Before I move on with my final self reflection on the module, I would like to say that to be able to evaluate oneself and what surrounds you fairly, candidly and helpfully is a skill which should not only be an asset within college.
With that being said, I was quite surprised about how much meaning there is within the internet. Previous to this lecture, I have been just a regular internet user but never attempted to interpret it. I came to realise that the internet is a whole new dimension to exist in, while I started considering that there is indeed an online life out there; one that navigates through simulated world, includes virtual personalities and enriches the sense of "what´s real"??
I was especially interested in the psychology of the online life; how I can establish one myself and how it provokes new ways of thinking about "who I am?" both online and eventually in "real life". For instance, I do have an online identity within Facebook , but I do better understand now what this identity is about and how it has to be maintained in the online context. And although I remain conscious and alarmed regarding the dangers of the internet, I enjoy experiencing the elements of the virtual reality, and investigating the boundaries between the real and the digital.
Our Wiki work was key for my conclusions. We talked about online identity, the reasons that one might feel regarding the need to create and explore one, and how invisibility and anonymity can be distorted. It would be interesting to question the damages causes in more depth.
I too enjoyed the blogging very much; the opportunity I was afforded to provide commentary and opinion on various subjects, was sheer brilliant for me. I started appreciating the importance of the quality in my posts day by day. Having a voice online holds a great deal of responsibility not only to the community but to oneself. I now take blogging very seriously, even if my very blog isnt read by anyone but you Nigel!! (or maybe one or sometimes two fellow students)... Oh, I confess that I highly enjoyed reading the blogs of my colleagues, what they wanted to express and how they managed to communicate it through their posts... I like picking their minds online. Frankly, blogging at the very end was not just about commenting, it had to become a reflection on life (in this example online life), but I am eager to see where it could take me if I maintain it and start posting commentary of a different nature.
In regards to our Wiki , I managed to plan and finish my work around the research I needed to. Still, while working within a group you want to meet the requirements utterly and present a credible effort. Overall, I found myself satisfied working with other students towards a common goal once again. It helped me realise that in order to be correct in an environment where different opinions are present, it is imperative to be open and valuable, which turns out as one´s own benefit at the very end.
Finally, this assignment, its conveyor and every single get together with the group, the exchange of thoughts, knowledge and each individual´s perception have managed to extend my knowledge once again and added to my skills portfolio both an enhanced version of the sense of responsibility and team spirit. Not only have I learned about the online life, but I began to understand it.
Thursday, 13 March 2008
Saturday, 8 March 2008
What? pt4 contd..
The "Manufacturing Online Identity" is going the way we want it to go. I confess, I have been obsessed with the particular structure I had in mind for the project and I might have been a lil pain for the rest of the group but I admire our handiwork and everyone is doing a great job. So many miles, so many detours, so many choices, so many aspects.. As we walk along the road of "working in a team", I learned that we sometimes have to stop running and take a minute at the crossroads of "where to go next?" So yes, the project needs one more fix or two and its good to go.
I simultaneously was influenced by the story in my previous post again. And I went digging around the net a bit more to get more perspective on the subject. Turns out that Insp Dreyfus has been given a written warning about his online identity during his career at The BTP. The question to be raised is whether one has the freedom to publish personal information if he chooses to or not? The story around Dreyfus appears to touch on discrimination, only in this paradigm, it is discrimination in the online dimension. What a lot of people fail to realise is, that an online identity is part of someone´s real identity, regardless if it is a true one or not. The opportunity to look into Dreyfus´ identity is the very key issue in this debate. People easily can go scooping online, as much as they wish to get behind the closed doors of others in real life. Dreyfus´ example is a rather interesting one in portraying what kind of a trouble an "online identity" can be when it makes private matters visible.
Be that as it may, I do not believe Insp Dreyfus acted rational, given the content of this Daily Mail article. His refusal to alter his online identity might have been his very own gay revolution, especially after being issued with a warning. He should have kept what is private, private. That can be illuminated if we take a look at the parallel of real life; it is almost as if the BTP would tell someone not to be gay in order to proceed with their career, which is and should be in fact not acceptable nowadays. And Dreyfus establishes that by saying, "As long as I do not do anything to disgrace the force then what I do privately is acceptable." Only he does not realise that his sexual identity was arbitrary accessible at the same time. His judgment was blurred when coincidentally, a spokesman for BTP confirmed that they had issued Mr Dreyfus with a warning and explained that staff must not post anything on websites that may bring the force into disrepute.
What does this event indicate at the end? Could there be sexual discrimination within the British Transport Police? Regardless of Dreyfus´ online or real identity, his sexual preferences truly seemed to be the issue there. And his online identity, which he might have thought is as private to him as his real one, made his sexuality visible.
Surely Mr Dreyfus made a mistake, I would not say that the BTP would ever deny him his promotion, if they accidentally found out he was gay, because he might have been spotted with his boyfriend in a bar or else. But him being gay online was the deal breaker for the BTP, and Insp Dreyfus failed to handle the obvious hypocrisy to his benefit, because apparently the balance between online and real identity is still commuting and judgment (or discrimination) can be applied onto them to rather variable extends.
I simultaneously was influenced by the story in my previous post again. And I went digging around the net a bit more to get more perspective on the subject. Turns out that Insp Dreyfus has been given a written warning about his online identity during his career at The BTP. The question to be raised is whether one has the freedom to publish personal information if he chooses to or not? The story around Dreyfus appears to touch on discrimination, only in this paradigm, it is discrimination in the online dimension. What a lot of people fail to realise is, that an online identity is part of someone´s real identity, regardless if it is a true one or not. The opportunity to look into Dreyfus´ identity is the very key issue in this debate. People easily can go scooping online, as much as they wish to get behind the closed doors of others in real life. Dreyfus´ example is a rather interesting one in portraying what kind of a trouble an "online identity" can be when it makes private matters visible.
Be that as it may, I do not believe Insp Dreyfus acted rational, given the content of this Daily Mail article. His refusal to alter his online identity might have been his very own gay revolution, especially after being issued with a warning. He should have kept what is private, private. That can be illuminated if we take a look at the parallel of real life; it is almost as if the BTP would tell someone not to be gay in order to proceed with their career, which is and should be in fact not acceptable nowadays. And Dreyfus establishes that by saying, "As long as I do not do anything to disgrace the force then what I do privately is acceptable." Only he does not realise that his sexual identity was arbitrary accessible at the same time. His judgment was blurred when coincidentally, a spokesman for BTP confirmed that they had issued Mr Dreyfus with a warning and explained that staff must not post anything on websites that may bring the force into disrepute.
What does this event indicate at the end? Could there be sexual discrimination within the British Transport Police? Regardless of Dreyfus´ online or real identity, his sexual preferences truly seemed to be the issue there. And his online identity, which he might have thought is as private to him as his real one, made his sexuality visible.
Surely Mr Dreyfus made a mistake, I would not say that the BTP would ever deny him his promotion, if they accidentally found out he was gay, because he might have been spotted with his boyfriend in a bar or else. But him being gay online was the deal breaker for the BTP, and Insp Dreyfus failed to handle the obvious hypocrisy to his benefit, because apparently the balance between online and real identity is still commuting and judgment (or discrimination) can be applied onto them to rather variable extends.
Sunday, 2 March 2008
bubblesofreflection pt4
I have learned much from last session on how to start designing the wiki. I was quite surprised it looked in order as I attempted to reopen it in my mac at home, too. The group project is on its right track as both Abeer and Naz and I add the finishing touches to our work.
Oh and then I found this article in the Metro about a Gay police officer who has been denied a promotion because of his Facebook flirt. And it really got me thinking about all the issues we raised in our work so far. Royal protection officer Insp Chris Dreyfus lost out on the chance to become a chief inspector when his new employer found he had posted personal information on the social networking website. Accordig to the journalist John Higginson, his page apparently has a sexual nature. The 30 year - old, who is in charge of guarding the Queen and other members of the royal family, admitted on Facebook that he was interested in men and looking for "whatever I can get".
His online identity afforded his bosses the opportunity to be rather indiscreet which then resulted in the blocking of his police promotion. That again brings on the debate of who we are online and whether there is any difference to our real life. That man is simultaneously gay online and gay in his everyday life. But only his online sexual identity, or better to say, the possibility to look into his sexuality within the online context, eventually brought on the trouble. Sometimes then it is not only a question of "who we are online?" but also "who looks us up on who we are online?". And that can have, as in the paradigm of this guy, damaging effects.
Oh and then I found this article in the Metro about a Gay police officer who has been denied a promotion because of his Facebook flirt. And it really got me thinking about all the issues we raised in our work so far. Royal protection officer Insp Chris Dreyfus lost out on the chance to become a chief inspector when his new employer found he had posted personal information on the social networking website. Accordig to the journalist John Higginson, his page apparently has a sexual nature. The 30 year - old, who is in charge of guarding the Queen and other members of the royal family, admitted on Facebook that he was interested in men and looking for "whatever I can get".
His online identity afforded his bosses the opportunity to be rather indiscreet which then resulted in the blocking of his police promotion. That again brings on the debate of who we are online and whether there is any difference to our real life. That man is simultaneously gay online and gay in his everyday life. But only his online sexual identity, or better to say, the possibility to look into his sexuality within the online context, eventually brought on the trouble. Sometimes then it is not only a question of "who we are online?" but also "who looks us up on who we are online?". And that can have, as in the paradigm of this guy, damaging effects.
Monday, 18 February 2008
who am I in the online bubble without knowing?
Intoxicated looks in party pictures posted on Facebook and angsty blogs and profane MySpace pages may come back to haunt you and your career! Yeep that is apparently true.
We do have to be careful with our online behaviour, control bad language, racist remarks and statements that might upset the majority of people. So basically, the question is what is if we are engaging in an online life, (i.e. virtual communities, networking sites), will that come back to haunt us??
According to statistics , while only 15 per cent of firms rejected employees strictly because of their online footprint, human resources managers were less forgiving. A quarter said they declined candidates because of what they found out online about the person. A fifth of employers have looked up prospective recruits online, with over half saying it affected their decision to hire the person, said respondents to the survey of 2,447 internet users and 600 companies, commissioned by business networking firm Viadeo .
My student colleauge Abeer Saalman is such a nice girl, commited to her studies and armed with all the positive aspects to make a career. In the online search of her name, it appears that she has witnessed a terrorist attack. The context in which her name is mentioned is not the most appealing one, should her future employers decide to "run a test on her".
I began to wonder how we can prevent misunderstanding and embaressment when recruiters start trawling through our Facebook accounts?
Will they decide against job applicants based on personal information showing what they saw as alcohol abuse or unethical activities? Intimate details are on display big time, thus inviting. It seems to be justified in a way to have concerns if the person you just interviewed for a serious job, is portrayed as a party animal in his profile.
On the other site, you have to be responsible with what you put online, pictures of someone lying passed out on the pavement seems to be a rather bad idea now, doesnt it? But what happens when your name is coincidentally out there, in refernce to negative things? Well, Nigel informs me there is not much you can do about it really.
Apart from that, my concern goes a bit further here: I believe we are touching on indiscretion in that context. Whether or not it's fair, people do it. Companies are looking up potential employees online and gain insight into your personal live, your hobbies and your leisure time, all well documented in pictures and colors. It's only just a few clicks away.
We do have to be careful with our online behaviour, control bad language, racist remarks and statements that might upset the majority of people. So basically, the question is what is if we are engaging in an online life, (i.e. virtual communities, networking sites), will that come back to haunt us??
According to statistics , while only 15 per cent of firms rejected employees strictly because of their online footprint, human resources managers were less forgiving. A quarter said they declined candidates because of what they found out online about the person. A fifth of employers have looked up prospective recruits online, with over half saying it affected their decision to hire the person, said respondents to the survey of 2,447 internet users and 600 companies, commissioned by business networking firm Viadeo .
My student colleauge Abeer Saalman is such a nice girl, commited to her studies and armed with all the positive aspects to make a career. In the online search of her name, it appears that she has witnessed a terrorist attack. The context in which her name is mentioned is not the most appealing one, should her future employers decide to "run a test on her".
I began to wonder how we can prevent misunderstanding and embaressment when recruiters start trawling through our Facebook accounts?
Will they decide against job applicants based on personal information showing what they saw as alcohol abuse or unethical activities? Intimate details are on display big time, thus inviting. It seems to be justified in a way to have concerns if the person you just interviewed for a serious job, is portrayed as a party animal in his profile.
On the other site, you have to be responsible with what you put online, pictures of someone lying passed out on the pavement seems to be a rather bad idea now, doesnt it? But what happens when your name is coincidentally out there, in refernce to negative things? Well, Nigel informs me there is not much you can do about it really.
Apart from that, my concern goes a bit further here: I believe we are touching on indiscretion in that context. Whether or not it's fair, people do it. Companies are looking up potential employees online and gain insight into your personal live, your hobbies and your leisure time, all well documented in pictures and colors. It's only just a few clicks away.
Thursday, 14 February 2008
Facebook a subject of Sociology? Or just bubbles?
Following what I have read here about the link between the website and Sociology, I began to establish more and more why Facebook must be used and enjoyed responsibly.Just like alcohol really. Sometimes, although you know your judgement is not the best, you keep on consuming it, and other times you overdo it, with terrifying consequences. As we mix our drink online and blend in our favorite music, our preferences and interests, just how much "alcohol" can we handle? Shouldn't there be a limit that serves as a guidance to avoid that terrible headache? The headache that I get is that I am being kept under an increasing surveillance as I am being probably watched constantly and although I partially congratulate the fine idea of the marketing aspect of Facebook I remain suspiscious of the fact that some sociologists are jumping to conclusions by reading all that online information. Especially because we have to consider the choices we make in creating our online identity, it is not adequate to go down the path of sociological interpretation simply because there is no great deal of sociology assumption that lies in the fact that my friends in my network and I might like the same kind of music!? Or that we poke each other back and forth? I suppose, that the fun of Facebook comes with a side of intellectualism for those who have to study the social implications of the website's success as they probably wonder why we have to poke each other 100 times a day and ask questions of an eliminated need for real interaction (maybe??). Or moreover who becomes friends with whom and why? The article touched on that, too and it seems to me as a claim on the epiphany of Facebook and its users. Besides, the website’s creator, Mark Zuckerberg ’06, has a different conception of community. Zuckerberg does not view the site as a place where community is formed. He views it as a tool to strengthen a network that already exists in real-life. “I’m more interested in seeing how [the site] affects community. It’s a subpart of culture,” Zuckerberg explains.
It's not a social mystery to have friends with common or uncommon interest and I hardly agree with the fact that Facebook can be sociologically interpretated. One poke at a time, guys. I am not entirely sure we are there yet.
It's not a social mystery to have friends with common or uncommon interest and I hardly agree with the fact that Facebook can be sociologically interpretated. One poke at a time, guys. I am not entirely sure we are there yet.
Ahh, the group!!
Now a couple of updates on our group project :
We all met on a sunny Tuesday in Maida Vale Starbucks to discuss our progress with the assignment.We established the area of research for each and every one of us on a common ground. Manufacturing Online Identity : 1) What choices are people making when they create an identity online? 2) Are these choices of a conscious or unconscious nature? 3) What does the observer think and why? We will compare online identity to real life identity and try to discover the difference between them (should there be any)!
left 2 right: Dimi, Abeer , Naz & Jonathan
additional bubbles on social networking - true friendship!
Haven't I heard many people say that we live in a "connected world"! At first, this seems rather peculiar because simultaneously there is much talk about individualisation, social fragmentation, independence and freedom. In the "Network Society" of Jan Van Dijk (2006), he takes that, "both tendencies might be two sides of the same coin."
Undoubtedly, the quantity and quality of social relationships might improve if communication technology enables us to get in touch easily with almost everybody, regardless of our and their whereabouts. Thats one type of users then. Those who want to stay in touch.
Then there are others who simply created and live a life in the online world (i.e online networking sites, virtual communities, dating sites etc). People who surf the web just like others are walking down Oxford Street, looking and feeling and experiencing every bit of what the "online life" has to offer them. Just like you will find yourself looking at an attractive person while waiting in line at the groceries, you can also start looking for that person in an online forum. That is what I meant when I mentioned that we have to clearly identify the users we are talking about. And speaking (blogging) of attractive people, yes, it is claimed that love can be found online. And it has.
In regards to the judgement, thats what I was referring to as well. Just like you won't judge the guy looking at the hot girl in line, you should not judge the guy who looks at the girl on line.
Cause online life, IS, happening.
Undoubtedly, the quantity and quality of social relationships might improve if communication technology enables us to get in touch easily with almost everybody, regardless of our and their whereabouts. Thats one type of users then. Those who want to stay in touch.
Then there are others who simply created and live a life in the online world (i.e online networking sites, virtual communities, dating sites etc). People who surf the web just like others are walking down Oxford Street, looking and feeling and experiencing every bit of what the "online life" has to offer them. Just like you will find yourself looking at an attractive person while waiting in line at the groceries, you can also start looking for that person in an online forum. That is what I meant when I mentioned that we have to clearly identify the users we are talking about. And speaking (blogging) of attractive people, yes, it is claimed that love can be found online. And it has.
In regards to the judgement, thats what I was referring to as well. Just like you won't judge the guy looking at the hot girl in line, you should not judge the guy who looks at the girl on line.
Cause online life, IS, happening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
