Although this assignment officially finished two days ago, I did not get a chance to read all of my classmates final blog posts until now and felt the urge to post just one more. After an incredible four years here at Laurier, this assignment was definitely one that stood out as an excellent teaching tool. Not only did I get to put theory into practice, but I was able to do so within a circle of classmates who were doing the very same thing. So on that note, I wanted to thank you, my classmates and fellow bloggers for every post you posted. Each one enlightened me in a different way and thru your thoughts, I was able to explore more of my own. I wish you each the best of luck in the future, I know you'll all do something fabulous. And for those of you who feel uncertain about the future of a Comm student, or how serious someone considers the issues we've studied, just consider the advantage we all have now having studied something we know is imperative! Hopefully it won't take others too long to catch on...
For me, my next steps are still to be determined, but I do know that blogging is something I plan to continue. It might be on this blog, or I'll establish another. Reminds me of our lecture that discussed what happens (or doesn't happen) to old Internet pages and profiles. But Adios for now my amigos, and I hope you all make headlines for doing amazing things!
For our CS400H final project, one of my classmates Jill created this great online magazine 'The Revolution Will Be Digital'. I really like how she included a Letter from the Editor, where she states how she feels about print vs. digital texts. It demonstrates an important aspect of citizen media, where it is normal and somewhat expected that the author disclose his/her bias. I also like the different graphics and fonts, especially the magazine cover. My only question/critique is regarding the "master plan" font and if it is supposed to be spaced awkwardly. It could be that it shows up differently on my mac than intended, or perhaps it's supposed to be like that for effect.
The articles are well written and I think you did a great job, Jill!
For the final project of my 4th year Communications course entitled Citizen Media and the Public Sphere (the course I was required to write this blog for), I was asked to engage in a citizen media project. I chose to make a YouTube response to the Vancouver Olympics that outlined the actuality of all the Winter Olympic spending. The importance of putting this spending into context is outlined in the remix of clips. The links to the clips I used are at the end of the video.
The creation of this video illustrates the concept that citizen media (like YouTube) can provide an alternative view to mainstream, hegemonic news. As well, it illustrates that the concept of remixing other texts (in this case, YouTube clips) is an effective way to create a new idea built upon other works.
This is the first time I've created something like this, so any and all constructive criticism is encouraged! Feel free to say things like "the clip from _:_ to _:_ is too long", "blank doesn't flow", or whatever you'd like. For the report part of this project, I need to include some feedback I receive, so please comment, rate and share it with your friends. The video is too wide for this post, so feel free to open it in its own browser to view it in proper form.
As some of you know, a SeaWorld trainer was killed recently when she was pulled underwater into a whale tank by a whale that had a past history of violence. With the other trainers unable to save her, Dawn Brancheau was thrashed around until she drowned. Since many spectators observed this shocking event (it took place during a live show), it is surprising that no horrific stringer footage surfaced on YouTube, as footage usually does when something shocking and outrageous occurs. SeaWorld does have two surveillance cameras that captured parts of her death, one on top a tall tower overlooking the tank deck, and another underwater camera. Now with the help of SeaWorld, Dawn Brancheau’s family will be one step closer to preventing the release of that footage.
It is known that people were and still are curious to see how this awful event happened, as they usually are when a bizarre and/or public death occurs (similar to how Marissa blogged about the Olympic luger’s death footage). I wonder why people feel the actual NEED to see footage of one’s death, especially if it can be effectively described in another, less graphic way. The family of the late trainer does not want the public to be able to see the footage of their loved one’s death become a exploited commodity, so now with the help of SeaWorld’s lawyers and money they will hopefully be one step closer to securing that privacy. They also argue that the footage does not provide any other helpful evidence as to why this happened or what can be done, because of what the footage did not capture.
"The underwater view does not show Mrs. Brancheau until after she had entered the water. The overhead camera was not aimed at the scene until after the incident had begun," the complaint states.
"Significantly neither camera shows what occurred in the moments prior to and including Mrs. Brancheau being pulled into the water and offer no insight into the cause of this tragic event."
Although the family has valid points regarding the video's lack of evidential ability, the Brancheau family and SeaWorld are fighting against First Amendment Rights and Florida Access Laws. According to the Freedom of Information Act, law enforcement files are public property in Florida. Since the footage was released to Florida police to investigate this case, media has a strong argument as to why they should have access to the footage, now that the case is closed.
If mainstream media gets hold of the footage, do you think they’ll show it? Or do you think they’ll respect the family’s wishes of not showing this unfortunate event? Do you think SeaWorld and the Brancheau family should have the rights to the footage or should the media have full access and decide for themselves if they’ll air it?
UPDATE April, 2010:
Footage was aired on CBC. Now easily accessible on YouTube.
On February 15th, 2010, UK radio personality Tim Shaw decided to lock himself in a steel box too small for him to even stand in for 30 days and broadcast it live to the world online. With help from daily clues and Tim’s discussions of his past, it is up to the online viewers to figure out his location and find him. And this is all for an incredible prize of €30,000!! (With all proceeds gained from the stunt being donated to Help for Heroes, a charity that helps wounded UK soldiers). I have been occasionally checking back to this man every few days (who I now deem insane) as he waits to be found, which would release him from his confinement prior to the 30 day mark. His production team also set up a Twitter account for the contest which they post status updates from about clever, funny, or crazy things they says along with rating his mood.
Tim is given food once a day through a small hatch (which is also when they collect his “waste”), and is also given random objects that could either help keep him from getting depressed or going crazy, or make him annoyed and go further insane. He talks about missing his wife, his kids, information about his past flings and the crazy situations he’s gotten himself into. But most importantly he talks about the past places he’s been in hopes that one of the 500,000 or so people that have viewed him in isolation would figure out where he was and release him. There are about 2,000 viewers on at the average time, give or take, and a total of 551,235 total views (as of March 12th, 3:30pm). You would think that by now (day 26 of his confinement), and with Tim figuring out he is at some form of WWII site or museum in the UK, someone would have figured out his location to win the €30,000 and some fame. But they haven’t. And Tim continues to get skinnier and skinnier legs (from being unable to stand), which is what I notice the most. He sleeps more and more of the day and the ‘mood meter’ on his Twitter feed has been steadily decreasing.
By last week, I couldn’t help but notice and be slightly bothered by the fact that he hasn’t been located. Last week was when he narrowed down his location to a specific enough description that even made me - someone very far from his location who had not been following close since the beginning - consider searching online for different places he could possibly be. Yet I haven’t looked, and apparently other people aren’t trying very hard either. This relates to one of our course readings, which raises point about the lack of actual social action executed by those in participatory culture.
“The majority of young people are convinced that supporting a social cause is something they should do. However, there is a strong disparity between interest and involvement, an ‘activation gap,’ and there is significant room for growth.” (Rheingold 98).
I guess a lot of people are enjoying watching this guy suffer and learning a bit of geography, but no one really cares enough to find him, win money and support the Heroes charity. Or maybe people really are trying and just haven’t figured it out? All I know is that although watching this guy in isolation is pretty painful, I still find myself drawn back to the live stream to see if he’ll do or say something nutso. Or to see if he’s been found, of course! Would you look for Man in Box for €30,000? Do you think he’ll be found before the 30 day mark is up?
I previously blogged before about the concept of negotiating an online identity for yourself and yesterday in class we were lectured on the concept some more. Our discussion led us to think about the way a person communicates their identity in the physical world, versus online. In the physical world (“rl” or real life), we assume that the way one presents him or herself is an accurate representation of who they really are. We take cues from clothing, hairstyle, the way they walk, and more. In the context of MMORPG (mass multiplayer online role playing games like Runescape or World of Warcraft), the same cues cannot be used. People of all ages and of all descents come together online for a common goal – usually to advance the user’s account in one way or another. There are many users addicted to these kinds of games, spending countless hours online and growing friendships with others who do the same. But your physical body is missing in the online world – how are you supposed to determine the kind of person you’re talking? In the case of MMORPGs, how are you supposed to trust the people you're spending countless hours and energy with, advancing your accounts? According to Prof. Boutros, you generally use conversations to determine one’s identity online, taking cues from the way the other users speak about things. But again, how are we supposed to trust that the person we are conversing with is actually who they claim to be? For example, I am blogging under the pseudonym Alexis Woods, but that is not my real name. And I could perhaps create a different character for myself as the author of this blog, but you might not realize.
There’s always a person behind that computer screen, so how do you get to know that person? How do you come to trust their character when you only interact within the so-called virtual community? And do you even need to get to know them? These are all questions posed by scholars of the “virtual identity”. I found that this blogger defines a virtual (or digital) identity very well – as being,
“the online representation of an individual within a community, as adopted by that individual and/or projected by others. An individual may have multiple digital identities in multiple communities”
Without you realizing it, users like you and I have been negotiating our virtual identities for some time now. Doing things like photoshopping the pictures we post on Facebook, editing the comments that are posted on those pictures, and even being an active user of a certain website (obviously, Facebook in this example) are ways that a person can represent oneself. Some people restrict certain aspects of themselves from being shown online. Perhaps if you have a prosthetic limb and choose not to have it photographed, or you pose in the way that it would not get noticed – that person then communicates him or herself as someone that has four functioning limbs.
This made me think - how is this different from people who lead so-called “double lives” in reality or historically? Classic examples like Superman can be used, or an extreme example like a mother who works a second job as a nightwalker, but none of her friends and family know. What are the consequences of misrepresenting yourself in reality and are they different than editing your virtual identity?
There are many ways to grow trust online – bloggers use verifiable facts, eBay users have buyer/seller feedback ratings, MMORPG users join guilds and spend time working toward certain tasks with guild members, or you can merely grow to trust someone by conversing with them regularly. Once individuals figure out what they want to get out of their experience in the virtual community, they can determine the cues they need to look for in order to determine the identity of who they’re conversing with.
I read an article for another class by Chris Gray entitled “Sex Machines, Human Beings, In-Betweens” (2002). In this article, the author compares the example of people hiding or manipulating their genders online to the manipulation of gender when undergoing sexual reassignment surgery. This comparison helps create an awareness that for many individuals, gender is one part of their identity that is constructed. Even if you think you are interacting with a male in person, it could very easily be a prior female. The world has advanced to such a level of understanding regarding gender, sexuality and the technological advancements that can alter gender and sexuality, therefor individuals need to realize that bodies can be altered. Specifically, because this gender and body alteration allows a person to renegotiate their identity.
Now one must consider the significance of this gender alteration in the virtual community versus the physical world. I cannot equate the manipulation of one’s online gender to the sexual reassignment surgery of an individual’s physical body, as the author, Chris Gray did. When chatting online, many individuals do not share their personal information and may not give accurate information regarding their sexuality. As well, people playing videos games that interact with others can choose a character that is either male or female to play as. There are no real implications of someone thinking a player is male versus female, since the intention is to win the game. On the contrary, upon meeting someone in person (at a bar for example), there is a good possibility the intention can be to ‘pick them up’. In our current society, there is a large assumption with respect to gender that “what you see is what you get”... perhaps people will need to rethink that idea now.
Shifting back to your online or virtual identity – which aspects about getting to know a person matter? Which don’t? How do you come to trust a person you’re interacting with in the virtual community? And do you need do?
Earlier today in Toronto, a tractor trailer accident caused Highway 401’s Westbound lanes to close for a significant amount of hours. Spilling two trailers worth of materials resulting in a serious clean-up, CP24 and other mainstream news outlets were sure to be on the scene and report the incident. Not surprisingly, many drivers traveling by were also taking footage of the accident and mess, bringing out their cell phones and other electronic devices to either snap a photo or take a video. What these drivers didn’t realize though, was that as they were travelling slowly by the accident filming the scene, the many police officers standing by would notice this and surely do something about it. After all, in Ontario it is now illegal to use a cell phone in any way while driving a car, so this traffic accident became the perfect opportunity for officers to enforce the new law. While being interviewed live by CP24, an officer noticed a man using his cameraphone while driving and swiftly pulled him over. Watch this humorous encounter between mainstream live media and citizen journalism.
Check out the video on the top right of the CP24 site.
Do you think this is merely bad timing on the driver's behalf? Or do you think it could be staged to set an example or precedent for other citizens not to use mobile devices while driving?
This blog was created in my fourth year of university for a required blogging assignment. I was required to use a pseudonym and chose Alexis Woods, although have since decided to keep it that way.
All the posts prior to and including April 2010 were for marks!
