My thoughts about the class, from Bella

Original post can be found here.

I felt that this class was a great class. There were times I'd get worked up and I think all of us did when it came to some topics. However, I think that it was great that we were able to discuss so freely and pose arguments as a group. Going into the class, I initally did not know what I was getting into. I knew the title of the class was something about smart mobs, but first coming to mind is ooh mobs like Italian mobs (LOL). I feel that I got a lot out of the class. As we learned new things and read many articles, I got a better understanding of our society and culture today. I never knew about 2nd life, virtual communities, or anything like that. I had never seen the Colbert show before this class either, which may sound ridiculous, but now I have seen it and I think it is hilarious! This class actually made me feel sheltered from our culture today, but I have gained a lot from the class. It has allowed me to be more open-minded toward the internet and its positive uses instead of only focusing on the negative uses of the internet. I initially was getting frustrated with the blogging assignments, because I was not doing as well as I'd like. In the end I was getting the hang of the blogging and writing tactics! This class was not only eye-opening, but it was interesting. It was also fun to be able to get on 2nd Life and watch clips, such as The Colbert Show or from youtube! Overall, great class! :)

Extra blog, from smelly1786

Original post can be found here.

This blog is basically to rant and rave a bit. When I first signed up for this class I had a completely different perspective about online communities and virtual worlds. However, since taking this class my mind has been opened to a whole new world I didn't even know existed. I'm really excited I decided to take this class because I enjoy learning new things and especially about things I don't fully understand.
However, we have gotten into virtual worlds more in depth than I thought we would and I have discovered that I'm a bit shy about how I feel. I think the fact that we've been learning about the negative side (and obviously the positive side) of virtual worlds, I just can't seem to understand why people are apart of these online communities/worlds. I don't want to offend anyone but it is still hard for me to understand why and how someone would enjoy this. But, after Burcu got back from the convention this weekend, she seemed really happy and content about meeting up with her virtual friends which made me ask myself, "Am I missing out on something I've convinced myself to be so against?" After Burcu made a few comments my opinion kind of shifted once again. Now, I understand a little more why someone creates a friendship with someone online in a virtual world or on LambdaMOO or something and then wants/gets the opportunity to meet them in person. It just made me rethink why I'm so against these virtual worlds and I think I've come to the conclusion that I don't think I'm against them as much anymore. This is really exciting to me but disappointing that I've discovered this so late in the semester.
I know we're going to write a paper about what we liked about the class but I figured I could write about it a bit now. I think that in the future the students who take this class should be assigned to create an avatar on Second Life and instead of writing blogs they can participate in Second Life. This way they will understand what goes on in this world instead of just reading about it. The schedule would probably have to be changed around but I think this would be good for them and they can communicate with one another better (in this case, maybe this could take the place of Twitter). Anyway, I just wanted to rant about SecondLife and how I have changed my perception and am now more open about it. Class discussion will be different now :)

Neil Postman's "Reach Out and Elect Someone" - Hillary Clinton New Hampshire Primary

I enjoyed reading the latest chapter from Postman entitled “Reach Out and Elect Someone.” The chapter discusses how politics is just like show business in that the main part of a candidates job while running for office is to APPEAR as if they are honest, respectable and hard working through various forms of media such as commercials. According to Postman, “we are inclined to vote for those whose personality, family life, and style are the most favorable among the candidates." I agree with his opinion in that politicians spend a lot of their during campaigns trying to APPEAR to the country that they are well rounded, like to have fun, but also know how to get the job done.

I feel that there are many people out there that know squat about politics but choose to vote based on the values of the candidates seen in the media. For example, I remember hearing a few months ago that Hillary Clinton cried in public showing her compassion for the nation. Immediately following this event, there was mass speculation on several news circuits granting Hillary a victory in gaining more voters just because of her response. This is because Hillary showed that she is human, thus improving her image.

Also, in April, Hillary continued to show how "cool" she is by appearing in college towns and taking shots of whiskey and chugging beers. She is doing this to change her image to make her look cool and hip so people will vote for her. This applies to Postman’s idea (mentioned above) because people who witnessed these events are beginning to sense that she is an empathetic, strong woman who cares about the nation. They are also showing that she is human in that she likes to drink and have a good time. Every leader needs to be able to sit back and enjoy life sometimes.

Julian Dibbell's "A Rape in Cyberspace" - Juicy Campus

Our latest reading entitled “A Rape in Cyberspace” by Julian Dibbell was very interesting. The chapter retells the story of Mr. Bungle committing online sexual harassment to two LambdaMOO characters and the issues that arose from the incident. On page 380, we hear legbda’s (one of the raped characters) reaction to the incident. She says, “I tend to think that restrictive measures around here cause more trouble than they prevent” and suggests that Mr. Bungle become “virtually castrated.” In other words, she wants Mr. Bungle’s character destroyed and wiped from the community. She feels his punishment should be to never show his (virtual) face in the online LambdaMOO community ever again.
One question that can be derived from her reaction is: does someone who “virtually” harasses someone in an online community deserve to be banned from that online community? In my opinion, free speech online is free speech. If legba was offended by Mr. Bungle, she should block his comments or just log off when he tries to contact her. For example, the website JuicyCampus.com is becoming increasingly popular among college campuses across America. The website is totally anonymous and encourages enormous amounts of bashing and gossiping.

To learn more about the website, check out this CBS News report about JuicyCampus: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/26/scitech/pcanswer/main3968514.shtml

If someone was gossiping or bashing me on that website, I merely would stop reading the comments because what I don’t read will not bother me. This is how legba should react to Mr. Bungle’s virtual remarks. Because there is such a thing as free speech in this country, it is hard to punish the person writing the criticizing statement on the web. Sometimes it just pays to be the better person and walk away from incident with maturity. There are hundreds of derogatory posts on JuicyCampus written about people that are even harsher than what Mr. Bungle expressed in LambdaMOO. I bet if people didn’t make such a federal case about the “raping”, the whole community would have quickly moved on. The problem here was that the “rape” victims were too enveloped in LambdaMOO that their reactions and emotions got the best of them.

Another point to bring up here is that if people just ignore that they are getting "raped" or bashed online, the act still continues, however they are just ignorant of it. Everyone else can still read what people say about you on JuicyCampus and remind you of it later. Therefore, there is only so much ignoring can do. Also, it is important to mention that free speech isn't 100% granted. There are some limits such as libel and slander. You can be sued for making up false claims and accusations. Perhaps, JuicyCampus will create outrage in the future that many petitions will form and get it shut down. There has to be a way to prove that the website is unethical and at some points can cross the line of free speech.

"Reach Out and Elect Someone" revisited

In “Reach Out and Elect Someone,” Neil Postman says that in the United States, “the fundamental metaphor for political discourse is the television commercial (126). He says that TV commercials have “profoundly influenced American habits of thought (126). “The television commercial has been the chief instrument in creating the modern methods of presenting political ideas” (129). And last, “…the television commercial is the single most voluminous form of public communication in our society” (130).

All of these are very good points and are probably true. But on page of 126 of his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, he goes as far as saying that we can like or dislike a TV commercial, but we “cannot refute it.” Well I can’t blame him because he published this book in 1986. Times have significantly changed, however. In the 21st century, the Internet is beginning to dominate, or at least it is closing in on becoming the dominate mass media technology.

The reason I bring all this up is that everything Postman said about television was once right, and some of it probably still is. A few years from now, however, surely the Internet will stand for everything that the television once did. As I write this, the Internet is currently leaving its mark on the 2008 election campaign. In his book, The First Campaign: Globalization, the Web, and the Race for the White House, Garrett Graff does a nice job putting some of this in perspective:

“No longer can they just put a thirty-second ad on television and be assured that everyone watching TV will see it. Instead, they recognize that online, no one has to watch anything, listen to anything, or read anything that doesn’t grab their attention. The campaigns are competing for eyeballs, and that means they have to step up their efforts” (251).

At one time, campaigners could put up an advertisement on television and expect most of the country to see it. That would mean airing an ad on the big three: NBC, ABC, and CBS. Now, however, not only are more and more people choosing the Internet over TV, but those who watch a lot of television are no longer bound to just the network stations. I read somewhere that for his re-election campaign, George W. Bush ran ads on ESPN, the Speed Channel (to reach NASCAR audiences, I guess), and a third cable station which has slipped my mind. He knew that he had to change his approach in reaching the general public.

With the extremely high dollar amounts of 30-second TV ads, many campaigns might find it more beneficial to use the Internet and say everything they feel they need to say, although that doesn’t always work. “…there are no longer the time constraints of television advertising, but instead of buying one’s attention—which is no longer as easy with the expansion to cable and satellite TV—one must earn it online (266).

Bottom line, times have changed and are changing and the television commercial isn’t once what it was. The internet is taking over Mr. Postman.

Everquest 2? Avatars? Attractiveness?

In one of my classes, T317- Children in the Media our teacher decided to give us extra credit if we agreed to participate in our AI’s research study. Desperately needing the extra points I decided to participate along with everyone else in the class. So our AI began his research study by passing out 3 papers that were stapled together. The first couple of questions we could answer on our own which were focused on attractiveness. We were to rate our answers on a scale from 1 to 10, 1 being the least attractive and 10 being the most attractive. We were first asked to rate ourselves and then rate how attractive we think society is around us. At this point we were still not told anything about the study, just simply told to answer the first few questions.

Then there were 2 more questions with yes or no answers where the questions centered around video games and computer games. They asked if we were knowledgeable on the subject of Second Life and the game Everquest 2.

After we answered those questions our AI told us that we would be shown some images of avatars and we were to do the same rating as before, 1 for how unattractive they were to 10 being very attractive. He didn’t explain to us what avatars were. If I had not taken C151- Intro to Pop Culture I would have been just as clueless as everyone else in the room. Fortunately I do know a little bit about Second Life and avatars therefore I knew what to expect from the images. As the first image popped up the room filled with laughter. The avatar was a large coyote looking person with large red eyes, wings, and armor protecting his body. No one was expecting this image and no one knew anything about it. The next image was just as unusual, an over sized toad with over sized hands holding weapons. There were 24 images of avatars that either had wings, were holding weapons, or had some type of armor protecting their body. After all 24 avatars had been shown and rated our AI had us turn in our papers and didn’t say anything else concerning the study, that was it.

Being familiar with avatars, Second Life, and knowing a little bit about War of the Worlds I understood what the characters were and why they looked so deformed. I could also tell that no one else in the class understood anything that was going on. I think our AI took the wrong approach by not explaining anything about the game Everquest 2 or even what avatars are. He just seemed to throw this study at us and not explain anything about it. After doing a little research I found out that the virtual game Everquest 2 involves combat fighting, hence the avatars armor. This was never explained to us. People didn’t know that there was a reason that these avatars were dressed a certain way, or why their deformities are a part of the game, they were just suppose to either know it or not question it. People also in the class didn’t know anything about avatars making the study, in my opinion, pretty pointless. Why have people rate of all things attractiveness on characters that they know nothing about? What kind of research is that? I think if he would have explained a little bit more either about the game or the design of avatars his study would have been a little more beneficial and people would have been more educated on the subject. I also think after the research answers were collected he could have explained why he chose to rate these avatars on a scale of attractiveness. I left the study full of questions but in actuality I was probably one of the most knowledgeable students concerning the subject topic.
What’s up with that?

Invasion of public space?

This week’s readings focused on Friendster, Facebook, and Myspace. “Identity Production in a Networked Culture: Why Youth Heart MySpace” describes reasons why young teenagers are attracted to Facebook, Friendster, Myspace, etc. One reason which I can relate to is because people who do not have cars or the ability to meet up with each other can hang out through the use of these programs. In addition, many teenagers lack uncontrolled space. This is because society today is much worse and it is unsafe to hang out in the woods or at certain locations without adult supervision. Thus, teenagers are expected by their parents to go home after school or to hang out at friend’s houses. In addition, teenagers who are involved in out of school activities, are still in controlled spaces in those activities because adults supervise and run these activities. So teenagers are in controlled, supervised settings all day in school, after school at their structured activities, and when they get home. Due to the majority of their time being spent in controlled settings, they don’t have time to just hang out with friends in unstructured, settings and places. This is why they use virtual, digital technologies to “hang out” in a setting similar to an unstructured private or public place, when they are in their controlled space at home. Teenagers use instant messaging to “hang out with friends” through a form of a private space, and Myspace and Facebook to “hang out with friends” through a form of a public space.

I used to use instant messaging a lot in middle school and in high school. I used to go to school from 8:15 until 2:55, and then would have either tennis, basketball, or softball practice (depending on the season) from 3:15-5:30. After these sport activities, I would go home, and then go back to school many times at night for different club meetings. Whether I was in school, under teacher’s control, at my sport practices, under my coach’s control, at home, under my parents control, or at club meeting, under teacher’s control, I didn’t have the ability to hang out with friends under uncontrolled settings during the weekdays. This is why at night, I would be able to talk to friends through instant message. We were able to talk about absolutely anything under our own privacy. It was as if we were hanging out. In high school I created MySpace and used this as a way to interact with my friends through a public place, posting pictures, comments, bulletins, etc. Later on, I stopped using my MySpace and created a Facebook, which I used for the same purpose.

My Uncle from California told me how he just reconnected with a distant cousin recently and went out for dinner with him in New York. I had never met his cousin before. However, two weeks ago I got a friend request from this cousin. I wasn’t sure if I should accept or deny the request. I didn’t want to be rude by denying it, or for him to think that I was trying to hide bad things on my Facebook by not accepting his friend request. I felt like my privacy would be invaded if I were to accept him as my friend. I have pictures of myself partying with friends and drinking. My parents know I drink. However, I don’t know this distant cousin and am not comfortable with him seeing pictures of me and my friends partying, seeing my wall posts, my information, or anything about my social life.

Facebook is my own public space for me and my friends to interact. It is not a space to interact with adults. I am in controlled settings in classes and when I am home. I use Facebook to interact freely with my friends, without having to worry about doing something that adults would not approve of. If that were the case, my Facbeook profile would be different. It wouldn’t be a true depiction of my identity or personality. It would be molded to be accepted by my family members, or authority.An article I found on The Boston Globe, describes how now employees, parents, and teachers are creating Facbeook accounts. When students get friend requests from their teachers or parents, or people get friend requests from their employers, they run into uncertainty as to whether they should accept or deny the friend request. Some feel like they have to accept it so they don’t create an awkwardness between the person pending the friend request. This is the same situation I was faced in when my distant cousin requested me as a friend on Facebook. However, I ultimately decided to deny the friend request. I may feel uneasy if I meet this cousin because I am not sure how he reacted to me denying his friend request. Sue Murphy, a manger in a National Human Resource Association trade group has a solution to avoid this problem and uncertainty that people encounter when faced with this situation. This problem is to create two Facebook accounts, one for socializing purposes and one for professional purposes. This is a good idea and is a win-win situation. Through one Facebook account, people can connect and interact with their friends freely, and through the other, they can connect with employers, employees, teachers, authority, etc.