Social But Not Connected

Week 10 was probably my favourite topic out of all those covered - mainly because I thought I might get to play some games and pass it off as work. Unfortunately this was not the case - though I did manage to find a suitable subject for my final essay, and one that made writing it quite easy (which is usually a bad thing, but I hope for my sake that it’s just because I am knowledgeable on the case study). 

Social gaming is one of my favourite past times, in particular the Online world of Grand Theft Auto. Together with two of my good pals I am the president of the Hells Harambe’s Motorcycle Club. We grow pot, we cut coke and we manufacture meth in a large scale operation which takes the tender loving care of all three of us (and sometimes some ring ins).

Running a shady criminal empire probably wouldn’t be anywhere near as fun as it sounds without having a couple of mates on the other end of a headset to share a laugh and some strategic murdering with. Waddell & Peng (2014) explored this subject in their research paper Does it matter with whom you slay? The effects of competition, cooperation and relationship type among video game players and found that “cooperative game play was found to predict increased cooperative behaviors and trust in their partner” Personally I am inclined to agree with them on this as I have complete trust in my  second, both in virtual reality and in real life where we are good friends, however I don’t know that this extends to makeshift alliances. Often if we allow an outsider into our inner sanctum it will only be for a short while - and afterwards they will be “let go” as they are nothing more than fodder and would only be called upon if need be. After all, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

But social gaming to me means so much more than online shooters or fantasy roleplaying. Roleplaying, in the traditional sense of words on paper, has been a part of my life for the best part of the last 10 years in one form or another and I have loved it since I first encountered it. It is somewhat disheartening then as a long time “competitive writer” as some may call it to see that our art is not even thought of in the new media society where social gaming seems to have replaced old fashioned communities with fast, money grabbing apps on social platforms like candy crush. This is the subject that I have chosen to complete as a case study for my final essay so I may leave it there before I give away all my secrets!

References

Waddell, J & Peng, W 2014, ‘Does it matter with whom you slay? The effects of competition, cooperation and relationship type among video game players’, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 38, pp. 331–338.

Is the internet good for ‘real’ activism? Or does it merely glorify the hard work of the activists, giving a protest or movement it’s 15 minutes of fame? News outlets are very quick to label such activism as a “Facebook revolution” or “Twitter revolution” (Gerbaudo, 2012). Is the use of this language designed to undermine the cause of the movement and belittle the protestors? It rings fairly condescending to my ears. However, I believe the strength of the passionate activists transcends the condescension of the news outlets. After all, establishments such as broadcast News and other traditional media are often at the heart of what is being protested.

Such forms of digital activism such as ‘hacktivism’ (like Anonymous) and ‘leaktivism’ (like WikiLeaks) seem to want to gain publicity as a way of promoting their anti-establishment message, despite legal or other consequences. I have recently read about a form of online activism called ‘quiet activism’ where digital activists provide covert ways for people in policed states to access internet, for one example (Karatzogianni, 2016). Another example includes hiding links in Wikipedia sites. This sort of activity suggests that some protesters are in fact questioning the loudness of campaigns dubbed ‘Facebook or Twitter Revolutions.’ Alternatively, and I believe more likely, they understand the strengths and weaknesses of different media and know that in some cases, such as policed states, this sort of ‘make as much noise’ activism is potentially unsafe.

An argument outlined by Gerbaudo suggests that social media’s main role in activism is the choreography of events (2016). Social media sites and their ability to reach mass audiences, as well as very targeted audiences, certainly do have their role in this side of activism. However, I do believe they offer a lot more. As a social media user, I have learned about many great causes through link sharing, Facebook status’, I have even had chances to contribute to smaller scale things like helping someone’s sick relative or pet. To me, a massive part of activism is getting the word out, and social media is great at this. My favourite example and a cause I am deeply passionate about is Oscar’s Law. This group rallied to have state law’s changes in Victoria to ban puppy farms and the sale of puppies in pet shops, and as of July 2018 this law has been enforced! Some good news to end the post on.

(Oscars Law, 2019)

I think there is a lot to say for online activism, I think I could write a thesis on it if I needed to! But, when it comes to spreading the word and getting people involved, the internet and social media are a great tool.

References:

Gerbaudo, P 2012, Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism, Pluto, London.

Karatzogianni, A 2016, Beyond hashtags: how a new wave of digital activists is changing society. [online] The Conversatio < https://theconversation.com/beyond-hashtags-how-a-new-wave-of-digital-activists-is-changing-society-57502> viewed 1 February 2019

Week 1-2

Social media, social networks, and digital communities; we are all so consumed by them, and yet we know so little about them. Is it possible we are all guilty of losing ourselves to our mobile devices, checking Facebook, sending tweets, or reading someone’s blog, all the while ignoring the people right in front of us? Recently I discovered I might be an addict - a digital junkie! The question is, why does this medium so consume us, and how is it impacting on our need for community and relationships?

To understand the effects of digital communities on society we first need to understand what they are. The most basic explanation of social media is it is a medium or platform by which users can create content, share content, modify content and comment on another person’s content (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, p. 60-64). They can include collaborative works, blogs, content communities, social networking sites, gaming sites, and virtual worlds (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, p. 62-64). Add mobile devices like smartphones and tablets into the mix, and we can email and text whenever and wherever we want. We become permanently contactable and permanently connected. This constant connection to the digital world poses an important question, what impact is it having on our society?

In a speech on Ted-Ed (2013), Sherry Turkle suggests that we are ‘connected, but alone’. My initial reaction was one of doubt. However, further research found her opinions are widely shared. danah boyd [sic] collaborated Turkles sentiment when she wrote: “Like many others around me, I am perpetually connected to people and information through a series of devices and social media channels.” (danah boyd 2012 p. 72). I soon found myself not only agreeing, but also feeling an upward surge of dread as I realised I had become dependent on both my phone and my social networks. The question I fail to answer is to what and why am I addicted to being connected.

Siapera (2012) claims the way we commune has changed from being based on location and person-to-person or face-to-face interactions to interactions where network individualism has removed barriers and opened broader opportunities to connect. Since the individual can now control the information they share, the willingness to connect more broadly has increased (Siapera 2012). Likewise, the ability to limit information has also given us the ability to construct and display whom we wish to be (cited in Wilken & McCosker 2014 p. 292).

Like it or not, many people are displaying themselves to the world. As danah boyd (2012, p. 75) writes “publicness is one of the strange and yet powerful aspects of this new world”, but to what extent is this new publicness true? Is what we see the real world, or is the world about to implode as the self-created filter bubble collapses? After all, people are people, and the truth seems to have a way of making itself found.

References

 Ahkuoi, D 2018, Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody Parody (Opinion Rhapsody), viewed 1 December, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IABRgZH12YA .

 Boyd, D 2012, ‘Participating in the always-on lifestyle’, in Mandiberg, M 2012, The social media reader, New York University Press, New York, pp. 71-76.

 HANUKA, A 2018, Likeholic, viewed 1 December, 2018, https://www.architecturendesign.net/satirical-illustrations-show-our-addiction-to-technology/.

 Kaplan, A & Haenlein, M 2010, “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media”, Business Horizons, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 59-68, viewed 29 November, 2018, https://ac-els-cdn-com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/S0007681309001232/1-s2.0-S0007681309001232-main.pdf?_tid=68fefca4-8562-4cc1-a6ea-82f4130d8b83&acdnat=1543497919_7b97a11a105f088cdb0dd2e0ee6a88bc.

Siapera, E 2012, 'Socialities and Social Media’, in Understanding New Media, Sage, London, pp. 191-208.

 TED-Ed 2013, Connected, but alone?- Sherry Turkle, 19 April, viewed 26 September 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv0g8TsnA6c

 Anon 2018, Cant Escape, viewed 1 December, 2018, https://www.architecturendesign.net/satirical-illustrations-show-our-addiction-to-technology/.

I really enjoyed reading this! 

It was very well written, engaging and included multiple references. 

In particular, what resonated with me the most was when you went on to explain how “Boyd (2012, p. 75) writes “publicness is one of the strange and yet powerful aspects of this new world”, but to what extent is this new publicness true? Is what we see the real world, or is the world about to implode as the self-created filter bubble collapses? After all, people are people, and the truth seems to have a way of making itself found.”

Thank you for sharing!

At this point in time, we have the ability to be connected to more people than ever before. We can tweet, post, reblog, instagram whatever we want to whoever we want, so we should never feel lonely, right? Being connected to someone online feels much different to being connected to someone face-to-face. Think of every movie you’ve ever seen where they say ‘long distance relationships don’t work’. This is because talking to someone via technology does not give you the same emotional gratification as seeing them in person does. If your social life exists solely on the internet, it is unlikely that your relationships with these people will be fulfilling enough to sustain you. You can post about being in hospital, and get over a hundred messages on Facebook wishing you well, but how many people are going to come out and visit you? Is anybody really there?

Social media has completely changed the way we interact with one another, usually from a distance. In Sherry Turkle’s TED talk ‘Connected, but alone’, she describes this as the ‘Goldilocks affect’. We want to everyone to be not too far, not too close, but just right. We want our conversations to be measured, thought out, no chance of looking stupid, we don’t want our relationships to be messy. Technology gives us the sense of comfort without being intimate, then we become afraid to really speak to people.

Twitter has become one of the most popular social media sites in the world. You can post 280 characters of pure nonsense, or intellectual genius, and there it is for anyone to read. If no one ever reads it, you’ll never know. You can post your every thought, and it feels like you are being heard, but are you really? It gives us satisfaction like we are, but we have no idea what kind of reach or impact that tweet is making, if any at all. We can connect to strangers using hashtags and read their opinions on the same topics, then what? Unlike Facebook, most Twitter users don’t actually know each other, they are tweeting to the world-wide web and hoping for something in return. Twitter doesn’t function as well if you don’t update regularly, so we tweet inane posts that don’t serve any purpose other than to remind ourselves that we’re still here, we’re still living. Dhiraj Murthy calls this self-affirmation, which keeps people tweeting, to sustain their need for affirming their own identities.

All social media has its perks of course, and there are many to consider. It is important however that we don’t forget that social media is just a copy of what is out in the real world. Instead of trying to find it through hashtags, photos and other people’s lives, we can go out and find it for ourselves. Experience it rather than looking at it or talking about it. If you have something to say, find someone who will listen, don’t just aim for the abyss and hope someone catches you.

References:

At this point in time, we have the ability to be connected to more people than ever before. We can tweet, post, reblog, instagram whatever we want to whoever we want, so we should never feel lonely, right? Being connected to someone online feels much different to being connected to someone face-to-face. Think of every movie you’ve ever seen where they say ‘long distance relationships don’t work’. This is because talking to someone via technology does not give you the same emotional gratification as seeing them in person does. If your social life exists solely on the internet, it is unlikely that your relationships with these people will be fulfilling enough to sustain you. You can post about being in hospital, and get over a hundred messages on Facebook wishing you well, but how many people are going to come out and visit you? Is anybody really there?

Social media has completely changed the way we interact with one another, usually from a distance. In Sherry Turkle’s TED talk ‘Connected, but alone’, she describes this as the ‘Goldilocks affect’. We want to everyone to be not too far, not too close, but just right. We want our conversations to be measured, thought out, no chance of looking stupid, we don’t want our relationships to be messy. Technology gives us the sense of comfort without being intimate, then we become afraid to really speak to people.

Twitter has become one of the most popular social media sites in the world. You can post 280 characters of pure nonsense, or intellectual genius, and there it is for anyone to read. If no one ever reads it, you’ll never know. You can post your every thought, and it feels like you are being heard, but are you really? It gives us satisfaction like we are, but we have no idea what kind of reach or impact that tweet is making, if any at all. We can connect to strangers using hashtags and read their opinions on the same topics, then what? Unlike Facebook, most Twitter users don’t actually know each other, they are tweeting to the world-wide web and hoping for something in return. Twitter doesn’t function as well if you don’t update regularly, so we tweet inane posts that don’t serve any purpose other than to remind ourselves that we’re still here, we’re still living. Dhiraj Murthy calls this self-affirmation, which keeps people tweeting, to sustain their need for affirming their own identities.

All social media has its perks of course, and there are many to consider. It is important however that we don’t forget that social media is just a copy of what is out in the real world. Instead of trying to find it through hashtags, photos and other people’s lives, we can go out and find it for ourselves. Experience it rather than looking at it or talking about it. If you have something to say, find someone who will listen, don’t just aim for the abyss and hope someone catches you.

References: