seeing things for more than what they are

In today's day and age everyone has to know how to use social media and especially when you are in the public eye. A lot of politicians have learned that Twitter is an effective way to get their message across to their audience in a more organic way than through traditional media.In the article Twitter Bites and Romney by Janet Johnson I believe what she concludes with is important. She states "Rhetoricians need to spend more time in social media venues to learn more about how rhetors—including newsmakers and candidates—correspond with the public, particularly in the political realm." I feel that more research needs to be done on social media in the political sphere for sure. So many politicians and people who hold public offices for the government are beginning to utilize these social media features and it is something that should be studied more closely.

In the article Interactivity: The golden fleece of the internet the author really hits home about the importance of finding that balance between interacting with your audience and pushing information at them. I believe that the user to web site author interactivity was the most interesting of the different types within the article. It is something that many organizations use online but rarely is it something that I think about when visiting a website. Everything down to the color of the background is created in order to get you to communicate with the authors of the website (that being the business or political persons team).

I also found the Google Maps piece interesting. I think it shows great expansion in the area of involvement with the public. "According to Ben Rigby, researcher for Rock the Vote, with these new programs “Google offers Earth as a canvas. Organizations like the Holocaust Museum paint this canvas with what are called layers, which mapmakers use to thematically organize information, such as images, icons, graphs, charts, and text.”

I also loved when the author talked about how maps don't just simply show us where we are or how to get somewhere. "These maps, instead, help us to locate ourselves on a more philosophical level, and work to build our identity in relationship to our location in the world (Pg.109)."

All of these articles this week made me see things for more than just what they appear to be on the surface. Websites are more than just places that house information, Twitter is more than just where people talk about social trends and maps are more than just something to point me in the right direction.

The Cherry on top..

So many people say that social media is taking over traditional media and that it is this totally new concept. 

I would have to disagree, especially after this weeks readings. 

I begin by bringing up the Gustafsson piece which is about social networks and viral politics. I take a quote from page 9 " It is not correct to describe or define social network sites or social media in general as the opposite of traditional or main stream media." I feel that social media has been able to add on to traditional media in many facets but most definitely in the theme of this weeks readings about protests and viral movements.

In Gustafssons article as well as all of the articles from this week, they both discuss how social media has been able to aid movements and protests to help spread the word to the followers of the different movements mentioned.

I love the idea brought  up by Gustafsson which is the Small World Pattern. It notes that social networks aren't held together by the bulk of people who just have a few hundred friends but it is supported by those who have tens of thousands of connections. I believe that is very true, people use social media to connect with others such as friends but also to connect to ideas and problems that they identify with. 

In the article by Penney and Dadas about the Occupy Wall Street Movement they describe the way that Twitter allowed people involved in the movement around the country to connect and be in the know with what is going on in real time. On page 16 they discuss Warner's idea of a counterpublic which "enables a horizon of opinion and exchange; its exchanges remain distinct from authority and can have a critical relation to power." I love how they also discuss the concept of audiences. I feel that this ties in a lot of ideas we have previously discussed and helps to bring to light something that I know I haven't thought of as a positive use of social media before. 

Using social media can enhance traditional media and help those who are not (as Gustafsson says) influencers, have an idea and voice to be heard.

Through the looking glass

This weeks readings were something that hit home to a lot of concerns that many people, such as myself, have about big data and online personalization of web space/interface.

To think that there are companies and people who choose what you should and shouldn't see online based on your 'likes' or clicks on different web spaces and even your interface that you use is something that I'm sure many people don't want to dwell on.

In the article The Big Data Divide, it brought a lot of  that home for me. It is crazy to think that someone can choose you for a job based on which web browser you use, let alone HOW they know which one you use. I like what Adrejevic quotes in his article from Weinberger "in the era of big data, the smartest person in the room IS the room." I think that this brings it to light that computers are more than just devices we use to communicate.

In the article by Aaron Hess he also touches on this aspect. He uses a quote by David Gunkel who argues this point. " Communication theory positions computers and other digital technology as part of the channel that send the message, rather than as an inherent part of the message itself." I do agree that the computer/phone/tablet/etc is more than just the technology we use to form our messages but it also changes the way we communicate our message based on which platform we are on.

I really like when Hess discusses how the media and technology are extensions of our selves. He says "As extensions of ourselves, media accentuate the physical and experiential form of the human body - television extends our sights while radio extends our hearing."

The Hess article was definitely my favorite this week. I like when he discusses Sherry Turkle's work and how she connects the nature of identity. "the nature of identity is a larger cultural context which is the story of the eroding boundaries between the real and virtual, the animate and inanimate, the unitary and the multiple self, which is occurring both in advanced scientific fields of research and in the patterns of everyday life."

I believe that our online identities are a little like Alice in Through the Looking Glass. We see potential in what we can be, and we let our imaginations have more of a home in the virtual world than they might in the "real" world. We can see ourselves and see how we have built this other self which still remains a part of us. I really think that is one of the better topics to focus on in this scary navigation of  big data and personalization of the web.

Something noteworthy to giggle about: I also thought that it was hilarious in the Fernback piece the people trying to fight for Facebook to stop invading their privacy were using Facebook to organize it...

Googling Egypt

This is what my search page looked like when I Google searched Egypt. (In class discussion)

What's in a name?

I remember the days when people had two separate Facebook profiles, one for work/professional and then their "real" one. I still have a few friends who have Facebook profiles that don't have their real names because of various reasons. One of my friends it is because she is an elementary teacher and doesn't want her privacy of her real life taken from her by a parent or student finding her on Facebook.

A good example of other very serious reasons as to why someone would want to use another name was brought up in an article this week by Danah Boyd. What if someone was a rape victim or had been harassed? That is more than enough reason to want to change your name online to keep from having something like that follow you.

The discussion this week is about online identities and how you portray yourself online. I like what Van Dijck discussed in his article You have one identity: performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. He discusses about the move from connectedness to connectivity. The idea of connectivity is something that is on the rise with social media research and I agree with him that we have moved from just wanting to connect with people to wanting to be connected to people via social media.

Over time people have been able to use this to their advantage by "cheating"the system. I know I have done it before. We have talked a lot before in other classes about the presentation of yourself online and this is a good example of that.By choosing what you want to show and how you want to frame it you can become anything you want online. In the article Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media the authors Marwick and Boyd state "To manage an environment where information is easily reproduced and broadcast, we find that many teenagers conceptualize privacy as an ability to control their situation,including their environment, how they are perceived, and the information that they share."

So, to change a name or not to change a name? I believe that it is everyone's right to be able to choose whether they want to go by their name or a pseudonym. After all people such as "Mark Twain" have been doing that since before Facebook was even though of.

Are people born bloggers? Or do we having blogging thrust upon us?

One short day on the blogosphere reflecting. (LOL)

This week we were asked the review previous blogs we have written and reflect on it. It almost like blog-ception.I feel as if in my blogs I mainly focus on reviewing information from the articles we have read from week to week. In my mind I rationalize doing that because I feel if someone who has no clue what articles they are happens upon my blog they could grasp a general understanding of what I am blabbing on about.

I feel that as the weeks have gone on I have increased in my reflections upon the readings instead of just the summary of said readings.  I have started to include my feelings on certain readings and whether I enjoyed them or not which I feel adds to the content and enjoyment of reading the blog.

I can definitely tell which weeks I prefer more just by the way I wrote each post but I don't know that anyone else would be able to tell apart from myself. I value being able to share my opinion with others online and I feel this has given me a way to show people a different side of me, that being the academic side. I do feel like I am better at personal blogging than academic however I feel as the weeks have gone I have grown in my strength with academic blogging.

From this I also have discovered how much I enjoy reading academic writings about more current stuff such as memes and blogging. I feel that this has given me a way to express my thoughts more and when we discuss in class I have a better understanding about the topics because of having to explain it in a blog before discussing in class!

blogging about blogs

I really enjoyed this weeks readings about blogs. I have had a fascination with them for a while by way of some of my favorite beauty gurus.

I love how Miller and Shepherd's article explains blogs and blogging. In all of the articles from this week (miller and Shepherd, Mortensen, Garden, and Shirky) they all agree that there are some key elements that make up the definition of a blog. First is is has to be chronologically organized. Thus each entry is dated. The second is frequent updating. This would make sense because the life of a blog depends on posts beginning constantly added to continue to have it stay relevant. The last is combination of links with personal commentary.

I agree with the article also when it says that across the board bloggers agree that content is the most important feature of a blog. I feel that without specified types of content, and the different versions of blogs, they wouldn't be as popular as they are now. I like how they also go on to say " Content is important to bloggers because it represents their freedom of selection and presentation." As someone who blogs, I find that to be very true.

The article also explains two themes prevalent in blogging: self-expression and community development. In another article by Mortensen it also goes into this idea of community development. The author says " This is part of the nature of weblogs: a personal expression of perhaps not community but an understanding of connectedness. To post online is to declare that you are part of something larger, even if the post is just in order to whine about dinner or about having lost a boyfriend."

Blogs and the content they hold can connect us to someone who shares our same thoughts on video games, or makeup, or anything under the sun and I think it is one of the great things about the internet. It has given a way for people to share their thoughts and opinions with the world in the hopes that there are others out there who share the same.

I think that Garden brought up an interesting argument about whether blogs should be defined as a genre or a medium. In my opinion I think they are more of a genre in the medium of the internet. What do you think?