander and helping those in need promotes a positive social media environment.

References Holfeld, B 2014, ‘Perceptions and attributions of bystanders to cyber bullying’, Computers in Human Behaviour, pp. 1 – 7.

Katz, I, Keeley, M, Spears, B, Taddeo, C, Swirski, T, Bates, S 2014, ‘Research on youth exposure to, and management of, cyberbullying incidents in Australia: Synthesis report’, Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW Australia.

Manuel, N 2011, ‘Cyber-bullying: Its recent emergence and needed legislation to protect adolescent victims’, Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law, pp. 219 – 252.

Papez, M, Veer, E 2017, ‘Don’t feed the trolling: Rethinking how online trolling is being defined and combated’, Journal of Marketing Management, Routledge, Abingdon.

[mackbruce96-blog]

#activismmakingchange

Cultivating a new stomping ground for activism and protest, digital technologies have created a platform for movements to be showcased to the world. Covering issues like social and political change this form of activism utilizes a vast share of digital resources (Britannica Academic 2018). Social media and sharing sites like Facebook, Instagram, and even YouTube have played an instrumental role in the success of digital activism campaigns. Bypassing barriers of locality and time, this form of activism has much wider reach than traditional methods (Britannica Academic 2018). There are, however, some limitations to the form. While the platforms provide immense coverage, social media is overcrowded with content and it’s often difficult for an idea to go viral (Lim 2013). With that in mind, what does it take for an idea to become something bigger and form the beginning of a movement?

In the past decade we’ve seen a slew of successful digital activism that has captivated the world. Recent examples include Black Lives Matter, #BringBackOurGirls and Me Too. The movements feature different issues but are consistent in several other key aspects. Each successfully use and promote a hashtag, place strong emphasis on social network presence, and the eventual involvement from celebrities and politicians. According to Lim, using captions that are concise and light in message are most consumable by audiences (2013). In the modern social media environment we could see this in the form of hashtags. With all three activism movements using hashtags they have simultaneously made the issue identifiable to social media platforms, created an easily consumable idea, as well as gaining free promotion through other users sharing the tag. Using a feature that any user on social media could access, these movements have created immense change to their respective issues. Whilst these movements provide positive examples, often digital activism doesn’t always leave a lasting effect.

Growing more and more evident in digital activism is the notion of slacktivism. Often the label is termed on movements where people can easily, almost mindlessly, become involved. Fueled by a sense of achievement, the ‘I made a difference’ kind, these involvements are commonly at low risk to the participant (Kristofferson, Peloza & White 2014). They also rarely produce any significant change (Kristofferson, Peloza & White 2014). Recent activist movement Kony 2012, aimed to bring Joseph Kony to custody after abducting children and turning them into soldiers (Bailyn 2012). Using YouTube as its preferred platform, the activism video now has over 102 million views and went viral at the time (Bailyn 2012). Supporters signed petitions, donated money and shared the issue amongst their online friends (Bailyn 2012). Aligning with slacktivism’s signature ‘I made a difference’ motive, the aforementioned forms or activism did little to assist in actually capturing Kony. Eventually interests waned and the issue fell out of relevancy. Slacktivists do care, if they didn’t they wouldn’t donate money or waste time watching 30 minute videos, but it comes in a different form to normal activists. Slacktivists seek to be part of change but seemingly don’t have the time or interest to go the next step in creating change.

References Bailyn, E 2012, ‘The difference between slacktivism and activism: How ‘Kony 2012’ is narrowing the gap’, Huffington Post, 19 March, viewed 5 June 2018, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bailyn/kony-2012-activism_b_1361791.html.

Britannica Academic 2018, Digital activism, viewed 4 June 2018, https://academic-eb-com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/levels/collegiate/article/digital-activism/609332.

Kristofferson, K, Peloza, J, White, K 2014, ‘The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action’, Journal of Consumer Research, pp. 1149 – 1166.

Lim, M 2013, ‘Many clicks but little sticks: Social media activism in Indonesia’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, Routledge, Abingdon.

[mackbruce96-blog]

Connected to who..?

With advancements in mobile and digital technologies the way we interact with the outside world is continually evolving. These technologies have prompted the rise of social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. With usage constantly rising on these platforms (Sensis 2017), and countless others, what sense can we make out of online environments? This fundamental shift in the way we engage with each other has been explored by numerous academics, including danah boyd and Sherry Turkle.

Attempting to deconstruct the concepts of an ‘always-on lifestyle’, danah boyd wonderfully presents her ideas of the digital world. Boyd goes on to describe her idea of ‘always-on’ as something on multiple levels of connectedness. The concept is neither online nor offline but somewhere in between. She uses the example of a message notification alert on her phone. Whilst she’s aware the message is there, she may make the conscious decision to ignore it. Technology has allowed boyd global connectedness, but on her own terms. Turkle also puts forward her idea of technologies effect on connectedness.