Wednesday, 5 February 2014

sticks and stones may break my bones...the dark side of social media

source : www.et.byu.edu

 
Cyber Bully : the use of electronic communication to bully a person, typically by sending messages of an intimidating or threatening nature. 
Definition British and World Dictionary

What was once out in the open is now behind closed doors, as we advance in our societies with new technologies and new ways of staying at arms length away from everyone around us – we are becoming more accessible to one another. Even though the door is closed, communication and accessibility carries on weather we like it or not.

Cyber bullying and traditional bullying essentially have the same intention and outcome.. 
Although, one is face to face and the other is behind a screen.                           The key word here is anonymity. Cyber bullying allows the bully to feel safe while ultimately their victim is led to feel the opposite.



It’s also often that children being cyber bullied are not telling anyone let alone their parents and one of the main reasons for this is the fear of having their technology taken away from them or not being able to do anything to stop the bullying. Mishna 2009. 

But is there an actual difference between traditional and cyber bullying apart from the way it is executed?

Studies have actually shown that yes there is and the outcomes of cyber bullying v’s traditional bullying are particularly more intense and negative for the victims.
According to Bonanno 2013, cyber bullying makes it easier for the bully yet more challenging for the victim, anonymity as opposed to traditional face to face makes the bully less aware of their impact on the victim.
The fact also that it is happening in homes, which is supposedly in the victim’s safety, there is nowhere to hide and the potential audience is infinite. 




Can it be stopped or changed ?  
New laws, policing, more educating, zero tolerance.. There are many schemes out there educating children, schools and parents & good nature and morals can be taught but when there is an absence of this people should be held accountable for their actions through laws.

Can the laws of defamation and intentional infliction be used against cyber bullies.. ? 



Thank you for your patience to those who have read through my blogs it’s been a blast !
Signing off Daniela  : )




References and Further Reading:
  • Bonanno, R, & Hymel, S 2013, 'Cyber Bullying and Internalizing Difficulties: Above and beyond the Impact of Traditional Forms of Bullying', Journal Of Youth And Adolescence, 42, 5, pp. 685-697, ERIC, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 February 2014.
  • Cyber Smart,http://www.cybersmart.gov.au/
  • Gerstenfeld, P, Grant, D, & Chau-Pu, C 2003, 'Hate Online: A Content Analysis of Extremist Internet Sites', Analyses Of Social Issues & Public Policy, 3, 1, pp. 29-44, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 February 2014
  • Mishna,F,Saini, M,Solomon, S, 2009, Ongoing and Online: Children and youths perceptions of cyber bullying, Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier.com.

Saturday, 1 February 2014

produser + user = produsage..


source: wordpress.com


Produsage describes being both the user and producer of information in the online world. I would say we are all producers in one way or another weather it be through blogging, face book and you tube at some stage in our life.  Wikipedia is a prime example of this. The user is able to become the producer and can change the content weather its correct or not.


source: wikipedia.org

Online tutorials are a big one for me, the amount of times I’ve spent seeking to learn a ‘how to’ and have simply found one via You Tube, this ultimately makes me a consumer of produsage.
However I am yet to load a ‘how to’ my self but I am sure in due time I will. 

source : www.squidoo.com


Bruns 2007 describes produsage as  “The collaborative and continuous building and extending of existing content in pursuit of further improvement”
Further discussion on produsage and other theories are discussed during an interesting part 1 and part 2 interview between Henry Jenkins and Axel Bruns in 2008. 


4 key principles to produsage include. 


1. Open Participation, communal evaluation.
The community as a whole if large and varied can contribute more than a closed team of producers.

2. Fluid Heterarchy, Ad Hoc Meritocracy
Producers participate as is appropriate to their personal skills, interests and knowledge’s, which changes as the produsage project proceeds.

3. Unfinished Artefacts, Continuing Process
Content artefacts in produsage projects are continually under development which means they are always unfinished.

4. Common Property, individual rewards
contributors permit community use of their intellectual property, and are rewarded by the status capital

See the full presentation here.


Jenkins view of participatory culture relates hand in hand with produsage. Jenkin’s idea of participatory culture is that citizens and public should not only be consumers but to also produce and contribute also. People are clearly contributing and collaborating through social media and the online world and these contributions are coming from everyday citizens.  

source: www.geekculture.com



Slashdot which was created in 1997 is another example of produsage where users are able to submit and evaluate news stories mainly on subjects related to science and technology, they are a dedicated community based on citizen journalism.   The difference between Wikipedia and Slashdot  is that there is a peer to peer to review system on Slashdot where other users are able to rate the creditability of the content and you are able to see some of the profile of the member that has contributed.


I will leave you with an early example of produsage. 
Weird Al Yankovic famous parody “eat it’ video clip back in 1984 – mashing up Michael Jacksons ‘Beat It’ 


See you next time for my final blog on
 ‘the dark side of social media’ 

Daniela 





Referencing & Further Reading