I wanted to write one more extra blog because I got to thinking about whether I was going to continue blogging after this class. I still haven't made up my mind so I searched the internet for articles about the advantages of blogging. Although most of the articles I found were interesting, I don't think blogging really does much for me, especially because I don't have any friends that have blogger accounts so no one would read them. But, it is a form of therapy for me, just like an electronic diary. Most diaries are suppose to be private, but as long as I'm comfortable with what I write about, I can get things off my chest whether anyone reads it or not.
Anyway, one article I found really intrigued me. I found an article on CNN.com about a woman who writes blogs about local people that have been murdered in the Los Angeles area. The article was Blog brings human face to big-city murders. The blog is called 'The Homicide Report' written by Jill Leovy in which she contacts the families of those murdered in LA. She felt that the homicides in LA were growing in numbers and wanted to go deeper and find out more about the stories and who the victims were. She wanted to put a face to the names, particularly in L.A.'s black and Latino communities. Her blog began in January of 2007 and she claims to have started it because the internet gave her something that the newspaper (The LA Times) didn't; which was unlimited space.
This brings up a good point because the internet is known for that. Anyone can write anything and post it on the internet. ME for instance; I'm writing about an article I saw on the internet and sharing it with others. Those other people can either choose to read my blog or simply disregard it. Either way, it is still here and won't be deleted (unless someone chooses to do so or I do) and is in an unlimited space and time. This reminds me of what we read about Henry Jenkins in his article about convergence culture. The fact that I read an article on CNN.com and chose to blog about it shows grassroots (blogger) and corporate media (article on CNN) intersecting. I've learned a lot about the advantages of blogging and how our culture has adapted so vividly to this new technology and it amazes me more and more everyday. I just felt like sharing a story that related to class and that I found very interesting. Here is the link to the article:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/18/homicide.blogger/index.html
Friday, April 18, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
danah boyd
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6699791.stm
danah boyd wrote the article Friends, friendsters, and Top 8: Writing Community into being on social network in which she discusses the multiple uses of Facebook. Boyd talks about how "friendships" on Facebook and how teens define their different forms of friendships. She lists 13 different reasons for accepting friendships some of which include: they're your actual friends; acquaintances, family members, or colleagues; having lots of friends makes you look popular; your list of friends reveals who you are; and it’s easier to say yes than no. Now I realize that many people don't want to reject anyone on Facebook because of the guilt left behind the rejection. I'm not so sensitive I guess. I don't care if I reject someone because if I don't know them, more than likely I won't feel bad about rejecting them. This is not my main concern, however.
My argument for this blog is how I think a lot of people accept friendships for the popularity of it all. If you have 1,000 friends and someone else only has 200, then you automatically look "cooler" than that other person, in some teens' eyes. However, how popular are you if you take into account that the person with only 200 friends probably knows all 200 of them and the one who has 1,000 friends probably only knows about 20% of those friends. Now I consider the person who knows more of their "friends" to be the more popular one. I found an article about a guy who is older than the normal teeny-bopper age group that has Facebook. The article talks about a couple of older users who know that the teens don't really want them spying on their profiles, such as a father having access to his son's profile. This is interesting because the teens who are faced with this decision of whether or not to reject a professor or parent get put in an awkward position. Does guilt go as far as parents and teachers or just other teens? The article made a comment about "not knowing the people you add as friends, you just add them and then don't have to say anything to them. Just adding them makes yourself look more popular- its what all the cool kids are doing." This just goes to show that popularity over true friendships mean more to some teens on Facebook. I think this is sad, but at the same time, having 1,000 "friends" on Facebook just gives you more options of people to hang out with, get advice from, and so on. In the end, it all comes down to how much you cherish your relationships with your online "friends" versus how popular you want to be perceived as by others.
danah boyd wrote the article Friends, friendsters, and Top 8: Writing Community into being on social network in which she discusses the multiple uses of Facebook. Boyd talks about how "friendships" on Facebook and how teens define their different forms of friendships. She lists 13 different reasons for accepting friendships some of which include: they're your actual friends; acquaintances, family members, or colleagues; having lots of friends makes you look popular; your list of friends reveals who you are; and it’s easier to say yes than no. Now I realize that many people don't want to reject anyone on Facebook because of the guilt left behind the rejection. I'm not so sensitive I guess. I don't care if I reject someone because if I don't know them, more than likely I won't feel bad about rejecting them. This is not my main concern, however.
My argument for this blog is how I think a lot of people accept friendships for the popularity of it all. If you have 1,000 friends and someone else only has 200, then you automatically look "cooler" than that other person, in some teens' eyes. However, how popular are you if you take into account that the person with only 200 friends probably knows all 200 of them and the one who has 1,000 friends probably only knows about 20% of those friends. Now I consider the person who knows more of their "friends" to be the more popular one. I found an article about a guy who is older than the normal teeny-bopper age group that has Facebook. The article talks about a couple of older users who know that the teens don't really want them spying on their profiles, such as a father having access to his son's profile. This is interesting because the teens who are faced with this decision of whether or not to reject a professor or parent get put in an awkward position. Does guilt go as far as parents and teachers or just other teens? The article made a comment about "not knowing the people you add as friends, you just add them and then don't have to say anything to them. Just adding them makes yourself look more popular- its what all the cool kids are doing." This just goes to show that popularity over true friendships mean more to some teens on Facebook. I think this is sad, but at the same time, having 1,000 "friends" on Facebook just gives you more options of people to hang out with, get advice from, and so on. In the end, it all comes down to how much you cherish your relationships with your online "friends" versus how popular you want to be perceived as by others.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Extra Blog- Facebook
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010608F.shtml
Ari Melber's article About Facebook was extremely interesting and intriguing. I found many of the issues Ari brought up to be some of the most crucial concerns I have about Facebook. I'll be graduating in 3 weeks and will have a career so knowing that the information I post on Facebook may end up in my future boss' hands is frightening! One major topic Ari discusses is the idea of privacy and how teens post information on Facebook and then get mad that random people have access to that information. Here is my opinion: I post photos and comments about myself (not my address or phone # of course) because I want my friends to see it and other people that I choose to be able to see it. I have my privacy settings at the highest security and I don't accept friendships unless I know you. This is because I am trying to restrict who has access to my profile. Its not the fact that I don't want people seeing these pictures, because otherwise I could just erase them. Its the fact that I only want my friends to see them, no professors or employers.
I think this is a big issue that some people don't understand. They ask questions like "well why do you post the pictures if you don't want people seeing?" I already answered this question by stating that I want to choose who views them and I believe that I should have the right to know if Facebook is sending my information to other companies or allowing users I don't know to view my profile. Ari made a good point by saying that we are always under surveillance whether it is at the mall or ATM or even a grocery store. This is all very true but I don't walk around with my phone number written across my forehead. However, I agree with what Ari said in the fact that we are being tracked all the time, without permission. To track what I purchase at the grocery store is information I never agreed on giving. So what can we do about this? Not purchase food? Of course not; we just have to be careful and watch what information we give out. Same goes for Facebook. Teens need to set their privacy settings to restricted and only allow those whom they know to access their profiles. Then, teachers and employers can't view their profiles without consent.
Ari Melber's article About Facebook was extremely interesting and intriguing. I found many of the issues Ari brought up to be some of the most crucial concerns I have about Facebook. I'll be graduating in 3 weeks and will have a career so knowing that the information I post on Facebook may end up in my future boss' hands is frightening! One major topic Ari discusses is the idea of privacy and how teens post information on Facebook and then get mad that random people have access to that information. Here is my opinion: I post photos and comments about myself (not my address or phone # of course) because I want my friends to see it and other people that I choose to be able to see it. I have my privacy settings at the highest security and I don't accept friendships unless I know you. This is because I am trying to restrict who has access to my profile. Its not the fact that I don't want people seeing these pictures, because otherwise I could just erase them. Its the fact that I only want my friends to see them, no professors or employers.
I think this is a big issue that some people don't understand. They ask questions like "well why do you post the pictures if you don't want people seeing?" I already answered this question by stating that I want to choose who views them and I believe that I should have the right to know if Facebook is sending my information to other companies or allowing users I don't know to view my profile. Ari made a good point by saying that we are always under surveillance whether it is at the mall or ATM or even a grocery store. This is all very true but I don't walk around with my phone number written across my forehead. However, I agree with what Ari said in the fact that we are being tracked all the time, without permission. To track what I purchase at the grocery store is information I never agreed on giving. So what can we do about this? Not purchase food? Of course not; we just have to be careful and watch what information we give out. Same goes for Facebook. Teens need to set their privacy settings to restricted and only allow those whom they know to access their profiles. Then, teachers and employers can't view their profiles without consent.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Griefer Madness
http://www.microsoft.com/protect/family/activities/griefers.mspx
(again, link will be explained at the bottom)
Julian Dibbell's article was difficult for me to swallow. First of all, I enjoyed the overall article but I didn't agree with the theme. I am upset by these so-called "griefers" who enjoy making fun of and hurting people. This kind of mockery and bullying is incredibly immature in my opinion and I can't seem to grasp the concept or reason for doing it. I know Dibbell claims that these griefers cause other people grief for the mere fact that the people who get upset are taking the internet too seriously. WHATEVER! That is not a valid reason for causing harm/ grief upon others for fun. To me, it seems like these griefers expect people to take it seriously or they wouldn't do it in the first place. How can you justify what you're doing and making fun of when you are relying solely on that thing you're mocking? I just can't see why someone would pick on another person just to get a reaction out of them (you can compare this to school bullies who pick on the weaker kids just to upset them). Now Dibbell talks about how these griefers throw penises, or show disturbing images, at people in SecondLife and how it can sometimes crash your Sim. Crashing someone's Sim or showing graphic images for no reason other than to make them upset is so odd. These griefers claim to do it to make a point but they're only making this a bigger issue.
I relate this griefing to bullying and I think its so immature. When I was younger I used to get picked on and my mom would always tell me to just ignore the bullies and they'd go away (I always had a big mouth so ignoring them was never something I wanted to do). She told me this because she knew that bullies only wanted the attention and reaction out of you. This is the same thing with griefers. I don't take the internet seriously because there is a lot of stuff I know may not be true or just posted for fun, but when it comes to making fun of people, I don't agree with that. In this case, it does become serious. I found an article (link up above) in which the author wrote 10 tips for dealing with internet griefers and I thought it was funny that the #1 tip is to just ignore them (like my mom used to tell me). There are other options like change names or games. We kinda touched upon this in class but I think its unfair to have to change the game you're playing just because someone is ruining your fun. Screw them, they should have to go on sties that allow that stuff. This is a serious issue because there are tips on how to "deal" with these griefers. They are getting the reaction they wanted! I guess this is why they do it but, like I said earlier, it just seems mean and immature.
(again, link will be explained at the bottom)
Julian Dibbell's article was difficult for me to swallow. First of all, I enjoyed the overall article but I didn't agree with the theme. I am upset by these so-called "griefers" who enjoy making fun of and hurting people. This kind of mockery and bullying is incredibly immature in my opinion and I can't seem to grasp the concept or reason for doing it. I know Dibbell claims that these griefers cause other people grief for the mere fact that the people who get upset are taking the internet too seriously. WHATEVER! That is not a valid reason for causing harm/ grief upon others for fun. To me, it seems like these griefers expect people to take it seriously or they wouldn't do it in the first place. How can you justify what you're doing and making fun of when you are relying solely on that thing you're mocking? I just can't see why someone would pick on another person just to get a reaction out of them (you can compare this to school bullies who pick on the weaker kids just to upset them). Now Dibbell talks about how these griefers throw penises, or show disturbing images, at people in SecondLife and how it can sometimes crash your Sim. Crashing someone's Sim or showing graphic images for no reason other than to make them upset is so odd. These griefers claim to do it to make a point but they're only making this a bigger issue.
I relate this griefing to bullying and I think its so immature. When I was younger I used to get picked on and my mom would always tell me to just ignore the bullies and they'd go away (I always had a big mouth so ignoring them was never something I wanted to do). She told me this because she knew that bullies only wanted the attention and reaction out of you. This is the same thing with griefers. I don't take the internet seriously because there is a lot of stuff I know may not be true or just posted for fun, but when it comes to making fun of people, I don't agree with that. In this case, it does become serious. I found an article (link up above) in which the author wrote 10 tips for dealing with internet griefers and I thought it was funny that the #1 tip is to just ignore them (like my mom used to tell me). There are other options like change names or games. We kinda touched upon this in class but I think its unfair to have to change the game you're playing just because someone is ruining your fun. Screw them, they should have to go on sties that allow that stuff. This is a serious issue because there are tips on how to "deal" with these griefers. They are getting the reaction they wanted! I guess this is why they do it but, like I said earlier, it just seems mean and immature.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
EXTRA BLOG
This blog is basically to rant and rave a bit. When I first signed up for this class I had a completely different perspective about online communities and virtual worlds. However, since taking this class my mind has been opened to a whole new world I didn't even know existed. I'm really excited I decided to take this class because I enjoy learning new things and especially about things I don't fully understand.
However, we have gotten into virtual worlds more in depth than I thought we would and I have discovered that I'm a bit shy about how I feel. I think the fact that we've been learning about the negative side (and obviously the positive side) of virtual worlds, I just can't seem to understand why people are apart of these online communities/worlds. I don't want to offend anyone but it is still hard for me to understand why and how someone would enjoy this. But, after Burcu got back from the convention this weekend, she seemed really happy and content about meeting up with her virtual friends which made me ask myself, "Am I missing out on something I've convinced myself to be so against?" After Burcu made a few comments my opinion kind of shifted once again. Now, I understand a little more why someone creates a friendship with someone online in a virtual world or on LambdaMOO or something and then wants/gets the opportunity to meet them in person. It just made me rethink why I'm so against these virtual worlds and I think I've come to the conclusion that I don't think I'm against them as much anymore. This is really exciting to me but disappointing that I've discovered this so late in the semester.
I know we're going to write a paper about what we liked about the class but I figured I could write about it a bit now. I think that in the future the students who take this class should be assigned to create an avatar on Second Life and instead of writing blogs they can participate in Second Life. This way they will understand what goes on in this world instead of just reading about it. The schedule would probably have to be changed around but I think this would be good for them and they can communicate with one another better (in this case, maybe this could take the place of Twitter). Anyway, I just wanted to rant about SecondLife and how I have changed my perception and am now more open about it. Class discussion will be different now :)
However, we have gotten into virtual worlds more in depth than I thought we would and I have discovered that I'm a bit shy about how I feel. I think the fact that we've been learning about the negative side (and obviously the positive side) of virtual worlds, I just can't seem to understand why people are apart of these online communities/worlds. I don't want to offend anyone but it is still hard for me to understand why and how someone would enjoy this. But, after Burcu got back from the convention this weekend, she seemed really happy and content about meeting up with her virtual friends which made me ask myself, "Am I missing out on something I've convinced myself to be so against?" After Burcu made a few comments my opinion kind of shifted once again. Now, I understand a little more why someone creates a friendship with someone online in a virtual world or on LambdaMOO or something and then wants/gets the opportunity to meet them in person. It just made me rethink why I'm so against these virtual worlds and I think I've come to the conclusion that I don't think I'm against them as much anymore. This is really exciting to me but disappointing that I've discovered this so late in the semester.
I know we're going to write a paper about what we liked about the class but I figured I could write about it a bit now. I think that in the future the students who take this class should be assigned to create an avatar on Second Life and instead of writing blogs they can participate in Second Life. This way they will understand what goes on in this world instead of just reading about it. The schedule would probably have to be changed around but I think this would be good for them and they can communicate with one another better (in this case, maybe this could take the place of Twitter). Anyway, I just wanted to rant about SecondLife and how I have changed my perception and am now more open about it. Class discussion will be different now :)
Saturday, April 5, 2008
A Rape In Cyberspace
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/1998/08/14219
(link explained below)
This article A Rape In Cyberspacce was awkward for me to read. I don't fully understand the need for virtual worlds as it is and then after reading about this rape in cyberspace it became clear to me: I think this is so weird. I really try to be open about this whole idea and although I don't personally use virtual worlds, I can't reject the fact that it is a big part of others' lives. After reading the description of what Mr. Bungle did to the characters in LambdaMOO I was really disturbed. I wasn't sure if something like this could ever happen in a virtual world, but clearly it did. The fact the this actually happened inside a virtual world, and not in real life, just makes it that much worse. No, obviously no one got physically hurt but there is an emotional side to rape that these characters experienced and will have to live with all their lives. Also, the fact that LambdaMOO is completely text- based disturbed me. Not only was it not physical, but it wasn't real, or was it? Rape in a virtual world is just as harmful as real life, to me. Such an action in text form would be terrible. You may not have the physical harm but you have such a graphic description spelled out right in front of you on your computer screen. The only thing I don't get is why didn't they log off? I realize that while you are participating in a virtual world, you cannot control what others say to you, in class for example, but if this were happening to me I would have told him to F*CK OFF and signed off. I guess my point here is that I don't think I would have let it happen to me since it wasn't in real life but who is to say that they would have control in a situation like this? I have never experienced anything like this since I don't participate in virtual worlds but I would hope it never happens.
I know Mr. Bungle got in trouble, or "toaded" as they called it but is that fair? Wouldn't someone who raped a woman in real life get arrested? This is an argument that has been debated for years and the article above talks about virtual courts. This article fits well with this article we read for class and I would hope that if a situation like this happens again, that character should be tracked and sent to jail- for real.
(link explained below)
This article A Rape In Cyberspacce was awkward for me to read. I don't fully understand the need for virtual worlds as it is and then after reading about this rape in cyberspace it became clear to me: I think this is so weird. I really try to be open about this whole idea and although I don't personally use virtual worlds, I can't reject the fact that it is a big part of others' lives. After reading the description of what Mr. Bungle did to the characters in LambdaMOO I was really disturbed. I wasn't sure if something like this could ever happen in a virtual world, but clearly it did. The fact the this actually happened inside a virtual world, and not in real life, just makes it that much worse. No, obviously no one got physically hurt but there is an emotional side to rape that these characters experienced and will have to live with all their lives. Also, the fact that LambdaMOO is completely text- based disturbed me. Not only was it not physical, but it wasn't real, or was it? Rape in a virtual world is just as harmful as real life, to me. Such an action in text form would be terrible. You may not have the physical harm but you have such a graphic description spelled out right in front of you on your computer screen. The only thing I don't get is why didn't they log off? I realize that while you are participating in a virtual world, you cannot control what others say to you, in class for example, but if this were happening to me I would have told him to F*CK OFF and signed off. I guess my point here is that I don't think I would have let it happen to me since it wasn't in real life but who is to say that they would have control in a situation like this? I have never experienced anything like this since I don't participate in virtual worlds but I would hope it never happens.
I know Mr. Bungle got in trouble, or "toaded" as they called it but is that fair? Wouldn't someone who raped a woman in real life get arrested? This is an argument that has been debated for years and the article above talks about virtual courts. This article fits well with this article we read for class and I would hope that if a situation like this happens again, that character should be tracked and sent to jail- for real.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Identity in Virtual Worlds
http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2008/03/most-online-wor.html
(I'll explain this link later in my blog)
Turkle wrote in her article Tinysex and Gender Trouble about identity in the virtual world. After our class discussion on Monday, I got to thinking about people's identities in virtual worlds and why some choose to be animals or someone of the opposite gender. All I could come up with is that it is a way for them to be someone that they are not without making any drastic change (like a sex change operation, for example).
In relation to gender-swapping, Turkle talks about this in her article and claims that "gender-swapping is an opportunity to explore conflicts raised by one's biological gender." This makes prefect sense to me because you would never know what it is like to be a guy (if you're a girl) unless you choose to gender-swap or get an operation of some sort. I know when I was in middle school, I talked on AIM all the time and when my friends weren't on or I was really bored, I would IM random people and pretend I was older or even a guy. This may sound strange but I did it because I got away with it and just made friends with people who thought I was really a guy, they had no reason to suspect otherwise. I did this for about a month and became good friends with these two guys until I accidentally made a comment about being a girl and got caught. But the point is, it made me experience something that I wouldn't normally feel in real life. In class, we talked about how Turkle states that a "fake" identity allows you to express unexplored facets that you are unable to manifest in real life. This is exactly what I was doing when I pretended to be a guy. The link above shows a study done in order to find how many gamers gender swap and they found that 70% of women gender swap and 54% of men do. It explains different reasons as to why they gender swap but they can all be grouped into the category of exploring facets that you can't in real life (being outgoing was an example from the study). In conclusion, Turkle made valid points about virtual identities that seem to make sense and I agree with doing it for exploration.
(I'll explain this link later in my blog)
Turkle wrote in her article Tinysex and Gender Trouble about identity in the virtual world. After our class discussion on Monday, I got to thinking about people's identities in virtual worlds and why some choose to be animals or someone of the opposite gender. All I could come up with is that it is a way for them to be someone that they are not without making any drastic change (like a sex change operation, for example).
In relation to gender-swapping, Turkle talks about this in her article and claims that "gender-swapping is an opportunity to explore conflicts raised by one's biological gender." This makes prefect sense to me because you would never know what it is like to be a guy (if you're a girl) unless you choose to gender-swap or get an operation of some sort. I know when I was in middle school, I talked on AIM all the time and when my friends weren't on or I was really bored, I would IM random people and pretend I was older or even a guy. This may sound strange but I did it because I got away with it and just made friends with people who thought I was really a guy, they had no reason to suspect otherwise. I did this for about a month and became good friends with these two guys until I accidentally made a comment about being a girl and got caught. But the point is, it made me experience something that I wouldn't normally feel in real life. In class, we talked about how Turkle states that a "fake" identity allows you to express unexplored facets that you are unable to manifest in real life. This is exactly what I was doing when I pretended to be a guy. The link above shows a study done in order to find how many gamers gender swap and they found that 70% of women gender swap and 54% of men do. It explains different reasons as to why they gender swap but they can all be grouped into the category of exploring facets that you can't in real life (being outgoing was an example from the study). In conclusion, Turkle made valid points about virtual identities that seem to make sense and I agree with doing it for exploration.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
