embelj-blog

[embelj-blog]

It's all fun and games until...

The above video is shocking and in complete ill taste, however it shows the entertainment value put on rape in a gaming and new media environment. One user outlandishly comments, “33 people have been date raped” to address the 33 dislikes on the video (keep in mind there is 443 likes).  

My stance on the issue of rape in virtual worlds has always been adamantly clear, so before continuing I looked to other student’s opinions to generate food for thought.  I found one blogger’s, INNEZKCB-206  ideas on the topic which came to disagreement with mine. They post, “I am left thinking that the two are vastly different and although sexual assault is unacceptable and despicable...”

I would disagree with INNEZKCB-206 stance on virtual rape vs. real life rape. I do not believe they are ‘vastly’ different even though one is physically held in the confines of an intangible environment and may only produce intangible consequences,  an opinion Regina Lynn confirms, “virtual rape is not just a prank, one the target needs to get over or expect as part of a role-playing world” (2007). Like Julian Dibbel I believe that it is just as “emotionally true” (1998) for a real-life rape victim.

Online conditioning towards rape culture doesn’t just exist in game form- but the colloquialisms and urban dictionary speak which litters Facebook and Youtube. Words like “frape” (Facebook Rape) and groups which promote rape joke culture are common to see in everyone’s newsfeeds. One such joke group is named "'I love raping bitches out in the cool night air, don't complain sluts or your (sic) next". I can't understand the punchline. lol Manitoba perceptively writes in his blog, "If you put as your Facebook status 'I totally raped at Halo today' for your two hundred Facebook friends to see, statistically, you have just reminded thirty-three people of one of the worst experiences of their entire lives... [just] to describe to someone how well you did at a video game"

Normalizing something through modern speak, colloquialisms and jokes doesn’t eventually mean it’s acceptable, it just shows our characters fail to stand up for what is right.

It is bizarre such a contentious issue such as rape still exists online. Why haven’t strict laws condemned it? Or at least a form of regulation from a governing body? Safe virtual realities are worth employing; it is even worth considering that ‘real life’ law practises or consequences apply to virtual worlds. I would suggest both.

I think we need to take a big step back, and look at the mess we’ve created online.

    References:

Dibbell, J. 1998. My Tiny Life. New York: Fourth Estate.

Lynn, Regina. 2007. “Virtual Rape is Traumatic, but Is It a Crime?” Wired, May 4. Accessed May 6, 2012. http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/05/sexdrive_0504

RAWRMEBITES 2007. "Close Gaia Online- DATE RAPE." Youtube video. Accessed May 5 2012.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_iXjDWv1_w

[embelj-blog]

New Transgressions

With our contemporary, convulsive need to be constantly connected I believe we often forget that there’s an “intellectual and emotional value of solitude” (Turkle 2009). Turkle’s notion of loneliness and solitude has given light to the society which we are all participating in today; our cravings for constant connection on the social networking net have given rise to an obsessed society. And the effects of it are startling me.

So let’s explore.

The use of social networking sites such as Facebook and YouTube has blurred the line between public and private life which has created a ‘liminal space’ (Leong, 2012). With the use of all these new media tools, it’s really no surprise this has happened.

I believe blurring our public and private spheres on the internet has negatively impacted our lives.

There are wide scale negative effects which are featured in the below video, such as the loss of personal privacy and the demise of social security. The video gives a startling perspective to the topic by stating, “Facebook has replaced almost every other CIA information gathering program since its launch in 2004.” In the video, Facebook is even addressed as “Facebook: the massive online surveillance program run by the CIA”.

And while this information may not seem immediately relevant to do-good citizens such as you or I, it expresses how even your own ‘personal and private’ online experience is no longer; it has shifted well and truly into the public sphere.

Then there are other more specific textbook horror stories which manifest out of new media’s grasp, such as the story of Ruth Jeffery and her social network stalker (True Stories 2012).

As the featured video explains, the mental attitude of our society reads that constantly sharing information about yourself is somehow desirable, instead of deeply unsettling. These examples above prove that new media both transcends and transgresses the boundaries that define our understandings of what is right about the way we relate and interact with each other. It is an important skill to recognise when one needs to revaluate the grasp new media exercises over their social life.

So some may see this constant sharing on a worldwide platform as ‘staying connected’ in our global digital age. But I would like to inject some food for thought.  I would ask a similar question to iArika, who shares my views on the subject in her blog “are we able to disconnect when everyone’s watching?’

 References:

FACTZONE 2012. "Close Your Facebook Account." Youtube video. Accessed March 16 2012. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sThcwmx3rs&feature=related&fb_source=message

Leong, Susan. 2012. “KCB206 New Media, Internet, Self and Beyond: Week 8 Prezi.” Accessed April 30, 2012

Turkle, S. 2009. An interview with Sherry Turkle. Frontline Digital Nation Interviews.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/interviews/turkle.html

True Stories. (2012, 30 April) My Social Network Stalker (Part 3 of 4) Retrived from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjpAa92Bp3Q&feature=endscreen&NR=1

[embelj-blog]

Murky Minds for Sale

Jennifer’s bloaawwg 2.0

The idea of ‘minds for sale’ on the internet as raised by Jonathan Zittrain is certainly an interesting prospect. As I have begun to learn, there is a dark side to almost everything surrounding the Internet and this is no exception.   

From a scale of big ticket challenges to micro tasks such as exercising simple human skills the idea of ‘cloud labour’ (Zittrain 2009) has become the internet’s newest phenomenon.  I find the progression between the two quite unsettling as the issue of privacy and questions surrounding the lack of cyber space labour law are raised.  

Mechanical Turks are a phenomenon where armies of thinkers are recruited in startlingly high numbers to complete mindless human tasks for a matter of cents that computers cannot yet handle. Privacy and morality, of course become an issue as often these employees have no knowledge of what company or cause they completing the task for. Zittrain offers the scenario of simple photo identification possibly being used to identify more ominous causes such as categorizing people at an illegal rally who may be arrested because of the information provided. Therefore, this privacy issue naturally manifests into a morality issue as the workers may not contribute to a cause they otherwise would not condone if they were given full disclosure of the intentions. Does this mean you may be out of line with your moral principles? (Zittrain, 2009).

But many would argue this aspect of the Internet should be embraced, not rejected. The notion of filtering and or censoring this content would be nothing but a complete movement against the understood freedom on the Internet. I believe that our interactions on the internet are guided by our own free will, and it is a choice to dabble in murky waters. 

[embelj-blog]

Online Medication

The role the Internet plays as the public’s information source has shifted in recent years. One of these manifestations is the accessibility of medical information posted online.

We now live in a world where doctors can often seem obsolete as the Internet is offering free medical advice, diagnosis and treatment without the queue. A service with does have obvious advantages as well as providing a sense of security to anxiety sufferers (Stark 2010) and consumers desperate for a quick-fix of information.   But, what are the implications?  

Well the nature of the Internet means it’s a platform, which does not have filtering, or a code of credibility. It’s essentially a public, faceless sphere. Anyone can call themselves ‘doctor’ or sound like a trustworthy source (whether this is driven my malicious intentions or not.) This means not all the information is factual which can cause misdiagnosis, leading to even more serious implications. This is highlighted by The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrics and the Australian Psychological Society “seriously ill patients could miss out on appropriate care if they rely solely on online programs” with the possibility of failing to detect serious illness (Stark 2010).

In her blog, Nothingbutafilmstudent

(http://nothingbutafilmstudent.tumblr.com/post/20344355038/it-used-to-be-the-norm-to-make-an-appointment-to)  shares my views that the murky waters of the internet should be understood, but not completely discounted. Just ensure you are trusting only authorised, reliable sources or just using online sources as a guide.

[embelj-blog]

Ethically ethical?

The question of ethics in our new media landscape is certainly a compelling issue. Many game-changing ideas have come to my attention since investigating the readings for this week.

For many people our age, the question of ethics in new media has been reduced to a tired socio-cultural issue which isn’t even a blimp in our busy lives. Or at the other end of the spectrum, it has become an issue which creates great controversy when raised in the media, conservatives, school and parents. But unlike the aforementioned, Hamelink (2006) argues that new media is not accountable for the ‘tears in the fabric of contemporary society’, rather it is ‘contextually altering the same morally ambiguous human condition which has been plaguing us for thousands of years. ‘

   So should we just accept the morally ambiguous ethical activity on the internet as unchangeable, or should we introduce different regulations for the internet? I would think that the less censorship the better and if this is simply a representation of our physical interactions than so be it. This doesn’t mean a free for all cess pit of harmful conduct, as out standard level of ethics should apply. This view is shared by another blogger, Tess Martin (http://tmartinnewmedia.tumblr.com/post/19882746378/social-media-ethics-politics-beliefs-week-4).

What I’d love to shout at those conservative thinkers is that the net does not imply a confrontation with new moral problems. What is new is that the chance of getting caught on the grounds of immoral behaviour has diminished considerably (Hamelink 2006).

  References: 

Hamelink, C. (2006). The Ethics of the Internet: Can we cope with Lies and Deceit on the Net? In Ideologies of the Internet, K. Sarikakis & Daya Thussu, pp. 115-130. New Jersey: Hampton Press.  Available on CMD  .

[embelj-blog]

New media is shaping not only our worlds, but the world around us.

  Our new media world is now populated with game changing platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, SoundCloud and Linkedin which all cultivate a world in where we are all now even more connected than ever.

Film, games, and music are no longer limited to cinema screens, television and CD releases. Accessibility of media is at an all time high which is also changing the way in which we consume. “We don’t just enjoy, we participate” (Leong 2012) which is expressing the idea that we now live in a participatory culture. Leong also raised the concept that ‘aggregating power to the hands of many’ is also one of societies current trends (Leong, 2012)

There are a few current examples which best explore these concepts. As outlined by TED (2010) Lux Aurumque Virtual Choir is a project where individuals from all over the world could post a video on YouTube of themselves singing the same song. These tracks were then edited into a virtual choral piece. This project displays an obvious need for human connection and interaction in our new online participatory culture. In an example posted in our readings, Star Wars Uncut: Director’s Cut’ YouTube video (2009) also shows how we have our fingers on the pulse- ready to embrace and explore this changing culture. And lastly, in Nardi’s 2010 blog, “My life as a Night Elf Priest: an Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft” it is discussed that games such as World of Warcraft enable players to interact through dialogue and discovery with other consumers.

With all these online environments changing our social conditions it is certainly leading to more exciting possibilities, but I must ask how much further down the rabbit hole can we go?

  Leong, Susan. “KCB206 New Media: Internet, Self and Beyond: Wk 3 Lecture Prezi.” Accessed March 18, 2012.http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_81726_1%26url%3D.

Nardi, B. (2010).   My Life as a Night Elf Priest: an Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft: Excerpts in First Monday. Volume 15, No. 7.

Pugh, Casey (2009). Star Wars Uncut: Director's Cut. Available online at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ezeYJUz-84 

TED. “Choir as big as the internet” Last modified April 2010. http://www.ted.com/talks/a_choir_as_big_as_the_internet.html

[embelj-blog]

test.