User talk:Chrisalwayson

Wiki Exercise

Online visibility has become a burden for so many. Revealing where you are and what you are doing has started to lose appeal to many social media users. I believe that visibility has become something many dislike, however there are people who live off of this. On Instagram and Facebook as well as twitter and many more, your visibility could make you money. Being Instagram famous or having many followers means that your visibility has to be completely transparent. Your followers want to see what you are doing.

Companies such as Facebook, WhatsApp and Skype, present your visibility to others. They also show the time that an individual has spent offline, away from their social media, for example Facebook shows the time spent off Facebook in minutes. WhatsApp has taken over this method after Facebook bought it.

However, one of the newest and most invasive social media is snapchat. Snapchat has managed to create a social media network that can be used as a tracking device. If the user has the location turned on, their phones can be located. This, of course, is a double sided blade. Having your location on, can help you find a phone that has been lost or stolen. But it can reveal information of you that is private. In addition Snapchat has reached a point where one could argue that privacy conditions have been breached. The new location system doesn’t just show the whereabouts of an individual, but also shows what exactly they are doing. From driving in a car to listening to music or sleeping, the avatars show what the user is doing. I have turned off this possibility by changing my privacy setting and going into so called “ghost mode”; this hides you avatar and makes you invisible. When it comes to visibility I like to keep myself reserved. On Facebook I keep my setting on private and don’t have my full name presented. Furthermore I don’t allow any outsiders to look through my images as I have privatised them. To top it all off I have extensively read the privacy settings and customised them to keep me visible, only to selected people. Regarding WhatsApp, I have turned off the two ticks from going blue, which prevents the others from seeing if I have read their message.

Visibility becomes difficult to block on social media. In many cases though, the visibility is what makes the app work. Dating apps have to be as visible as possible. However they only reveal the information you provide them with. On the other hand Facebook and WhatsApp save every text typed and every photo sent. WhatsApp has the right to use any of your pictures for advertising. This really does bring up the question, if we really are in control of our own privacy and our own visibility. One could argue that we choose to accept their terms and conditions, however in a developing world where communication has become faster than ever it is difficult to deny this messaging app. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Always on culture annotated bibliography
Creeber, G., & Martin, R. (2008). Digital cultures. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill International UK Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.stir.eblib.com/patron/ FullRecord.aspx?p=420772 "Doing the Internet" In this chapter Creeber and Martin discuss the evolution, development and creation of the 21st century online presence, and how the web culture has been molded. The authors analyze informations from previous studies and authors, like: Life on the Screen by Sherry Turkle or The Virtual Community by Howard Rheingold. Their research focuses on the analysis of how our online culture was created and what means caused our culture to reach this point. This article is useful to my research topic as is focuses on always on culture and it provided historical insight into the development of being always on. The main limitation is that it focuses mostly on historical aspects and relates less to the present situation. In this chapter they reveal in depth information on the development of technology 20 years ago and the effect it might have on the upcoming generation. This chapter would help form the basis of our research, as it discusses the historical context of an always on culture and help elaborate and give insight into the development of technology.

Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 22:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

This annotated bibliography is useful in reference to your collaborative essay topic 'always on culture.' However as you've state the source is from 2008 and is quite old now. Additionally the source has a lot of historical content although I think this will be useful in comparing how the 'always on culture' had changed throughout time. #Rachelmm0037 (discuss • contribs) 17:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Rachelmm0037! Thank you for your comment. You are absolutely right is saying that this source could be used for my collaborative essay. It covers interesting aspects of the development of technology and where it all started. Yeah sadly the source is rather old and might be out of date in regards to modern technology and communication. However it could show an older perspective on how an Always on Culture was seen as back in the day. I was thinking of perhaps reading over the sounrce/ chapter again an picking out important bullet points that I could use and perhaps see if I can compare them with a more modern perspective. Might create new ideas that could help elaborate how and always on culture has changed and effected the upcoming generation of children. Just as a side tip Racheel0037 and do not get me wrong because I have done it too, but i would place a time stamp on comments. Just to help you and me out a little more. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 12:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

This annotated bibliography is a good read. Development of technology is always something that can interest not just media students but the general public as well. I would be interested to see if Creeber and Martin have written more studies on technology today as this would show further development of an 'Always on' culture. The use of other research helps to emphasise their point and a new study by them would bring this research forward and a more worthwhile read in today's society.


 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 10:27, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Amw00036 thank you for your comment. It is an interesting read and it allows for insight in a historical context of an Always on Culture and how it developed. I would recommend you using this resource perhaps for further information or even elaboration and evaluation on your conclusion in the collaborative essay. It goes into detail regarding the first means of communication that would count as being online and it also compares and slowly builds up the information regarding development of technology. I would recommend the read however, I do not know if the full essay could be based of this resource as It generally only covers a smaller part of the always on culture. You could perhaps use it as a side reference to some statistical numbers and facts that are presented in the book. I agree that you should defiantly cross reference information. As you did mention Creeber and Martin could be a good comparison and perhaps also more contemporary as my source is from 2008 and might be a little outdated when it comes to the modernity of the information. But i can see those sources being used and referred to, to create a deeper insight and knowledge of the topic. This would also demonstrate that you have done further reading which most likely would reflect in you writing. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 11:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris thanks for replying! I didn't think about using their information to refer to facts from more up to date sources. Media is ever changing but the basic fundamentals of it; like lack of privacy, social context and economic use will just be growing and not changing. Always on Culture will be difficult to keep modern as it is about the present so this information, although possibly outdated, did describe an 'always on' culture just at an earlier date which could also be an interesting angle to go from.
 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 10:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris i'm glad I could be of help! Yes I could see this chapter fitting into your essay as a comparative piece, especially as you've stated it could be held against the older technologies in comparison with now and the varying effects they've had. Additionally as to how the evolution of technology has created the 'always on' culture. Also your strategy of 'bullet pointing' key points is an effective tactic in building an argument, therefore I will be stealing this approach when writing my own collaborative essay. Also apologies for not putting a time stamp, I have done so now thank you for the reminder.
 * 1) Rachelmm0037 (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Rachel!! Im always glad to help out. Your words have given me inspiration as well because I first only saw this perspective as something I might use, as it doesn't cover my category of economy and the always on culture. However I figured that history is more or less universal and that the economy had to start somewhere as well. So I think the historical aspect can be further elaborated on however, in an economic perspective. It allows for a new idea to emerge, the first company that started using messaging apps to improve communication at their firm. It can also conclude if this method has really been that effective or if there is a way of improvement. Im also happy that I could help in finding a new way of studying/ evaluating different sources. In my journalism course one uses triangulation to find the validity of a source, so I thought why not use it as a way to find more accurate information on the topic of Always on Culture. Its very handy to use and it gives a clear oversight and insight into the two or more sources that you are comparing. I truly enjoy our conversations as you have revealed and opened a new thought to me that I will 100% use in my collaborative essay. Oh yeah and the time stamp hahah I just want all of us to do well and succeed in Digital culture and media. Its the only way one can know when you posted anything. Glad you took the time to go back and fix it. Its tedious but worth so much more when done right. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 00:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

This article seems like an important read for those who are focusing on the always-on culture. You mention how the article talks in depth about the development of technology going back 20 years. I think its important to learn about the history and the effects it may have on our generation. As technology keeps developing, we should educate ourselves about the possible implications it may have on our generation and future generations. Celine Hunt (discuss • contribs) 15:47, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Celine!! Thank you for your comment appreciate it. I agree with you to look at the past to see what the future could bring. The development has been exponential over the years and has brought some positive aspects and negative as well. I personally think that the upcoming generation doesn`t really have any other choice but to follow this always on culture blindly. Firstly because they are raised into this, which makes it a norm for them and secondly, to keep up to date and not being left behind has become a vital aspect in this world. Old cant keep up with the new and exciting. It also just shows that our world is at a point where we are one invention away from becoming so called cyborgs where we rely so much on technology and being online that it becomes one with us. But an always on culture has devastating downfalls to young and old. For the young they seem to think that posting private information and giving the public insight into their thoughts and ideas is a good thing. For the old the level of technology might overtake them and create a world where that technology cant be used by people who don`t have insight into it. A sad idea is that we might become the next generation that doesnt understand moder technology as we get older. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 14:35, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello!! Much like the other above commenters, I think that you have done an excellent job with your annotated bibliography, and I find the concept of exploring the historical context of "always on" culture fascinating. I often find that exploring the history of a concept is a good way of introducing yourself to the topic and more fully understanding it, so I think finding a book that discusses the history of "always on" culture to be a good call for your research topic. Since the book chapter was written in 2008, I wonder how much the chapter would have evolved, if this chapter on the concept of "always on" culture was rewritten today, and what the author thinks of the rapid development and expansion of "always on" culture. Overall, you made a very strong selection for your annotated bibliography, and I wish you and your group all the best in continuing your research! Mom00107 (discuss • contribs) 22:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words i hope your group is doing well with their project and that all is well with you! Your absolutely right about everything you have said. Seeing the historical aspect of a topic gives u further immersion into it. Earlier in our film course we looked at film history which helped my understanding an appreciate that we have come so far since those days. Its truly inspiring and amazing to see that we have reached this point and now we are further developing. As to the history of an always on culture is a truly interesting read. It gives perspectives towards the topic that I didnt necessarily think of right off the bat. I would be curious how the authors would review their writing from 2008 and perhaps how they would write it now a decade later. I`m intrigued by the idea of development in technology and how we are becoming more and more dependent. Sadly this is inevitable but i see it as a positive thing too because development in technology doesnt only bring personal improvement but can bring medical discoveries and industrial discoveries. Im just waiting for space travel to happen on a commercial basis. I know i might not be alive then, but one can always dream. Thank you for the comment by the way :) Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 15:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

No problem! I agree, our generation and the younger generation has grown up with these advancements and will continue the always-on culture. In particular, my younger sister is so obsessed with technology. Not only is it crazy but it is so unhealthy to see how much we rather spend time with our devices than with each other. I truly believe that people can be addicted to technology. Personally, I try to balance how much time I spend on social media. Celine Hunt (discuss • contribs) 17:29, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I understand that as I am the younger brother I notice that myself. I'm on my phone quite frequently. I'll be honest I don't think I excessively use tech no log but I remember when I was younger there wamt a day I didn't go outside or a day I didn't read. I'm curious if it will continue like this or there will be cleansing courses or people will notice everything around them. Here's hoping!! I do sometimes wish I could through it all away but with my course being journalism and all its ideal to get updates to news and information. But I'm positive there will be a solition soon to come. Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 19:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris! The article you have chosen to write about is certainly an interesting one. Media is an ever evolving platform. Technology changes so quickly that it can sometimes be hard for society to catch up with is current development. Therefore, I agree with you, in the fact that if the content is too outdated it is no longer as relevant to you're own research, but interesting as a backbone to the history nonetheless. Im interested to see what your own research hold regarding always on culture.

Jademanning (discuss • contribs) 21:30, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Reflective wiki post
For me personally wikibooks is a version of Wikipedia which is more collaborative and group orientated. For this module we had our separate group under which we dropped our time stamps, however every individual had their own page and own personalised information. I learned that Wikipedia has more than one platform. I wasn’t aware of this feature until I started this course. Wikibooks is a way to post information for specific people who know your username. When regarding visibility I would say perhaps it’s not as open as Wikipedia itself but more confined and group orientated. People can see your information that you post however this requires them to know your username. This gives random users limitations in finding out about the persons posting and it also give the person posting a better idea of who is looking at his/her posts. Regarding collaborative research it can be compared to having one file that all users in that group can post update or edit in. Everything is saved and it allows for transparency and shows new edits and update by sending the users emails. Furthermore it doesn’t necessarily mean that the group need to find a time where all can meet. It provides individuals a chance to be more independent and flexible. We as a group did meet up frequently, but that was because we were fortunate and had similar free spaces between our studies. But we also collaborated using a group-chat. In addition this method also gave us the chance to help learn and understand wikibooks as a group. Wikibooks brings together people who have similar interests by adding them into a cohort which covers similar topics and ideas. It also is a good source for inspiration and new perspectives. Reading others posts and commenting and receiving comments back gives a more engaging perspective. It`s also interesting to see what people think of your own projects and annotated bibliographies. The feedback is a good source of help as the other users see things that you perhaps didn’t notice or think of.

The digital commons between all the users, in this case my fellow class members, have been very positive and have become a source for information. Furthermore it has become a source for any readings that are relevant to our topics that we have studied. Some of the annotated bibliographies have been used in my collaborative essay because it covered my part of an always on culture. By creating your own wikibook it feels like I have added important information towards a group and have provided my online contribution. It makes me feel like I have done something independently that was done in my own time and effort for an accepting group. Wikibooks has also provided new methods of posting in a group that I wasn’t aware of. It opened a new way of research for me and also a new way to post useful and adequate information. I feel that Wikibooks has made me want to post and provide information to help out others.

Chrisalwayson (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris!

If I have to be completely honest, I did not know any features of Wikipedia or Wikibooks. I mean I used them on daily basis, but just to retrieve information. But I always wondered who wrote the articles, yet alone who had the amount of free time to do so. I am more than happy that people contribute to the online community by editing or adding to these pages topics to these pages. Furthermore, I only knew about Wikipedia, therefore, I would say the course expanded my knowledge in many different ways. Yes, you are right; Wikibooks is clearly a way to post information for a certain group of people who are aware of your presence on the page and know your username. But if feel like nowadays these types of private information cannot stay private for long no matter how much we want it. Sooner or later it will be discovered by some random web surfer. However, I am sure none of our classmates posted any sensitive information, therefore its discovery would not bother anyone. Altough it is hard to find our pages, I do think it would be beneficial and interesting if students from other universities were able to find it. This way we could help each other even more and share information amongst ourselves. I am curios what would they say about our project and our work we have done so far. Hopefully, future class might be able to do a collaborative research with a different University.

As for your experience with the collaborative research, I must say you were incredibly thorough regarding the topic. It is true that thanks to the privacy setting of the books it is sometimes hard to find certain individuals, but the collaborative project made it somehow easier. People tend to forget things, especially when they are new or entirely differs from previous experience. I had to be constantly reminded to submit coursework and get in contact with my group. I am going to be honest with, even though I am probably older than most of my classmates, I still feel like in need motivation and it was not different with this project either. After a while, I did get in contact with them and thankfully finished the group project, but I feel like being independent in a group project did not help us to get a good grade. Sometimes you are the only one who actually works on the project and certain individuals just are not reliable enough to get the job done. (This is not a reference to my group! Different module).

Regarding the group work I feel like the recent events were not helpful at all. A few students just vanished without leaving a single trace behind. This might have caused problems in a few group, but as I read through your writing, I am sure this did not happen to you. I am glad that your work went smoothly.

Above all, I mostly agree with all your ideas and I am glad you have a positive experience with Wikipedia. I do think we did what we could, and we gained transferable experience. Who knows? We might need this in 3rd or 4th year or even in the distant future as an employee. Thank you for sharing your experience.

Mark Markpopradi (discuss • contribs) 18:17, 12 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:
 * Fail. Contributions of this standard do not address the assignment requirements. They offer little to no engagement with the concerns of the module. They are poorly written. Entries of this grade may have been subject to admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement. The wiki markup formatting will be more or less non-existent.

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


 * None. See below.

•	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


 * None on the discussion pages, although what has clawed back a few marks for you is the fact that you were commenting on User Discussion pages and suggesting content for the collaborative essay. This has probably saved you from failure overall.

•	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


 * See above comment.

•	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


 * None.

•	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.


 * You gave a decent account of yourself where evidence shows..

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
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.


 * Although this work is at the lower end of this grade band, there’s clearly room for improvement here, and the quality of work (especially the engagement with other users) shows real potential for future projects. 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.


 * Additionally, 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 become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would have made a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good, and especially so where you have gone the extra mile in response to the wiki #3 exercise. I like that you have framed some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about, and although not always successful, this shows that you are thinking through the platform’s potential).) I also note that you have engaged in discussion most often 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: There is some evidence of this.


 * Argument and analysis: some evidence of this in the various pieces of work submitted.


 * Presentation: This could have been improved through greater use of wiki markup (see above comment).

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:01, 9 May 2018 (UTC)