Week 4 - The Lecture

Online communities are an opportunity for people all over the world to get together and become part of a “virtual community” as Rheingold would say. There is the inevitable stereotype of a community being towns and villages meeting once a week to discuss the goings on within the neighbourhood, but online communication allows this to be furthered, where geographical state doesn’t need to necessarily be an issue. Being online has advanced us from associating a community with solely where we are in the world, it can be “talk of groups with common interests, shared goals, activities and governance.” (Preece, 2001, 9) These factors described by Preece can be applied to online communities. I do agree with Levy in that an online community “offers nothing less than the rebirth of the social bond through real time direct relationships among all people.” (Lecture) Therefore traditional communities can continue to exist.
XXXXX
A question raised in the lecture is that … is technology creating the ability for online communities to exist, or have we created them to help assist us in our lives? Have we allowed ourselves to continue the social bond in communities into online interaction?
XXXXX
Here is a quote that I found quite interesting by Winston Churchill, which also links in with last week’s topic of the ‘open architecture’ of the internet…

“There is no doubt about the influence of architecture and structure upon human character and action. We shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us.”

I think this shows how techno-determinism has affected us in that social-determinism is now playing more of a role in how we use the internet to create online communities connecting more people which isn’t possible in real life.

Week 3 - Topic 3 ... The Guardian

For this topic I looked at The Guardian online and was quite surprised at how negative and angry the comments seemed to be. I have always associated the Guardian as a respectable newspaper, but some of the comments shocked me because I didn’t anticipate people to ‘rant’ as much as they did. That’s probably naivety on my part because there will always be controversy and disputes between what is raised in the press and the public, I just hadn’t connected it with responding to a newspaper. XXXXX
Screen-names – out of the 7 comments posted on the story I looked at, only 2 had screen-names containing their actual names, and even then they were just forenames. I raise the question that although these ‘comments’ are purposely used so people can voice their opinions, do their screen-names act as a way of hiding so people can’t tell who they are. The posts are arguing/questioning against the actions of the police-force, one comment was actually removed from the site. Therefore although people are voicing their opinions and expressing themselves in a strong manner to get themselves heard, they still don’t have complete freedom in what they are saying/typing, linking into the power of the media. XXXXX
I think the users who comment online, would discuss these issues with the same opinions offline, more so however within a ‘group’ with the same opinions, alike the comments that other people would be leaving. I don’t think they would be as passionate about the subject if they weren’t in the knowledge that other people around them would be backing them up. Additionally, it is easier to get carried away online because people don’t know who you are. XXXXX
Here's the link, if you wanted to know what I was talking about....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/feb/05/police-giant-snowball?commentpage=1

Week 3 - Topic 2 - Online Identity and Relationships

When taking part in online social interaction, in whichever group, you are bound to enhance the characteristics most related to what that group entails in shaping your identity. This may happen subconsciously but people will express themselves in ways to fit in, to ensure that they are part of that group’s interaction. In a way this can be seen as manipulation, but then again the users want to be manipulated to be accepted by the group. Online I probably come across more confident when talking over MSN or Facebook than I actually am in ‘meatspace.’ You become less reserved online because I think it’s easier to be, you can think about what you want to say etc. As I’ve mentioned before in a previous blog, I think altering personalities online is bound to happen because people want to enhance their personality traits, but when false identities are created and they become out of hand I think it becomes morally wrong. XXXXX
I can identify with why people don’t use their full names on the internet, with all the risks about it is understandable. People don’t walk around with name badges on all the time do they? The factor of privacy in the real world does pass over into online interaction, especially when you don't know 100% who they're talking to. There are so many risks with online communication, i.e. paedophiles, identity fraud etc… This sometimes can over-shadow the good things of CMC.

Week 3 - Topic 1 - D and E

However much new media and online is a major part of our culture in today’s society, I don’t think cyber-identities can constitute for an alternative ‘normal social reality.’ In saying this, as new media progresses I’m not saying that one day the ideology of ‘normal social reality’ won’t become that of an online ‘normal social reality’ but as it stands now, people in my opinion living as solely a cyber-identity aren’t living in reality. As formerly discussed users on cyber identities are often portraying different characteristics to what they would be doing in the real world. Although being online allows an escape and withdrawal from society, it can’t replace the real world. Cyberspace isn’t a “separate or distinct realm… (it’s) part of our already existing social reality.” (Lister page 168) This ‘second paradigm’ explained in Lister furthers my views as Cybersociety isn’t a separate world, therefore it can be retreated to but not lived in as such. XXXXX
When it comes to relationships online there is no question that they exist and are real, but they aren’t the same as offline relationships because there is no ‘meatspace.’ Online users can build relationships online, but a relationship online, and one offline are different. Obviously they can be combined, there is a great deal of evidence that relationships start off online, and then become offline. This section from ‘Who Am Me?’ I think distinguished why offline and online relationships differ (it’s a bit lengthy sorry!)

“It is as if they are seeking to underscore that although today's machines may be psychological in the cognitive sense, they are not psychological in a way that comprises our relationships with our bodies and with other people. Some computers might be considered intelligent and might even become conscious, but they are not born of mothers, raised in families, they do not know the pain of loss, or live with the certainty that they will die.”

Sorry if that’s a bit deep guys but I think it portrays that online relationships may involve a connection, but it doesn’t necessarily have the emotion from a real life offline relationship, consequently showing their disparity.

Week 3 - Topic 1 - B and C

“Some people are leading double or multiple lives in cyber-space, even with different gender identities.” (Jones: Cybersociety 2.0: 1998) Being able to not be seen allows people to experiment with their own personalities, in a way that they would not do so in a ‘meatspace’ situation. I think it can give people confidence to say things they wouldn’t say, and generally express themselves in a way they don’t feel they can do in real life. Personally, I can see this in a positive way until people online lie about their identities. To an extent I understand why people do this, and it does allow people to disconnect and experience new identities, as described again in the lecture its can create a “better self.” However, I agree with the post-modern views - “technological embodiment of a post structualist theory” (Lister page 167) when the element of escapism is taken over when seen to be real-life. Moreover, when screen-names etc aren’t just an expression of another part of someone’s personality, but are in fact a false identity. This is evident within the case study in Lister page 168, the “Cross Dressing Psychiatrist.” Although an experiment, when it genuinely goes on so much over the internet I think it becomes a problem. What we can’t see for ourselves makes it hard to trust!
XXXXX
With reference to the lecture, in real-life people do have to ADAPT their personalities to suit certain situations, whereas online I think the difference is that people can CHANGE their personalities and sometimes transform them into different people, i.e. changing their age, sex, gender etc which people can not possibly do in real life situations.

Week 3 - Topic 1 - Open Architechture

The net can be seen as “open architecture” in the sense that it is constantly open, and there are no plans for it to finish being built. Additionally, it is open for all users of the internet to add and build on. In my opinion, the internet has become more “open” as it has progressed because the online population are constantly contributing to the internet as a whole, networks are expanding. “The quantity of human labour and ingenuity that has gone into building net-based communication systems in a very short space of time is unprecedented.” (Lister page 164.) This quote sums up how the expansion of networks and online communicating or CMC has worked in unison to create such a massive online construction. XXXXX

Within this construction I think there is something that could be described as a hierarchy of authority within the structure of the internet today. Big businesses and more established sites will have more power within what they are adding onto the internet, they are the sites which were able to initially start building upon the foundations of the internet. However, with the large expansion of different networks more and more sites and networks are able to contribute to the “architecture”. There is so much information on the internet; unlike other media information is supplied in so many more ways rather than just one channel.

In relation to Lister … Is the internet just one big architectural base? Or has by users being given their chance to build upon this base, created many more?

Week 3 - The Lecture

After reading through the lecture materials one point stood out for me in particular, in how new media generally “combines the officiality of written text and the informality of the spoken word.” (Lecture 3) There seems to be casualness about e-mails, MUD’s and speaking generally online. I know personally I sometimes have the bad habit of writing how I would speak when it comes to writing essays etc, this is influenced largely from talking on chat sites over the internet, i.e. msn, you get used to chatting online but mirroring a face to face conversation, and this comes through when writing. When speaking online, even in situations where there needs to be a formality, new media interaction I think is labelled sometimes with a more relaxed approach. This links in with one of my previous posts about the convenience of new media, and this could be how it is now perceived as more relaxed because of its expediency.

I just thought I’d blog on this point as it can tie in with last weeks and this week’s forthcoming blogs!