jurgenson

“I’m so thankful the internet was not in wide use when I was in high school”, this article begins, a common refrain among people who grew up without social media sites from Friendster to Facebook, Photobucket to Instagram. Even those using email, chatrooms, Livejournal, multiplayer games and the like did not have the full-on use-your-real-name-ultra-public Facebook-like experience.

Behind many of the “thank God I didn’t have Facebook back then!” statements is the worry that a less-refined past-self would be exposed to current, different, perhaps hipper or more professional networks. Silly music tastes, less-informed political statements, embarrassing photos of the 15-year-old you: digital dirt from long ago would threaten to debase today’s impeccably curated identity project. The discomfort of having past indiscretions in the full light of the present generates the knee-jerk thankfulness of not having high-school digital dirt to manage. The sentiment is almost common enough to be a truism within some groups, but I wonder if we should continue saying it so nonchalantly?

“Glad we didn’t have Facebook then!” isn’t always wrong, but the statement makes at least two very arguable suppositions and it also carries the implicit belief that identity-change is something that should be hidden, reinforcing the stigma that generates the phrase to begin with. more...

“the Cyborgology school of digital criticism”

“A simple piece of software got us through the dark ages of computing”

“The Decelerator Helmet is an experimental approach for dealing with our fast moving society…a perception of the world in slow motion”

“War existed before social media, but not like this. This is a new thing”

“he’s the one who was violated. But he knows that won’t stop anyone from clicking “play” over and over again”

“A book is basically thousands of tweets printed out and stapled together between pieces of cardboard”

“does it even make sense to distinguish between the natural and technological sublime?”

“ideally, real human users will leave social networking altogether”

“Build a world where Facebook is obviously the inferior mode of communication and fast food just seems gross”

“Do we buy iPads b/c they change & improve our lives? Or because we need something we can believe improves our lives?” more...

“Silicon Valley doesn’t just reflect social norms — it actively shapes them in ways that are, for the most part, imperceptible”

“Perhaps it won’t be long before Google, not Gallup, is the most trusted name in polling”

“I took pictures of the panopticon while watching other tourists take pictures of the panopticon”

“the skeumorphic has begun to feel – in Lyotard’s terms – pornographic”

“styles change hands so quickly it is ludicrous to discuss who “thought of it” first, but simply who did it best”

“the Internet lets us say more, but what we actually end up saying is more distracting than informative”

“Think of our password problem as being like polio”

“the system they’d developed could raise $3 million from a single email”

“Silicon Valley imagines itself as the un-Chick-fil-A”

Follow Nathan on Twitter: @nathanjurgenson

more...

“The lapses of disconnect between me and my avatar are occasional, but odd”

“social media nurtures the impulse to speak”

“bloggers have reached the level of pop culture acceptance that comes w/ having a dog do their jobs for comedic effect”

“since the election of Barack Obama, the worldview of online hate groups has become more violent”

“the vaunted FiveThirtyEight model is only as good as the data it runs through its algorithm”

“Items that evoke sadness or contentment are unlikely to spur the clicks and conversations that lead to virality”

“Now a slightly more stomach-churning bit of online past can be yours with a custom Goatse email address”

“the anxious and microfamous risk their reputation and the immediate deciding outcome is likes, reblogs”

“few things make me contemplate digitally-mediated sociality the way being unwillingly cut off from it does”

Follow Nathan on Twitter: @nathanjurgenson more...

“What thrill does one imagination hold, after all, when we can program a bot to voice the imagination of everyone who’s ever uploaded their words onto the web?”

“What happened at Zuccotti Park was not wholly unlike what had happened a few months earlier on Delicious and Google Reader”

“What happens when, as a result of social media, vigilantism takes on a new form?”

“In event of power or Internet loss, just shout 140-character comments out window”

“There aren’t enough terms of service to manage all the publics and space in the world, or the people who live in them”

“When disaster strikes, make sure to bring your sandbags of skepticism to Twitter”

“Death is denied when a Facebook activist can never prove it”

“the [cyberspace] metaphor constrains, enables, and structures very distinct ways of imagining”

“a dualistic offline/online worldview can depoliticise and mask very real and uneven power relationships“ more...

The semantics of Silicon Valley Capitalism are precise, measured, and designed to undermine preexisting definitions of the things such capitalists seek to exploit. It is no coincidence that digital connections are often called “friends,” even though the terms “friend” and “Facebook friend” have very different meanings. And then there is “social,” a Silicon Valley shorthand term for “sharing digital information” that bears little resemblance to the word “social” as we’ve traditionally used it. From “Living Social” to “making music social,” “social media” companies use friendly old words to spin new modes of interaction into concepts more comfortable and familiar. It is easier to swallow massive changes to interpersonal norms, expectations, and behaviors when such shifts are repackaged and presented as the delightful idea of being “social” with “friends.”

But is this “social” so social? Yes and no and not quite. To elaborate, we propose a distinction: “Social” versus “social,” in which the capital-S “Social” refers not to the conventional notion of social but specifically to Silicon-Valley-Social. The point is, simply, that when Silicon Valley entrepreneurs say “social,” they mean only a specific slice of human sociality. more...

When I first began as a graduate student encountering social media research and blogging my own thoughts, it struck me that most of the conceptual disagreements I had with various arguments stemmed from something more fundamental: the tendency to discuss “the digital” or “the internet” as a new, “virtual”, reality separate from the “physical”, “material”, “real” world. I needed a term to challenge these dualistic suppositions that (I argue) do not align with empirical realities and lived experience. Since coining “digital dualism” on this blog more than a year ago, the phrase has taken on a life of its own. I’m happy that many seem to agree, and am even more excited to continue making the case to those who do not.

The strongest counter-argument has been that a full theory of dualistic versus synthetic models, and which is more correct, has yet to emerge. The success of the critique has so far outpaced its theoretical development, which exists in blog posts and short papers. Point taken. Blogtime runs fast, and rigorous theoretical academic papers happen slow; especially when one is working on a dissertation not about digital dualism. That said, papers are in progress, including ones with exciting co-authors, so the reason I am writing today is to give a first-pass on a framework that, I think, gets at much of the debate about digital dualism. It adds a little detail to “digital dualism versus augmented reality” by proposing “strong” and “mild” versions of each. more...

“The digital and the physical are becoming one”

“Design is one of the linchpins of capitalism, because it makes alienated labor possible”

“My hologram rendered somehow less complete. A broken stream in the data mind”

“Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world”

“Facebook is broken, on purpose, in order to extract more money from users”

““Invisible Users” is one of the few texts explicitly dealing with the Internet that will not feel dated in five years”

“Writing for a general audience, he said, was “a responsibility of scholars”

“Given a city block, the challenge will be to excavate and present that information which the most people are curious about at the precise moment they walk through it”

“Scrobbling might be “social,” but it’s not very personal”

“Wikipedians may be their own worst enemy”

“a Predator parked at the camp started its engine without any human direction, even though the ignition had been turned off and the fuel lines closed”

“I would challenge the idea that trolls, and trolls alone, are why we can’t have nice things online”

“Memory on the Internet is both infinite and fleeting”

“EDM lets listeners experience what feels like risk, and excess but is actually very tightly and carefully controlled”

“In this climate, it gets hard to draw strict distinctions between living systems and mechanical ones”

“A machine does far more than the task it performs. It is forged of historical moments, acts as a flash-point for contemporary questions, and always, inevitably, produces new cultures of its own”

Follow Nathan on Twitter: @nathanjurgenson

“if you haven’t visited the Deep Web, you ain’t seen nothing yet”

“nothing in society makes sense except in the light of power. And that goes for speech, too”

“it used to be hard to connect when friends formed clicks, but it is even more difficult to connect now that clicks form friends”

“how did the Awkward Party Comment shift from “I know, I read your Livejournal” to “You read what I posted on Facebook, right?”

“Red Bull will most likely never fund a trip to Mars or a high speed rail line”

“It became very difficult to look at the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building without thinking that they looked CG”

“self-broadcasting always feels like agency, even if it only builds the walls of our own personal terrordome”

“A 3-year-old shouldn’t know which of her actions are worthy of being documented”

“gamification seems to invite false consciousness arguments because it’s scary that “play” can be so completely non-transgressive”

“Are we using technology to stylize our unease with the present, our feeling of disconnection from the past?”

“Why I felt OK outing Violentacrez: Anonymity should be valued mainly to the extent it helps protect powerless from powerful. VA wasn’t that”

“Trecartin’s characters, like the modern-day technophiles they satirise, are umbilically linked to their Blackberries”

“Surface is going to make some kind of history for Microsoft, one way or another”

“I always react negatively against the idea that technology is a foreign body inside the human” (1997)

“You do not hear about a YouTube video in the press w/o hearing about how many views it has, and that’s not accidental”

“over the past two years social media has also become an increasingly hostile place for women writers and journalists”

“to design with an eye to how clothes look online, perhaps sacrificing how they feel on the body”

Follow Nathan on Twitter: @nathanjurgenson

more...

Many have linked political conservatism with “the authoritarian personality,” which, in part, involves the willingness to view power structures as legitimate, less reluctance to submit to those in authority over you, and an increased tendency to exercise authority over the less powerful. Social media is often seen as counter-authoritarian, however, we also have good evidence that the Web in general, and social media in particular, also replicates existing power structures.

With these different concerns in mind, we might wonder if those with different political orientations use social media for politics in different ways. More specifically, are those on the right, even in a social media environment that permits more expression, voice, and creativity, more likely to submit and follow? Theodore Adorno, pictured above and pioneered work in this line of thought, I think, would predict that Republicans would be more passive, more likely to listen and restate, whereas those on the left would be a bit more likely to create new content.

I post these very brief thoughts (certainly much more would be needed to substantiate the sweeping claims I just made above; this is only a short blog post!) because The Pew Internet in American Life Project just today released some new findings on Social Media and Political Engagement [pdf]. Here are most of the findings:  more...