Teens’ desire for privacy does not undermine their eagerness to participate in public. There’s a big difference between being in public and being public. Teens want to gather in public environments to socialize, but they don’t necessarily want every vocalized expression to be publicized.
I agree with the point Boyd is making here. It's difficult to find and maintain a good balance between public and private.
The teens that I met genuinely care about their privacy, but how they understand and enact it may not immediately resonate or appear logical to adults.
The way teens today express their privacy on social media may be very different than their parents would have. There are generational differences that play a major role in how both the teen and adult view privacy.
Interactions that were previously invisible to adults suddenly have traces, prompting parents to fret over conversations that adults deem inappropriate or when teens share “TMI” (too much information).
It can be dangerous to post online something that you may regret later. Once something is online someone can trace it or take a picture. Nothing ever is truly erased from the internet. I think a good example of this is what a lot of celebrities go through when someone leaks inappropriate pictures or takes something they said out of context. Nothing is invisible.
And because of a variety of social and cultural fac-tors, social media has become an important public space where teens can gather and socialize broadly with peers in an informal way. Teens are looking for a place of their own to make sense of the world beyond their bedrooms. Social media has enabled them to participate in and help create what I call networked publics.
Social media allows us to connect with people all around the world. We can find a community that shares similar interests as us. Social media has brought so many people together, building various different networks.
The status updates I saw on her page were filled with references to conversations that took place at the game.
Different social media platforms provide people with the opportunity to continue a conversation. We have the chance to connect with friends in different ways.
my attempt to describe and explain the net-worked lives of teens to the people who worry about them—parents, teachers, policy makers, journalists, sometimes even other teens.
I think it is important to clarify how the internet can be really useful for teens to network and connect with each other. This isn't to say that it can't be a dangerous place. Users should always practice caution on the internet. Some people don't understand all of the benefits of the internet.
The distinction between broadcast and communications, which is to say between one-to-many and one-to-one tools, used to be so clear that we could distinguish between a personal and impersonal message just by the type of medium used.
The line between broadcast and communications media is becoming hazy. From different social media platforms there are different forms of interaction. You could participate in a larger community or privately. For example, on Twitter your tweets could be public or you could direct message someone. What Shirky is talking about reinforces some of the conversations we've had in class.
Considerable effort must be expended toward maintaining the discipline and structure of the profession.
Keeping the discipline and maintaining structure can be a difficult task. However, it is important to enforce these aspects of a website. You get as much out of something as the amount of effort you put in.
In the same way you do not have to be a professional driver to drive, you no longer have to be a professional publisher to publish.
Anyone can post anything. There are no standards to what can be published. Like Shirky mentions earlier, the conditions of the professional class no longer exist. Because of this, we are also losing reliability.
However, in the face of the speedy transmission of Internet memes, taking the time out to critically assess an image in this way may be less appealing than simply passing on the meme.
People want to be able to quickly share a meme and not have to think about it or do any greater analysis of the meme.
Much like genes, memes could replicate, undergo natural selection, and evolve.
Memes are always changing. One picture can have an infinite amount of different captions. They are always evolving.
Anyone who crosses a line can expect to see their messages deleted or their entire account frozen
While censorship and security are necessary components of Internet activity, what China is doing seems extreme.
Memes, as micro-actions of media remixing and sharing, are particularly important in a censored, propagandized state, which seeks first to isolate individuals who express opinions contrary to state interests, and then to deaden the sort of public debate that fosters a diverse sphere of opinion.
In these censored states, memes allow people to express their opinions. This is important because everyone should have the opportunity to share their thoughts and ideas. Memes give these people a safe way to do that.
memes make up just one part of a larger repertoire of youth expression and identity formation online
The internet has become an outlet for many people. The development of memes has led to the creation of various communities where people can connect and relate to each other online.
Racism and sexism have proven resilient enough to thrive in the digital world.
Racism and sexism are extremely prevalent in the media and many people have used the internet as an outlet to express their feelings on these, as well as other social problems.
We learn early on that the given rules don’t work for us, and that we have to manipulate them to succeed, even where others might wish us to fail.
I think what the writer is saying here is that sometimes we have to bend the rules a little. Sometimes we have to do anything we can to achieve a goal. However, this could lead to legal issues or other problems.
What does it mean for companies to know everything about us, and for computer algorithms to make life and death decisions?
Can we really trust a computer, to rely on so heavily and to make decisions based off of an algorithm?
•Internet technology design increasingly facilitates rather than defeats censorship and control.
This reminds me of when I was in elementary and high school certain websites would be blocked. However, this is on a much larger scale. There are increasing security measures now being taken on the internet to censor what we see and read about online. Many websites will try to protect users by asking them for their age or prompting them to create an account. But in the future will we have to worry about what's being censored and hidden from us?
you couldn't have a functioning democracy if citizens didn't get a good flow of information, that the newspapers were critical because they were acting as the filter, and then journalistic ethics developed.
Society can't function without a reliable and trustworthy source of information. We need to continue to filter and edit. It is vital to develop genuine sources that produce a dependable flow of information.
What we're seeing is more of a passing of the torch from human gatekeepers to algorithmic ones. And the thing is that the algorithms don't yet have the kind of embedded ethics that the editors did.
The internet has taken a major turn in past few years. Anyone can post anything. One problem with this is that we could be receiving completely false information now that there aren't editors or "gatekeepers."
The tools that a society uses to create and maintain itself are as central to human life as a hive is to bee life.
Bees all work together to achieve certain goals. As a humans we must also work together for the common good of our society.
Human beings are social creatures-not occasionally or by accident but always. Sociability is one of our core capabilities, and it shows up in almost every aspect of our lives as both cause and effect.
We survive by communicating and socializing with others. We wouldn't be able to do even basic activities without some socialization.
0 we want a world in which a well-off grown-up can use this kind of leverage to get a teenager arrested, as well as named and shamed on a global platform, for what was a fairly trivial infraction? The answer is yes and no.
What we post online can have both extremely positive and negative effects.
"the former audience," those people who react to, participate in, and even alter a story as it is unfolding.
It's essential to take into account how the audience may react to something you put on the internet. The audience plays a major part in a story or post. They can shape how others perceive your work in the future and determine your fate as a writer.
Despite Evans heroic efforts, he could not have gotten the phone returned ifhe had been working alone.
Although Evan initiated the search for the phone, he would have never gotten it back without the help of everyone involved on the internet. By creating the website, he created a network of people all trying to help. The first "StolenSidekick" page created a chain reaction of other people researching and working to find Sasha and get the phone back.
Sometimes you come across a piece of content that is so compelling, you want to use it, you're dying to use it, but you're not 100 percent sure if you can because you don't know if the source is credible.
Just because something is on the internet doesn't mean it is 100% true. It's always good to check multiple reliable sources.
We have free Internet tools that allow us, help us do this kind of investigation. We have algorithms that are smarter than ever before, and computers that are quicker than ever before.
The Internet is a great source for finding new information. However, we cannot fully rely on computers to do all of our work for us. We must keep researching and investigating and learning.
as journalists, we interact in real time. We're not in a position where the audience is reacting to news. We're reacting to the audience, and we're actually relying on them. They're helping us find the news. The
There is a lot of possibility for interacting with your audience thanks to various social media platforms. A news article can be posted on twitter and have a number of "retweets" and "favorites" and replies almost instantly. You can communicate and respond to anyone anywhere.
No one of these tests, typically, is conclusive in itself. But together they constitute a kind of sniff test for the quality of any given piece of Web-borne information.
The steps mentioned in this article are very important to take to prevent being scammed and spammed. You can never fully trust a site you are unfamiliar with and think might not be authentic. It's always a good idea to stay cautious on the internet.
As long as we think multitasking is destroying our brain, as long as we think technology is ruining us, we don’t have control. As long as we say, this is a tool, and like all tools human use, we can use this better or worse, then we can take some time to really think about what we, individually or collectively, need to make this tool work for us
It's important to be aware of how we work and the most effective way to get something done. It's good to know your personal habits to make them work for your needs.
A recent study of productivity, just in the last couple of weeks, showed that, in fact, people who are constantly using social networks while they’re at work, or doing Facebook while they’re at work, or switching back and forth, think they’re less productive. But actually, they’re more productive than people who think they’re monotasking who are Luddites, and who say, no, no, I don’t allow any of that.
This is interesting because you would think that people who are using social media at work were much less productive because of all the distractions. However, I don't think using social media at work frequently should be encouraged. I would be interested to learn more about why this is.
Our visual and emotional systems are faster and more powerful than our intellect; we are given to automatic responses when either system receives stimulus, much less both. Asking a student to stay focused while she has alerts on is like asking a chess player to concentrate while rapping their knuckles with a ruler at unpredictable intervals.
I think this is really interesting. In my own experience, I can't work or study efficiently when I have my phone out because I get distracted with all the alerts and notifications. However in the "Myth of Monotasking" they mention how it's good to "refresh" your mind. They also mention that people who check Facebook and other social media platforms still work efficiently.
We’ve known for some time that multi-tasking is bad for the quality of cognitive work, and is especially punishing of the kind of cognitive work we ask of college students.
Many people look at multi tasking as a solution, as a way to get more things done quickly. It may not be effective though because if you're doing many things at once you aren't fully focusing and you're not putting in your best work.