Archive for the ‘Baym’ tag
Nobody knows you’re a dog…
NOTE: I know this is a bit of a long post, but it’s because I’m not sure what to focus on specifically. There is so much STUFF out there! I figure because I’m working with YA literature a lot, I will incorporate some of what I have learned from fiction into this post. I hope that I don’t confuse too many people.
A lot of what Baym has to say can be seen reflected back from the pages of fiction. Currently, I am reading Cory Doctorow’s For the Win, in which a number of people meet, interact, and fight back the evil corporate world through online games and all sorts of other crazy technological things that I can barely follow. What made me think of this book is Baym’s discussion of the curious dynamics of online relationships and interaction. The cartoon that reads “On the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog,” is in both Baym and Doctorow and is relevant both in reality and in the slightly fictional world of the novel:
Although Steiner has said he didn’t know what the cartoon was about when he drew it, New Yorker cartoon editor Robert Mankoff said it “perfectly predicted both the Internet’s promise and its problems” (2004: 618). Whether this cartoon represents a dream or a nightmare depends on whether one is the dog or the fool unknowingly talking to the dog.
Don’t panic! It’s only new media
Nancy Baym’s chapter provides us several ways of examining technologies and technology use. She introduces us to the discourse of technological determinism, which posits users as acted upon by technology, seemingly powerless to counter its negative affects. She also describes its polar opposite, in which technologies and technology use are constructed and determined by social factors. Along the way, she mentions the issue of “moral panics,” which is particularly relevant to our examination of young people and new media. We often see parents, educators, and policy makers responding to dystopian visions of technology adoption, worst-case scenarios in which children are the victims of technology, or are preyed upon by those who employ technology for devious purposes.
As part of our conversation on Monday, I’d like to address both the unintended uses and unintended affects of technology with young people. Can you think of an example of this? I’ll get the ball rolling with this example from my research in children’s virtual worlds:
I asked my students last year to spend time in one of three virtual environments designed for children: Club Penguin, EcoBuddies, or BarbieGirls. Most people were totally intrigued by the chat systems. These sites all use a moderated chat structure that either limits users to pre-selected words and phrases, or edits messages among users with a dictionary of restricted language. Students remarked that the dictionaries are too primitive to allow users to hold intelligible conversations, or the dialogue appears exceedingly vapid and generic. Kids, however, have figured out a ways to get around this. YouTube was full of CP hacks and cheats for getting around the swearing and self-identification rules. Disney appears to have cracked down on this, but kids seem to find a way. This highlights the tension between child safety (keeping kids away from online behavior like swearing or grooming by pedophiles) and online communication rights.
What are your reactions? Any examples of similar unintended uses/affects that you wish to share?