This blogging experience has been refreshing in terms of a project. I found it a blast being able to blog about items relating to topics of particular weeks. I was able to expand my views from the discussion board posts and from the writing activities. I believe that courses like this should offer the option to blog about course related material and integrate it with personal findings, thoughts, and revelations. It is a new take on how to approach a course project. I will not divulge too much about my blogging experience here, so that I can leave room for content in my blog evaluation paper. This was a nice change from having to write a research paper or do some project that was repetitive and mundane. I'm glad this opportunity was offered to me because I enjoy blogging.
As a bit of conclusion to my blogging experience I wanted to focus on the topic that we first learned about, which was that of Netiquette. I feel that this is an extremely important aspect of computer mediated communication and these guidelines of netiquette should be taught and practiced by everyone who communicates via technology. It is difficult sometimes to remember all of the rules: think first, be concise, know the audience, etc. (Scheuermann & Taylor, 1997), but for the most part the rules are simple and easy to follow. Netiquette can be tied into the aspect of self-presentation, online anonymity and exposure, cyber-bullying, computer mediation of interpersonal relationships, and CMC in business; you can virtually apply a rule or two many areas of CMC.
My favorite rule is that of 'think first' which could easily include 'know your audience'. This rule could be seen as the golden rule of netiquette, think before you post, think about the context in which you will be interpreted, think about how you are presenting your self to an audience that may not know you, think about your audience (will they understand what you're saying? will you offend them?), think about what this could do to your relationship(s) and your future endeavors. Some of those examples may seem extreme and oOoOOo life changing but in this day and age you've got to watch yourself and protect yourself from....yourself. It can be difficult to criticize everything thing you do online but in the end it can save you from a lot of damage that can be caused.
Scheuermann, L. & Taylor, G. (1997). Netiquette. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 7, 269-273.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Post 6: E-monitoring, Regulation, & Privacy
Seeing as how I accidentally thought that the RF13 was due this week, I practically read all of the material so now I can blog about it.
The coupling of privacy and technology has been a long standing issue. This seems the become more and more relevant as technology advances, especially in the workplace. Nord, McCubbins, and Nord (2006) state that, "workplace monitoring has existed for a long time...and will continue to...become increasingly sophisticated as technology advances" and this causes concern for employees everywhere due to the fact that a level of privacy is expected to provided. Of course with more and more employees conducting non-work related acts it is practically standard procedure for employers to implement monitoring and blocking software. Blocking certain content and sites from work computers seems to pose no harm but it's when we start talking about monitoring employee computers where problems start to arise. However, if you're at work then you should be following policies and procedures, and you should be doing work, not browsing around shopping, playing games, paying bills, etc.
It almost seems too simple not to follow these rules, guidelines if you will. When you're at work you can expect some privacy but you're at work so you're under the jurisdiction of your employer. I'm not saying that employers can do whatever they want and put surveillance cameras in the restrooms, but each side of the line should follow the policies and procedures set forth, and if there isn't any for any one side then action should be taken.
Nord, D. G., McCubbins, T. F., & Nord, J. H. (2006). Privacy, legislation, and surveillance software. Communications of the ACM, 49(8), 73-77.
The coupling of privacy and technology has been a long standing issue. This seems the become more and more relevant as technology advances, especially in the workplace. Nord, McCubbins, and Nord (2006) state that, "workplace monitoring has existed for a long time...and will continue to...become increasingly sophisticated as technology advances" and this causes concern for employees everywhere due to the fact that a level of privacy is expected to provided. Of course with more and more employees conducting non-work related acts it is practically standard procedure for employers to implement monitoring and blocking software. Blocking certain content and sites from work computers seems to pose no harm but it's when we start talking about monitoring employee computers where problems start to arise. However, if you're at work then you should be following policies and procedures, and you should be doing work, not browsing around shopping, playing games, paying bills, etc.
It almost seems too simple not to follow these rules, guidelines if you will. When you're at work you can expect some privacy but you're at work so you're under the jurisdiction of your employer. I'm not saying that employers can do whatever they want and put surveillance cameras in the restrooms, but each side of the line should follow the policies and procedures set forth, and if there isn't any for any one side then action should be taken.
Nord, D. G., McCubbins, T. F., & Nord, J. H. (2006). Privacy, legislation, and surveillance software. Communications of the ACM, 49(8), 73-77.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Post 5: Political & Social Activism
This week we covered a topic that I don't like to cover. Politics is a crazy thing and there are many aspects to it and it can be confusing and overwhelming. I try my best to stay as informed on issues as possible but with so much information coming from everywhere it's hard to take it all in. Not to mention how to sort out the biased information from right and left winged followers and media sources. Needless to say this writing activity was tough and it took me forever to complete my assignment because I just couldn't figure out what I wanted to say or discuss. Blah.
Thurlow, Lengel, and Tomic discuss how CMC effects offers opportunities to view current issues from different perspectives, offers organizations a chance to promote and support their ideals and beliefs, offers cyber activists new stages to offer change, offers people to connect with others in 'politically charged situations' (2004). Computer mediated communication offers a wide range of opportunities in every aspect and this weeks material helps support the theory of technological determinism. The theory of technological determinism basically states that the advent and characteristics of new technology effects the 'development and set[s] the conditions for social change' (Barnes, 2003). The advent of blogs, email, and social networking sites have changed how we all communicate and transfer information to one another and they have changed the way activists, politicians, and regular people do things now a days. Back in the day if you wanted to be a part of the civil rights movement and participate in a march you'd have to network and find out how to get involved, you'd call someone or perhaps you'd stumble upon a flyer. It seems like you'd have to put a lot of work into getting involved and taking action. Now a days you can just search for a groups with your interests online, then you can click on their link and get information on how to "take action". I believe this has changed how activists promote themselves and more than likely they are larger in numbers and more closely connected because of such advanced technology. As long as you have advances in technology that can affect how organizations form and maintain themselves, then you will always have at least one large supporter of the technological determinism theory.
Barnes, S. B. (2003). Computer-mediated communication: human-to-human communication across the internet. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Thurlow, Lengel, and Tomic discuss how CMC effects offers opportunities to view current issues from different perspectives, offers organizations a chance to promote and support their ideals and beliefs, offers cyber activists new stages to offer change, offers people to connect with others in 'politically charged situations' (2004). Computer mediated communication offers a wide range of opportunities in every aspect and this weeks material helps support the theory of technological determinism. The theory of technological determinism basically states that the advent and characteristics of new technology effects the 'development and set[s] the conditions for social change' (Barnes, 2003). The advent of blogs, email, and social networking sites have changed how we all communicate and transfer information to one another and they have changed the way activists, politicians, and regular people do things now a days. Back in the day if you wanted to be a part of the civil rights movement and participate in a march you'd have to network and find out how to get involved, you'd call someone or perhaps you'd stumble upon a flyer. It seems like you'd have to put a lot of work into getting involved and taking action. Now a days you can just search for a groups with your interests online, then you can click on their link and get information on how to "take action". I believe this has changed how activists promote themselves and more than likely they are larger in numbers and more closely connected because of such advanced technology. As long as you have advances in technology that can affect how organizations form and maintain themselves, then you will always have at least one large supporter of the technological determinism theory.
Barnes, S. B. (2003). Computer-mediated communication: human-to-human communication across the internet. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Post 4: Culture & Society
The writing activity for this week was cancelled, yay, and so all we had to do was read the materials for this week. If you take a look at much of the media in today's society we find that culture and media co-exist, but which one affects the other? Barnes discusses several different theories that have surfaced in order to explain this relationship between culture and technology. I found that you have extremes on both sides, the technological determinists folks and the social determinists, and then some other groups that are not as extreme and some kind of in between. Basically it's a big ol' mess of 'isms'. Each side has persuading arguments that highly support their theories, making it difficult to come to one conclusion. I find that all of these theories can be applied to various situations and events that occur in society and technology.
I like to use the example of Twitter and how it has changed western culture and many other cultures communicate around the globe. Twitter is still growing and yet when something big happens in the real world, you better believe you can find it on twitters list of 'Trendy Topics'. I can remember the tweet coverage on the Chris Brown and Rhianna incident, when T-mobile was having nation-wide problems, and the huge coverage of the Iran election crisis. These are just a couple of examples but every minute of every hour of every day, you can always find big news in 'Trendy Topics' all coming from everyday people. It's amazing! Here is an example of a form of media created for people just for fun, but it has changed culture and society in a way that makes us the reporters. So, did society affect this technology or did technology affect society? I'd like to think it a bit of both.
Where do I stand? I believe that you have influences from both ends... you want to make browsing through your daily go to websites easier and less time consuming? Hey why not create an add-on in Firefox for that! DONE. Can you find your weekly shows online? Yup, that's right abc.com now includes recent episodes online of your favorite shows. How has that affected you? Well, now you don't have to rearrange plans so you can watch your show, you don't have to be left out if you miss the television airing. This relationship is a beautiful thing, where technology prospers and society prospers as well.
...or is this relationship going to cause problems???
Barnes, S. B. (2003). Computer-mediated communication: human-to-human communication across the internet. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
I like to use the example of Twitter and how it has changed western culture and many other cultures communicate around the globe. Twitter is still growing and yet when something big happens in the real world, you better believe you can find it on twitters list of 'Trendy Topics'. I can remember the tweet coverage on the Chris Brown and Rhianna incident, when T-mobile was having nation-wide problems, and the huge coverage of the Iran election crisis. These are just a couple of examples but every minute of every hour of every day, you can always find big news in 'Trendy Topics' all coming from everyday people. It's amazing! Here is an example of a form of media created for people just for fun, but it has changed culture and society in a way that makes us the reporters. So, did society affect this technology or did technology affect society? I'd like to think it a bit of both.
Where do I stand? I believe that you have influences from both ends... you want to make browsing through your daily go to websites easier and less time consuming? Hey why not create an add-on in Firefox for that! DONE. Can you find your weekly shows online? Yup, that's right abc.com now includes recent episodes online of your favorite shows. How has that affected you? Well, now you don't have to rearrange plans so you can watch your show, you don't have to be left out if you miss the television airing. This relationship is a beautiful thing, where technology prospers and society prospers as well.
...or is this relationship going to cause problems???
Barnes, S. B. (2003). Computer-mediated communication: human-to-human communication across the internet. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Post 3: Cyber Selves
A symbolic marker helps you present yourself to others how you want them to see you, they say something about the way you want to present yourself, and how you feel you fit in with a certain group (Thurlow, Lengel, & Tomic, 2004). They can be anything from clothing, to how you get your hair cut, to how you speak in front of others. Online these markers can be a bit more difficult to find and there are much less to be judged upon. In most cases the main component of your online symbolic markers is your words: what your tone is, what you say, how you say it, your spelling, your grammatical usage, etc. Of course there are pictures and the links to which you post to show that you're interested in certain things, but the impressions we create are formed heavily from your words and your actions through those words.
When it comes to our identities, our self-presentations, we are really representing two different forms of ourselves because "there are two of [us]" (Conlin, 2006), the warm-blooded version who interacts face-to-face with everyone and our online version, who Conlin suggests is becoming more and more difficult to control. Before I never noticed this two version self of myself, but in completing this week's readings I found it to be more evident than before. I never thought I was maintaining two versions of myself, but I am, and it is difficult to watch what I post on social networking sites, blogs, etc. I feel like I am still me no matter if it's my online self or my warm-blooded self. I would say that I do not alter my online identity and I post as if I were actually speaking to that person. I do not post things that I wouldn't say to my friends in real life...and those that know me in real life know what I would and would not say.
Thurlow et al. talk about people taking on multiple identities throughout their lives and "find[ing] new was to represent themselves to the world" and I believe that this holds true for a majority of people. We are not the same person we were at the age of 17 or 28 or 54. We consistently change and shape ourselves into who we think we should be, whether our identities are influenced by media, family, friends, our interests, goals, morals, values, etc. The more we find out about who we are and who we want to be the more we try to change our identities to become that vision. I can say that I have experienced changing my identity as I have gotten older, not by much but I have become more certain about particular aspects of my life, but at the same time I have become bogged down with questions about decisions in my life that need to be made...and to me that is also part of figuring out who I am because the answers to those questions help define who I am and what I want to do.
Conlin, M. (2006). You are what you post. Business week, 3977, 52-53.
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
When it comes to our identities, our self-presentations, we are really representing two different forms of ourselves because "there are two of [us]" (Conlin, 2006), the warm-blooded version who interacts face-to-face with everyone and our online version, who Conlin suggests is becoming more and more difficult to control. Before I never noticed this two version self of myself, but in completing this week's readings I found it to be more evident than before. I never thought I was maintaining two versions of myself, but I am, and it is difficult to watch what I post on social networking sites, blogs, etc. I feel like I am still me no matter if it's my online self or my warm-blooded self. I would say that I do not alter my online identity and I post as if I were actually speaking to that person. I do not post things that I wouldn't say to my friends in real life...and those that know me in real life know what I would and would not say.
Thurlow et al. talk about people taking on multiple identities throughout their lives and "find[ing] new was to represent themselves to the world" and I believe that this holds true for a majority of people. We are not the same person we were at the age of 17 or 28 or 54. We consistently change and shape ourselves into who we think we should be, whether our identities are influenced by media, family, friends, our interests, goals, morals, values, etc. The more we find out about who we are and who we want to be the more we try to change our identities to become that vision. I can say that I have experienced changing my identity as I have gotten older, not by much but I have become more certain about particular aspects of my life, but at the same time I have become bogged down with questions about decisions in my life that need to be made...and to me that is also part of figuring out who I am because the answers to those questions help define who I am and what I want to do.
Conlin, M. (2006). You are what you post. Business week, 3977, 52-53.
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: social interaction and the internet. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
