I find the relationship between language and new technology really interesting. New words are invented: the word blogging still comes up as a misspell in Microsoft Word... webinar, netiquette, and even blook? and old words have changed meaning... like friend.
If you ask most people if they really consider their Facebook friends friends, they would reply: "some of them are, but the rest are just Facebook friends." What is the difference between a real friend and a Facebook friend?
On Page 74, Donath and Boyd talk about the same phenomenon with Friendster, an earlier version of social networking: "Linking to externally unknown people became so common on Friendster that the phrase, 'she's not my friend, she's my Friendster' arose to explain the relationship one has had with a person known only through that site." Here, they talk about the difference between an in-person contact and an online contact.
For Facebook, the lines are greyer. Right now, I have 1,419 Facebook friends. Almost all of them I met in person at some point through undergraduate leadership experiences: Orientation Leader, VP of Student Government, RA, etc. So, my relationships with some of my 'friends' range from meeting them for a few hours to my brother who I've known for 23 years. I would not consider all of my Facebook friends, even the ones I met in person, real friends.
Facebook recently came out with a Friend List Organizer which apparently allows you to organize your friends into groups and mass mail them, but these lists do not appear anywhere on your profile. Currently, privacy settings can't be edited related to these groups-- but many speculate this is the next step.
I'm assuming the features will continued to become more advanced until we can manage our image online much like we do in everyday life. I find Erving Goffman's research about self presentation and "face work" very interesting. Definitely worth discussion as it relates to online social interaction.
Anyway, here is a semi-related interesting link:
When a parent asks a child to be their friend on Facebook
And an interesting video:
A Pastor speaking out about the Facebook friend limit
Oops!
I was so caught up in the project; I forgot to post a blog before class. SO in an attempt to make up for it, I'll post a day-after analysis.
One of my favorite aspects of the CCTE program is the incredible diversity. A great example was obvious in class yesterday... art, gender studies, music, design --- we had all bases covered in our conversation. It's interesting to see how technology impacts all fields in similar and different ways.
To comment on my article choice, I think examining the impact of internet on political dialog and experience is really important, considering our current political and economic situation. The intensity of the 2008 election is presenting me with some questions:
Record voter turnout is expected on November 4th. Chuck and I had a brief conversation about it this morning. Early voting has begun in some states, and NPR reports lines lasting multiple hours ALREADY -- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96019326
It will be interesting to unpack the causes of the high voter turnout. I'm sure a few basics will rise to the top, in no particular order: 1) failing economy 2) closeness of the race -- at one time the candidates were within a few points of each other 3) the historical nature of obama's candidacy (haha I had to edit this, because the first time I wrote "presidency"... amazing) 4) sarah palin -- enough said and 5) candidates' use of new media technologies for advertising, marketing and... BRANDING.
Obviously, I'm most interested in the 5th point. I really want to explore how the candidates' use of web 2.0 internet technologies (i.e. MyBo), text messaging and YouTube did or did not have an impact, specifically on young born-digital voters. In the 2004 election, online fundraising was a significant contributor to both campaigns; however, the money raised online was used for old advertising tactics i.e. direct mailers. In 2008, we are watching candidates use of media and technology in a new, savvy way. Corporate organizations comment on how well managed the Obama brand has been-- even suggesting that other businesses should use Obama as an example! I have a hankerin' all this digital stuff has something to do with it.
Just a non-partisan reminder: John McCain doesn't know how to use e-mail.
One of my favorite aspects of the CCTE program is the incredible diversity. A great example was obvious in class yesterday... art, gender studies, music, design --- we had all bases covered in our conversation. It's interesting to see how technology impacts all fields in similar and different ways.
To comment on my article choice, I think examining the impact of internet on political dialog and experience is really important, considering our current political and economic situation. The intensity of the 2008 election is presenting me with some questions:
Record voter turnout is expected on November 4th. Chuck and I had a brief conversation about it this morning. Early voting has begun in some states, and NPR reports lines lasting multiple hours ALREADY -- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96019326
It will be interesting to unpack the causes of the high voter turnout. I'm sure a few basics will rise to the top, in no particular order: 1) failing economy 2) closeness of the race -- at one time the candidates were within a few points of each other 3) the historical nature of obama's candidacy (haha I had to edit this, because the first time I wrote "presidency"... amazing) 4) sarah palin -- enough said and 5) candidates' use of new media technologies for advertising, marketing and... BRANDING.
Obviously, I'm most interested in the 5th point. I really want to explore how the candidates' use of web 2.0 internet technologies (i.e. MyBo), text messaging and YouTube did or did not have an impact, specifically on young born-digital voters. In the 2004 election, online fundraising was a significant contributor to both campaigns; however, the money raised online was used for old advertising tactics i.e. direct mailers. In 2008, we are watching candidates use of media and technology in a new, savvy way. Corporate organizations comment on how well managed the Obama brand has been-- even suggesting that other businesses should use Obama as an example! I have a hankerin' all this digital stuff has something to do with it.
Just a non-partisan reminder: John McCain doesn't know how to use e-mail.
Final Project Ramblings
Today we were asked to write about our final project musings. Obviously politics and power structures are major themes in my blogs, but I'm having a difficult time narrowing it down. The other question, of course, is to do a mini-study or a literature review. I suppose I need a topic before I can choose. Through some web searches, I found some buzz on "net neutrality"---
A decent overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality
This may be a possible topic. I'm also interested in the "Obama Brand" -- essentially, branding in political campaigns. It might be interesting to examine the internet impact of the "Obama Brand" -- especially on young media-literate voters.
A short take on the Obama Brand:
The Atlantic article referenced in the video:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/obama-finance
So, classmates... let me know which you think would be more interesting! Thanks :0)
A decent overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality
This may be a possible topic. I'm also interested in the "Obama Brand" -- essentially, branding in political campaigns. It might be interesting to examine the internet impact of the "Obama Brand" -- especially on young media-literate voters.
A short take on the Obama Brand:
The Atlantic article referenced in the video:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/obama-finance
So, classmates... let me know which you think would be more interesting! Thanks :0)
Fear Influences
"New technological advancements appear to go through times of question, apprehension, and suspicion as societies test the boundaries of what the new technology can actually accomplish" - Leander & McKim
I think I am dealing with the questions and skepticism about what effect technology will have on the future. Thematically, I'm skeptical about technology, but moreover, I'm skeptical about the intentions of people who are making a profit from technology. Technology should be used for the greater good, but is it always? I'm worried that we may rush into things to make a profit without examining the possible outcomes. I see a similar theme in the pharmaceutical drug industry. Everyone wants to rush to get new drugs on the market, sometimes without realizing how important it is to understand exactly what the drugs do and don't do for us. Sometimes I wish I could just blindly embrace technology and globalization without being plagued by all of these "what if's"... Again, we have tough questions to examine in our field.
community: moving from main street to the net?
I have always been fascinated by communities. Growing up, I was a part of many: school, church, neighborhood, sports teams, musical organizations, my family etc. All of these communities were fundamentally fueled by in-person interpersonal interaction. As I grew up, I observed and became a part of a different kind of community: a virtual one. Here, I could find like-minded people too. I could join a chat room community about raising horses, or a Backstreet Boys fan club... ok... I really was in one of those...
The point being, I was able to connect with people through a new, alternative medium. Now in college, I can take classes completely online or chat about politics with people from all over the world. The advent of MUD's is bringing people together in new worlds. I see in-person communities migrating and morphing into online communities. My question is, do you think that that one will consume the other? Will in-person communities dwindle until almost all community interaction is electronic or digital? If so, is this a good or bad thing?
A quote from the Sherry Turkle text:
"As more people spend more time in these virtual spaces, some go so far as to challenges the idea of giving any priority to RL (Real Life) at all."
****
Angela Thomas argues in "Digital Literacies of the Cybergirl" that girls are using cyberspace to satisfy their desires for a different body or personality. My question is: Is this a good thing? I'm reminded of our WallE discussion, where humans sit in chairs, fed through tubes and clicking to interact with everyone around them. This never ending quest to satisfy desires: for money, food, companionship has WallE humans immobilized. It seems like they are losing much of what it means to be human.
Or are they?
"Our new technology enmeshed relationships oblige us to ask to what extend we ourselves have become cyborgs, transgressive mixtures of biology, technology and code. The traditional distance between people and machines has become harder to maintain."
This weeks reading left me with more questions than answers. I guess that's the point?
The point being, I was able to connect with people through a new, alternative medium. Now in college, I can take classes completely online or chat about politics with people from all over the world. The advent of MUD's is bringing people together in new worlds. I see in-person communities migrating and morphing into online communities. My question is, do you think that that one will consume the other? Will in-person communities dwindle until almost all community interaction is electronic or digital? If so, is this a good or bad thing?
A quote from the Sherry Turkle text:
"As more people spend more time in these virtual spaces, some go so far as to challenges the idea of giving any priority to RL (Real Life) at all."
****
Angela Thomas argues in "Digital Literacies of the Cybergirl" that girls are using cyberspace to satisfy their desires for a different body or personality. My question is: Is this a good thing? I'm reminded of our WallE discussion, where humans sit in chairs, fed through tubes and clicking to interact with everyone around them. This never ending quest to satisfy desires: for money, food, companionship has WallE humans immobilized. It seems like they are losing much of what it means to be human.
Or are they?
"Our new technology enmeshed relationships oblige us to ask to what extend we ourselves have become cyborgs, transgressive mixtures of biology, technology and code. The traditional distance between people and machines has become harder to maintain."
This weeks reading left me with more questions than answers. I guess that's the point?