709 Final Project (Post 1/5)

“The blogosphere is the imagined public sphere, the space inhabited by all of the public digital bodies.” –Danah Boyd

In this series of posts, I want to explore the definition of “community” in blog networks. Many questions abound about how to define blog communities, or whether or not they exist. For example, a 2003 survey by the Perseus Development Company found that a significant proportion of blogs on the Web were inactive, and generated little, if any user interaction. Are blog communities defined only by activity or special interests? Are blogs that don’t receive comments or other forms of feedback not vitally contributing to the ways in which the “blogosphere” is developing? Given the sheer scope of the blogosphere, these are difficult questions to answer.

However, a closer look at these questions may reveal some important ways in which blog networks can be defined as communities. Specifically, I want to argue that blogging communities can be defined as dynamically changing groups of individuals who keep or read blogs at varying levels of participation. “Dynamic” can not only be seen in terms of participation, but also in the very medium of blogging itself. If this definition of community can be applied, it could have potent influence on the way the blogosphere will develop.

As a model to complement my research, I’ve analyzed a blog and conducted an interview with the blogger about her experiences. In June of 2007, Karen Cinpinski began blogging at playinthecity.com (PITC). PITC had previously been in existence for two years, and was originally conceptualized by visitmilwaukee.org as a tourism blog. Cinpinski writes from the perspective of “a person who has experienced [Milwaukee],” and is free to implement her own ideas, format, and content.

Little Fish in a Big Pond...(Post 2/5)

Previous to blogging for PITC, Cinpinski had kept her own blog for a short time for the sake of writing and getting her own opinions out on the Web. However, she was disappointed because there “wasn’t any interaction [with readers] on that site.” She was hoping to meet new people, receive comments on her posts, and generate dialogue with her readers. But she felt that blogs such as her own—personal and journal-like—too often are lost in the millions of blogs on the Web. As Lampa notes, filtering—through the small-scale work of individual bloggers with specific interests and large-scale work of news aggregation blogs—seems to separate active blog communities from more dormant, “diarist bloggers.” However, these diarist blogs are still published, and are available to the rest of blogging community. Although Cinpinski did not receive the kind of dialogue she wanted on her own blog, her comments and visits to other blogs became published interactions, a part of those communities. Thus, Lampa states that “an alternative explanation for the persistence of community is needed” to describe blogging communities.

This alternative can be seen in the ways Cinpinski approached the content of PITC. She was excited to find ways to include bloggers with a “lesser voice” in the blogosphere and wanted to provide “well-rounded” content that would attract a variety of visitors and keep them participating in the communities surrounding PITC. For example, she began noticing that readers who were interested in music events would come back every month to read and comment on her concert previews, echoing Halavais’ notion of blogs as a “popular and accessible form of public discourse,” as well as a “source of public opinion and deliberation.” On the other hand, some readers would make a single visit or comment, and then would never be heard from again. However, Lampa points out that even brief contacts “should not be marginalized,” because including them as active members will “strengthen the image of community” and will encourage them to return and participate.

Different blogging practices—such as making a single comment or interacting on a daily basis—contribute, according to Schmidt, to “social networks of varying density.” Thus, blogging communities can be seen as dynamic because “members” constantly have varying roles of participation and interaction, much like a citizen who casts a single vote at election time compared to a citizen who is politically active year-round. Because a single comment can be viewed indefinitely, it holds the potential for future interactions and discussions.

The Main "Nodes"... (Post 3/5)

In addition to sporadic participation from those on the periphery of the PITC blogging community, Cinpinski has also noticed increases in the core of her regular readership. She attributes the growth to “linking and commenting.” For example, when Cinpinski visits the blogs of her readers, she will leave comments, and they will do likewise. She explains it as a “give and take” process:

“When you talk about community, it’s interesting because the former blogger [of PITC] set up her own network of people, and they still read, and I added my own, and now everyone is linked to each other.”

A study by Nardi establishes blogging as “social activity, a form of social communication in which blogger and audience are intimately related through the writing and reading of blogs.” PITC is an excellent representation of this idea because of the interaction that Cinpinski and her regular readers engage in. She notes: “I try to get people to comment. The purpose of a blog to me is to put opinions out there and be honest, get responses from other people, and form a dialogue with your readers. Then these readers speak to other [bloggers].” Likewise, Blanchard argues that “a sense of community may develop and be shared between [interactive blogs]” because it will “decrease the dependency of the virtual community on any one blog author and increase the chances of viability for the virtual blog community as a whole.”

As Cinpinski previously mentioned, she wanted to increase the strength of her core readership, hoping that it would be a gateway for interaction and communication with all corners of the blogosphere. Bloggers who regularly interact with other bloggers actively attempt to build communities through networks of links and discussion, further adding to the varied dynamics of participation.

Making it Easy for Everyone...(Post 4/5)

It is important not to forget that the blog medium is also key to developing a dynamic community of readers. In contrast to printed mediums, blogs allow users easy access from all over the Web. According to Boyd, “blogs differ from static Web pages because they capture ongoing expressions, not the edits of a static creation,” and “allow people to extend themselves into a networked digital environment that is often thought to be disembodying.” Since blogs can be shared “asynchronously with a conceptualized audience,” writers and readers can share ideas and interests without the constraints of physical space. This further supports the notion of the dynamic nature of blog communities. A single comment can be responded to a year from when it was posted, or active discussions with hundreds of comments can occur during the course of an afternoon.

Looking to the Future...(Post 5/5)

Blog communities are certainly comprised of dynamic blogger and reader populations. In Cinpinski’s case, she has been able to experience blogging communities as a member of the periphery (through her personal blog), as well as a member of the “highly interactive” (through PITC). However, at both levels of participation, she was part of the dynamic communities that are increasingly networking themselves across the Web. Enhanced by the digital medium of the blog, being part of a community in this sense no longer requires residing in a certain area. A community member can interact everyday or stop by once a year, and can choose to be part of one community, or many. As blogging popularity grows, it will be interesting to watch how the peripheral members further interact with the more “populated” and interactive nodes of the blogosphere. If higher and more intense levels of interaction are encouraged throughout the blogosphere, perhaps the notions of community will expand even further.

Works Cited

Transcript of Cinpinski Interview

Transcript of Interview with Karen Cinpinski - April 13, 2008

Why did you start your blog?

Play In The City was started in May 2005, and it started with a different blogger. She wrote up until May 2007, and I took over in June that year. It was conceptualized by Visit Milwaukee, who wanted it to be a primarily a tourist site, but also a way for locals trying to figure out something to do in Milwaukee. It was a way for them to talk about events that are going on and to publicize the city. Also, they wanted to have a blogger as a third person so it has credibility. On my site you don’t know its related to Visit Milwaukee at all. There’s no reference, so they don’t think I’m biased. They let me speak my mind and write my own thing. They want it to be a way for locals and tourists to look at the site and find out what’s going on and they actually see a person who has experienced it.

How do you determine content?

It’s mostly up to me. I’m pretty well-rounded in terms of content. The blogger that used to write, she focused on a lot of the same things. I talk about sports and concerts, for example. It’s pretty well-rounded, but if there’s a specific event--art museum with the a photo exhibit, for example--they will tell me to go to that. Overall, it’s mostly me and my ideas, but they have a little bit of say.

What were your goals and expectations when you started running the blog?

I was new to the blogosphere. I tried doing my own site and I had no idea what I was doing. I had no idea what to expect. In this case, I acquired a site rather than set up my own. When I set up my own I just wanted to write and get my opinions out there, but I didn’t get comments. I was expecting more feedback, but there’s so many blogs out there, so people don’t find it. I was expecting to meet people, but there wasn’t any interaction on that site. Fast forward to Play in the City--it was already established and there was a readership, so it was weird stepping in to that. I was going into it blindly. The columns were the same, but I changed the content in the columns. It is a site for tourism so I made different sections…sections for concert venues, links to sports that the previous blogger didn’t have.

How has your blog grown since you began running it?

Since taking over, comments have increased and hits have increased by about 200 per day. I’ve been personally marketing the site. When you write, its helpful to link and to use specific words, especially in your heading and the title. It helps to be specific to what you’re writing, so in searches, it will pop up more.

Have you seen a growth of “community” through linking and reader interaction?

Linking each other and commenting definitely contribute to that. I go to certain sites and comment and they comment on mine. It’s kind of a give-and-take type thing. Every blog I’ve read has had links to what they like. And if they link you then you link them. When you talk about community, it’s interesting because the former blogger set up her own network of people, and they still read, and I added my own, and now everyone is linked to each other. I thought that was interesting because I’ll go on one site and I’ll be linked, but so is the other one I read. Mostly bloggers read blogs regularly, so there’s networking. With Typepad, you can track where comments come from. Most hits come from Google. As far as comments, I have 2 regular readers who comment on every post. I do a concert preview every month, so those who are into that always come back at that time to check it out and leave responses. I have people who search me and like what I write but sometimes they don’t come back. I anticipated dialogue and comments. Everywhere I’ve gone, like corporate blogs, I’ve seen that.

What major limitations of printed media does the blog medium overcome?

The difference between print and blogging is that there’s no editor when you blog. It allows you to write what you want, with your own style and subject matter. With blogging, people are more inclined to come back because it’s easier access. It reaches more people because it’s over the web. In print you can’t have that. I think the overall structure is different from print. There’s so many different kinds of writing styles in blogs compared to print.

What do you think is the most important factor for a successful blog?

I think interaction, at least for mine, because we have companies behind it. If you have hits and readership it’s important. I try to get people to comment. The purpose of a blog to me is to put opinions out there and be honest, get responses from other people, and form a dialogue with your readers. Then these readers speak to others.

Does your blog reflect your personality or your reader’s personality?

Both, because people who like my writing and personality will come back and read. And if they don’t, they probably won’t read it regularly. The former blogger and I wrote very differently, and I’ve had new people come and start reading mine because they like my style over hers, and at the same time I’ve lost a few readers because they prefer her style.

Works Cited

Blanchard, A. (2003). Blogs as virtual communities: Identifying a sense of community. In L.J. Gurak, S. Antonijevic, L. Johnson, C. Ratliff, & J. Reyman (Eds.), Into the blogosphere: Rhetoric, community, and culture of weblogs. Retrieved May 5, 2008 from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/blogs_as_virtual.html

Boyd, D. (2006). A blogger's blog: Exploring the definition of a medium. Reconstruction: Studies in contemporary culture. Vol. 6.4. Retrieved April 1, 2008 from http://reconstruction.eserver.org/064/boyd.shtml

Lampa, G (2004). Imagining the blogosphere: An introduction to the imagined community of instant publishing. In L.J. Gurak, S. Antonijevic, L. Johnson, C. Ratliff, & J. Reyman (Eds.), Into the blogosphere: Rhetoric, community, and culture of weblogs. Retrieved May 5, 2008 from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/imagining_the_blogosphere.html

Halavais, A. "Blogs and the 'social weather'." Internet Research Conference 3.0: Net/Work/Theory. Maastricht, Netherlands, October 2002.

Nardi, B. et al. "Blogging as social activity, or would you let 900 million people read your diary?" Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Chicago, IL, November 6-10, 2004.

Perseus Development Corp. (2003). The blogging iceberg. Perseusdevelopment.com.

Schmidt, J. (2007). Blogging practices: An analytical framework. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 13. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/schmidt.html

Digital Poetry

Thoughts on Chun...

Like Nakamura, Chun often bogged me down with the race factor (as well as the chapter on Neuromancer and Ghost in the Shell), but overall, I found the second half of _Control and Freedom_very interesting--and paranoi-ing!

"Paranoia increases as visibility decreases"--so states Chun on p. 268. This is hardly a surprise in today's technological world. What we can't see makes us edgy. Where does our credit card information go when we make a purchase? Who is reading our blogs? Who's watching our webcam feeds? These are all questions that Chun ties into her notion of control-freedom--"the rise of a generalized paranoia" (250).

I can see where Chun comes from in her arguments, and I think there's a lot of truth to what Lacan terms "paranoid knowledge" (251). Simply put, "the Internet is of interest to us because it is the object of another's desire" (251). Chun's comments on the "Anthem" commercials further shed some light ("hurry up and get online because all these other people already want or have it" (250)). I was always behind most of my friends in terms of getting the latest technology. I was one of the last ones to have Internet at home, as well as one of the last ones to own a cell phone (I was however, the first to get an iPod!). I felt out of touch at times, or at least not able to be in touch to the extent they were. I also wondered if I was at a disadvantage in school by not having the Internet available at home while I was doing homework. However, I feel that I'm caught up, and in many cases (taking this class for example), ahead.

If there is truth to paranoid knowledge, then it's a scary thought that the more people who have access, the greater the paranoia will become in other populations. But here's my question--if the Internet does eventually become so widespread that everyone has access (chips in people's heads, I don't know), will that erase the paranoia? Or, will the control systems (or lackthereof) shift and begin to give rise to a new form of paranoia?

Sometimes I try not to look at ideas such as Chun's too seriously. Life develops in certain ways that we can't control, so sometimes we have to make the best of things as they come along. And I think the human race has been doing that for quite some time now, and not just in the age of fiber optics.

Meeting in First Life

Some thoughts about a "real life" discussion with Jennifer last week...

From the Heverly and Lessig readings, we talked a lot about the shifts between the analog and digital worlds. We wondered whether this shift we are currently experiencing--the shift towards digitality--will be permanent, or just another phase until the next thing?

Digitality seems to be building an architecture that uses an invisible interface for control. Are we using technology's tools? Or is technology using us? Heverly argues that we should be cautious about the ways we invest our physical selves into digital parts. It seems that as digitality grows, we are removing more and more of the physical aspects that define us as humans and communicators. Jennifer and I wondered if the digitality shift suddenly ended for some reason, would we have to begin to "reinvest" ourselves in physical materiality?

As far as the nature of our conversation, we discussed some of the differences the Second Life discussion-group probably would encounter. We agreed that "text capacity" would hinder discussion. If you were to take our conversation and type it out onto paper or screen, it would take up quite a bit of space on the Second Life screen. If there were 5 or 6 people present, it might make detail and depth of conversation limited. A lack of context and direction of conversation also would seem to be problematic. Basic conversation (like that of an IM chat session) would be okay, but for discussing academic texts or in depth conversations, we both felt a medium such as Second Life would diminish the quality of discussion.

Growing Up "Analog" and "Digital"

Heverly's "Growing Up Digital: Control and the Pieces of a Digital Life" raises some interesting questions about growing up in the digital age. At 26 years old in the year 2008, I'm in the unique position of having grown up in both the "analog" and "digital" world. I remember first having the Internet in my home as a sophomore in high school, and also remember how cool it was to buy a computer (a big honking desktop) for college because it would be "essential." I first got a digital camera and cell phone in college, releasing me from the chains of film and landlines.

Perhaps my overlapping position within these two realms has blunted my understanding and perception of what Heverly talks about in his article. I've always realized how fast things develop, and that my generation is experiencing new things at a different shift in time than the generations before me. However, I've never considered how people "grow up digital, similar to how they grow up a particular race, or to a particular height (216). Could growing up "digital" be just as defining as growing up as a 6' 7'' white kid?

I'm wondering what will happen to things such as the posts for this blog. Could I just let it float around in cyberspace infinitely? If I choose to delete it after this class is over, will it truly be gone? I really don't know. But the truth is, 10 years or so into my own digital aging, I've already begun to litter pieces of myself (digital pictures, blog posts, emails, etc.) in the digital world. Hopefully no one will ever blackmail me with an explicit online video--as was the case in Heverly's examples--but I'm not sure I'll ever be able to avoid similar problems given the nature of the digital world.

Maybe the next generations--the ones who will take cell phones to Kindergarten and virtually dissect frogs in 6th grade Biology--will experience this shift in identity the most. I like what Heverly says about education in this sense:

...there has been little, if any work done on how to educate children regarding the long-term effect of either creating digital media files that include themselves within them, or allowing themselves to be included in such files created by others" (214).

This is interesting. Will we need to "digitally" educate our children about having a picture taken? Perhaps my 5th grade Social Studies class will become Social Digitality Studies...

Finkel and Hansen...Hansen and Finkel!

In honor of Ray Finkel, I decided to take his last name as I created my Second Life-self. I was kinda surprised that we were limited to what last names we could chose, but what better one than Finkel!

Anyways, here are a few of my initial experiences in Second Life:

1. Creating a box and sitting on it.

2. Encountering a fellow Second Lifer, and instead of talking (which I hadn't figured out yet), we simply began jumping 15 feet into the air over and over.

3. Wearing a tuxedo coat with blue jeans and getting a nice complement from a girl with blue skin and wings.

4. Meeting another person who was also exploring Second Life for a graduate class. Would have been a little weird had it randomly been someone from 709.

This experience was quite interesting to say the least. I was playing around on it over the noon hour one day, and Eric, the grad student in my lab kept looking over my should saying "I'm getting addicted to this and I'm not even using it." Walking around in this virtual world certainly brings a sense of detachment from your physical self, as well as this underlying addiction to keep playing. If a character approached you and started a conversation, I almost felt obligated to say hello and do a stop-and-chat. Unlike AIM or other messengers, the visual presence of an avatar made the communication seem much more real. I couldn't just close a text box, but had to "physically" walk away from that person if I wasn't interested in speaking to them. Kinda felt bad doing that. On the other hand, when I was bothering people for advice on how to acquire clothes and such, there were many who simply ignored me or walked away. Some were very helpful though, and given the initial, and difficult learning curve in Second Life, it would have taken me much longer to learn how to do simple things. Overall though, a very fascinating microcosym of real life.

I'm almost glad it crashes my Safari at home, otherwise I might be tempted to use it more often, and then things would never get done. I'm waiting to see if Eric went home and downloaded the software at home last night, effectively ending his thesis work.

Lingering questions from Chun discussion...

In response to our discussion on the Chun reading last week, one aspect that I would like to remember and come back to is that of morality. The paragraph by Elmer-Dewitt on page 88 got me thinking about some simple ideas that could resolve many of the controversies surrounding pornography on the internet. "Pornography is powerful stuff, and as long as there is demand for it, there will always be a supply" (88).

This particular section talked about the message vs. the medium, and which one is to blame for the spread of porn online. While the Internet has certainly enabled pornography to come into our homes, it is merely following the preceding mediums (printing press, TV, etc) by maximizing how many people it can reach. In other words, the content is naturally following the progression of information access. That said, morality, or in this case, parents teaching/informing their children about pornography seems to be a constant line of defense that the medium can't touch (seemingly). Yes, kids will always be curious, and there will always be parents who won't be concerned about their kids viewing porn, but for those who do care, it seems that installing a sense of morality will, at least in some part, help to curb some of the dangers of online porn. I find it interesting that a human sense of morality could be the answer to technological questions.

Project ideas...

From the first day of class I've found blogging a fascinating (and fun) way to communicate and discuss topics with each other in class. In contrast to classes I've taken in the past that have had discussion components, I've always felt that the blogging aspect unified our ideas a little better and made actual in-class disscusion all the more beneficial.

Other than reading a few blogs, I didn't have much experience writing or responding to blogs before this class, so for a semester project I want to focus on the blog medium and how it effects community and network-building.

Some initial ideas:

1. How blog format promotes community--Chun's concept of space and Weinbergers idea of disorder. I've been thinking about how blog links tie into endless, seemingly random networks and how this is a basis for the formation of blog community.

2. As a basis for some research, I want to do an interview with a local blogger that runs a fairly successful blog about the city of Milwaukee. I've followed her blog since day one, and asking her about it one year later might reveal some interesting things about growth and community.

3. Scouring the Internet for blogs dedicated to improving blogging, hits, and number of readers in an attempt to build networks.

4. Ideas from our class postings and experiences.

I think it would be fun to write this project out as a blog post (or several if need be). Having links insteads of Works Cited, maybe some Photoshop or iMovies, and the blog format in general would be an interesting way to read a "term paper." I think the way the class would read the project would lend well to some of the things I'll talk about.

This seems like a lot of rambling right now, but hopefully things will come into focus a little better once I narrow things down and get some feedback.

Recent article of interest...

Going back to the Nakamura/Rose reading, I found this article on Fox Sports today that relates to some of the topics we have discussed concerning race and visuals.

Thoughts on Chun (1-127)...

There were two different areas that struck me during the first two chapters of Chun: 1) Her notion of "space" and the separation of physical and virtual bodies, and (2) the differences between the message and the medium.

First, Chun states that cyberspace "is a free space in which to space out about space and place, fact and fiction" (43) allowing users to "see oneself...where one is not" (54). As I was reading, I began to get a little paranoid about what I looked like while I was surfing the net, checking email, or chatting with friends online. I think if we were to watch a videotape of ourselves doing these things, Chun's notion of separation of the physical self from the virtual self would be quite self evident. Of course, our fingers are typing, our facial expressions might change, or we might cross or uncross our legs, but our minds occupy a space that is limitless, yet no bigger than the diameter of our screen. We fully absorb ourselves in this world, whether we are shopping on Amazon or sampling music on iTunes. "By moving from URL to URL, we cut the scenery or space between fixed locations" and are able to navigate through vast corridors of information (47). I wonder how this shift from a physical space to a virtual space will eventually effect the workplace and academia. Our class is a prime example--outside of our class discussions, we interact through our blogs. Rather than physically meeting for discussions, we "jack-in" to our virtual class space, read each other's postings, and experience an infinite potential of ideas, links, and pictures/videos. And all we need is a 15-inch computer screen to do that?

Second, I wanted to briefly touch on Chun's notion of message vs. medium. I think a lot of ideas from this chapter will be fleshed out as we get into later chapters, but I found it very interesting that some argue (concerning pornography) that "the medium was the message, and the message was the pornographic invasion of the home" (81). To me, the invasion of pornography into homes via the Internet is a natural progression, just as it was with the printing press and television. Porn will always be one of the "staple dark sides" of humanity, and, as Chun states, pornography, sexual practices, and commerce have not changed since the printing press, or since early prostitution" (80). Therefore, the type of medium does not matter. There are certainly a lot of good things online as well, and I think many of the same arguments could be made for ESPN.com bringing sports news into the home, too. Or into the workplace, which I am guilty of. The medium enables, but the message itself will always be interpreted by the user. I think that many take the medium for granted because of the ease with which it allows us to access information, but I don't see the two connected anymore than I connect a person's voice with my cellphone.

Thoughts on Benkler...

_The Wealth of Networks_ was quite the meaty read, but I suppose the best way to give a summary statement would be the following from page 30..."the Internet decentralizes the capital structure of production and distribution of information, knowledge, and culture."

As Benkler hits on again and again (and again and again), we are seeing the complete restructuring of information and cultural environments. There's a lot to sift through, but I think the best place to begin is to look at the way information is becoming a public good, rather than a pure, private good. The example that struck me hardest was that of the "Clickworkers." I thought it was amazing how 85,000 untrained users could map out craters and almost perfectly replicate the skills of a trained geologist. Imagine the difference in costs: a very low budget to organize this volunteer effort compared to the money it costs to train and hire a geologist (I'm not sure how much that is, but I'm sure it's much more than what they paid to put together this experiment). I think it would be an understatement to say that "digitally networked environments makes nonmarket strategies vastly more effective."

He also uses the example of open source software. In many cases, one user is defined as the author, another user identifies the bugs, and yet another user fixes the bugs. All three of these actions are completely independent of each other, yet still yield a viable and useful software product. This type of unmanaged collaboration is similar to that of the Clickworkers, only on a much smaller scale. However, the driving force behind each of these phenomena is the same--decentralized access to information and production.

Whether it's 85,000 amateur "geologists," or the thousands of users who run and edit Wikipedia, decentralized information illustrates the "reorganizing of the public sphere." This has become a powerful tool in today's Internet culture, and has the real potential of forever changing global economies. Normal, everyday users of the Internet don't have to raise the necessary capital to become powerful players because so much information is now free and shared. The concept of Exclusive Rights is becoming more and more challenging to pull off because information is becoming more dependent on itself. I picture it as this "eternal stack" where each piece becomes crucial to the formation of the next. In the case of the Clickworkers, the crater maps they created exemplify this phenomenom. Who can take credit for the production of that information? It was an 85,000 member team effort, and it cost beans to put it together.

There are endless examples of this in the online world today, and this network that Benkler describes is only becoming more complex. He uses terms such as "unmanaged collaboration" and "resources governed by commons," but I still think that "decentralized" is the best fit term. Certainly there are centers of information exchange, but when access to these centers opens futher and further, the clear lines our market and nonmarket behaviors once saw become blurred.

Thoughts on Weinberger...

I suppose I'll probably never walk into a Staples the same way again after reading _Everything is Miscellaneous_. Weinberger's Prologue sets up a great framework for the rest of the book, and highlights a few obvious points that I've always known, but never really considered. "In physical space, some things are nearer than others...physical objects can only be in one spot at any one time...physical space is shared...human physical abilities are limited" (5). That's not exactly mind-blowing stuff, but when you think about it, the layout of a Staples store is pretty useless relative to what the average person might need. If I need a cable (assuming I have no prior knowledge of where they are), I have to stop, look at all the category signs hanging from the ceiling, or maybe even ask someone. Even when I do find the location, I still might be tempted to stop and look at some cool new item or sale. So maybe a 15 minute trip into Staples isn't a big deal, but when you consider the age of digitality, it can seem like an eternity.

Weinberger's third order of order--the digital bits--is certainly a valid idea that will be brought more and more to the forefront of consumerism, as well industry and academics. Technical communication fields are already dealing with the boom of single sourcing and content management, and online stores such as Amazon and iTunes are offering endless ways for customers to shop and acquire things. I know that when I shop for music online, making miscellaneous searches is one of the best ways to find new stuff. As Weinberger states, the third order hangs information "from as many branches as possible" (103). Users of Amazon and iTunes create random lists of CDs and mp3s, and a single search can yield thousands, if not millions of possibilities.

I've been an avid user of Amazon and iTunes for quite some time now, but I find it very interesting that "giving up control" is what allows them to be so powerful (and addictive). I really like some of the analogies he uses throughout the book, especially the one about going into a clothing store, pulling everything off the shelves, and sorting through the "distractions" until you find your size. In many cases, not knowing what you want seems to be advantageous because you get more options. And at the click of a button. I suppose I've always thought of the Internet as very ordered--typing web pages, getting exact numbers of search results, etc--but the disorder that's out there is really what is driving it along. We're losing control of the order of information, and somehow it's making it easier for everyone.

So my lingering question is, will things evolve in such a way that order and ownership will become the norm again? Does the disorder/order come and go in cycles? It seems like we've been on the upswing for a while now--chiseling tablets, printing press, Internet...I wonder what new technologies could bring an order to the disorder?

iMovie...

For my iMovie, I wanted to put together a video "commentary" on Nakamura's analysis of the iPod commercials. As I posted in my response, I really liked how she analyzed the black, silhouettes as "negative spaces" that the user could project themselves into. However, I didn't like how she assumed that this also represented a desire for white people to be able to dance like black people.

So for my video, I put together a few clips of a variety of iPod users, using the iPod like I think most people do. For me, those ads symbolized how a variety of people can be represented by the images, and how each person can enjoy their iPod in their own way. I think my video supports Nakamura's analysis of the iPod commercial, yet disagrees with the way she thinks most people interpret it.

Thoughts on Nakamura (95-209)

As I'm digging further into Nakamura, I'm finding a lot of ideas that I really like, but I think some of them are overshadowed by her perceptions on race and how it is interpreted in digital/visual cultures.

In Chapter 3 (Social Optics of Race), Nakamura begins an interesting analysis of the iPod and how it's design and advertising reflect a product's integration into popular culture. The iPod commercials depict black, silhouetted figures against colorful backgrounds, which according to Nakamura, allows the potential user to put themselves into this character's shoes. I remember when I first saw those commericals, the very same idea popped into my head...that could be me! Although I wouldn't be going quite as crazy, and my selection of music would have been quite different. This "negative space" that the image provides is a powerful example of how a blank image can project a visualization of one's self. It definitely worked on me, even though I had purchased an iPod before those commercials came out.

She also makes some great points about "flattening" of data, and how "spatial wandering" lessens the need for an author to direct the media experience. I also thought her Manovich quote on how "random access is symptomatic of the 'decline of the field of rhetoric in the modern era'" made for a great discussion of how the usability of the iPod interface was changing the way we approach new media.

However, just when this chapter started to get interesting, Nakamura begins to describe how these images of black, dancing silhouettes depict black people dancing "because, as in the Matrix trilogy, black people dancing visually signifies desire that the white body cannot feel and cannot express visually." I think it's extremely presumptuous, and I have no idea where she gets her grounds for that argument. I felt the same way about her characterization of race in the Matrix. To me, it seems like you could pick apart any movie or advertisement and make connections with race. Race is everywhere in the online and visual world today, but she makes it seem like it's this hidden secret that we need to watch out for.

I'm just having a hard time making the race connection with digital and visual images in this book. Like I mention earlier, she has some great ideas, but the hardcore race factor she keeps throwing in makes it difficult for me to appreciate the good qualities of this book. I'm wondering if other students are having this dilemma as well...

alllooksame!

Just a quick real-life example of alllooksame...I work with a guy from South Korea, and sometimes at lunch in the cafeteria at MCW we play of version of this game (never heard of the original until now though). Neither of us are very good at identifying between Japanese, Korean, or Chinese. When we do meet someone the usual exchange is "Oh I thought you were Korean" and "Well I thought you were Chinese!" Until I met him, I always thought this kind of mix-up would be offensive, but he thinks it's hilarious.

self-portrait...

This was a "portrait" my friend took of me a while back. I added a few things opaquely in the picture frame, and then of course the parade of family and friends below me. Basically I included things that are important to me. And yes the beer in my hand is one of them.

Thoughts on Nakamura (1-94)

In her intro, Nakamura states that the purpose of her book is to "focus on the ways that users of the Internet collaboratively produce digitial images of the body...in the context of racial and gender identity formation" (5). I found this a fascinating mode of critique. The Internet has become a visual-generating medium where text is no longer the only option. As our experience with Photoshop has taught us, ideas and creations of self-imaging are at our fingertips, and we can share those images with classmates simultaneously (not to mention the rest of the world, if only so many people were interested in our 709 blogs). Thus, it would seem important to analyze how we portray ourselves with the visual tools and outlets the Internet provides.

After reading the first couple of chapters (maybe I've not gotten far enough into the book to make a fair assessment), I found myself with many questions about the value of such analysis. Her second chapter focuses on AIM buddy icons. If we assume that the author of "Muslim" is a 15-year old Muslim girl from Detroit, why should we be suprised that her buddy icon features a Muslim girl with a DKNY shirt? This seems like a normal progression of expression, no different than if we were asked to draw a picture of ourselves. However, the Internet hides the actual person, so we can't be sure if "Muslim" is a Muslim girl or a 50 year-old white guy. The "anonymous" user is the wild card in terms of visual expression in an online environment. I was at first skeptical of Nakamura's choices of analysis, but I'm really beginning to see the value of online image analysis. The Internet certainly holds the potential for endless creativity with how we portray ourselves, but how will that change the way we communicate with others?

If we can be anyone we want online--which in most cases, we already can be--how will that affect our cultures? Nakamura raises a great point about how children today seem to be skipping the written text phase of learning and are jumping directly into a digital world of images and pictures. I've always been sure that the Internet will eventually be accessible to everyone on the planet, so when that day comes, it's feasible that a world-wide, uniform online culture could develop. Skin color would no longer matter, because each individual could represent themselves in any way they chose. And since the online environment would likely become the focal point of communication and culture, the actual human beings wouldn't really matter anymore, just like it doesn't matter if "Muslim' is a 50-year old white guy.

some more word play...

Some pics from summer vacation...

a semiological approach to pic #3

I've decided to analyze picture #3 (the black and white of the guy and the drawing) and to apply a semiological method of analysis. As Rose's text states, semiology "confronts head on the question of how images make meanings." To me, this picture was the most subjective of the three--very minimal, simple, and quiet--and so it offers many different ways to interpret signs and meanings. Semiology explores connections between signs and meaning, and since I'm an audience of one (for the purposes of this analysis anyways) I want to talk about the signs and meanings this picture conveys to me.

According to semiology, the sign consists of two important parts--the signified and the signifier. Two separate things are being signified in this picture. One is "sight" and the other is "lack of sight." The signifier then, are the two men. The drawing of the man is the signifier of 'lack of sight," (I see a blind caricature feeling around as to not bump into anything as he is walking along). The actual man, who is physically looking at the drawn man, is the signifier for "sight."

All other elements in this picture (plain, black t-shirts, black and white, simple poses) defer to (in my opinion) the central meaning, which is the sharp contrast between seeing and not seeing. According to Rose, these signs are paradigmatic because they gain their meaning from contrast with other possible signs. Unless you have an extremely wild imagination, I think that "sight" and "lack of sight" come to the forefront of meaning in this picture.

Going one step further, we can physically diagram this photo to evaluate how the images transfer to one another. I imagined a line down the middle of the two men, with arrows coming from particular places. An arrow would be coming from the blind drawn man's hand (his way of seeing the man), and another arrow could go from the actual man to the blind man (his way of seeing). The fact that they are both looking at each other suggests they are aware that each other is there, only they are each using their methods of "sight".

So, whether through personal interpretation or diagraming, a semiological approach indeed offers a variety of ways of determining meaning. I've always believed that art (I think we can assume this is not advertising, but hey, thats my call,) is a personal way of deciphering, and this approach really works well for picking apart the signs that strike you as meaningful. However, this is also why this method is restrictive, because people interpret signs in different ways.

some word play...

I've always enjoyed album artwork, especially the kind where the artist's name and album title are nowhere to be found. All you have is a visual representation, and for me, that creates distinct art value apart from the actual music. Most of the time, you see the artwork before you hear the music, and I've always thought that plays a role in how you interpret and appreciate the music. And vice versa. For this assignment, I thought it would be fun to add a couple of captions to such an album. This is a particular album cover I've always been curious about...

Rainbows End vs In Rainbows

I was listening to Radiohead's "In Rainbows" at work today, and I was surprised why I didn't make this connection to "Rainbows End" sooner (if not just because of the name similarities).

For those of you who don't know, Radiohead released this album last Fall as an mp3 download, and offered consumers the choice of what to pay for it. Paying absolutely nothing was an option, and many fans went this route (although reports have been that Radiohead still made quite a killing).

I've been reading the responses and comments on Rainbows End by other students, and two themes that keep popping up are ownership and access to information. In Vinge's world, access to information is not an issue. Libraries are a thing of the past, and what you want is literally right in front of your eyes. To me, it seems like this kind of accessibility kills the notion of ownership. I really enjoyed the album (and threw down a couple of bucks), but since have purchased the hard CD copy. I can touch that, put the CD in my player, and enjoy the artwork that comes with it.

With the rise of electronic and digital texts, will I feel the same way about books? If authors simply put their texts online for me to read onscreen (or maybe with some sort of contact lens in the future!), will I get the same satisfaction that I do from holding a book that I paid for? If there's no value attached to it, I would feel cheated that no one had to make any finanical sacrifice for it, and thus, the product (or art?) becomes nothing more than a "tap water" commodity. The world in Rainbows End, while seemingly fantastic and accessible, really appalls me in some ways. All the information is right there, and you barely have to lift a finger to get it.

Thoughts on Vinge

I've never been a huge fan of the sci-fi genre...the plots are too loose and the characters all seem to be simpletons. I think that's what prevents me from appreciating some of the cool ideas and concepts sci-fi authors come up with. I know we're not reading this for the literary quality, but the critic in me had to comment.

HOWEVER...if Vinge is really this good at predicting the development of new technologies, I am not eagerly awaiting the arrival of "silent messaging." When I first started using text messaging on my phone, I couldn't get over how much that changed the way I interacted with friends. Texting eliminated many phone calls from my phone bill, especially the conversations that only required 2 minutes but swelled to 30. The need for vocals was eliminated, and my right thumb was all that was necessary.

After reading the first part of this book, I tried to imagine how eliminating the thumb would change things. It would be like telepathy. Four people talking to each other could carry on "sub-conversations," which would most likely influence the outcome of the actual conversation. There's an interesting part in the book when Braun, Vaz, and Mitsuri first meet the Rabbbit, and they're worried that the Rabbit might be silent messaging. Imagine the paranoia such technology would create! I feel like sitting in a bar with your friends would become a nerve-racking situation. If technologies like this do come about, I'm not sure I want to know how they will affect the way we communicate.

"read you like a book"

I really enjoyed our first night of class, and if there's one part I want to remember, it would have to be our discussion about how physical books shape us. I had never really thought that much about the phrase "read you like a book" until after Anne made that comparison. I think it was when she mentioned that we both had spines that it really clicked. Books, and the way we handle and read them, are certainly a reflection of how we interact/communicate with someone else.

That said, how are digital texts going to change things? How will we respond? If things progress to the point of Vinge's future world, what phrase will replace "read you like a book?" "Scroll you like a webpage?" We should come up with a list as a class and pick the best ones.

First ever blog post

This is the first time I've done a blog, but I have to say, I've been curious about it for some time.

Being a music nut, I read a lot of music blogs...in particular livemusicblog.com, which has an extensive list of links to other bloggers. I usually use this site as a starting point, and then just surf around until I find something interesting. It's amazing how endless the networks are, and how each time you surf around you get a personalized summary of things that are going on.

Setting up the blog was surprisingly easy...no different than signing up for something online. I have a few friends who blog as a part of their jobs, and they often complain about the time it takes to set up and maintain a blog. I suppose there's a big difference between working blogs and leisure blogs, though. I'm really looking forward to working with this more.

I chose this template because it was simple and easy on the eyes. Now that I think about it, I rarely take notice of the styles of the blogs I read. I'm much more drawn to the titles of the posts or the images.

When I write in this blog (and as I read other blogs), I think that there's quite a bit more freedom than if I were doing a freelance project or classroom assignment. To hell with parallel structure or active voice! It's a simple medium that I think people prefer to read in a more conversational style. When I write, I try to just imagine a conversation I'm having with myself. In many blogs, I think the main attraction is how interesting the writing style is.