#n7587716

[kcb206group2]

Big data and how it's taking over the world

Big data – It’s everywhere and affects every single one of us. Like a great deal of individuals I never really considered the impact of big data, I didn’t even consider the fact that I was a contributor towards it. The fact is every single little thing you do from googling a phrase to buying a pair of shoes off eBay to liking someone’s Instagram photo generates data. “Every medical procedure, credit application, facebook post, movie recommendation, fraudulent act, spammy e-mail, and purchase of any kind-each positive or negative outcome, each successful or failed sales call, each incident, event, and transaction-is encoded as data and warehoused” (Siegel, p.g.3). It was estimated in 2011 that there was approximately 1.8 zettabytes of data created and replicated (The Economist, 2012).

Siegel (2013, 4) states that, “As data piles up we have a genuine gold rush. The data isn’t the gold; data in its raw form is boring crud. The gold is what’s discovered there in.” We can measure, visualize and research so much more than we ever could. Big data is a currency across industry, as well as the sciences and social sciences. Business intelligence and data market feed predictive analytics including online behavioral data (Woodford, 2014). Big data has proposed the opportunity to understand customers and people and push products and ideas at them more effectively. Ebay is a great example of this. Every time you search for an item on eBay is retains that data so that the next time you enter the website it will display a home screen of items it predicts you might be interested in. I often search for brand new clothing under brand names that are normally out of my budget if bought from the actual clothing store. I opened eBay to test this theory and sure enough displayed on the home screen is woman’s clothing from brands I have previously searched.

Big data has the potential to be very useful however it can also be extremely dangerous. With more and more companies, corporations and individuals being able to easily access our personal information and interests privacy is fast becoming a thing of the past. There are 2464 words in the average Internet privacy policy and 1337 words in the declaration of independence (The Economist, 2012). When you research into these privacy settings its alarming how many people have access to your information even if you think you have set your profile or information to private. I believe big data can be very useful in certain circumstances however it worries me how long it will be until privacy is a thing of the past.

  By Courtney Day

  Reference List:

Siegel, Eric. 2013. “Introduction – The Prediction Effect.” In Predictive Analytics, 1-16. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

The Economist. 2012. The Dark Side of Big Data. YouTube video, posted 26 June. Accessed 11 May, 2014.

Woodford, Darryl, Katie Prowd and Axel Bruns. (forthcoming). 2014. “Telemetrics: Towards Measuring Social Media Engagement with Television.”

[kcb206group2]

Is the importance of correct language and grammar a thing of the past?

There have been many debates over social media and technology and the way we communicate through different platforms. Naomi Baron (2008, 6) asks the question, “Could it actually be that the more we write online, the WORSE writers we become?”  The language we use has dramatically changed particularly in the means of written communication. Society abbreviates words, uses fragments or simply symbols and emoticons to communicate with others.

  Mediated communications are tools and technologies that are used to communicate and record information across time and space. These technologies are appropriated and shaped by human users (Sauter, 2014). Auto correct is a perfect example particularly with mobile phones. Autocorrect is often joked as the best invention for drunk people; when they can’t string the right letters or words together auto correct does it for them. Although auto correct is handy when you’re in a rush it does make it easier for people to be lazy and potentially result in becoming “dumber”.

  Due to textual communication often coming across as emotionless society has adapted ways to incorporate their feelings. Abbreviations are a commonly used method particularly when talking one on one with someone. TTYL is used to sign off a conversation and stands for Talk to you later as does GTG with Got to Go whilst LOL is used to express laughter – Laugh out loud. Punctuation and spelling also play a huge roll in communicating with people. Adding exclamation marks can dramatically change the meaning of a word as does caps lock for example Hi and HI!!!!! Full stops and abbreviations used in conjunction can also express how a person is feeling or what mood they’re in. If someone were to say k. as opposed to ok! The first comes off as being quite blunt perhaps angry or annoyed whilst the second comes across happy and enthusiastic.

  “A glance at any mobile phone’s texting service will likewise reveal a wide range of graphic expressions of emotion, almost all of which originated in novel uses of punctuation to illustrate feeling” (Baym, 2010, 60). Emoticons are not only found on mobile phones these days but also on social networking sites including Facebook. Emoticons are great for incorporating emotions into textual messages however can often be over used. I was browsing through a website called College Humour a few weeks ago and came across an interesting video illustrating how we talk through textual communications and what it would be like in the future if we spoke through emoticons.

It got me thinking about the extent to which my friends and acquaintances communicate through textual comments with emoticons and abbreviations. Baym (2010, 61) states, “We display immediacy online in behaviors that reduce psychological distance and increase affiliation. We show others that we are approachable and that we are interested in them”. On Instagram for example its not rare for people you don’t know very well to compliment you on a photo. The other day I had a male comment on my photo with “Looking pretty (image of fire)” the symbol of the fire meaning hot. I was flattered and took the comment as a compliment however if he was to come up to me face to face and say “Looking pretty” and hold an image of a fire up because I don’t know him very well I would react completely different and feel very uncomfortable.

  So is textual communication through mediated platforms making us “dumber”? And is it alternating the way in which we communicate with people face to face?

      References: Baron, Naomi, (2008). Chapter 1 : Email to Your Brain : Language in an Online and Mobile World. In Baron, Naomi, Always on : language in an online and mobile world, (pp.3 - 10). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  Baym, Nancy K, (2010). Chapter 3 : Communication in Digital Spaces. In Baym, Nancy K, Personal connections in the digital age, (pp.50 - 71). Cambridge: Polity Press.

  Sauter, T (2014) KCB206: Internet Self and Beyond: Week 6 Lecture. www.blackboard.qut.edu.au

[kcb206group2]

User Exploitation and Advertising

Over the centuries with the growth of new media society and the way in which labour is performed has dramatically changed.  What once was purely physically labour is now predominately digitalized. New media is interactive, available 24/7, instantaneous and global (Sauter. 2014). We live in an informational economy. Manuel Castells (1999, 400) states that an informational economy is, “an economy in which sources of productivity and competitiveness for firms, regions, countries, depend more than ever, on knowledge, information, and the technology of their processing”.

  This change in economy has resulted in a blurring of consumption and production, work and play and waged and unwaged labour. Crowdsourcing has become an increasingly popular trend amongst companies. It allows for a cheap and diverse workforce and an improved outlook by accessing an on demand scalable workforce. Personally I think crowdsourcing is a great idea as you don’t necessarily need qualifications or training, you gain a sense of contribution and you have the potential to be paid. What I don’t agree with and wasn’t aware of until recently is the extent in which users are being exploited.        New media users are being exploited by their user activity and creativity through the collection of data and targeted advertisements. They are sold as a commodity and are constantly exposed to commodification.

  “The corporate web platform operators and their third-party advertising clients continuously monitor and record personal data and online activities. They store, merge and analyze collected data” (Fuchs, 2013. 108). This information then allows these operators to create detailed user profiles, which is then used for targeted advertising. Facebook is one of the ultimate offenders for using targeted advertising. I was watching sunrise the other morning and there was an interview with Val Quinn from gadgetguy.com about the Dangers of Facebook (2014). Quinn explained that Facebook uses a tool called graph search which tracks everything you do including your status updates, posts and everything else. It also tracks your check ins. Facebook makes this information available to marketers, which can then be potentially used for advertising. “They can use your like and your photo, the terms and conditions of Facebook, say they can use your stuff for marketing activities” (Quinn, 2014).

  After watching this interview I was reminded of a story I heard about a young teenage girl who’s family friends stumbled across a photo of her used for advertising that she had not consented to. After researching further into this story I found it was actually a common issue. In Facebooks terms and conditions under section 10 number one is states “You give us permission to use your name, profile picture, content, and information in connection with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us. This means, for example, that you permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you (Facebook, 2014).

  Although I understand how important it is for companies to collect data based on user interests I believe users have the right and should be fully aware of the extent to which their information and user activity is being used.

    References:

  Castells, Manuel. 1999. “An Introduction to the Information Age.” In The Media Reader: Continuity and Transformation edited by H. Mackay and T. O’Sullivan, 398 – 410. London: Sage Publications. 

  Facebook. 2014. “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.” Accessed 31st  March, 2014. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

  Fuchs, Christian, (2013). Chapter 5 : The Power and Political Economy of Social Media. In Fuchs, Christian, Social media : a critical introduction, (pp.97 - 125). London, UK: Sage Publications.

  Quinn, V. 2014. “Facebook Dangers” on Sunrise, interviewed by David Koch (broadcast 31 March) http://au.tv.yahoo.com/sunrise/video/watch/22270917/facebook-dangers/

  Sauter, T. 2014. “KCB206: New Media: Week 4 Lecture Notes”. Accessed 31st March, 2014. Accessed from www.blackboard.qut.edu.au

  By Courtney Day

[kcb206group2]

The Rise of Viral Media

New media has empowered audiences, we’ve become real and are now able to have an input which also means we’re less predictable. We can choose when, where and through what devices to access media and are able to make demands and get involved (Sauter, 2014)

  Audiences play a new role in the production of content and taping into economic markets. Media audiences appropriate, interpret and pass on content infusing it with new meaning. Users make choices about what, why, how and whom they spread content but technologies provide affordances that enable the distribution and reappropriation. When users distribute content it can become viral. Viral content is content that spreads like a biological epidemic and is often produced top down then spread bottom up (Sauter, 2014).

An example of viral content is a Youtube video ‘Bed Intruder Song’ that I stumbled across a few years ago. A WAFF-48 news interview with a man named Antonie Dodson who was talking to a reporter about a home invasion and attempted rape of his sister Kelly in Alabama was found by two DJs The Gregory Brothers and two days after the news report aired an auto tuned song version of the report was uploaded to Youtube. The video incorporated clips from the news report, a self created backing track and manipulation of pitch of Antonie s voice to sound like he was singing. The video went viral and became YouTubes most popular video in 2010 and to date has been viewed over 120 million times; the mp3 version is also available for download from the Itunes store.

  Audiences play an active role in spreading content; their choices, investments and actions determine what gets valued. Audiences find out what’s interesting and whats worth spreading (Green and Jenkins, 2011, 116).        

Successful viral marketing is one of the cheapest forms of advertising. Youtube has assisted many aspiring artists that have become known to the greater public simply by a video of them performing has gone viral. Susan Boyle is a prime example of this. “The most popular YouTube version reached 2.5 million views in the first 72 hours and reached 103 million views on 20 different websites within the first nine days of its release” (Green and Jenkins, 2011, 113). The reason viral marketing works so well is it allows anyone in the world with Internet access to view it. I first saw the Susan Boyle video after a friend had shared it to Facebook. For advertising purposes the idea is to create a designer germ and use the public as unknown carriers (Green and Jenkins, 2011, 115). Audiences are not simply producers or consumers. They create new meanings, social connections and understanding of self through the activity of sharing content.

 By Courtney Day

  References: Green, Joshua and Jenkins, Henry, (2011). Chapter 5 : Spreadable Media : How Audiences Create Value and Meaning in a Networked Economy. In Nightingale, Virginia, The handbook of media audiences, (pp.109 - 127). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

  Sauter, Theresa, (2014). “KCB206: Internet, Self and Beyond: week 3 Lecture Notes” Accessed 21st March 2014. www.blackboard.qut.edu.au

Schmoyoho. 2010. "Bed Intruder Song". YouTube Video, posted July 31 2010. Accessed 22nd March, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtZfW2z9dw 

[kcb206group2]

Public Vs. Private

As technology advances so do social networking sites and as a result the line between public and private life starts too diminish. Social networking sites allow consumers to connect with friends, family, work colleagues, acquaintances and just about anyone in the world and allow them to gather for social, cultural and civic purposes (Boyd, 2001, 39).

  “Sociality has always required some (voluntary) abandonment of privacy. In order to become social, we must give up some of our private time and space so as to share it with others” (Papacharissi and Gibson 2011, 78). The question to this theory however are people giving up more and more of their personal lives than required? The example of the glass bedroom by Pearson (2009) is a prodigious example of the blurring of public and private. Private conversations and exchanges are no becoming public and sharing has become the default. Social networking sites such as Facebook use this trend by allow consumers to ‘check in’ to places where they visit, post statuses on not only what they’re doing but how they’re feeling, what they’re eating or listening to and share photos and posts from other users.

  “Profiles are also a site of control, allowing participants to determine who can see what and how. While social network site profiles can be accessible to anyone “truly public” it is common for participants to limit the visibility of their profiles making them semi public” (Boyd, 2011, 43). Although consumers are able to control their privacy settings, Boyd states that even semi public profiles are still open to a broad audience. It is rare for friends on social networking sites to only be closest and dearest friends; the majority of consumers include current/past friends, acquaintances and people the consumer may not know but feel they need to include (Boyd, 2011, 44). Consumers more often consider the implications of excluding certain people from their friends list as opposed to the  benefits. The Instagram app Instafollow is an app that allows you to see who follows and unfollows you on Instagram. Unlike Facebook and other social networking sites, you don’t have to follow people back who follow you like a normal friends list would work. It is however common curtsey to follow your friends and acquaintances. Due to the Instafollow app you have to carefully consider whom you unfollow. A few times I’ve unfollowed old friends who I don’t talk to as much and because they have the instafollow app they have approached me and asked me why I unfollowed them, which leads to unnecessary confrontation and arguments.

  Due to public networking sites being more public than private it increases the risk of identity theft. “The public display of connections can help verify that you are who you say you are. But it can also help someone else establish that they are you, too” (Donath and Boyd, 2004, 76). Extensive personal information, friends and photos are often listed on sites and easily replicated. A few times I have found fake profiles of me on Facebook and Instgram with my photos claiming to be someone else. Unfortunately once something is made public on the Internet it is hard for it to be removed and doesn’t stop the user replicating it multiple times.

  So how do we conform online sociality whilst keeping our privacy?

    Reference List       

Boyd, Danah, (2011). Chapter 2 : Social Network Sites as Networked Publics – Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. In Papacharissi, Zizi, A networked self – identity, community, and culture on social network sites, (pp.39 - 58). New York: Routledge.

  Donath, Judith and Boyd, Danah (2004). Public displays of connection., BT Technology Journal 22 (4) pp.71-82.

  Papacharissi, Zizi and Paige L. Gibson. 2011. “15 minutes of Privacy: Privacy, Sociality, and Publicity on Social Network Sites.” In Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web, edited bySabine Trepte and Leonard Reinecke, 75-89. Heidelberg and New York: Springer.

  Pearson, Erika. 2009. “All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in online social networks.” First Monday, 14(3): 1-7. 

By Courtney Day - N7587716