Home » Article Topics » Communication » Digital Strategic Communication » Media, Technology & Society (Page 2)
Category Archives: Media, Technology & Society
Now Available: Community 2.0
As our society becomes more saturated with digital technologies, members in and leaders of all types of communities will be challenged to incorporate, assess, and even design digital and media tools and experiences for their communities.
Community 2.0 – at the intersection of digital media and information design – aims to integrate information design squarely into that discussion as a tool and framework for building experiences that can create and shape the communities we serve.
Download the e-book now
or
Order a print edition on Amazon.com
The e-book, which is also available in a print version directly from the publisher, is a product of a seminar in digital communication in the graduate program in the James L. Knight School of Communication at Queens University of Charlotte in North Carolina. It was edited and produced by Dr. John A. McArthur, assistant professor of communication.
Contributing authors include marketing executives Kristen Bostedo-Conway and Sandra Saburn, community organizer Jennifer Hull, news producer Davida Jackson, athletics coach Emily Carrara, and non-profit administrator Kenyon Stanley,
Chapters in Community 2.0 address information design issues and solutions surrounding:
- Developing credibility online
- Hyperlocal community engagement
- Communities of social support in healthcare
- Business-to-consumer communities
- Socio-economic divides in technology use
- Generational gaps in technology adoption
Baby Carrots, the Internet, and The Filter Bubble
Why would a web service filter the information that I see?
The information created in the entire history of humanity until 2010 is the same amount of information created online every two days. To filter that vast set of information, web companies have adopted the, “if you like this, you’ll like that” approach to curation.
What started as a tool for presenting product preferences quickly became a model for presenting information, says Eli Pariser, author of The Filter Bubble. Today’s holy grail of web curators: Relevance.
We are each surrounded by a membrane of filters that determine what information comes in and what is left out. We are unaware of the processes that determine these filters.
Three challenges presented by this filter bubble include:
The Distortion Problem
The “like” concept creates a bias. It’s easy to like a marathon, but not so easy to like genocide in Darfur. That doesn’t mean the news is not relevant.
Balance
Filters diminish balance. We want to see news about Justin Bieber, but that needs to be balanced with news about Afghanistan. We eat the junk food we crave but we should target the nutrition we need.
A Matter of Control
We are putting increasing power in the hand of computer algorithms to tell us what to view. Editors used to serve as gatekeepers to information. The Internet swept away gatekeepers. The new gatekeepers are code. These new gatekeepers don’t even have the pretense of civic ethics that the old gatekeepers did.
What can be done?
- Algorithm Ethics: Data sorts need to cause us to encounter multiple points of view.
- Filter Literacy: As we consider digital literacy, we need to consider our knowledge of the filters.
- Baby Carrots: Because people’s information environments are much more personalized, we need to ensure that the “nutritious snacks” make it through the filter bubble.
“We need the Internet to be as good as we hoped it would be.
And it won’t if we’re stuck in a bubble of one.”
- Eli Pariser
The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation’s 2012 Media Learning Seminar in Miami Florida brought together leaders of community foundations, media professionals, technology entrepreneurs, researchers, educators, and foundation staff in the foundation’s quest for informed and engaged communities. I attended as a representative of the James L. Knight School of Communication at Queens University of Charlotte, a grantee of Knight Foundation. Read my articles on the conference here.
What’s Next, and Why it Could Matter to You, with Amy Webb
They’re not just scary trends that invade our privacy. Even frightening tools can be used for good. Amy Webb of Webbmedia Group, a digital strategy agency, highlighted three current trends that could be made relevant to community foundations at the Knight Foundation Media Learning Seminar.
- Social discovery. Tagging, or captioning, pictures with hyperlinks occurs across social media sites. Tagging currently creates networks of facial recognition that allows search based on facial images. Even though this is scary on one hand, on another it could allow for vast networks of help or support.
- Mobile data. Everyone who uses mobile phones and tools on the phone is being tracked. Mobile phones can reveal biometrics, bus arrival times, and serve as predictors of personal preferences for marketing research. Lots of information can be collected via mobile technology and can be used to pinpoint a community’s areas of need.
- Gamification. “We start from the point of view that we should teach people stuff, and they are inherently not fun.” Rules of gamification: what is the purpose? Players must believe in the purpose of the game. It must create good vibes – that positive outcomes occur for actions. It must be inherently social. It must have a clear beginning and end or levels.
Instead of gamifying everything, bring elements of gaming to ongoing work.
Download a complete set of Webb’s notes here, with case studies that could be implemented for each.
The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation’s 2012 Media Learning Seminar in Miami Florida brought together leaders of community foundations, media professionals, technology entrepreneurs, researchers, educators, and foundation staff in the foundation’s quest for informed and engaged communities. I attended as a representative of the James L. Knight School of Communication at Queens University of Charlotte, a grantee of Knight Foundation. Read my articles on the conference here.
Does Technology Impact our Health?
Bobby DeMuro, who has been hosting The Bobby DeMuro Show on WBT Radio every Sunday evening since fall 2011, tackles current issues related to public health. This week’s topic: Does technology impact our health?
Bobby hosted me on tonight’s show alongside Jason Silverstein, Jon West, and others to discuss current issues in media, technology, and society. My section of the show covered the ways that technology intersects with communication, advocacy, and health.
I answered questions from DeMuro surrounding the impact of technology on health, the relationship between technology and society, our “need” to be connected, the growing digital divide, and future predictions about society’s reliance on technology.
My message was one of the continued need for digital literacy. We each have a responsibility to use technology wisely, by carefully assessing the information we discover and creating information that is accurate and reliable. We each need to take responsibility for the information we share, and we have to learn how to collaborate with our communities through technology as well as in person.
Listen to or download the full interview on media fire
Thanks to Bobby DeMuro for bringing this topic to the Charlotte airwaves and for inviting me to be a participant.
For more information about the Bobby DeMuro Show, visit http://bobbydemuro.com/work/wbt/
Google, Wikipedia black out over SOPA
Even though the widespread and unconfirmed Internet shutdown scheduled for today has not yet happened, major websites are using their own typical strategies to spread the word about SOPA. SOPA, the “Stop Online Piracy Act” (H.R. 3261) currently in process in the US House of Representatives, was introduced by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) on December 16, 2011. It has received loud protests from many in the social media industry including noteworthy sites such as Wikipedia and Google.
Under the bill, copyright holders and law enforcement agencies would have greater ability to fight cases of online copyright infringement.
Proponents of the bill say that it would better protect intellectual property and the rights of content creators, including artists, musicians, graphic designers, photographers, and writers. Opponents of the bill suggest that it could violate first amendment protections of freedom of speech.
One of the more controversial components of the bill surrounds the ability of courts to order injunctions that could effectively shut down offending websites. Websites that allow users to post user-generated content (like YouTube, Google, Facebook, and Wikipedia) could be concerned that a single user could post copyrighted information to YouTube, for example, and a court could order that the YouTube website be temporarily shut down. As a result of this concern, several websites discussed having a choreographed Internet blackout today. But, after the House Judiciary Committee indicated work would continue on SOPA, not today, but rather in February, talk of the blackout fizzled.
Nevertheless, Google took the opportunity to give a voice to SOPA opposition. Using its now traditional method of changing the logo, here’s what appeared on Google’s website today:
Screen shot of http://www.google.com, January 18, 2011
And Wikipedia’s blackout looks like this:
Screen shot of Wikipedia black out, January 18, 2012
Find out more about the various viewpoints:
- Wikipedia’s SOPA initiative
- Google’s “End Piracy, Not Liberty” Campaign
- SOPA – The Stop Online Piracy Act (H.R. 3261)
- Representative Lamar Smith
Facebook Etiquette, according to Dear Abby
Dear Abby, the well-known advice column, has finally dealt with the etiquette of posting photos on Facebook.
In her column on December 11, 2011, Abigail van Buren responded to a reader who was concerned about photos taken of her that ended up online.
The gentle reader, who calls herself “Camera-Shy in Pennsylvania,” described her personal weight gain and hair loss that resulted in her discomfort with her photos being placed on social media sites. The central issue in her question was:
Despite any of her fears about her own body image, Camera-shy’s question is a valid one that all of us must grapple with in the new public, yet seemingly private spaces of social media. When we choose to post the images of other people, we have to be sensitive to repercussions, both positive and negative.
Abby’s answer was a common one in the social media world: “Contact the person who took and posted the picture and ask that it be taken down from the Facebook page.”
In a digital environment, we should all feel comfortable asking others to take down photos of us. In return, we should also not be offended if we are asked to remove a photo we posted of someone else. These are skills and reflections of digital and media citizenship, of being a good friend and a thoughtful user of technology.
Twitter and Teacher Behaviors
Does Twitter influence student perceptions of teacher behaviors? As part of a session surrounding new and emerging technologies in instruction, I presented my research (co-authored with Kristen Bostedo-Conway) on Twitter’s role in the classroom at the National Communication Association 2011 National Convention in New Orleans, LA.
We conducted this research in Spring 2010 to better understand the role of Twitter in the classroom. Our findings give preliminary evidence that student-instructor interaction on Twitter has a relationship with student perceptions of teacher behavior. Most interestingly, students’ perceptions of a teacher’s non-verbal immediacy was heightened by out-of-class Twitter use.
These findings, the full text of which is under review for publication, have inspired us to continue this research into Twitter uses in the classroom.
Below is our handout from the convention which contains the research abstract and demonstrates the correlations identified between standard measures of student perceptions of teacher behavior (instructor credibility, content relevance, and immediacy) and instructor and student Twitter use:
e-Books, Tenure and Promotion
“The ‘Publish or Perish’ model in academia might be missing a third ‘P’ - Profit,” says Mel Odom, a successful e-book publisher and faculty member at the University of Oklahoma.
Odom, alongside Michael Kent of the University of Oklahoma and Lisa Schreiber of Millersville University, led a pre-conference on e-publishing at the National Communication Association 2011 Convention in New Orleans, LA.
Academics have made careers out of giving their research and editing skills to publishing houses for little or no return. But what would happen if academics started publishing their work for wider distribution and higher return?
Schreiber raised the issue of open source books, e-publishing and academic criteria for tenure and promotion. If professors write books that aren’t considered “research” under their universities’ models, the work then falls in the ”service” category.*
How does a professor meet the peer-review requirement for research** and move toward e-publication?
Respondent Bryan Crable of Villanova University suggests that the peer-review process might return to a university press model: “How is it can we use our university resources to generate conversations that are not happening in other spaces … or interactions that we are not already having?” The new university press alongside university libraries would have to focus on building community and conversation around books, not the promotion of its books or its own faculty and authors.
Respondent Robert Heath of the University of Houston calls this proposed change ”a galatial shift” for the future of the academy. Heath continues, “I’ve never sat on a promotion and tenure committee that gave any of this stuff credence. It might work for promotion to full professor, but not for tenure.” Dr. Heath is not opposed to the idea, but suggests this is a realistic interpretation of the typical promotion criteria in a climate where tenure and promotion “is only going to get more and more strange.”
A faculty member’s research is evaluated on four things: (1) quantity, (2) quality, (3) reputation, (4) impact. Respondent Maureen Taylor suggests that reputation and impact might be determined through the a journal’s ISI rating, peer review reputation**, acceptance rate. Articles can be cross-checked through the Web of Science or Google Scholar and double-checked to see who is citing the work and what awards it has won. “Self publishing is unknown territory,” she says. “The peer-review process** becomes hidden.”
How does Taylor suggest that faculty utilize self publishing in a tenure and promotion case?
“You need to provide information to make the case for impact in self-publishing,” she says.
For example, Downloads of an e-book can be counted and measured. Blog impact aggregators can measure impact for public scholars. Encouraging student participation in the creation, promotion, or evaluation of content can add to a tenure argument. Any hidden review processes should be revealed. Included information could also explain why self publication was the best way to reach the target audience and list a concrete plan for the target impact.
One final excellent recommendation for faculty members wanting to invest in e-publishing: “Gain agreement from your chair, dean, and others in the school about the value of self publishing,” says Taylor. “And,” quipped Heath, “making sure it’s on university letterhead is probably a good idea.”
* Professors and other faculty members are typically evaluated on three criteria: teaching, research, and service. Each university sets its own standards for faculty tenure and promotion in relation to these three areas.
** Typically, to be classified as “research” in a university setting, projects must be reviewed by experts in the field. The process of having one’s research reviewed is called “peer-review.” Peer-review is a standard practice for articles that are included in most journals, books published by academic publishing houses, and textbooks.
e-Books and the Changing Dynamics of Publishing
The front page of this morning’s USA Today Money section heralded the importance of e-books and the high quality of digital book readers in an article by Edward C. Baig.
The early beginning of the e-publishing industry can be traced back to July 4, 1971, when Michael Stern Hart founded Project Gutenburg. Forty years later, with the release of Amazon’s Kindle and Kindle Fire and Barnes & Noble’s Nook, e-Books recently outpaced print editions of mass market paperbacks in percentage of overall sales.
Mel Odom, a successful e-publisher, Michael Kent of the University of Oklahoma, and Lisa Schreiber of Millersville University, led a pre-conference on e-publishing at the National Communication Association 2011 Convention in New Orleans, LA.
For colleges and universities, books have become a costly barrier to access and student retention. According to the panel, estimates of average book costs at universities range from $700-$1100 per student. Book rental programs have attempted to address these rising cost, but often do not serve the student. Even though the issues of author credibility continue to swirl in the debate surrounding e-publishing, e-books might actually give instructors and students access to multiple choices of authors, book cost, and formats for their learning, says Schreiber.
One model to be considered, says Schreiber, is the production of open source course textbooks and websites. These could be used by students across universities for free. Schreiber’s current effort is an online public speaking open source book project.
For authors, e-publishing can provide the opportunity for wide distribution of texts and increased royalties, as well as the opportunity to tailor and update content regularly, say Odom. No longer are authors built through contracts with publishing houses.Rather, they can generate their own audience. Kent has created an audience of those who would likely e-publish from Mac to Kindle and PC to Kindle.
Presenters offered specific tactics for publishing to Kindle, Nook, and print-on-demand (POD) models. In addition, Kent discussed using Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign in addition to online book development tools.
Unexpected Use for iPad — Jumbotron
I stumbled across a new use for the iPad – one I didn’t expect.
The Biltmore Estate, well-known for its Christmas decorations and Candlelight evenings, has to decorate the house in preparation for the season. On Wednesday, November 2, 2011, the estate invited people to watch the installation of the 35-foot Christmas Tree in the Banquet Hall. One of the added perks is that for one-hour, onlookers and local media can watch, participate in, and document the decorating process.
After the tree made its way into the house, we lucked out being on the right side of the Banquet Hall in the Wintergarden to have a clear view of the tree being raised.
As the crowd shuffled around, a stranger next to me, Brian, decided to get a photo with the iPad he purchased the week prior.
As he raised his iPad above his head, the crowd behind us cheered. They didn’t have the line-of-sight into the banquet hall, but they could see the event on Brian’s screen. The cheering continued as the make-shift Jumbotron documented the tree-raising and allowed the crowd to witness the event first-hand.
As Brian flipped from the rear camera to the front camera, folks in the crowd behind us saw themselves on the screen.They laughed, cheered, and waved. Clearly, the iPad 2′s dual cameras are a crowd-pleaser.
Event planners, take note. iPads can be used to extend a view, to allow a crowd without line-of-sight to engage in an event. The age of the personal jumbotron begins.
What other unexpected uses have you discovered for the iPad?
