Our recent discussions about young people who turn to violence made me consider what sort of behaviors should be considered alarming; behaviors which parents should pay attention to and perhaps seek counseling for their child when these behaviors are displayed. It's hard to think of obvious factors other than the severe ones, like a child's tendency to hurt animals or a history of physical or sexual abuse. When it comes down to it, a lot of normal teen behaviors, taken to an extreme degree, are negative and cause for alarm, but it can be hard for many adults to note the difference between extreme behavior and normal, average behavior.
For example, a teen listening to the Norwegian black metal band Mayhem is not necessarily cause for alarm, but if that teen started to empathize with then and proclaim a desire to burn churches, then it's time to step in.
Or another example. Take a look at my favorite person ever, Miley Cyrus. She's being attacked in the media for having pictures where she slightly exposes a green bra/undershirt, and others where she is laying in a boy's lap and exposing her midriff. Many people automatically jump compare these pictures to the infamous nude/scantily clad pictures of High School Musical star Vanessa Hudgens, and fear that they may imply that she is sleeping with the boy in the pictures.
Miley is 15. 15 year olds have boyfriends and girlfriends. They are developmentally and hormonally inclined to be sexually and physically attracted to those people. It might be cause for concern if a 15 year old girl was sleeping with someone or taking nude pictures of herself. However, pulling up one's shirt to bare their midriff is quite different from stripping and posing nude in front of a camera. And as far as allegations that her sitting in the boy's lap is tantamount to her being sexually active with him, I can only say that having sex with someone and coming in flirtatious physical contact with them is far from similar. To quote Jules Winnfield from Pulp Fuction, it "ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport." But this sort of conclusion jumping is not uncommon amongst adults who are examining the behaviors of young people.
Adults will often overinterpret a few perfectly normal teen behaviors and from there assume that the young person is at risk. There's a fine line between normal teen behavior and scary seek-help behavior.
And that made me remember a feature by one of my favorite comic writers, Lore Sjoberg:
Is Your Child on Drugs?
All that said, I still think I'd rather have a parent be too attentive and worry over small insignificant things than have a parent be completely absent and pay no attention to possible signs that their child might be at risk for negative behavior and violence, though there is plenty of middle ground between the two extremes.
On a different note, while looking for Sjoberg's old work, I came across some of his new work, a vlog project on YouTube called Alt Text, and I thought some of them were relevant to our class discussions:
Regarding the state of online communication, social networking sites, especially Twitter.
Also, some of his previous comic writing work involved taking a bunch of items in a certain category and giving them an A, B, C, D, F rating. He's apparantly revived his Ratings in his vlog.
This one is a rating of First Level Dungeons and Dragons Spells
Showing posts with label online communities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online communities. Show all posts
Friday, April 25, 2008
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Social Bookmarking: Making the Web Work for You
Ta-da! I mentioned this tool in class last week and decided it would be a worthwhile subject for a resource review, so here it is, after a lot more work than I expected... If anyone else is interested in using Camtasia for screencasting or Audacity for narration, I think I can share some tips that might save you time now, after I had to try everything 3-4 times to figure out what I was doing. :-P
Social Bookmarking: Making the Web Work for You by Emily Barney
based on works viewable at socialnetworkinstruction.googlepages.com.
Note: This about 9½ minutes long, so it might load slowly on some connections. While you're waiting for it to load, here's my outline:
Thanks to everyone for giving me feedback on the class Moodle, hopefully I've addressed the right range of information for y'all. My boss says I should mention this is a free website... I've gotten to the point that I usually take that for granted, but now it's been said.
Oh, and if you hadn't seen it already, I put up a quiz to see what people in this class have been doing with these kinds of tools. It's one anonymous, multiple choice question, so it shouldn't take long to answer... if you haven't already, I hope you'll take a moment to stop by and add your 2¢.
Clearly we all approach this sort of thing with different needs and different strategies. I've found this tool to be very simple and flexible for me to use, so if you'd like to poke around in my profile and links, here's where you can start:
My profile: http://www.diigo.com/profile/ebarney
the list I set up for this class:
http://www.diigo.com/list/ebarney/media-literacy-youth
(it isn't complete... I'm kind of sporadic with any attempts to systematically organize anything in my life)
Feel free to leave me comments here or send me messages some other way if you have questions about how this works. And if you do use it, I'm very open to "friend" requests. :)
Social Bookmarking: Making the Web Work for You by Emily Barney
based on works viewable at socialnetworkinstruction.googlepages.com.
Note: This about 9½ minutes long, so it might load slowly on some connections. While you're waiting for it to load, here's my outline:
- What is Social Bookmarking? How does "bookmarking" work online? (1 min)
- Diigo: Read, Organize, and Share websites (~1 min)
- How to start using Diigo (2 min)
- Create a Login
- Install the Toolbar
- Set up a Profile / Privacy Settings
- Review using the Diigo toolbar (1 min)
- Social Features - overview of the Diigo website (~3 min)
- Email Contacts
- "Friends"
- Groups
- Tags
- Lists
- Final Review: how does it work for you? (1 min)
- If you've never used social bookmarking...
- If you're already using a different tool...
- If you don't need a bookmark tool...
Thanks to everyone for giving me feedback on the class Moodle, hopefully I've addressed the right range of information for y'all. My boss says I should mention this is a free website... I've gotten to the point that I usually take that for granted, but now it's been said.
Oh, and if you hadn't seen it already, I put up a quiz to see what people in this class have been doing with these kinds of tools. It's one anonymous, multiple choice question, so it shouldn't take long to answer... if you haven't already, I hope you'll take a moment to stop by and add your 2¢.
Clearly we all approach this sort of thing with different needs and different strategies. I've found this tool to be very simple and flexible for me to use, so if you'd like to poke around in my profile and links, here's where you can start:
My profile: http://www.diigo.com/profile/ebarney
the list I set up for this class:
http://www.diigo.com/list/ebarney/media-literacy-youth
(it isn't complete... I'm kind of sporadic with any attempts to systematically organize anything in my life)
Feel free to leave me comments here or send me messages some other way if you have questions about how this works. And if you do use it, I'm very open to "friend" requests. :)
Saturday, April 5, 2008
MyBarackObama.com - Grassroots Organizing Online
Note: I know national politics are not quite the thing to bring into a classroom discussion, but I do believe this is a unique situation and it definitely connects to our discussions about civic involvement. I especially wanted to bring it up in response to Kamilla's post questioning just how relevant the forms of civic engagment you see online really are. I hope y'all don't mind too much. :)
First and foremost, I highly recommend reading this article showing how all the pretty things on Obama's website (a NYT article compared it to the Mac/Apple website) are connected to the actual on-the-ground organizing in the primary campaign so far:
They also make it easy for anyone who wants to remix their media in their posts to do so, making videos available through YouTube and photos on Flickr and so forth. Then they're able to link back to those blog posts and videos and so forth to show how people's stories connect with their campaign or what their supporters are concerned about.
Moving from the primaries into the general election, they're continuing their training program and promoting it heavily right now through all their web tools:
Obama Organizing Fellows
I got an e-mail about that program at work and talked about it with my boss, who's been curious about all the hype about younger people following Obama and wondering how that connects to all this technology stuff. I told her the first time I noticed anything about Obama online was when my friends started joining groups on facebook - they were created by supporters, not the campaign, and were able to ratchet up support and actual fundraising very quickly because they could hook into the social features of the campaign website so smoothly.
This is exactly why Obama is marketing himself as someone who raises money through small donations: his campaign is drawing on the full range of people's commitment ability. This can include the die-hards who will apply for an intensive training program and commit to working 30 hours a week or people who are willing to let other volunteers from out of town stay with them for free while they attend those trainings. It also includes people who will call a friend in a primary state and persuade them to register to vote by a certain date or people who can only give $10 here and there when they're able. But they find a way to make any level of participation seem meaningful, which is exactly why it works so well.
Like the Jenkins paper we read on participatory culture, it's absolutely essential to the ethics/etiquette/mores/whatever of these social sites that you create a welcoming environment where novices can be mentored and everyone feels that they not only can contribute something but that whatever they can do will be valued by others.
I know the stereotype about millenials is that they need constant reinforcement - I don't know how true that is, but I do think it's an aspect of these online settings for a reason. Like using emoticons to adjust your tone in e-mail or on forum posts, giving feedback is essential to making participatory sites seem truly social. If people can tell that they're being listened to, they're much more likely to make an effort to speak their own words.
This is true offline, too, of course, but it isn't common in the political process. When I was a kid I remember helping my dad pass out flyers for a congressional candidate that he thought would make a big difference in Chicago - Michael Patrick Flanagan (who was running for Dan Rostenkowski's seat). It was raining and cold the day we passed them out, but we got a lot done and when we came back Flanagan was in his office and came out to thank us personally. That was probably my most direct participation in the electoral process that I can think of, but it isn't what I remember most.
After Flanagan was elected, my father read something about him in the paper he didn't like and sent him a paper chiding him for going back on his promises. A couple weeks later we got a call from the congressman, who wanted to talk to my dad personally and explain how the news story was distorting his actions. We were all kind of gobsmacked - it isn't the sort of thing you expect in Chicago if you aren't related to an alderman. :)
I do think it's great that Obama has been successful in getting a lot of people actively involved in the political process who haven't been interested before. But campaigns can do that - the real change that needs to happen, the change that Kamilla was wondering about, is in the second part of my story. We need people who will hold their elected officials accountable, and we need elected officials who take that kind of feedback seriously. Have any of you seen that happening online?
First and foremost, I highly recommend reading this article showing how all the pretty things on Obama's website (a NYT article compared it to the Mac/Apple website) are connected to the actual on-the-ground organizing in the primary campaign so far:
The Machinery of Hope: Inside the grass-roots field operation of Barack Obama, who is transforming the way political campaigns are runI found all the information about the training process they've been using very interesting, especially this part:
by TIM DICKINSON, Rolling Stone, March 20, 2008 (Issue 1048, p. 36-42 in the print)
"We decided that we didn't want to train volunteers [...] We want to train organizers - folks who can fend for themselves."To work out that ethic on their website, they've created the "My.BarackObama.Com" platform within the general campaign site, allowing people to blog and do event organizing and fundraising and all kinds of other social networking from their space.
They also make it easy for anyone who wants to remix their media in their posts to do so, making videos available through YouTube and photos on Flickr and so forth. Then they're able to link back to those blog posts and videos and so forth to show how people's stories connect with their campaign or what their supporters are concerned about.
Moving from the primaries into the general election, they're continuing their training program and promoting it heavily right now through all their web tools:
Obama Organizing Fellows
I got an e-mail about that program at work and talked about it with my boss, who's been curious about all the hype about younger people following Obama and wondering how that connects to all this technology stuff. I told her the first time I noticed anything about Obama online was when my friends started joining groups on facebook - they were created by supporters, not the campaign, and were able to ratchet up support and actual fundraising very quickly because they could hook into the social features of the campaign website so smoothly.
This is exactly why Obama is marketing himself as someone who raises money through small donations: his campaign is drawing on the full range of people's commitment ability. This can include the die-hards who will apply for an intensive training program and commit to working 30 hours a week or people who are willing to let other volunteers from out of town stay with them for free while they attend those trainings. It also includes people who will call a friend in a primary state and persuade them to register to vote by a certain date or people who can only give $10 here and there when they're able. But they find a way to make any level of participation seem meaningful, which is exactly why it works so well.
Like the Jenkins paper we read on participatory culture, it's absolutely essential to the ethics/etiquette/mores/whatever of these social sites that you create a welcoming environment where novices can be mentored and everyone feels that they not only can contribute something but that whatever they can do will be valued by others.
I know the stereotype about millenials is that they need constant reinforcement - I don't know how true that is, but I do think it's an aspect of these online settings for a reason. Like using emoticons to adjust your tone in e-mail or on forum posts, giving feedback is essential to making participatory sites seem truly social. If people can tell that they're being listened to, they're much more likely to make an effort to speak their own words.
This is true offline, too, of course, but it isn't common in the political process. When I was a kid I remember helping my dad pass out flyers for a congressional candidate that he thought would make a big difference in Chicago - Michael Patrick Flanagan (who was running for Dan Rostenkowski's seat). It was raining and cold the day we passed them out, but we got a lot done and when we came back Flanagan was in his office and came out to thank us personally. That was probably my most direct participation in the electoral process that I can think of, but it isn't what I remember most.
After Flanagan was elected, my father read something about him in the paper he didn't like and sent him a paper chiding him for going back on his promises. A couple weeks later we got a call from the congressman, who wanted to talk to my dad personally and explain how the news story was distorting his actions. We were all kind of gobsmacked - it isn't the sort of thing you expect in Chicago if you aren't related to an alderman. :)
I do think it's great that Obama has been successful in getting a lot of people actively involved in the political process who haven't been interested before. But campaigns can do that - the real change that needs to happen, the change that Kamilla was wondering about, is in the second part of my story. We need people who will hold their elected officials accountable, and we need elected officials who take that kind of feedback seriously. Have any of you seen that happening online?
Monday, February 4, 2008
Lookybook
Last semester, one of my classmates shared a link to Lookybook, a site that puts picture books online. You can preview some relatively new titles, or view old favorites. The site also allows you to embed your selected title in a blog, website, etc. like I've done here:
(click on the "eyes" to go to a larger version of the book at Lookybook.)
The site also allows comments by registered users, and registered users may create virtual bookshelves as well. It's still in beta version right now, and I'm not sure how they plan to expand. (Although by mid-08, they want to have 1000 titles online.) However, they seem to want to use their site to promote books you might not otherwise come across. On their About page, Lookybook says, "Libraries and bookstores have limited space, so the only book covers you see are generally best sellers. But what about all of those other books—new books, obscure books, undiscovered gems that are stuck sideways on the shelf, or worse, in a warehouse somewhere. Since we have infinite shelf space, every book on Lookybook is displayed cover out and searchable by a number of different criteria." You can browse books in a number of different ways from the "tumble" feature that puts out a random selection, by author, illustrator, most viewed, and more.
Lookybook seems to be interested in marketing books and encourages authors, illustrators, and publishers to put their books online so that they can be seen by many more people (especially if the books are embedded in other websites). I think this is really interesting, given the fact that some copyright holders are afraid to place content online. (The controversy surrounding Google books is an excellent example.) The difference between Lookybook and other sites (like Amazon's preview system or Google books) is the fact that the books are actually quite small. While you can preview the entire book, you certainly wouldn't use such a small image to replace the actual book. I'd be curious to know whether any of the books on Lookybook have sold more copies because of their appearance on the site.
I also think this could be a great tool for libraries' websites. Adding previews of titles might encourage people to check out additional books. Or, create a virtual book list on your website using Lookybook titles. Right now, Lookybook doesn't have any ads, and they allow the placement of books for free for the first year. After that, they "may" charge the publisher/rights holder "an agreed upon fee" to keep the book on the site.
I am not sure how some librarians would feel about putting this content on a website. Is it promoting reading or is it promoting a certain author/publisher? Is it ok if we are promoting a publisher? How is it different to publish a list of recommended titles vs. publishing a list of recommended titles along with their previews on Lookybook? In answer to my last question, the main problem I see is the limited content - would you limit your recommendations only to titles on Lookybook? Then that's probably not in the spirit of what libraries usually do. On the other hand, you could do some previews and some "traditional" listings - but would people skip over the regular lists and just click on what almost appear to be featured titles? A tough call, but still worth investigating.
(click on the "eyes" to go to a larger version of the book at Lookybook.)
The site also allows comments by registered users, and registered users may create virtual bookshelves as well. It's still in beta version right now, and I'm not sure how they plan to expand. (Although by mid-08, they want to have 1000 titles online.) However, they seem to want to use their site to promote books you might not otherwise come across. On their About page, Lookybook says, "Libraries and bookstores have limited space, so the only book covers you see are generally best sellers. But what about all of those other books—new books, obscure books, undiscovered gems that are stuck sideways on the shelf, or worse, in a warehouse somewhere. Since we have infinite shelf space, every book on Lookybook is displayed cover out and searchable by a number of different criteria." You can browse books in a number of different ways from the "tumble" feature that puts out a random selection, by author, illustrator, most viewed, and more.
Lookybook seems to be interested in marketing books and encourages authors, illustrators, and publishers to put their books online so that they can be seen by many more people (especially if the books are embedded in other websites). I think this is really interesting, given the fact that some copyright holders are afraid to place content online. (The controversy surrounding Google books is an excellent example.) The difference between Lookybook and other sites (like Amazon's preview system or Google books) is the fact that the books are actually quite small. While you can preview the entire book, you certainly wouldn't use such a small image to replace the actual book. I'd be curious to know whether any of the books on Lookybook have sold more copies because of their appearance on the site.
I also think this could be a great tool for libraries' websites. Adding previews of titles might encourage people to check out additional books. Or, create a virtual book list on your website using Lookybook titles. Right now, Lookybook doesn't have any ads, and they allow the placement of books for free for the first year. After that, they "may" charge the publisher/rights holder "an agreed upon fee" to keep the book on the site.
I am not sure how some librarians would feel about putting this content on a website. Is it promoting reading or is it promoting a certain author/publisher? Is it ok if we are promoting a publisher? How is it different to publish a list of recommended titles vs. publishing a list of recommended titles along with their previews on Lookybook? In answer to my last question, the main problem I see is the limited content - would you limit your recommendations only to titles on Lookybook? Then that's probably not in the spirit of what libraries usually do. On the other hand, you could do some previews and some "traditional" listings - but would people skip over the regular lists and just click on what almost appear to be featured titles? A tough call, but still worth investigating.
Disney creates "virtual theme parks"
According to a Sunday article from the LA Times via SLToday.com, Disney is expanding its virtual empire. While the media and advertisers are fixated on Second Life and other virtual worlds aimed at adults, Club Penguin and Webkinz are drawing in huge numbers of kids. "As many as 20 million children and teenagers will visit virtual worlds by 2011, up from 8.2 million in 2007, according to research firm eMarketer Inc."
What does this mean? Well, first Disney will spend between $5 to $10 million dollars for each of the 10 virtual worlds it plans to create. (Note: Disney already owns Club Penguin.) Disney calls their new investment "virtual theme parks," noting that they will be "much more accessible. You don't have to get in a car or a plane." So for those kids whose parents won't take them to Disney World, they can make avatars that let them become Mickey and Minnie.
The difference between many of the sites aimed for kids and say, Facebook, is the fee. You can't log on to some sites without a fee, and for others, like Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean game site, you can play for free, but you have to pay to get access to the tools to win. One parent cited in the article noted that he decided to pay for the site rather than face the immient "meltdown" from his daughter.
How do you feel about kids becoming members of these online communities? They are designed to hook kids in by playing lots and lots of games to earn points. I have a friend whose daughter begs and begs to play Webkinz for hours because she has to play the games to earn stuff for her Webkinz. (At least I think that's how it works.) I know it's not that much different than the kid who really wants to beat a video game, but at least that seems to have a set ending. These activities go on forever.
I don't have kids, so I don't know what I'd do in this situation. On the one hand, I love virtual communities. I enjoy using Facebook, and I do play video games. I even love to watch TV more than reading a book for fun (I think it has to do with reading for school and work and the need to do something different - don't kick me out of library school!) :) But at the same time, I really worry about kids playing online for hours and hours. We all need to do a variety of things, whether it's playing on the computer, reading a book, watching tv, or playing outside. Perhaps I worry more about the specific medium than the act of sitting still. I feel as if a lot of kids don't just go play outside and make up games the way I did - there are too many choices. What do you think?
What does this mean? Well, first Disney will spend between $5 to $10 million dollars for each of the 10 virtual worlds it plans to create. (Note: Disney already owns Club Penguin.) Disney calls their new investment "virtual theme parks," noting that they will be "much more accessible. You don't have to get in a car or a plane." So for those kids whose parents won't take them to Disney World, they can make avatars that let them become Mickey and Minnie.
The difference between many of the sites aimed for kids and say, Facebook, is the fee. You can't log on to some sites without a fee, and for others, like Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean game site, you can play for free, but you have to pay to get access to the tools to win. One parent cited in the article noted that he decided to pay for the site rather than face the immient "meltdown" from his daughter.
How do you feel about kids becoming members of these online communities? They are designed to hook kids in by playing lots and lots of games to earn points. I have a friend whose daughter begs and begs to play Webkinz for hours because she has to play the games to earn stuff for her Webkinz. (At least I think that's how it works.) I know it's not that much different than the kid who really wants to beat a video game, but at least that seems to have a set ending. These activities go on forever.
I don't have kids, so I don't know what I'd do in this situation. On the one hand, I love virtual communities. I enjoy using Facebook, and I do play video games. I even love to watch TV more than reading a book for fun (I think it has to do with reading for school and work and the need to do something different - don't kick me out of library school!) :) But at the same time, I really worry about kids playing online for hours and hours. We all need to do a variety of things, whether it's playing on the computer, reading a book, watching tv, or playing outside. Perhaps I worry more about the specific medium than the act of sitting still. I feel as if a lot of kids don't just go play outside and make up games the way I did - there are too many choices. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)