Ms Greenhill's Blog: librariansmatter.com/blog/
States that there is a sub-culture of Mommie-Bloggers (!)
Sirexkat is her web presence - just like mine is FyawNym, which I would not actually disclose in a lecture auditorium or to online students. I wonder why she reveals this second ID:
By using Sirexkat she inadvertantly branded herself...
She uses Wordpress for her blogging purposes.
The reason why she blogs is that she wants to be a node in a community. She later also states that she wants to share with people who are happy to share their experiences with her. (approx. 29:00)
Decided to do a blog every day over thirty days. Result was that at least ten followers unsubscribed from her blog because they thought it was just to much to roead.
My comment: That is what I am most concerned about. People sometimes just do too much or emphasise too much on "getting it out there". People should look forward to your next blog with anticipation. Not blogging enough can also be seen as a lack of interest in keeping the blog alive or having moved on to other environments, communities or interests.
She states that it took her six months to come up with a tag line:
It is and we do. Musing, Enthusing, Libraries, Emerging Technologies, Balancing, Being Mum.
Comment:
She used this tag line for her professional blog Libmatters. To me it feels very unprofessional to put this half personal half professional tag line up. What has musing, enthusing and being Mum to do with professinalism? I certainly regard being mum as some kind of profession, but you cannot provide the service of being mum. Being mum is something family related that belongs inside the family. It cannot be applicated to any other job. You are the mother to YOUR children, not to those at work and not to anyone you might consult in a professional relationship.
It wouldn't work in Germany...
'Who am I speaking for and who is speaking?'
She prefers to make her blogs interesting by putting in a lot of related stuff: Slides from Slide Share, Youtube videos, all sorts of links to related topics and material etc. pp. Just to make it more interesting.
Uses Sitemeter to analyse her blog, and how it attracts visitors.
Because she blogs about things like 2nd life people assume that she is an expert in the field. I experience the same with my contributions to discussion of Germans, wanting to immigrate to Australia. Because of my comments people keep coming back asking me about the best way to immigrate. They think am a specialist in the field, which I am not. I only reflect on my own experiences and what I read from immigration agents or other people who moved to Australia.
'Do you attract the audience you want? Or do you want another audience? Attracting the wrong audience, what are you going to do?'
'Is the voice of your blog human?'
Findability is forever and this should be of major concern before posting something. Do you really want to share this the way you formulated it and put it?
Prewrite blogs and publish them later in a certain pattern so that readers who like your blogs can expect something new to come up at certain tiomes - just like Spicks & Specks...
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Lecture 1 - Copy/Paste & Copyright
Compared to older times, property today also means intellectual property. Originating from the physical thing, it now extends to ideas and creations of individuals. This is intangible property.
In 1624 the King (don't know which King) granted monopoly without limitation. This guaranteed that there would be no competition, and monopoly holders would be protected by the King. (no time limits, or until they die)
Queen Anne established the first copyright in 1710 which guaranteed monopoly for 14 years - at least this is where copyright is regarded to origin from.
Bern Convention established first publishers copyright in 1886 granting monopoly for 50 years after the author has died. On demand of Disney the monopoly has been extended to 70 years after death of the author. The copyright on Mickey Mouse will extinguish in 2036, as Walt Disney as the creator of Mickey Mouse died in 1966.
As soon as you go online, you start copying. Eg. your browser loads copies of Websites onto your computer.
Intellectual property are
Copyright
Patents
Trademarks
Protect creativity - protect the expression of ideas.
'If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstilltoday.'
- Bill Gates -
Do's and dont's in copyright:
Anything with expired copyright is public domain - free to use by anyone
Fair use means that you are allowed a certain amount of usage (the core question is: What effect does the use have on the value of the original?)
Alternatives:
Creative commons (CC) is a not for profit organisation allowing for circumventing copyright. Some rights reserved. The aim is to work together. Share for the purpose of remix and reuse.
Crative commons licenses Attribution
Attributon Share alike
Attribution No Derivates
Attribution non-commercial
Attribution non-commercial share alike
Attribution non-commercial non Derivcatives
Other alternative: Open Source, Free Software
Also see www.slideshare.com
See www.prezi.com
In 1624 the King (don't know which King) granted monopoly without limitation. This guaranteed that there would be no competition, and monopoly holders would be protected by the King. (no time limits, or until they die)
Queen Anne established the first copyright in 1710 which guaranteed monopoly for 14 years - at least this is where copyright is regarded to origin from.
Bern Convention established first publishers copyright in 1886 granting monopoly for 50 years after the author has died. On demand of Disney the monopoly has been extended to 70 years after death of the author. The copyright on Mickey Mouse will extinguish in 2036, as Walt Disney as the creator of Mickey Mouse died in 1966.
As soon as you go online, you start copying. Eg. your browser loads copies of Websites onto your computer.
Intellectual property are
Copyright
Patents
Trademarks
Protect creativity - protect the expression of ideas.
'If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstilltoday.'
- Bill Gates -
Do's and dont's in copyright:
Anything with expired copyright is public domain - free to use by anyone
Fair use means that you are allowed a certain amount of usage (the core question is: What effect does the use have on the value of the original?)
Alternatives:
Creative commons (CC) is a not for profit organisation allowing for circumventing copyright. Some rights reserved. The aim is to work together. Share for the purpose of remix and reuse.
Crative commons licenses Attribution
Attributon Share alike
Attribution No Derivates
Attribution non-commercial
Attribution non-commercial share alike
Attribution non-commercial non Derivcatives
Other alternative: Open Source, Free Software
Also see www.slideshare.com
See www.prezi.com
Concepts of self: Chinese vs. Western
Working in the Careers & Employment unit of Swinburne University I get a lot of exposure to international students. Being of German origin I count myself as a member of western culture. Lots of international students attend our daily resume and cover letter checking services. What I find quite fascinating about cover letters from Chinese students in particular is, being asked what they think makes them the right candidate for the job, they respond that they are well presented, harmonious and polite, rather than explaining the skills and experience they have and why they want to work for this particular organisation.
Today I attended the VIC/TAS meeting of the National Association of Graduate Careers Advisory Services (NAGCAS). Part of the program was a lecture by Dr Jane Orton, who is the director of the Chinese Teacher Training Centre at Melbourne University.
Her lecture was about the difference between the Chinese and the Western concept of self.
Here are the major facts in brief:
Chinese have difficulties to distinguish between themselves and their parents. The ego, the way we know it doesn’t seem to exist in the Chinese perception of self. If you put the three words, Mum, Dad, and Me in a group and ask someone with a western world concept of self to draw a circle around what he/she regards as him or herself, the person would definitely put a circle around Me. Using the same scenario and asking someone with a Chinese concept of self to draw a circle around what they regard as themselves it will be drawn around all three words: Mum, Dad and Me. From a Chinese view to think about “me” or “I” as a solitary thing is childish and immature.
It is the same thing with getting angry. Getting angry is an absolute no-no, a lack of self control and discipline.
Dr Orton came up with a great example of the Chinese self and how it shows in the context of a western world environment:
A manager’s secretary, who is of Chinese origin, has to collect monthly sales numbers from different branches of the organisation. She is used to this routine and therefore confident about the process of collecting the data and forwarding it to her boss. One day one of the sales representatives delivers sales numbers that are about ten times the usual numbers. The manager realizes that there is something wrong and addresses his Chinese secretary about it. She feels that his outrage is silly, because it is not her fault that the numbers are wrong. She did what was expected from her – she collected the data and passed it on to the manager. The manager asks her to get in contact with the sales person in charge and get the right numbers. As the sales person is older than her, she cannot just call him and tell him that he did wrong. She is not in the position and would also make him loose his face. To address the sales person, from her point of view it requires somebody else who is older than the sales person and in a more senior role. Anything else would be completely unacceptable, even rude.
In Chinese culture, worthy are the valued, not able. Chinese expect to be appointed because of their kindness, while individuals from western society expect to be appointed because of their skills and abilities. Learning this I also understand why Chinese cover letters are always emphasizing on not doing any harm, not causing any trouble or being a nice person. Who in the Western world would want to find something like that in a cover letter? It says nothing about abilities, but everything about worthiness.
In Chinese world view, intelligence is knowledge about how to behave, while merit is a pretty low concept.
“You have to make things discussable on the Chinese person’s behalf.” Chinese are good at routine and keeping to processes. That is why they are great at ICT or Accounting. In Face-to-face situations (HR Management) things can become quite complicated, because western and Chinese culture is so overly different.
Before I came to Australia I did a lot of translating, mainly Australian books into German. Although Australia and Germany are much closer in both culture and the concept of self than either of them compared to China, I realized that it is not enough to simply translate from one language into another. The culture part also dictates the way of thinking. Living in Australia for quite a while now I understand the Australian self much better than I did, living in Germany. I now am aware that I needed not only to translate the language, but also culture.
Revising what I noted during the lecture I realize that regarding what Dr Orton said, the very different concepts of self and the different world views of western and Chinese culture, this definitely needs consideration when addressing a Chinese audience with an article. Otherwise the audience would have no idea what you are talking about – even if it’s in Chinese.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Lecture 1: Reading Schau & Gilly - We Are What We Post
Introducton:
This article examines personal Web sites as a conspicuous form of consumer self- presentation. Using theories of self-presentation, possessions, and computer-medi- ated environments (CMEs), we investigate the ways in which consumers construct identities by digitally associating themselves with signs, symbols, material objects, and places. Specifically, the issues of interest include why consumers create personal Web sites, what consumers want to communicate, what strategies they devise to achieve their goal of self-presentation, and how those Web space strategies compare to the self-presentation strategies of real life (RL). The data reveal insights into the strategies behind constructing a digital self, projecting a digital likeness, digitally associating as a new form of possession, and reorganizing linear narrative structures.
What exactly is CME:
With the advent of new technology, computer-mediated environments (CMEs) have emerged, allowing virtual worlds in which consumers can present themselves using digital rather than physical referents.
Explanation: Semiotics
'Consumers who create personal Web sites are engaging in what Arnould and Price (2000, p. 140) call "authenticating acts," or "self-referential behaviors actors feel reveal the 'true' self' and frequently multiple true selves.'
'Goffman (1959) asserts that the presentation of self is contextual, based on a specific setting and facing a definable and anticipated audience. By contrast, personal Web sites allow consumers to self-present 24/7 beyond a regional setting to the virtual world.'
Comment: I disagree on this conclusion. Although a website is available 24/7 it does not self present all the time. To do so there needs to be audience 24/7. What is the point of self-presenting when there is no-one to present to? Although this might be achievable, I don't believe this to be general law. This is confirmed later in the article (p. 388): 'In fact, re- searchers claim that the relationship between a person and object is "never a two-way (person-thing), but always three- way (person-thing-person)" (Belk 1988, p. 147).' This is why there cannot be a 24/7 self presence. The second person needs to be available 24/7 for such a scenario.
Propensity - eg. to lean towards an idea, while not totally accepting it. (Hang)
'Self-disclosure in CMEs is easier for some people than self-disclosure to a physically nearby person due to the pressure of social desirability. Thus, CMEs as mediated communication may allow for more open self- expression.'
'Social presence in the absence of physical presence is known as telepresence (Minsky 1980).'
(p. 391) In terms of methodology I am surprised that the authors don't realise that their finding might be biased. The reason I discuss this is, that the design of a website provides space for another, a second self. Many website authors appreciate the fact that they cannot in the first place be identified as the authors of the website. This gives them freedom to discuss matter that might otherwise be confronting or disturbing to their RL environment (ethics of family, friends, children, parents, work colleagues, even church). To participate in a research program that not only focusses on a snap-shot in time on their website, but keeps coming back on an annual basis, to see the development of the site, may make the author feel publicly exposed. This might hinder him or her in the further development of the website. The RL self might take over to keep website content within the barriers of RL and to disguise the online self. See p. 394: . 'The content of the sites is diverse (text, audio, image, icons, hyperlinks, and animation) as is the style of communication, but the desire to present a physically absent self to others underlies all personal Web sites in our data set. This self may relate to one or more roles played by an informant (journalist, mother, daughter) or to a latent self (warrior, hero, intellec- tual), but the desire to construct a self is a common theme in these data.'
HAHAHA!!! To all the academic nerds out there who never see the day of light:
(p. 392) 'He also hopes his friends think it is "pretty fly" (a slang term with hip-hop origins that is similar to "cool")' ...and
(p. 393) 'People told me, 'Dude, your site is so 8-track, so old hoo-yaw [a derogatory term for heavy metal music fans].'
...right, but where, may I ask, is the reference?
(p. 399)Initial and Evolving Motivations for Personal Web Space Construction
Although I think the authors over emphasise the brand factor in CMEs a little, I believe this to be a parallel to RL. In everyday life we seek a sense of belonging. When I was a hippie in the late 70s I dismissed any kind of conformism, showing this to the world by waring ripped jeans, long hair, trench coats and sneakers. I didn't realise it needs some kind of uniform to distinguish yourself from another kind of uniform. This is the RL brand factor. To me it's only natural that branding also plays a major role in CMEs. As you cannot display RL branding properly on CMEs you are required to take different measures. See also the first paragraph on Self-Presentation Strategies (p. 400)
We are what we post - certainly. But aren't we also what we read or what we film or photograph. Although the last three examples refer to the real world they are not part of real life in the real time sense. As branding takes place in personal websites, so it does in expressive writing about self, displaying self in certain environments or situations. In my view branding in the above circumstances takes place the way it does in CMEs. The question is, if there is face-to-face communication or not, rather than RL or CMEs.
This article examines personal Web sites as a conspicuous form of consumer self- presentation. Using theories of self-presentation, possessions, and computer-medi- ated environments (CMEs), we investigate the ways in which consumers construct identities by digitally associating themselves with signs, symbols, material objects, and places. Specifically, the issues of interest include why consumers create personal Web sites, what consumers want to communicate, what strategies they devise to achieve their goal of self-presentation, and how those Web space strategies compare to the self-presentation strategies of real life (RL). The data reveal insights into the strategies behind constructing a digital self, projecting a digital likeness, digitally associating as a new form of possession, and reorganizing linear narrative structures.
What exactly is CME:
With the advent of new technology, computer-mediated environments (CMEs) have emerged, allowing virtual worlds in which consumers can present themselves using digital rather than physical referents.
Explanation: Semiotics
'Consumers who create personal Web sites are engaging in what Arnould and Price (2000, p. 140) call "authenticating acts," or "self-referential behaviors actors feel reveal the 'true' self' and frequently multiple true selves.'
'Goffman (1959) asserts that the presentation of self is contextual, based on a specific setting and facing a definable and anticipated audience. By contrast, personal Web sites allow consumers to self-present 24/7 beyond a regional setting to the virtual world.'
Comment: I disagree on this conclusion. Although a website is available 24/7 it does not self present all the time. To do so there needs to be audience 24/7. What is the point of self-presenting when there is no-one to present to? Although this might be achievable, I don't believe this to be general law. This is confirmed later in the article (p. 388): 'In fact, re- searchers claim that the relationship between a person and object is "never a two-way (person-thing), but always three- way (person-thing-person)" (Belk 1988, p. 147).' This is why there cannot be a 24/7 self presence. The second person needs to be available 24/7 for such a scenario.
Propensity - eg. to lean towards an idea, while not totally accepting it. (Hang)
'Self-disclosure in CMEs is easier for some people than self-disclosure to a physically nearby person due to the pressure of social desirability. Thus, CMEs as mediated communication may allow for more open self- expression.'
'Social presence in the absence of physical presence is known as telepresence (Minsky 1980).'
(p. 391) In terms of methodology I am surprised that the authors don't realise that their finding might be biased. The reason I discuss this is, that the design of a website provides space for another, a second self. Many website authors appreciate the fact that they cannot in the first place be identified as the authors of the website. This gives them freedom to discuss matter that might otherwise be confronting or disturbing to their RL environment (ethics of family, friends, children, parents, work colleagues, even church). To participate in a research program that not only focusses on a snap-shot in time on their website, but keeps coming back on an annual basis, to see the development of the site, may make the author feel publicly exposed. This might hinder him or her in the further development of the website. The RL self might take over to keep website content within the barriers of RL and to disguise the online self. See p. 394: . 'The content of the sites is diverse (text, audio, image, icons, hyperlinks, and animation) as is the style of communication, but the desire to present a physically absent self to others underlies all personal Web sites in our data set. This self may relate to one or more roles played by an informant (journalist, mother, daughter) or to a latent self (warrior, hero, intellec- tual), but the desire to construct a self is a common theme in these data.'
HAHAHA!!! To all the academic nerds out there who never see the day of light:
(p. 392) 'He also hopes his friends think it is "pretty fly" (a slang term with hip-hop origins that is similar to "cool")' ...and
(p. 393) 'People told me, 'Dude, your site is so 8-track, so old hoo-yaw [a derogatory term for heavy metal music fans].'
...right, but where, may I ask, is the reference?
(p. 399)Initial and Evolving Motivations for Personal Web Space Construction
Although I think the authors over emphasise the brand factor in CMEs a little, I believe this to be a parallel to RL. In everyday life we seek a sense of belonging. When I was a hippie in the late 70s I dismissed any kind of conformism, showing this to the world by waring ripped jeans, long hair, trench coats and sneakers. I didn't realise it needs some kind of uniform to distinguish yourself from another kind of uniform. This is the RL brand factor. To me it's only natural that branding also plays a major role in CMEs. As you cannot display RL branding properly on CMEs you are required to take different measures. See also the first paragraph on Self-Presentation Strategies (p. 400)
We are what we post - certainly. But aren't we also what we read or what we film or photograph. Although the last three examples refer to the real world they are not part of real life in the real time sense. As branding takes place in personal websites, so it does in expressive writing about self, displaying self in certain environments or situations. In my view branding in the above circumstances takes place the way it does in CMEs. The question is, if there is face-to-face communication or not, rather than RL or CMEs.
Lecture 1: Narrating the Self
Comments on the E-Lecture:
Explanation - what actually is writing the self?
Self is in constant change. It emerges and develops over time.
The development of the self comes from interactions with other people, the society in general.
Performing the self is about how I adapt myself to the places I'm in and the people I am talking to, the way that I act. We perform different facettes of ourselves.
Explanation: Cues = signals
Context: Cues: language, framing, context, links, flows, feedback.
24:46 - The major things to consider when planning an online identity:
42:39 - "Put yourself on Google search"
Try Fyawnym - the whole page is Fyawnym...
Try Tama Leaver - the Web 101 Lecturer...
Try Spezify.com to find out how well the online self is distributed on the net.
Explanation - what actually is writing the self?
Self is in constant change. It emerges and develops over time.
The development of the self comes from interactions with other people, the society in general.
Performing the self is about how I adapt myself to the places I'm in and the people I am talking to, the way that I act. We perform different facettes of ourselves.
Explanation: Cues = signals
Context: Cues: language, framing, context, links, flows, feedback.
24:46 - The major things to consider when planning an online identity:
- Voice
- Style
- Persistence
- Consistency (do you have control over your identity online?)
- Centrality
- Links
- Nodes (Develop a singular central node that is the core of all online activities and to which everything leads back)
42:39 - "Put yourself on Google search"
Try Fyawnym - the whole page is Fyawnym...
Try Tama Leaver - the Web 101 Lecturer...
Try Spezify.com to find out how well the online self is distributed on the net.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Lecture 1:Turkle - Looking Toward Cyberspace - Beyond Grounded Sociology
As ist seems, this journal entry is about second life, although it doesn't say this explictly. Obviously Turkle states that people seek to create different personalities online which they cannot become in real life.
I'm surprised how happily she accepts the fact that people do this. To me this says that there is something wrong with society. I don't simply see it as an escape, I see it as compensation for something that these people cannot achieve in real life.
Why would I want to use different languages in online communities? Manipulate people? What about friends that share connections in these different communities? Trying to explore the self I would expect these shared connections to join in exploring each others different facettes of the self in the different communities we share. It sounds to me like virtual shizophrenia.
(page 647 column 1, 1st paragraph)
I am saying that the many manifestations of multiplicity in our culture, including the adoption of online personae are contributing to a general reconsideration of traditional, unitary notions of identity. Online experiences with "parallel lives" are part of the significant cultural context that supports new theorizing about nonpathological, indeed healthy, multiple selves.
How is this healthy? A symptom for unhealthy identity is the effect of war games on computer gamers. Obviously this other identity gamers adopt for the game session can take over on real life. When this is possible with gamers, why is it not possible with other personalities users of parallel virtual worlds experience online?
The way I understand this report, Turkle does not see computer users in front of a computer anymore - they are in the computer. Holding psychoanalytic and computer culture as a joint venture would mean to accept the artificial world of the computer as a given reality.
I am thinking of people exchanging comments on Youtube. Controversal videos spark verbal fights pretty quickly, while others don't make viewers comment at all. Is this another reality? Or is the web a playground? Can we really take written emotions, or decisions to make a software react in our favour, as worthy to be psychoanalysed?
I'm surprised how happily she accepts the fact that people do this. To me this says that there is something wrong with society. I don't simply see it as an escape, I see it as compensation for something that these people cannot achieve in real life.
Why would I want to use different languages in online communities? Manipulate people? What about friends that share connections in these different communities? Trying to explore the self I would expect these shared connections to join in exploring each others different facettes of the self in the different communities we share. It sounds to me like virtual shizophrenia.
(page 647 column 1, 1st paragraph)
I am saying that the many manifestations of multiplicity in our culture, including the adoption of online personae are contributing to a general reconsideration of traditional, unitary notions of identity. Online experiences with "parallel lives" are part of the significant cultural context that supports new theorizing about nonpathological, indeed healthy, multiple selves.
How is this healthy? A symptom for unhealthy identity is the effect of war games on computer gamers. Obviously this other identity gamers adopt for the game session can take over on real life. When this is possible with gamers, why is it not possible with other personalities users of parallel virtual worlds experience online?
The way I understand this report, Turkle does not see computer users in front of a computer anymore - they are in the computer. Holding psychoanalytic and computer culture as a joint venture would mean to accept the artificial world of the computer as a given reality.
I am thinking of people exchanging comments on Youtube. Controversal videos spark verbal fights pretty quickly, while others don't make viewers comment at all. Is this another reality? Or is the web a playground? Can we really take written emotions, or decisions to make a software react in our favour, as worthy to be psychoanalysed?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)