Untitled

Social media has created not only the opportunity for photo, information and video sharing, but has also allowed both individual and interactive gameplay. Social gaming has become increasingly popular through Facebook. According to Zainzinger (2012), during 2012, 53% of Facebook users were playing social games. These games included both social games and casino style games.  Suzor & Woodford (2013), highlight that regulators need to be aware of the potential impact of regulatory decisions in order to avoid unnecessarily damaging the viability of autonomy of virtual worlds.

So how regulated is social gaming? Is it creating younger gamblers?

According to Humphreys & De Zwart (2014),  game rules created by developers in the establishment of an online digital game space intersect and overlap with rules created socially by player, with cultural norms emerging from within the game space and from the contexts of play. With that being said it is important that publishers are in line with laws and ensure no legal consequences with players. During 2013, Apple was being questioned for  having potentially breached Australian gambling laws. This was found through the use of Apple offering gambling apps such as PokerStars. Moses (2013), investigated with the Australian Gambling reform committee and found that they don’t allow online poker in Australia for Australian people under the Interactive Gambling Act … they [Apple] have got an obligation to take down apps that are against Australian law and they should do it’ ( as quoted by Greens Senator Richard di Natale, member of the gambling reform committee). During this period it was brought to light the need for the Australian government to reevaluate the current rules around gaming and make the relevant changes necessary to avoid an influx of gamblers.

Facebook has created a platform for increased game play. According to Zainzinger (2012), about 20% of gamers have paid for in-game benefits through the network’s virtual currency, Facebook Credits. Although these games may not appear to look like the average pokie machine or gaming table they have the same emotional and financial effects. This can also result in negative consequences on minors. For example some studies have shown children exposed to gambling as a child are more likely to develop the habit later on in life. According to Chong & Nettleton (2013), To fall within the scope of an interactive gambling service, the “game” must:

1. Be a game of chance or of mixed chance and skill; and

2. Involve consideration; and

3. Be played for money or anything else of value.

The above points can be used as considerations for parents when assessing what their children are playing. Have you experienced the negativity of social gaming? Comment below!

References

Black, A 2015, ‘Blackberry slots’ [image], Web slot casino, viewed 5 January 2016, <http://webslotcasino.com/blackberry_slots>

Chong, K & Nettleton, J 2013, ‘Online social games- the Australian position’, Addison Lawyers, 16 October, viewed 4 January 2016, <http://www.addisonslawyers.com.au/knowledge/assetdoc/1496179efe668027/Online%20Social%20Games%20-%20The%20Australian%20Position.pdf>

De Zwart, M & Humphreys, S 2014,’ The Lawless Frontier of Deep Space: Code as Law in EVE Online’, Cultural Studies Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 77-99

Israel, R 2012, ‘888 casino’ [image], Gambling kingz, viewed 4 January 2016, <http://www.gamblingkingz.com/news/2012/12/14/888-and-facebook-real-money-gambling-deal.asp>

Moses, A 2013, ‘Online apps take bite of illegal betting’, Sydney Morning Herald, 1 April, viewed 5 January 2015, <http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/smartphone-apps/online-apps-take-bite-of-illegal-betting-20130331-2h1eb.html>

Suzor, N & Woodford, D 2013, ‘Evaluating consent and legitimacy amongst shifting community norms: An EVE Online case study’, Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1-14.

In this week’s blog we  look at Social gaming.  What is Social gaming and what does it comprise of?  The Oxford Dictionary describes it as the activity or practice of playing an online game on a social media platform. Social games are different from other games due to the following:

1. Turn-based – It is not social unless you are playing with another person. As such users taker turns playing the game. 2. Awareness of others actions – this is a means for you to interact more with the game.  You are more likely to interact if you see a friend taking money from another firend online. 3. Casual gaming  - as advertised not for players who want to play 24 hrs a day. 4. Multiplayer – again as advertised, can be two to a hundred users. 5. Based on Social Platforms – These provide users with an identity and also can help in communication.

Some examples of social features in popular games are: • Gifting – This is a huge driver for retention. Players can send each other gifts, some of which actually impact gameplay such as Zynga’s Treasure Isle. • Wishlisting – Players can add items they need within a game and share these on their wall. Other Players/friends can then choose to help out the person in need. • Collaborative Building – Most of the top games have these, where you don’t have access to certain objects unless you ‘get a friend to help you’. These are requested either through Facebook requests or wall posts.

The above video defines social gaming and the true potential it has.

In 2014 was in the top 25 companies that y generated $54.1B in revenue.  A report on CNBC on 26 Jan 2016 stated digital gaming sales hit $61 Billion in 2015.   Among the growth sectors was multiplayer online battle arena game “League of Legends” which earned $1.6 Billion, and games on the PC-based gaming platform which includes titles such as “Farmville” pulled in $32 Billion. Hmm definitely in the wrong industry here!

It does pose the question though, if PC games are free how do these companies make money?  Here’s how, you can download the game for free, however there are all sorts of extra costs.  This doesn’t necessarily translate into big revenue as it doesn’t matter how much you spend (see this report on how much one teenager spent) but rather the most social players.

So how does it work?   You download a game, start to play it, buy some extras, think it’s awesome, mention it to your friend, they in turn then download, buy the extras (what you bought plus more), they think it’s awesome as well and they tell their friends.   (Uh is anyone else seeing similarities to the pyramid schemes?).  Developers look at this and then target the original person for “special” promotions to keep them playing.

Playing these games constantly online can be addictive and can cause strain in relationships.  Some gamers live totally in the online world and may start to think this is the real world. This may mean they can’t or won’t engage in real world conversations with friends and families, and thus may cause them to feel left out which may lead do feelings of anxiety and depression. Social gaming may cause carpal tunnel, migraines, sleep disturbances, poor personal hygiene and lack of sleep.

From personal experience and my research social gaming can be fun provided it’s in moderation.  Organising activities for kids (whether it be actual kids or man/woman size kids) can help stop the constant need to immerse oneself in the online world. For me personally I play Candy Crush Saga, but only on the train ride to and from work.  When I am home I put my mobile/tablet away and concentrate on interaction with my family - certainly not as bad as the picture above.

References

DiChristopher, T (2016) Digital gaming sales hit record $61 billion in 2015: Report  CNBC http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/26/digital-gaming-sales-hit-record-61-billion-in-2015-report.html [Accessed 31 Jan 2016]

Grubb, J (2015) Gaming’s top 25 public companies generated $54.1B in revenue last year.  VentureBeat http://venturebeat.com/2016/01/30/googles-u-k-tax-deal-sparks-criticism/ [Accessed 31 Jan 2016]

Knapp A (2014) The Moneymakers for Social Games Aren’t the Big Spenders Forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2014/10/03/the-moneymakers-for-social-games-arent-the-big-spenders/#200cc9ef6076 [Accessed 31 Jan 2016]

O’Neil N (2008) What Exactly are Social Games? Social Times http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/social-games/1695 [Accessed 31 Jan 2016]

Simpson J (2014) The power of truly social games: James Simpson at TEDxOU Tedx https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO7uaoMX60o [Accessed 31 Jan 2016]

Visual communities and social imaging have become an exceptionally prominent aspect of social media.

From video and images to app created cartoons and memes, visualising posts to social media is an every-day occurrence for millions of people.

Apps have been created that deal with various types of visual media.  Snapchat enables users to share photos and videos to friends. Pinterest is focused on sharing existing image content relating to users likes and interests. Twitter doesn’t have a specific focus on a particularly type of image but links to videos and photos are commonplace alongside text based content. About tech (2015) discusses ‘Memes’, which are a specific type of content, with images accompanied with words or phrases often sarcastic in nature.

According to AdNews (2015), in 2014 and 2015 Facebook publicly stated that it considered itself to be a video platform.  According to Facebook (AdNews 2015), half of Australia’s 13 million active users are viewing at least one video a day, and since June 2015 its worldwide consumption of videos is averaging 1 billion - per day.

Other visual communities relate to specific areas of interest such as dating, through apps such as Tinder, which enables users in a defined location to indicate their ‘like’ for a person through reviewing their photos.

This use of location based visual imagery is increasingly being used natively within apps and also within posts.  Facebook is set to automatically post the location alongside an image unless this feature is turned off. This type of automation is called Tagging and this can also be done manually by the user – often to associate people within a photo – or to draw someone’s attention to a certain post or group.

There are issues with this however, with tagging being a focus of the plethora of guides on social media etiquette.  There are a vast array of ‘do’s and don’ts’ but many of them are about how the specific group expects you are posting to expect you to behave. Ultimately the crowd rules, and a step outside the social media rules will be dealt with swiftly by other members of the group. This type of self-moderation is common and applies to all forms of visual communities and social imaging.

  Reference

About tech 2015, What is a ‘Meme’?, viewed 19th January 2016, <http://netforbeginners.about.com/od/weirdwebculture/f/What-Is-an-Internet-Meme.htm>

This weeks bog is dedicated to crowdsourcing. What is it and how it has evolved over time. Crowdsourcing is a combination of words ‘crowd’ and ‘outsourcing’. The term was coined in 2005 and is defined by Merriam-Webster as the process of obtaining needed services, ideas or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from an online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers (Merriam Webster Online 2014).

The rapid growth of crowdsourcing applications for disaster relief profits from the develop of online social media that provides an open, convenient platform that can collect data from various sources in a short time. (Zeng 2011).

The article written by Heather Ford is an example of how crowdsourcing was used effectively. During the 2007 Kenyan elections a platform called Ushahidi emerged which gave citizens the opportunity to report human rights abuses. This tool integrated Twitter, Facebook, smartphone apps, texts, blogs, YouTube and videos. Since then Ushabidi has been used in locations such as Mexico Afghanistan and Haiti.

The below video by Patrick Meier at TedxSendai was interesting and gives a really good explanation on how crowdsourcing can be a powerful tool.

There are however Advantages and disadvantages of crowdsourcing.

Advantages:

• Crowdsourced data including user requests and status reports are collected almost immediately after a disaster using social media, building a compressive situation overview.

• Senders with a mobile phone can provide descriptions, pictures, and location information by using tools such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

An example of the above was earlier this year, on Jan 14 2016, when in the wake of the Islamic attack on Jakarta a Twitter user identified a safe area in Jakarta using the hash tag #SafetyCheckJKT . this quickly became a means of crowdsourcing information with citizens identifying safe locations along with photos, even the Jakarta Government and Metropolitan police Traffic Management used it to update people on the attacks.

Disadvantages:

• Information may not be reliable or instantly verifiable.

• Security issues – where information can be made public for both reporting and viewing, thus causing problems when trying to make decisions about the places urgent relief is needed. Furthermore relief workers may be targeted by unsavory characters or groups so publicizing details may endanger lives.

An example of misinformation is the article in the Hollywood reporter where citizens in DC read about an earthquake before feeling it.

So who can I trust? And given that there are malicious people posting things is crowdsourcing a good thing? Well the thing to take note from the above is that there needs to be more responsibility by the messengers, how - you should always verify the information with major news sites before you post it on social media sites.

References:

Ford, R (2011), Earthquake: Twitter Users Learned of Tremors Seconds Before Feeling Them, Hollywood Reporter, [online] Available at: https://www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing [Accessed on 17 January 2016].

Ford, H (2012), Crowd Wisdom, [online] Available at http://ioc.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/content/41/4/33.full

‘[Accessed on 17 January 2016]

Zeng, D (2011) Harnessing the Crowdsourcing Power of Social Media for Disaster relief, [online], Available at http://star-tides.net/sites/default/files/documents/files/Harnessing-the-Crowdsourcins-Power-of-Social-Media-for-Disaster-Relief.pdf  [Accessed on 17 January 2016]

Cher, B & DNA Team (2016), Social media: Vox populi when terror strikes, Digital News Asia, [online], Available at https://www.digitalnewsasia.com/social-media-vox-populi-when-terror-strikes [Accessed on 17 January 2016]

We don’t have to look to far in Australia to find an example of crowdsourcing in times of natural disaster. Bush fires, floods, severe storms including cyclones and earthquakes occur regularly. This week we examine how social media is assisting during times of crisis.

A newer phenomenon that has been attracting attention in Queensland is sinkholes. On 26th of September 2015 campers at popular Inskip Point, north of Rainbow Beach were voluntarily evacuated when fellow campers raised the alarm. Campers were lucky to escape with their lives; the sinkhole claimed two cars, a caravan and other camping equipment (Moore 2015).

The action was caught on the ‘dash cam’ of a local towing firms vehicle that was camped at the location. This footage was quickly added to social media and as local residents woke on Sunday morning details were flowing into their newsfeed long before conventional media picked up on the story. This was an isolated incident, everything unfolded so quickly and the area affected so localised that social media was not able to contribute assistance during the crisis management.

IMAGE SOURCE: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/j/v/q/z/g/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gjvq44.png/1450483303456.jpg

However when a crisis spans several days or longer, social media becomes a dominant tool in communicating with the community. In the case of the 2011 Queensland floods, the Queensland Police Service media unit was able to relay credible information that was shared/retweeted many times over to allow the information to reach a broader audience (Bruns et. al, 2012, p. 7).

Social media is an integral part of the bushfire response in Victoria. CFA (country Fire Authroity) uses the “Phoenix RapidFire simulation tool, which provides up to six hours warning of the direction, speed and intensity of a fire within minutes, rather than hours of its detection” (CFA 2011, p.7).

PHOENIX RAPIDFIRE MODELLING

IMAGE SOURCE: http://report.hazelwoodinquiry.vic.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/2_19.jpg

Phoenix Rapidfire generates information that is fed into the OSOM system that in turn coordinates internal communications, dispatching and coordinating crews from different stations and coordinating other emergency services and also feeds information to external communications via the CFA website.

Previously the CFA relied on mainstream media to communicate information however started using Internet based technologies in 2010 (Bender 2013). The speed of generated fire simulations and real-time sharing of information across social media sites has helped to prevent loss of life and property.

Social media is so integrated into people’s lives these days that it seems only natural that it assists during times of crisis. The speed in which social media can distribute information seems to have made conventional mainstream media redundant for reporting crisis events in real time. 

REFERENCES:

Bender, A 2013, Victorian firefighters extinguish online congestion during bushfires, Computerworld, viewed 23 December 2015, < http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/454947/victorian_firefighters_extinguish_online_congestion_during_bushfires/>

Bruns, A, Burgess, J, Crawford, K & Shaw, F 2012, #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods, Arc Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation, pp 7-10, viewed 17 September 2015, <http://www.cci.edu.au/floodsreport.pdf>.

Implementing the government’s response to the 2009 Victorian bushfires Royal Commission May 2011, CFA.gov.au, viewed 23 December 2015,  <http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/fm_files/attachments/Publications/royal_commission_implementation_plan.pdf>

 Moore, T 2015, Sinkhole swallows can and caravan at Inskip Point camp ground, Brisbane Times, viewed 12 January 2016, < http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/car-and-caravan-in-sinkhole-at-qld-beach-20150926-gjvq44.html>

  IMAGE SOURCES:

State Planning for Fire, 2014, Hazelwood Mine Fire Enquiry, viewed 1 January 2016, <http://report.hazelwoodinquiry.vic.gov.au/part-two-fire/preparing-fire/state-planning-fire>

Children are being bullied online and it seems we are powerless to do anything about it. 

This week we look at the history of bullying, and then examine the prevailing factors contributing to bullying, proposed changes to governance and ways to address the problem.

Racial violence, bullying and other such destructive behaviour are not new to society. However the ability to take that destructive behaviour and broadcast it to a community or in the case of viral posts, to the world, in a matter of hours is new. Digital citizenship has made the spreading of unethical behaviour commonplace. The term citizenship has long been associated with “bloodshed, struggle, resistance, hope, fear and terror” (Hartley cited in McCosker 2014) so it’s not surprising that the digital equivalent is upholding these qualities.

IMAGE SOURCE: http://static1.squarespace.com/static/522f7cdbe4b056ca5e8127f6/t/5523bdfce4b0cefeaac2c28e/1428405767797/cyber-bullying-word-art

The bullies of old were attention seekers, no different to the bullies of the cyber world except that the audience is magnified; “teens participate in battles over reputation, status and popularity” (Boyd 2014, p. 151). Identifying what constitutes bullying is difficult. The language used, definitions used to identify harmful behaviour and the perspectives of the individuals involved, whether as the bully or the bullied, vary greatly. Terms identified by academics are of little use when the children, parents and media all seem to have their own differing views of what constitutes bullying (Boyd 2014, p. 132).

 Much of what is deemed bullying could be fobbed off as ‘kids being kids’ except that in extreme cases online bullying has been attributed to cases of teen suicide. A Google search of the phrase ‘internet trolls causing suicide’ brings up a disturbing trend of young lives lost far too soon through senseless acts of online harassment.

IMAGE SOURCE: https://www.google.com.au/#q=internet+trolls+causing+suicide

In the same search click on the ‘images’ tab and the story gets worse. It seems some trolls don’t stop at attacking the living.  In one such example Sean Duffy trolled the condolence pages of deceased teenagers whom he had never met and left obscene messages, created fake sites and even hijacked tribute sites (Camper & Neville 2011).

IMAGE SOURCE: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/09/14/article-2036935-0DE0390100000578-88_634x611.jpg

As of 2012, 48 US states and their federal government had implemented statutes to address bullying (Boyd 2014, p. 131). The Australian government announced proposed reforms to protect children from cyber bullying in 2014 targeting ‘content that was likely to cause harm’. The major players in the digital world were quite vocal with their opinion on the proposed reforms to Australian legislation saying the move was counterproductive to the internal commitment made by the individual digital media to protect the safety of users (Fletcher 2014).

IMAGE SOURCE: https://esafety.gov.au/~/media/cesc/images/infographic-png-720x720-report-cyberbullying.png?h=720&la=en&w=720&hash=D4500C77181F2A41F4DFE504A9248FE3FD45FCBA

According to Boyd (2014, p. 152) blaming technology is not the answer to addressing cyber bullying; recognising where teens are at and why they feel the need to engage in destructive behaviour will go a long way towards creating interventions that work.

So the question remains, is legislation the answer to protecting children from cyber bullying? Perhaps limiting exposure to social media sites would assist in addressing the problem?  Or does the answer lie in opening the channels of communication between parents and children through education on the best way to handle cyber bullying? 

I believe the answer is ‘all of the above’.  Keen to know what you think.

  REFERENCE LIST:

Boyd, D 2014, ‘Bullying: Is the Media Amplifying Meanness and Cruelty?’, in It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, Yale University Press, New Haven, USA, pp 128-52.

Camper, R & Neville, S 2011, Sick internet ‘troll’ who posted vile messages and videos taunting the death of teenagers is jailed for 18 weeks, Daily Mail, viewed 9 January 2016, < http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2036935/Natasha-MacBryde-death-Facebook-internet-troll-Sean-Duffy-jailed.html>

Fletcher, P 2014, Transcript of the Hon Paul Fletcher on Radio National about protecting children from cyber bullying, 25 February, viewed 9 January 2016, <http://www.minister.communications.gov.au/paul_fletcher/news/transcript_of_the_hon_paul_fletcher_on_radio_national_about_protecting_children_from_cyber_bullying#.VB-T5fmSyeF>.

McCosker, A 2014, YouTrolling as provocation: Tube’s agonistics publics, Convergence, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 201-217.

  IMAGE SOURCE:

Cyberbullying, Office of the Children’s eSafety Commissioner, viewed 9 January 2016, < https://esafety.gov.au/~/media/cesc/images/infographic-png-720x720-report-cyberbullying.png?h=720&la=en&w=720&hash=D4500C77181F2A41F4DFE504A9248FE3FD45FCBA>

Daily Mail, viewed 9 January 2016, <http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/09/14/article-2036935-0DE0390100000578-88_634x611.jpg>

Google search, viewed 9 January 2016, <https://www.google.com.au/#q=internet+trolls+causing+suicide>

This week we learn about Trolling and social media.  Trolling really means the peer to peer abuse or bullying forms of harassment or stalking.

In this weeks readings i especially found the article by Danah Boyd interesting as the different people interviewed had different perspectives of the word “bullying” for example some teens didn’t think spreading gossip and rumors or pranking other students. She also makes a good point that social media has complicated the dynamics of social sharing and gossip as it provides a larger audience for information to be spread

As the picture above states trollers gonna troll, however do we accept it and what is the government doing about it?.

In 2014 Charlotte Dawson took her own life after a series of hate posts, however it is to be noted that this was only a contributing factor as Charlotte had other mental issues.  Her situation started a petition called #Charlotte Law

In Australia cyber bullying laws have been in effect since 2014.  The scheme is a 2 step monitoring system for social media giants like Facebook and Twitter.  The scheme allows for companies to voluntary address cyber bullying, but if they don’t they will face civil penalties. The new laws will create an e-Safety Commission that will be empowered to ensure that cyber bullies take down harmful posts or face court and police penalties.

The problem with this however it is complaint based, and that the action can only be taken after the harm has occurred. Second it can take a while before the post can be taken down. Third the law is inadequate and therefore the sanctions are inadequate.While these laws may be imperfect it is still the best option.  There are other criminal laws in place for other online abuse for example section 474.17 of the criminal code act 1995 makes it an offense to use a carriage service (such as the internet, email, social media) in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive.

The role of social media has created a digital world, as well as a form of ‘digital citizenship’. According to McNeal, Mossberger & Tolbert (2008), digital citizenship is a term that has been used to refer to the potential benefits for society as a whole that comes from new digital and social media tools and their ability to ‘facilitate the membership and participation of individuals within society’. The formation of digital citizenship has expanded the coverage and roles of activists, as well as coined new terms like ‘slacktivists’ and ‘hacktivists’.

Social media has created new opportunities, expression and reach among activists, artists, and other political and cultural groups who have found new media to be inexpensive, powerful tools for challenging the givers of mainstream or popular culture (Lievrous, 2011). This has created a platform to document and provide ‘evidence’ of claims made live and changing. One example of an online activism group is ‘Anonymous’. This modern days activist group (who are disguised by masks) aim to expose the truths that our governments hide. More specifically, they fall under the category of the recently coined term ‘hacktivist’. According to Wolchover (2011), hacktivism is a modern form of protest in which savvy programmers use their hacking skills to fight back against perceived social and political injustices. Hacktivism can be considered illegal (in many instances) and practices activism through anonymous online acts and attacks.

Anonymous is responsible for creating a ‘Low Orbit Ion Cannon’ (LOIC) tool which allows individual users to participate in hactivism events. According to Schwartz (2012), Anonymous expanded its focus, and (backed by what appear to be numerous international chapters) has tackled everything from cartels in Mexico and child pornography file-sharing sites, to takedowns of Israeli government servers and U.S. law enforcement agencies. More recently, Anonymous has become involved in the western world’s war on ISIS and have declared their own personal revenge by hacking and exposing ISIS social media accounts. 

‘Slacktivism’, on the other hand, requires less effort and thought than activism. This can often result in little to no resulting action. Although the internet provides tools such as ‘like’ buttons and ‘retweet’ options, most of them are wastes of your time; a pointless click of the mouse. But at their worst, they can potentially steal millions of dollars from armchair activists, who are persuaded to donate actual money to what they’re told is some useful cause. The intention of slacktivism is often pure, and individuals involved often consider themselves an activist. For example, a petition may be started to promote a cause and even if thousands or even millions of signatures are reviewed it often results in no real outcome and is often deemed unproductive. An example of this was a petition that was created to seek the removal of a vegetable oil-based chemical from PepsiCo products. This was not actually an PepsiCo ingredient,, but because of the negative publicity, PepsiCo announced they’d remove it. This case highlights the increasingly high amount of hoaxes that are spread and believed by the public.

Social media and online communities have created new opportunities for activists. A message or a cause can now be widely received by millions, with little to no effort,  in a short period of time. Although the intentions of online activists may be pure, there may be no real outcomes for their efforts. Instead this creates a community of conformists. In order to achieve real outcome everyone needs to get involved, not just those who spend their time on facebook clicking on the social issues which interest them.

What category do you fit in? Are you an activist or a slacktivist? Comment below!

References

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

Lievrouw, L 2011, Alternative & Activist New Media, Polity, Cambridge, U.K, p.2.

Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C., & McNeal, R 2008, Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Schwaltz, M (2012), Who is Anonymous- 10 Key Facts, Dark Reading, viewed 10 December, <http://www.darkreading.com/attacks-and-breaches/who-is-anonymous-10-key-facts/d/d-id/1102672>

Sky News (2015), Hackers Identifying With Anonymous To Isis: We Will Never Let Up, 16 November, viewed 11 December, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAUZnDIWu2I>

Social media has become the voice of grass roots activism. Case in point, the Reclaim Australia (RA) movement. This is not a post about whether RA is right or wrong - It’s a post to demonstrate how one woman naively aired her views from the safety of her computer desk and was thrust into the role of activist leader. She was soon attracting a lot of attention; thousands of people were prepared to actively follow her cause, some with quite extreme views.

Of course with any activist group come some very vocal opponents. So when RA decided to hold protest marches the opponents were there to face them head on, literally. Ironically, the very thing RA stands for, ‘a peaceful Australian culture’ is being threatened by the rallies they are organising. Of course RA is claiming to be the innocent victim that wants peaceful protest, however the two words are pretty much an oxymoron: peaceful, protest. You simply can’t have an extreme view without attracting counter-protestors who are equally passionate about their views. Hence RA’s founding member has received death threats and subsequently has fears for hers and her family’s personal safety.

Source: https://s.yimg.com/dh/ap/default/151015/Snip20151017_115.png

To gain a greater understanding of the RA movement take a look at the story aired by television program Sunday Night https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/a/29836715/it-shocked-me-to-the-core-alex-cullen-goes-inside-anti-islam-group/

RA is just one such group; activists that have used internet applications such as Facebook and Twitter to “create and exchange user-generated content” (Gerbaudo 2012, p. 2) are rampant. The strengths of the various social media platforms become apparent by the type of content distributed. Facebook is used to gather the community, Twitter is used for real-time organizing and spreading news while YouTube and other video streaming services provide a forum for video evidence of claims (Mason, cited in Gerbaudo 2012, p. 3)

The Arab Spring has been well documented, research and analysis have shown that this movement and its vocalisation through social media, attributed to the overthrow of the Egyptian and Tunisian governments (Youmans & York 2012, p. 317). Internet based activists have the potential to reform society and the relevant authorities are well aware of the power generated by these groups. But the ultimate power lies in the hands of the social media platform, which at the press of a button can deactivate an account and thereby silence the voice of the activist.

Pros and cons to social media activism are numerous. Pros include providing a voice for those who may have otherwise been silenced and oppressed, providing an online meeting place for followers despite geographic differences, the ability to communicate on many levels from local through to global. Cons include information being spread by citizen journalists who have not checked the credibility of claims, lack of control over where information is spread to, risks to activists personal safety, videos and photographs being shared without the consent of those shown.

Source: https://s3.amazonaws.com/lowres.cartoonstock.com/social-issues-social_problem-protester-protesting-protests-protest_marches-shrn2826_low.jpg

Activism is not new and as the cartoon above so aptly demonstrates there will always be someone with something to protest about, that will find a way to make his or her voice heard. Right now that voice is being heard loudest from social media platforms.

  REFERENCE LIST:

Cullen, A 2015, “It shocked me to the core” Alex Cullen goes inside anti-Islam group, Sunday Night, viewed 12 December 2015,  <https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/a/29836715/it-shocked-me-to-the-core-alex-cullen-goes-inside-anti-islam-group/>

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

Youmans, W, & York, J 2012, ‘Social Media and the Activist Toolkit: User Agreements, Corporate Interests, and the Information Infrastructure of Modern Social Movements’, Journal Of Communication, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 315-329.

IMAGES:

Cullen, A 2015, “It shocked me to the core” Alex Cullen goes inside anti-Islam group, Sunday Night, viewed 12 December 2015,  <https://s.yimg.com/dh/ap/default/151015/Snip20151017_115.png>

Social media has become a popular platform for individuals to socialise, and for businesses to promote their products, services and specials. More recently, politicians have caught onto this trend and have begun using social media to promote their campaigns and agendas. A well known example of this is the biggest tweet of all time, which was an image and caption ‘four more years’ by American President Barrack Obama. This tweet has had over 7 million retweets (Social Squared, 2013). However, even though this tweet was positively received, can one argue that one ‘like, ‘share’ or ‘retweet’ equals the equivalent of one vote? Politicians are scrambling to be both culturally relevant and popular with key demographics who drive the use of social media.

According to Bennett (2008), the future of democracy is in the hands of these young citizens of the so-called ‘digital age’. This is because many of today’s youth are digitally driven, whether it be through the use of laptops, tablets or smartphones. Access to social media and up to date information is always at the fingertips of society. This can also mean that users are able to access unflattering content about an individual. An example of this was during the 2012 Queensland Election Campaign. At the time ALP candidate Peter Watson found that posting comments on blogs can come back to haunt you, as homophobic comments he had made as a 15 year old on blogs (such as slackbastard) led to him being forced to resign his candidacy (Jericho, 2012).

Politicians, like most of the younger segments in society, are using social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube to promote their agenda. However, it may be presumptuous to assume social media political campaigns will override more ‘traditional media’ streams when trying to reach today’s youth. According to Auvien (2012), traditional media, with their television broadcasts, newspapers and magazines, are in active interaction with social media: traditional media follows the lead of social media, but aspects of the latter can also be found in the former. It is therefore important that politicians consider ‘traditional media’ in their marketing plan.

Media outlets have also diversified their method of reporting on elections and current events. For example, The Huffington Post transformed from a blog to a ‘fully fledged online newspaper’, and had involved 12000 citizens in reporting on the election in what was hailed as ‘the first open platform election coverage term (Young 2010). The use of hashtags in the political arena can have both positive and negative consequences. For example, during early 2015, then Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott made a 79 second media statement. This was followed by ridicule by the Australian public who kicked off a #ThingsLongerThanAbbottsPressConference campaign (Hebber, 2015). This contributed to the already highly ridiculed Prime Minstership of Abbott and created a negative PR storm.

Social media and the digital world has created both new dilemmas for today’s politicians. The extended digital reach for politicians has allowed them to enter new audiences and become more ‘relevant’. But this has also created a fast and publicly documented platform for their ‘dirty’ laundry.

Again, it begs discussion about whether a like, share or positive comment actually impacts votes… or does it merely play host to an online popularity contest?

References

Auvinen, AM 2012, Social Media- The new power of political influence, Suomen Toivo -Think Tank, viewed 5 December 2015, <http://www.martenscentre.eu/sites/default/files/publication-files/social-media-and-politics-power-political-influence.pdf>

Bennet, WL 2008, Changing Citizenship in the Digital Age, Civic Life Online: Learning How Digital Media Can Engage Youth, viewed  5 December 2015, <http://static1.squarespace.com/static/51ede959e4b0de4b8d24e8a9/t/525485cde4b0843ea38965df/1381270989265/Ciberciudadan%C3%ADa+y+opini%C3%B3n+p%C3%BAblica.pdf>

Heber, A (2015), Australian Twitter is having a stack of fun with these political hashtags, Business Insider Australia, viewed 5 December 2015, <http://www.businessinsider.com.au/there-are-some-hilarious-libspill-hashtags-trending-on-twitter-this-afternoon-2015-2>

Found media group 2014, ‘Vote social media’ [image], Found media group, viewed 5 December 2015, <http://foundmediagroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Vote_Social-Media.jpg>

Jericho, G 2012, ‘How many votes are there on Twitter?’, in The Rise of the Fifth Estate, Scribe, Victoria, Australia

Social Squared 2013, ‘Role of Social Media In Politics’, 23 September, viewed 4 December 2015, <https://youtu.be/UEuvNduQ97A>

This week’s blog is on politics, which unfortunately I am not very knowledgeable and interested in, however I do like to keep up to date with various news happening around the world. I tend to only tune into politics when bad stuff in the world goes on.

Politics within social media has become a bit part of how people get their sources of information today. What I do is I ‘like’ various news pages on Facebook and they post articles of updating news from their website. This is the way I access news, I don’t watch the news at 6-7pm, I just scroll my Facebook newsfeed and let the news find me.

I studied abroad in America last year when the Sydney Lint terrorist attack went off; and the only news I heard about it was from my Facebook news feed, none of the television news stations aired any news outside of America.

Another reason why social media is now such a good tool to source news is to target a younger demographic. Think of it this way, when I was younger and didn’t have Facebook or media was not sourced there I had no idea about the news, I was never going to watch the news at 6pm. But, when interesting stories come up and other countries and new inventions are coming out its wash more interesting then the weather and sports updates at 6pm.

After understanding Young’s reading ‘News, political reporting and the internet’ I have thought about online voting and how it could work successfully. The world is rapidly digitalizing so I wouldn’t be surprised if this did begin. A lot of political campaigns are turning to the internet for marketing advantages; having various advertisements to enhance the popularity of the campaign.

References: