Can I please get some privacy?!

In week 5 of the course, we discussed the issues of privacy, and mainly the privacy statements made by Facebook. We also had a brief look at statement made by Mark Zuckerberg, as he was discussing how the new Facebook privacy tools made it easier for people to set their own privacy statuses for their individual pages, and thus, would greater encourage the sharing information between people. I find that Facebook’s Privacy tools are more than sufficient in the control of information shown between users, however, those who complain about the lax privacy security, I believe are just not educating themselves enough. I think it might be expected by users that sites, such as Facebook, set up the individual’s privacy settings automatically. However, the fact that these sites allow users to change these setting themselves, gives me greater confidence in what information I’m sharing.

On another privacy-related note, a few weeks ago, it was found that Apple were using their iPhones in order to track users’ locations. This, to me, should be given more time in the papers than Facebook’s privacy issues, as the company is doing this under all of their consumers’ noses. The link I provided states that a lawsuit was enactioned against Apple for these actions, however, I have been unable to find the results of the lawsuit.

The two examples of privacy issues discussed above show two different types of issues with privacy. However, I find that the first one is more of an issue with consumers than with the companies behind the product, and that more focus should be given to privacy breaches such as the Apple case, as this is a clear violation of people’s private lives.

Simple. Is. Always. Better.

In week 8 tutorials, we discussed in groups, what we deemed to be good and bad websites. I thought that this was an interesting exercise as everyone has their own criteria of what makes a good website. To me, the best websites are the simplest ones. This doesn’t mean that they have to be boring, rather, they are websites which allow you to get the information you need efficiently. Here are some examples of my some websites I find are simple, yet good:

Firstly, Google would be one of my all time favourite websites, and I don’t think I’d be wrong if I’d say that most people would agree with me on this one. Again, the reason I fidn this site to be a great one, is the simplicty of it; it’s usually a white background with a few useful links and a search bar. What could be more simple? Yet, it gets the job done every time.

Another website I enjoy as well, is Ticketek. This might seem like an odd choice, but I find that although the homepage is quite busy and loud, it still has a sense of simplicty. It breaks down the most popular attractions by categories, and its search bar allows you to search not only keywords, but in genres as well, so it’s still helpful even if you’re not sure of what you are actually looking for. Also, even though the screen might seem busy, there is always a consistent motif in the colours and backgrounds to the website, and this continuity, I find is quite appealing in websites.

Copyright? More like Copywrong… This blog is turning to Creative Commons!

In week 10’s tutorials, each student had to add a Creative Commons license to our blogs. I just wanted to discuss which license I chose and why.

Firstly, I enjoyed the idea of the Creative Commons more than copyrights, purely because it gives the producer more control over what can and can’t be done with their work. Instead of reserving all rights, the producers are able to let people use their work, still within some set guidelines. The Creative Commons website speaks more on this, but this is the basic idea of what the organisation is trying to promote.

The license I chose for my blog is called the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0). The full details of the license can be found here, but basically this means that the work on this blog is free to be shared and remixed, given that the person doing so attributes the work, and uses a similar license which allows people to share and remix their work.

The main reason I chose this license was that I wanted to make sure that my work is free for all to use, however, I also wanted to make sure that the people who use my work also share the same principles as I do, in terms of sharing of information. Thus, basically, I just want to be sure that the sharing of information is encouraged as much as possible, and this is why I chose this type of Creative Commons license.

Creation of Celebrities Through Youtube

Justin Bieber (in the ‘ordinary world’)

Justin Bieber (in the ‘media world’)

Copyright vs Intellectual Property

In week 10 of this course, we discussed copyrights in quite detail. However, I realised that even though the word ‘copyright’ is always being thrown around nowadays, I never fully understood the definition. That’s why I felt it would be a good idea to write a short blog in order to explain it.

What is the difference between the traditional idea of copyright and intellectual property?

Copyright is the monopoly of an idea or product for a limit amount of time. Copyrights and patents are, in essence, the same. For example, a patent for a drug is when a company develops a new drug, which no other company is able to reproduce for a specified time period.

Originally the idea of a copyright is the physical and visible manifestation of an idea, rather than the idea itself, which is the intellectual property.

(e.g. quoting a paragraph is copyright infringement, but if you use your own words, you are using someone else’s idea)

What does the latter imply?

The wording of “intellectual property” conjures the perception of possession, and that there is a limit to who is able to possess such property.

Distinguish between a rivalrous and non-rivalrous resource.

A rivalrous resource is something that is depleted when one is using it. Thus, an idea, for example, is a non-rivalrous resource.

Building Communities Through Youtube

The topic of this blog is the ability for Youtube to create communities through its use of ranking tactics, which promote the more popular videos in circulation. Firstly, in order to discuss such an idea, the term ‘community’ should be narrowed down, as it is such a general term. Jose van Dijck argues that the term has a strong connotation with belonging to a rea-life group, however, he believes that when it comes to the online community, it can be defined as “groups with a communal preference in music, movies, or books, (a so called ‘taste-community’)”, he then argues that “building taste is an activity that necessarily ties in individuals with social groups” (van Dijck, 45).

Now that the definition for ‘community’ has been outlined, a closer look of how Youtube operates, shall be discussed in greater detail. When an individual is signed into Youtube, the first page they are greeted with presents many attempts, by Youtube, to place them in certain categories. One of the first things on the page is a section with the heading ‘we’ve found some channels that you might like’, below this, are many ‘recommended videos’ which have been picked by the site’s system through wading through the individual’s video search history (youtube.com, 2011) . All of these sections are tools for Youtube to create the personality of the individual, and thus, place them in certain categories. Ranking systems further allow for this to occur, because, when a person is watching a video, they are given options of other similar videos which have been well-received by viewers. These systems and sections have all been introduced by Youtube, in order to categorise viewers into subsections of taste; because if people are watching videos they like, they are more willing to increase its popularity or comment on the videos, which will give the website a feeling of community.

These ranking tactics which have been employed by Youtube are yet another example of the power of produsage being harnessed. Everything about the system requires the user to generate value into the product being presented, and this is the epitome of ‘produsage’ (Bruns, 2008) . Not only are videos created by the users of the website, people who comment on videos, like them, or even watch them, for that matter, are contributing on marginal value onto the product. Popularity on site such as Youtube are based on public perception; and most of the time, the number of likes, comments and views a video receives, all contribute and determine how good a video actually is, and not the actual content.

This blog has tried to present the idea that Youtube’s effective ranking tactic has been able to give people the sense of community, and belonging to a group, through their use of user histories, in order to be able to present individual users with more content which will strengthen their position in that community, through liking and commenting on videos. And finally, the idea of produsage was applied to this case, as a tool for creation of value within videos.

References

Axel Bruns, The Future is User-Led: The Path Towards Widespread Produsage, Fibreculture Journal, Date Published: 2008, Date Accessed, 31 May 2011

Jose van Dijck, ‘Users like you? Theorising agency in user-generated content’, Media, Culture & Society, 31 (2009): 31-58.

Youtube, Youtube.com, Date Published: 2011, Date Accessed: 31 May 2011 <www.youtube.com>

FUN FUN FUN!!!

The above  is an audio version of Glee’s cover of the Rebecca Black song, “Friday”. No, I didn’t just post this to annoy you, but I just wanted to make the point of how certain youtube celebrities enter into the mainstream media and move beyond the limitations of youtube. In this respect, youtube is a great initial step for aspiring celebrities to get a foot into the public’s eye.

I don’t know exactly where I am going with this, but terminologies such as “youtube sensation” means that there is a divide and a difference between the traditional celebrity and youtube hits. I guess this means that somewhere in the definition of “celebrity” it states that the person requires to be in the public eye AND be distributed by the mainstream media…

Blogs as Effective Information Sources

In a paper written by Russell, Ito, Richmond, and Tuters, the following question is pondered: “Do bloggers, with their editorial independence, collaborative structure and merit-based popularity more effectively inform the public?” (Russell et al., 67). Ironically enough, this blog post will aim to answer this question; however, it will argue that blogs are, in fact, not a more effective information source than the media. In doing so, this blog will use example of blogs and other sources to illustrate the point.

Firstly, information does not only include news, this first example will deal with the issue of fashion information. One of the most popular blogs of this kind, is “thestylerookie.com.”. At first glance, this blog is purely an amalgamation of pictures of every style of fashion imaginable. It all seems quite unorganised, and the texts which are written appear to be extremely self-centred, as what is usually being discussed are the daily routines and thoughts of the bloggers herself (Gevinson, 2011). An example of the kinds of posts which this blog presents is; “In these last weeks before summer I’ve been trying to soak up the back to school vibes before Chicago settles on some legitimate summer heat and it becomes too unbearable for vibes of any kind, other than like, ‘sweaty vibes,’ or ‘what-does-one-wear-to-watch-Seinfeld-all-day vibes'” (Gevinson, 2011). Posts such as this is the basis of what people will find when scrolling down the blog’s pages. This blog, although popular, strengthens the argument that these sources of media are, in fact, not the most effective sources of information for the public. In fact, this particular blog is a perfect example of Geert Lovink’s idea, that blogs are merely a way in which bloggers manage the self, which has been dealt with in previous blog posts (Lovink, 28).

Now this blog will compare the aforementioned example with a more mainstream source of information. Gentlemen’s Quarterly, or GQ for short, is one of the most renowned men’s magazines, which deals mostly with fashion trends, discussions, and the public personalities who men are interested in reading about. This type of media is the complete opposite to the first example, in that, it is a private institution which doesn’t collaborate with the greater community on its issues, and it’s a for-profit organisation. This blog would argue that GQ, as a magazine and website, informs the public much more effectively than blogs such as “thestylerookie.com”. These sort of organisations not only give advice and insight, they also utilise current pop-culture personalities in order to remain relevant and interesting. For example, one of their recent articles have been on man’s style in weddings, and what men should be wearing to such occasions. The model they used for the different styles was Darren Criss, a male actor (Feng, 2011). This example shows how they effectively are able to inform the public, because the use of a personality such as Criss draws in readers’ attention, and once that has occurred, they are able to let them know about the fashion side of the article.

This blog has aimed to argue that blogs ar, in fact, not more effective in presenting messages to the greater public. This was done through the use of examples such as thestylerookie.com, and GQ, respectively.

References

Adrienne Russell, Mizuki Ito, Todd Richmond and Marc Tuters, ‘Culture: Media Convergence and Networked Culture’, in Kazys Varnelis (ed.) Networked Publics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008, pp. 43-76.

Geert Lovink, ‘Blogging, The Nihilist Impulse’, in Zero Comments: Blogging and Critical Internet Culture, London: Routledge, pp. 1-38.

Tavi Gevinson, Style Rookie, thestylerookie.com, Date Published: 21 May 2011, Date Accessed: 25 May 2011 <www.thestylerookie.com>

Kai Z Feng, The GQ Wedding Primer Starring Darren Criss, GQ.com, Date Published: May 2011, Date Accessed: 25 May 2011 <http://www.gq.com/style/wear-it-now/201106/darren-criss-summer-wedding-style-men#slide=2>

Piracy as a Cultural Function

Armin Medosch argues that “piracy, despite being an entirely commercially motivated activity carried out in black or grey markets, fulfils culturally important functions” (Medosch, 81). This blog will aim to support his claims with the use of various examples. Firstly, an example of piracy in Brazilian Favelas will be used, followed by a brief discussion of peer-to-peer websites such as limewire, which is now no longer in existence.

Firstly, this following example will argue how piracy is able to empower people and encourage greater equality between income groups. A reasearch study conducted in Brazil have resulted in great insight as to how piracy, although illegal, can be a tool for entertainment and education. The researchers found that, in the Brazilian slums, also known as “favelas”, there is a great prevalence of “a small thriving industry called LAN houses” (Medosch, 81). LAN houses act not only as internet cafes and gaming centres; they are also places where pirated computer hardware, as well as software, are sold. These LAN houses are the epitome of “piracy”, everything from the water, to the electricity is pirated. At first glance, one would think that these operations are highly illegal, and dangerous, and thus should be shut down. However, upon closer inspection, this industry is indeed fulfilling culturally important functions. A brief discussion of Brazil’s income distribution will aid in the understanding of this perspective. A study in 2002 showed that Brazil is the country with the fourth most unequal distribution of income in the world. In this country, the top 20% of earners have incomes which are 30 times greater than the poorest 20% (The World Bank, 2005). The reason why that point was brought up was to illustrate the gap between the rich and the poor in this country. These LAN houses are allowing the poorer socioeconomic groups of this country to have basically the same resources as the richer groups. They are able to use similar technology, play the same games, and use the same software as everyone else, which would otherwise be unobtainable by these people. The way this industry encourages equality between income group is that it allows for the education of poorer members of the society in computer software. This then, would allow them to become more employable in higher paying jobs, which could take them out of poverty. Of course this is an idealised view of this industry, however, this does not mean that these things can’t and won’t happen.

Online piracy through Peer-To-Peer websites is one of the most popular forms of piracy. One such example is isohunt.com. According to the site’s founder, Gary Fung, “Remixing and sharing is good for culture” (Moya, 2008). His argument is that, in the internet age, sharing information between individuals should be promoted, as it is our cultural perspective that sharing is a favourable activity which should not be vilified. Be it sharing photos on Facebook, or sharing music through Peer-To-Peer sites, Fung believe that in today’s society, people want to share, and that the law should not prohibit an action which the majority of us find no fault in.

This blog has aimed to argue that piracy is not only an action with negative consequences. Rather, it can play a positive role in how society’s culture is formed.

References:

Armin Medosch, ‘Paid in Full: Copyright, Piracy and the Real Currency of Cultural Production’, in Deptforth. TV Diaries II: Pirate Strategies. London: Deptforth TV, 2008, pp. 73-97.

Gap Between Rich and Poor: World Income Inequality in 2002, The World Bank, Date Published: 2005, Date Accessed: 21 May 2011 <http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908770.html&gt;

Jared Moya, isoHunt: ‘Copyright Infringers Aren’t Wrong, the Law Is’, Zeropaid.com, Date Published: 11 November 2008, Date Accessed: 21 May 2011 <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9840/isohunt_copyright_infringers_arent_wrong_the_law_is/&gt;

Such a “like”-able kid!

An amusing story on News.com.au has interested me today. In this article, an Israeli couple has named their newborn child, “Like”. WHY IS THIS? You may ask. Well, stop asking questions, we’re not in a conversation, it’s a blog. Nonetheless, I will answer it; the reason they did it was because they believe that “like ” is the modern equivalent of the word love. The basis of their observation was rooted in the fact that now, on Facebook, you can “like” people’s posts, comments, and photos alike. After posting the picture of their new-born on Facebook, they received 40 “likes”, and thus, they decided to name their daughter “Like”.

The reason I felt that this was blog-worthy, was that it shows how big of a role the internet plays in people’s mindsets nowadays. Yes, I admit that this is an extreme example, but I mean, how many times have you thought “Oh! I should put that thought as my status!” or “I should really put those pictures up on Facebook” or even “That person seemed cool, let me add them on Facebook”. I know I have been guilty of this at some points in the past few years.

… and that’s the way the cookie crumbles