During our Wiki group assignment, which focused on the pros and cons of altmetrics, I wondered about the effects that personal branding exercises would/could have on the personality. Would the process of promoting one’s work (and one’s self) help improve ties between post-secondary institutions, and broader communities? between academics and non-academics? between people?; would social media tools help researchers grow on a personal level, and would that, in turn, increase their motivation to be more innovative?; or would communication with others become an unhealthy popularity contest?
Then one morning on CBC Radio’s The Current, in an episode entitled “Selfies: Narcissistic, Empowering, or Just Fun?,” I heard three people vigorously debating the merits and perils of selfies: “self-photos” which young women, in particular, enjoy sharing with others over the Internet using tools, such as Facebook, Instagram, and Flickr. Their debate made the questions above still more difficult to answer.
The selfie, I think, epitomizes the best and worst of aspects of social media, as demonstrated by the passion with which the panel members (Sarah Nicole Prickett, Andrew Keen, Hal Niedzviecki), writers all, debated the topic. Prickett, a twenty-something woman, and two pre-recorded female photographers argued that selfies have little to do with narcissism and everything to do with self-empowerment, especially in a world where women are frequently judged by their appearance. They asserted, too, that selfies were a part of personal branding, a necessity when traditional jobs and their attendant financial security are going by the wayside and being replaced by projects and tasks (Bersin, 2012). Niedzviecki responded that this act of seeming empowerment actually enslaves the selfie creator: her audience might become more demanding, and she, if naïve about how easily people—including herself—are influenced by others, might succumb to those demands to her later regret. Keen cautioned that selfies simply reflect the “democratization of celebrity culture,” and that in the “attention economy” only an “elite” few will win the attention they pursue: the others will look like fools or idiots. Keen himself maintains a presence on Twitter and other social media but is strongly opposed to selfies.
A selfie with a “smoke them” – created by jnyemb
I thought all of the panelists made valid points; they also inadvertently raised some interesting questions. For instance, I wondered why Keen, although comfortable with verbal self-promotion, was so fiercely opposed to images. He was further concerned about people appearing to be fools or idiots, which seems a weak argument against potentially courageous acts of self-empowerment. If we were all afraid of ridicule, very few of us would take any risks in life. Niedzviecki, like Keen, is convinced that all selfies are created for an audience, but are they? Many creative people simply enjoy the act of creating. An interested audience is a pleasant bonus. And Prickett’s argument for selfies as personal branding in precarious economic times did not fly for me, as most of the selfies I have seen posted are, at best, part of a personal development activity. How will an online diary help jobseekers acquire work? Further, Prickett’s out-of-hand dismissal of narcissism playing a role in selfie creation sends up red flags for me. I think that such overconfidence in one’s motives can invite the insidious creep of self-absorption.
A great deal of research indicates that this aspect of selfies—and of social media use in general—must be taken seriously. The work of many scholars (this chapter by Konrath offers a great review) has shown that “[s]elf-esteem and narcissism have been rising in college students from the late 1970s to 2010, with simultaneous declines in empathy” (Konrath, 2012. p.1). But while the drop in “empathic concern” (feeling what another feels) and “perspective taking” (understanding what another may be experiencing) has occurred over four decades, the most significant decline began in 2000 which is the time when social media started coming to the forefront in the cyber world (Konrath, 2012, p.9). One reason may be because social media use can cut down on face-to-face interactions: some believe that this increased distance between people leads to decreased empathy, much as the famous 1965 Milgram experiment illustrated (Konrath, 2012, p.13). While Konrath notes repeatedly throughout her review that these phenomena are correlational and thus open to interpretation, she does also state that “every single study… that has measured the relationship between narcissism and social media use has found some sort of correlation between the two” (Konrath, 2012, p.15).
I’m nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there’s a pair of us — don’t tell!
They’d banish — you know!How dreary to be somebody!
How public like a frog
To tell one’s name the livelong day
To an admiring bog!Emily Dickinson
So where does this leave the librarian? While my Wiki group was researching altmetrics this term, we learned that librarians have an important role to play in teaching scholars how to make optimal use of social media tools (Galligan, 2012). The possibilities are exciting, but it’s crucial for us to remember that our role is to educate, not evangelize. I think that this cautious approach is much needed, especially in light of such articles as “Historians Get Advice on Writing for the Readers of Today” in The Chronicle of Higher Education. In this piece, Perry (2013) observes that many in- and outside the field of history, believe that historians should change their approach to writing history in order to appeal to larger numbers. As one commentator (px7_mq9) pointed out, however, the more popular history books, particularly the more thoroughly researched and accurate ones, “are a payoff of normal work done by historians… [work that] though necessary, will be dry as dust.” I think the lesson here for librarians is to avoid shoehorning scholars into communication models that don’t feel comfortable with. After all, social media, when used well, is about inclusivity and sharing—not conformity.
References
Bersin, J. (2012, January 31). The end of a job as we know it [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbersin/2012/01/31/the-end-of-a-job-as-we-know-it/
Brotzel, P. (Producer), & Mattar, P. (Producer). (2013, January 30). Selfies: narcissistic, empowering, or just fun? [Audio podcast). In J. Moroz (Executive Producer), The Current. Toronto, ON: CBC Radio. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2013/01/30/selfies-narcissistic-empowering-or-just-fun/
Galligan, F. (2012, August 31). Altmetrics for librarians and institutions: Part II [Blog Post]. Retrieved from http://www.swets.com/blog/altmetrics-for-librarians-and-institutions-part-ii#.USBvdKXR2So
Konrath, S. (in press, 2012) The empathy paradox: Increasing disconnection in the ageof increasing connection. In Rocci Luppicini (Ed.), Handbook of research on technoself: Identity in a technological society, IGI Global. Retrieved from http://www.sarakonrath.com/media/publications/Konrath_-_Empathy_Paradox_2012.pdf
Perry, M. (2013, January 4). Historians get advice on writing for the readers of today. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/article/Historians-Get-Advice-on/136489/
Social Media Use in the Workplace: The Conundrums of Free Speech
Should a workplace have the right to fire employees or pass them over when considering promotions based on their social media usage? Should a business make a practice of suing professionals for libel? These are questions raised by a recent New York Times article “Even if It Enrages Your Boss, Social Net Speech Is Protected” and another article in The Chronicle of Higher Education entitled “Librarians Rally behind Blogger Sued by Publisher over Critical Comments.”
The latter article describes the case of Dale Askey, a librarian at McMaster University, who in a blog in 2010, described Edwin Mellen Press (EMP) as “dubious” and many of its publications as examples of “second-class scholarship” (New, 2013). A sympathetic commentator on Askey’s site then went on to call Herbert Richardson, the founder of EMP, a “’fascist and evangelical Scientologist’” (New, 2013). Richardson, in his claim, ascribes the commentator’s words to Askey: the Internet Archives, however, disprove that claim (New, 2013). According to a CBC article, Richardson also says that Askey’s posting “badly hurt our business….[and] the reputation of our authors” (Ruf, 2013). Askey is now being sued by the publisher (which is also suing McMaster) and by Richardson.
By the way, if you wish to read the blog entry that has led to these lawsuits, you will find a copy in the action notice served by EMP. The original blog has been removed from the web.
The joys of blogging
Fortunately, many in the academic community have rushed to Askey’s aid, including York University Faculty Association’s library chapter, the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), the Canadian Association of Professional Academic Libraries (CAPAL), the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), and its Canadian counterpart CARL. In addition, Askey supporters can sign a petition started by Martha Reineke, a University of Northern Iowa professor.
While I do support Askey’s right (and duty) to critique publishers, I think his case raises , among other questions, the question of how information professionals should critique publishers, works, vendors, and the like in their blogs and other social media platforms. As the CAPAL site recommends, reading the HLWIKI entry on “Blogging and the Law” is an excellent place to begin this question. I took their advice and found that the following points stood out for me in this entry:
Askey will be able to defend himself successfully if the fair reports privilege holds for him, but he might fall short on the third point.
A blog posting in Percolator entitled “How Rude! Reader Comments May Undermine Scientists’ Authority” highlights the third point. It describes how a recent study (presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science and soon to be published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication) demonstrates that rude reader comments result in more people feeling negatively about a given topic. In this instance, the topic was the risks of nanotechnology: after reading the article, a greater percentage of those who then read rudely expressed comments (as opposed to those who read only politely worded comments) thought that nanotechnology posed high risks (Basken, 2013). So, moderating comments may serve purposes other than lawsuit prevention.
And while I have focused thus far primarily on academia, social media usage is a topic of hot debate in the broader business world as well. In his NY Times article , Greenhouse (2013) draws attention to several cases of perceived inappropriate social media use in the US which have led to employee termination. Of course, what is “inappropriate” is currently being determined by policy makers and the National Labor Relations Board (Greenhouse, 2013). The legal system has yet to catch up with technological changes, but labour lawyer Denise Keyser advises policy makers to write clear and “specific” policies (Greenhouse, 2013).
In the meantime, social media users and information professional especially (we have an example to set, don’t we?) will need to exercise ever greater levels of restraint in media forms that make impulsive behaviour all too easy.
References:
Blogging and the law. (n.d.) In HLWIKI Canada. Retrieved February 16, 2013, from http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Blogging_and_the_law
Basken, P. (2013, February 14). How rude! Reader comments may undermine scientists’ authority [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/how-rude-reader-comments-may-undermine-scientists-authority/32071
Greenhouse, S. (2013, January 21). Even if it enrages your boss, social net speech is protected. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/technology/employers-social-media-policies-come-under-regulatory-scrutiny.html?pagewanted=all
New, J. (2013, February 14). Librarians rally behind blogger sued by publisher over critical comments. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Librarians-Rally-Behind/137329/
Ruf, C. (2013, February 14). Book publisher sues McMaster librarian, university for libel. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/02/12/hamilton-librarian-lawsuit.html
3 Comments
Posted in comments, lawsuits, legal concerns, libel, netiquette, workplace social media use