Wer den Social Media fernbleibt, ist vielleicht online, vielleicht auch nicht. In beiden Fällen können die, die online sind und bei Social Media mitmachen, denjenigen, der fernbleibt, nicht «sehen», auch nicht als Leerstelle. Wer nicht bei den Social Media mitmacht, existiert – aus der Innensicht – in gewisser Weise nicht. Es sei denn, das Fernbleiben wird innerhalb der Social Media thematisiert. Und das kann nur, wer mitmacht oder prominent mitgemacht hat. Aus den Social Media heraus könnte zwar nach außen auf jemanden verwiesen werden, der nicht mitmacht – aber wäre das Kommunikation? Doch nur dann, wenn diese Person innerhalb der Social Media bekannt ist. «Ich mache bei Euch nicht (mehr) mit!» mach bei Social Media keinen Sinn. Ich würde also behaupten: im Zusammenhang mit Social Media ist Nicht-Kommunizieren durchaus möglich.

Jonathan Albright says that Instagram is another major channel of Russian propaganda.

IRA (Internet Research Agency) - a Russian troll factory.

David Karpf argues that actual user engagement among US citizens can be hard to estimate, since a lot of apparent activity comes from fake accounts.

This (“[hearts] increased likes by a billion!”) is said by an actual employee of Twitter as if it means something, but it means nothing. Clicking on a heart is not some inherent good like increasing exercise, or upping the amount of fiber in your diet, or decreasing poverty. It’s a decision to provide Twitter with more data. That’s it.

The truth is many people working these jobs are so far into the machine they don’t see the difference between platform engagement (clicking on hearts) and civic and personal engagement (enjoying life more fully, thinking about things more deeply, empathizing more broadly, imagining and building a better world). They upped the click rate on a heart which is good for marketing. They are food scientists trying to tweak a flavor profile to get people to consume thirteen more Doritos a day.

This is something that's been nagging at me for the last couple of weeks.

Does it all matter? Does that tweet, share, thumbs up, like really matter at all? If you/we/I share out of tweet of support, outrage, or indifference, does it really matter on the grand scale.

Yes, I might have some likeminded individuals value it, read it, use it, share it. But, ultimately aren't we really just shouting into the echo chambers that have been built up for us thanks to these algorithms and networks? We're preaching to the choir.

I'd like to think that open can/will combat this...but unsure.

I think this is a post for Hybrid Ped or elsewhere. Lemme know if this resonates with anyone and you want to write it out.

Kris Schaffer distinguishes bots, sockpuppets, and trolls, and talks about how to identify botnets. Twitter and other social media sites should be able to eliminate many of the bogus accounts. But they don't.

Interesting section

Our social work education accrediting organization fetishizes competencies, thereby inducing stress in instructors, which then gets passed along to the students. I use hypothes.is extensively and can directly observe the students transition from coping to engagement.

Close reading is basically standardized in Common Core--it's referenced in the first ELA anchor standard for reading. Hypothesis is a means to assess competency in that standard by recording, measuring, and allowing feedback on

A big part of social reading: listening to the text and to other readers.

Because social and interactive, collaborative annotation can make reading more engaging.

Pretty good definition of social reading in fact!

Social reading makes reading a team sport!

Twitter took 11 months to close a Russian troll account that claimed to speak for the Tennessee Republican Party even after that state's real GOP notified the social media company that the account was a fake.

The account, @TEN_GOP, was enormously popular, amassing at least 136,000 followers between its creation in November 2015 and when Twitter shut it down in August

The Bystander Effect - Crowds sometimes fail to help someone in trouble: everyone assumes someone else will do it.

Similarly, people in groups often fail to check facts as carefully as they would if they were alone. They assume someone else has already checked.

Careless people, and bots, tend to share news quickly, without bothering to fact check. Once something has been shared thousands of times, even fairly careful people are likely to assume it must be true.

Again, if social media was to think a bit bigger, there are ways to apply this insight to deprivilege the influence of the quickest, and privilege the influence of those making informed decisions.

Mike Monteiro's short history of Twitter from the point of view of a long-time user. They went bad when they started tolerating racists for the sake of continued growth. And now Trump's tweets are a genuine threat to the entire world.

DH as moving English more toward the statistical...

Back in 2012, Zeynep Tufecki pointed out that election campaigns driven by big-data and social media could be bad for democracy.

This passage clearly exhibits the desire of human growth and expansion generated by the University. Again, there is this ambition to continue to be better than before; adding to the prestige of the University of Virginia. This quote discusses “qualities of virtue and social worth,” however, they do not outline their virtues and social worths - it is to be implied by the times of it’s creation. From my Doing Fieldwork Engagement, I have learned that social virtues and worths are extremely varied depending on the perspective. It is not fair to assume that everyone follows and conforms to one’s own expectations and values; in fact, this makes one ignorant and biased when collecting viable and strong data.

interesting

This is a critical distinction.

Is there data on this? What research has been done looking at networks and bystander intervention behaviors and/or beliefs? This would be a very interesting project.

Yes! This is the cost of geographical, educational and social marginalization. Different economic groups travel in different circles which reproduces their current economic position.

Again, I think the theoretical point behind social capital is that all relationships can have some value but it is also to show how some connections have more value than others. Certainly, knowing your neighbor or sharing stories with the clerk at the 7-11 is helpful to those how live in poverty. But, for those who are born at the top, they know the head of the corporations so the pay off is bigger. Both pay off but one pays off more.

I am not sure this is the best example of social capital in that these are family relationships not social relationships. I think the idea of social capital is to show that other relationships beyond family or blood have value.

What are the benefits of this? In terms of cost/benefit, if these ties pay off just as well as in person ties without the expending of as much time and labor, is that a net positive? Or is something lost in the ease of contact? Again, what does data say?

Are these students building social capital? Do these ties follow them outside the class? Do they draw on these ties for other purposes?

Are weak ties now more important than strong ties for seeking and finding social support? I am thinking of discussion boards/forums.

This is a new line of research and theory!!

These are the new questions raised by the digital world. What does digital social capital look like? Have our new ways of interacting replaced bowling? Are we still as social only in different ways?

Almost 25% of Japanese men and 10% Japanese women over age 60 say there is not a single person they could rely on in difficult times. The American crisis may not be so dissimilar from the Japanese one.

The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare reported there were 3,700 “unaccompanied deaths” in Japan in 2013, but some researchers estimate that because of significant under-counting, the true figure is closer to 30,000. In any case, the frequency of kodokushi has been on the rise since they emerged in the 1980s.

I wonder if people with social anxiety fear weak ties more? What is the psychological relationship between strong and weak ties? I also wonder about social mobility--do those at the higher levels have more weak ties? Spend more time on their weak ties?

I wonder if those who are more aware of their weak ties or have more contact with more ties have higher or lower social anxiety? We always think of social support as a net positive but is there such a thing as too much?

This is an interesting SaaS system for exploring how to create good moderation systems.

Moe aptly presents her argument again, as she argues that Elizabeth's frustration with Charlotte, for example, has to do with her own issues managing her frustration with "social forms." Moe allows the reader to "fill in the blank" here, as the reader can use this piece of information to better understand Elizabeth's reaction to Charlotte--her frustration is in Charlotte's refusal to resist the social forms that inherently oppress women and impact the emotional aspect of marriage. By giving her reader room to make this judgement herself, Moe's argument consequently becomes more concrete.

Main motivation for adoption of workplace social learning tools.

This space is fundamental to sociological theory. It the place where social forces exert power in the lives of individuals. SNA seeks to capture that influence and power.

This is fundamental to sociology as a discipline. We call it peer pressure, social support, social capital, norms, etc. This is why many who use SNA see it as the best methodology for doing sociology.

This is called the horizon of visibility. We generally know who are friends friends are but it is really hard to know who are friends friends friends are. SNA and the internet give us sight beyond the horizon. I wonder if that makes a difference in our choices or social capital?

Networks are like 'air'; they are all around us constantly. This class will not only help you see networks but also to see the complexity of them. They are growing more complex and more important to how our society functions. I often wonder if networks are not replacing institutions.

I think this is why we are so fascinated by social media; it has revealed what has always been under the surface. To me, networks are like 'air'; all around us but hard to see. SNA reveals the air.

I think this is a central question of our age--does social media make us happier? Increase democracy? Smarter? And the question always changes because the technology always changes. I now wonder about SnapChat. It functions a bit differently but with the same goal of connection. Does it produce better feelings than FB? Worse? More vicitimization? Less?

I think this is why they are hard to analyze...it is like trying to see and understand air. It is everywhere so it feels so normal and invisible. Networks, particularly human networks are the same. Humans have always been embedded in networks; we live, thrive and die in networks. They are another form of 'air'. The difference is that today, social media has made them more visible. We can now see them and analyze them in new ways. Hence, why this class is online :-)

I have never seen this movie, so the start of this scene is a bit confusing. Why are these people secluded from what seems like the rest of society? I also notice that there are no people of color aboard on this "rocket bus;" it seems like only the upper class are included so far.

This part of the text is a good example of how technology has become transparent because cellphones and other computers are used so regularly that the knowledge of how to use them, are second nature; however, social groups that are excluded from this idea are the lower class whom cannot afford such luxuries. Most of these examples seem to be geared towards the upper middle class.

Some ways to identify bots on Twitter.

*Social experiment*: Our cognitive perception of others ha s an effect on whether we decide to help or not.

A short film captures how social interactions influence our complex relationships between self-presentation, self-esteem and self concept in a unique way.

MIT is running a master's program in data, economics, and development policy with unique admission requirements. Anyone can apply after completing five online courses through edX with in-person exams.

https://micromasters.mit.edu/dedp/

Social-emotiobal learning is more important than any other subejct taught in class

https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.07592

Bot tweets are retweeted by humans at the same rate as human tweets. Stories propped up by 1,000 bots spread just like stories propped up by a thousand humans.

The backfire effect is getting turbocharged online. I think we’re getting more angry and convinced about everything, not because we’re surrounded by like-minded people, but by people who disagree with us. Social media allows you to find the worst examples of your opponents. It’s not a place to have your own views corroborated, but rather where your worst suspicions about the other lot can be quickly and easily confirmed.

I concur. Diigo could have been a leader in the social annotation space, way ahead of Hypothesis. But now I think H is gaining more momentum than Diigo, because it adheres to open standards.

Em.. this is an interesting statement. So Diigo is moving away from being social?

Reduce the number of distractions you get better results.

Again, economic relationship is also social relationship in Marx's eyes. Because both relationships co-exist.

In Marx's idea, superstructure is the base for other infrastructure, all ideas rely on superstructure. Superstructure can be looked at as the foundation.

In Marx's social relationship of production, Marx always include that social is also a part of economic activity. Marx pointed out what differentiate human from animals are that human feel the need to work together and make the things they need to survive, and as a result of this, social relationship became essential in our lives.

I find this statement to be eerily ironic given america currently

The transformation of modes of production and social organization resulting from changing superstructures -- due to a reordering of social relations and belief sets in a society -- and technologies that change the means of production. The process begins when problems with the system become apparent to producers but remain unaddressed by owners.

With the goal of uncovering the power structures in society and the true meanings of "common knowledge", Marx did a historical analysis of the society with consideration of the physical, social, political and economic environments in that society.

Taking into consideration the specific historical moment, its political, economic and social process and accompanying structures and relations when considering an event, phenomena, action etc.

Being that humans need to produce use-able goods from their natural environment, we must rely on the collective strength and ability of their community. Many people are involved in the labor process in production, thus, production creates social relationships.

This is a way of looking at class structure. In capitilistc society that we live in labor is extracted from the proletariat at the lowest possible costs for economic interest ( pay only enough to keep the proletariat alive and productive). Marx predicts the proletariat will drvie a change to communism from the capitalism

a classless and stateless society

caused by conflict between the oweners of material productions and the producers which results in a change in the economic bases. This then leads to a transformation of the superstructure.

social classes posses an awareness - of itself, the living conditions, the social world, - and futher their ability to act in their own interests is based on this awareness. Therefore, class consciousness has to be reached before the class can have a successful revolution.

Marx proposes that history is made of up stages driven by class conflict where there is an ownership class which controls the means of production and a lower class that thus provides labor for production. One class is thus exploiting another class. When these two come into conflict it leads to social change.

The Shouting Class -- people who criticize things as a way of life.

we’re at a pivotal point not just in the life of our democracy, but in how we think, read, and make choices. Selective information is being presented to us in a way that encourages selective reading and offers psychological and social rewards for, to put it bluntly, being stupid and submissive and spreading stupid to submit others.

...

What’s different now is that this propaganda is being gamed by professionals in a massive, orchestrated data campaign at a volume, pace, and consistency that not only muddies the truth, but completely eclipses the truth. Destroys the very notion of truth.

...

The truth about the truth is that we believe because we want to, because our ability to think independently is a point of pride for Americans. The people behind the curtain are telling us the same story we tell ourselves about ourselves. But this is also a vulnerability: Independence is in its purist form a kind of division. If you exploit it the right way, you can turn a democracy against itself.

Analysis of a subreddit for Trump supporters, based on comparisons of the users of various subreddits.

The history of the Seth Rich conspiracy theory.<br> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/20/the-seth-rich-conspiracy-shows-how-fake-news-still-works/

This saying refers to a home in the eighteenth or nineteenth century that had elegant furniture throughout the home; and elegant dishes and dinnerware. The servants lived in brand new liveries. (janeaustens world)

According to the OED, rubber refers to "A set of games (usually three or five), the last of which is played to decide between the opponents when each has won an equal number; (hence) the winning of more than half the individual games by one side" (OED).

This phrase altogether indicates that Lady Middleton was partaking in a card game upon hearing the news of Marianne.

"A carriage with a half-head behind which can be raised or let down at pleasure, having a seat in front for the driver, and seats inside for two couples to sit facing each other" (OED).

For a young, unmarried woman such as Marianne to correspond with an unmarried man was considered extremely improper. In fact, for a single woman to initiate such correspondence would be considered scandalous, thereby tarnishing her virtue and reputation as an eligible bridal candidate. Only if they were engaged to each other would this practice be looked upon favorably; in fact, it might be necessary and expected. If they were not engaged, and especially not to each other, open correspondence would indicate a lack of morals in the woman, in that society would assume the young woman to be the man's mistress. Brandon follows this statement by extrapolating that Marianne and Willoughby would soon be married, since that would be the only alternative so her social reputation would not suffer.

"Calling cards became popular at the end of the 18th century and bore the visitor's name, title and residence." (Grace, Maria. "Morning Calls and Formal Visits: Socializing in the Regency Era" English Historical Fiction Authors, http://englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.com/2013/08/morning-calls-and-formal-visits.html . Accessed 24 April 2017.) The purpose of the calling card that Willoughby leaves behind at Mrs. Jennings' residence serves to inform her, as the mistress of the house, of his presence in London. As her acquaintance, it would have been considered rude of him not to do so.

"An attendant or foot servant; one employed to run ahead of or alongside a coach, carriage" (OED).

"The flesh of a calf as an article of diet. A calf...as killed for food or intended for this purpose. Now rare. Chiefly in names of dishes. Made from veal, as veal pie, veal broth, veal cutlet, veal gravy" (OED).

To "take orders" means to ordain as a clergyman to the Anglican Church. In the Regency era, many young gentlemen looked to the church as a professional option, especially younger sons who had no other inheritance or estate.

At this time it was not unusual for women to go to London or other urban settings for access to different experiences. They offered many opportunities for new social interaction and there is ample evidence of women traveling to London and partaking of its many social activities. There were also many opportunities of new experiences for pleasure and excitement, some through social interaction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/victorian_britain/women_out/urban_life_04.shtml

Short for 'post-chaise', defined as ""a horse-drawn, usually four-wheeled carriage (in Britain usually having a closed body, the driver or postilion riding on one of the horses) used for carrying mail and passengers, esp. in the 18th and early 19th centuries"" (OED).

The tradesmen or middle sort are below Gentry and make their money by working. They could have as much or more money than the gentry class in some cases, but their status was always considered as lower.

http://www4.wittenberg.edu/academics/hist/crom/brit/socstruc.html

"A room reserved for reception of company, and to which the ladies withdraw from the dining-room after dinner" (OED).

The drawing-room had feminine decorations compared to the other rooms in a home; which included classically tasteful furnishings and musical instruments" (Drawing rooms, The Regency Town House).

As Florence Hartley notes in her conduct book, "When a child is present in a formal visit or call, he is the first subject in a conversation" (Hartley, The Ladies' Book of Etiquette, and Manual of Politeness, Chapter 16. S.l.: OMNIA VERITAS, 2015).

The fact “Lady Middleton” is referenced without her first name illustrates to the reader that she was married by a man with a title. However, in the novel Pride and Prejudice Lady Catherine de Bourgh is addressed with her first name indicates she was born into nobility.

(The British System of Aristocratic Honorifics, The Republic of Pemberley)

Said of a woman who determines to gain the affections of a man....Origin: from the French nautical phrase 'mettre le cap sur' - 'to set a course for'... Women commonly wore caps of white linen or muslin in the 18th century. Any woman who was intent on attracting a man would certainly wear her best cap, probably ornamented with lace and ribbons, and set it at the most becoming angle… By the early 19th century the phrase was common enough to have taken on a metaphorical usage. ('Set One's Cap At' - the Meaning and Origin of This Phrase. Phrasefinder.)

"In Jane Austen’s day most people walked to work, town, church, and market square, or to their neighbors. Six miles was not considered an undue distance to travel by foot one way. The gentry were another breed. They either owned their own carriages or hired a public horse cab." (Victorian and Edwardian Horse Cabs by Trevor May, a Book Review, Jane Austen's World)

"The fashionable carriage now is a curricle, and the most elegant of that fort is one built by." Times [London, England] 2 Aug. 1787: 3. The Times Digital Archive. Web. 25 Apr. 2017.

This carriage was deemed to be one of the fashionable ones; this could only shed good light on Willoughby and alludes to his class and his fashion style. It was deemed to be an elegant mode of transportation, which helps contribute to the Dashwoods' impression of Willoughby.

In the Regency era, it was common for people to visit private homes and estates. There was a "presumption of access to private houses" (Clarke, "A fine house richly furnished: Pemberley and the visiting of country houses") In this discussion, Elinor is chiding Marianne for breaking one of the cardinal rules of visiting a great house: visiting while the family who owned said house was at home. "If the family were away, [a] housekeeper would feel free to show the house to visitors" but "access [could be] refused because the family were at home" (Clarke). By entering Allenham while Mrs. Smith was at home, Marianne has intruded. The fact that she was also alone with Willoughby, a man who is not a relative of hers, with no supervision from others could cause people to question Marianne's virtue.

"Among family, friends and romantic partners, exchanging a lock of hair was a sign of mutual esteem and deep affection. Upon the death of a loved one, locks of hair were often cut and kept as a way to both honor and remember the dead... [H]air was both an intimately personal souvenir of a specific person and an (almost) everlasting memento." ("Hairwork jewelry" on the Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising (FIDM) Museum of Los Angeles' blog) Locks of hair were often kept in the form of jewelry, as we see Edward Ferrars wearing later in the novel. Hair jewelry ranged from simpler rings like the one Edward wears to complex necklaces, brooches, and other pieces.

(Image: "Gold and enamel mourning ring with hair of the deceased under glass, c. 1855." from The Victor Mourning Blog) (Image: "Hairwork necklace. 1850-1890. Gift of Andrea Tice. 2008.46.101" from the FIDM Museum Blog)

The term "Christian name" refers to one's first or given name, which was often given at the time of an infant's baptism (Thurston, Catholic Encyclopedia). An excerpt from Etiquette for Ladies, published in Philadelphia in 1840 by Lea & Blanchard, details some specifics on the use of Christian names in different types of company: "In speaking, it is always proper to give the name of Sir, Madam, or Miss... It is equally good [etiquette], when alone with [one's husband], to designate him by his Christian name." The use of a Christian name, or given name, was incredibly intimate and for the most part only meant to be used by family members in private spaces.

In the Regency period, women were not permitted to ride alone, except under very specific circumstances, and were usually expected to be accompanied by a chaperone. This chaperone was often a groom, whose duties also included caring for the horses. "A lady was permitted to drive her own carriage, but only about the town attended by a groom, or by herself on the family estate... It was acceptable to go out riding or driving with a man as long as a groom or other chaperone was in attendance... It was acceptable to go out driving or riding with a man without a chaperone if he was a relative of close family friend" (Kloester, Georgette Heyer's Regency World).

In her conduct book, Letters to Young Ladies on their Entrance into the World (1824), Elizabeth Lanfear warns women not to rush into marriage: "love-matches, at least those which are generally so called, do not always prove the happiest ; and, when entered into rashly, or at an early period of life, before either the taste or the judgement are sufficiently matured, mutual disappointment is too frequently the result" (Lanfear, p. 49). Lanfear is stating the possibility that marriage can lead unhappiness and warns women not to rush into marriage. If Colonel Brandon proposed the idea of marriage to Charlotte to Sir John, Charlotte might have needed Lanfear's advice not to jump into marriage so rashly.

Horse-drawn carriage used in the 18th and 19th centuries; a status symbol of material wealth used by the upper classes.

“Hair jewelry served as a physical demonstration of internal feelings, similar to the idea of sensibility” (Absorption in Austen,On Hair Jewelry). The act of a man carrying a woman's lock of hair is a symbol of love between the two lovers. It is an act of affection as the lock of hair can also represent a woman's beauty and virtue. By gifting a lock of hair a woman is in a way promising herself to her lover, and in return the man carries and protects the lock which is his way of symbolizing that her will protect her virtue.

Proletarianization is the social process by which people move from being either the employer or self-employment to being employed as a wage laborer by an employer.

Marx, Karl, and David McLellan. Karl Marx: selected writings. Oxford University Press, USA, 2000.

Participatory Propaganda - an analysis of current techniques for exploiting our online behavior. https://twitter.com/lageneralista

research on how ideas spread through social media

“England was a very patriarchal society. Not only in the public sphere, but also in the private one as well. Women did not have any power in any portion of the nation, whether it be economic, political, or social. In England there was no law written expressly concerning inheritance other than, that the will or desire of the man of the home or estate will be carried out. This meaning that if the man of the estate wished for his nephew to inherit the land it was to be so. The common practice was that a son or nephew to the head of the family was to inherit all of the assets, because he would be more worthy of the property than a woman.” (Davis, Brooke. Inheritance Laws in the Early 1800s in England, Web)

“Before the nineteenth century, most families were organized according to patriarchal tradition. Household heads owned and controlled the means of production, and their wives and children were obliged to provide the unpaid labor needed to sustain family enterprises. Masters of the household had a legal right to command the obedience of their wives and children—as well as any servants or slaves—and to use corporal punishment to correct disobedience.“ (Ruggles, Steven. Patriarchy, Power, and Pay, Web)

Elizabeth Lanfear describes the repercussions of marriage and the commonality of how marriages occur: “marriage, generally speaking, in either sex, is more frequently the result of accident than of selection : propinquity, convenience, interest, or, at best, mere fancy, dignified by the name of love, forms the basis, of most matrimonial engagements” (Lanfear, Young Ladies on their Entrance into the World, p. 47). Lanfear's statement on marriage relates to this moment where Elinor notes her knowledge of this common type of marriage. In relation to Lanfear's statement, Elinor notices the infatuation between Mr. Palmer and his wife being the main attraction that led to their marriage.

In her conduct book published in 1824, Elizabeth Lanfear explains the etiquette expected from married women: “a sensible woman, to preserve the peace and secure the affections of her husband, will often sacrifice her own inclinations to his” (Lanfear, Young Ladies on their Entrance into the World, p. 67). Lanfear states that married woman are expected to sacrifice their tendencies and desires for those of her husbands. In regard to the relationship between Charlotte Palmer and her husband, this same etiquette is very strongly illustrated. In this particular moment, Charlotte is being selflessly tolerant to her husband's comments whether or not her husband's actions affect her.

A billiard room according to David Selwyn served as a key part of enjoyment towards entertaining guests, "large houses . . . were provided with a billiard room, which, though largely for the enjoyment of the men, could sometimes be an advantage to the ladies: Jane Austen commented that it drew 'all the Gentlemen to it whenever they are within, especially after dinner'" (Selwyn, Jane Austen and Leisure, p. 265). In this context, Austen is depicting the assumption that people with large houses who frequently entertain guests are expected to have a billiard room.

A gig is "a light two-wheeled one-horse carriage" (OED). Austen is saying these gigs are very fashionable and flashy. These carriages relate lawyers to the association of wealth. Aoife Byrne states that "gigs in Austen's works highlight their owner's social aspirations, and they illustrate contextual attitudes to those aspirations" (Byrne, "'Very Knowing Gigs': Social Aspiration and the Gig Carriage in Jane Austen's Works," Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal, vol. 37 (2015)). . For the lawyers that "drove about" in these carriages, Austen is suggesting the connection of carriages relating lawyers to wealth and fashion.

In other words, "who were lawyers." Edward's referencing the barrister's chambers in the Temple, an area of London.

An example of an early 19th century cottage, this one being the birthplace of author Thomas Hardy

A 1799 income tax put a particular strain on the middle and upper classes at this time. For Edward, being idly rich could also be beneficial. His options for rewarding work are few.

The typical engagement period in early nineteenth-century England is about 6 months to 2 years.

A common way in early nineteenth-century England to exchange sentiments. Also used in the mourning of a loved one.

Portrait miniatures were often given between lovers as a symbol of love or affection, especially if the loved one was absent for long periods of time. (1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World, Web)

Approbation means the "action of expressing oneself pleased or satisfied with anything; or the mere feeling of such satisfaction; approval expressed or entertained" (OED).

According to the customs of the time, parents were to be consulted about a marriage and their opinion to be taken in high regard; however, men and women were mostly free to choose their marriage partner. If a young adult did choose someone who their parents disliked, they might be left out of the will or, if they are underaged, they may have permission withheld from them. Parental opinions were often respected by young people. ( Elizabeth Maurer, "Courtship and Marriage in the Eighteenth Century", Web.)

Some girls born into affluent families may have been educated at home by parents, a live in governess, tutor, or may have gone off to a private boarding school. Since women did not go on to have careers in this day, education and knowledge was something reserved primarily for boys.

Domestic trainings were a more appropriate education for a woman to receive. "For women of the 'genteel' classes the goal of non-domestic education was thus often the acquisition of 'accomplishments,' such as the ability to draw, sing, play music, or speak modern (i.e. non-Classical) languages (generally French and Italian)" (The Republic of Pemberley, "Education, Women's Education, and Accomplishments")

Detection of fake news in social media based on who liked it.

we show that Facebook posts can be classified with high accuracy as hoaxes or non-hoaxes on the basis of the users who "liked" them. We present two classification techniques, one based on logistic regression, the other on a novel adaptation of boolean crowdsourcing algorithms. On a dataset consisting of 15,500 Facebook posts and 909,236 users, we obtain classification accuracies exceeding 99% even when the training set contains less than 1% of the posts.

New Hampshire state legislator discovered to be the founder of the misogynistic online group The Red Pill.(Which has nearly 200,000 subscribers. Yikes.)

Needs to focus on practice not policy - Perhaps consider adding in Social learning ? Julian Stodd's work around social leadership? https://julianstodd.wordpress.com/2016/02/23/10-things-a-social-leader-does/

“The choice of a spouse was not solely left up to the suitors. Parents and even the wider community had an interest in securing suitable matches, between men and women of similar status, wealth, and age, and they exerted pressure accordingly“ ( Robert B. Shoemaker, Gender in English Society 1650-1850: The Emergence of Separate Spheres, p. 93 )

Example of how gossip plays a big role in society. Gossip is how information goes around and status can go up and down.

This was also custom and simple manners when attending a party. It is offensive if this action was dismissed. It is a way of introducing oneself to the host/hostess and showing gratitude for the invitation.

During this time, the purpose of this was just so that your presence was known and acknowledged. This is custom.

digital identity, as a practice, operates counter to the collaboration and cooperation that need to be part of digital citizenship.

This is our contemporary contradiction: identity as a construct in contemporary social media spaces makes for pretty rotten social spaces.

...

We’re algorithmically manipulated. We’re surveilled. We’re encouraged to speak rather than listen. We’re stuck engaging in visibility strategies, whether we admit it or not, in order simply to be acknowledged and seen within a social or professional space.

Our digital identities do not – and at the level of technological affordances and inherent structure, cannot – create a commons that is actually a healthy pro-social space.

The key changes we can make in the short term (without requiring sites to relinquish their business models) are to teach social software to forget, to give it predictable security properties, and to sever the financial connection between online advertising and extremism.

Orwell imagined a world in which the state could shamelessly rewrite the past. The Internet has taught us that people are happy to do this work themselves, provided they have their peer group with them, and a common enemy to unite against. They will happily construct alternative realities for themselves, and adjust them as necessary to fit the changing facts.

Finally, surveillance capitalism makes it harder to organize effective long-term dissent. In an setting where attention is convertible into money, social media will always reward drama, dissent, conflict, iconoclasm and strife. There will be no comparable rewards for cooperation, de-escalation, consensus-building, or compromise, qualities that are essential for the slow work of building a movement. People who should be looking past their differences will instead spend their time on purity tests and trying to outflank one another in a race to the fringes.

Obviously, in this situation whoever controls the algorithms has great power. Decisions like what is promoted to the top of a news feed can swing elections. Small changes in UI can drive big changes in user behavior. There are no democratic checks or controls on this power, and the people who exercise it are trying to pretend it doesn’t exist

On Facebook, social dynamics and the algorithms’ taste for drama reinforce each other. Facebook selects from stories that your friends have shared to find the links you’re most likely to click on. This is a potent mix, because what you read and post on Facebook is not just an expression of your interests, but part of a performative group identity.

So without explicitly coding for this behavior, we already have a dynamic where people are pulled to the extremes. Things get worse when third parties are allowed to use these algorithms to target a specific audience.

any system trying to maximize engagement will try to push users towards the fringes. You can prove this to yourself by opening YouTube in an incognito browser (so that you start with a blank slate), and clicking recommended links on any video with political content.

...

This pull to the fringes doesn’t happen if you click on a cute animal story. In that case, you just get more cute animals (an experiment I also recommend trying). But the algorithms have learned that users interested in politics respond more if they’re provoked more, so they provoke. Nobody programmed the behavior into the algorithm; it made a correct observation about human nature and acted on it.

This part of the article stands out to me for a number of reasons. First, the idea that people with physical and mental disabilities prior to the nineteenth century suffered in a difference sense compared to what they deal with now. Prior to this point, this introduction points out the stereotypes that people with disabilities had in the eighteenth century. Though this is something that is still socially dealt with now, we've taken further measures to help people who deal with specific setbacks that emphasis the overall point on maximizing "the importance of personal agency," and minimizing social change. Overall, this article interests me because it allows me to think deeper about how disabilities have always existed, though they've been handles in a variety of different ways as well as reflect it to how it's handled regarding circumstances we've learned including the role of the doctor and what they can do to help and the resources we had access to then versus now.

Digital Social Networks, particularly Facebook and Twitter.

Makes an interesting point about homogenisation in Facebook and Twitter (i.e. people are a binary of friend or not friend, categories that collapse all different categories.

Interestingly, both Facebook and Twitter have taken steps to address this recently.

p. 2

Originally wanted to study HSS and STEM but scientists didn't qulify. See chapter III

"Natural development" here seems to imply that there are types of language that are not constructed, but of course we can use cultural context to intuit that she does not mean "natural" as the opposite of constructed but to mean something closer to "just as valid as other language, which is all constructed and ever-evolving."

Trump-Russia sock puppets posing as "Bernie bros" targeted women and black men with harassment on Twitter when they expressed support for Hillary Clinton.

2 April, 2017 - International Fact-Checking Day Lesson plan and several how-to guides.

Colleagues. connection. mutualisation.

Network colleagues

Nice talk and nice use of social media

Conner on the social nature of listservs--cf. McCatry

This is a really good key question..

Social presence

Disconnection

Courses. Mapping. Focus.

Yearning to reach out and be really present with the people on line.

Timezone confusion. Competence

Being able to picture the person in a physical context in which one has walked.