Digital Communities @rileyh20009-blog - Tumblr Blog

Week 11: Global social media: case study China

And here we have my final entry!

Living in an age where digital citizenship is an assumed part of our daily lives, it’s difficult to comprehend that it may differ in other countries. While media censorship as a concept is understood by Western countries, its actual execution is relatively misunderstood. Before reading Crampton’s explanation of social media usage in China (2011), I too would have assumed Chinese residents go without social media entirely, however that’s not the case. Crampton explains that “rather than eliminating social media, restrictions on foreign websites and social media have resulted in a flourishing home-grown, state-approved ecosystem in which Chinese-owned properties thrive. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are blocked in China, but their Chinese equivalents are expanding” (2011). So while the Chinese government is simply blocking internationally accessible social platforms, surely it can be assumed that if they did have access to Twitter and Instagram like everyone else, they would have no use for their national platforms. Incorrect. Crampton also found that unlike my hypotheses, it has been found that Asian countries without government blocks, Japan and South Korea, for example, still “flock to domestically developed social media platforms such as GREE and Cyworld, respectively, rather than internationally known sites” (2011). Now it has been established that China has developed its own way of communicating via social media and its citizens are not being left out of communication developments, the real challenge comes for those trying to gain insight on Chinese consumers, how the interact with social media and how to enter the country’s marketplace from an international perspective. Chiu et al. says that “while these unique Chinese market characteristics often create challenging wrinkles for marketers to contend with, they don’t invalidate the principles that underpin effective social-media strategy elsewhere”, continuing that adopting a “test-and-learn” (2012) approach is often the best option when navigating an unfamiliar market. The benefits of this approach were seen by Dove China when they initially tried to introduce the internationally successful Real Beauty campaign. The campaign was not received well by the Chinese market, therefore the company went back to the drawing board and instead introduced a similar campaign “partnered with Ugly Wudi, the Chinese adaptation of the US television show Ugly Betty, to weave the Real Beauty message into story lines and mount a number of initiatives, including a blog by Wudi and live online chats” (2012). By reassessing the campaign and adapting to the market for their second attempt, their efforts paid off and eventually “generated millions of searches and blog entries, increased uptake of Dove body wash by 21% year over year after the show’s first season, and increased unaided awareness of Dove’s Real Beauty by 44 % among target consumers. The estimated return on investment from this social-media campaign was four times that of a traditional TV media investment” (Chiu et al. 2012). By recognising that the differences in the approach to Western social media versus China’s localised approach, beneficial outcomes can still be reached by marketers as long as these differences are appreciated and adjusted to.

It’s been fun guys!

And in the words of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...

References

Chiu, C, Ip, C & Silverman, A 2012, Understanding social media in China, McKinsey Quarterly, McKinsey & Company: Marketing & Sales, accessed 2 February 2017, <http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/understanding-social-media-in-china>

Crampton, T 2011, Social media in China: The same, but different, China Business Review, Vol 38, Issue 1, pages 28-31, accessed 2 February 2017, <http://thomascrampton.com/china/social-media-china-business-review/>

#mda20009 #government censorship

Week 10: Social gaming: playing the crowd

As the internet grows our capacity for communication, gaming is no longer limited to its console. Now it’s possible to join teams with people across the world, and share experiences with other gamers in real time during gameplay without sitting right next to them sharing your controllers. This communicative and collaborative addition has added a whole new depth to the virtual gaming experience, however with new advancements come with new issues and risks. Before the connectedness of gaming, kids couldn’t access their parent’s bank account details to pay for in-game purchases, however this is just one of the increasing problems with the new interactivity of online gameplay. A mother, whom remained anonymous, told The Guardian that her son ran up an almost $1,500 debt on in game purchases playing FarmVille, a popular game available on Facebook. Due to the nature of their relationship and the “unsuspicious” activity, the mother was not covered to receive a refund, and commented saying "I do think they (the game developers) need to shoulder some responsibility in this business and put systems in place to stop this happening again. The fact that he was using a card in a different name should bring up some sort of security and the online secure payment filter seems to be bypassed for Facebook payments" (Insley 2010). Since this case, families in the United States have filed lawsuits against Apple for allowing apps designed for children that are free to download initially, like Smurfs’ Village, allow the child to collect ‘game currency’, charging the real life cost to the parent’s iTunes account. Lythe reports that the formal complaint made by the parents states “these games are highly addictive, designed deliberately to be so, and tend to compel children playing them to purchase large quantities of game currency, amounting to as much as $100 (£62) per purchase or more”. While there are now setting for parents to use to ensure their credit card details are password protected, it is arguable that the blame should fall entirely on them, as the general increase of connectivity and accessibility in gaming adds new depths to the experience, as well as risks. These risks now include increased exposure to game developers and individuals encouraging children to spend money in the game without having them understand the repercussions, of which game developers should be partly responsible for as entertainment providers. Much like the labels on the back of alcoholic drinks telling consumers to “Drink Responsibly”, there needs to be able warning for both parents and children from the developer about the risks before playing.

References

Insley, J 2010, FarmVille user runs up £900 debt, Consumer affairs, The Guardian, accessed 20 January 2017, <https://www.theguardian.com/money/2010/apr/07/farmville-user-debt-facebook>

Lythe, R 2012, Parents sue Apple over children's costly and highly addictive apps: Some are aimed at children as young as four - but can rack up bills up to £1,300, The Daily Mail Australia, accessed 20 January 2017, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2131826/iPhone-apps-Parents-sue-Apple-childrens-costly-highly-addictive-games.html>

#mda20009

Week 9: Visual communities and social imaging

It was my group’s turn to put together a Prezi discussing this week’s learning materials and concepts and our findings on the topic, which I feel has given me a leg up on this blog post. The section I was responsible for covered the evolution of Videos of Affinity as an aspect of visual communities, and how this evolution has led to video sharing platforms like YouTube to now pay video creators for the work the upload. Quoted by Harvey, Sara Mormino, a director at YouTube has commented on the growth and success of these videos saying "these young people have really captured a new way of creating content and a new way of engaging an audience" (2013). The idea that these videos are in high enough demand with viewers that they have been acknowledged by a company as large as Google as a worthwhile investment shows the undeniable growth and importance of VOA within the digital space today.

[Professional content creator Alfie Deyes ‘vlogging’]

The growth of communities within the digital space has led to the legitimacy of the connections being made being questioned. Most commonly introduced by older generations (typically 45+), there is a general view that digital connections between people are not as fulfilling or valid a those made in person, and that these relationships are simply to satisfy superficial needs within ourselves and do not actually satisfy important social needs as humans. This can absolutely be said for some individuals, whom have hundreds of Facebook friends, of which they actually know very few in a capacity outside the internet, and feel validated by every ‘Like’ they receive, however this should not be the blanketed way we view all internet users. By living as functional adults in society, we create superficial connections every day without the internet. We use the same “Hi, how are you?” “Good, how are you?” call and response without thinking, and politely communicate with people we would otherwise have nothing to do with because we work with them five days a week. The difference between the superficial connections made outside the internet versus within is purely based on accessibility. It is not a new generation of young people undervaluing real life connections, superficial connections just feel more common now because they’re easier to find than in years past.

References

Harvey, D 2013, Meet the vloggers: Self employed and 'worth a fortune', News Beat, BBC, accessed 4 January 2017, <http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/24726895/meet-the-vloggers-self-employed-and-worth-a-fortune>

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.

#mda20009 #videos of affinity

Week 8: Crowdsourcing in times of crisis

Emergency services, for example, but also mainstream news media, are making innovative use popular social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube during times of crisis. Facebook has implemented a feature called ‘Safety Check’ that helps you ‘connect with friends and loved ones during a disaster’ (Facebook 2016). “If you're near a major crisis, you can tell friends if you're safe and check to see if they're safe, too” (Facebook 2016), which has proved to be helpful in the event of natural disasters like floods and earthquakes that would cause mass causalities and injuries. This feature is great for locals, but probably most beneficial for travellers who don’t have immediate access to their loved ones, letting both their family and friends know their status, but also emergency services and crisis management teams in their own country and the country they are travelling in.

Using social media to crowdsource information in a crisis when traditional crisis communication channels like radio and television cannot is a new but innovative method. It was once considered an entirely unreliable way to source information, however now, although taken with a healthy degree of scepticism, is utilised more frequently when the source is closer to the disaster than traditional channels can get themselves. The method of crowdsourcing was seen in the Australian media recently during the 2011 Queensland floods, in which Twitter was used “to find and disseminate information” (Bruns et al. 2012, pg 7). Bruns et al. also found that 50-60% of #qldfloods messages were retweets, the act of passing along existing messages on the platform, and thereby making them more visible. Leading accounts including the Queensland Police Service Media Unit, ABC News, and the Courier-Mail also joined civilians in sharing of messages on the platform, significantly amplifying each message’s audience reach (Bruns et al. 2012, pg 7). Bruns et al. reports that the disaster forced media outlets to use sources closer to the site of the disaster, civilians and Twitter users, whom shared their own experiences and observations, often by including photographs and videos in their tweets (2012, pg 7). This visual access that would have otherwise been dangerous for emergency services to attain provided vital information during the crisis (Swinburne Online 2016). Both cases of Twitter and Facebook being used to crowdsource important information in times of crisis demonstrates the merit social media can have when collecting or providing important information.

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, pages 7-10, accessed 8 January 2017, <http://www.cci.edu.au/floodsreport.pdf>

Facebook 2016, Safety Check, About, accessed 8 January 2017, <https://www.facebook.com/about/safetycheck/>

Swinburne Online 2016, Week 8: Crowdsourcing in times of crisis, MDA20009: Digital Communities, Swinburne Learning Materials, accessed 8 January 2017, <https://ilearn.swin.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-5949028-dt-content-rid-31715127_2/courses/2016-SO3-MDA20009-217733/UnitLearningMaterials/week-08.html>

#mda20009 #crisis communication

Week 7: Digital Citizenship 3 - Trolling and social media conflict

A lot can be said for trolls, cyber bullying and digital harassment. While the latter two can be punished under law, ‘troll’s’ are becoming a strange grey area in the digital space, with much of the defence for their actions being called ‘freedom of speech’ by a lot of participants, which was labelled a fallacious, silly argument by the Law Report (2014). Now we begin an interesting stage in digital development as the term is further refined and what actions are considered ‘trolling’ come to be more inclusive. McCosker says that what has come to be called trolling should be taken as a starting point rather than a vague end point for understanding the place of provocation in its multiple, highly contextualised and always changing forms (2014, p. 202).

With propositions of a children's e-safety commissioner position being created to help protect children from cyber-bullying on social media, arguments have been made that believe such a role is a slippery slope to government censorship (Law Report 2014). With suicides of young people becoming far more common when involved in a cyber-bulling incident, how can any form of prevention be too cautious? This question is still up for debate as some ae of the opinion that this is a serious matter that perhaps requires government censorship, whereas others are of the belief that children have become more sensitive in recent years, and simply need to “step away” from technology. This however, is not as easily done as those individuals may think. While this would have been an easy fix to the issue in the 2000’s, communication technology has progressed rapidly since then, with this technology becoming a requirement for classwork in a lot of schools, and much of homework being performed and submitted through online forums. Being engaged is engrained into the DNA of a new generation of children, and they cannot be made responsible for the lack of policing of new technology because officials around them cannot keep up with its rapid progression.

Matthew Keeley, director of the National Children's and Youth Law Centre at the University of New South Wales, “ is not sure specific cyber-bullying legislation is necessary and is concerned that it may leave many young people with criminal convictions” however organisation No Bullying offers a counter to Keeley’s argument by finding that “letting these kids get away with bullying others is… akin to nurturing a future criminal since young bullies have a one in four chance of getting arrested and ending up with a criminal record before they even turn 30” (No Bullying 2015). No Bullying (2015) shares that a “study in the UK suggests that young kids who are subjected to bullying often are more likely to develop symptoms of psychosis in early adolescence” which can often cause suicidal thoughts or actions in young people when gone untreated. With cyberbullying being so common, perhaps the potential for criminal conviction is now as necessary as it is in the prevention of other crimes.

References

Law Report 2014, Can A Cyber-Bullying Commissioner Protect Our Kids?, Radio National, 27 February, accessed 8 January 2017, <http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lawreport/5286036>

McCosker, A 2014, YouTrolling as provocation: Tube's agonistics publics, Convergence, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 201-217, accessed 8 January 2017

No Bullying 2015, Cyber Bullying Statistics Australia, The Ultimate Guide, Bullying Facts, Bullying Statistics, Cyber Bullying, Cyber Safety, accessed 8 January 2017, <https://nobullying.com/cyber-bullying-statistics-australia-the-ultimate-guide/>

#mda20009 #cyber bullying #censorship

Week 6: Digital citizenship 2 - Activism and protest

Social media has given everyday people the power to stand for a cause they believe in publicly, even if that cause isn’t prevalent in their country. While this is largely a positive aspect of social media activism, it has also introduced a lot ‘clictivists’ that have no real intention of driving for change, rather wanting to appear socially responsible or caring in their involvement. The complacency around change and activism via social media has created a platform for an imbalance in social media activism that achieves a tangible goal, and social media activism that falls short of its goal/s. The KONY 2012 campaign created by Invisible Children, Inc. is a globally recognised example of this imbalance. A viral social media campaign of this quality and extraordinary global reach had every reason to succeed, however while “the campaign itself was immensely successful in terms of the spread of video and activity”, it failed “in terms of its actual aim of having Joseph Kony apprehended” (Swinburne Online 2016). This outcome caused a lot of people to feel let down with the realisation that the KONY campaign was a “relatively 'empty' connection with no significant result” (Swinburne Online 2016).

Sharma (2015) quotes Jen Schradie of the Institute for Advanced Study at the Toulouse School of Economics saying “In an era of hashtag activism, clicktivism, or whatever you want to call digital politics, it still takes some level of organization/s to create and sustain a movement, even an online movement”. When reviewing many of the activism hastags of previous years, Schradie’s comments ring true, as each hashtag fades away after a few days due to lack of organisational infrastructure to keep the continuation of the message alive, which is what naturally happens in the media space without marketing and promotion. The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge is proof of organisational backing being a cornerstone of successful social media activism. “According to the national chapter of the ALS Association (ALSA), the challenge brought in a staggering $115 million. Participants also donated an additional $13 million to the association’s regional branches” (Wolff-Mann 2015). This kind of financial support was unheard of for the ALSA, proving that with appropriate support and resources, social media activism has the power to drive real and tangible change.

References

Sharma, R 2015, 5 Movements Where Social Media Was a Big Catalyst For Social Change, Social Media For Non-Profits, accessed 21 December 2016, <http://socialmedia4nonprofits.org/blog/5-movements-where-social-media-was-a-big-catalyst-for-social-change/>

Swinburne Online 2016, Week 6: Digital citizenship 2: Activism and protest, MDA20009: Digital Communities, Swinburne University of Technology, accessed 21 December 2016

Wolff-Mann, E 2015, Remember the Ice Bucket Challenge? Here’s What Happened to the Money, Money, Time Magazine, accessed 21 December 2016, <http://time.com/money/4000583/ice-bucket-challenge-money-donations/>

#mda20009 #kony2012 #als ice bucket challenge

Week 5: Digital citizenship 1 - Politics and civic cultures

Social media has enabled public figures to reach their audiences further than they were ever able to with just spoken word. This new found extension of reach does come with a high level of responsibility with Jericho quoting Barak Obama’s advice to a group of high school students in 2009 saying “I want everybody here to be careful about what you post on Facebook, because in the YouTube age whatever you do, it will be pulled up again later somewhere in your life. That’s number one” (2012, pg 254). While this is very common advice given to young people today, politicians globally still struggle to individually operate social media smoothly. With the 2016 US Presidential Election still fresh in the public’s mind, President-elect Donald Trump is a prime example of a politician publicly struggling with both their pre-campaign and during-campaign social media presence, with various Tweets being made by Trump alienating entire races, genders, and also picking on individuals entirely outside of the political world. While social media can be assumed to be the next logical step for young voter engagement, Australian politicians simply are not embracing this evolution. Having almost entirely neglected their social media presence in favour of dated communication channels, with the “best way to get in touch with the vast majority of politicians remains as it was a decade ago — through email” (Jericho 2012, pg 255), young voters in Australia have little to interact with politically in the realm in which they feel comfortable. With this being the case, Jericho asks “whether politicians will go to where the people are, or whether will they remain largely in the centre, trying to control the message” (2012). In conjunction with our native politicians struggling to embrace the next facet of voter engagement, little research has been performed in Australia to deepen young people’s use of social media “beyond naïve charges of ‘clicktivism’” (Chen & Vromen 2013), giving a very limited resource for this kind of engagement to the few figures that do with to engage on social media. To increase meaningful voter engagement through social media, Australia can look to a recent America Votes study discussed by Chen & Vromen (2013) that used an experimental engagement method on Facebook which ultimately found that the kind of message and behaviour-sharing communication used on the platform for this study increased the probability that a person voted by just over 2%. While this may not seem like a large increase, a small uptake in probability in a user population as big as Facebook means substantial changes in voting behaviour, meaning “social pressure for electoral turnout applied through social media works” (2013).

References

Jericho, G 2012, Chapter Nine: How many votes are there on Twitter?, Rise of the Fifth Estate, pages 254 & 255, accessed 16 December 2016,

Chen, P & Vromen, A 2013, For younger citizens, Social Media, Youth Participation and Australian Elections, Australian Electoral Commission, accessed 16 December 2016, <http://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/research/caber/1b.htm>

#mda20009 #social media analysis

As someone who is very much pro-social media, I love Adam’s take on the general view that social media isolates us from our immediate surroundings.

Comic by Adam Ellis

follow his tumblr: @booksofadam

#adam ellis

amandapaigebruce-blog

To Tweet or Not to Tweet? That is the Question.

Week Five:

Week 5!? I feel as though the semester only just started!

This week I took a close look in to the role that social media plays in the big wide world of politics. What a time to be researching this after a HEAVILY publicised American campaign. For months all I saw on my news feed was Donald Trumps face and hilarious Obama memes.

This week my team and I volunteered to do the units presentation on Politics and Civic Culture, which meant I dug a little deeper in to the readings and some wider research than I do in most weeks. I didn’t need to sleep this week anyways…

The rapid take off of social media has opened a plethora of new and personable avenues for politicians to reach the public. Over the past decade there has been a notable growth in the relationship between political campaigns and social media. This week my team and I explored in great detail the marketing campaign that was used by Barack Obama in 2008… This was a fascinating topic to research.

During this campaign all presidential candidates explored the use of social media in order to connect with their voters directly (Rollyson 2008). This particular election is often referred to as the “Facebook Election”. It must come at no surprise that co founder of Facebook was indeed the key strategist for Barack Obama’s online and social media campaign (Dutta 2008). With such a successful social campaign in the States, its no surprise that the use of social media in politics spread like wild fire. Before long we were given another avenue to ridicule our own politicians.

#AUSPOL has given many Australians a good laugh paired with head shakes of disapproval. Throughout this week I kept thinking to myself “Do our politicians actually reach the ‘kids’ of today or are they leaving themselves totally vulnerable”.

Throughout the week there was some interesting conversations on the discussion board and Rebecca encapsulated my very thoughts in this question, “We can see Australian politicians jumping on the digital media bandwagon, trying to reach the ‘kids’ of today. But are audiences buying it?”. Jericho (2012), suggests that politicians are risk adverse, always cautious of saying or doing the wrong thing; and this comes across in politicians’ social media / networks attempts to connect. It is obvious that politicians are 'always on’ and working their social profile to promote their political careers and not to genuinely trying to connect with others. After having a very close look in to Obamas campaign when the rise of social media in campaigns was taking off, I personally find Obama’s social media presence dramatically more genuine than our fellow Aussie Politicians!

References

Rollyson S C 2008, Web 2.0 Case Study Barack Obama’s Use of Social Media, CSRA, 1 December 2016, <http://rollyson.net/web-20-case-study-barack-obamas-use-of-social-media/>

Dutta, S & Fraser, M 2008, Barack Obama’s win means future elections must be fought online, The Guardian, 3rd December, <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/nov/07/barackobama-uselections2008>

Jericho G 2014, The Impact of Social Media on Political Journalism, Papers on Parliament No.62, 12 December 2016, <http://www.aph.gov.au/~/~/link.aspx?_id=AF4D0999B1BA40C99E71B5439E603A13&_z=z>

rileyh20009-blog

Amanda!! Thank you for including those tweets, I had a good old laugh haha. I think I’m going to take a page out of your book and include some in my future posts, it definitely makes your work engaging :)

rileyh20009-blog

Blog Stage 1

Week 1: Introduction to digital communities and social media platforms

The idea that as a society we are now “always-on” because of our access to technology and social media platforms is deeply explored in the first week’s learning materials. While accessibility to each other 24/7 can make us as individuals feel switched on all the time, Boyd offers the point that their “always-on-ness doesn’t mean” they are “always-accessible-to-everyone”, continuing to say that just because their phone buzzes with a message notification, it does not mean they are compelled to look at it (Boyd 2012, page 72). Boyd refers to this appropriate distancing between themselves and accessibility as not being antiphone, but procontext, which is believable how much of the population view social media interaction. For most adults, texting at the dinner table is rude, however texting while you’re on the toilet is considered a social norm. The learning materials also explore social networking as a controllable platform in which you can choose the level of privacy you wish to have, with platforms “encouraging increasingly public levels of self-disclosure or exposure” (Wilken & McCosker 2014, page 292), seen in social networks like Facebook providing automatic profile privacy settings that are relatively loose, and Instagram’s automatic privacy settings allowing anyone to follow you without your approval first, all of which must all be changed by the user after the account is created.

Week 2: Social theory and social media

Sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies and his exploration of sociality prompted much of Week 2’s learning materials. While his theory did not take technological advancement into considering why the world has transitioned from a community to a society, the same questions till apply when inquiring “what do late modern informational societies function as?” (Siapera 2012, page 193), or more simply put, how will technology and new media continue to develop the world into its next stage of sociality? Siapera (2012, page 194) foresees this societal shift to move individuals further and further into isolation and into new virtual communities that are based not merely on where they live and who they know from work, school and leisure activities, but common ideas, beliefs and experiences. This shift has already begun as seen on microblogging sites like Tumblr, which provides users will the ability to follow and blog alongside users of similar interests and ideas regardless of each individual’s physical location, eventually developing into smaller communities within the site itself. Youtube has opened up the reality of Siapera’s prediction in a similar fashion, giving the world the capacity to share how each individual lives their life differently through the sharing of video blogs or diaries, or how each person learns by watching someone from a different country teach their language or a skill to the viewer, again regardless of location.

Week 3: Platform case study: reddit

As the focus for Week 3’s learning materials, the social platform reddit and subreddit page ‘reddit gonewild’ sparked a discussion about the value and harm online anonymity can offer an individual. reddit gonewild allowed individuals to upload nude photos of themselves with their faces blocked or removed, and while they maintained anonymity, doing so while “showing such intimate body parts highlights complexities and contradictions implicit in online anonymity” (van der Nagel 2013, page 2). Barton identified (2015) that people are more likely to behave poorly online when they can hide behind anonymity. Arguments can also be made on the contrary, as McElroy (2011) adds that those opposed to online anonymity often blur the line between rude or socially unacceptable behaviour, much like that of reddit gonewild, and criminal acts like the possession or distribution of child pornography. McElroy (2011) added that when a crime happens, it should be investigated with a narrow focus on the individuals accused or suspected; the investigation should not be aimed at controlling the anonymity of the general public. Finally, McElroy finalises their argument to protect online anonymity by identifying that “the right to withhold your identify, like the right to remain silent, is not the sign of a thug or child predator. It is the sign of a free human being” (2011).

References

Barton, E 2015, The danger of online anonymity, BBC Capital, accessed 2 December 2016, <http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20150309-the-danger-of-online-anonymity>

Boyd, D 2012, 6: Participating in the Always-On Lifestyle, Part 2: Sociality, The Social Media Reader, page 72, accessed 16 November 2016

McElroy, W 2011, In Defense of Internet Anonymity, Mises Daily Articles, Mise Institute, accessed 2 December 2016, <https://mises.org/library/defense-internet-anonymity>

Siapera, E 2012, Socialities and social media, page 193-194, accessed 20 November 2016

van der Nagel, E 2013, Faceless Bodies: Negotiating Technological and Cultural Codes on reddit gonewild, accessed 2 December 2016, <http://researchbank.swinburne.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/swin:37605>

Wilken & McCosker 2014 in Cunningham & Turnbull (eds), The Media & Communications in Australia, page 292, accessed 16 November 2016

amandapaigebruce-blog

HI Riley,

I enjoyed reading your blog! I find Dana Boyd’s theory of “being always on” so incredibly interesting. You have touched on how she speaks about that we are not compelled to look at our phone when we hear a message tone. However, I must say I don’t think I have ever been in a situation where myself or others around me have completely ignored the vibration or the sound of a message before first looking at what it says and then making to choice to ignore or reply. For me personally (even though I too fall victim to it) creates a sense of isolation. I feel as though the directness and the instantaneous nature of social media now out ways the importance of face-to-face conversations.

rileyh20009-blog

Thanks for the response Amanda!

I chose to include Boyd’s theory because I found it quite interesting and different to a lot of other views on our now constant availability through technology, but I personally relate far more to what you’ve described as not really being able to resist the urge to at the very least check what my phone is buzzing about! I believe my partner is one of the rare few left who quite comfortably leaves his phone to the side with no urge to check a message he hears come in, but he’s also a man who had a Nokia brick until 3 years ago and quite begrudgingly upgraded to an iPhone and joined the 21st century so he’s had some good practice at only checking his phone when its essential hahaha

Blog Stage 1

Week 1: Introduction to digital communities and social media platforms

The idea that as a society we are now “always-on” because of our access to technology and social media platforms is deeply explored in the first week’s learning materials. While accessibility to each other 24/7 can make us as individuals feel switched on all the time, Boyd offers the point that their “always-on-ness doesn’t mean” they are “always-accessible-to-everyone”, continuing to say that just because their phone buzzes with a message notification, it does not mean they are compelled to look at it (Boyd 2012, page 72). Boyd refers to this appropriate distancing between themselves and accessibility as not being antiphone, but procontext, which is believable how much of the population view social media interaction. For most adults, texting at the dinner table is rude, however texting while you’re on the toilet is considered a social norm. The learning materials also explore social networking as a controllable platform in which you can choose the level of privacy you wish to have, with platforms “encouraging increasingly public levels of self-disclosure or exposure” (Wilken & McCosker 2014, page 292), seen in social networks like Facebook providing automatic profile privacy settings that are relatively loose, and Instagram’s automatic privacy settings allowing anyone to follow you without your approval first, all of which must all be changed by the user after the account is created.

Week 2: Social theory and social media

Sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies and his exploration of sociality prompted much of Week 2’s learning materials. While his theory did not take technological advancement into considering why the world has transitioned from a community to a society, the same questions till apply when inquiring “what do late modern informational societies function as?” (Siapera 2012, page 193), or more simply put, how will technology and new media continue to develop the world into its next stage of sociality? Siapera (2012, page 194) foresees this societal shift to move individuals further and further into isolation and into new virtual communities that are based not merely on where they live and who they know from work, school and leisure activities, but common ideas, beliefs and experiences. This shift has already begun as seen on microblogging sites like Tumblr, which provides users will the ability to follow and blog alongside users of similar interests and ideas regardless of each individual’s physical location, eventually developing into smaller communities within the site itself. Youtube has opened up the reality of Siapera’s prediction in a similar fashion, giving the world the capacity to share how each individual lives their life differently through the sharing of video blogs or diaries, or how each person learns by watching someone from a different country teach their language or a skill to the viewer, again regardless of location.

Week 3: Platform case study: reddit

As the focus for Week 3’s learning materials, the social platform reddit and subreddit page ‘reddit gonewild’ sparked a discussion about the value and harm online anonymity can offer an individual. reddit gonewild allowed individuals to upload nude photos of themselves with their faces blocked or removed, and while they maintained anonymity, doing so while “showing such intimate body parts highlights complexities and contradictions implicit in online anonymity” (van der Nagel 2013, page 2). Barton identified (2015) that people are more likely to behave poorly online when they can hide behind anonymity. Arguments can also be made on the contrary, as McElroy (2011) adds that those opposed to online anonymity often blur the line between rude or socially unacceptable behaviour, much like that of reddit gonewild, and criminal acts like the possession or distribution of child pornography. McElroy (2011) added that when a crime happens, it should be investigated with a narrow focus on the individuals accused or suspected; the investigation should not be aimed at controlling the anonymity of the general public. Finally, McElroy finalises their argument to protect online anonymity by identifying that “the right to withhold your identify, like the right to remain silent, is not the sign of a thug or child predator. It is the sign of a free human being” (2011).

References

Barton, E 2015, The danger of online anonymity, BBC Capital, accessed 2 December 2016, <http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20150309-the-danger-of-online-anonymity>

Boyd, D 2012, 6: Participating in the Always-On Lifestyle, Part 2: Sociality, The Social Media Reader, page 72, accessed 16 November 2016

McElroy, W 2011, In Defense of Internet Anonymity, Mises Daily Articles, Mise Institute, accessed 2 December 2016, <https://mises.org/library/defense-internet-anonymity>

Siapera, E 2012, Socialities and social media, page 193-194, accessed 20 November 2016

van der Nagel, E 2013, Faceless Bodies: Negotiating Technological and Cultural Codes on reddit gonewild, accessed 2 December 2016, <http://researchbank.swinburne.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/swin:37605>

Wilken & McCosker 2014 in Cunningham & Turnbull (eds), The Media & Communications in Australia, page 292, accessed 16 November 2016

#mda20009

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Digital Communities