E.J Westlake (2008). Friend me if you Facebook: Generation Y and performative surveillance.

E.J Westlake (2008). Friend me if you Facebook: Generation Y and performative surveillance.


The author starts of the article by illustrating their own experiences with facebook, which I found often resonating my own feelings as a frequent user of facebook, such as Facebook News Feeds and feeling uncomfortable about my online privacy during it’s inception (i.e. who can see what I write and to whom). Some of the key topics the author addresses includes: Generation attitudes, surveillance & Performative surveillance, facebook’s background, fake profiles and availability of information, Facebook’s News Feed controversy amongst other things.

When addressing Generation Y the author argues that most of generation Y who use facebook do so to identify the limitations of normative behavior through unique performances of an online self. As apposed to deviant exhibitionism on or a passive acceptance of intrusive surveillance. Whilst I’m still undecided regarding Westlake’s argument I can see merit to her argument on this. However I would have liked more elaboration on their argument, then what I read.

According to the author, attitudes of Baby- Boomers and Generation X-ers, is that Generation Y is detached socially and politically because of technology. However the author goes on to note –

“Studies show, in fact, that while young people spend more time on the computer (Fox and Madden 2006), they are more connected than ever in large part because technology facilitates contact in ways unfathomable even 10 years ago (Boase 2006).” – E.J. Westlake (2008)

Through my experience of facebook and myspace, as a frequent user, I tend to agree with the latter. Topics such as, socially and politically ones, are strong amongst facebook users including Generation Y.

Westlake also refers to Erving Goffman when addressing computer-mediated interaction. Westlake says,

“whilst certain elements that Goffman defined as part of the “front stage” performance are absent in computer-mediated interaction (visual cues such as clothing and facial expression and aural cues such as tone), they are replaced in chat and on websites by more “staged” elements such as font, photographs, music, and graphics.”


According to the Westlake some sociologists are worried that computer-mediated communication possibly could shape a generation, which has not properly socialized. Whilst these can be seen as genuine concerns it’s too early to know if these concerns carry any warrant. Moreover Westlake says, “Research suggests that computer-mediated contact does not replace more traditional modes of interaction.”

Other topics briefly touched were ‘fake profiles’ and ‘how facebook created its own subculture and language.’ One of the examples used for this was the variations of using the ‘Facebook’ as a verb or noun.

No doubt a major concern for the modern day parenting is Internet predators, which the author briefly looks at under the header ‘Surveillance.’ In 2005 & 2006 Facebook and MySpace made headlines for two reasons - Internet predators and had justifiable unease about the availability of information for state surveillance. MySpace was more global and lacked the similar precincts that facebook enforced on its users. So when several children were stalked on MySpace the alarms were raised regarding the possible threats of online user profiles. Westlake states:

“Facebook users have reported to me that they find the openness of the MySpace environment unsettling:

“I’m also on MySpace, which i used mostly for the kids i know who don’t go to college. It’s sort of creepy tho because of randoms. I had this guy who worked with a musical theatre/ cabaret record label randomly message me because he saw me on [another user’s] friends [list] and thought I ‘looked fun.’ It was true I had a crazy bowling picture of myself as my picture—but it was kinda creepy.”


Westlake says the U.S. Congress has made efforts to have limitation on access to websites such as MySpace and Facebook via legislation such as HR 5319, the Deleting Online Predators Act, this would mean schools and libraries would have to make online social networking sites unattainable on their networks.

Through my own experiences online social networking sites like MySpace & Facebook can definitely be a playground for the online predator(s) and that is why I think it is a better idea to educate its users on how to practice online safety. Online networking sites have become very important in today’s society (i.e. politics, business, social and government etc…) so to simply restrict access may not necessary be the answer. Moreover online social networking sites could open up economic opportunities and / or new concepts from online participation.

Christopher Harper (2003). Journalism in a digital age.

In H. Jenkins & D. Thorburn (Eds), Democracy and New Media (pp. 271-280). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
(In E-reserve)

Clear paper about how journalistic practices change with the internet. It is from 2003, takes a good look at “old media” journalism and continuity in the present.

Christopher Harper starts of by referring to the term “Defining moment” (a phrase meaning which a story / event has defined a specific medium or brand). He then compares defining moments for the other mediums such as television (John F. Kennedy), radio (Hindenburg), print (Vietnam War) and then the internet, in which Harper says Pundits have used a variety of defining moments (e.g. TWA Flight 800 crash, Princess Diana, the mars Probe and Monica Lewinsky case) regarding the web. However he is quickly to state that a defining moment doesn’t always mean that the internet and the WWW have obtained the power to establish a specific agenda for the test of the media and public. It is the media who sets the agenda “agenda setting” (i.e. what to think about…). According to Harper – 1970’s researchers, Max McCombs & Donald Shaw argue that it is not the individual media who determine what a reader thinks, but gives the reader something to think about. Moreover he says the media can produce stories in a certain light which may affect the reader’s interpretation of the news. He says - only the mars probe and Lewinsky case have come close to having a significant impact on the issues of the day by attracting mass interest online.

The 2003 paper says the web cannot set an agenda because the audience is relatively small when comparing with newspapers and televisions. However I no longer see this as the case in 2010 though I still agree that for the most part the broadcast outlets and newspapers still control the bulk of the “agenda setting” of journalistic agendas and public debate…

Harper says – “online journalism stands to alter dramatically the traditional role of the reporter and editor” – this is because it give heaps more power to the reader / user and allows them to challenge the traditional role of the publication as the gate-keeper of news and info. The user can either still depend on the gatekeeper to select and filter the news in the traditional sense or can take a more hands on approach by going to the basic documents of stories. This means the reader can check out the stories for them selves by comparing against other sources. Plus have access to archives, which weren’t so easily accessible using traditional sources.

Online journalism opens up new ways of presenting the story via utilizing a variety of online media-text such as - audio, video and images. It also gives the user the ability to search for data quick and easily. Online journalism also gives outlets for nontraditional means of transmitting news and info. Even back in 2003 online news had the ability to break news headlines faster then any other sources (i.e. TV, print or radio…) and provides more space giving journalist & editors less restrictions when choosing which stories to chose.

According to Harper researchers found that Gate-Keepers – may chose digital online stories based on ‘Intensity of the threshold value’ – ‘Unexpectedness’ – ‘Sociocultural values’ – ‘Continuity’ and ‘Cultural proximity or relevance.’ Compared to the Gate-keepers roles – which don’t apply to online – ‘Time span’ – ‘Clarity or lack of ambiguity’ – ‘consonance’ and ‘composition.’

Harper says – Computer consultant Leah Gentry argues that while there is much more options online in the way a story can be presented using links, blogs and often broken up stories into their component parts the same traditional Tenets will remain the same.

Another aspect Harper addresses is the structural design of online media. Tribune reporter Darnell Little creates storyboards for what the main pages showing how they’ll look and work, a process which has been used in film and TV for years. However with online media it’s different due to layout restriction i.e. computer screens tend to be smaller then the front newspaper page. So he uses a layering process, which utilizes images, text, headlines, navigation and highlighted links that flows and leads into other parts all of which he says makes the news easy to follow and read.

Harper continues by pointing out the different views amongst reporters regarding digital journalism and its future. He says researchers found reporters falling into three groups - ‘Benevolent revolutionaries’ (Enthusiastic ones about new technologies) – ‘nervous traditionalists’ (the ones that aren’t) and ‘serene separatists’’ (not scared by new technology but think its impact won’t make much difference). As this paper was written in 2003 it would be interesting what the views would be in 2010?

One of the final points Harper touches is - How will new media make its money…? This is a question that still today seems to be ambiguous according to Mignon Shardlow (Topic 3.1 lecture). Never-the-less in 2010 digital journalism continues to break the latest news faster then any other source and gives its readers more power to the user by allowing them to challenge the traditional role of the publication as the gate-keeper of news and information.

TED talk – Jimmy Wales on the creation of Wikipedia

Jimmy Wales first starts of by discussing the architect of Wikipedia, which is a freely licensed encyclopedia written by thousands of volunteers in many languages and is truly global. It’s written by using wiki software, meaning that anyone can join and edit. Wales says it’s managed by virtually all-volunteer staff within a close community.

It’s a free online encyclopedia, which enables its volunteer contributors to collaborating, created, self-organizing, self-correcting an ever-growing multilingual encyclopedia. According to Wales it’s funded by donation from public and is in the top 50 websites and more popular then the New York Times, which employees 100s while Wikipedia employees only one, which is the led software developer.

He also states that one of the most important components that assist with Wikipedia’s Manage quality control is its neutrality policy. A policy that’s carries a Neutral Point of View meaning it social concept of co-operation, avoids some philosophical issues. The Diverse political, religious, cultural backgrounds of its community Wales says are kept together by our NPOV policy. This policy also may make it less controversial then offers.

When addressing the question on how good is Wikipedia he says its not perfect but pretty good considering its crazy model. Wales says when comparing Wikipedia to traditional sources they win hands-down. Wales also uses an example of a quality test done by a German magazine, which tested German Wikipedia. The German magazine found, according to Wales – its not perfect, but much better than you would expect – comparing Wikipedia to traditional sources shows Wikipedia to be generally superior, though weak in some areas. Better then some others such as: Microsoft in carter & Brock house multimedia.

Topic 3.1 lecture - MED104 Engaging Media

In this lecture Mignon Shardlow looks at four main topics – ‘Why News media is important,’ News is now online…so what?’, ‘The new digital revolution – will new media animate and strengthen democracy?’ and ‘Who will pay for quality journalism?’

Why News media is important: - News media is important because it is the main differences between what makes a democratic country and what doesn’t. A true democratic country relies on how free their journalists are (i.e. free press). In old terms called the fourth-of-estate in which journalism acts as a watch dog for the interest of the general public and keeps them well inform with government activities. Without this in place the public most likely wouldn’t be informed with government activities. This would mean the government would not have to answer for any breaches it breaks whilst in power.

News is now online…So what?: Whilst online media is a relatively new medium offering new platforms to publish and distribute news the traditional Tenets of the media industry will most likely be the same big company’s currently in existence, with some exception. Things that will change is the fact online platforms give journalist more possibilities to be creative using tools which will enable them to provide news faster, have more space for news, links, compare with other - journalists doing the same story, searching possibilities, check archives stories and use the latest online tools for Visual story telling.

Shardlow touches on further issues gyrating around the new digital revolution such as: - will new media animate and strengthen democracy? And who will pay for quality journalism? And how some media info we just can't trust. In which she highlights examples of incorrect journalism - such as the ‘weapons of mass destructions’ (WMD) being in the gulf, a huge error made by the world’s Medias.

Shardlow agrees with Rupert Murdoch, whom she uses as an example that journalism will be fine and continue to grow and develop even amongst the uncertainty surrounding the future of the media and journalism. A future that is unsure of media funding options such as: pay wall, publicly funded news sites and non-profit benevolent organisations. Shardlow finishes her lecture by emphasizes the importance of understand news values (i.e. how the media chooses news topic and which ones make the headlines)…

Topic 3.1 lecture

Playing on the digital commons: collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture.

Sarah Colman and Nick Dyer-Witheford (2007) article looks at the relationship between online gaming / fan production and the corporations. The authors discuss how copyright regulation replaced much of the collective traditions from oral culture and how cultural creation is born via the outcome of practices. The two side were distinguished as The rejectionists & The reformers.

The rejectionists, tend to represent the major corporations and industry associations which view the commons activity as criminal and having negative impacts on the future and growth of new media and its related industries.

The reformers, believe that cultural production in a digital world needs to have a more balanced & flexible copyright regimes that will protect, not just authors, but its audiences and sources also within the creative processes.

The paper suggests a need for our copyright laws to be reviewed and amended to accommodate our digital times.

Sarah Colman and Nick Dyer-Witheford (2007). Playing on the digital commons: collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. Media, Culture and Society 29 (6), 934-953.
http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/934

All the world's a game & copyright (i-lectures)

Listen to a couple of i-lectures last night. The first being "topic 2.5 All the world's a game" by speaker: Dr David Savat

http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/lectopia.lasso?ut=1963&id=38671


David Savat discusses the games, virtual worlds, interactivity and convergence and how these impact on the way we consume entertainment through discussing his own interests such as 'the World of Warcraft franchises.' He briefly looks at the relationships between games, military and Hollywood (i.e. movie making) and argues that computer games.

and the other "topic 2.2 copyright" by Speaker: Dr Em McAvan.

http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/lectopia.lasso?ut=1963&id=38669

Dr Em McAvan discusses copyright, read only / read write and briefly looks at the history of copyright and related technology. She often refers to Lawerence Lessig and the US term 'Fair Use.' Plus how the recording industry often manipulates (e.g. uses loop holes) the law.

Indigenous, ethnic and cultural - by Ramesh Srinivasan

Ramesh Srinivasan's - article looks at how modern media technology can impact indigenous and ethnic communities in a positive way by utilizing database-driven networks in order to help met the needs of their cultural, political and social visions.

Srinivasan argues thorough work he has done he has developed a process where information systems can enable culturally and community-focused goals. Moreover incorporating participation from the people of those cultures and community's, where they can use information systems to preserve, share information and develop collective infrastructures...

Srinivasan - emphasises the process he took, specifically, relationship building he established through the community he was doing a case study on.

He states - "18 months (11/03–5/05) on the reservations, my goal became to develop bonds with as diverse a group of tribal elders,
leaders and institutions across all the reservations as much as possible."

This was a key component for his research to work. By building the nessersary relationship meant the project could interact with diverse networks and power structures across the reservations rather than inherently serve as a tool of those already in deeper connection with the SCTCA. (Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association).