Blog #5 - Free Write: "PostSecret"

After we learned about the role of OSSGs (online social support groups) in class, I started to pay closer attention to similar types of support groups online and the types of benefits they provide for users who choose to reach out through these websites. As I mention many times in my previous blogs, my communications class frequently focuses on the same topics that we discuss in our class – mainly because people communicate through media just as much as they communicate in real life. While flipping through my communications textbook, I found an example of a teenager, Tina Malament, who turned to an online social support group to recover from anorexia, depression, and suicidal thoughts when she was seventeen years old. This social support group was in the form of a bog, called PostSecret, where “strangers mail in postcards to be posted online every Sunday” and on the postcards, “people anonymously share their secrets – funny secrets, happy secrets, and secrets filled with anguish, remorse and pain” (Adler 2011:319). The popularity of this blog is reflected in the amount of people who visit it each day – the website gets nearly 1 million hits a week! Tina sent in a postcard in which she took a picture of herself standing in front of another postcard, which had a cupcake crossed out on it. She wrote on the postcard that she was going to win her battle against anorexia. I felt that this type of online social support group relies on three specific beneficial aspects discussed by Tanis – the need for anonymous disclosure, the need for text-based conversation, and the need to expand a person’s social network. Naturally, the nature of the blog allows participants to share their secrets completely anonymously. This way, they don’t have to feel embarrassment or guilt sharing personal and intimate information. Moreover, if they were to say something incriminating, they would be able to express themselves with more honesty and self-disclosure because they could not be held accountable for the information that they had disclosed. I also think that actually writing your secret on a postcard helps lessen a burden emotionally and psychologically. It’s the process of actually writing a problem out that has been found to positively affect mental and cognitive health (Pennebaker 1997; Pennebaker and Harber 1993; Pennebaker et al. 1997 in Robinson 2011). I think for Tina personally, writing out that she was going to win the battle against her anorexia somehow made the idea much more real and the goal a lot more attainable because it was tangibly expressed- on a postcard and not just said out loud or thought in her head. Finally, Tina reflects that the “idea that someone else might read [her postcard] and get something out of it [was] encouraging” (Adler 2011: 319). Even though she remained anonymous, Tina knew that other people from all around the world would be able to read the postcard and perhaps identify or support her through her difficult battle with anorexia, even if they did not know her personally. Overall, I just thought that Tina Malament’s recovery via PostSecret was a heartening illustration of the Internet healing people who can not attain a recovery in any other way. It’s one of those positive things about the Internet that I applaud – the way a community of unrelated people can work together to help each other.

Works Cited

Adler, Ronald B. and Proctor, Russell F. 2011. Looking Out, Looking In. United States:

            Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Robinson, Laura et al. 2011. Technology in Our Time. United States: Cognella. 

Blog #4 - Free Write: "Second Life"

          Taking this class has been particularly interesting for me because I am also taking a communications class right now and many of the topics we learn about deal with the same issues. Just last week, while we were learning about communication in relational dynamics, I stumbled on this article: “A Geek Love Story” by Jessica Bennett in our textbook. The article talks about an unlikely romantic relationship between a man and a woman who live thousands of miles apart but manage to stay connected through technology. The most fascinating aspect of their relationship, and as Bennett correctly points out, is that “at any other moment in history, it would’ve been impossible” (qtd. in Adler 274). Lillie lives in California, and Hawkins lives in England. They met four years ago on a virtual Internet game world called “Second Life,” a type of online social networking site that basically allows people to adopt virtual selves and live a virtual life on the Internet– buy houses, get married, walk their virtual dogs, even go to work. After their relationship blossomed, the two started to expand the scope of their relationship to involve other types of media connections – now, they even hookup headphones at night so that even while they sleep they can hear each other breathing!            

            This story ties in directly with our study of online social networking sites during Week 2, but the implications offered here focus on the more positive aspects of online social networking sites. While we focused mainly on the issue of privacy on these sites, and the many detriments that result from a lack of privacy, this story focuses on peoples’ willingness to abandon privacy – to share information with each other and to find like -minded individuals with whom friendships and relationships can be built. But it is necessary to retain caution and act responsibly and carefully on games such as “Second Life,” because people can and do encounter stalkers and other dangerous lurkers. This is just to say that there will always be positive and detrimental aspects to the Internet. However, I’d like to concentrate on the potential for “Second Life” to change people’s lives in a positive way. Lillie and Hawkins say, “they’ve shared things with each other that they’ve never told anyone else, and that it’s the deepest bond either has felt” (qtd. in Adler 274). The most interesting aspect of their relationship, and those of other people on similar sites, is that these people get to know each other through words and conversation first, without knowing what they actually look like. In most real life relationships, initial physical attraction is usually the main determining factor that influences whether or not two people will start to talk each other. Even though appearances are not as important as the relationship progresses, they are definitely important for initial attraction. But in “Second Life,” people take an entirely different approach towards starting a relationship. As Bennett affirms, “60 percent [of these online gamers] said they didn’t think their unions would’ve formed in real life because a physical attribute would’ve turned them off” (qtd. in Adler 274). Because people choose avatars to represent themselves, their actual physical appearance does not play a part in the forming and building of relationships. I realize that relationships such as the one formed between Lillie and Hawkins are far from perfect, and that sites such as “Second Life” can provide a safe base for stalkers, but on the whole I think that these types of online social networking sites have the potential to fulfill relationship needs and to draw the emphasis of relationships more on the personality of the person rather than on his or her physical attributes. Relationships such as these have long been criticized for being unnatural, cold, and second-grade compared to real life relationships. And I believe that if these relationships never progress to actual real life relationships then they do not satisfy actual relationship needs. But if these relationships begin in a different way than what we are accustomed to – if they begin based on criteria outside of physical attraction, I think they can build the relationship into a much stronger and longer lasting one.  

Works Cited

Adler, Ronald B., and Russell F. Proctor. Looking Out, Looking In. 13th ed. Belmont, CA:

                        Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.

Blog #3 - Technology and Social Interaction

       Technology influences peoples’ social interactions in different ways and to different extents. In other words, the spread of technology will affect individual people differently.

       While people tend to distinguish between “real” social interactions and “virtual” ones, the difference may not be as pronounced for certain people, largely depending on their needs and individual circumstances. For people who have difficulties maintaining real life relationships due to shyness, the Internet offers the chance to meet and converse with people without having to suffer. Online social support groups may offer the only viable social relationships for people who need advice, comfort, or just an empathetic audience. One recovering alcoholic testifies that his appeal for help on social networking sites led to “encouragement [that] kept coming: strangers leaving messages about their lives, encouraging me to keep going” and that “without that far-reaching network of people – friends and strangers alike – I wouldn’t be here today” (qtd. in Adler 19). For this recovering alcoholic, social media was a vital tool in his recovery. It was just this phenomenon of the Internet – its ability to connect hundreds of different people from all around the world – that saved this man. For him, virtual relationships were the only type of relationships that offered him moral support because he “couldn’t communicate with most people” (qtd. in Adler 19). His experience with virtual friendships is similar to many people who do not find their real life relationships as rewarding or their real life friends as understanding.

       Virtual worlds and gaming are psychological and emotional strongholds for people who suffer physically or psychologically in real life. Jason Rowe, affected by a medical condition called Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, which prevents him from using any of his muscles except his thumbs, found an outlet to his condition through virtual gaming. He says, “my character in the game is a lot different from what you see here in real life,” and that in virtual worlds, “everyone is on common ground” (qtd. in Adler 71). For Rowe, and people with similar conditions and experiences, online virtual worlds and games allow them to experience and participate in a world that is off-limits in real life.

       For most people whose lives are not marked by physical or psychological problems, technology offers a way of strengthening pre-existing real-life relationships – by providing diverse channels of communication. The spread of social networking sites, especially, offer channels through which people can connect with friends and family far away. Calling your parents on your cell phone while you are miles away in college, or sending your grandparents your love on Facebook from a different state, are just some of the ways technology serves to knit people closer together. I can’t imaging what life would be like without my cell phone – it would definitely weaken my relationships with friends and family because I would not be able to talk with them as often or as immediately as I am able to now. For me, technology has definitely improved my relationships with all of my friends and family. I can talk with friends from different countries and see their lives through photos as often as I want and without having to pay an exorbitant amount of money for long-distance phone calls. Likewise, I can call my parents whenever I want or need to, regardless of distance. For me, then, technology has provided countless channels through which I can pursue my relationships with other people.

       Because people are so different, and their needs are so varied, it is difficult to draw a line between real and “virtual” social relationships. Moreover, there is no clear need for the establishment of public spaces for people to talk and engage with one another because these public spheres already exist - people regularly meet up with each other to spend time together - whether its at home, at the mall, or at a restaurant. Rather, the Internet has provided an alternative option for social interaction for people who can not or choose not to interact socially in real life. 

                                           Works Cited

Adler, Ronald B., and Russell F. Proctor. Looking Out/looking in. 

        13th ed. Australia: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.

Privacy is the issue...

Although I don’t spend a lot of time on Facebook, and don’t have a Twitter account at all, I still feel the pull to access Facebook at least once a day if only for a couple of minutes. I feel that I have become dependent on Facebook as a “social portal.” Part of the allure of Facebook and other social networking sites is that they allow you to keep tabs on all your friends in a manner that is both inconspicuous and informative. Perhaps the most prominent aspect of Facebook is its lack of privacy. But while such behavior can be harmless among friends, it can also have dangerous and long lasting repercussions for future acquaintances and even for personal image and integrity.

 It’s interesting the way most people post comments, status updates, and other personal information about themselves on Facebook that they wouldn’t normally share in real life – even among the same friends. It’s one thing to say something inappropriate on Facebook and hope that your 500+ friends don’t all read or pay attention to what you wrote, but it’s quite another thing to walk up to each of those 500+ people in real life, look them in the face, and repeat what you just wrote on your page. That’s the approach I usually envision when I think about updating a status post or commenting on somebody’s wall. If I inwardly cringe at the thought of my parents or my future boss looking at or reading my Facebook entries, I know it’s not something I want the world to see. Moreover, embarrassing yourself in front of friends is not always a temporary discomfiture. Branding yourself with a bad reputation may scar your future personal and professional relationships.

Then there’s the issue of so-called “lurkers” and “stalkers” who take advantage of lax privacy controls on Facebook and use this as an opportunity for harassment. During the “era” of myspace, when I was still in middle school and hardly aware of privacy issues, random strangers would post comments or even personally message me on MySpace asking to meet up with me and even giving me their phone numbers. This kind of unwanted attention happens to most social networking users, but the most frightening aspect of this is the thought of young teenagers being subjected to harassment and stalking and perhaps not even realizing the consequences involved. The Internet, but especially social networking sites, has opened previously closed channels for people to meet strangers.

Even though I think Facebook has a lot of negative aspects relating to privacy, I still believe that it has almost equal benefits in drawing people closer together. Many of my friends live in other countries - and Facebook is the only link between us. It’s amazing to keep the relationships alive and see how their lives progress. Calling friends overseas is not only expensive, but also not nearly as interesting and informative as through social networking sites.

The cultural move towards social networking cannot be assessed as either a positive or negative trend, but can only be seen as falling somewhere in between. Facebook and other social networking sites have the potential to become useful and entertaining when used with responsibility and an eye towards privacy and discretion. 

My Media Diet - Blog Post #1

Log: Cumulative Time Spent Per Media Device Each Day

Monday 9/27:            

Laptop - Internet (4 hrs): Gmail, SCU email, weather.com, Facebook, Camino online lecture readings

Radio (1 hr): in the car, on the way to school and back

Cell phone (10 min approx.): texting friends

iTouch (5 min approx.): logging in homework assignments

television (approx 2 hrs): DVD

Tuesday 9/28:

Laptop - Internet (3 hrs): Gmail, SCU email, weather.com, Facebook, Camino online lecture readings, online shopping, youtube.com (Charlie bit my finger – it’s a classic, I have to watch it at least once a week for de-stressing J)

Radio (1 hr): in the car, on the way to school and back

Cell phone (10 min approx.): texting friends, making calls, taking pictures

iTouch (5 min approx.): logging in homework assignments

Wednesday 9/29:

Laptop - Internet (4 hrs): Gmail, SCU email, weather.com, Facebook, Camino online lecture readings, online shopping, fandango.com (looking up new movies)

Computer in general (1 hr): Word (typing up an assignment)

Radio (1 hr): in the car, on the way to school and back

Cell phone (5 min or less): texting friends

Thursday 9/30:

Laptop - Internet (2 hrs): Gmail, SCU email, weather.com, Facebook, Camino online lecture readings

Radio (1 hr): on the way to school and back

Cell phone (10 min): texting friends

iTouch (5 min): logging in homework assignments

television (approx. 2 hrs): DVD

Friday 10/01:

Laptop - Internet (5 hrs): Gmail, SCU email, weather.com, Facebook, online shopping, Google search engine (looking up information/tips), youtube.com (music videos)

Radio (1 hr): on the way to school and back

Cell phone (5 min or less): texting friends

Keeping a daily log of my media intake was both alarming and illuminating. Some of the most interesting discoveries I can draw from this assignment is the length of time I spend on the Internet, the types of sites I visit, and the different functions for which I use each of the types of media. Before this assignment, I had never consciously clocked the time I spent on the Internet. Checking my mail and the weather naturally only take a small proportion of my total Internet time. But the activities devoted to homework assignments make up the largest proportion of total media intake. It is important to recognize that I use the Internet to read articles and whole chapters for two of my classes. This also reveals the fact that I have partially moved away from traditional textbooks to online books. Personally, I prefer to read actual books, just because I feel more at ease staring at printed material than the screen of my computer. But because one of my classes does not have an actual textbook, all of the reading assignments are posted on the Camino website and I am compelled to read the material through the Internet. This, for example, is a type of media consumption that I do not perform by choice, but by necessity. It also might allude to my social location as a student. Because I am a full time college student, my media consumption is probably noticeably influenced by my social role. I find myself using the Internet for school-related purposes very often, if not most of the time. The log also reveals that I follow a pretty stable pattern as regards media type and amount of time spent per media device. The Internet, which takes up the greatest amount of time on any given day, reflects to a great extent its functionality. Because I can engage in multiple activities using just one type of media device, it follows naturally that I take advantage of these qualities. I think my avid Internet consumption also reflects its entertainment qualities. Many times, even though I have finished all of my necessary assignments and have checked my mail, I find myself beginning to surf – spending unnecessary amount of time on Facebook, shopping online, and even randomly using the Google Search Engine to look up topics of interest. This unnecessary and, in my view time-wasting activities could be substituted for more productive ones. This is definitely one area of my media consumption that I would like to change. To begin with, I really could spend more time socializing with my parents in person (neither of them have social networking sites, such as Facebook). I definitely think the habit of surfing the Internet as a means of entertainment can be said to apply to many people my age. Most of my friends admit that the Internet leads to procrastination. Another interesting aspect of my media consumption is that I ascribe separate functions for many of my media devices even though most of them could potentially perform all the necessary functions. For example, both my iTouch and my cell phone have Internet access, and I could potentially use them for this purpose. Moreover, my iTouch also has a handy weather application. But instead I use my laptop for Internet access, my phone for calls and texting, and my iTouch as an agenda. Likewise, I could use my phone, laptop, and iTouch to listen to music, but instead I simply switch on the radio in my car. Moreover, my differentiated use of all these media forms can probably be generalized to apply to most Americans today. Most of my friends, for example, have some sort of specialized music device (MP3 player, iTouch, iPhone) but they still sometimes use their Internet access or radio to listen to music. This is a classic example of the “black box fallacy” – clearly, media content continues to flow through different delivery technologies simply because people find it more convenient to utilize different tools for different occasions.