Social Media

by TMD

31 comments

1 Genevieve Brisson { 11.12.09 at 3:51 pm }

Web 2.0? Web 1.0? Before I read Alexander’s (2006) article it was all gibberish to me, but his clear portrayal of the “evolution” of the Web provides me with a good basis to work from. It’s interesting how I often end up using new “tools” without even thinking about how they are similar or different from what I have used before.

For instance, I have a blog, a “private” one. I tackle neither grand political, cultural, and peace issues nor do to I “spill my gut” online. Most of what I write is of no interest to the World. I started it when I moved to BC and I have been using it to post pictures and news about what is happening in my life for my family and friends, back in Québec. I remember a friend of mine asking what a blog was and how it differed from a Website. All I could tell him at the time was that with Blogger, it had been really easy for me to create a blog, posting entries was a piece of cake, and that it would be really easy for him to write comments. I would now tell him that my blog is something of a mix between a diary, a travelogue and a journal, published on the Web. Most importantly, I would tell him that my blog was updated regularly, contrary to a Website which is quite static, and that my latest post would always appears first, at the top of the “page”, because in a blog “entries are placed in reverse chronological order”(Lange, 2007). I could even entertain him with the concept of microcontent… for a few minutes at least. I loved Mortensen’s definition of the blog (in Lankshear and Knobel, 2006): “a bastard child of all personal writing, breeding wildly as it meets others of its ilk online.” Poetic, no? ☺

I read my friends’ blogs (nobody I know have a Vlog yet). Most of them are about their family: babies’ first steps or tooth, smiles and bruises, adventures, etc. I really enjoy reading these blogs because it allows me to keep in the loop of what is happening in my friends’ lives. I feel no interest towards blogs/vlogs written by strangers. I watched one video on Rox’s blog BeachWalk (mentioned by Lange). It wasn’t as bad as I expected, I enjoyed her chat about bimbos, bikinis and clean energy… but I still don’t quite get it. And I was abashed when she gave her email and phone number for people to contact her… I am not sure if the good deeds she does by sharing personal insights really outweigh the disadvantages and dangers of going so public.

Reading boyd’s article “Why Youth (love) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life” reminded me of our discussion a few weeks ago about txting. I went back and browsed Carrington’s article “Txting: the end of civilization (again)?”. Both authors are discussing teenagers’ involvement in a digital phenomenon that has become tied to their identity formation. In her article Carrington notes that txting is often perceived as a dangerous practice, and that txters/teenagers are often described as dangerous people who are consciously destroying the “Queen’s English”. From what I remember of our discussion in class, not much positive has been written about txting, and people mostly see it as a threat. boyd, however, really brings in the pros and cons of social network sites. She explains why teenagers are so interested in these sites, why and how they use (or do not use) them, etc. Her article reminds me of Gee’s article “Good Video Games and Good Learning” (2005) where he suggests we have to learn how to use the positive features of video games to improve learning in and out of school. As for boyd, one of her conclusions is that we need to learn from the experiences of teens on social network websites instead of trying to prevent them from accessing them. “[Teenagers] are learning to navigate networked publics; it is in our better interest to figure out how to help them.” Social network sites are here to stay, as video games are, so let’s learn how and why kids are engaging with these new media. “If you can’t beat them, join them!” 🙂

Questions about Ethics
Lankshear & Knobel (2006) as well as Lange (2007) use excerpts from blogs in their article. I believe that Lange did not only look at the Rox’s videos (from the Vlog “BeachWalk”); she also interviewed her. Lange must, therefore, have gone through all the “Ethics stuff” in order to be allowed to analyze Rox’s blog, and to write about it. But what about Lankshear & Knobel and, for instance, their discussion of “Blogging Project Runway”, a blog about a TV show created by a blogger named Laura K.? They discuss her first entry, and then go on to talk about some of the comments that were posted on her blog over a period of a few months. Did they have to obtain Laura K’s permission to study her entries as well as permission for all the bloggers who posted on her blog? I know I am not allowed to photocopy a novel and use it in a class, but I do not need the author’s permission to include his/her novel in my research… What about entries and comments on a blog? Are they “public” enough that one does not need permissions for the authors of these microcontents?

An unrelated question
Why are some authors not using capital letter for their first and last names (danah boyd)? I remember hearing something in passing about it, and I think it was in this class, but I cannot recall exactly what was said.

bonne fin de semaine
Geneviève

2 Heidi { 11.12.09 at 8:32 pm }

Thought some of you might be into listening to some or all of this interview with Clay Shirky, in which he discussed the pros and cons of social media:
http://www.cbc.ca/spark/2008/12/episode-59-december-24-27-2008/

3 Melanie Wong { 11.12.09 at 8:55 pm }

Hi everyone,

I am so excited about this weeks readings and possible discussion. I am constantly using social media. I finally get to talk about it too!

Alexander’s (2006) article provided me with a great overview. One comment in his article in particular was interesting to me concerning blogs. “Students can search the blogosphere for political commentary, current cultural items, public developments in science, business news, and so on” (p. 9). I am a bit concerned about students using blogs for their studies. Maybe it is because I am worried about how accurate the information is. This comment obviously extends to using websites etc.. When I was the technology teacher in my last school I would go to meetings representing my school and we would discuss about web safety, new technology etc.. Quite often our meetings would discuss about the validity of information on the web and whether or not students would be able to distinguish what is accurate and what is not. I am not saying that all information on the web is not accurate. As a blogger, I don’t know if I necessary put accurate facts on my blog. Often my comments are personal opinions etc.. I guess what I am saying is that if students are going to be searching the blogosphere for information, we as educators, need to be educating them about what is accurate and what is not. I know I didn’t come with the skills to be critical and I needed to be taught strategies to do so. However maybe some students are just naturally critical.

Bleicher (2006) gives a brief definition of what Web 2.0 is from Wikipedia. In this particular definition collaboration and sharing information online is emphasized. There is further discussion on how traditional webpages are static in nature. I find that this sense of collaboration could be very beneficial to my ESL students. I have never used a Wiki or blog in my classroom. Although I had a distributed learning environment, it was very different from these Web 2.0 applications. Again, we go back to this concept of locus of control and how individuals are not given more control. As Bleicher says users are now contributors. I am not familiar with LinkedIn, which was mentioned in the article. Obviously it is probably similar to social networking websites like Facebook (which I use on a everyday basis). I can’t even imagine not be able to update my status or post pictures to share with my friends. However, as an educator I am a bit uncomfortable about how much information is available to everyone on my Facebook page. I guess this concept was highlighted in some of the situations discussed in Lange’s (2007) article. I know there are restrictions/security measures you can change on your Facebook account. However, recently I find a lot of my past students are trying to add me as their friends. These students are young, as I taught elementary school. I have obviously not accepted them, partly due to privacy issues and partly because of ethical issues. However, what about these news stories:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/09/08/bc-north-vancouver-facebook-teachers-guidelines-students.html

http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/reportcard/archive/2009/10/21/teachers-warned-to-be-careful-with-facebook-twitter-and-other-online-communications.aspx

http://www.switched.com/2008/11/13/teacher-suspended-facing-dismissal-for-facebook-comments/

What are your thoughts on these articles? What about professional boundaries? What about losing your job because of Facebook? My thoughts are that when we are educators we need to be acting in a professional manner, whether we are online or offline. However, it is obviously that the online environment presents different situations and perhaps different guidelines.

I guess I am blogger, not really a “vlogger” (is that the correct term??). My current blog contains pictures, text and some video diary moments. I have friends who visit my blog on a daily basis. Like Genevieve, I use my blog to connect with friends back home. I created it prior to coming to Vancouver. In some aspects it is my online diary of my time at UBC. It is also very fun to create. I love coming up with new posts and putting up pictures etc.. I also love sharing some of my funny adventures here in Vancouver and explorations of this new city. Genevieve, I like Mortensen’s definition too. I got a kick out of that one.

My friend and I had a discussion about vlogs. She was telling how significant vlogs are for the deaf community since it provides them with a way to communicate using sign language. Check out the two youtube vlogs below. They are done by a deaf interpreter. First, he does his story in ASL and then he translates in spoken language. Have a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGNl-_X_bvQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxqENBghS34

By the way, Lange (2007) had some very interesting interviews. One comment from an interviewee really stuck with me, “my whole social life is online.” Interesting since there is there is definitely a blurring line between offline and online lives for some people.

Melanie

4 Janet Pletz { 11.12.09 at 9:45 pm }

Hi everyone,

It has been another week of ‘grand awareness’. Like you, Genevieve, I also learned about a new vocabulary (and processes) associated with Web 2.0 – most specifically the meaning of ‘deeply participatory’. The nature of ‘ethos stuff’ (Lankshear & Kobel) of new literacies and the primacy of participation (and the design of social constructs embedded in making-it-that-way) is dizzying. Mindset 2 gives me a feeling that the world is infinitely, out-of-grasp. In this environment, tools for mediating and relating in my world may provide a just-tangible means for interpreting and making meaning in my tiny grain of sand (I mean world..) in the space I inhabit. Indeed, space is open, continuous, and fluid. I like some notion of understanding and order in my world (seek comfort in Mindset 1 while living fully and consciously in Mindset 2). Hmmm…

As I enter each week’s readings I try to orient myself in some way, to these two questions, “What does this reading mean about teaching and learning with young children?” and/or “How can this reading inform teacher education?” This week it is the latter question that stays with me. While reading the Alexander article, the questions he inserted to guide his commentary offer openings for us: “How can social bookmarking play a role in higher education (teacher education)?” and “How do social platforms intersect with the world of higher education (teacher education)?” I don’t have the answers, however, Alexander’s response to his own questions provokes my inner-dialogue. I see two perspectives. Social bookmarking and writing platforms do offer higher education students (adults) collaborative, information discovery (p. 36) resources and networks. As teacher educators, and adults, this is conceivable and already our lived reality. Does our position change somewhat when we think of how we then turn the table in our approaches in working with students in junior high and high school classrooms? What is taught? What is ethically responsible teaching practice in these spaces? Not being a high school teacher, I would love to hear the perspectives and experiences of Erin, Peter, and Richard?

I thoroughly enjoyed danah boyd’s article. The conversation around mediated and unmediated public spaces was my first introduction to the concept. Understanding that public spaces are socially mediated (back to Wertsch!) and unmediated in nature and contextually named, provides me another way to configure some order into Mindset 2! Brilliant! (Calming…?) In relation to our teenagers, I wonder if any research has been done with regards to her statement, ”The long term implications of being socialized into a culture rooted in networked publics are unknown.”

I have many more questions than answers today. I look forward to our conversations on Tuesday!

Janet

5 Peter Hill { 11.13.09 at 10:53 am }

Hi,

I also enjoyed boyd’s article. Her comments on ‘public /private ‘were vedry interesting. It seems the boundaries of these words are shifting.
As an observer of computer use, I ‘m interested why Facebook has become more popular that Myspace.

Interesting also the notion of lurking and voyeurism online.
The kid that was yelled at by his mother when he was on myspace in the middle of the night sounded familiar.

6 Melanie Wong { 11.13.09 at 7:39 pm }

Hi again,

Speaking about Social media and Facebook, check out this news story:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/091112/tecnology/ctech_us_facebook_alibi_1

Apparently, updating your status etc.. does pay off!

Melanie

7 Erin Garcia { 11.13.09 at 10:16 pm }

As I mentioned in my presentation last week, I’m a Creative Commons Convert. I love the mass of content available and the concept of creative sharing. My only concern is that many people were claiming ownership and marking it with the Creative Commons mark, but the material was actually copyrighted material that the person had (perhaps unwittingly) stolen. So if I use that material, and the fierce Copyright powers come after me, can I claim ignorance. Or wait, now that I’ve said that in a public forum, I guess not. Damn.

Facebook Addict: Melanie, I read the articles you posted about BC teachers being warned about using Facebook. What annoys me is Facebook started out as a social networking tool for college students, and now, just because young people are using it, teachers are supposed to get out of it. I totally agree with the idea of not accepting students on your Friends List, and the article in Switched that gave a quick step-by-step for increasing your privacy settings should be all the warning that is required.

But I have to admit I am a face book addict, it was the crutch I used to get me off my MSN addiction. And it is a hard habit to kick. I keep trying to disable my Facebook site or at least checking it only once a week, but I always fear that if I to that, I will miss out on real-life social events, because I won’t see the Events list. I guess as long as the activity is not “done to the exclusion of other activities” it’s not a problem. (See Psychologist Discusses Facebook Addiction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY2KH8LGmU0) After watching this video, I guess I’m not that bad of an addict, but I definitely feel I spend to much of my “cognitive surplus” time (as the Spark interview with Clay Shirky discussed) on Facebook and good old email, and I would love to get that 30-60min a day back in my life.

Here’s a local Vancouver Sketch Comedy’s take on Facebook Friend Rejection: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr1e0M6HZeE

Janet,
The ethics of using social webspace as a teaching tool? I actually don’t feel comfortable using it at all: how can I ask my students to publish something for school, that could potentially come back to haunt them down the road, if only because our opinions and ideas change a great deal throughout our lives, and we may not want our names attached to said ideas in a public setting, which can be searched and read out of context.

In direct relation to that question, comes my own use of this very blog, as a required assignment for this class. I feel uncomfortable with the idea that my name is published along side with the things I’ve posted here, not that I think I’ve written anything “that might be considered to be in the dubious category” (as described in article that Melanie posted), but once in print, who knows how my words can be taken out of context and mistconstrued. Maybe I’m just not pronoiac enough.

8 Melanie Wong { 11.14.09 at 8:58 am }

Hi!

Erin, thank you for your comments. I have to remember not to click any links after I type an entire message reply because then I lose everything! I am typing my reply a second time as a result. I agree with all your Facebook comments. I think it is very unfair that they are trying to impose restrictions on teachers’ use of social media and Facebook. However, I guess there are some teachers that probably go over the professional boundaries on Facebook. Unfortunately I couldn’t find all the articles I wanted to post regarding Facebook. I remember that awhile back there was this teacher who had a wife who posted nude pictures of him on Facebook (or something like that). I am sure there was action take against him but it was because he was acting in an unprofessional manner. It is obvious that the implications of social media are starting to really emerge in our society.

I am bit worried that I may be a Facebook addict myself. However, I am definitely not as severe as what was said on the youtube video. LOL!

Melanie

9 Jeff Miller { 11.14.09 at 9:28 am }

Hi everyone,

I also found the readings quite interesting this week, particularly as there was so much attention to how youth are being, well, youth, in using social media to connect with one another, try on different social roles, and otherwise engage in exploration of identity with all of the heights and depths that such quests entail.

I thought I would bring in some recent stats on the use of social networks in the US based upon some of the PEW Internet and American Life research publications. You can find other research from their project on this website:

http://www.pewinternet.org/

According to their recent study “The democratization of online social networks,” the use of social media in the United States looks something like this:

Between 2005 and 2009, adult use of Social Network sites grew from 8% to 46%. It is worth mentioning that 81% of these adults are under the age of 55.

For youth between the ages of 12-17, the numbers are a bit higher, with 55% of youth using social network sites in 2006 and 65% using them in 2008. They were earlier adopters and still lead the use.

The net effect of this is that larger and larger numbers of youth (and younger adults) are using social network sites on a regular basis, with sites like Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn being very popular sites.

I saw an advertisement on TV last night that might be an indication of the affects that these trends in social networking are having on other markets. A phone dating site was pitching an aggressive ad saying that if you really want to reach out and “touch” someone new, you should reach for the phone, not the keyboard, as talking is so much more intimate and exciting than typing! Does this sound familiar?!

Cheers,
Jeff

10 Peter Hill { 11.14.09 at 1:52 pm }

Hi Melanie,

Sorry to respond so late to this…

I completely agree witht the BCTF regarding teacher /student intertacion on Facebook.

It’s not saying teachers have to get off Facebook, but that they cannot communicate with their students on Facebook.

We’ve had a few workshops on this where a teacher is giving waaay too much info to their students. They also showed how students were then trading this info around to laugh at the teacher.
Shouldn’t happen.

I like what the registrar said:
“Registrar Marie Crowther says educators should ask themselves: Are you sharing this information because it will help the student or because you have a need to be liked?”

It’s well put for a registrar.
p

11 Melanie Wong { 11.14.09 at 2:37 pm }

Hi again!

Jeff, those are interesting stats! Thank you for sharing them. It was neat to see the jump of adult usage from 8% to 46%! Wow!

Peter, thanks for sharing! I am really concerned about my students having access to my personal information. It’s one thing to share things with your friends on Facebook but it is another thing to share with your students. Your last quote was great!

M.

12 Heidi { 11.14.09 at 3:10 pm }

In response to what has already been posted..

Geneviève:
I also have questions about the ethics required for virtual ethnography or any kind of online research – I am hoping this class can give me an introduction to that as I begin to work towards a dissertation that may involve this kind of research.

Melanie:
Regardless of what some students may already know about collecting information from blogs for student projects, I feel that this conversation needs to be incorporated into our curriculum…not only for the purpose of obtaining accurate information, but to better understand the digital society we live within. If a teacher senses that they are saying things students already recognize, use it as an opportunity to discuss the presence of the internet in their lives and encourage them to think critically about their relationship with computers and electronic information.

LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/) is less social than Facebook and seems to be primarily business-oriented. I joined awhile back thinking it was a good way to make connections with others in my field, but it has been pretty uneventful. I could see it being useful for employers who want to get a better sense of a potential employee’s work by referring to their list of contacts.

Sometimes my husband talks about the same concerns you have regarding Facebook – he is a special education assistant at an elementary school. He never knows what the rules are since they seem to be in constant flux, and I think this uncertainty creates a lot of anxiety amongst teachers and employees at public schools. The other night I saw a news story about a teacher in the US fired for having a couple of pics on her private Facebook account that showed her holding drinks on her summer trip to Italy:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/21586641/detail.html

Janet:
You bring up some excellent questions….particularly, “Does our position change somewhat when we think of how we then turn the table in our approaches in working with students in junior high and high school classrooms?” Your position as an elementary school teacher also makes me ask, Can private networks within elementary school classrooms be of any use to shaping children for a future filled with online communication? It is surprising how early children are becoming comfortable with the interface of the internet, and the language of user-friendly icons. How old should children be before we begin to incorporate these communication tools into the classroom? I don’t know. I am not thinking of young children using social networking sites in and out of class to stay connected with what their friends are doing, but rather adapting the social networking site to the content of projects already being taught….to instigate a more critical approach to these powerful tools. One example that comes to mind is http://www.ning.com where one can set up private networks and then delete the network (and all content) later if they chose to do so…I’ll show examples of how I used Ning for a teens summer program at Emily Carr this past summer in class on Monday.

13 Richard Harris { 11.14.09 at 3:19 pm }

Hello Everybody,

Janet:
I’m glad you brought up Lankshear and Knobel’s “mindset” categories. Although they acknowledge that “they are not the only mindsets one can hold,” they seem to assume the two categories do not blend. I find I agree with the general heading of Mindset #1, but the sub-points of Mindset #2. “The world is much the same as before,” but it also “cannot adequately be interpreted, understand and responded to in physical-industrial terms only” (Lankshear and Knobel). I realize these categories are arbitrary and used primarily for outlining their ideas, but they seem a little too artificial. If the world before (Mindset #1) is focussed on individual intelligence, then perhaps that was the construction of the Renaissance Humanist movement – bringing greater focus on the individual. Prior to that, one may argue, society could be viewed in terms of a collective intelligence. Therefore, the Mindset #2 is nothing new. In fact it seems especially old. Perhaps new networking spaces are allowing for a reversion to the collective intelligences of oral-based literary traditions? Just a few thoughts.

In response to all the discussion about social networking spaces I would say a lot of it is common sense. If a space is truly “social,” in that one socializes with actual friends there, then students are not welcome. If the space is exclusively used as a teaching/learning space (such as this one) then one acts as a “teacher” and there usually is no problem. But there is one catch with the later scenario. One can establish a “teacher” profile/identity in theses spaces, but they sometimes can’t ignore content that appears unfiltered from the students’ profiles – I’m thinking of Facebook status updates here. I should not be, nor want to be, privy to their private lives.

Thanks to Melanie for the link to the CBC article. It certainly got a lot of response from the public.

Genevieve:
I fall into your camp regarding the Rox beach video blog (“I still don’t quite get it”). Did Lange really need to use that blog – frankly, Rox sux. I think she just likes the idea of people watching her live her dream walking on the beach in Hawaii. She’s looking for admirers. But that’s just my unfiltered opinion. By the way, I’m not looking for admirers here. Overall, I was not impressed with the Lange piece.

That’s it for me,

Richard.

14 Heidi { 11.14.09 at 3:56 pm }

Me again…
Still thinking about questions of ethics….where is the line drawn? I’m hoping Teresa can touch on this in class sometime.

Most likely with my own research, I will be drawing on students and teachers, however, to gain a better understanding of imagined communities and networked publics I may want to extend my research outside of the educational institution. Earlier this year I attended a PhD defense in which the candidate discussed her ethnographic research of a specific online community. As originally conceived, her dissertation project was to be a conventional cyber-ethnography of a community involving 3 stages: 1) non-participant observation (lurking); 2) participant-observation (gaining insider status by participating in the community); and 3) participant interviews. She wanted to study both the products of fan discourse and the subjective experiences associated with producing them. When it came time to gain ethical approval, moving from the role as lurker to participant-observer became much more complicated – she was told that the participants would need to know that they are part of a study and consent would be required. Because she felt that ‘outing’ herself as ‘researcher’ in her status would jeopardize the ethnographic potential of her research, so she decided to focus her dissertation exclusively on stage one – non-participant observation. Within the question period following the candidate’s presentation, it was stated that her discussion of ‘lurking’ in the written paper (which I have since received but have only skimmed through) had a defensive tone because of the ethics experience and why not rethink this predicament for the potential available in possibly furthering the lurking methodology. Lurking is a common act today with the internet, not necessarily associated with negative connotations.

This got me thinking….if lurking is common practice by internet users, how can it be incorporated into research of the space/place of the internet in a way that might reflect the actions and experiences within contemporary digital culture? I just feel that we need to know more about the subjective experiences of members of different online communities/networks….so do ethic reviews need to be adjusted to accommodate for this kind of research? OR….Do we as researchers need to develop new ways for working within these restrictions? If so, would those new methodologies even be accepted by the institutions?

15 Heidi { 11.14.09 at 4:07 pm }

On a similar note….another recent PhD defense of a social networking site adapted to classroom use, required all participants to remain anonymous for the duration of the study. I really don’t know how much this has to do with the ethics board, but what are we saying by requiring people to remain anonymous with this type of research? How significant (or insignificant) is personal identity in relation to learning within online environments? Perhaps I am struggling with this issue because I completed a masters degree without even hearing mention of an ethics review, and yes….lots of contemporary art uses people as research subjects. Or maybe I am anxious because I feel my work as an art educator is all about identity development…post-secondary art courses being a good place for that to occur. I need to learn more about this…

16 Chelsey Hauge { 11.14.09 at 7:29 pm }

What does it mean to participate in the bloggersphere, and how is that participation linked to agency and/or political/social change and awareness? Mostly, a few blogs get most of the attention—and lots of blogs out there are visited by a few, directed toward family/friends, and seemingly a conversation between oneself and one’s close ones (Lankshear and Knobel). What, though, of the sense of time? These writers ask about this, mainly in the sense of who or which blogs abide overtime, focusing largely on the lifespan of the blog. This reminds me of something Lissa Soep noted in her talk a few weeks ago, where she spoke about the consequences of posting youth radio work in online in the form of a podcast. Her organization, YouthRadio, is dealing with what it means to have youth journalists post podcasts, and then, years later, for that podcast, attached to that persons’ name, still have a presence online. What if the youth no longer agrees with what he/she said? What if they are searching for a job and want it taken down? What does that mean for journalism and its integrity? Additionally, what does it mean to be able to access blog writing and posting, and to be able to particpate in that blog/writing posting months or years after the initial post? Warner writes that publics are constituted by participation in them, so if you post to/comment on a blog six months after the initial post, is the entire public reactivated? What does this mean for the public sphere? Boyd talks about this public sphere as “being bound together through digital means” and notes that social networking sites, including blogs, are publics because speech occurs in them, and audiences gather through them. The persistence Soep mentioned is one of the qualities boyd identifies as making a networked public distinct from a non-networked public. In some ways, the act of speech returns to an event in the networked public in a way it isn’t an event but an object with the book, but then there is a trace left, a persistence of the event, and so it becomes both an event in the networked public and a trace, a record in a way similar to a book, except its embedded in a public of people bound through digitality. Then there’s this thing about audiences, imagined ones, invisible ones, ones that have potential to change and shift and become an audience of the event through the trace/persistence years, months after the speech event took place! How strange!

Here, I find Lange’s notion that the reading of a blog/viewing of a video/accessing of some kind of “private” or not-celebrity based media online can open profound spaces for conversation about challenging and/or occult topics interesting. If the accessing of the video she refers to and the subsequent discussion of gender between the two men has affects changes in terms of how these men relate to others in their lives, what does that mean for storytelling to an imagined audience? Also, does that kind of perfomativity by the woman in the red bikini really shift gender roles, or move people beyond gender roles? How does the discourse of the conversation between the men about her video and discussion of her morning routine play into how they relate to each other, who they relate to, and how they process the world? Is this video, then tactical? Does it run counter-current or reverse relations of power, if only for a moment? Where is the space of this every day discussion able to move individuals to change? I think there is something about intimate moments that move individuals to social change, or even open up spaces for conversation, but I’m not sure if this is “social change”? Is it? How big does it have to be to be “social change?” Is it tactical? What does it mean for a tactical media space to have persistence, to leave a trace? When I say tactical media, I’m referring to When I say tactical media, I’m referring to Tactical media as defined by Garcia and Lovink as the exploitation of do-it-yourself, inexpensive media tools by communities or groups that feel excluded from mainstream culture (Garcia and Lovink, 1997). Using De Certueau’s emphasis on uses of representation as opposed to representation as is, and his notion of the rebellious user of representation as tactical, for Lovink tactical media is hybrid, provisional, and disruptive towards dichotomies like amateur vs. professional, alternative versus mainstream and private versus public (Lovink and Garcia, 1997). Rienzi builds upon this notion in order to locate tactical media “into a broader cartography of social struggle” (Renzi. 2008). Tactile media, and the dissent implicit in it, is reliant upon artistic practice, the encounter of artist, activist, and others, and do-it-yourself media in order to disrupt flows of power (Bruns, 2008; Renzi, 2008). Tactical inhabits a space “between the emergence of new media technologies and their utilization by the mainstream…. Exploit alternative entries into the media sphere that have not (yet) been secured against unauthorized entry” (Bruns, 2008 251). In thinking about the ways that youth remash media, theories tactical media and the encounter of the artist and activist illuminate how youth come into contact with visual ideas and each other in networked publics. Additionally, this will allow me to understand how mashups and brief political statements are made through video.

Here, I find Lange’s notion that the reading of a blog/viewing of a video/accessing of some kind of “private” or not-celebrity based media online can open profound spaces for conversation about challenging and/or occult topics interesting. If the accessing of the video she refers to and the subsequent discussion of gender between the two men has affects changes in terms of how these men relate to others in their lives, what does that mean for storytelling to an imagined audience? Also, does that kind of perfomativity by the woman in the red bikini really shift gender roles, or move people beyond gender roles? How does the discourse of the conversation between the men about her video and discussion of her morning routine play into how they relate to each other, who they relate to, and how they process the world? Is this video, then tactical? Does it run counter-current or reverse relations of power, if only for a moment? Where is the space of this every day discussion able to move individuals to change? I think there is something about intimate moments that move individuals to social change, or even open up spaces for conversation, but I’m not sure if this is “social change”? Is it? How big does it have to be to be “social change?” Is it tactical? What does it mean for a tactical media space to have persistence, to leave a trace?

Here also, boyd’s discussion of writing oneself into being is interesting. Its as though in order to perform being-ness, one must exist in a social networking site. The digital performativity here flows in and out of virtual and physical worlds, and how are spaces of conversation opened up in the sense Lange tries to open them up?

So much more to write, really want to respond to some people, but I am going to go make dinner for now, more later.

17 Melanie Wong { 11.14.09 at 7:48 pm }

Hi!

I am lurking. *_*

Heidi, thanks for your discussion. I agree with your comments about discussions with students regarding blogs etc.. As my school board has basically blocked everything (filter levels in the elementary level are high, unless you get them lowered), my students never really got to see blogs very often. But I imagine when I go back to work in January, I will have more opportunities to have these discussions with my students. Thank you for sharing that Facebook story. It seems like there is a lot of issues recently with social media and teachers! Interesting dynamics for sure. I am really excited about your possible research by the way! Imagined communities etc.! Awesome!

Chelsey, still processing your post but you brought up some amazing points.

M.

18 Chelsey Hauge { 11.14.09 at 11:20 pm }

Hey guys! OOPS! I just realized I posted the less-than-final version of my blog post… so sorry if it’s a little discombobulated….

Genevieve- Just to respond to the question about boyd not capitalizing her name, I believe that she doesn’t do so in the tradition of not trying to prioritize herself over others/ideas/etc. There is, I think, more about this on her website, danahboyd.com (or .org?) bell hooks is another well-known feminist theorist who does not capitalize her name. I think its cool. Maybe I’ll start going by chelsey hauge. It’s a statement about power.

Melanie- Doesn’t student use of blogs for information seem like an amazing opportunity we could harness to discuss truth? Lots of other sources—history books, etc—could be argued to tell an “untrue” story or a biased story—for example, I was taught on Thanksgiving (as a child in the states) that the Indians and the pilgrims became friends, helped each other harvest, plant, and cook, and it was the beginning of a collaboration. Some collaboration. Couldn’t we teach here about perspective, power, and storytelling?

Also, Melanie, love your blog use description. I have a ton of blogs and a few YouTube accounts, which all serve different purposes- the blogs range from recording notes/thoughts/ideas from classes to posting photos of projects I’ve done to journal entries for family. My YouTube accounts are similar- one is active “in the youtube community,” others are just storage spaces for when I want examples of visual media, and others are for certain audiences. Some are private, some are public. Some are publicy private.
And yes, Melanie, I’m a FB addict too, though you know this since you always comment on my status updates! =)

Erin—As for using social web spaces for teaching—this is exactly what Soep, and boyd, in other articles, talk about! While you may not feel comfortable using is, for the same reasons you discuss above and that Soep mentions, I think we also have a responsibility to work with youth in these mediated spaces. Having done a ton of work with teenagers in these spaces—from blogs and videos about cultural traditions in Oaxaca to videos and art and online exchange with youth in Harlem on violence to youth in SL learning about Darfur, I think we’ve got to find a way to facilitate learning in networked publics, and I think there’s potential here for social justice learning…. And what about “writing oneself into being?” What about digital inclusion and the right (in the Declaration for Human Rights) to have access to the latest tech innovations, and to education—do these two rights conflate? Just food for thought. Maybe public school isn’t the space, maybe that’s why there are so many youth media orgs doing work outside of school, but how does that relationships value (or not) youth videos, blogs, words, performances, etc? What is the line here between in school/out of school learning, even in facilitated spaces?

Heidi,
I share similar questions about ethics. In a social networking site, even if you get consent from particpants, how do you deal with people who post onto the space and onto whose site your participant posts? You can’t ignore all the posts from people you don’t have consent from, but you also can’t include everyone in your study—how do you draw boundaries when all the postings are embedded in a network? If the postings are embedded in the network, and the network is technically public, does it mean that the content is all public domain and therefore “ok” to study? I don’t know- but I’d love to hear thoughts and opinions as I, too, would like to conduct cyber-ethonographic research.

19 Chelsey Hauge { 11.14.09 at 11:22 pm }

Last thought on the tactical and social networks:: what does it mean to be political in these spaces? How does meaning arise out of relationality? Can one post something or exist in a current that is counter-discourse without knowing or being aware of their posting being counter-discourse, and if so, is it tactical?

20 Eva Ziltener { 11.14.09 at 11:23 pm }

Reading the Lankshear and Knobel article made me wonder about our use of this blog… although it’s meant to share insights into the readings (which, BTW, are super helpful!) I feel it’s also become a bit of a social site for us. Although I usually only post once a week, I check into the blog during the week to see how the rest of you and reacting to the readings and to “listen” to your ideas. I’ve noticed certain patterns that I’ve come to depend on, such as Melanie always being online (or so it appears). And Heidi and Jeff can usually be counted on to have intriguing links for me to follow (which tend to take me off on various tangents). I also feel reassured to know that I can post a question, or ask for help and the chances are high one you, my fellow classmates, will respond in a short space of time. As you all know, I never blogged before this class, and already I’m feeling at home in this new collaborative digital space. I will admit, however, that part of what makes me feel at ease blogging on in this particular space is that I have met you all face to face, and I feel (to a certain extent) that I know who you are. I don’t know if I’d feel as comfortable blogging with/for complete strangers. I guess it’s one step at a time for me.

More later,

Eva

21 Chelsey Hauge { 11.14.09 at 11:24 pm }

P.S. Here’s danah boyd’s website: http://www.danah.org/

On her name, she writes: No, i did not forget to capitalize that, but i’ve quickly learned that most people don’t appreciate my decision to leave the capitalization out of my name. There are a lot of reasons that i got rid of the capital letters in the final name change, some personal and some political.

First, there’s my mother’s original desire to have balance and my adult appreciation of that (as a child, i was just cranky that i could never find anything with my name on it). danah balances; Danah does not. In fact, my entire name balances quite conveniently, in all of its forms: danah michele mattas beard boyd. There’s something elegant about that.

There’s also the political. I was always bothered by the fact that the first person singular pronoun is capitalized in english – i always thought it was quite self-righteous. Or, as Douglas Adams noted, “Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn’t have a good answer to.” Ever since i was a kid, i was told that the world does not revolve around me, yet our written culture is telling me something entirely different. Why not capitalize ‘we’ or ‘they’? (Yes, i love the work of bell hooks.)

So, i started researching where the capitalization of said pronoun came from and was quite stunned to find that it was always capitalized because it always appeared as the first word in a sentence, never stuck in the middle. And then, when it started appearing in the middle, it started getting capitalized out of convention and because people worried that it would get lost in script. Of course, “It’s odd, and a little unsettling, to reflect upon the fact that English is the only major language in which “I” is capitalized; in many other languages “You” is capitalized and the “i” is lower case” (journalist Sydney J. Harris).

Well, we’re in a digital age and the computer conveniently spaces the ‘i’ quite properly to make it recognizable, so i gave up on giving it such a special level of importance – it is referring to me, right? I thought an attempt at minimalizing the individualization could start at home.

But, this led me on a mental tangent – What’s in a name? What’s its worth? Why is it so valuable that it is to be capitalized? Down this path, i started thinking about names as descriptors versus separate entities. Isn’t a name simply another unique adjective for me? A label? I am not my name; my name is simply another descriptor of me. Should i weight that descriptor as anything more valuable than the other adjectives used to describe me? Obviously, i care about my name – i’ve gone out of my way to change it too many times to suggest otherwise. But do i believe that capitalization shows the appropriate value?

But that’s exactly it – it’s my name and i should be able to frame it as i see fit, as my adjective, not someone else’s. Why must it follow some New York Times standard guide for naming? The words that i choose to describe myself should be framed in writing and in speech in a way that feels as though i own them, as though i can relate to them. This is not to say that i wanted a unique symbol to stand for my name, simply that i wanted to write it in a fashion that showed the beauty of my mother’s consideration. Of course, as i get older, i end up having a deep engrained individualization of my name. I really don’t like when people remove the ‘h’ or capitalize my name – it’s not how i’ve chosen to identify.

With all of these thoughts in mind, i signed my new name change papers simply as i wanted to label myself, with an aesthetic appreciation for the spelling of my name, and with a unique flair that allowed me to truly hold on to my name as my own:
danah michele boyd

22 Genevieve Brisson { 11.15.09 at 8:18 am }

Thanks, Chelsey. So much to think about.
Geneviève

23 Peter Hill { 11.15.09 at 9:13 am }

Eva,

I liked your thoughts about this blog.
I guess we could probably track the different personas we’ve revealed on this blog depending on whether it was the beginning, middle or now, looming end, of the course.
Was our intent didactic- to teach others? Or was it to have fun at times? To show emotion- say Erin wanting to throw the computer across the room? Or to be waspish- say- dogs on hind legs?

I think you’re quite right Eva, we see each other during the week and readjust our personas accordingly. For example, are we under the stress of preparing our presentation to the class?

I’ve always enjoyed these forms of blogging, but I know that my online persona changes depending on the group, the instructor, the task( how much do we have to respond to the readings? ) and oddly, how my week has gone. Life always intervenes.

I’ve always encouraged my students to participate online on the English discussion boards at our school. This seems to have saved us from any Face book worries.

Still I wonder about privacy in the bigger blogging world. I see , from a distance, all these people putting all this information online and I worry.It takes some organization to set up a camera on a beach. Would the person have talked about suicide without their online forum? Do we return to lurk because we’re bored? What’s the difference between a voyeur and a participant?

Again, sadly these are only personas that we present.The only true person we can be semi- sure of is that little person alone in our little room next to us. OOOPs, that’s me!
Do we need to tell the world all that other stuff? Or do we try to find one other person (perhaps not our 8 BEST friends) our true secrets and lies.
That awful killer Jaimie Bacon is in a form of solitary confinement (the reason given is that many people in the general population want to kill him). After a few weeks of complaining that his TV wasn’t loud enough, he’s taken to talking to himself and laughing maniacally. As one guard suggested, he’s starting to realize how many men, women, children he’s killed. Now that’s a persona shift!
All brought about from being disconnected.

Can we get away from these machines long enough to look at the falling rain and ponder what’s for dinner?-(he said laughing maniacally.)

p

24 Melanie Wong { 11.15.09 at 9:32 am }

Hi!

I have got to stop accidentally clicking something when I type my messages so I don’t have to start all over again!

Chelsey: Thank you for your comments. I agree with your students and blogs comments. I am not saying I don’t believe that we should be using blogs in the classroom. However, I think that students should be critical about what they see. Obviously that means that teachers need to be having conversations (including myself) with their students about the information presented in blogs. I would use blogs in my classroom in the future, if I could get past all the security measures put up by my school board. *_* I enjoyed your discussion by the way. Lots to think about again. Thank you!

Peter: I am wondering about privacy in the bigger blogging world too. With my own blog I had to change the URL because I had a lot of nosy people, who went beyond what I was expecting. Many of them would email me and ask why I hadn’t posted recently, that wasn’t so bad. Some would ask me for details about friends I had mentioned in my post, who they had never met before. In order to maintain some privacy I changed the URL and only gave it to close family and friends. I even contemplated password protecting it.

Melanie

25 Chelsey Hauge { 11.15.09 at 1:07 pm }

Hey guys!
I enjoyed the discussion about how we present ourselves online, especially since I’ve been reading a lot lately about performativity. I wonder how this is different than presenting ourselves in a physical space? Is it any different than the different ways we hold our bodies/speak/gesture/etc in different spaces? Also, I wonder a lot about what it means in the social networking space that individuals define themselves without community participation in the defining? What I mean, is that in a social networking site we define our performance of self whereas in other physical spaces this is more of a collaborative definition of self because we respond to people based on their social performance. I suppose in some ways this happens online, but I wonder what the difference is?

26 Emma Kivisild { 11.15.09 at 2:12 pm }

Random thoughts—

I have noticed a funny process that repeats here in the course, and also in my life, that is – first something seems a complete change that is leaving me behind, and I either scoff at it or am intimidated; then it seems terribly new and exciting; then I realize that it is just a new and perhaps batter way to do the same old thing. This was driven home for me when I worked on my presentation on txting.

So yes, those consciousness raising groups enabled women of the late 60s and early 70s to see that the events in their private lives had political meaning. Right thing at right time. consciousness raising groups don’t work that way these days (there’s a host of reasons), but private lives still have political meaning. So how do people learn about that now? Maybe they learn from video blogs., if they find the vlogger is someone they can relate to.

Welcome to crackbook,’ was the first message I got on facebook. Can you call people ‘hermits’ who interact socially all the time? Sometimes I think that those of us who age getting older, and/or like me have some mobility issues, just don’t want to go out very much anymore. I used to. But I don’t now. Is that so terrible? Teens (and I loved that history of the term) are motivated to go out, partly because of that pheromone/hormone thing. They write their identities and communities and they meet up. Two excellent activities. (and I loved that an improvement in public transportation might be all suburban parents need to get teens away from the computer. Though then they might be txting…)

When our assistant prof jeff was helping me with the wiki, he said ‘it’s all about negotiation.’ And I feel like we are learning learning as a culture, about negotiation, and about what to say where. I loved the account of who sees you, and how now everybody does, or could. At a certain point it doesn’t matter anymore, I suppose. But for teachers. Oy. I know that out lesbians who want to teach at the elementary level have to stay in the closet first until they are hired, and then often within the classroom. It is not the school system, or other teachers, or even usually the students, but the parents. Many of them don’t want homos teaching their kids. So are the teachers then forced into the closet on facebook? Maybe. The issue is still the same, though, namely homophobia. Facebook or no.

As they say, most people agree on politics, it’s strategy they fight about.

27 Heidi { 11.15.09 at 2:45 pm }

When I came to check the blog today I was feeling unmotivated to do work – it’s time for me to be finishing up course projects and deciding on final papers and, as usual, I start to panic about everything that needs to get done before the end of term. Although I chose to only audit this course, in order to keep focus on grades for my other two required courses, I have found myself completely engaged in discussions that extend on the interests I have with social media and online technologies. I did not expect this week’s blog discussion to have advanced further than where I left off yesterday….but it has! And you have got me excited again! With my presentation tomorrow, I merely hope to extend upon the ideas in this discussion within a format that will allow me to show/share some of my online teaching experience – without us being able to show what we have been working with in relation to digital media, it becomes extremely difficult to understand certain areas each of us work within and I’ve really enjoyed listening/watching each of your presentations.

Chelsey:
You’ve given me lots to think about (thanks for the references that go beyond/extend from the class readings). I’m interested in your thoughts about the “persistence of the event”….I wonder if the classifying of event or object/record might depend on the context of the networked public, the type and scale of audience. For instance, with online courses I think of a posting as less of an event and more of an object or record. I’ve thought a lot about online forums as a place for recording and archiving thoughts, particularly thoughts that are meaningful to personal and intellectual development, so I guess that’s why I see them more this way as opposed to an event. On the other hand, when I think of how some artists use social networking sites the forum/context could be more perceived as a venue that gives voice to their practice and depending on the work might be more of an event. Just thinking out loud here but….the “event” might be thought of as the moment the microcontent is made visible in the network, the action performed by the user in making it visible. I might argue that it through the “persistence of the event,” it becomes an object/record that can be tracked through the traces.

Later on you ask “Where is the space of this every day discussion able to move individuals to change? I think there is something about intimate moments that move individuals to social change, or even open up spaces for conversation, but I’m not sure if this is “social change”? How big does it have to be to be “social change”? ….These questions connect to offline forms of education as well, whether it occurs in traditional our informal spaces of teaching and learning. I’ve had these questions too and they’ve come up in discussions within my Curriculum & Pedagogy (EDCP) cohort when talking about Critical Theory stemming from the work of the Frankfurt School, Marxism, leading up to the work of Paolo Freire. One of my classmates has argued that a change in thinking counts as social change – if you can change thinking of individual students that will lead to social change, if even in small ways. I’m really interested to learn more about the work you have done between in school/out of school learning…

REALLY interesting in where you are going with your most recent post on presenting ourselves online….

Eva, Peter:
I LOVE that you have taken the discussion into examining THIS BLOG itself and I’m pretty sure that either Jeff or myself, or both of us, can facilitate discussion around this tomorrow evening. Since I am just auditing the course, therefore have no worries about grades etc, following my showing some examples from teaching experience I think it would be great to really analyze the points you have brought up:
1) Does our blog enable better “listening” towards each others’ responses to course content? Why?
2) What kinds of interaction patterns exist? and, To what extend can we reliably construct personal identities from these interaction patterns?
3) How has the blog contributed to your identity as a “classmate” versus a “student”
4) How did you initially respond to the course requirement of posting to a blog? What is your response now?
5) How do you feel the experience would change if the course took place completely online? (considering points I will bring up about relational aspects of teaching and learning experiences from fully online courses)
6) Is “lurking” still a bad thing? How is the meaning of the word being altered due to the internet?
7) Which is more accurate – having your identity defined by textual/visual input presented on screen or by the bodily gestures that accompany your voice in the classroom?

Thanks for the ideas! Maybe this will cut down on the time I need to spend thinking about the presentation for tomorrow!!

PS. Melanie – I share your pain about having to retype posts after accidentally deleting them. This happened to me a lot when setting up online courses in Moodle….I would simply forget and click on something. I now type any detailed responses in a word processing program and then cut and paste when completed….but sometimes I still forget!

28 Melanie Wong { 11.15.09 at 5:14 pm }

Hi again!

Heidi: Thanks for the Word processing tip. Actually I usually do that but I find when I am replying to people I get a bit lazy and just type in the textbox on the blog. Oh well, this is a learning experience for me. All is good!

M.

29 Eva Ziltener { 11.15.09 at 7:12 pm }

I am starting to get almost as addicted to this blog as to our wiki story. Has anyone checked it out lately?

I’m really looking forward to tomorrow’s presentations and general discussions!

Eva! (=

30 Chelsey Hauge { 11.15.09 at 8:00 pm }

Eva, I’m getting addicted, too. I also always notice how you write your smileys backwards, and it reminds me of how my brother wrote Ys backwards until he was ten. I mean, maybe its not backwards, but you know. =)

31 Melanie Wong { 11.15.09 at 8:40 pm }

Eva, I didn’t know the wiki story was still being added to! I checked it out and wow!

You must log in to post a comment.