TC 375: Social Networking and e.e. cummings

Before I address the issues of social networking sites, the Facebook, privacy, and the other matters which were brought up in Judith Donath and danah boyd's paper, "Public Displays of Communication," I want to point out one strange thing that I noticed immediately when I read the article. One of the authors, boyd (perhaps one day dr. boyd?), has put her name in all-lowercase letters (in other words, she has purposely not capitalized her first or last name).

Danah, who do you think you are, e.e. cummings? Your use of lowercase lettering may be "cute" in regards to the fact that your research is on the medium where such is common and even tolerated (along with "ROFL," "LMAO," and "BRB"), but when you are a PhD student at the University of California, Berkely, doesn't it look a lot better to align yourself (to the extent that the way you visually represent your name is concerned) with other academics, rather than with a portion of the people whose behaviors you study? A minor grievance, but I couldn't avoid pointing it out, and I'm sure that boyd didn't write her name like this without full awareness of the attention it would bring to her.

Now, on to the topic at hand. Donath and boyd discuss social networking sites, but the Facebook is not included in the discussion. The article's date of publication was about eight months after the launch of the Facebook, meaning it was likely excluded due to its newness (if the writers were even aware of it when they wrote this) and its small size (as a result of being new). According to my profile on the Facebook (viewable only to Facebook members who are friends with me or who attend MSU), I joined on November 28, 2004.

I remember that at that time, I had known about the Facebook for quite some time, but had avoided joining simply because I did not see any point in it. I had already been convinced by friends to join Myspace and Friendster, and did not see any point in joining a third. Additionally, I did not feel like I had gained anything from my membership in those other networks, aside from the initial curious exploring of the sites. In fact, I felt that they were often more of a chore, sending me emails saying that I needed to log in to servers that were often slow to "approve" friends, sometimes people who I did not know, and who made no attempt to explain why they were claiming a friendship between us. Regardless, I eventually joined the Facebook, and have used it for a variety of things since. It should also be noted that for the most part I avoid other social networking sites.

I have used the Facebook to find people (friends that you have lost touch with, weak ties who I wish to know better, members of groups for class projects, etc.), communicate with people (friends at other schools, friends at MSU, and even some professional acquaintances), and make myself "findable" by other people. The communication tools of the Facebook (announcements, messages, etc.) have been used by my friends and I to alert one another of our parties, events, and important milestones. As a result, my social network has been affected by the Facebook by facilitating communication between myself and my friends, between myself and people I do not yet know very well, and between friends of mine and other friends of mine. It is not uncommon to be asked by a new friend or peer, "I see that you know So-and-so, I have known him since first grade, how do you know him?" In this way, the social networking sites speed up the process of establishing or positioning oneself and others in a "social web."

As far as professors and other faculty are concerned, I have seen very few on the Facebook. While the site has special designations for faculty, graduate students, undergraduate students, and alumni, the vast majority of Facebook users at MSU fall into the latter category (both by actual count and by percentage). Rather appropriately, the only professor of mine who is on the Facebook is Dr. Nicole Ellison, instructor of the course for which I am writing this, which focuses on computer meddiated communication. Because she is the only professor I know who is on the Facebook, it is very difficult for me to guess what it might be like if all MSU professors joined. The article noted a situation like this with Friendster, but did not go into extensive discussion on that particular matter. According to her profile, Dr. Ellison is interseted in underwater hockey. I can safely say that I do not think I would have found that out had it not been for the Facebook. Of course, discussions of what situations might develop if a majority of university professors signed up on the Facebook are far more concerned with how this affects relationships between students and faculty. I can take some guesses at what might happen, and what sort of difficult situations could potentially arise, but I think I would be more interested in first hearing what Dr. Ellison's experiences have been using the Facebook.

The authors discuss the issue of privacy in relation to social networking sites. Some of the particular areas of online privacy on such sites that they discuss include identity theft (the more information you provide, the easier it is for someone to pretend to be you with this information), selective exposure to information (making information visible only to select groups or levels of contacts), and a longer discussion of a story of an individual who uses publicly accessible data to construct an entire identity that is wholly untrue. The authors sound weary of some of the potential developments and concerns about privacy and social networking sites. While I agree that there are some serious ways in which people could be victimized or harmed by exposing too much valuable information to too many people, I think that it is up to the rational individual to be aware of what information they are putting out and who is able to see it. These are "opt-in" services, not mandatory directories, and anyone who chooses to use one should be aware of precisely what they are doing and the risks that may be associated with their sharing of information.

TC375: Privacy & Technology

"Which of the following societies would you rather live in: one in which everyone uses WearComp like Steve Mann or one in which everyone and everything has an embedded RFID tag?"

Before I can begin to discuss this particular issue, I must make a few distinctions about where I stand on most matters of civil liberties and privacy. I am slightly torn, as I am a major advocate of civil liberties, civil rights, and the right to privacy, but I am also entirely intrigued by and interested in the widespread possibilities of new technologies and their implications for society. Therefore, my views will reflect my personal feelings about privacy and civil liberties, but I have an interest in seeing just how such things could work, so I am not entirely opposed to developing ideas just because they could later contradict views of mine; I would prefer to see such possibilities investigated to greater length before we make any final decisions on their legality or morality.

First, I am against (and weary of) the idea of powerful organizations and individuals being able to identify my location (if not my activity or current state) at any given time. I believe this strips people of a very basic right, but I also believe that it has very beneficial uses, such as locating individuals in emergency situations. Therefore, I think that we must structure protective measures and systems as we design increasingly complex and immersive technologies.

To support my view, I point to the position of the American Civil Liberties Union. According to Barry Steinhardt's "Liberty in the Age of Technology," "We should be responding to intrusive new technologies by building stronger restraints to protect our privacy."

So I am against the idea of information about my precise whereabouts and condition being used to advertise to me, or to exploit me in any such manner, but I see value and use in such information being used to rescue victims of a collapsed building, or to locate where an emergency call is coming from, to give just two examples. Thus, I see the need for strong and well-thought-out restraints to protect our privacy.

It is partially because of this shared weariness of such power and information being in the wrong hands that I am intrigued by Steve Mann's WearComp projects. I like his philosophy about individuals mediating and enriching their own environments. However, I do not think it is all that realistic to ask whether one would prefer to live in a society where individuals all use systems like Mann's or one where everyone has embedded RFID tags. Instead, I think it is far more likely that whatever develops in the future will be a combination of the ideas that are just beginning to unfold now, such as these, and ideas and technologies that do not exist, and perhaps have not even been envisioned yet.

Like the student who returned home from high school and threw his RFID badge on the table, proclaiming "I'm a grocery item, a piece of meat, I'm an orange," I do not want to be akin to a trackable commodity in Wal-Mart's warehouse. However, I am not so technophobic as to suggest that any use of such technologies would be detrimental to society; I would love it if my refrigerator would remind me that my milk is expiring! The trick will be balancing power, privacy, and practicality. Without the proper restraints, the technologies that we are dealing with could quickly become more problematic than we intend.

TC 375: Gender Digital Divide

I think that the "gender digital divide" must be looked at in several ways in order to be understood properly. First, on the side of access opportunities, we have seen in the readings that various communities and groups around the world have limited, slow, or no internet access. These groups are most commonly correlated with economically poor groups and states. In some of these societies, the subordination of women is great, and this inequality extends to access to technologies such as the internet. Secondly, we must look at how women are actually using the internet. Just as Nakamura pointed out in the discussion of ethnic minorities and the internet, we must look not only at just "haves" and "have-nots," but also at how these individuals, when able to access the internet, actually use it. As noted in the textbook, various groups of women and ethnic minorities use the internet in markedly different ways than the average white male internet user. As such, when thinking about a "gender digital divide" we must look not only at access, but what is offered to (and by) the female audience that participates in online activities.

I think that the readings from October 13 raise some very valid concerns about the current state of women and the internet. The author addresses some very recognizable statistics such as the minority status of women in computing clubs and organizations, a fact which is easily seen by walking into any class in the Telecommunications, Information Studies, and Media department at Michigan State University. However, to limit this only to the area of the internet seems rather pointless, as a very similar situation of gender under-representation can be seen in the field of Engineering. Much as Engineering clubs and organizations dedicated to helping women in the field and enhancing the image of the field as a viable area for women to excel emerged as a response to this gender inbalance, organizations cited in the text have formed to do much the same for women and the internet. The prescriptive recommendations that follow the descriptive analysis in the AAUW report reflect such efforts.

The report's recommendations include full integration of computing into educational curriculum, a redefinition of computer literacy, a respect for multiple points of entry into computing, changes in the public face of computing, instruction for educators, the beginning of a discussion on equity for educational stakeholders, educating students about the importance of computers in their future work, a rethinking of educational software and computer games, and other support efforts for women in computing (such as the organizations mentioned in the text and school-based organizations). These recommendations cover a full spectrum of areas to wage this fight and reflect a variety of ways to improve the situation for women in computing. While they are very broad and vague, the proper implementation of some of the core programs (such as computers being integrated into academic curriculum) could have very noticable effects and contribute to a greater overall shift in the climate of computing for women.

The greatest recommendation I can make is to echo an idea mentioned in several of the writings, being that the best way to engage women (or any group) in computing, and specifically the internet, is to look at what sort of communication activities they most enjoy, and to tailor services and content to these communication styles. Evidence of the success of such tactics can already be seen in the number of women using weblogs.