User talk:Jfm00011

On this discussion page, I will be posting the various exercises for the Digital Media module.

Online Visibility
Despite having various accounts on several different social media platforms, I am not incredibly visible online. Since I only got Facebook a few years ago when I first moved away to university as a way of keeping in touch with my friends, I have always been cautious about what people can and cannot see on my account. My privacy settings ensure that no one but my friends can see any of my posts, photos, other friends, or my location. I can even make sure that posts I am tagged in do not appear on timelines of people I am not friends with. I have these settings for peace of mind more than anything else, and to keep just anyone from seeing my private life. However, to do this I had to actively decide that I wanted these settings, and then had to navigate the privacy settings to enforce them.

Although I have these settings on my Facebook profile, they are not the same for all my social media accounts. For example, although I can choose to have a private Twitter or Instagram account, I keep them public and free for anyone to see. This is a conscious decision, as I do not share anything personal on those accounts that I would be uncomfortable with other people seeing. There are online platforms that people will use mainly to communicate with their friends, and so these security settings might not seem as important as no one else will be seeing this information. For example, Snapchat has a feature which literally allows you to see on a map where your friends are at that time. Almost all social media and online platforms will have a variation of these security settings, so you can choose how visible you want to be online. However, generally the default is an open account, and you have to seek out these privatisation settings yourself.

The amount of information you share online can have an effect on your social life and how you interact with your friends. We are constantly checking our phones for updates, never truly disconnecting for the online world, as danah boyd suggests. Always On culture has created mini societies, networks of people online sharing their lives with groups of people that can vary depending on how visible you want to be.

Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 10:15, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments:
Hi, Jessica! What an interesting post about Online Visibility, especially in regards to social media sites. I find it interesting that you brought up having to actively find the settings within your Facebook account that would allow you to have your profile on private- isn't it just interesting that Facebook would assume that everybody wanted their private life and information out there for all to see? I never thought much in depth about that choice Facebook would have consciously made. It really does remind you of the sites true motives: that they are a business first and a social media site second.

I also agree that while we are posting for our friends to see us we are also, as a result, on our phones more often as we need to keep up to date with /our/ other friends. So we're posting to stay connected but the 'always-on culture' as a resulting has us disconnecting from those around us.

Wow. That was a revelation.

Anyway, I enjoyed reading your post very much! I hope you are finding your way through the collaborative essay ok! I cannot wait until Thursday when I can finally stop working on it and then we have no more deadlines for this course until April!

Digitalmediafiend (discuss • contribs) 22:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

This post is thought provoking, as it reminded me that we have to actually seek out our privacy, it is not something we are given we are given initially! I feel it would make more sense if all accounts were automatically secure and private, then you could reset them if you want a public profile! To me, this would be far safer. I also am not that visible online and prefer to only use Facebook for staying in touch with friends. I do like to keep an eye on my privacy settings and what I am tagged in. I personally do not like the Snapchat update that allows others to see your location, I find it invasive and unnecessary, yet I have not actually stopped myself from being visible through my settings! I agree that the Always on Culture is linked to this subject. Despite trying to maintain my privacy, I am constantly on social media and contributing to this culture. I also see your point that levels of engagement vary depending on an individual's visibility. Dcg00003 (discuss • contribs) 16:00, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading this post as it shows the other side of being online as many people are massively visible. I found it interesting reading about your personal reasons for choosing to have your Facebook private, I respect that you only got Facebook a while ago rather than at a young age like most which allowed for you to have a more mature outlook on privacy etc. I relate to your openness with Twitter as I also have my account open due to not posting personal content on there. I have my Snapchat map available for people to see, purely because I only communicate with people that I know on that specific platform as therefore do not feel the need to hide it. Always On culture is directly related to this topic which you made clear with a concise point and I can relate to your point as I am someone who is constantly online and participating in this. Overall, this is an interesting and insightful post that I enjoyed reading, especially as I can relate to it.

Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 18:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

This was an interesting, well-written and concise piece. I am glad to know I'm not the only latecomer to Facebook; purely because my parents didn't like the idea of it and I'm quite glad I joined when I was older because my friends tended to overshare when they were younger, which is now quite embarrassing for them.I also have strict privacy settings on mine- which definitely gives peace of mind like you suggest! I think your points about 'Always-on' culture are really thought provoking. It definitely does change the way we communicate and connect with out friends, a lot of communication with my friendship groups happens online and even when we're together, we're 'always-on' as we are sharing pictures on Snapchat and Instagram to show that we're together. I like the idea of it creating 'mini-societies' too, as we control the viewership of our online content.

Jeneds (discuss • contribs) 11:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography
Kennedy H. (2016) Social Media Data Mining Becomes Ordinary. In: Post, Mine, Repeat. Palgrave Macmillan, London

In the first chapter of her book, Post, Mine, Repeat, Kennedy introduces the argument that social media data mining has become ordinary practice performed not only by large organisations and governments, but also by smaller actors such as local councils, museums, and charities. With this is mind, Kennedy stresses the importance of differentiating between the types of data mining by considering their purpose, the consequences they have, and the institutional and organisational contexts in which they take place. She aims to add to the pre-existing debate about social media data mining, tackling the criticisms of data mining, and confronting whether this data mining can have a positive effect for both people and organisations when “ordinary” actors are involved. The research Kennedy conducted into this subject included collaborative research and interviews with workers in social media data mining, and appears to be based in the UK. This book chapter proves useful to my collaborative essay on Always-On culture as it gives insight to what happens with this information that so many people put online. Social media data mining shows how people’s online habits, personal profiles, shopping transactions, and so many other factors influence organisations. By participating in always-on culture people give an incredible amount of information about themselves that can be used in so many ways. Although this chapter will not be the foundation of my research into always-on culture, it contains a lot of information on what can be achieved due to constant connectivity in relation to how businesses and organisations benefit from it. Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments:
Hey, I thought your annotated bibliography was an insightful read, as it is both informative and appears like a good summary of the article. Although, I have not read this particular article I think it seems very topically to multiple areas we have previously looked at throughout the semester. The argument itself is highly thought-provoking, as it is something I have not considered before, in terms of what and who actually collects the information from online usage. This argument relates well to dinah boyd’s always-on culture, as the more someone is online the more information there is to collect and the more a company or government would be able to create an image of the person, the thought of which I find disconcerting. Overall, I found this annotated bibliography very enlightening both on it’s own and in relation to the collaborating essay. Kab00094 (discuss • contribs) 12:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your comment! I'm glad you found my annotated bibliography helpful. I definitely recommend reading the chapter or even more of the book if you are interested in the subject, it brings up debates that I would not have previously thought about concerning the subject. I agree that the idea of companies and governments being able to access this personal information is disconcerting, and if more people took this into account they would perhaps be more careful about what they share online. However, it is interesting to consider the other side of this, that perhaps people like that adverts and other things are becoming more tailored to them. Have you ever seen an ad that you know is being shown to you because of something you said online, but appreciated it nonetheless? Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 10:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I definitely will read this chapter at some point. I find the idea of how much people know about what happens to their information after it is online very interested, as most of the people I know have only ever read the terms and conditions of online accounts for classes similar to the one we do. I understand that from the other view point having tailored adverts to the stuff that interests you can have positives, for instances, if you are looking for something and then you get a advert for a website that has that produced for a cheaper price. Personally, at the current moment most of the adverts I see online are to do with properties in Stirling, which is both useful and infuriating, as the properties in the adverts are more expensive than I can afford. Kab00094 (discuss • contribs) 12:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I also did my annotated bibliography on this chapter and found it interesting to read how you interpreted it. Data mining is a very serious topic that I feel is 100% brushed under the rug with users believing that it's not as big of a deal as it quite clearly, as seen in this chapter, is. Companies are literally created to collect our information and to work with it and it's an uncomfortable thought. I like how you have connected this with your collab essay and I look forward to seeing and reading more about it. Always On Culture directly relates to this through the ability to collect so much information due to everything and everyone being online 24/7 and it's easy to understand the direct correlation. With the online world continuing to grow at a rapid pace, it only begs the question of if this will ever stop or will data mining eventually get totally out of control? Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 23:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

It's really helpful to hear how you took in the chapter. Social media data mining is definitely something we should factor into our collaborative essay, as it opens up a whole new debate on Always On culture. We need to consider the effect putting all this personal information online has. If people were more aware of the fact that companies can so easily access this personal information we share, I feel like we would be more careful about what we post. It also brings up the question of what is ethically right. Should companies be allowed to so easily access this information, or should social media sites have stricter privacy policies? You pose an interesting question at the end of your comment, as to whether social media data mining will get out of control, and I feel like if it continues as it is going now, it might. We see in science fiction films how advertising becomes incredibly specific and catered to everyone, and it seems like we are not far off that now. Would you be comfortable with something like this happening? Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 10:33, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I will make sure to note down that we should include social media data mining within our essay, I'm sure the other members would agree. Yes, I agree that I think people would be far more conscious of what they put online if they knew the extent that companies go to in order to collect information.I think social media sites should indeed have stricter security policies and maybe sharing of information should be an opt in/out agreement rather than unwillingly and unknowingly. You're right about the science fiction films becoming scarily reflective of reality, Black Mirror is an exceptional example of this. I don't think I would be entirely comfortable with something like this happening as generic advertising is something that is easier to deal with, I feel that direct, totally personalised advertising is a step to far and encroaching on personal space (of sorts). Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

Hey Jessica! How are things coming on with your collab essay? Hope you're working your way through the Wiki page. How are you finding the module? Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey, the collab essay seems to be more or less finished, it was really interesting to look into Connectivity and the huge impact it has had on society. The module is definitely challenging, it takes a while to get used to the Wiki platform. Hope you are handling the workload well, and good luck with the final essay. Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 20:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I can imagine, we are all so unconsciously addicted to being part of the network that it's something you don't really realise until you think about it. I was looking into general definitions so it was interesting to learn about what each aspect of our collaborative essay was and how they all integrate and what each one was. Wiki is absolutely a difficult platform to work with, especially with limited guidance but think I've manged to get the hang of it. Thank you, the essay is finished now thankfully. Nice to get that weight off our shoulders. Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Collaborative Essay Reflective Account
The Wikibooks platform allows users to upload and share information that on any given subject. Any user can edit and add to this content, making the platform collaborative in nature, and a great tool for discussion and building knowledge. For the collaborative essay, in which our group tackled Always-On culture, we were able to have discussions and provide each other with information and thoughts on our topic on our group discussion page. Being able to communicate in this way was a huge help, as we did not have to rely on everyone being able to meet up at the same time multiple times a week, or only using chats where information can be quickly lost if everyone talks at once.

It is no one persons job to create these pages, rather the role of many, which enhances the community aspect that Wikibooks has created in this online space. It is not only people simply adding information to the pile, but rather people helping other to reach their goal and create something useful. As I found during the collaborative essay, this can be by explaining something someone might not fully understand, helping find the best way to structure or phrase something, or even as simple as sharing a link that others might check out for information. This communal nature of Wikibooks is how it creates such a successful online commons, as it is on everyone to add to this community, and there is no leader or one person in charge that makes the decisions.

The Wikibooks platform has a lot of emphasis on visibility, as you can see how much a user has commented by clicking on the contributions tab. It is also the norm that a user would sign off whatever comment or edit they made allowing everyone to see who made what changes. These features came in useful when researching and writing our collaborative essay, as someone could add to the discussion and if you found what they had said was useful or wanted to follow them up on it, you would know who to write to. In addition to this, it would also be the case that other groups would add comments on our discussion page, maybe giving suggestions or simply words of encouragement. The ability to see which user this was from and therefore find their group discussion page to offer similar help was a great feature. It encouraged community even outside our set groups.

The interactions our group had on our discussion page were incredibly useful, especially when it came to sharing knowledge about the subject. It meant only having to meet maybe once a week in person to make sure everyone was on the right tracks, as it was easy any information or concerns to the discussion online. The only time where discussion on Wikibooks was perhaps not as useful was arranging when we could all meet. This was because it is easier to figure these things out when you know people are going to reply quickly, like in a messenger chat. Overall the Wikibooks assignment helped us to better understand the platform, and get an idea of how useful it can be for not only accessing information, but adding to this knowledge yourself. Jfm00011 (discuss • contribs) 08:33, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Reponse

Hi there, your post was very interesting to read and provided an in depth account of your experience with using Wikibooks. I like and wholly agree with your comments on how Wikibooks represents a community environment in the sense of everyone helping each other and contributing to each others’ work. I also found this a highly useful feature during the collaborative essay as it made it easier to keep track of what everyone was doing and achieving the ultimate goal of the group. I was highly useful when other members of the group helped out and provided any useful information that they had found, enhancing that community feel that you mentioned. Do you feel that you enjoyed the community feel of the platform, or would you have preferred to carry out your own work of your own accord?

I feel like we have similar views on the aspect of visibility in respect of Wikibooks. I found that you could not possibly stay invisible on Wikibooks as you cannot post without signing off and showing that it was you who posted as this would complicate matters for other users who may not know who was contributing to the page. I liked seeing who was posting on what page and it allowed to see what groups were interacting with each other and to keep track, did you find this too? It was helpful also to see what members were helping me out as this meant I knew who to refer to if I had any more questions concerning the topic that they were helping on.

It was also a good way to stay up-to-date with each member of the group instantly as you have mentioned when you said how there was only the need to meet up once or twice a week as we all communicated and kept track of where we were all at through Wikibooks. I personally feel like this was one of the most useful features, do you agree with this? I also feel the same that it is easier to do simpler discussions such as organizing where to meet on other social media platforms and in regards to this, Wikibooks is not so useful, as you have discussed.

You have referred to Always-On culture and the fact that this is what your collaborative essay was on. My groups essay was also on this and I thought I would suggest the relation between Always-On culture and Wikibooks. I would be interested to know if you agree with me. As you likely know, Always-On culture refers to being constantly online and I feel like this applied to Wikibooks in the sense that you need to be actively connected and online in order to stay up-to-date with any contributions and discussions that are taking place as they are easy to miss if you are not, therefore this could be argued as another online platform that demands for us to be constantly connected to the network? Through Wikibooks I was a lot more active online due to wanting to stay on top of the essay discussions and to provide any necessary contributions.

Overall, I found your entry highly thought-provoking and feel that we share a similar opinion concerning the use of Wikibooks and our own experiences of it. Kgr00003 (discuss • contribs) 21:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I found your piece of the reflective account extremely interesting to read, and there are a lot of points that I agree with you on.

I feel that wikibooks has definitely made the communication aspect of the essay a lot better in that everyone can see what the others are doing and find it a good way to share information in an organised manner. The community aspect of wikibooks is extremely useful and it helps people communicate and expand their ideas, whilst helping or recieving help on things they may not fully understand or need another perspective from.

The visibility aspect is helpful, extremely with the digital media module as it allows people to keep up to date as well as see how little or how much they have contributed to a discussion. I also feel that it will make marking and seeing what an individual has done for the module themselves, as well as see how much work that has been out into discussions and contributions Rej00012 (discuss • contribs) 10:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC) Rej00012 (discuss • contribs) 10:00, 16 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:
 * 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.


 * This was clearly not the case here – only 5 days registered as having logged a contrib. However, when you did engage, these were significant entries in terms of moving the project forward, and an appropriate level of engagement is in evidence.

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


 * Several contribs registered as being under 1000 characters, and a couple that could be regarded as “considerable” contribution to the project.

•	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


 * This was the strongest element of your contribution. You clearly pushed your arguments and encouraged others to comment/respond, helped others in their work, and there’s evidence of reading, application and discussion of ideas.

•	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 were clearly collaborating on the discussion page. Some of the organisation here is a little haphazard, but overall the discussion is easy to follow. You have also signed where necessary, so it’s easy to see where your contribs fit into the overall discussion.

•	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 conducted yourself well. Good work!

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:09, 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.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are especially good. 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 also that you have engaged in discussion 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: evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material. Some excellent work in this regard.


 * Argument and analysis: well-articulated and well-supported argument; evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position); evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections); evidence of independent critical ability. Again, showing some real potential and engagement.


 * Presentation: good use of wiki markup and organisational skills, though again, could have been improved upon.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 10:45, 9 May 2018 (UTC)