Web206: Web Publishing: Has the division between public and private writing been influenced by the rise of social media?

Has the division between public and private writingbeen influenced by the rise of social media?

How has the division between public and private writing been influenced by the rise of social media? Do we write differently depending on the social networking site? Do we use both private and public voice separately? Or are they interchanged? Is it difficult to switch between colloquial private voice one minute to professional, academic voice the next. Do people make several accounts on the same platforms so they can publish in their different voices? In this essay I will address this division between public and private voice and the way people use their voices while communicating over the Internet.

What is the voice? The voice is our personal representation in all forms of communication. Rheinhold explains: “the 'voice' is the unique style of personal expression that distinguishes one’s communications from those of others, can be called upon to help connect young people’s energetic involvement in identity-formation with their potential engagement with society as citizens” (Rheingold, 2008). So when we speak or write text online we are using our voice. Initially we use our normal everyday private voice until we learn about the importance of using a more acceptable voice for online communication – the public voice.

Rheingold states: “Moving from a private to a public voice can help students turn their self-expression into a form of public participation. Public voice is learnable, a matter of consciously engaging with an active public rather than broadcasting to a passive audience” (Rheingold, 2008). When people use their voice on social media they need to consider that it is a public space where anybody can see what they have published. Social media is a powerful tool for communication and can sway readers to form an opinion. The power of social media is not simply about the size of the audience, but from the power of linking to each other to form a public. This is a psychological and social characteristic of the media (Rheingold, 2008).

The act of blogging can be highly interactive. However it can take some time for the blogger with no formal journalistic training to develop their blogging, and creative writing skills, enough to attract an audience. Van House claims: “The author's thinking and writing develop under public scrutiny. Some journalists-turned-blogger cite the immediate response that their blogging work receives as one of blogging's advantages over journalism” (Van House, 2004). Where traditional media has gatekeepers and content is controlled, blogging has no gatekeepers so there is no screening in place for the content that bloggers publish. Some blogs are academic, some professional, and others are very personal. Van House explains: “I have found that bloggers tend to be highly self revealing, not only about their work but about their whole self” (Van House, 2004).

As a blogger becomes successful and their audience grows, it is possible the blogger will not be able to keep up with the demand, the comments from readers and replies to emails. Shirky claims the more people read a blogger's work than the blogger can actually read and link to, makes it impossible for the blogger to answer all incoming mail or follow up to the comments on their site. The result of these pressures is that the blogger becomes a broadcast outlet, distributing material without participating in conversations about it (Shirky, 2003).

Some bloggers use their real names and private voice while others choose to use different names and a public voice to protect their real identities. Gumbrecht, Nardi and Schiano claim: “Some bloggers create pseudonyms if they wish to blog about topics which are political or considered controversial, to be kept separate from their everyday blogs. Some people blog about topics they feel uncomfortable about confronting a person with face to face. A large percentage of bloggers keep a blog simply to keep distant relatives informed of what's happening in their lives” (Gumbrecht, Nardi and Schiano 2004). They go on to report: “Some bloggers find their voice once they become aware that others are reading their blogs. They feed off positive comments and encouragement from their readers and hence write more” (Gumbrecht, Nardi and Schiano 2004). As a blogger myself, I can relate to this claim. I've been blogging for many years, however it took about two years for my blog to develop an audience. Their feedback and encouragement keep me writing, and hopefully in turn – I keep them entertained.

Social media is like a broadcasting service. What you publish can reach the other side of the world instantly and in most cases you have no idea who is reading your content. It is therefore advisable to use a public voice rather than your own, especially if you are using your real name. Hogan and Quan-Haase state: “Social media combines features of one-way media and two-way media. Like one-way media, information is broadcast from one source to a (potentially unknown) audience. But like two-way media, individuals can react and respond

to this communication through the same channels” (Hogan & Quan-Haase, 2010).

Protecting identity can be a concern for many people using social media. Some create pseudonyms or multiple accounts on social networking sites. Whereas traditional media needs to cover their own backs, on social media the writer needs protection. Snapper explains: “From the writer's perspective, it has been argued that the Web opportunity for more self publication by writers on their works shifts copyright concern away from protections for publishers to the need to protect writers” (Snapper, 1999). The social media landscape is changing so rapidly that it is hard to keep up. As soon as we become familiar with a social networking site's security settings, they change them without consultation. For the average user who doesn't post updates often, this can be problematic. Their privacy settings may be tight one day, and the next time they log in, things have changed, their settings are now lax and without knowing it – they are making public posts.

When Sandry declared: “The popularity of sharing, re-blogging and pinning is becoming more and more noticeable as a form of web publishing” (Sandry, 2012), it made me believe that it is becoming more and more difficult to find content on the Internet which can be trusted. When sourcing information to back up a web publisher's claims it can be problematic obtaining reliable sources. Warnick states: “Only 29% of people trust commercial websites and only 33% trust the advice. People want the sites to provide clear information on who runs the site, how to reach those people, the site's privacy policy and other factors related to site authorship and sponsorship” (Warnick, 2004). With the abundance of websites available on various topics and the number of domain extensions now seen, it is impossible to know if the information you are reading has come from a dependable source. “Domain names are proliferating; we can no longer rely on .com, .net, .org, .edu, .gov and so forth. Now .info, .biz and others have added to the mix, and the URL becomes less and less a reliable marker of what type of site it is” (Warnick, 2004).

Social media is a strong avenue for people to share information, images and personal details with their friends. And there are hundreds of social networking sites out there which people can join for networking. There are many advantages to sharing on social media – you can keep in touch with friends overseas, family who live interstate, or you can even be friends with your next door neighbour who you see every day. Shirky states: “Publishing an essay and having 3 random people read it is a recipe for disappointment, but publishing an account of your Saturday night and having your 3 closest friends read it feels like a conversation, especially if they follow up with their own accounts” (Shirky, 2003). I'm constantly amazed at the content which people share online. In fact I am sometimes disgusted when I see inappropriate images of people in compromising positions, or those who are regularly checking in at pubs and clubs and uploading images of themselves drinking cocktails every weekend. Is this expected to start a conversation? I wonder what conversation they are attempting to start with this form of communication. Are they not concerned with how this portrays them? And these people are using their real identities and are friends with their employer on Facebook.

Why do so many people share their most intimate thoughts over the Internet in public spaces? Do they think nobody is reading? Some people make aliases for publishing online, in fact it is probably best to do so. Maybe it's important to keep your private live and your professional life separate. However some social media sites require your real identity. Whereas it is acceptable to have more than one Twitter account, Facebook frowns upon this. Sengupta states: “Facebook has sought to distinguish itself as a place for real identity on the Web. As the company tells it's users: 'Facebook is a community where people use their real identities...the name you use should be your real name as it would be listed on your credit card, student ID, etc'” (Sengupta, 2012). However how do we know people are abiding by Facebook's rules? It is still possible to create fake accounts on Facebook.

Online behaviours and our voice make us the communicator that we are. When submitting content online are we looking for reassurance? Are we looking for fans? Or are we simply writing to get things off our chest? Kendall did a study on LiveJournal participants, about their online behaviours. He states: “Privacy concerns thus govern some of how LiveJournal participants use their journals. However there are also pleasures to be found in the public performance aspects of blogging. Private expressions risk exposure to the public world of the Internet”. He goes on to explain: “Attention to audience desires can make self–expression feel less genuine. The desire for autonomy and the belief in discrete, individual selves conflicts with the desire for feedback and approval from others” (Kendall, 2007).

The parameters of relationships has changed since social media became a form of communication and sharing. Prior to the Internet we could only have relationships with people whom we had met. Now we can have relationships with total strangers, friends of friends and fellow gamers on the other side of the world. On Twitter we can feel connected to celebrities if we follow their Twitter feed or Like their Page on Facebook. If a celebrity we are following retweets us personally, or sends us a direct message – we get excited because that tightens the bond we have with them. Johnson tells a story about TV queen Oprah tweeting about her dog having a tick. She asked her followers the best way of removing the tick. Her Twitter feed was overwhelmed with replies as Oprah has more than a million followers. However as Johnson states: “That isolated query probably elicited thousands of responses. Who knows what small fraction of her @ replies she has time to read? But from the fan's perspective, it feels refreshingly intimate” (Johnson, 2009).

In conclusion, in my opinion the division between public and private writing has been influenced by social media. Although it can be difficult to switch between colloquial private voice to professional, academic, public voice - it can be done. The more people use social media and learn to develop their writing and 'find their voice', the better understanding they will have about which voice to use within with the platform or website. The more they share, the more connected they will feel to an audience. The more mistakes they make, the more they learn what is acceptable in public spaces like the Internet.

References:

Gumbrecht, M., Nardi, B., & Schiano, D., (2004, November 6-10). Blogging as social activity, or, would you let 900 people read your diary? CSCW ’04 (6–10 November). Retrieved from http://home.comcast.net/~diane.schiano/CSCW04.Blog.pdf

Hogan, B & Quan-Haase, A. (2010). Persistence and Change in Social Media. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society 2010 30: 309 DOI: 10.1177/0270467610380012

Johnson, S. (2009, June 5). How Twitter Will Change The Way We Live. Time Magazine Online. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1902818-3,00.html

Kendall, L. (2007). Shout Into The Wind And It Shouts Back: Identity and Interactional Tensions on LiveJournal. First Monday, Vol 12. 9. 3 September, 2007. Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2004/1879

Rheingold, H. (2008). Using Participatory Media and Public Voice to encourage Civic Engagement. Civic Life Online: Learning how Digital Media can engage with Youth. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 97–118. doi: 10.1162/dmal.9780262524827.097

Sandry, E. (2012) The Future of Web Publishing [Lecture]. Retrieved from http://echo.ilecture.curtin.edu.au:8080/ess/echo/presentation/f0e29969-3561-4de9-b975-fbf94696ec74

Sengupta, S. (2012, November 12). Facebook's False Faces Undermine Its Credibility. New York Times Online: Technology. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/technology/false-posts-on-facebook-undermine-its-credibility.html

Shirky, C. (2003, February 8). Clay Shirky's Writings About The Internet: Economics & Culture, Media & Community, Open Source. Retrieved from http://www.shirky.com/writings/powerlaw_weblog.html

Snapper, J. (1999). On the Web, plagiarism matters more than copyright piracy. Ethics and Information Technology, 1, 127-136.

Retrieved from: http://www.springerlink.com/index/L215064QJ8KK1331.pdf

Van House, N. (2004). Weblogs: Credibility and collaboration in an online world. Retrieved from :http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~vanhouse/Van%20House%20trust%20workshop.pdf

Warnick, B. (2004). Online Ethos: Source credibility in an "author-less" environment. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(2), 256-265. Available through the Library Database

Net204: Internet Communities and Social Networks - Stage 2: Social Networks

Stage 2 is about preparing for the 2000-2500 word paper for the Online Conference. There are 4 streams:

1. Communities and Web 2.0
2. Social Networks
3. Identity in Communities and Networks
4. Communities and Online Gaming

Social Networks

Social Network Sites: Definition, History and Scholarship

This paper discusses the history of social networking sites, what attracted users to them, and what made them succeed or fail. Some sites cater to diverse audiences, while others attract people based on common language or shared racial, sexual, religious, or nationality based identities. Tools of communication vary among social networking sites, i.e. mobile connectivity, blogging and photo/video sharing.

We define social networking sites as web-based services that allow individuals to:

1. construct a public or semi public profile within a bounded system
2. articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection
3. view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system

Here is a brief history:

• 1997 - SixDegrees.com was the first recognisable social networking site and failed because it was considered ahead of it's time
• AIM and ICQ supported buddy lists
• Classmates.com connected school friends
• 1997 - 2001 - Friends, AsianAvenue, BlackPlanet and MiGente were considered dating sites
• 1999 - Live Journal and Cyworld
• 2000 - LunarStorm
• 2001 - Ryze, Tribe.net, LinkedIn and Friendster. Friendster has been considered one of the biggest disappointments in Internet history. It lost members due to technical problems, server crashes and negative press coverage
• 2003 - MySpace became very popular because it connected bands with their fans and because they welcomed younger members. They were also the first to introduce html customisation into member profiles. Around this time blogging services with SNS features became popular like Xanga, LiveJournal and Vox
• 2004 - Facebook began as Harvard only, then all university students and eventually anyone could join

Reference

boyd, d., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1).

Net204: Internet Communities and Social Networks - An Introduction

Net204 is about Internet Communities and Social Networks, particularly looking at virtual communities. We are asked to think about how technology has changed communities.

This week I watched a YouTube video by Michael Wesch, a Professor of anthropology called 'An Anthropological view of YouTube".

Quotes and notes from this video referring to communities:

• Over 50% of YouTube videos have an 18-24 year old in them and the same number of 40-55 year olds watch YouTube as do teenagers
• When media changed - human relationships changed
• Why has community been in decline? Women went to work which meant less time for other activities, shopping moved from the corner store to the huge supermarket. These historical events resulted in "massive communities of suburbia becoming disconnected and connected only by roads and TV's. New forms of networks and communities began emerging"
• We are currently in a state of "networked but individualised" and we are becoming increasingly individual but many of us still have this strong value and desire for a community

What makes YouTube so popular?

• When recording a video you don't know who is going to be talking back to you, you have an invisible audience, it's asynchronies, you never know when they're going to watch you
• Context Collapse = when you talk to someone in real life you talk within a context, whereas when talking to a camera, there is no context. What you are saying or doing can be taken out of context by the viewers, however, and particularly if your video is remixed by another person
• There is a lot of reflection on YouTube - many people discuss their inner most thoughts because they are not anxious or shy talking about themselves in the privacy of their own bedroom. Nobody is around them. There are no faces staring back at them, so many people feel very liberated making a video
• YouTube offers the possibility of connection without constraint
• Over 200,000 videos are uploaded daily

The YouTube Authenticity Crisis

lonelygirl15 first came to international attention as a "real" video blogger who had achieved massive popularity on YouTube. The show was eventually proved as a hoax by suspicious viewers who identified the actress playing Bree as 19-year old American-New Zealand actress Jessica Rose. The three creators of lonelygirl15 were Mesh Flinders, a screenwriter and filmmaker from Marin County, California, Miles Beckett, a surgical residency dropout turned filmmaker, and Greg Goodfried, a former attorney with Mitchell, Silberberg.

When lonelygirl15 was ousted the, YouTube community was outraged and pleaded that YouTubers should be real people, that YouTube is a place for people to just be themselves. The creators of lonelygirl15 responded with this:

lonelygirl15 is a reflection of everyone.

She is no more real or fictitious from the portions of our personalities

 that we choose to show (or hide) when we interact with people around us.

Did you know:

The thumbnail image which appears next to your uploaded video is taken from the exact centre of the clip? Some YouTubers insert a shocking or sexy image to grab the viewers attention which entices them to click the thumbnail and watch the video. Mmm interesting marketing ploy!


Wikipedia
We were asked to look at this article on Wikipedia about Virtual Communities and comment on the structure of the article and the relevance of information. Here is my response:

The first thing I notice about this Wikipedia article is the structure. At the top of the page you can view the article (as normal), can edit the article if you are a registered Wikipedia user, and view the history of changes which contributors have made. I was curious to see what was edited and by whom so I looked at the 'View History' tab.
A list of all changes to the article appears with the name of the contributor who made those edits. There were many changes to the article made a many contributors. I chose a contributor at random and it appeared to be a bot which picks up errors. See attached screenshot.

Another user I chose at random was by the name of Bellagio99. He/She states on their profile page: "Where Google supplies an unorganised list, Wikipedia tries to organise information chaos into comprehensible bytes". I thought that was an interesting statement...considering Google is quite organised in my opinion. His profile can be viewed here. 

Once I began reading the article on virtual communities I noticed that under the heading 'Online Chatrooms' the article states: "The original development by CompuServe CB hosted forty channels in which users could talk to one another in real time. The idea of forty different channels led to the idea of chat rooms that were specific to different topics." This made me think about CB radios and the community of CB radio users. I remember using a CB of a relative when I was a kid and I recall hearing very inappropriate conversations. 

I wondered if CB radio users were one of the first virtual communities? I did some reading on CB radio use and discovered that during the 1970s CB radio use became so popular that the licencing board couldn't keep up with licence applications so dropped the requirement. This mean anybody could use a CB radio. Because the laws were lax and there were no regulations the CB community became quite vulgar and full of racism and sexual discussions (Tynan, 1978). 

Other things I noticed about the article on virtual communities (and Wikipedia in general) is we don't know how accurate the information is that we are reading, often statements are not backed up with evidence, the contributors are not necessarily academics or experts in the topic, articles give a brief overview rather than a thorough understanding. Wikipedia may be perfect for children who want a quick explanation or definition, but it isn't suitable for academic papers.

References
Bellagio99 (n.d.) Profile Page. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bellagio99

Tynan, K (1978). The New Yorker Profiler: Fifteen years of the Salto Mortale Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1978/02/20/1978_02_20_047_TNY_CARDS_000326477?printable=true

Wesch, M. (2008). An Anthropological Guide to YouTube. Retrieved January 2, 2011, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPAO-lZ4_hU&feature=channel.

Web206: Topic 2.1: Narrating The Self

This week we talked about how we portray ourselves on the Internet. Do we keep our professional lives separate to our personal lives? We discussed the topic of avatars and personally I can live without them. Avatars or lack thereof make no difference to my web experience.  In fact when I do have to choose an avatar I stress over it for so long that I end up making a rubbish one just to get it out of the way.  Every time we choose an avatar or nickname for an online service, we perform a small act of self-presentation. We choose whether to use our real names, to choose a name that reflects something about our personality or situation in the world or we create a fictitious personality (Walker, 2005).

Identity is characterised by the tension between how a person defines themselves as an individual and how they connect to others and social groups in affiliative relationships. In cyberspace meaning is communicated far beyond the people in proximity to the communicator; instead the world is watching (Gilly & Schau, 2003).


We were asked why we were doing this subject. I've always been interested in computers and began building basic websites in the 90s. When my last job was made redundant I decided to enrol in uni and follow my dreams of becoming a web designer. Well I'm only a third of the way along this journey but am loving every minute.

I feel it is important as a web designer to learn about web publishing, different platforms, different online spaces, copyright and creative commons among other topics. I've only been blogging for about 3yrs so am fairly new. I want to learn more about increasing my followers, getting more of an audience, writing in an appealing and creative way to get attention, because the more people I get to notice me (my blogs, my website, my social media profiles) the more potential customers my business will attract. On that note - Mojo Online Solutions is the name of my business. We have a Facebook Page, Twitter account and blog. I use all platforms on a regular basis to increase my 'followers' and 'likes' in the hope of securing some work.

We are creating a blog for this subject on a topic of our choice. My blog is called Pure & Simple Food and is about food allergies and special diets. This is my bio:

My name is Michelle and my passion is cooking. It wasn't always! For as long as I can remember I have always cooked fairly plain, boring but familiar meals. However last year my husband and I decided to renovate our house. The first job on our list was a new kitchen. I was very excited and it was a challenge being without a kitchen for a few weeks. The BBQ and microwave got a work-out and we had no kitchen sink for a month and had to wash up in the bath!

Now I have my new kitchen, my love for cooking has really increased. With a family of fussy eaters - dinner time can be a challenge, but with forward planning cooking can definitely be enjoyable.

We have many friends and family members with food intolerances, food allergies, have special diets like Veganism and Vegetarianism, and others require either a gluten-free diet, nut-free diet, egg-free diet, or dairy-free diet. Over time I have researched these conditions and have gained useful information which I believe is important to share with others.

References:


Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. (2003). We Are What We Post? Self-Presentation in Personal Web Space. The Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 385-404.

Walker, J. (2005). Mirrors and Shadows: The Digital Aestheticisation of Oneself. Paper presented at the Digital Arts and Culture Conference. Retrieved from : https://bora.uib.no/handle/1956/1136

Web206: Topic 1.2: Sourcing information on the web

How do we locate reliable sources on the Internet with the sheer volume of information available? It is important that when doing research we find credible sources of information. They don't necessarily need to be academic sources, but reliable, respected experts in their field.

Did you know that you can narrow down your Google search using the words OR, AND and NOT? So when searching for science fiction you will be presented with hundreds of article on science fiction movies, comics, TV shows, etc. but if you want to eliminate movies it is best to search Google for science fiction NOT film.

When using Google Scholar for academic sources you will more than likely come across databases or journals which you cannot access unless you subscribe. If this is the case, make a note of the journal and issue number and then search for it in your university's library (which you are a member of).

Using the Advanced Search in Google (see below) opens up several fields where extra search criteria can be added to narrow down your search further. At Arrow 1 you can either enter your search criteria in the field 'all of these words' or 'this exact word or phrase' or 'any of these words' etc. At Arrow 2 you can ask for information updated within the past 24hrs, past week, month or year or anytime. At Arrow 3 you can only search titles or whole page text, and at Arrow 4 you can narrow down your searches for only pdfs or images, etc. It's a great idea to utilise Google's Advanced Search facility.

As well as using Google there are other search engines to help you find credible sources, including http://www.about.com/education/ and www.delicious.com

Another point to bear in mind when researching is who wrote the article you are using? When was it written? How respected and knowledgable is the author? Also ask yourself is the source biased in any way? Are their arguments only one-sided? Are they against first person shooter games because they allegedly cause aggression in young males but that's because that company sells anti-aggression medication? And finally does the page also provide links to other reputable sites?

Don't limit your research to websites alone - use blogs too! Just make sure the blogger is respected, is knowledgable and offers several arguments. Do they take pride in their blog? Is it full of spelling and grammatical errors? Is it full of advertising? If so - it's probably best not to use such a blog for academic purposes. http://technorati.com/blogs/directory/ is a blog directory. While http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/blogs shows us the most popular blogs at the present time and http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/media-websites the most popular media websites. These are updated monthly.

Web206: Topic 1.1: Preparation for the unit

This unit is called Web206 Web Publishing and we will be learning about publishing content on the web, finding and expanding an audience, writing on different mediums and for different audiences and evaluating credible sources.

If you are interested in becoming a blogger - this is an interesting slideshow from a credible and respected blogger. This slideshow is called "10 Steps to Building Your Personal Brand via blogging" and is presented using nationally-recognized fashion blog Omiru: Style for All (www.omiru.com) as a case study. Omiru has been featured by the Wall Street Journal, Lucky Magazine, and Real Simple Magazine.

Blogging for Personal Branding from Trisha Okubo

Web207: Topic 2.2: YouTube & Participatory Culture

What is Participatory Culture and how reliable and respected is YouTube? Notes from this week's lecture:

• Participatory culture means members feel some degree of social connection with one another and they feel their contributions matter
• Culture perpetuates and is meaningful for a long period of time
• Simply blogging isn't participatory culture - only if it engages with an audience is it considered participatory
• How many YouTube clips have you watched and instantly thought it was fake?
• How many comments from viewers repulse you? Some people have nothing better to do that to leave derogatory comments for your video
• Do you respect education videos over amateur funny videos? Or do you enjoy them all equally?

Reflection:

Even though I've been blogging for years, for the first year or so I was blogging to nobody. As soon as my blog posts began getting comments, shares and likes, did I consider it participatory. I now have an audience who interacts with my blog (as well as my Facebook status updates and tweets. If nobody is reading them - how can it be considered participatory?

Reference:

Leaver, T. (2012) ... Topic 2.2: YouTube & Participatory Culture [Lecture]. Retrieved from http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/casterframe.lasso?fid=794620&cnt=true&usr=not-indicated&name=not-indicated