A reflective moment....

I am still undecided on whether I loved or hated the blog tutorials. I must say that before we started them, I had thought that blog tutorial weeks would be like weeks off, in a way, as we didn't have to stick around uni, and could spend abit of time just typing up some thoughts on the topic/ readings. I though that this would be easy, as I spend alot of time on the internet during the week. However, I found that in reality, alot more work goes into preparing your post. In the end rather than having a tutorial discussion which branches off onto lots of different paths, covers lots of ground and which is over in an hour, you are faced with a blank page and a keyboard. I find that with these posts people (me included) put in alot more effort to sound more....I guess you could say 'scholarly'. There are no colloquialisms, and the discourse is alot less conversational- there is alot less room for discussions to become heated and interesting.
I must say that it was quite a relief to return to the offline classroom after the online weeks.

Nonetheless, there is alot of space for those who aren't loud and confident in class to express their opinions. I found it good in the way that an idea can be developed in an online situation- in class lots of good ideas and points can be cut short, with people cutting in with other points, and only one idea at a time can be extended and developed, as in tutorials only one person is really supposed to talk at once. On the internet, however, thre is opportunity for each individual to develop and extend ideas and thoughts, which is beneficial to the whole class.


Am I a cyborg? Yes. I would go into detail here, but the answer is a definite yes. I think the internet is amazing, and love the way it lets me explore the world, explore other people's minds, find (and purchase) (and sell) weird and wonderful things etc. etc. etc.


This unit overall has been really great and really relevent to modern life.


Have fun with exams everyone ! x

Reflection

I found using blogging to be a really convenient idea, not least because the asynchronous nature of posting means that late posts aren’t such a disaster! Of course, the time flexibility eliminated the hassle of hanging around for in-class tutorials and also allowed you to mull over ideas. I also found myself typing more, firstly because there was a requirement to post every week, and also because it didn’t involve ‘butting in’ in fiery tutorial discussions (something I’ve never been particularly good at)!

At the moment, I would have to agree that I am a cyborg because of my reliance on technology. This unit taught me that the cyborg experience can be positive, and give us new ways of perceiving the world. Despite this, I would still like to believe that being a cyborg is a matter of choice, and that I could go back to being simply ‘human’ – whatever that involves!

The best thing about the unit is that it complemented the communications units. Looking at the same themes from a cultural studies perspective was definitely enriching, as was the use of web-based resources. Overall, the unit felt like it would not lose its relevance any time soon. (And I’ve also learnt that my blog posts have a tendency to turn into novels!)

Thanks everyone!

Week 12's Reflective Post

I think I'm a more real-world person, at least when it comes to classes. Haha. Having our tutes on the web, I somehow kinda always forgot that I had to come post something instead of reading and reading.. And when I did type something out it didn't feel natural - it was almost like I was making a submission of an assignment. When you discuss it in words it feels like your opinion is judged more, that kinda thing? Compared to during a verbal discussion. And I guess that's whats put me off from discussions here a lil bit. I'm not quite sure who else here is in their first sem of uni as well - everyone's seemed to be really confident speakers/opinion-makers, but (confession here!) I've found it tough to follow the train of thought for alot of the topics in this unit and process the gibberish in my head into proper words for speaking. :/ But yea, have kinda enjoyed it all along with everyone's insights and sharings, it's been pretty eye-opening. Thanks everyone! From here, I realize there's a whole new level of online interaction out there, and it's something I have to try and get into.

Anyway, we were just talked about how virtual world is seemingly becoming real-life, and I picked up 2 articles today on that: a woman going to jail for 'killing' her virtual husband, and youths being publicly punished for stealing virtual items. lol now fancy that.

cyborg cheers to all. (:
good luck for the exams!

Reflective Post - Week 12.

I really enjoyed the use of weblogs for this unit. In fact I would say it was my favourite part! Apart from the convenience of it, it was interesting to watch a weekly tutorial function in a web environment. It was especially useful during my week for presentation as I was able to post my reading quite early and then monitor comments and discuss throughout the week. Perhaps the greatest advantage was being able to gain insight into the thoughts of everyone in the tutorial, not just those people who are confident speakers. This style forced ALL members to contribute so I believe discussion was more diverse. I am definitely a cyborg more then ever before! I think nowadays it is so much easier to absorb technology and register it into our lives so to me this is like the next level of web interaction and has given me insight into how I can represent myself through an online opinion.

Thanks for a great semester!

Rebekah.

Week 10: The Virtual Community

“The richness and vitality of computer-linked cultures is attractive, even addictive”.

A quote from Howard Rheingold’s The Virtual Community, that quite aptly I found, summed up this reading for me. Rheingold talked about his experience of participating in the online community of WELL (Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link), and how he’s seen it grow from a community of barely a few hundred members in 1985, to more than 8 thousand in 1993. He talks about the way virtual communities have become a part of his life, how it’s put him in touch with people from all over the world, and how the virtual world has transcended into real life for him. Stating how “people in virtual communities do just about everything people do in real life, but ‘they’ leave their bodies behind”, Rheingold goes on to discusses society’s uses for virtual communities and why it has become such a phenomenal part of society.

Some discussion points:

In the reading, Rheingold came across as somewhat of an addict to his virtual communities to me. He mentions how he can spend all day at his computer and his family has gotten so used to it, it’s even normal for him to be laughing and swearing at his computer as if he were talking and relating to an actual person in the room. He seems to be more towards, in his words, “living a life that does not exist outside a computer”.

As virtual communities expand and more people become drawn to them, does it have a negative impact on society? For example, are people cutting away that real space and real-life touch of human relation, and turning it all virtual?

Rheingold made me think of how in offices these days, colleagues sitting next to each other don’t open their mouths to speak, but instead sent an msn instant message and say “Lunch time, let’s go!”. Has it gotten to a point where virtual reality beats human communication, human real life relations?

On the other hand, does communicating via virtual communities honestly help you, and is it exactly the same as communication in real life?

A good example of this point would be this unit’s blog. Being virtual gives you the opportunity to be the person you want to be, the opportunity to think before you speak. In class we might have had the fear of speaking up in case we said something out of context, or get laughed at, or had simply feared being shot down by another classmate or the teacher. This illustrates Rheingold’s idea of virtual communities changing our experiences in the real world; we become more articulate and confident of our views and opinions through this veil known as cyberspace.

Works the same for guys trying to chat up girls I guess. Though I don’t actually have evidence per se, I’d say it’d be easier for a guy to approach a girl online and strike up conversation – where he can plan his right words with his possie of friends and gather the confidence he needs slowly – than if it was in real life. Virtual and real life – sets quite a different stage.

What are your own experiences with virtual communities, and do you think virtual communities are positive or negative upon our society?

I find Livejournal to be a great site for communities that flourish. Like how Rheingold described finding WELL to be like “discovering a cozy little world that had been flourishing without me, hideen within the walls of my house”; so I felt the same when I first joined Livejournal. I was part of a shopping/trading community based in Singapore – I actually recognized or knew some of the people I met online here. I was part of a music-sharing community, they were as good as having Limewire; every music need I had, they provided. I enjoyed the pockets of people who all shared the same interests as me; it was like having instant friends!

I believe virtual communities are positive; they can exist in correlation with real life communities. It shouldn’t be a case though, of real life communities diminishing while virtual ones increase. I agree with what Rheingold said about there being a “hunger for community” in people, but disagree on the stance that more and more informal public spaces are disappearing from our lives. There are shopping communities out there, people who’d exchange movies or programmes with you out there. We just need to be out there looking for these public spaces, not cooped up in front of our computers all the time. It’s something easier said than done at this time and age, I know... convenience and wariness make it hard to do so I’d guess. But I don’t think that it’s impossible. People can and should learn how to converse naturally again.

Week 10: Why Youth ♥ Social Network Sites

I found Danah Boyd’s article to accurately cover many important issues surrounding a relatively new social phenomena- social networking (MySpace, in particular) Boyd begins by discussing the logistics of the MySpace profile page- a user’s personal homepage which includes pictures, lists of interests, friends and comments. She notes how friend lists allow users to surf from “Friend to Friend to Friend” (p6) in an endless network, which she says can become both a source of entertainment and motivation for social voyeurism.

The issue of online visibility really alarmed me and got me thinking. Boyd says, of MySpace: “friends are publicly articulated, profiles are publicly viewed, and comments are publicly visible” (p7) The article describes how what would have previously been private messages written between two friends (such as “I’ll meet you at the movies at 7”) are instead written in a public space- as a publicly viewable “comment” on MySpace (or alternatively-a “testimonial” on Friendster or a “wall post” on Facebook)

It makes me wonder what our motivation is behind such actions? There are private messaging facilities available on all social networking sites, yet users still choose to post messages of a personal nature in a public space.

What are your thoughts on this?

An important part of the article is that in which Boyd discusses the difficulty involved in defining “public”. She talks about how “the public” can be read as synonymous with the “audience.” but she is careful to point out that there is not “the public” (one public). There are multiple publics, separated by social contexts, so we must talk about “A public”. (p7) The public on MySpace is what Boyd defines as a networked public because its members are bound together by technological networks (p8) Boyd also notes that a networked public is actually a type of mediated public.

Networked publics are special because of four properties…persistence, searchability, replicability and invisible audiences (where the infinitival nature of the audience means that we can cannot know WHO might come across our expressions in a networked public space) (p9) There are no geographical /temporal constraints on networked publics (p9)

I found it important that Boyd pointed out the fact that MySpace is primarily used to strengthen, enhance and maintain social action between already existing friendships. Boyd describes in detail the steps a teenager typically takes when joining MySpace. She talks about how the creation of an online identity is a highly important and premeditated step to take. Boyd notes that more often than not, a newcomer to MySpace will first examine friends, and friends of friends’ profiles, to work out the social conventions of online identity (i.e. what is acceptable/unacceptable, what is cool/uncool) Profiles can then be created and manipulated in order to create an online self.

A central idea which Boyd revisits throughout the article is that of impression management- the way in which people use “contextual cues from the environment around them” to gain an understanding of which behaviour is and isn’t appropriate. She notes this process as vital to socialization into society, and is in no way limited to the offline sector, it is also highly applicable to the building of a “digital body” or identity. (p12)

Boyd discusses how on MySpace, friends are connections, and a friend network displays these connections to everyone for scrutiny. “ For better or worse, people judge others based on their associations” (p13). The article describes dramas that are common amongst teens which emerge out of the “Top Friends” feature. I think it is important to note that online and offline are inherently and inseparably linked. Online actions can translate into real life fights/dramas.

Finally, the article had a strong focus on privacy, which is necessary in a discussion of teenagers online. However, I found Boyd’s take on privacy problematic. In my opinion, it seemed to be based too much on the child/parent privacy issues, and gloss over the child/predator privacy issues.

In her conclusion, Boyd makes the point that parents, as adults, must allow teenagers to “ make mistakes and learn from them” in public life (and in a networked public)(p22) Of course I understand that Boyd is suggesting a supportive parenting approach rather than a restrictive one, but I must confess that in my opinion, online mistakes and offline mistakes are very different things. And as social networking is a fairly new social phenomena, a lot of these “mistakes” are ones which teenagers and adults alike are not fully prepared to handle. I don’t disagree with Boyd’s conclusion, but I find her manner of brushing over the seriousness of the issue of online bullying, child predators etc slightly difficult to swallow.

Any other opinions on this?

Overall, I really enjoyed reading this article in depth :)

A further question to consider from the reading: What is consumerism’s relationship to angency in online participation on social networking sites? (adapted from p5)

All quotations etc taken from:

Boyd, Danah. (2007) " Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life." MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning- Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Week 10: Theres No Place Like Myspace…..

So, just separately from my core post, I thought it would be interesting to test out Danah Boyd’s theory that

“ In essence, MySpace is the civil society of teenage culture: whether one is for it or against it, everyone knows the site and has an opinion about it” (Why Youth ♥ Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life, p3)

As most of us were highschool/teenage aged when MySpace was released, I wanted to test this, and find out whether, in fact, everyone knew of/ had an opinion about the site. Furthermore, I thought it would be interesting to find out which of Danah’s categories of MySpace users/non-users did you (or do you) fit into if any ….

1. MySpace teen

- those who sign up, create an online body/virtual identity and participate in a network public

2. Disenfranchised teen

-those who don’t have a MySpace Account because of lack of internet access

- those who don’t have a MySpace Account because the only internet access available is at school/public places where social networking sites are off limits

- those who are banned from the site by parents/guardians

3. Conscientious objector

- those who refuse to sign up in a protest against the corporate ownership of MySpace

-those who respect or agree with the moral/safety concerns of parents

-those who either feel not cool enough (maginalized teens) or too cool for these sites (Boyd,p3)

I will answer my own question by saying that in highschool, I was definitely a MySpace lover/addict (but have long since abandoned it for the new social networking mecca-Facebook) In parts of the reading I cringed a little, for it reminded me of my former self !

Have some fun, I would especially like to hear from those who fit into category C :)

Boyd, Danah. (2007) " Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life." MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning- Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (ed. David Buckingham). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Week 10 - A Rape in Cyberspace.

The virtual community of LambdaMOO has an intense reaction to the cyber-rape of several characters by Mr Bungle. Although this story seems to unfold in a world far from ours in the reading A Rape in Cyberspace by Julian Dibbell, I found the links to the real life or ‘RL’ eerie and disturbingly close to home. Although the rape only happened to two characters, the emotional and ethical repercussions begin to concern the majority of the cyber community of LambdaMOO. Amongst the outrage, there are also several groups willing to let the matter slide in order to preserve the freedom of cyber communities. A freedom which is censored within RL. Dibbell says the rape is “Ludicrously excessive by RL’s lights, woefully understated by VR’s.”(p203) which shows the exact reason for our hesitance towards such on-line crimes. This is where the gap between the real world and cyber clash within the undefined structure of technological existences and intermingling.

Dibbell highlights the effects that cyber culture has on its real life participants. Legba, a participant of LambdaMOO cried at her computer as she posted her reaction to her cyber rape, calling for “Virtual castration”(p203). When discussion arises as to what punishment should be handed down to Mr Bungle, it comes about due to the fact that cyberspace and real life cannot be separated. Without even realising it, our ideas about cultural ethics cross into our social environments on the web. The link between both is together a blessing and a curse. It allows us to perhaps use our cyber culture as a tool to enhance our real life experiences whilst simultaneously creating the same rules in cyberspace that hinder our ultimate freedom in the real world. The gap between the virtual and the real is the critical problem we face when blogging, facebooking or walking within these online communities. Do we resolve tensions through applying the same rules we have in the real world?

It is also important to note through Dibbell’s reading that although “LambdaMOO has never been the same since…nothing’s really changed”(p210). Many issues can be raised from ‘The Bungle Affair’ such as the intensity at which issues online are raised and then evaporate. It is also interesting to note that even though Mr Bungle was ‘toaded’, he was still able to return as another character, rendering the online judicial system somewhat of a farce really. The threat of the rape is still ultimately there, yet virtual time, and perhaps the virtual community, has healed and learnt so fast that blocks have been put in place to prevent it happening again. Viewing this from afar, we could say that perhaps the community system in cyberspace is more effective then a judicial system setup like in RL.

The cyber community of LambdaMOO, unlike the real world, is segregated over the rape. There are many justifications, approaches and arguments from groups such as the ‘technolibertarians’, royalists, parliamentarian legalists, anarchists and even a strong female participant response over how to deal with the rape whilst maintaining the freedoms of cyber space. Which group would you belong to and why? Do you think that actions performed online, such as the cyber-rape, should be punished or is it simply a consequence of the freedoms of cyber culture?

Week Nine: Pranking Rhetoric

Culture jamming, according to Harold, is ‘an artful proliferation of messages…which challenges the ability of corporate discourses to make meaning in predictable ways.’ However, Harold distinguishes between parody and pranking.

Pranking, Harold’s preferred method, can be viewed as the adornment and folding of texts. The goal is not to create a new meaning, but to challenge the idea of meaning itself. A good example of this is the Biotic Baking Brigade, which threw pies into faces of famous people it considered to be promoting questionable values (such as capitalism). The act in itself did little to challenge norms, other than that of authority.

In contrast, parody aims to change things in the name of a presupposed value. A successful example would be Adbusters' 2003 campaign to sell the ‘ethical’ Blackspot sneaker as an alternative to Nike. Here, Adbusters drew on the presupposed value of fair labour to challenge Nike’s use of sweatshops. Parody can also be successful in ‘rebranding’ products. Brands aim to associate themselves with concepts: for Nike, these may be freedom, or discipline. Instead, Adbusters attempted to associate the Nike brand with unfair labour.

Harold criticises parody because it fails to challenge the hierarchy of language and all its binaries. However, I believe that this is a positive thing. All texts and authors (including culture jammers) are socially, economically and politically situated and thus have their own biases. Trying to pretend otherwise would be counter-productive. Presenting parody against corporate advertising, I believe, allows the audience to arrive at their own ‘truth.’ This works in a manner similar to our adversarial court system. Hearing binary arguments does not prevent the reader from choosing a middle ground.

Like advertisements, subvertisements rely on existing norms and values. The fashion industry associated the norm of beauty with its models and clothes. Retaliating, subvertisements used commercial rhetoric to associate the industry with unhealthy choices. Adbusters featured a model vomiting into a toilet. Recently, Dove launched its Campaign for Real Beauty, appropriating the norm of natural beauty from subvertisements in order to sell its beauty products. Should the norms of the advertisement be celebrated, or is it even more dangerous than other commercial advertisements? Unlike pranking, parody is open to challenge.

Another example of parody moving into the mainstream was ABC TV’s Gruen Transfer, which dissected various advertisements. It aired subvertisements (such as anti-tourism) and encouraged critical engagement with culture and advertising. For example, in ‘Consumer’s Revenge,’ users are invited to mix their own advertisements.

Do you believe that parody or pranking is the more successful method?
Does the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty make you uncomfortable, in that it is ‘hijacking’ parody for commercial purposes?
Can culture jamming make a real difference?

WEEK 9: CONSUMPTION AND DIGITAL COMMODITIES IN THE EVERYDAY

Hi everyone. This is the discussion for next week but I have a triathlon training course this weekend that runs through to Monday so I will not be able to post on the Monday. This is why I am doing it today. Hope you all have a good weekend!!

WEEK 9: CONSUMPTION AND DIGITAL COMMODITIES IN THE EVERYDAY (MARK POSTER)

In this text Mark Poster discusses how consumers are the core of society but they are not individuals in this society but merely objects for media to target. “In the space of the city, the individual is labelled and branded into the category of the consumer with a consistency that would be admirable were it not so deplorable.”[1] Media is so instilled in culture that it programmes our minds to think about things in a certain way. Poster was surprised when he visited Ljubljana (a war torn country) and found it to be beautiful. The media had instilled in his mind “a depressing urban landscape dominated by a monotony of greys.”[2]

Poster describes how we cannot escape media not matter how much we attempt to do so. We are invaded in our own homes whether it is from television commercials or whether we get that 10pm phone call from telemarketers. When contemplating this idea I tried to imagine my world without media – it is impossible. I do believe though that a person can choose whether or not their life is dominated by media if not in the outside world, most certainly at home. We can choose to not buy that TV, radio and computer and to not have a phone line. Then again, in this day and age is that possible? Our lives have become so centralised around media that we may not be able to live without it. It is instilled in our culture.
Do you agree that we cannot escape media?

Without consumption there is no industry. “Consumption was considered necessary for the reproduction of labour and the satisfaction of needs.”[3] This point is very interesting. When thinking about the world we live in it consumption happens every minute of our day. I am consuming right now by just using this computer and listening to the radio in the background. If people were not ‘consumers’ how would people make a living?

As technology has improved the consumer has become less and less of a human being and more of an ‘actor’. The consumer has become predictable and the media know just how to exploit this predictability. Poster contrasts modern and postmodern consumption patterns. In modern society one had “a fixed idea of consumption for wealthy, middle class and poorer folk”[4] whereas the postmodern argues that consumption patterns can derive from the minorities and move up in society. In modern society the consumer is not connected to the product and that product is a big part of status whereas in postmodern society the product is an extension of that user’s self. It represents that person’s identity. When thinking about this I thought about the computer – we use this device hugely to communicate and therefore has become an extension of our own minds and speech – the postmodern argument I think rings true here. Do you agree?

In the last couple of years consumers have been able to choose whether or not they are exposed to advertising, particularly through television. Think of Foxtel IQ and the way we can record programmes and then fast-forward through advertisements. In a way we are starting to rebel against media. “Television finds itself fundamentally at risk simply because the cultural object has been digitized and the ‘consumer’ has chosen to deploy the new medium to ends other than those of capitalism.”[5] We are now in a world where we can log onto a programme such as Limewire and have access to millions and millions of free songs and movies with the click of a mouse. Media companies have put actions into place to try and combat this but all efforts have proved unsuccessful. Their last option is to make the “cultural object accessible to consumers only a pay per use basis. Consumers will have, in this view, no object at all, only access.”[6]

Do you think that this will work or do you think that consumers will still find a way to rebel against this type of media action?

What are your thoughts on the fact that we are no longer individual people in the media environment but targets to gain and exploit?

REFERENCES
Poster, Mark. “Consumption and Digital Commodities in the Everyday.” Cultural Studies 18.2/3 (2004): 409-23

FOOTNOTES
[1] Mark Poster, “Consumption and Digital Commodities in the Everyday”, Cultural Studies, 18.2/3 (2004):p409
[2] Poster, p410
[3] Poster, p411
[4] Poster: p416
[5] Poster:p420-421
[6] Poster:p418-419

Week 8 "The Ethics of Porn on the Net"

Lumby’s article The Ethics of Porn on the Net examines how the Internet has changed many aspects of porn, namely its producers, performers and consumers, and how these changes may have altered the ethical status of pornography. With a particular focus on amateur porn, the author examines how amateur Internet porn challenges the stereotypes of mainstream porn, particularly the restricted representations of beauty, and how in doing so, it provides a forum for those with alternative sexual desires to not be excluded from sexual experimentation and enjoyment.

Lumby begins with an examination of the traditional opposition to porn. This includes religious/conservative objections which view pornography as immoral because of its representations of sex that extend beyond the acts of private, heterosexual married couples, and can be seen to incite masturbation. Marxist/feminist objections to pornography include the exploitation of sex and women’s bodies for money, as well as the perpetuation of stereotypical female and male forms, as represented in traditional porn.

The remainder of the article discusses such issues as the rise in amateur porn production on the Internet, and how and why individuals are producing their own. These reasons include the ease and relatively low cost of home made porn, and the dissatisfaction with existing traditional porn productions that do not encompass alternative forms of sex and sexuality. Lumby examines how these new forms of porn are challenging exiting stereotypes, particularly the restricted representations of female sexual beauty in porn. The author notes that much of the appeal of amateur porn lies in either the ‘ordinariness’ of its actors, or its gratification of fetishes, such as sites dedicated to hairy women or amputees.

Finally, the author examines whether Internet porn has “ethical sensibilities”, as it portrays a diverse range of sexuality and beauty that is not confined to mainstream stereotypes. Also, many of the websites have “internal guidelines, rules and etiquette” (p.207), which are open to debate and can be altered according to consensus of participants.

Do you agree that these new sorts of porn “relax some of our anxieties about the dangers of cybersex and cyberporn” (p.209)?

Does Internet porn really succeed in offering an alternative from of sexual beauty than the ones depicted in traditional porn, or is it still a form of objectification, just on different grounds?

In her article, Lumby includes part of her research interview with “Craig”, a webmaster who feels that Internet porn has enabled women to “feel safer and more confident in their experimentation with alternative sex practices” (p.200). At his parties Craig places webcams in certain rooms, and warns participants not to enter if they do not want to be filmed. He is quoted as saying “There’s something about having the ability to let your hair down and just for once in your life, you know, do some amateur porn on a camera or jump around pretend you’re a stripper or something like that” (p.200-201). Perhaps I’m being a little conservative here, but I don’t consider stripping on camera as an “alternative sex practice” for women; we’ve been doing it for decades.

I think the real question here is why these women would be doing these things (particularly stripping on camera) in the first place. If they are doing so because they get great sexual satisfaction from doing it, then by all means, but personally, I think many would be doing it from a post-feminist perspective of “sex is power”, and misinterpret this exploitation of their bodies as a means for power and equality.

What do you think?

Week 8: “Diary of a Webdiarist: Ethics Goes Online” – Margo Kingston

This excerpt is from Lumby and Probyn’s 2003 text Remote Control: New Media, New Ethics, which examines the ethical challenges posed by new media formats, technologies and audiences. In this chapter, Kingston, as Sydney Morning Herald’s chief of staff in 2000, discusses her investigation of ethical conduct online through her own experience managing a journalist weblog called “Webdiary”.

What started out to be a weekly online column on federal politics evolved into an online forum, giving Kingston a personal voice and encouraging the public to share their opinion on the representation of current news. Like other journalist weblogs, Webdiary could have been seen as a type of online ‘Letters to the Editor’ or ‘Your Opinion’ column. However, the instantaneousness of a weblog, where short or long commentary could appear instantly for all to see as soon as the ‘post’ button is clicked, superseded the tedious process of writing a “substantial” letter and sending it off to the editor’s mailbox or email account, with the unlikely prospect of it being published. This advantage of the weblog encouraged more equal and conversational dialogue between the journalist and the public.

The manner in which Kingston managed the site also gave the contributors power to control the balance of opinion that appeared on the weblog. By publishing most emails critical to her “in style and substance”[1], and refusing to maintain an equal balance of opposing views, Kingston created a space which truly represented the response and view-position of the contributors. This in turn established a strong trust between Kingston and her contributors, which maintained the high standard of objective, well researched response that did not aim to attack or devalue opposing opinion.

As well as analyzing her experience as a journalist blogger, Kingston approached various key-players in journalistic blogging in this investigation. Her findings suggested that mutual trust between journalist and reader, which would create a safe space for variety of opinion, stood as the main objective in ethical practice online. This led to a reconsideration of the heavier code of ethics which governed offline journalism. Although Kingston decided to place the Media Alliance Code of Ethics and Sydney Morning Herald Code of Ethics in a prominent place on Webdiary, she notes that the ethics code of journalism renders the reader powerless. The media’s defensiveness and reluctance of correction, “does little or nothing to improve the relationship between reader and journalist”[2]. She expresses discontent with this fact, and consequently applauds the opportunity for the public to participate through the journalist weblog.

However, there is a risk involved in creating a space that welcomes the public display of opinion without the discipline of censorship or editing. In minimizing harm, journalists are made to “treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect”[3]. This poses the question of if similar demands should be made on bloggers. Although there is no official weblog code of ethics, the news and resource site cyberjournalist.net created “A Bloggers Code of Ethics”, which references the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics. When comparing the two, there is very little difference. This makes the assumption that any opinionated writing available to the masses is considered journalism. This is strongly contended by Rebecca Blood, who states that the greatest strength and weakness of a weblog is its status as being uncensored. She finds it unrealistic to expect bloggers to hold the responsibilities of professional journalists, and steps away from journalist’s code of ethics to create “Weblog’s Ethics”. Blood outlines six different points that should be considered, and goes into great detail concerning the use of multimedia, the method of making corrections in order to keep the corrected information visible, or typing out a URL of a website rather than linking it if the website could be of offence to someone. Although this list is very comprehensive, it is of interest to note that Blood took her inspiration from Dave Winer’s two criteria discussion of online ethics on his blog “Scripting News”, which merely emphasizes the importance of integrity when participating in ethical blogging practice.

It is the different characteristics, especially the instant nature and organic process of the weblog that does alter the moral and ethical dimensions of journalism on line. It is not only the censorship or adherence to the reliability of sources that separates journalism from blogging, but also the editing process undertaken by a paper publication that divides these two mediums. In general, the ethical dimensions of the weblog expand, where the reader is no longer powerless and is encouraged to critically analyse the information presented to them.

Questions

Is the growing skepticism pervading in today’s society going to increase the popularity of online journalism? Or will traditional media persevere to influence our perception of current affairs?

If the ethical system of blogging can be narrowed down to trust and integrity, can this also be applied to offline journalism in a democratic government like Australia?

---

[1] Margo Kingston, “Diary of a Webdiarist: Ethics Goes Online” in Remote Control (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003) p. 162

[2] Kingston, p. 163

[3] Society of Professional Journalists: Code of Ethics: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp [accessed 13/09/08]

Week 9 Reading - Verity

Hey Verity
Just wondered which reading you chose for week 9?
Thanks!

Menu-driven Identities

Lisa Nakamura argues that cybertyping forces us to choose our race from a list of defined categories. While this may be true in some portals, I think that this is an outdated perspective. Email is not the only aspect of the Internet to privilege cultural affinity over biology.

One example that most of us would be familiar with is Facebook. It allows you to add many applications and join multiple groups. You could thus create a hybrid identity for yourself of different races, and even include age, gender or location.

Digital literacy also allows us to create hybrid identities when, for example, searching Google. By using the correct search terms, you could find a specific identity. Alternatively, you could conduct multiple searches and synthesise the information in a way appropriate to your identity. These are just some of the challenges to menu-driven identities...

Tute 7: “Ruminations on Cyber-Race” Summary and Questions

Jerry Kang’s article, “Ruminations on Cyber-Race”, explores three potential ways of dealing with the construction of race in cyberspace. The article defines race as a social construction which is further complicated when it is represented in cyberspace (also a social construction). Kang’s article begins with a disturbing anecdote, in which he chose a black avatar in an online game and was subjected to a wave of racial slurs and hatred, highlights the existence of racism in virtual environments and leads neatly to Kang’s first area of exploration-the abolition of race in cyberspace.

The article discusses the concept of abolishing race and racial identification in cyberspace as a means of eliminating racism and subconscious racial prejudice. However Kang goes on to argue that such a move (which is highly unlikely) is insulting and damaging to those who identify themselves through their race. Asking people to silence their race is in turn asking them to silence a part of who they are.

The second option explored is that of integration, which Kang treats with relative optimism. The article discusses the potential for cyberspace to break down geographical and racial barriers. Kang notes that within virtual communities, people are drawn together by a common interest. He states “In real space, because residential segregation cuts across income, rich white folks do not live next door to rich black folks. In cyberspace both groups will congregate in virtual communities”. Although he is opposed to the silencing of race in cyberspace, Kang proposes that participants in online communities do not initially disclose their race-in turn minimizing racial assumptions and presumably fostering interaction between members of different races.

The third approach, transmutation, encourages members of virtual communities to adopt a different racial representation as a way of challenging racial constructs. This approach could be beneficial as it could provide users with an insight into prejudices faced by members of a different race (as evidenced in Kang’s online gaming anecdote). Conversely, however it could prove detrimental as ignorant users may enforce prevalent racial prejudices and stereotypes. Kang comments “I might intentionally play Amos & Andy-like blackface, acting as an ignorant buffoon speaking “jive”.
Cyberspace can facilitate interracial interaction however Kang’s article highlights that isolating racial prejudices and stereotypes of the real world from virtual environments is a complex task to which there is no one set answer.

Questions:

Do you believe that racism is more overt in virtual environments rather than the real world? Why do/don’t you think this is so?

To what extent would withholding ones racial identity assist in the interaction between different races?

Of the three approaches outlined in Kang’s article which do you believe would be the most effective in minimizing racial prejudice and facilitating interracial interaction?

Computer Joke!

Hey all!

I jus was sent this email joke about computers, and considering how we talked about embodied computers last week.. just thought I'd share this. Haha :)

(I hope this is allowed!)

-

A SPANISH Teacher was explaining to her class that in Spanish, unlike English,nouns are designated as either masculine or feminine.'House' for instance, is feminine: 'la casa.' 'Pencil,' however, is masculine: 'el lapiz.'

A student asked, 'What gender is 'computer'?'

Instead of giving the answer, the teacher split the class into two groups ,male and female, and asked them to decide for themselves whether computers should be a masculine or a feminine noun. Each group was asked to give four reasons for its recommendation.

The men's group decided that 'computer' should definitely be of the feminine gender ('la computa dora'), because:

1. No one but their creator understands their internal logic;

2. The native language they use to communicate with other computers is incomprehensible to everyone else;

3. Even the smallest mistakes are stored in long term memory for possible later retrieval; and

4. As soon as you make a commitment to one, you find yourself spending half your paycheck on accessories for it.

(THIS GETS BETTER!)

The women's group, however, concluded that computers should be Masculine ('el computa dor'), because:

1. In order to do anything with them, you have to turn them on;

2. They have a lot of data but still can't think for themselves;

3. They are supposed to help you solve problems, but half the time they ARE the problem; and

4. As soon as you commit to one, you realize that if you had waited a little longer, you could have gotten a better model.

The women won. (:

-

Have a great week ahead ya'll!

Hong Kong Cyberculture: A Case Study by Amy Lai Tak-yee

i will be discussing Amy Lai Tak-yee's essay on cyberculture in Hong Kong, as examined through the online community 'ICERED'.

Tak-yee presents a compelling argument about how users of ICERED were able to voice racist, sexist and homophobic ideals, commonly to the point of blatant slander and abuse, because of its nature as a virtual space. The concept of 'cyber-democracy' is explored in regards to the idea of freedom of speech - which the creators of ICERED (Tim Lam and Kenny Lam) advocated.

"Your English Sucks" explored the fact that in Hong Kong, being able to express oneself eloquently in English indicated their higher education and social background. There was a focus in this section on whether individual IceRedders were 'local' or 'not local', with 'not local' being synonymous with having a higher intellect. This section demonstrates the marginalization in ICERED in regards to class.

The section titled "The Unbearable White-ness of ICERED" flagged the fact that Hong Kong is "not a very racist place in the sense of the whites, who are regarded as more superior", however, racist rantings are indeed found in ICERED. The author argues that this may be due to the fact that ICERED is an English-language site. I found the argument put forward by IceRedder 'RATMAN' regarding the peripheral vision of the Chinese absolutely ludicrous, and a perfect illustration of the narrow-mindedness of individuals. Tak-yee's argument is that race is able to be conveyed to the virtual world because an individuals perspective on racial issues will more often than not indicate their race. For example, RATMAN is assumed to be a white racist.

Sexism also exists within ICERED, highlighted in the thread "Men are after sex, women, after money." It is my opinion that the anonymity of the virtual world allows sexism to flow more readily, as individuals are not held back by the restraints of social etiquette, and instead allowed to take a leaf out of RATMAN's book, and engage in ridiculously offensive arguments, often without any actual evidence to back up their claims (such as his claim that Chinese women have the lowest IQ of any other Asian country).

The third issue dealt with in this article is that of homophobia on ICERED, as shown through the thread "Homosexual on ICERED". Claims that homosexuals 'harm our children' and are 'sick' or 'sordid' indicate the ignorance of homophobes. ICERED did not censor discussions on homosexuality, and allowed discussions such as that of 'E-rayzor' on 'rimming'.

i agree with Tak-yee's idea that marginalization occurs online like it does offline. The fact that people are able to hide their identities means that they do not have to take responsibility for their opinions, and therefore are more free to express their racist, sexist, or homophobic attitudes to the point of obnoxiousness.

Finally, the ICERED article illustrates the fact that events in the virtual world can impact the real world. Examples of this include voting of actual people for titles such as "party animal of Hong Kong", "Most Eligable Banker" and "Most Beautiful Woman in Central." Also, there are examples of individuals in the virtual world organising get togethers for other virtual participants in the actual world, meaning that online 'celebrities' can meet their online 'fans' outside the constraints of ICERED.

All in all, i think that Tak-yee presents a compelling argument on how marginalization exists in the virtual world, through the use of ICERED as a microchasm. The sexist, racist and homophobic hostilities present within this online community indicate that the virtual world cannot be entirely seperated from the actual world, as personal views of class, and race, as well as background and education all contribute to how one presents themselves and their ideas in online communites.

Workshop Four: Menu driven Identities

2. These profiles emphasis the ‘hard’ facts about someone, a photo, their age, location, height/weight, ethnic background and smoking and drinking habits. There’s only a brief quote at the top, to give the reader any indication whatsoever of the personality of the person behind the profile, the rest is purely someone’s physical characteristics as if that’s all that matters for both the reader and all the user who made the profile, when they are looking for a date. Despite being an online dating service, Lavalife still treat physical prowess as singles’ priority, with more abstract concerns (such as personality) that are difficult to place into a drop-down menu secondary.


4. While I’m not sure whether any of these websites are inherently racist, I do think that race is certainly a neglected issue. For example take Second life, its “default” avatars are severely restricted. I think this limitation, is more based on individuality in general, rather than racism in particular. SecondLife works on the basis that you have to buy or create your way to being an actual individual, rather then giving them to you, increasing the amount of time you will play, and your attachment to your characters, rather then a deliberate 'othering' of any minority group.