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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
