As a student participating in the online public sphere, I think it is important to make use of my alternative media channel as I am inspired, but most importantly, when mainstream news outlets report poorly. (Which I guess does inspire me ;). According to Henry Jenkins, alternative media (like YouTube) have an essential place in our contemporary culture when it can challenge the mainstream (as do blogs). In his article titled Nine Propositions Toward a Cultural Theory of YouTube, Jenkins states that on YouTube, “Amateur curators assess value of commercial content and re-present it for various niche communities of consumers”.
In this case, the commercial content I am choosing to highlight is footage of NBC discussing who will be participating in opening ceremonies. In the footage, not only does the reporter confuse Michael J. Fox’s name in place of Terry Fox, but the network even shows a picture of Michael J. Fox after the reporter has spoken about Terry and his mother. No more comments needed here, other than- HOW ON EARTH DO YOU CONFUSE THOSE TWO? You just don't... especially when you are NBC. Thank goodness alternative media caught this mistake, because it needs to be pointed out for the sake of Terry Fox’s memory. I have yet to find an article or any correction from NBC apologizing for this outrageous error. Here’s the clip.
I do want to take this time to link to the foundations related to both Terry Fox and Michael J. Fox. Please check out the Terry Fox Foundation for Cancer Research and the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research.
With the Superbowl fast approaching, there’s lots of chatter regarding the epic advertisements that are known to make the most of the astronomically expensive commercial airtime they purchased. These commercials are so great that some people tune into the Superbowl JUST for them. Companies are aware of this, and sometimes go overboard in the ad production, resulting in it being banned for some reason or another. It’s interesting to note, though the commercials that do not make it on the air are uploaded and discussed online. The week before the Superbowl, the Internet is packed with information about banned ads and the effectiveness of the advertisement. Remember this one?
Taking into consideration that the ads are banned, they receive an enormous amount of viewing activity thanks to the rise of YouTube. So much attention that it’s been said some companies purposely create commercials with the intention of the being banned. This just shows the power of social media and interestingly enough, Pepsi has figured this out. This is the first year in 23 years that Pepsi is skipping out on paying millions for airtime and opting for another kind of viral marketing campaign. Named “Refresh Everything”, this is how Pepsi plans to use social media to better the world.
“Instead of pouring millions of dollars into a Super Bowl commercial, Pepsi has started a social-media campaign to promote its "Pepsi Refresh" initiative. Pepsi plans to give away $20 million in grant money to fund projects in six categories: health, arts and culture, food and shelter, the planet, neighborhoods and education.”
The following is an ad for the Refresh Everything Project. Nothing makes me happier than seeing a large corporation spend millions on positive initiatives – especially the environment, since human activity is not helping global warming. And really, we know how many people the Superbowl attracts, but spending millions on a 60-second ad compared to this Pepsi Refresh Everything Project seems stupid. Social Media for the Win!
And for the record, I’ve always liked Pepsi products better than Coke.
Having spent most of our class time thus far discussing participatory media with respect to journalism and democracy, I wanted to highlight another amazing way that social media is often used for – posting and sharing personal, user-generated content. Last year, a hilarious and witty YouTube video went viral called the JK Wedding Dance where a very creative bride and groom choreographed a funny dance to replace the traditional wedding procession. Their idea was so clever that even The Office (US) replicated it in the episode Pam and Jim got married. Imagine your wedding video having millions of views, but then being copied by one of the most popular shows on television – talk about a great start to your marriage!
But now another couple has risen to their occasion. Jeff Wong and Erin Martin, a recently engaged couple decided to share their engagement news and send a “Save the Date” message, but in a way that is hysterically representative of the current growing online participatory culture.Using a mash-up of them parodying famous action movie trailers (remixing culture) along with pictures from the last 10 years of their relationship, Jeff and Erin produced a movie trailer-inspired “Save the Date” YouTube video. Check it out.
If you did not notice, the video above is not the YouTube version of the Save the Date. When attempting to access the couple’s viral video on YouTube, the video had been changed to private, meaning the hundred or thousands of citizen media journalists who had already linked to their video to share the love now had defunct videos on their sites. It is presumed that when several mainstream news outlets and online bloggers began featuring the short film, the couple decided they wanted to keep their engagement private from the curious world and changed their YouTube privacy settings. But as we all know about social media, once you click that post button your content is out for the online world to view and in this case, many sites copied Jeff and Erin’s video for future use making the privacy settings on the original YouTube video irrelevant. My last post discussed the threat of not having control over your online identity and this is another situation where that couple now has minimal control over theirs. Fortunately, it’s an incredible idea that will grant them 15 minutes of fame (or if they’re lucky, longer like The Office’s adaptation of ‘JK’s Wedding Dance’). One lesson to keep in mind though – don’t underestimate the power of your creativity. This couple obviously did not expect the vast media attention about the personal clip they created, so be sure when posting your own content that you assume anyone will be able see it.
After being assigned a reading on Web 2.0 by Trebor Scholz, I reflected on the clarifications discussed in the article about the Internet's social progression. Participation from Internet users and the collaboration and sharing of user-submitted content has become wildly popular. Websites like Wikipedia, Flickr, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook allows users of all sorts to post information about themselves, their interests, share pictures, videos and other online activity. Digital communication has become all about the mixing and consuming of these multiple sources and pieces of information.
Interestingly enough, many of these collaborative website have been active since the mid-90s, and this connectivity and sharing of information IS what Internet creator Tim Berners-Lee intended the Internet be used for initially. Though in the article, Scholz clarified that the term Web 2.0 has only now been coined recently in order to create enthusiasm among potential investors. Because of course, the nature of businesses and marketers has been to collect this collaborated user information as intelligence - ultimately allowing them to further their own business endeavors.
This got me thinking about the way I use participatory media and real-time websites like Twitter. I spent this past summer 2009 experimenting with Twitter.com – mainly following domestic and international news outlets to keep up to date with the world, and some celebrities for entertainment news. Occasionally, I would post a tweet commenting on current events or about something I was doing, but of course was always conscious not to be too detailed in my whereabouts or private life since I knew the information was public. Unfortunately, I didn’t make the connection that these “tweets” would be showing up in search results alongside my name, which made me realize just how unimportant and unnecessary it was to post anything about myself. I proceeded to make my account private, delete my full name from settings and delete the majority of my tweets. Twitter, I told myself, would now only be used for following others and when appropriate, helping spread the message about issues that were important to me. (Just thought I would slip that last link in there about Stem Cell Research).
This leads me to the point of this blog post. As a graduating student (and a generally curious individual), every few months I like to Google my name to see what potential employers would see if they were to look me up before granting me an interview. Recently, I Googled myself again to see if there were any new developments other than the usual embarrassing results like old websites featuring awkward pictures of my friends and I from summer camp. Sure enough, with the increasing popularity of social media websites and their public nature, I saw several results relating to Twitter and the useless Tweets I posted. Though to my dismay, there was so much more.
I found that there are now companies that will take your information from Twitter (or any other public profile you may have) and create ANOTHER online account/profile under your name on their own website like http://thewhuffiebank.org/. (I chose not to link to this site, since I do not support their actions.) So with the Whuffie Website and a few others like it, I now had multiple search results under my name that I did not create or directly consent to (Twitter of course told me this in the fine lines of privacy details). Worse than the taking of information without your direct consent, even if you edit your personal information to be more private or remove content you posted, the information will still remain on the external website as well in Twitter Headquarters’ power. Since I allowed what I posted to be public at one point, I no longer have a way to control that information.
One plus side is the characteristic of real-time web. If some Twitter posts are deleted, once you click on the search result relating to the post, the page will not exist. BUT Google has stepped up to ensure the information remains available for public viewing. When you Google something that no longer exists, there is often a “Catched Link” option available that revokes all benefits of deleting information.
“Google takes a snapshot of each page examined as it crawls the web and caches these as a back-up in case the original page is unavailable. If you click on the "Cached" link, you will see the web page as it looked when we indexed it.”
So this means that even though the web page or information does not exist anymore, you can still view what it looked like before it was deleted (or at the time when your search terms were relevant). Meaning, any content ever posted can always be retrieved.
Will we ever solely control our online identities again? We may think we have control to remove what we post, but unless we are a big, powerful company or have some sort of elite status, website owners/administrators won’t even be looking at requests to remove your information or delete a fictitious account that was made on your behalf. The issue of privacy and control will only become more pressing as increasing amounts of unsuspecting users upload content for personal use and increasing amounts of businesses find ways to use that content. With live software and real time web applications, one click of a button can take away any control or power you have over the content you just posted, thus your online identity.
It is imperative that Internet users explore all privacy regulations on the websites or technological programs one is making use of, because you never know when your future boss will be looking at the useless photo you posted of you and your dog sunbathing in the backyard or even worse, an online petition you “chose to support” because some company was able to compile enough of your information to convincingly use you.
On a lighter note, hopefully your future boss won't be crazy and judgemental! As long as you don't show any signs of having a poor work ethic or a "bad-ttitude"...
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!
