Skip to main content

Home/ COMM 182/282 2011/ Group items tagged free speech

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Jennifer Bundy

Real name sites are necessarily inadequate for free speech « Social Media Col... - 4 views

socialmediacollective.org/...ily-inadequate-for-free-speech

free speech social media impression management names

shared by Jennifer Bundy on 21 Oct 11 - No Cached
  • . When people do this offline, they do it in situations: temporally and spatially bounded contexts for action.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 21 Oct 11
       
      These sound like third place locations
  • Being online is being encoded and having that which is encoded available to some party other than those immediately present
  • Online is on-the-record. Offline is off-the-record.
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • performance of impression management into the process of curation
  • Curation means selecting objects for display
  • Impression management means selectively presenting an idealized version of one’s self specific to that context.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 21 Oct 11
       
      Impression management - the key word is "idealized". These sites are making things much more transparent, which might not be all bad
  • Collective
  • the myth of selective sharing
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 21 Oct 11
       
      They are inadequate for free speech only if you don't want to be associated with what you are saying, which is not an issue of the tool but rather a preference of the person. Many people own their statements in the public sphere (politicians, leaders, etc). Real name sites are just giving the average person the opportunity to do the same - people just have to realize that what they might be saying is available to anyone to hear
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 24 Oct 11
       
      Yes, real name sites do have a reason to exist on the Internet. Meantime, I remembered Facebook's Marketing Director, Randi Zuckerberg, claimed several months ago that anonymity on the Internet has to go away, because people behave a lot better when they have their real names down. And people hide behind anonymity and they feel like they can say whatever they want behind closed doors. Is an Internet in which everyone has to use their real name necerraily be more polite?
  • , the curator won’t even give you the choice to begin with.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 21 Oct 11
       
      I see how this applies to Google+ but not really Facebook or Twitter. Google+ doesn't give you the option to select, other then circles, who will see your posts. And I guess Facebook is moving this way too. Does he mean that these sites give people the option to search for you without you knowing? Like Twitter or Google+ will suggest people for you to follow? But in all of them you still have to accept the people as followers and you can control privacy so I have a hard time understanding how you don't have agency in that.
  • In addressed media we are trusting our recipient. In non-addressed media we are trusting our curator, not our recipient.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 24 Oct 11
       
      Excellent point.
  • That’s a sea change of difference as we’re placing trust not in the hands of our known and targeted audience, but in the designers of these spaces and their algorithms.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 24 Oct 11
       
      People like the dissidents in Egypt and Iran and Libya, whose like to use social networks to further their cause was made much more dangerous by Facebook's blocking of pseudonyms.
  • Reading posting, Google circles are only good for directing your broadcasts to limited private groups.
alperin

Boston Review - Cass Sunstein: The Daily We - 4 views

bostonreview.net/...sunstein.php

democracy public sphere community internet media free speech

shared by alperin on 25 Nov 11 - Cached
  • increasingly engaged in a process of “personalization” that limits their exposure to topics and points of view of their own choosing
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Validating what you already believe in. We had a discussion about this when talking about why/when people use peer recommendation sites like Yelp
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      A cycle of bias!
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      It's interesting that almost none of these services (aside from Tivo and Intertainer, Inc?) are still around. But the ideas that they had about personalization have lived on. They had the right idea, perhaps before anyone else. Why did they fail?
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      That's an interesting topic. Perhaps in his time there are dozens or even hundreds of similar services, much more than the five cases here. But only very few of them have survived the fierce competitions in the market.
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      it could be just that their business models weren't right. Online businesses are easy to start (engineers are good at implementing them), but then turning a profit is another story. Many of the great websites operated for ages in the red, only surviving on investors believing in the idea.
  • people should be exposed to materials that they would not have chosen in advance.
  • ...45 more annotations...
  • Unanticipated encounters
  • are central to democracy and even to freedom itself
  • many or most citizens should have a range of common experiences
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      In some ways these two requirements are the basis for the standard school system as well.
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      but its too much of a burden on the school system to provide the basis for all our common experiences. These must continue well into adulthood, which means we should still have them outside of our school years.
  • consumers can entirely personalize (or “customize”) their communications universe.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      how close are we to this now? and is it a utopian dream?
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      I mean in personalizing our internet experience, not in the course of everyday life as will be outlined here...
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      the only place we have some encounters with things we don't expect is with searches. Sometimes, random things come up that are unexpected. Otherwise, yes, we get what we want. At best, we get a bit of exposure because someone we follow links to things we don't necessarily expect. 
  • many people are using it to produce narrowness, not breadth.
  • there is a difference of degree if not of kind.
  • dramatic increase in individual control over content, and a corresponding decrease in the power of general interest intermediaries, including newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Not sure if I agree completely with this. I think the decrease in power might just be more subtle use of power
    • S Chou
      S Chou on 27 Nov 11
       
      I feel like this overstates the original power of general interest media, as well as the "general" piece of it. 
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      I also think that these general interest media content providers are still alive and well, providing general interest content over the internet. How many ways can I get reality tv?
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      and less tonge-in-cheek, most people still read the NYTimes, the Guardian, CNN, Fox, etc. Be it online, tv, or in print. There are a million ways to personalize your experience, but most people opt for the traditional sources for the majority of their news and then may dig deeper with personalized choices.
  • chance encounters,
  • When people see materials that they have not chosen, their interests and their views might change as a result.
  • common framework for social experience.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Is the increase in fragmentation made up for by the fact that news/experiences on the Internet can travel instanteously to large numbers of people if they go viral?
  • group polarization
  • groups of people, especially if they are like-minded, will end up thinking the same thing that they thought before—but in more extreme form.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      I've read articles and heard from people that political parties now are much less likely to compromise with each other than in the past. A couple of questions: Do you think that's true or just a typical exaggeration that happens as the past fades away from public memory? If it is true, do you think the rise of individualizing content on the Internet and subsequently polarizing views of large groups of people have contributed to it as a reflection in the political parties?
  • If your position is going to move as a result of group discussion, it is likely to move in the direction of the most persuasive position defended within the group, taken as a collectivity
  • the group as a whole moves, as a statistical regularity, to a more extreme position
  • group polarization is likely to have fueled many movements of great value
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Appreciate pointing out the positives of group polarization as well. Sometimes we get bogged down in the negatives of a topic
  • it is extremely important to ensure that people are exposed to views other than those with which they currently agree,
  • In a heterogeneous society, it is extremely important for diverse people to have a set of common experiences.
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Builds community
  • congregate around a common issue, task, or concern
  • enjoyment
  • people who would otherwise see one another as unfamiliar can come to regard one another as fellow citizens, with shared hopes, goals, and concerns
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      Goes back to communities included shared experiences and the thoughts on how time spent together leads to a community
  • to show how consumer sovereignty, in a world of limitless options, could undermine that system
  • Websites might use links and hyperlinks to ensure that viewers learn about sites containing opposing views
    • Jennifer Bundy
      Jennifer Bundy on 25 Nov 11
       
      would this just encourage more overt disparaging remarks?
  • The basic question is whether it might be possible to create spaces that have some of the functions of public forums and general interest intermediaries in the age of the Internet.
    • S Chou
      S Chou on 27 Nov 11
       
      Part of this argument seems to assume that qualities of balanced reporting do not apply to websites as well. As more brand name news agencies weigh in online does this change the need to a degree?
  • As a result of the Internet, people can learn far more than they could before, and they can learn it much faster.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      Yes, knowledge is power. However, has the Internet forever changed our lives? Do we adapt to it or do we make it absolutely work for us? Does the technology also open a "Pandora's box" at the same time it emancipate us? Whenever I come through here, I often remember a saying that fortune and misfortune comes side by side.
    • S Chou
      S Chou on 27 Nov 11
       
      Learning is not the same as accessing. 
  • the growing power of consumers to “filter” what they see.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      Yes, it's interesting. What you can see depends on what you are looking for. A clairvoyant would tell you that you are not going to see something you don't want to see.
    • alperin
      alperin on 27 Nov 11
       
      This has been shown empirically to be true, like the now well-known 'tale of two blog-o-spheres'
  • involving unfamiliar and even irritating topics and points of view
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      This is one important reason that I still enjoy reading the newspaper, because I can "encounter" the information, news stories and points of views which might be surprising as well as fascinating.
  • group deliberation with like-minded people and insulation from alternate views breeds increasing extremism.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 26 Nov 11
       
      Form a bias -- confirm the bias -- leading to prejudice. Does it work this way?
  • general interest intermediaries expose people to a wide range of topics and views and at the same time provide shared experiences for a heterogeneous public.
  • exposures help promote understanding and perhaps, in that sense, freedom
  • If the public is balkanized, and if different groups design their own preferred communications packages, the consequence will be further balkanization
  • raise questions about the idea that “more speech” is necessarily an adequate remedy—especially if people are increasingly able to wall themselves off from competing views.
  • “consumer sovereignty,” which underlies much of contemporary enthusiasm for the Internet
    • S Chou
      S Chou on 27 Nov 11
       
      Ties to Habermas, but puts more power in the hands of the consumer.
  • As a result of the Internet, cascade effects are more common than they have ever been before.
    • S Chou
      S Chou on 27 Nov 11
       
      An argument for media literacy.
  • New technology can expose people to diverse points of view and creates opportunities for shared experiences. People may, through private choices, take advantage of these possibilities. But, to the extent that they fail to do so, it is worthwhile to consider private and public initiatives designed to pick up the slack.
  • in a free republic, citizens aspire to a system that provides a wide range of experiences
  • Hence their views may shift when they see what other people and in particular what other group members think.
    • Liu He
      Liu He on 27 Nov 11
       
      What's interesting is that sometimes when I do group readings, I feel that other people's comments on the page may have more or less influence on my formation of opinions. It is especially obvious when we do group readings on the paper.
  • social comparison
  • when group discussion tends to lead people to more strongly held versions of the same view with which they began, and if social influences and limited argument pools are responsible, there is legitimate reason for concern.
  • often becomes quite entrenched, even if it is entirely wrong.
  • This is a simple matter of numbers.
  • To the extent that choices proliferate, it is inevitable that diverse individuals, and diverse groups, will have fewer shared experiences and fewer common reference points.
  • voluntary self-regulation.
  • voluntary self-regulation.
  • advertisers are willing to spend a great deal of money to obtain brief access to people’s eyeballs
  • a well-functioning democracy depends on far more than restraints on official censorship of controversial ideas and opinions. It also depends on some kind of public sphere
1 - 2 of 2
Showing 20▼ items per page