The Technological Affordance of the Internet: Recognizing the Power of Participation

All technologies have affordances. Anything from guns to email to blogs are created with a purpose, one which has a powerful psychological effect on us since it provides us with a behaviour option we previously lacked. These technological affordances have created a shift in the way individuals participate in society and, therefore, how society functions as a whole. Looking at several examples, while using TED as my primary one, I will convey how the affordance of the Internet has transformed our thinking and provided us with the recognized ability to have our voices heard in this interconnected global village and stimulate change like never before.    

Before delving into how TED assists in facilitating such change, it is necessary to acknowledge several important features of the Internet. To begin, we must recognize how ANYONE has the ability to communicate to the masses today. New technology, specifically social media, require participation. The “web” or "net" cannot function without it (hence the name). Whether participation be through Youtube, blogs, Twitter, Facebook… individuals can communicate to an unlimited audience. In principle, “‘anyone’ or ‘everyone’” is able to be a journalist today. There need not be a reliance or sole trust in news media anymore. This is what participatory media is about. Through engagement in this realm, citizens acquire skills needed to be a part of what Henry Jenkins’ calls participatory democracy.

The logic behind this is, with skills acquired through participatory media, such as fan culture creations, like Star Wars remakes, people can creatively speak up and gain attention in social and political arenas. For example, look at the viral protest mashup,  George Bush Don't Like Black People, produced after hurricane Katrina in an effort to raise an important political issue relating to race.  Similarly, TED, using the reputation it has built online, utilizes the Internet as a tool to find “ideas worth spreading” and raise awareness of them. TED talks happen live, but they all get posted on Youtube and their website, allowing it to reach countless more people. There are an abundance of insightful voices and messages floating around the Internet; TED acts as a filter for these. 

Clearly, the public sphere Habermas spoke of has moved from the coffee house to the computer. The new public sphere (and blogosphere)  offers greater equality since participation is not limited to the bourgeoisie. It embraces a gift economy in which we , as equal creators, all give our creative or intellectual work (such as music covers or political views) away for free in exchange for the work of others. Monetary exchanges are being replaced by information and entertainment.

So how do these affordances change the way we think and act? From the aforementioned examples, I would argue that people actually believe they can make a difference today. They have the unique ability to be heard free of charge. TED was built on that core idea. Their purpose being to filter and promote ideas they believe should go viral. Everyday there are new viral videos or articles, often short lived, such as Kony 2012, but nonetheless, public attention grabbers. Evidently, the Internet creates a world of possibility; One in which ordinary people can create and stimulate change. That’s the technological affordance of the Internet. You don’t need to be the President, or a movie star to get heard. All you need is the Internet… and maybe a Youtube account.

Welcome to the new age public sphere where anything is possible with participation. 

The world is at your fingertips.

“Um… Do I know you?” Part 2: Social Suffering

Social media, this word leads me to the assumption that those that are highly engaged in social media are, additionally, quite social in real life. Turns out, however, that there is a difference between social skills and social media skills.

In my last blog post I discussed the issue of Facebook Friends versus real life friends and how a single person can have two completely different personalities online and face-to-face. Stemming from that slightly frustrating discussion, were thoughts related to interpersonal abilities of people growing up in this age of technology. In pondering this I was overcome with concern for the generations succeeding mine whose social skills could potentially be drastically altered with the increased communication via technology as opposed to in person. Studies have already begun discovering evidence of the hindering of social skills in children growing up with new technologies. As I’ve mentioned, many of my own experiences have come to support this evidence as well, and clearly so have other bloggers.

            There are so many skills we gain from interacting with people in person, from picking up non-verbal cues such as body language, tone of voice, eye contact, etc. that I fear for the ability of individuals to develop the same types of relationships in real life that they have online. Online relationships deceive us into believing we are more social, and socially competent than we truly are. Relationships online, however, are “shallow” and often “superficial”. Yet the trend in social relationship building appears to be on the rise. Perhaps close friendships in the physical world won’t be as valuable in the years to come seeing as one can simply vent their feelings in a method “akin to diary writing” as suggested by Danah Boyd in her article “Blogging Outloud: Shifts in Public Voice” as opposed to spilling their feelings to their friends in search of advice.  Moreover, if they do so, these people can get seemingly honest, true, emotional (yet sometimes harsh) advice from readers’ responses.

Can this ‘diary writing’ be a real substitute for human interaction though? Will face-to-face social skills sink on a level of importance in relation to an ability to cultivate mediated relationships? Are computers man's new best friend?

Good news is at least writing skills should improve! Rite? Right? Write? Well, at least we’ll have spell check and online dictionaries … hopefully pens and paper will become extinct and computers will be allowed in exam rooms, otherwise I wouldn’t want to be the teacher marking those essays… 

Um... Do I Know You?

Media mediates our everyday lives. I believe we can all agree to that. That, however, is not entirely the topic of concern for me today. The topic I will be delving into revolves around the vastly different impressions people often make in live interactions versus interactions over some form of mediating technology (be it  Facebook, Twitter , texting, email, etc.).

HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE ARE SO DIFFERENT?

Does a simple screen give a person that much courage?

Who is the real self behind the screen?

     The majority of the time it appears that people have a serious personality (& confidence) boost when communicating through their technology. Not only are they more talkative, but they are also often funny and much more likely to request a get together in person. Is this why dating sites are so successful? - Because people feel they can show their 'best' selves (minus the nerves and stress of having to wonder if the other person accept or reject an invitation to get together) this way? But and here's the big but--- IS that their true self? Maybe it is their wittiest self because they have time to construct the perfect responses thanks to the backspace button, but, again, is that their true self? I have encountered MANY instances in which people via text or Facebook chat were seemingly extremely charismatic and not shy in the least, but upon getting together with them in person they become someone COMPLETELY different. A person I have never met before. Sometimes I wonder if they realize that? I say this because a day after getting together with them their technologically mediated conversations continue to be the exact same, as if they didn't just reveal their true colours in person.

     So my big question resulting from this is- are media helping or hindering social relationships? They seemingly have the potential to help them. For example, I understand for the boys it is especially hard to ask a girl out in person and the blow is much less powerful when it is felt through a screen. Realistically, though, who wants to expect to meet the person they've been talking to online or via text and then end up getting together with a familiar stranger? This is an instance where the miscommunication does not lay within the wording, but rather in their social skills, in their ability to hold up a conversation in person. Look at Facebook friends for an easy example of people behaving as though their relationships with certain friends are much more intimate than they truly are. Truth be told, we all have friends we view purely as our 'Facebook Friends;' those people we really only interact with through that platform. The typical reason for this being because in real life things just don't click as nicely. Are Facebook friends real friends though? Do they fulfill the needs of a live friendship or are you essentially just talking to your computer?

Would love to hear some opinions on this :) 

Thanks for reading!

Online Debates

Last week in class the topic of online debates was brought up. Many people brought forth very interesting examples of online debates relating to politics, gender discrimination, entertainment and other such topics.

One online debate that was circulating for a while and got me particularly heated in class was the question of whether famed singer Beyoncé Knowles lip-synced her performance at the presidential inauguration ceremony on January 22,^, 2013. As it turned out the singer, known for powerful pipes, did admit to lip-syncing at a press conference, but not before showing the world that just because she lip-synced didn’t mean she couldn’t do the exact same performance live. She began the press conference by singing the national anthem loud and proud and later explained the reasoning behind the decision to lip-sync at the inauguration was due to technicalities and lack of rehearsals, which made her uncomfortable doing the performance live.

Just a few weeks later the star burned the stage up and caused a power outage during her Superbowl halftime performance. Audiences around the world were in awe by her post-baby body and incredible LIVE performance. Talk of her inauguration performance has died down, however, in the heat of it all I can say that the debates around Facebook and online blogs were quite intense. I can admit that I participated in some civil debates over Facebook as well.

However, in stepping back and analyzing the topic of online debates such as these via the comments on blogs or on social networking cites, it simply goes to show how incredibly rapidly information goes viral and how every individual who wants to, can give their opinion. No matter how informed or uninformed one is on a topic, everyone in this online public sphere has a voice. One’s post may be read by only two people or it may be read by thousands, but chances are someone at some point stumbles across it. Moreover, no one can technically silence anyone. Everyone is essentially equal. Obviously there are those people with more followers on their blogs or on twitter, and those more prominent opinion leaders in the community (some might refer to bloggers like Perez Hilton for that- personally I wouldn’t, but just as an example since the number of people that follow him is massive), who will always have a greater impact on society as a whole, but, regardless, each and every single online contributor (via youtube, blogs, twitter, etc. …) has a voice that can get heard, despite the number that hear it. Personally, I think this is one of the greatest benefits of the Internet itself and Mr. Habermas would likely agree with me on this statement.

The prominent artist and thinker Andy Worhol said it right…

“In the future everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes.”

Welcome to the future.  

ABOUT

WHAT I WILL BLOG ABOUT:

Before I make my first real blog post, I want to let you all know what it is I intend to use this blog for.
I am currently enrolled in a university class called CS400 (hence the name of my blog) and I will use this space in order to post relevant and interesting topics from the class that I believe merit some further discussion or that really peak my interest.

I want all readers to feel free to contribute to the discussion topics I bring up. It is always interesting to hear what others have to say on any given topic and it is a great way to learn about perspectives that I may overlook.

Hope to hear from all of you soon :)
Thanks in advance for your contribution to my blog!