Digital Communities

Congratulations to all of my fellow digital communities students out there, because this week marks the last week of our Tumblr posts! I feel like we’ve all been through thick and then this semester, but we rode it out ‘til the end, and we deserve a big pat on the back for posting every week and engaging in such an interesting, and innovative unit.

Last, but definitely not least, this week we submerged ourselves into something that I personally had never explored before – social media in China. The case study was interesting, as I learnt that China did not in fact have access to the social media platforms that we, as a Western society, has access to. The internet, and the fundamental platforms we know and love, such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube (just to name a few), are blocked from the citizens of China – thus, the term ‘Chinanet’ is coined.

In his TED talk, Michael Anti (2012) discusses this ideological term of the ‘Chinanet’, being a completely different category to the internet itself. Anti discusses how the Chinese government, along with servers, control everything that happens on the Chinanet, with the idea that there is a “Great Firewall of China” that enables them to block out every Web 2.0 service utilised by other countries worldwide. The serve is kept in Beijing, which allows the government and other authorities to access any data, any time that they wish, therefore giving them the power to control what happens on their social media platforms.

So what does the Chinanet have if it doesn’t have Facebook? China’s social media platforms are much like the platforms utilised around the rest of the world. China is fact is seen to have dupes, clones, or copies of the original Western platform itself:

This concept of China having its own social media platforms and essentially, their own virtual realm and their own ‘publicsphere’ does not deter Chinese citizens in participating online; as Anti (2012) would describe the term, netizens (citizens on the net). With over 500 million users on the Chinanet, and 300 million of them being mircobloggers, it is speculated that China “leading the way” of the social media epidemic (Chiu, Lin & Silverman 2013, p 1). Consequentially, Chinese netizens have the ability to hold the power when it comes to the actions that the government takes, as more and more Chinese wish to embrace freedom of speech in modern day society (Anti, 2012).

Personally, I believe that China’s publicsphere through the use of the Chinanet, enables individuals with the freedom of speech to an extent. Platforms such as ‘Weibo’ are catered to the individual’s needs of the country as they hold specific content which is able to target their Chinese consumers. It is however, limited as netizens have their every move monitored by the Chinese government. Thus, whilst it is believed that China is leading the way with the explosion of social media, the way that these platforms are used by individuals are different to how the rest of the world uses these forums. As the Chinese government has access to everything in their net, in the future, the Chinese would want to live in the world where they are able to “tweet anytime, anywhere, without fear” (Ant 2012).

As we arrive at the home stretch of the semester, our brains fried, and our eyes slowly drooping closed, this week I managed to keep mine open with the interesting topic of ‘Social Gaming’. These are something that have risen in the 21st century, with the emergence of social media and Web 2.0 – thus it is something that we can all relate to, whether it be through the guilty pleasure of Farmville, or even playing poker with friends on Facebook.

A definition of social gaming, described by game designer John Romero (2011), “Social games are games that have a very gentle learning curve, easy-to-understand, and lives on a social network, taking advantage of your friendships in meaningful ways within the game”.

Therefore, it is clear that these social games are a distinct category in itself – being different from other games through its characteristics of being multiplayer based, casual (daily interaction rather than 24/7), and based on social platforms.

When it comes to social gaming, there are many different types, and different ways in which players interact with these games. The types include:

- Social RPG’s: RPG standing for role playing games or role playing video games, borrow a lot from regular video games. They work in the way that players will collect money to buy items in order to partake in missions. A highly successful social game developer ‘Zynga’ (which will be discussed a little later on as well) is responsible for a lot of these types of RPG’s, having developed Facebook games such as Mobsters, Mafia Wars, Street Racing and many more. - Sports RPG’s: These games are much like our social RPGS, however they are much more competition-oriented. A popular example of this is Tennis Mania. - Word games: These are a unique subset of casual games. These are games that require you to think – it encompasses players competing with their friends and coming up with words or phrases within a given time limit. A huge epidemic that came through in the Word game world was ‘Words with Friends’ which I’m sure we’re all familiar with. - Virtual Villages: These are games which are seen to be the most popular amongst social gaming due to their balance between social interaction and creative mentality. This is the idea of creating an environment where people are able to give gifts to each other, play mini games and just essentially hang out in this virtual realm. These tend to create communities online and offer a great place for like-minded people to meet. Examples of Virtual Villages are Yoville, Pet Society, and Club Penguin. - Casino: These gambling games offer a place for people to easily come in and out of particular casino games such as Poker, or BlackJack – offering a place for people to practice their skills and play against their friends, without having physical cards or chips. These are games such as Zynga’s Texas Hold ‘Em and Poker Palace.

With the escalation of social games, and the increase of socialisation online, communities are able to form; providing virtual realm where people are able to come together across the globe. However, with these communities comes conflict. A prevalent issue within society is sexism in gaming – with 65% woman receiving sexual harassment online. This is seen to be the issue with this ‘gaming’ culture, with males believing that females should not be a part of it. It is reported that woman receive 3 times more insulting or derogatory remarks than males! That is an insane amount, and as a result, it is companies like JB-Hi in Melbourne that have taken recent action in order to combat these stereotypes:

Thus, it is clear that social gaming will continue to become a huge part of our society, due to our natural thirst to socialise with others and other communities. Social gaming provides us with the affordances of creating environments for communities to form, as well as finding like-minded people to socialise with. Although the gaming culture can produce some conflict, with the maturity of modern society, we will be able to decrease these issues and give everybody an equal opportunity to participate.

As we’ve probably all realised, social media is a vital part of our modern lives, and this week we didn’t fail to recognise another great element of this technological success.

From the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating, to the classic Movember campaign, and even the ALS ice bucket challenge (which I’ve mentioned in post #3), organisations have utilised social media as an avenue to reach society, raise awareness and educate individuals on good health and wellbeing.

Apart from it being a more cost-effective means of communicating messages to the public compared to other advertising techniques (e.g. television ads or billboards), health promotion campaigns through social media platforms have the ability to reach a larger audience, and perhaps even a more targeted segmented audience. As mentioned by a fellow classmate @alexandratrushell, social media allows organisations to make use of multiple platforms that will best suit their desired target audience. For example, there is a growth of a photo-sharing trend in the American, Hispanic, and African demographic, therefore, Instagram would be a great platform to utilise (Pew Research Centre 2015).

Social media also provides affordances such as ‘connectivity’ through its ability to reach large audience in a very timely manner. As a result, individuals from around the world are able to connect with others that are like minded to them and able to spread the awareness of health promotional campaigns. On the other hand, organisations also have the ability to gain feedback and speak directly to the public – this is something that is highly critical to a health organisation in modern society as they are required to continue to spread positive messages.

A particular organisation that I am familiar with is the World’s Greatest Shave. Deriving from television advertisements and websites, the Leukaemia Foundation has recently turned to social media in order to raise awareness and funds for the organisation. The World’s Greatest Shave involves brave individuals to get sponsored and raise as much money as they can to either shave, or dye their hair. In my experience, I have had multiple friends participate in the challenge, with friends of theirs sharing posts on Facebook to get others to donate to their cause.

This sharing ability has enabled friends of friends, as well as family members to get involved and donate money, as well as the spreading awareness of the foundation itself. In this way, the World’s Greatest Shave will also be able to spread through social media after the actual challenge is completed, as individuals will most likely post photos of themselves with their new do.

Furthermore, challenges such as these often spike effective communication through social media platforms, through its fun, light-hearted nature and their ability to urge people to get involved. More examples of health promotion campaigns such as these include Movember the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge.

Thus, it is clear that social media has created another opportunity for organisations to spread awareness and promote good health and wellbeing to individuals around the world. It provides affordances that would not otherwise be available without the rise of these technological advances.

With the highly evolving emergence of the innovation that is social media, it is important to utilise technology as a tool to not only live our lives, but also help to save lives. At times of great crisis, for example natural disasters, social media has been employed by individuals, organisations and governments, in order to spread awareness, and to aid individuals in danger.

Crisis mapping is an element of crowdsourcing that is also applied during times of crisis. By definition, Crisis mapping is the real-time gathering, display and analysis of data during a crisis, usually a natural disaster or social/political conflict. Thus, crisis mapping has the ability to provide individuals around the globe with information about where a disaster is happening, what is happening, and who is involved.

In 2010, the idea of ‘crisis mapping’ was utilised in a way that changed the definition in itself. Haiti’s capital was struck by a devastating earthquake – 100,000 feared dead. A live crisis map of Haiti was created, mapping live Tweets, as well as SMS’s which enabled the world to be informed on the details about the disaster.

According to Victoria University’s Dr Poblet, “extracting relevant information from tweets, Facebook updates, SMSs, satellite maps and online videos is revolutionising the way humanitarian organisations operate” through this idea of crowdsourcing and crisis mapping. Thus, social media has allowed open access to important and relevant information at times of crisis, as well as providing this critical information in real time, making it rapidly available all over the globe. Social media has produced the idea of connection. Through social media platforms, aid organisations are able to respond to requests for help from victims and able to receive live photos and videos of what is happening immediately. As described by Dr Poblet, this crowdsourced approach is “available faster than governments can provide it and is available whether or not aid agencies and media can gain access”.

Dr Poblet uses the term “digital neighbour” to describe the use of social media in such times of crisis. In an emergency, the first to respond would be neighbours, or others close by on the ground that can be of immediate aid. Now, with the idea of crowdsourcing through online forms, there is a second type of neighbouring respondent that can instantly be of assistance – the digital neighbour. Again, this describes the idea of the instantaneous nature of crowdsourcing during times of crisis, and the affordances that social media provides to individuals around the globe.  

In my opinion, social media creates this platform that is equally accessible to almost anyone, anywhere around the globe – thus offering this ability for individuals to utilise this media in order to crowdsource at times of a crisis. Without this advancing technology individuals would not have the knowledge that they have today to not only know about whether their friends and family are okay on the other side of the world, but also know if they themselves are in some form of danger; whether it be during potential bushfires or floods.

With over 40% of children worldwide having experience with being bullied online, I’m sure this week’s topic is something that all of us are familiar with. Whether you’ve been trolled yourself, or know somebody who has been cyberbullied, it is a sad reality that our generation are the beginning to the era of bullying through online forums.

Whilst there is no single phrase or term that describes bullying, this week’s readings discusses that Swedish psychologist Dan Olweus defines 3 pivotal components that are central to bullying: “aggression, repetition, and imbalance of power” (Boyd 2014, p. 131).

Thus, there is no doubt that these components of bullying are present on social media platforms – but is trolling and cyberbullying the same thing? According to an article in ‘Opposing Views’ (click here to see full article), trolling is the act of leaving provocative and inflammatory comments in public forums for many people to see as they seek attention to disrupt the intended discussion, shifting the topic from what is proposed, to themselves. This is a little different to cyberbullying, because whilst trolls desire to target online communities as a whole, cyberbullies target specific, vulnerable individuals. Cyberbullies post malicious and spiteful content about a single person with the intent to gain negative attention on their victim, and ultimately cause harm.

Within the readings this week, Boyd (2014) discusses that as us teenagers engage with online forums and networked publics, these provide us with another “social ecosystem” where peers often fight for social status. Within these ecosystems, “interpersonal conflicts” have a high chance of arising, as teens “battle over reputation, status, and popularity” (Boyd 2014 p. 151). This is where both trolling and cyberbullying emanate.

Social media forums such as Facebook and Instagram, should not be to blame for the creation of gossip and bullying. Rather, these networked publics offer the affordances for individuals to abuse their power online and do so. Individuals are able to hide behind their computer screen and torment others or communities – whatever news is being posted can spread like wildfire, and thus taking victims along with it.

It is important that young people today are educated on the correct use of social media, and understand what sort of impact their posts can have on others online. As a result of the skyrocketing cyberbullying rates in our country, the Australian government has commissioned an eSafety website. Through this website, the government is able to regulate the content created on social media platforms, as well as providing a place where individuals can gain insights and educate themselves and others on the correct uses of online environments. The website also allows individuals in need to report issues of cyberbullying through reporting content that can be deemed illegal or is offensive. This is a great tool provided by our government and can be used to educate young Australians before submerging themselves into the virtual world.

Another element to the correct use of social media is keeping yourself private when you’re online. Sharing your information to your friends online may seem like a safe thing to do, however disclosing too much of your own personal information online can lead to your details getting in the hands of the wrong people. This is where your reputation can be put on the line as trolls and cyberbullies like to feed on these types of leaked information. In retaliation to this, the governments around the globe, including Australia’s have initiated ‘Privacy Awareness Week’ where virtual classroom presentations are able to educate young people on ways to keep themselves private online.

The program is running this year from the 15th – 21st of May – only a month away! Young people like ourselves should take this to educate or remind ourselves and others about the correct uses of the internet, as we can be the role models for future generations.

So let’s work together to make a difference. Stop the harassment, stop the trolling, stop the bullying, and put an end to cyberbullying by not encouraging this behaviour. Don’t let others get bullied – take action!!

If you wish to visit the website for more information, your own curiosity, or you need help, please don’t be afraid to click on the link: www.esafety.gov.au

We’ve done it! We’ve officially made it half way through the semester! (I know what you’re thinking, time flies right?) As we submerge ourselves deeper and deeper into the world of digital communities, this week we looked more closely into the idea of digital citizenship – more explicitly, ‘activism’ and the role that social media plays in regards to activism, as well as protests and revolutions.

So, let’s throw a few terms out there that we looked at this week:

‘Civic Cultures’ ‘Everyday Activism’ ‘Subactivisim’ ‘Culture Jamming’ ‘Clicktivism’

Whilst these terms might sounds like a bunch of gibberish to the common folk, us media students want to look more closely into what these mean for society, and more specifically, how social media can be seen to “simply introduce a new passivity to activism” (McCosker, 2016).

According to Sabrina Khan-Ibarra from The Huffington Post (2014), social media is one of the “most powerful forms of activism” and a “catalyst for change”. Although some might agree to disagree, they have provided some worthy examples of why this is the case:

1. Ability to send more messages to more people, more quickly.

2. Potential to bring people fair and balanced news without biasness of mainstream media/propaganda.

3. Provides the general public with the ability to call out injustices, inaccuracies and misinterpretations.

4. Through the support of hashtag campaigns, individuals all over the world are able to get involved.

Just to name a few.

A great example of social media’s uprising in the support of promoting issues on a global scale, is the event of Arab Spring. According to Catherine O’Donnell (2011), new study finds that social media played a pivotal role in shaping, forming and spreading awareness of political debates in the Arab Spring events. With the help of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, inspiring stories of protest were able to cross international borders, raising expectations for success, thus “social media became a critical part of the toolkit for greater freedom” (Howard, 2011).

Along with this, there is no doubt that the 230,000 tweets about Egypt’s political change around the world, a week before Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak’s resignation, raised awareness and advocated this revolution through the use of social media. Thus, it is countries such as Egypt, as well as Tunisia, that when conversations appear on social media about “liberty”, “democracy”, and “revolution”, they immediately led to mass protests – almost forcing other countries to join the conversation (O’Donnell, 2011).

However, as ­­­­­­­­­­­­­Pierre Omidyar (2014) rightfully points out, social media is merely in its “infancy”, and the way in which individuals utilise this “tool of liberation and empowerment”, may not be so powerful. This is where the term ‘Clicktivism’, or more specifically ‘Slacktivism’ comes into play.

This can be seen through an example that I’m sure we’re all familiar to – the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. This was a movement created by the ALS Association in order to spread awareness for the disease Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and encourage donations into research. This involved the activity of throwing a bucket of ice over somebody’s head, taking a video, and posting it on social media, in turn, naming their friends and family to do the same. The challenge went viral, making almost every second post on everybody’s newsfeeds ice bucket related. Nevertheless, the knowledge about whether the individual actually donated to the cause was unknown – therefore, many people may have taken advantage of the challenge and done it for the sake of the post, rather than actually donating money to the charity.

Thus, the idea of ‘Clicktivism’ – for example, clicking ‘like’ on a post on Facebook, may make individuals seem as if they’re making a difference to the world, but instead are merely being ‘Slacktivists’ as they are not using social media in a way in which is beneficial to particular activist movements.

Furthermore, to answer the question ‘is social media promoting activism?’, I would say yes, in some cases it definitely is. I agree that social media is advocating the spreading was awareness across international boundaries, as well as enabling individuals all over the globe to participate in protests and revolutions. Social media enables equality, for the most part (given that the individual has access to such enabling technologies), and thus causes activism to be spread quickly and with impact. However, as long as individuals do not take advantage of the tool, social media should be used in an appropriate manner, in order to be utilised to its full potential – allowing everyday activism to occur adequately.

Have an opinion? I would love to hear you comments below!

PEOPLE I REFERENCED:

Khan-Ibarra, S 2014, ‘The Case For Social Media and Hashtag Activism’, The Huffington Post, 13 November, viewed 12 April 2016, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sabina-khanibarra/the-case-for-social-media_b_6149974.html>

McCosker, A 2016, Lecture 6, Digital Communities, MDA20009, 12 April.

O’Donnell, C & Howard P 2011, ‘New study quantifies use of social media in Arab Spring’, University of Washington, 12 September, viewed 12 April 2016, <http://www.washington.edu/news/2011/09/12/new-study-quantifies-use-of-social-media-in-arab-spring/>