Digital Communities

Most people I know, well actually pretty much everyone apart from one grandma and my Dad, have Facebook accounts. So it’s weird to think that in China Facebook is blocked to those who either can’t be bothered or don’t know how to use proxy’s.

But when looking into Chinas social media use I was surprised to find that it was filled with copy cats of Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, you name it! They operate in the same way with the same functions but are just for the Chinese population. It’s interesting to note that although Facebook is not available in China, when given a copycat platform like Ren Ren it is utilised in the exact same way. They are not just following suit and doing what every other county with Facebook is doing, they came to their own conclusions on how to use it and create communities within it and that just happened to be the same way the rest of the world use it.

It got me thinking, if you did an experiment and isolated a group of people from the outside world, and then all of a sudden handed them a technology like Facebook or Twitter, would they use it in the same way we do? Would they create insider networks and communities within their own? Is it human nature to band together with others?

I do not consider myself a gamer but in saying that I reached level 189 on candy crush and loved every minute of it! But the way I justify that to myself -after playing it for 45mins instead of writing these blog posts or other homework I’m meant to be doing- is that it’s a puzzle and it’s working my brain. Or at least I like to think so.

However my boyfriend is a gamer so I have spent countless hours watching him play and hopelessly trying myself to defeat the next new boss. I got my first (and only) Play Station 2 when I was 13 so it was a bit late for me to develop my X Y perspective skills and I still struggle to make my character walk in a straight line. But I totally understand how people get into gaming.

When I was about 10 my nan brought her first computer –a massive white box- but along with it she brought the first Harry Potter computer game. Every week my older sister, my cousin and I would go to her house purely to play this one game together by taking turns and it was awesome. We would eat vegemite and cheese toast and play Harry Potter. 

When crisis situations like natural disasters or terrorist attacks occur there is a scramble for information and knowledge as the usual channels of communications get shut down. Knowledge is power in these circumstances and so everybody is looking for updated information that could tell them where to go for medical help, what areas have been affected and what to do. The instantaneous nature of social media platforms as opposed to tradition forms of media makes it the go-to when disaster strikes. Witness generated content actually has value as it enables information to be distributed globally and let the world know what is taking place.

But what about the people on the ground, where the crisis has occurred and where they need help? This is where crowd sourcing comes into play. By spreading awareness and information of the occurrence, it encourages people to help out. Turning towards non-traditional suppliers and online communities to attain services, ideas or content allows for the widest spread of help possible.

However we need to ask ourselves whether new technologies are being used to their full capacity to help. I was in London a few months after the bombings in 2005 and when I first arrived there had been a bomb scare that day. I remember the panic and mayhem as everyone was running around and trying to figure out if there was in fact a fifth bomb or what was happening. Communication at this point was critical to maintain control and not get everybody panicked for no reason. The whole day and even the next day there still wasn’t a definitive answer as to what police had found.

There are still some major modifications that need to be made to the way media platforms are used to get the best result possible in a crisis. Instead of centralised or decentralised networks, authorities need to focus on distributed networking to help communicate information in a time of need. This means there would not a break in communication between the authorities and civilians and witnesses which at moments of crisis could save someone’s life.

When I think of trolling or trolls I think of my childhood and that little bridge and those poor little Billy Goat Gruffs that just wanted to pass over but the troll wouldn’t let them. The goats did nothing to the troll apart from being in his presence and yet the troll wanted to eat them.

The second thing that comes to mind along with the word troll is the term ‘key board warrior’. Someone who is too cowardly to say something in real life so instead sticks to the safety and usually anonymity of their computer keyboard. However I think the conventional view may be a bit harsh –the speaker may not have the means, geo location or publicity of expressing themselves and being heard other than online. So to blame computer keyboards and social networking sites for giving these trolls the ability to speak their mind is not necessarily right as the persons intent would not differ without such capabilities.

Trolling is bullying. No matter what anyone says, deliberately putting someone down is bullying and trolling is just a fancy new word for it. Cyber bullying is not a new issue, I remember 7 years ago getting my own Formspring account where people can ask anonymous questions publicly. My friend assured me it was only compliments and good things people asked and showed me her profile of positive comment and questions. What she didn’t tell me was that as soon as enabling my account I received some horrible queries regarding false gossip and some downright mean comments that I should have just deleted according to her. So that brings up two points- firstly that this 14 year old friend was already creating a fabricated persona online and secondly that anonymity gives way to bullying even the most mundane and boring teenage girls. Needless to say my Formspring career latest exactly 27hrs before unceremoniously deleting it.

 Many governing bodies have tried different initiates, education and laws of ethics to stop these trolls but they will just keep coming back. Bullies will keep being bullies because it is not the victims issue but the trolls. As evident by my own Formspring account people will fine any old reason to have a go at someone with or without social media platforms in which to do it. Just like those poor Billy Goats Gruff, trolling, bullying or any other name you give it will continue to occur in on form or another.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

People are mean. They will be mean to your face, behind your back and heaven forbid, even online! Blaming social media platforms for bullying is begging the same questions and critics as blaming scientists for nuclear war. The public sphere and the social discourse that takes place within it will always be a window for heated debate and nasty comments. The new digital age has just ushered in an alternative platform in which these hot headed –and sometimes just mean for the sake of entertainment- “trolls” can communicate.

Governing the internet is like trying to enforce a nation-wide ban on swearing. People will still swear, they’ll just find new words in which to turn derogatory or they just won’t stop using the old ones. A recent study found that a majority of trolls only troll for the lols. They do it because they are bored and are looking for some entertainment. Rarely is it out of spite or revenge or actual loathing. Because of this, trying to stop them will be increasingly difficult as they don’t really care enough about it to care if they are stopped.

Activism has reached new levels with social media platforms and networks. You can extend your scope to wider and larger audiences, find people who share your mindset and gain more exposure and response. But is this really doing anything? Obviously there are instances when different platforms are used and communities are created and they actually do achieve something like the Egyptian revolution of 2011. But in many cases –or at least the ones I have been exposed to- they haven’t really achieved anything apart from creating a flurry on my Facebook newsfeed. Now I’m not trying to diss the idea of using these platforms for good and bringing about change because I think there is a strong potential there however what I have personally witnessed hasn’t done much.

Take the Kony campaign of 2012. I was right in there with the action (figuratively speaking). I mean I watched the whole of the 19:48 video on YouTube, I posted the red symbolic image to my Facebook and in return I got 56 likes and I felt like I was doing my part for humanity. But really what did that achieve? Now don’t get me wrong I’m not saying I’m a heartless person with no sympathy to the cause because I am not, I’ve been to Africa and seen the harsh circumstances in which some people live and I’ve donated my time and money to charities that help them but that had nothing to do with social media. When it came down to it I did nothing to help the Kony situation apart from spread the word but still that doesn’t stop him committing any more crimes.

 It’s just like the latest craze: no make-up selfie for breast cancer awareness. Now again I’ve been touched closely by cancer so I’m not at all against helping the cause but taking a selfie with no make-up on is doing nothing but making me feel like a good citizen for a minute. It isn't even raising awareness as I could bet my bottom dollar that most people already know about breast cancer. Perhaps if it was more like "if I raise a hundred dollars for cancer research I will post a picture without makeup" that would make more sense. I just feel like this is just a more extreme version of those pictures where it's a image of an abused animal and the caption is "like this picture if you think animal abuse should be stopped". It doesn't do anything, donating money or time DOES something. Social media activism does very little in these circumstances. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Social media has introduced a whole new platform for social discourse. More people are getting involved with comments, likes and sharing around information. The discussions that are taking place cover all topics from sporting games to yum cha to the governance of countries. Through this new means of communication people with the same stance can join and connect with each other. They can find thousands of people who share their view of the world or even just their view of one particular matter. When you get enough people talking about something, passions run high and tempers flare. Get enough people riled up about a particular issue and this is where revolutions begin.

Another contributing factor is that social media is dominated by young people who aren’t settled into their lives enough to just accept the status quo. Social media outlets have been indispensable tools for the voices of those suppressed to finally be heard and not only that but actually band together and bring about changes. This was seen in Cairo where thousands of people flooded the streets and demanded governance change after recognising their peers and allies on social media. By spreading viral messages, creating hash tags, uploading raw footage and images people all over the world are finally being recognised and that is all thanks to social media.  

Now I’m not saying that gaining 1 million likes on Facebook is going to over throw the prevailing power, but it is impractical and naïve to underestimate the ability of social medias use as a jump start to revolution.

Photos and videos are an intrinsic part of everyday life now. You go to a party -you take a selfie and upload it to Facebook, you go on a holiday- you take a photo of your hotel room view and upload it to Instagram, you make a nice lunch at home and no surprise here you upload it to Facebook and Instagram and then you take a Snapchat eating it. Everything we do we record and post it to our virtual lives. I mean yesterday at uni my friend pointed out a tree that looked really pretty with its red and green ombre leaves and my first thought wasn’t to just appreciate the beauty in it but instead my first was thought was to take a photo of it and post it to Instagram.

It isn't even just the things around us but us as well! We get a new hair cut so that calls for a selfie, we buy a new dress and just have to share it with everyone -we are putting ourselves out there just as much as the things that make up our lives. Because of this we have been incredibly camera conscience. Most of my friends know their 'better angle' and refuse to take a photo from any other direction. If a friend posts a bad photo of us we beg them to take it down or at least untag ourselves from it. It hasn’t yet been decided if this is a good or bad development yet and there are varying arguments for both sides.

 One party in support of this new visually connected world are companies and brands who are looking for an in. A cost effective way to be recognised, talked about and made to look cool. This is where the Instagram advertising campaigns come into play. Who ever thought up this model of launching brands is a genius. It plays on all of our cultures desires to appear ‘cool’ online and also our love for aesthetically pleasing visuals. 

The first contact I had with one of these cyber brands was Triangl swimwear. An Australian model who is Insta famous with quite a few thousand followers had posted a photo of her new Triangl bathers with the brand tagged. Over the next few weeks many of my friends posted their own photos of their new Triangl bathers in the same manner. The Triangl swimwear Instagram account was filled with of Instagram celebrities –pretty girls who take lots of pretty selfies with and pretty clothes and pretty friends- wearing these bathers. None of their models (and there is a new one each day) were actual celebrities and you would never know who they were if you weren’t on Instagram and up to date with the latest Insta IT girls. Every few model picture they would upload a picture of a luxurious yacht in bright blue water, or a white sand beach with a hammock hanging from two palm trees. Obviously I started following them straight away! I mean who doesn’t wasn’t to look at pictures of a beautiful sunset over a beaches or your favourite Insta celebs! 

 Since then I have now seen Frank Body Scrub, Bondi Sands fake tan and many other sweep my insta feed, all using the same techniques. This phenomenon only takes place on Instagram as it is the only platform that’s sole focus on the visual can accommodate it.

Looking at someone’s Instagram can sum up the lives they want us to see with a rosy filter over the top of it but is it real? Are these companies taking advantage of societies –and particularly young teenagers- desire to appear cool and fashionable and up with the latest trends in our online presence?

All I know is that these companies are cunning social media users and that I desperately want my own Triangl bathing suit and Frank Body Scrub! 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Social media and media platforms help many causes, whether it is the plight of a man needing 1,000,000 likes on Facebook so his wife will let him build a man cave or simply a girl trying to get some fast cash by selling her unwanted clothes. However when social media first kicked off 10 years ago not many people would have guessed it would help the cause of hopeful politicians in their run for election.

Since Barack Obamas successful 2008 campaign for Presidency many other political figures have engaged social media as a useful tool for their own political campaigns. Obama used SMS, YouTube videos, a personal blog and Twitter to reach a wider and younger audience and used these platforms to start a conversation between Democrats and Republicans. It wasn’t even just official party sources that created interest in the campaign, many unofficial collaborations sparked viral viewings. Obama Girl being one of them. The need for entertainment as well as credibility in American politics found their way into Australia with the Kevin07 campaign. Comparing Rudd’s Twitter and Facebook with a variety of serious and entertaining posts to the Liberal oppositions boring run of the mill policy based posts it’s no wonder Rudd was elected in. Much like Obama he was something new and different from the same old, conservative men we had seen before, I mean he appeared on Rove Live!

As helpful as it can be, social media can also be detrimental if the wrong thing comes to light or goes viral. Tina Fey’s impersonation of Sarah Palin was the end any slight chance she still might have had of becoming Vice President. Even though she never actually said this Palin is known as saying “I can see Russia from my house” after Fey said it. In Australia hate pages on Facebook have been started for Tony Abbott and every slightly misogynist thing he says goes viral (as it should!). People living in the public eye are now scrutinised more than ever with every second person owning a video phone and recording everything you do. Celebrities, politicians and even ordinary people can gain negative or positive attention at any moment for one slip up or misread situation. Social media can also improve these situations though when the person in the spotlight can explain their side of the story bypassing mainstream media outlets and their possibly biased representations.

We can conclude that social media is not however, the be all and end all of political campaigning. Having suffered through 8 years of Bush madness and the fact that Obama was the first African American candidate definitely helped his cause! Social Media campaigning is a cost effective way of engaging a younger, wider audience but at the end of the day you won’t win an election based on the amount of likes and shares you receive on the internet! Although upon reflection Arnold Schwarzenegger did win California so maybe it helps?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Ideas

Reaching out and connecting to a wider audience is vital in political campaigns. If no one feels connected to you no one would vote for you. But nowadays politicians have the helpful tool that is the internet and through that they can connect to a much larger audience than ever before. Take Barrack Obama for instance; in 2008 I remember thinking that even I would vote for him and he wasn’t trying to win my state over.

Most young voters are a part of digital communities and networks and are easily influenced by what they see online on social media sites. They don’t turn to newspapers and traditional media outlets for their information, insteas they bypass them and  they look on Facebook and YouTube and what the ‘common man’ thinks. To engage young voters politicians are joining in the online world and participate. However there is a downside. The hate for Tony Abbot at the moment is only fuelled by more comments and likes and memes on Facebook by university students. And that’s the thing, as much as the politicians need to join the online game it comes with its risks because they can’t control the message they are sending.

Traditional media outlets allowed the journalists and the heads of the companies that own the newspapers and TV stations etc. to control what message was sent. However with social media where everybody can have an opinion there is little or no control over the content and message that is being received. This can damage a politicians carefully constructed image as photo being leaked of them in an unfortunate pose or a clip of them saying something stupid can go viral and quickly.