Sam McNamara

During the unit “Digital Communities” the topics have explored different social media platforms and how digital communities can provide both connectedness and autonomy, with the creation of new digital personal and group identities. Further the use of social media for political purposes has increased political participation, as well as affording activism at a grass roots level. 

This week’s readings explored the aspects of social gaming that apply to digital communities that reflect the benefits and harm reflecting the same interpersonal issues that arise in the ‘real world’. In the online gaming environment people interact, compete, socialise, conflicts arise, and experiences are gained and shared. Technical issues can be explored, teams formed, and the resulting loyalty that comes from this bonding can be highly lucrative to the companies developing the games (LinkedIn 2015).  

Some issues that have arisen within the virtual communities, such as the example of the online game EVE, based in Iceland, have led to regulation of certain egregious examples of conduct that may be allowed within the boundaries of the game, but are not acceptable outside of those boundaries: punitive action was taken against the offender.

The aspects of the topic that most interested me are how sophisticated the communities have become in that game rules that are set by developers are at times negotiated and changed by the gamers themselves, creating cultural norms that are unique within the game space (de Zwart & Humphreys 2014).

Massively multiplayer online games or MMOG “refers to video games that allow a large number of players to participate simultaneously over an internet connection. These games usually take place in a shared world that the gamer can access after purchasing or installing the game software" (techopedia 2015). In such games as EVE not only do players have a channel of communication with developers through which they can offer improvements or different directions in the game’s development, which benefits both the developer and the game’s players (which could be considered free labour). 

According to de Zwart and Humphries (2014), serious and potentially harmful behaviour has arisen from the game between players that make exploration of how the rules and the cultural norms that exist within the game (in the case of EVE aggression, cheating, even murder) become complex when they affect people outside of the game, namely in reality.  

An example is cited where this negotiation of acceptable behaviour the different roles gamers shift through from the real world, their role as perhaps a student, a son, a gym fanatic, to an online gamer (alluding to Goffman’s Frame Analysis). Usually this transition is not problematic, but when one powerful member playing EVE, made an online presentation that unscrupulously exposed the name of a vulnerable player, that may have encouraged self-harm, it was considered by the regulators that action should be taken, and the player involved was banned from the community. 

Laughing about ISIS atrocities? Entertainment or offensive ISIS propaganda?

Being particularly focused on how digital communities are relevant in the area of terrorism, an article published on 28 January 2016, in Britain's Daily Mail. was very troubling. 

A gamer had modified the popular game Arma 4 to recreate ISIS executions, uploading the videos of the modified game to YouTube, and describing the atrocities as 'hilarious'. The footage appeared to be from a first-person perspective with a sniper killing hostages and an Islamic State flag flashing continuously on the screen. This is an example of how the online behaviour of an individual within the boundaries of a game, can be considered a possible threat to real-world society. The question that I ask is although the gamer claims the videos as just parodies, is this acceptable behaviour and should it be under the jurisdiction of either domestic or international law?

References

de Zwart, M and Humphreys, S 2014, The Lawless Frontier of Deep Space, Code as Law in EVE Online, Cultural Studies Review, Vol.20(1), March 2014 pp.77-99

Techopedia 2015, Massively multiplayer online games, accessed online 1 February 2016, https://www.techopedia.com/definition/27054/massively-multiplayer-online-game-mmog

Images

LinkedIn 2015, The different types of digital communities, accessed online 1 February 2016,  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/different-types-digital-communities-earth-liew-wei-da-andrew?forceNoSplash=true

The focus of social media has shifted from the written to the pictorial modes of expression and identity construction: the use of visual modes of communication is increasingly used in both user-generated and professional contexts.  

Visual modes of communication - video, photographs, graphics - have been revolutionised in the digital age and the development of social media platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat, Tumblr, Flickr and the ubiquitous Facebook have shifted social media users focus from text to pictures. Where blogs turned into tweets, and business and personal communication turned to stunning visual design and photography to sell and communicate, the old maxim ‘a picture is worth a thousand words’ is very applicable to social media (Blackboard 2015).

The old family photo album has been cast up into the attic, with most people now, multiple times a day, reaching for their mobile device to check out the latest visual update, to get ideas, and immediately grasp news through visuals, from friends, family, celebrities, companies, bloggers, and a plethora of other social media users.  

Social media allows for immediate connection visually, and intimately connecting with one’s ‘networked communities’. ‘Networked visuality’, that ‘visual chit-chat’, changes the meaning, content and context of social media postings and “notions of cultural transmission, memory, remembering and forgetting are actively transmitted through perceived material worlds” (Blackboard 2015: Vivienne & Burgess 2013). Identities are shaped through how we construct ourselves through visual modes of expression, and our biographies are captured through those images.  Photographic expression and dissemination through social media is now as much about communicating ideas as recording a biographical and historical record (Lang 2009).

Self-portraits - the phenomena of the ‘Selfie”

No matter where one is, and alone or in company, the development of the forward facing mobile phone camera gave rise to the mania of the ‘selfie’. Immediately your image can be shared - even astronauts have go the urge to take selfies.

So what is the appeal, that can even lead to addiction, for people to take photographs of themselves, leaving an indelible digital mark on their social media history? According to recent research, the ‘selfie’ provides a channel to show others how we want to be seen.  With both ‘active online identities’ and ‘passive online identities’ With an active online identity, the social media user chooses what is presented ‘something about which you have control over’: conversely one’s passive online identity is that one which can be constructed by others posting comments and pictures about you, without the individual’s control (BBC 2013).

However, taking a selfie can be a dangerous, even fatal, activity.  According to the Daily Telegraph, in 2015 there were 12 reported deaths from ‘selfies’ making it more likely you would die taking a selfie than getting eaten by a shark (for which there were 8 recorded deaths!). In Russia a guide has been produced to prevent the increasing number of deaths by selfie.

References

BBC 2013, Self Portraits and Social Media: The Rise of the ‘selfie, accessed online 21 January 2016,  http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22511650

Blackboard 2015, Week 9, Visual Communities and Social Imaging, accessed online 15 January 2015, https://ilearn.swin.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-5190914-dt-content-rid-26655219_2/courses/2015-SO3-MDA20009-210404/UnitLearningMaterials/week-09.htm

Gurr, T, A picture is worth a thousand words, accessed online 21 January 2016, https://allthingslearning.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/a-picture-paints-a-thousand-words/

Lang, P 2009, Videos of Affinity on YouTube, The YouTube Reader, National Library of Stockholm,  http://onlineres.swin.edu.au.ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/99333066111.pdf

Limbu, M 2014, Emerging Pedagogies in the Networked Knowledge Society: Practices Integrating Social Media and Globalisation, accessed online 21 January 2016 https://books.google.com.au/books?id=b-iWBQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Daily Telegraph, More people have died by taking selfies this year than by shark attacks, accessed online 21 January 2016, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/11881900/More-people-have-died-by-taking-selfies-this-year-than-by-shark-attacks.html

Vivienne, S and Burgess, G 2013, The remediation of the personal photograph and the politics of self-representation in digital storytelling, Journal of Material Culture, SAGE

Walter, E 2015, The Rise of Visual Social Media, accessed online 21 January 2016, http://www.fastcompany.com/3000794/rise-visual-social-media

Images

BBC, The Dangerous art of the Ultimate Selfie, http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34466322

BBC, The First Selfie in outer space, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22511650

Managing Crisis with Visual content, https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi49sCb3NLKAhVkJKYKHYosBrYQjB0IBg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmelissaagnes.com%2Fmanaging-crises-visual-content%2F&psig=AFQjCNGCa5hcI_9q9_jdFsDucVgxt4U2Xg&ust=1454283916280601

The old adage “two hands are better than one” is as relevant today as it was in the 16th century when a writer, John Heywood, coined the phrase (The Phrase Finder 2015). 

The phenomenon of ‘Crowdsourcing’ works along the same lines as the phrase: a collective wisdom, financial funding,  or the efforts of a group of people as opposed to one person, can achieve far more, and often for free, than an individual mind, or wallet (Shepherd 2012).  User-generated contributions can be an innovative way to engage in an almost infinite resource of skills, intelligence, experience, and money.  

This week’s content focussed on the innovative use of technology-based tools, including social media, to enable delivery of information, calls for action, and various responses to crises (Blackboard, Week 8, 2015).

HELP - natural disaster and the ‘natural’ urge to help

During the 2011 Queensland floods and to a lesser extent, the 2009 “Black Saturday” bushfires in Victoria, emergency services and police harnessed the power of social media, and crowdsourcing, to gain real-time information from people at the scene, as well as inform the public.  According to Crikey (2011), given natural disasters generate a considerable amount of information, using both media reports and citizen accounts can enable a more effective emergency response.  Human instinct, as a rule, is to help (people and others): emergencies provide a catalyst for this response and Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms can provide tools to enable by, for example, using a simple hashtag # such as #qldfloods (Crikey 2011).

Collective Wisdom: are the masses ‘wising up’

Crowdsourcing is used to build information databases, such as Wikipedia, Linux, Yahoo!, and Answers. The massive connectivity of the Internet means that accessing cheap, vast sources of information can bring ‘diverse heuristic ideas’ to solve problems and build user-generated knowledge bases.  The appeal of contributing to a collective, democratic database resonates clearly with millions, given the success of crowdsourcing information systems (Rang Bar & Maheswaren 2014).

The ‘compelling benefits of crowdsourcing’, however, are not without challenges:

Novelty: The novelty of altruism is arguably being worn out: people now seek reward for contribution

Identity: The identity of participants cannot be verified - contributors previously rejected for content can reappear

Privacy issues of the content: who owns the ideas, the contributor or the collective?

Integrity of content: it is impossible for one individual to qualify the integrity of the content of the entire collective contribution, and it negates the concept to have an external arbiter

The Darker side of Crowdsourcing

More sinister uses of crowdsourcing are emerging.  The use of crowdsourcing to incite terrorist activities through social media experts involved with terror groups is being increasingly identified. Islamic State (IS) provided information and guidance for activities related to terrorism through the convergence of terrorism and cyber-threat. An example is the recent detainment of a Kosavar cyber-hacker who obtained personal contact details of 1300+ government officials from the US, UK and Australia, and passed to those details to IS.  The list was disseminated to ‘the crowd’ globally, with the presumed intention of committing terrorist acts against those people, including ‘lone wolf attacks’ (RT 2015).

References

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>

Crikey 2011, How Twitter is mapping the flood crisis, accessed online 17 January 2016, http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/01/12/how-twitter-is-mapping-the-flood-crisis-and-whether-you-can-trust-it/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

RT, 2015, ISIS is ‘crowdsourcing terrorism’, https://www.rt.com/usa/318984-isis-crowdsourcing-kosovo-list/

Rung Bar, A and Maheswaran 2014, ‘Confidentiality and Integrity in Crowdsourcing Systems’, SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-0217-3_1

Shepherd, H 2012, ‘Crowdsourcing’, Contexts, American Sociological Association, SAGE

In the previous weeks, the units explored the impact of social media and networked communities within the contexts of personal use, the increasingly employment of social media platforms for political campaigning, and activism and protest through digital means (Blackboard 2015). The unit moved to focussing on the contested concept of online interpersonal conflict and exploring further how we manage our identity socially online: ‘trolling’, cyber-bullying and recognising some positive opportunities exist to ‘help’ the bullies themselves whose intention is to expose and embarrass others through social media platforms (Wilken & McCosker 2014).

Bullying - Divergent Conceptions

According to danah boyd (2014, p.130), the concerns about teenage online conflicts and perceived public shaming and harassment have resulted in a ‘national obsession’ with cyber-bullying - interactions that are largely misconstrued by adults.  Boyd’s perspective is based on a definition of bullying drawn from the work of Dan Olweus that identifies three components that are required to meet the threshold of bullying

agresssion

repitition

imbalance of power

Personal accounts obtained from teenagers by boyd do not support that most online conflict contains the element of ‘imbalance of power’: rather the interactions are entered into wilfully and knowingly and are often initiated for ‘drama’ - “perfomative, interpersonal conflict that takes place in front of an active, engaged audience, often on social media” (boyd, 2014, p.138).

Given the absence of an imbalance of power, many examples of perceived cyber-bullying are no more than a form of entertainment, or a means to alleviate boredom.

This perspective can be contested. “Social Norms Theory” (Perkins and Berkowtitz, 1986), proposes that an individuals’ interpretation of social norms, “those beliefs about the attitudes and behaviours that are normal, acceptable, and even expected, in a particular social context” and that influence behaviour, can be misinterpreted to conceive that an attitude or behaviour is more common (or less common) than they perceive it to be: thereby the person engages with ‘false norms’ (Anti-Defamation League). In the social media context, such false norms can lead to someone to engage in behaviour - online rumours, cruel taunts, deliberately embarrassing someone - thinking that it is acceptable to their peers, with the intention of conforming to expectations, driving behaviour in engaging in cyber-bullying.  The perception can be that non-participation may lead to being ostracised from the group - and potentially become a victim themselves (Berkowitz 2015).

As a parent of teenager who is in the cohort of being susceptible to both being bully or victim, the changes in legislation that has recently been implemented is of particular interest.  One only needs to become aware of one tragic example of how cruel online persecution can lead to the death of a young person to be persuaded that perceived violation of civil liberties (i.e. freedom of speech) measured against regulation to prevent such behaviours, supports that a regulatory framework is justified (Begg 2015).

Text messages, Facebook posts - and tragedy

On Easter Saturday 2014, 19-year-old Jessica Cleland suicided having been cyber-bullied by two teenage boys “she considered friends”: she had no history of mental illness.  The Coroner’s finding stated that “although it is not possible to identify, with any degree of certainty, the factors contributing to a person’s decision to take their own life, it is evident that messages received by Jessica online proximate to her death ... were precipitating factors. I am satisfied that Faceboook and text messaging were problematic for Jessica: easy access to the Internet on her phone meant that she was exposed to potentially upsetting communications 24 hours a day: and she was able to return to, and re-read, the upsetting messages .. and ruminate about them” (The Drum 2015). Jessica’s Facebook account had been flooded with “horrible sentiments before she died” by the two boys, who had publicly stated that they hated her and that she was “a f**cking woos” and “useless” (Ford 2015: McNab 2015).

Under new legislation, the two boys in the Cleland case could be sentenced to 10 years in prison.  With the function of promoting online safety of children, The Office of the Children’s eSafety Commission provides education and resources for young people, parents, teachers, and anyone concerned about cyber-bullying stating the Commission’s vision “is to encourage behavioural change where Australian children and young people act responsibly online, just as they would offline to create an environment where cyberbullying behaviour is just unacceptable” (Office of the Children’s eSafety Commission 2015).

References

Begg, M 2015, ‘New cyber-bullying commissioner takes nanny state too far’, The Australian, freedomwatch.ipa.org.au/tag/childrens-e-safety-commissioner/

Berkowitz, A 2013, Social Norms Approach, Education Development Centre’s Higher Education Centre, www.ou.edu/judicial/pae/pdt/iv/b/IVBiiSocialNormingTheory.pdf

boyd, D 2014, ‘Bullying: is social media amplifying meanness and cruetly?’, It’s complicated: the social lives of networked teens, Yale University Press, New Haven

Blackboard 2015, Digital Communities, https://ilearn.swin.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-5190912-dt-content-rid-26655217_2/courses/2015-SO3-MDA20009-210404/UnitLearningMaterials/week-07.html

Throughout history, and regardless of political systems, activism on behalf of a cause has resulted in profound and enduring social and political change. The abolition of slavery, the Suffragettes fight for women’s right to vote, anti-war protests, anti animal cruelty campaigns, are but a few examples of historical social protests and collectivist mobilisation (Martin 2007).

In the corporate-dominated, commercial traditional media systems, democratic deficits were clear: the control of the media by the elite, with commercial and/or idealogical agendas made access to have a voice for the average citizen limited and constrained (Carroll & Hackett 2006).

In today’s world, digital activism has transformed the methods and motivations of digital citizens, enabling and facilitating the mobilisation of social movements (Mossberger, Tobert & McNeal 2008).  The ‘Arab Awakening’ is well cited as the transformational power of information technologies to share information, to ‘choreograph’ social movements and to offer ‘a sphere of public life in which ..  youth could reach beyond the control of older generations .. build links with transnational networks of advocates who provide a counter balance to state power” (Gerbaudo 2012, p.4; Youmans & York 2012, p316). However, the emancipation promised by the new technologies is viewed by some as another channel for state repression or facilitating ‘slacktivism’, according to the Oxford Dictionary

Slacktivism

“Actions performed via the Internet in support of a political or social cause but regarded as requiring little time or involvement, e.g. signing an online petition or joining a campaign group on a social media website” (Oxford Dictionary 2015)

Culture Jamming

American lecturer, essayist and cultural critic Mark Dery coined the phrase ‘Culture Jamming’ to describe a unique form of political communication employing strategies that “play with the branded images and icons of consumer culture to make consumers aware of surrounding problems and diverse cultural experiences that warrant their attention” (CCCE 2015). With practitioners of culture jamming considering that social values, culture and politics have been distorted by commercial and corporate sponsors, the use of ‘memes’ (”images that stimulate visual, verbal, musical, or behavioral associations that people can easily imitate and transmit to others”) the intention is to cause the viewer, or audience, to, even for a split second, consider how their consumerism is affecting global issues.  (Dery 2015; CCCE 2015). 

References

This week’s readings and unit focus shifted from the individual use of social media, and the platforms themselves, to the development of social media as a tool for political means and social activism.  We examined the notions of digital citizenship and the uses of social media, Twitter, YouTube, even Snapchat, as channels to reach the voting public.  However, social media does not always afford politicians, and those promoting political causes positive outcomes, but rather can reinforce pervading negative perceptions from uncontrolled sources.

With significant changes in the media landscape, revolutionary technical innovations, improvements in services and connectivity, a shift from political observation to political participation has, arguably, led to the true utopia of democracy. The shifting from elite-controlled mainstream media to information sources from news organisations, from the individual politicians themselves, to the ‘citizen journalist’ - you and me - who can have an equal share in influence and input in political discussions (AEC 2015).  

Tech-savvy ‘pollies’ have to be aware of damage in everyday interactions due to the immediacy and accessibility of expression that social media platforms afford. A case in point is the Facebook post by an Australian make-up artist who, after ‘working on’ Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott as they prepared for a ‘People’s Forum’ during the 2013 Australian electoral campaign was clearly unimpressed with one of the candidates (Kissane 2015):

According to research, 66% of social media users have engaged in political activities online including ‘liking’ posts with political content, using their own accounts to encourage voting in elections or for political causes and following political candidates (Pew Research Centre 2015). Reportedly since the 2014 mid-term elections in the United States, 16% of voters have followed candidates online (Brousel 2015).

Social media has also facilitated political parody and amateur political commentary as this Jimmy Kimmel Live YouTube clip, “Donald Trump’s newest ad campaign” demonstrates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ep53vIAV9c

The jury is out as to the true benefits of the affordances in the political arena that the digital age has afforded: there is no doubt however that social media is increasingly a tool used for campaigning and activism and is available to 46.4% of the world’s population, it is undoubtedly a part of every political individual, or entities, media agenda and requires careful and considered management of social media exposure.

References