User talk:Braydencoulman

This is my Wikibooks user discussion page and will be used as part of my Wikibooks project. Braydencoulman (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Visibilty and Online Footprint
Surprisingly, until being asked this question for this assignment I hadn't considered my visibility online very much before. However, i believe my visibility online is a safe amount and don't find many problems with how I've represented myself online.

Although technological determinism and theorist Marshall McLuhan states that ‘new media changes everything’ and that technology is ubiquitous, cultural determinism seems to remain important when considering my online identity. Cultural determinism is the belief that media can only take effect through already present social processes and structures and explains the pressure of having to have an online identity in today's society. This can be reflected in the creation of my Facebook profile as it was actually my friends who made it for me. In 2014, my last year of high school, my friends created my Facebook profile for me as they thought I had gone long enough without one. Therefore, I wasn't motivated by the technology to join Facebook but it was society and my social situation that pushed me towards joining Facebook. As a result of my late arrival to Facebook I don't share the same experience as most other users my age, having not been ‘online’ throughout high school and having much less older content on my profile - making me unable to use other platforms such as Timehop.

Although being hesitant towards having an online presence at first, I now engage with many platforms and I am comfortable with sharing information. My personal information such as my birthday, where I live and where I study is available through my Facebook profile as well as some of my likes and interests. Also available are who my friends are but there is a limited view of my activities offline as I don't post much to Facebook and don't share everything online. My timeline mainly consists of others tagging me in pictures and events. Therefore although an impressionistic representation of myself is visible through what I do post, my activity offline means there is a false narrative of myself online as I don't focus on sharing everything I do and my friends contribute to this narrative outwith my control.

My profile is private so I limit this information to friends on Facebook. This also applies to Instagram which I don't use very much. Snapchat is a very private platform in which I send direct messages to my friends and overlook the fact that these private messages are often screenshotted and remain available online.

Overall, I would say my visibility online is reasonable and I am comfortable with what information is available. I mainly use social media for messaging rather than publicly sharing content but I still maintain an online identity through irregular posts and my friends tagging me in pictures.

Braydencoulman (discuss • contribs) 11:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC) Braydencoulman (discuss • contribs) 11:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload!
I often find myself distracted by the abundance of information available online and use it as a place to procrastinate. My web activity involves consuming rather than creating and when scrolling through the newsfeed on Facebook or spotting related videos on Youtube I will depart from my former activity. Although I may detract from my main objective online, I find it interesting and useful to explore related content I wouldn’t have looked at otherwise.

I use different platforms for retrieving different information. For example, I would most likely go to Youtube to get specific information such as movie and media news but for bigger world news I would seek out full articles on trusted news websites. My decision to switch is that I have my trusted sources for different types of information, moving between websites for different level of professionalism or entertainment. I rarely engage with the information through sharing or commenting publicly but will discuss with my friends through private messaging. My decision to not share everything I find interesting is because I would rather talk directly to my friends who i want to hear a response and opinion from.

For David Gauntlett, Web 2.0 was about “harnessing the collective abilities of the members of an online network, to make an especially powerful resource or service.” He also feared that if the mode of engagement was consumption over creativity then the web will have become an industrial tool and its positive potential will have been destroyed.

Many people will use the abundance of information as an easy way to find answers meaning people don't have to learn anything anymore and can just use this tool as an encyclopaedia for information needed at the time required. This collective intelligence also leads to collective behaviour as in my experience with social media I have noticed people tend to follow popular opinion. Many people won’t attempt to give original thought or new perspective but instead follow the crowd.

The Web may already be a tool in the hands of commerce, echoing Howard Rheingold’s thoughts in 2002:

“Are the populations of tomorrow going to be users, like the PC owners and website creators who turned technology to widespread innovation? Or will they be consumers, constrained from innovation and locked into the technology and business models of the most powerful entrenched interests?’.

I would argue that the majority of people consume rather than produce however I would also argue that is by choice. The means for creativity is available on the Internet with many platforms offering a workspace to play around with. Applications such as Youtube and Wikibooks allow users to add to the abundance of information. Braydencoulman (discuss • contribs) 21:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments
That's a great text and with very good references! I want to focus on 2 things you mention which I relate to as well: Like you I also find myself distracted by the plethora of information online. Most of the times I am tempted to follow a link or a theme and just look up as much relevant material as possible (Videos,Wikipedia, Social media). Although I do feel distracted by this process I feel like I am learning something which I can recall in a future discussion with someone. Your second point is about innovation on the Internet. With reference to Gauntlett you contextualized very clearly a tendency of our times where people imitate others and cease to create original material. We could look at the famous "selfie" as an example which spread from celebrities to everyday users although it was known as a technique for a long time. I also think we live in an era where mimicking is widespread in arts and film with a lot of artists making references to old films or remaking original movies. So as you said there is a struggle in the future whether we can create original material or recycle and consume the old stuff.Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Distraction from information overload
 * 2) Creativity on the Web

Wiki Exercise #4: Wikibook Project Reflective Account
‘An Internet of Everything?’ proved to show the collaborative power of the Internet, with every student in the module contributing towards the project.

David Gauntlett described Web 2.0 as ‘harnessing the collective abilities of the members of an online network, to make an especially powerful resource or service. [...] any collective activity which is enabled by people’s passions and becomes something greater than the sum of its parts.’ (2011: 7)

This quote accurately describes the process of creating the Wikibook ‘An Internet of Everything?’. In the chapter I worked on in the book – Private and Public Spheres in the digital age – there was an effort to offer the chance for people to work on whatever they wanted. By working together, we were able to build a wealth of content, through people tackling their own mini projects or multiple people working on the same topic. This allowed for a collaborative space and resulted in a mass of content – one unlikely to be achieved through individual work in the time we had.

Banaji and Buckingham in their chapter ‘Young People Online and Offline’ discuss young people, the Internet and civic participation. Assumptions that young people are politically apathetic and even irresponsible are contrasted with the result of our collaborative effort to successfully use the platform of Wikibooks and complete our project. Although the Internet may be considered a huge distraction for some, it does offer much more than entertainment and can be used as a tool such as the collaboration on this wikibook project. I believe this project showed young people have the potential to be civic activists, able to adapt to the digital world and have much to offer when deciding to use the internet for something useful.

We managed to show the strength of cognitive surplus by eventually organising and structuring our Wikibook into a functioning useful resource. Clay Shirky argues that the actions of groups add up to much more than the aggregated acts of individuals which proves to be true with a look at what we managed to achieve. However, Shirky also argues that the massive amounts of free-time in modern democratic societies spent on watching TV/media consumption generally could be harnessed and better spent on civic collaboration and creative endeavour. This is important to consider in the context of our project and the situation we as students are in. We are faced with the deterrent of failing our module by not contributing to the Wikibook, therefore this acts as our main incentive and are not powered by the design for generosity. Therefore, our Wikibook falls under communal value rather than civic value arguably - an effort to pass the module and make sure we complete what is expected of us. If the project were voluntary for example the same effort and results may not have been achieved.

In our offline approach to the project my group and I met several times to discuss the Wikibook and how we would be able to contribute to our chapter. We made sure everyone was comfortable and aware of our task at hand and managed to each work on our own sections which added to to the chapter. There was an effort made within our group to ensure there was a collaborative atmosphere, allowing others to help add to our section or offer ideas and input as we too would wish to give our input in other sections if we felt we had something interesting to add.

Overall, our Wikibook project could be considered a success as we managed to create something as an online community, acting on topics discussed throughout the module. The process of creating the wikibook may have been stressful but we were able to overcome the obstacles that we encountered and make use of the power of digital media.

Gauntlett, David (2011) Making is Connecting: The social meaning of creativity, from DIY and knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0. Cambridge: Polity

Braydencoulman (discuss • contribs) 22:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your point about that projects like this proves that young people are capable of being online civic activists and making decisions on the digital world and how it should be used. Perhaps Banaji and Buckingham focussed on the though there were stressful points of the process and times when communication was hard, in the end I feel that we created something very impressive. We certainly achieved a cognitive surplus as the project progressed, and it was very to see this as many users adapted a similar approach and, through trial and error, found which method worked best and stuck with it. I made a similar point in my post about how there was a tainted environment due to the pressure of having a deadline and of course, the chance of failing the module. I would recognise a 'collective intelligence' as one which is built by users who are in their leisure and are highly interested and knowledgeable about the topic, whereas our environment was much less relaxed. I do feel, however, that I have a much better understanding of the civic web and the process of creating content like the wikibook we have made. In the end it is good to say that we have learned something and gained some valuable skills which we can use for future online projects. 14buchananL (discuss • contribs) 17:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
It's good to see that you engaged with learning Wiki basics through the Wikipedia Adventure. You have a good range of contributionss and demonstrate collaboration within your group. There is clear evidence of tackling core themes through secondary reading and engaging with critical analysis (although please remember to fully reference everything, even in exercises.) Contributions to chapter demonstrated an understanding of various aspects of private and public spheres

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a good brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a good range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a good range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, clearly grounded on close familiarity with concepts and ideas encountered on the module
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material through evidence of close familiarity with a wide range of evidence
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument featuring appreciable depth of understanding
 * good level of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * good level of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of appreciable independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content to a variable standard (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Satisfactory engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Reflexive, creative and fairly well-managed use of discussion pages using deployment of somewhat limited judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)