User talk:Bex.frew

Online Visibility
When I think about online visibility I think about all the actions I have taken to be as private as possible online. I have a large number of social media accounts ranging from Facebook which I got at 11, obviously using a fake birthday to bypass the rule of having to be 13, to Twitter which I got a few years later as it became the ‘in’ social media at my school. I’ve always kept up to date with the new trends of social media, mainly due to FOMO, however I have always taken the actions to keep my accounts as private as possible, only allowing people I want to see what I post. If you google my social media usernames my profiles will appear but only showing my profile picture, no other information about myself is shared unless we are friends on the site.

For the most part, the information about myself available online is what I post myself. However, in some circumstances especially on social media such as Snapchat and Instagram people are able to share photos and videos of me without my permission. The morning after a night out is filled with dread about the photos and videos of yourself that a friend has put all over their Snapchat. For the most part, these photos and videos are gone within 24hours never to be seen again, but the thought that there are photos of me floating around in the endless abyss that is the online world is pretty terrifying.

Convergence is the flow of content through multiple media platforms.Due to the amount of online accounts most people have, convergence has become part of how people use their social media. Anytime I post on Instagram, save a pin to a private board on Pinterest or reblog something on Tumblr I am asked if I want to share it on my Facebook page or tweet it. For me I have different social media for different things. The seamless convergence of my online life is both a blessing and a curse. Due to my settings on everything being as private as these sights allow I don’t ever have to worry about people I don’t know seeing what I’m sharing and posting. However, some of my online activity is just for myself to view and not for even friends and family to see (mainly embarrassing Pinterest boards) and the fact it is so easy, and almost expected, to share and connect all parts of your online life can be annoying.

For me being private on social media is just the obvious thing to do. I have never wanted just anyone to be able to see the photos I publish or see that someone has written on my timeline. On a more serious level, since I was 14 I have worked in some capacity with younger kids, firstly coaching at a gymnastics club to most recently working at a summer camp in America. Every week when the kids would go home from training or left camp for the summer I would get multiple requests to follow me on Instagram or be my Facebook friend. These were always rejected as it is unprofessional and against many rules for me to be online friends with the girls I was a coach and role model to. I want the power over what is available about me online so am, and will continue to be, incredibly careful about my online visibility.

This is a good piece and a very interesting piece to read. I like how it's structured and I feel you have some very important points, especially with the idea of cnvergence Rej00012 (discuss • contribs) 18:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments
I also dread the "night before" photos because I like to be in control of how I present myself to the world on and off online. There's always a risk of a screen shot being taken so what you would hope is "gone" might still be existing somewhere. I totally understand your need to keep up with trends, though I personally gave up when Snapchat blew up and it wasn't appealing to me at the time. I still try out various platforms from time to time as they come and go but they usually don't stick. I also liked your thoughts about cross social media platform posting as a form of convergence. I hadn’t thought about that before but it makes so much sense to think of it like that. I’m one of those lazy people who will make an Instagram post and then also post the same thing on Facebook when offered to do so. I think it streamlines the whole process nicely in some respects but I also find it annoying when I see the same exact post from someone across all the platform I follow them on.

Have you thought about how much people actually use that idea of convergence across platforms? I wonder if there is information out there about how often people actually share the same post across multiple platforms, might be something interesting to look into for your paper topic that is an aspect of it. Over all, I really enjoyed your commentary and insight into how you use social media.

Cls00085 (discuss • contribs) 23:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography
Derek Johnson, 2012, 'Cinematic Destiny: Marvel Studios and the Trade Stories of Industrial Convergence', Cinema Journal, 52(1), 1-24.

In this article Johnson discusses how Marvel Studios are central to the independent production of their films even when working with huge Hollywood firms in the past and now with being owned by Disney. The author looks at Marvel film productions from the late 1990's onwards to show how they have pathed a dominant film culture within Hollywood cinema. The article focuses on how Marvel Studios have a "model" which has created a whole universe that crosses movies, television shows, comic books and video games with a core group of characters that interact within all areas of media. This article is highly useful to my research as Marvel have taken the idea of convergence and used it in such a successful way to create a universe that expands across all forms of media. The main limitation of the article is that due to it being written in 2012 it can't discuss in depth how Disney buying Marvel has affected the continued creation and convergence of the Marvel Universe. The author indicates that further examination of Marvel's new era and it's spot within Hollywood film is crucial in the further understanding of convergence and the new opportunities it is creating. This article will be highly useful for my research as it focuses on both convergence and Marvel as a company who are the main focus of my study making this an important source.

(Bex.frew (discuss • contribs) 23:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC))

Comments
1. Despite studying convergence on this course, I had failed to think about the Marvel brand being a key business that uses convergence to market their properties so this annotation was very interesting. I knew that their cinematic universe where characters teamed up, and the films made sense to view in order, was a type of film plot and character convergence that strengthened Marvel's universe. However, I had neglected to think about how Marvel comics, video games, television shows and other media all converged into on another, strengthening Marvel further.

Before Marvel films began to converge characters in Avengers Assemble, I had not observed any film series that could be watched in order and have plots and stories be effected so much by events in the previous film. Now in 2018, it's clear that other brands, such as DC, are trying to follow the film formula that Marvel first curated due the their success which highlights that they have paved a culture for films, particularly super hero films.

It would be extremely interesting to research whether or not Disney has had an influence on how the convergence of Marvel's media takes place. I look forward to seeing further research on Marvel and convergence from you!

--Stirsb00027 (discuss • contribs) 03:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

3 Collaborative Research Exercise
Thanks for commenting on my annotated bibliography! I myself hadn't truly appreciated a connection between convergence and Marvel until I started to think more about it and it suddenly made so much sense. I think especially for me, as someone who isn't very interested or knowledgeable about comic books I really only knew Marvel as this huge cinematic universe, but even that in itself can be classed as convergence as they have these characters who are showing up in so many films across the franchise. Through my research in the last few weeks I've only just realised how big a company Marvel truly is and how many ventures they have creating such a large expanding universe that all converges and connects to one and other. I agree the idea of researching if Disney buying over Marvel has had an influence on convergence and will definitely be an area our group research will look into! (Bex.frew (discuss • contribs) 22:41, 19 March 2018 (UTC))

I only really became on the comics after watching a Youtuber by the name Beyond the Trailer who discusses films and reviews them professionally. She often reflects on Marvel comics and the representation of characters in the Marvel films. It's another way of how the internet can help audiences to be interactive and converge information to understand more about a film or text. A sense of fandom also can be created not only through the convergence within Marvel as a brand itself but also through the spectator's interactions with each other online. It is also important to see how the brand promotes it's franchaise and characters through toys, teasers and added extras in the dvd release of films and how these can also help converge into the Marvel cinematic universe.

However, it is interesting how unlinked some Marvel properties are. For example, the films are somewhat detached to the television/Netflix series. The characters in the Marvel Cinematic Universe never mention characters such as daredevil or Jessica Jones etc. Although, in Jessica Jones for example, they do mention the Avengers, highlighting that they are in the same world but in completely different levels. There is an aspect of convergence here but more subtle than in the films. The convergence of the Defenders on Netflix (linking Jessica Jones, Daredevil, Iron Fist and Luke Cage together) is fairly separate to the cinematic version of character convergence but it is interesting to see how character come together regardless of setting. --Stirsb00027 (discuss • contribs) 10:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Collaborative essay: Reflective account
Wikibooks is a content sharing platform which allows multiple people to collaborate on projects. Due to its accessibility and the easiness for many collaborators to work on the same webpage it was the ideal platform for us to use for our collaborative essay. As a group, we first started the process of creating our essay by meeting up in person during scheduled lab hours and began brainstorming ideas. Quickly we agreed that writing about convergence was what we were all most interested in and from there decided to focus specifically on Marvel as an organisation and how they use convergence. From this initial meeting, we met up a few more times to settle how we wanted to layout our essay and what aspects of Marvel we were all going to focus on we began our own personal research for our part of the essay. It was very fortunate that our group all agreed very quickly about what theory we all wanted to focus on as it made the process of starting the research very easy. Also, we each had an area we were most interested in to do with Marvel as a company so it was very easy to decide on that aspect as well.

One of the most useful aspects about using Wikibooks as the platform for our collaborative essay is that everyone in our group was able to post onto our essay page with our own research and findings. This created an easy way for us all to see the progress of everyone’s research but also allowed us to share sources and ideas with each other without having to meet up in person if our schedules didn’t all fit. By sharing the progress of our own individual findings on our Wikibooks page it allowed not only our group to read each other’s progress but also the other groups who are focusing on convergence for their essay. This was helpful as it allowed more feedback from people who were focusing on the same theory allowing more discussions and sharing of ideas. This wider community of people all working on the same basic idea was a great resource and especially useful on Wikibooks is we were all linked through a Wikibooks created by our seminar tutor allowing easy access to every collaborative essay and discussion pages.

One of the most important aspects of the collaborative essay was the communication factor. The part that for me that was most useful was having an open discussion page. I used this a lot to discuss different theorists and ideas with other people. Having such an easy and accessible way to speak with other students was really useful when I was doing my research and writing my part of the collaborative essay as it gave me a wide group of people who were doing the same work to bounce ideas off of. In this way Wikibooks is a way to foster a community as it allows an area for people working on, or interested in, the same things. Due to this I was able to share knowledge and gain knowledge for people I otherwise wouldn’t have been able to in person as they were in different seminar groups. This way of communicating was essential for the collaborative essay and was a huge part in the preparation of writing the final piece.

Overall the group I was in worked very well together and were always on the same page when it came down to what we wanted to include in the essay. We each played important roles of the essay and the communication between us all wouldn’t have been nearly as good if we weren’t using a content sharing platform like Wikibooks.

(Bex.frew (discuss • contribs) 14:00, 12 April 2018 (UTC))

Comments
Hello Bex! This is a great summary of your experience of using Wikibooks, many of your thoughts shared I can really relate to. I agree with the point you make that the Wikibooks platform was useful for the collaborative essay due to the ability to share sources with group members/other students in the module. As well as being able to comment/receive comments of suggested sources, by simply glancing through other student’s reference lists/bibliographies I was able to find additional reading and articles I may have never have come across otherwise.

I added the ‘list of contributors’ page created by our lecturer to my favourites bar, as I found the list extremely useful when we were required to comment on other contributor’s discussion pages. I also benefited from viewing the layout of other student’s user pages when I was setting up my Wiki account when I was getting to grips with the platform in the earlier stages.

I also agree with the point you make about the open discussion pages being one of the most important aspects in terms of communication. Our group tried to use the discussion pages as much as possible and update it after we had face-to-face meeting so that we had a record of what was discussed and what our next goals were. We were able to use the ‘reply to’ function to notify each other when discussing, however because this didn’t notify us directly to our mobile devices we did communicate on other platforms such as Facebook Messenger when organising meeting times. Although we populated our discussion pages with thoughts, ideas, sources and aims; I personally wouldn’t have been comfortable of sharing meeting times and places in such a public area. Did your group use other social media platforms when planning meeting times?

I got to grips with the platform relatively quickly after a spending time looking at information on how to use the Wiki formatting, however I understand why the site can be confusing and challenging for first time users. How easy did you find the platform to use throughout the course?

Did you find that you were able to express yourself better online in your group than you did in person? Personally, I found our face-to-face meetings easier to explain and discuss ideas as I prefer to speak my ideas through than type. However, some people may experience the ‘online disinhibition effect’ when using Wikibooks, which Suler describes as a concept where people are able to “loosen up” and “express themselves” more so in an online environmentally than they do in a face-to-face scenario.

Lastly, do you think you will continue to use Wikibooks outside of this module? Overall, a concise and informative reflection of your use of Wikibooks – best of luck on your results! Vw428 (discuss • contribs) 20:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: DISCUSSION, ENGAGEMENT, CONTRIBS

 * Engagement on discussion pages of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for contribs. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level (although it should be noted that the quality of your work is at this level, the descriptor is not indicative of the consistency of contributions made to the group discussion pages):
 * Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory contributions may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse) and will have little justification for ideas offered on Discussion Pages. The wiki markup formatting will need some work.

Students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.


 * You clearly have not done this – there is only engagement on the discussion page registered for 12th and 13th March.

Evidence from contribs to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of editorial activity as evidenced through ‘contribs’). These are primarily considered for quality rather than quantity, but as a broad guideline: o	Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial” o	Items on a contribs list that are <1000 characters are important, and are considered in the round when evaluating contribs as a whole because of their aggregate value


 * Only two items on your contribs list that constitute a “substantial” contribution

•	Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages o	Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration o	Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay o	Evidence of peer-review of others’ work


 * You have made mention of theorists, as well as group working, application of that work to the essay theme, and an account of some offline discussion

•	Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of Discussion Pages o	Clear delegation of tasks o	Clearly labelled sections and subsections o	Contributions are all signed


 * You have made mention of the question, how it has been formulated, and developed.

•	Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated.


 * Impossible to judge this because you only made 5 contribs in total to the discussion page

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:59, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall.

Good. Among other things, good entries will make a clear point in a clear way. They will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. They will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). They may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and are likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band, so there’s clearly room for improvement here. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and (especially for this, perhaps, the Understanding) criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you had made more use of the discussion pages, you would have become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this in turn may have made a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good. Remember that the comments are "worth" as much as posts themselves. The reason for this is not only to help encourage discussion (a key element of wiki collaboration!) but also to get you to reflect upon your own work. This can all, of course be used to fuel ideas that might form part of your project work. I like that you have framed some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion even if they weren’t always successful in achieving response (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and also that you are beginning to discuss in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are).

General:
 * Reading and research: Fairly good.


 * Argument and analysis: Some evidence of these elements in your posts in general. I would have liked to have seen a bit more critical engagement in your annotated bibliography entry, but your final piece was really quite good in this respect.


 * Presentation: Could have done more with presentation.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 10:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)