BYE!!!!!

I think that there is so much to say about Facebook, or social networking in general, because it's just this totally messed up thing that we all hate that we love. I remember the first time I got Facebook was during exam period one year! Bad news. Blogging has been great because I have had to depict and remain critical of a technology that I secretly love. Basically it has just made me laugh at myself. This class has been great for that reason alone! Good luck with the baby Ted!!
Bye CMNS!
P.S- I always love the "song of the day"!!!

A new form of privacy

I wonder how old one would have to be to remember a time where surveillance was only conducted by the state (for reasons of security). Today, surveillance has so many purposes that relate to the market it seems like anyone can figure out what I am buying and when and then categorize me accordingly. This exact issue was seen with the "Beacon System" put forth by Facebook. This form of surveillance basically told people what their friends had purchased online. Users profile pictures and private activities were distributed across their own networks as a personal add. Now to me this seems ridiculous and strikes me as a total invasion of privacy. But as previously discussed in my blogs, I think that we sign off on the conventional form privacy when we accept to Facebook's "terms and conditions". Overall, the more information we release, the harder it will be for us to control how it is used.... fair enough I think. But the question is... why are we even releasing this information? I think that today, simply, my generation does not think of privacy in the conventional sense. An article that I have previously spoken of, from The Nation, considers that “new privacy” is about controlling how many people know one's information and not if anyone knows. I completely agree with this fact, people who engage in social networking find "privacy" in their ability to control who and how people come across their information, and definitely not whether they do at all. If the way in which we envision and understand privacy is constantly changing and if the types of surveillance which were are becoming subject to are growing, all i can ask is where will it stop? How much will we expose of ourselves before we realize that what we get in return is not worth what we are loosing? Just curious....?

Do we even know the Terms and Conditions??

Today, 0ur information has huge economic value and Facebook is aware of the fact. In an article published in The Nation, it is stated that "Facebook’s 58 million active members have posted more than 2.7 billion photos, with more than 2.2 billion digital labels of people in the pictures. But what many users may not realize is that the company owns every photo. In fact, everything that people post is automatically licensed to Facebook for its perpetual and transferable use, distribution or public display. The terms of use reserve the right to grant and sublicense all 'user content' posted on the site to other businesses."
OK so...although I should technically know this, due to the fact that I, at some point, accepted the "terms and conditions" on Facebook. I can say that this information still shocks me. When I post photos of my family vacations or nights out with my friends, I do not consider surveillance and data gathering. However, If everything I post is subject to distribution, then it seems that perhaps I am safer when accepting a random invite from somebody that recognizes me from the hallways at cap, then from companys that want to turn my information into a number. The idea that my information is leading to profit gain for some cooperation that I have never heard of makes me feel watched. Lyon states that "info societies are also surveillance societies". Is it not possible to have one without the other?

Facebook, the iphone, and SCOT

About a week ago I found myself in a huge rush for a meeting with some girls with which I was assigned a class presentation. Since I was rushing out of my house, I obviously forgot to go on my computer and mark down their phone numbers (which they had sent me via facebook). As I drove along, I started worrying... would they think that I wasn't planning on showing up? Luckily for me, I remembered that I actually own an iphone which provides me with easy Facebook access. So... I accessed Facebook (Don't worry it was a 30 zone!), and I was able to get one of the phone numbers that I needed and phone a member of my group to let her know that I would be running late. In this situation my phone provided me with an easy solution to a stressful situation. Thus, it can be considered that, in this case, by encompassing Facebook, the iphone functioned in a way that reflected the goals and needs not just of myself, but more specifically of society. As a result, the social construction of technology can be seen in the iphone as, in this situation, it reflected the goals and values of my social group. Essentially, a broad social group, in which I could generally be included, influenced a design that reflected our own goals and values and this, in turn, has made the iphone very practical for me, even in the confines of my own car.

A bunch of ideas that I tried to connect together!

Online relationships, whatever they be, friendships or romantic relationships are extremely viable. The idea that relationships often start and end before people carry out any sort of "in person" interaction is true to both social networking online and online dating. When we researched the topic of online dating for our class project, my group and I came to realize that people are aware of this factor, yet they choose to continue to engage in this form of networking due to certain aspects, such as convenience and ease at which they can join these worlds. Essentially, if people are easily able to start a multitude of friendships and relationships online, they can afford to loose one or two. Online dating, as well as social networking have developed to be available for everyone. People today are not so interested in separating the real world from the virtual world, because often the virtual world stands to be more accepting of who they are. Any form of site in which people can network with others in a way in which they feel at ease will lead to two situations. People will either feel more inclined to represent their true selves, or more inclined to misrepresent themselves. Either way... they don't really have much to loose and people find comfort in this fact. Ambivalence in relation to technology means that, as explained by Ted, at a certain stage in their development, technologies can embody a range of different meanings in relation to social groups. Thus we can consider that during the development of social networking sites as well as online dating sites these technologies have been valued by different social groups in different ways. Different social groups will have different emotions and feelings that they attach to these technologies and these feelings will affect they way in which they use the technology, thus, they way that people use and adapt online dating and social networking sites to their lives in various different ways will affect the development of these technologies. In relation to the fact that people are willing to jump head first into into online relationships (whatever they may be), due to the ease at which they can do so, we see that this is one form in which a social group has taken a technology and adapted it to their needs. The technology will change with them as the creators of Facebook and these online dating sites come to understand the advantages that different social groups draw from the sites. For example, the mini- feed on Facebook was not always a part of the system. However, the creators realized that some social groups were not only using Facebook as an avenue to connect with others, but also as a way of keeping up to date with what other people were doing, in their own personal lives. As a result, the mini- feed was created as a way of updating people on other peoples actions. Thus, Facebook, at a certain stage in it's development, was altered due to the meaning that certain users found in staying up to date with other peoples daily actions. Overall, social networking and online dating have the similarity that the technologies will continue to develop in accordance to the different meanings that social groups will attach to the technology. Right now social groups have found it meaningful to be able to interact in ways that are easy and thus, online networking sites have adapted accordingly and continue to find ways to make this possible.

Is Social Networking Encompassing of a Bias?

When one integrates the use of a social networking site into their life, they obtain the ability to manipulate the technology to their advantage. These sites give us, humans, control over one part of what we present to the world, or at least our "friends". If we are not all interested in proving something, then chances are that we wouldn't be so actively engaged in the use of such a technology. Facebook encompasses a sort of “formal bias”, in the sense that our social values, for example a desire that we may have to control our image, has been embodied into the very creation of this social networking system. The idea that people prefer to document their life through photographs is understood and built into the construction of social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. Essentially, the various ways in which people desire to express themselves and control their social realms are understood and avenues under which they can continue these forms of expression are built into the structure of these social networking sites. Feenberg states that a bias excludes certain considerations and includes others in the design of technology. Facebook and MySpace are an example of this bias, in the sense that they assume that people have specific social needs, that their system can fulfill. Assumed is that, in peoples desire to observe the way in which others conduct their lives, they will be willing to expose their own private selves. Furthermore, assumed is the fact that people are utterly image obsessed in today's time and thus in order to be able to portray a desired image of themselves, they will engage in a trade of valuable personal information in return for this “control”. Essentially, social networking sites are not incorrect in making these assumptions as it seems that around the world people are adapting their lives around the adoption of this form of technology. However, in the design of these technologies, conventional forms of privacy are not valued or considered, nor is value placed on physical social relationships as being significant within society. Thus, the bias of social networking is in the very root of the system itself.

Facebook, A Democratizing Influence?

In “spirit of the web”, Rowland considers the phone as a powerful democratizing influence and I think that this idea can also be related to Facebook. With a social networking site such as Facebook, we see a system that is extremely accessible. Such a system becomes an equalizing force in society simply because there is no way to adapt the system to make it more advantageous to those with money. Just as it is considered by Rowland that there is no way to make a telephone work differently for the rich, for example it can’t ring louder for some people then for others, there is also no way for a social networking site to discriminate by class. A site such as Facebook is not only unable to discriminate by class, but it also has no way of controlling the age of it’s users. However what is interesting to consider is that Facebook started out as a networking site for Ivy League university students. So if we buy into the stereotypes of “privileged” Ivy League students, it can be considered that, at first, this specific social networking site did discriminate by class, or at least by education and furthermore, at the time, by age. However, this was quick to change and as Facebook has filtered down to become available to college students, high school students and even residents of cities that are not partaking in education, we definitely see a system that groups people together, people who often come from extremely different walks of life, but who all have the similarity of either having friends in common or a network in common. Furthermore, relating back to the idea that the system in itself works in the exact same way for everyone, which we see through equal accessibility to privacy settings or different applications, it can be considered that the only thing that could change the way in which somebody uses this site is the access that they personally may or may not have to a camera, which clearly requires money. The other two technologies that are needed to access this site would be firstly, a computer and secondly, the internet. However, with easy access to computers and internet in schools, cafes and public libraries I am certain that, at least in the developed world, Facebook is, in fact, an easily accessible, non discriminating website and a definite democratizing influence.

Why use social networking services

Does a social networking service force us to sacrifice what could perhaps be important conversations and face to face interactions with others by substituting them with "relationships" that do not require continuous effort? Relationships where an understanding of whom the other is, is not based on a personal connection but on a perception of another that we gather from personal descriptions and photographs that others have specifically edited to portray the image that they want for themselves? Or on the contrary, does this service hand us the ability to say things to others or forge relationships with people that we wouldn't have had the confidence to otherwise, therefore, positively broadening the scale on which we socialise?

Perhaps there is no correct response to this as different people use these “services” with different levels of commitment and for different reasons. Furthermore, the level of attention and time that one permits themselves to devote to, for example, Facebook, is contingent on different factors. Is a person using Facebook as a distraction from their commitments and responsibilities or are they only signing on during spare time where they would otherwise be consumed by boredom? Is a person trying to stay in touch with people who are living far away? or is a person trying to make new friends and find people that they’ve never met to interact and create relationships with? Privacy settings help one asses which types of users they want to accept into their online world. However, when one has no way of knowing how closely another is watching their profile, privacy is not actually in full effect. Furthermore, even in this online world that we have created and claim to have the ability to keep as personal and private as we want, we are being bombarded with publicity. Again taking Facebook for example, on the right-hand column of ones profile, ads are always present. They are there to be read, to be taken in without even realising that one is doing so. On an e- mail account, junk can be filtered and one can choose to delete a message without reading it. On Facebook, junk is there, unavoidable, often only noticed subconsciously as is most publicity. So, if privacy settings may not be as efficient as we think and we can not always avoid creepy people adding us and looking at our profiles, then why use these services?

I think that humans will always want to share ideas and experiences. Why go on a trip and take photos if you can't share them with other people? Isn’t it better to have a place where you can post the names of your favorite bands with the idea that maybe someone else will like the same stuff? The bottom line is that in our rushed busy lives people don't always have the time to talk to each and everyone of their friends on the phone at night. So, if a quick post on a social networking site can make you feel like you are more involved in the life of someone that you care about, if in this site, a place has been created where you can not only learn about but somewhat view that friend's experiences, then the site, i think, has done it’s job.

Assignment 0

Hi,
I'm Sabrina Jensen and I'm from North Van. This is my third year at Cap College, University. I took some random, different classes until I landed on Communications, which I find interesting because it involves writing, which I love (most of the time), while allowing me to learn about and asses a bunch of different aspects, past and present, about the way in which people communicate and the technologies that allow them to do so. Also, Communication, I think, is sort of the basis of everything we do in life and therefore it must be moderately important to study. Anyway, I plan to transfer to SFU this winter and continue to take Communications there. Moving on to the point of this class, which is New Media. I figure it should be interesting because we are all basically obsessed with one form of it, even if we are not aware of the fact. And if you aren't either on facebook, or don't use text messaging, or engage in one form of new media in a totally obsessive way, well then people usually ask why and find you to be "off the map" or something. After some thought, I think that I have chosen to blog about social network services. Mostly because of the fact that it's a pretty new obsession or even a way of life that is only getting crazier and the networks being created, I think, are becoming more and more complex to a point where other forms of communication with peers may no longer even be necessary (well for some). So lastly, how do I feel about this course? I am afraid of this blogging thing (it's sort of over my head)...so hopefully it works! Apart from that, I will keep my fingers crossed that I can write some good papers and study enough for exams and then it should be fine!!!!