Week 8 – Jerry Makare – Archive

Projects like PostSecret are perfect examples of using user generated content and ideas to create a space that can foster discussion, creativity, and promote a sense of healing or community. When the PostSecret blog started in 2005 I never would have thought that it would still be going almost 9 years later, but not only  is it continuing, it is embracing different forms of media which will drive the evolution of the project in new directions. This TED talk from PostSecret founder Frank Warren highlights the ideas that PostSecret embraced to become so successful.

The internet has opened many doors for people to express themselves with varying degrees of anonymity to a large audience. This anonymity can be a good thing, as seen with PostSecret, or it can be absolutely awful, as you can see by the negative posts on  sites like 4Chan /b/. It is important to remember that the internet (as a place to exchange ideas, produce and distribute content, market, or build community) is neutral, and can be utilized by the individual users for anything that strikes their fancy, or capability. With such a wealth of freedom (not universal across the web, and under constant threat) there are so many possibilities that can be engaged that can open doors, and create opportunities for communities to form, and for stories to be told.

Utilizing online space as an archive of the human experience brings a wonderful dimension to projects that can grow and evolve over long periods of time. Not only will this capture moments and thoughts in time, but it allows an opportunity for users to search, shares, and express themselves and connect with people or thoughts that have come before.

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10: Scott Anderson

One area of ethics that jumped out at me in this class related back to my group project. Going into this project, I did not think there would be many ethical dilemmas that my group would face, simply because of our content. The main reason I thought this was because our project was fairly light in terms of social activism (we were not trying to prevent genocide or anything like that).

That area where we faced an ethical dilemma was when a story was posted on our website that told the story of a father who was trying to get together support for bike helmet reform in England after his son, who was not wearing a helmet, collided with a van while riding his bike. Unbeknownst to me, bike helmet reform is a contentious subject in the cycling community and the story we posted on our site could have been a negative focal point. So do ethical considerations come into play for the story to be posted on our site? For some people, those considerations do. For other, they do not.

So this brings me to many of the works we interacted with this term, which were controversial in nature. If there’s a strong, engaged and active public on one end and a latent public on the other end of the spectrum, is it ethical to either limit or promote controversial content? It would seem there’s a possible risk of alienating the active publics and not engaging the latent publics by posting controversial content, but more important than that is that limiting or eliminating the controversial content could take a step in not helping to expand the knowledge base — and ultimately possibly saving lives — of people. How much of a responsibility do we have to help save lives if we can? I think that’s a question people can only answer for themselves.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10_Summer Hatfield

One of the biggest ethical issues that I have been thinking about throughout this term is privacy. How do we be respectful of it, or in some cases how do we be transparent enough so that people are aware of the potential violation of their own privacy? It has come up in different ways in our viewings, in my group project, and in things I have explored on my own. In our viewing for example, it came up when we looked at the Swipe project by Brook Singer. This is one case where a media artist is trying to raise awareness of a violation of privacy. Most people don’t know that detailed databases are being created from their private information every time their ID is swiped in a bar, so Singer’s goal is bring it to peoples’ attention so they can do something about it. On the site it says, “With public knowledge there is a chance for public voices, and ultimately resistance.” This also makes me think of one of the bigger issues of the year, and that is Edward Snowden’s exposure of the major privacy violations by government surveillance programs. I fully believe in transparency, and for that I think Snowden, just like Singer, is a hero for raising public knowledge.

In my group project the issue of privacy came up because we were dealing with minors for part of the engagement process. The issue was about how to protect the identity of minors when using photos of them online, and what is ok to post when dealing with minors. In the end we decided it would be best to try to keep the identity of each teen discreet.

In my own exploration privacy is a huge issue that ranges from how much is too much to share about somebody and what types of things do you have to have permission for, to how do you “listen” to what audiences are saying about certain issues without invading their privacy? It is an issue that I think will always have blurred lines, but that I will continue to do my best to understand.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Eckerson: Week 10

Ethical issues that came up during this course:

Intentions versus Experience: The issue I returned to most throughout this course was the question surrounded the presentation of information.  We viewed many projects, some of which were problematic with regard to the authors stated intentions, and the actual experience of the project.  Some of the projects we viewed didn’t see the  ethical tensions inherent in their own work, but because of the packaged and final nature of a website or a project, that was obvious to outside observers, and that juxtaposition became part of their work.  That was interesting.

Authenticity of participation:  The question of participation was bantered about, but the issues of access and “real democracy” behind input was not addressed.  There are ethical issues with regard to participatory projects aimed at “creating social change” if they don’t address the barriers to access that exemplify the digital divide and how it maps out on traditional lines of oppression.

Social capital versus Capital: There’s an inherent tension between media for “social change” and capitalism. It at least has to be acknowledged, if not explicitly addressed, in any project being done in the name of social change.  Otherwise, it’s a farce.

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week #10 – Ethics – Lauren Marie Paterson

As media creators in both the journalism and communication fields, ethics will always be an integral part of our work, especially if we are putting it out into the public eye. Through this course and the study of the changing digital landscape I had a few thoughts on the subject.

Personal/Professional Ethics:  While many of us have probably taken an ethics class and we will be studying the subject more in detail during our graduate studies here, Lauren Kessler reminded us that we are all at some point going to have to decide where we draw our own ethical lines. Each of us have different interests, and although I’m sure we’re all wonderful human beings, perhaps our ethical boundaries will be tested in our future endeavors to help us shape a good moral backing for uncovering and communicating media work.

Company/Corporate Ethics: A large number of America’s biggest international companies are always popping up in the media for their unethical behavior, whether they’re spilling oil into the ocean or paying their workers so little that they insist their workers donate to their co-workers so they can have a Thanksgiving dinner. (Way to go, Walmart…) Why are these huge companies allotted the public relations power to try and constantly cover up their unethical behavior? Sure, journalists constantly uncover scandals, but it seems as though even if the company in question goes to court, they settle out in time for a new one. Does it seem to anyone else that companies and corporations are held to a different ethical standard than human beings? As communicators in the media world, can we do anything to help?

The Future of Ethics in Communication: Journalism has faced intense criticism over the past decade or two, and rightfully so. The 24-hour news model bent on generating drama at all costs to sell advertising is really making hard-working, ethically committed journalists look bad when they’re lumped in all together as “journalists.” If journalism is considered the 4th branch of government, allowed to check and balance the activities and intentions of those in power, should it be structured more democratically? How will good stories and important information really reach people if your boss cares more about selling ads than curating important content for the public?  Can the “profit at all costs” model of our nation’s capitalist system provide the kind of media people really need?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10: Emily Priebe

One of the ethical issues that seems to pop up frequently in a wide range of media projects is the disclosure of information. Sometimes seemingly unrelated transmedia projects have ties to brands. Those relationships can potentially affect how viewers interpret the content. The example from Spreadable Media with the young woman who was looking for the male owner of a jacket left in a coffee shop springs to mind. The producers of those videos were later revealed to be the jacket manufacturers, and the whole project provoked negative responses from viewers. Do those relationships need to be disclosed right up front? How do those kinds of partnerships affect the authenticity of content?

I know that when it comes to bloggers, my perception of the authenticity of their content is often affected when I see that some posts are sponsored or they’ve been provided with goods for free. With changes in FTC regulations, these types of relationships have to, by law, be disclosed. Many of them also share links to products that they then earn money on when somebody buys the linked-to product through an affiliate program called RewardStyle. I have to question sometimes if they are sharing links and spreading media because they really believe in it or because they are going to potentially reap compensation from the share. Ethical?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10: Joel Arellano

I didn’t encounter many ethical questions during this course or project, perhaps because I was focused so much more on investigating the ontology and teleology of digital culture. In fact, several times when the authors of Spreadable Media described topics as ethical dilemmas, I felt unmoved. For example, the alleged problem of corporations benefiting from fan creators struck me as unremarkable- all parties were willfully engaging in the ongoing process, so I couldn’t understand where anyone was being harmed. This seems to bear out economic homeostasis that Charlie Gere describes as characteristic of digital culture. How can there be injustice where engagement is voluntary and its modes are boundless?

On our video conference yesterday, Sam Ford did mention one topic where I see potential for unethical practice that might apply to our group project. Sam described the criticism leveled at folks who changed their profile pics in support of marriage equality a while back when the matter was before the Supreme Court, pointing out that many argued these ‘slacktivist’ gestures pretended greater impact than they could rightly claim. Injecting ineffective courses of action into political discourse could be malevolent, but I don’t believe that was the case here, and as Sam pointed out, activism isn’t a zero-sum game. Even if folks who changed their pictures felt an inflated sense of accomplishment, it’s hard to imagine that the pic campaign could have diminished support for more meaningful actions like marches or monetary contributions. For a moment, I wondered whether the online petition my group has supported couldn’t also be considered more sign than significance, in which case we would have an ethical obligation to stop. But for a cause as obscure as ours (divestment of publicly-held financial instruments provided by institutions that offer financing to private prisons), any means to raise awareness is likely constructive and well within ethical bounds.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10: Adam King

The underlying ethical question behind every media project we’ve looked at this semester is to what extent does a project take advantage of its subject in order to advance themselves. Many of the projects we have looked at have dealt with communities of people in need of aid. I’m thinking way back to the first week of class when we looked at Precious Places. It seems to me the creators of this project are able to avoid any ethical issues by putting the creative process into the hands of the subjects. Of the videos we looked at, none of them would have been able to convey the same message if they were professionally produced. The reason being that, when viewed and created through the eyes of an outsider, there’s always a lingering question of intent in the viewer’s mind. When made by the subjects themselves, we know that their only intent is to better their community.

This is in relative contrast to something like David Lynch’s Interview Project, where some may argue that the producers are using potentially negative storylines to create a compelling piece of art. Were the storytellers aware that so many people would bear witness to their sometimes tragic stories? It’s hard to tell, and raises the ethical debate over whether it’s right to take someone’s story and then leave those people to rot away in the mundane reality of their fly-over states. Of course, not all the stories were negative in that project, but it does raise those questions on the ones that were.

I deal with these questions of ethics regularly on my blog, I Shit Music (check it out!) I’ve found that it’s the most negative pieces I write that draw the most attention. While in most cases I’m just trying to alert the world of how over-hyped a potential record or artist is, I regularly receive comments from people accusing me of speaking negatively just to gain attention. This has led me on several occasions to need to reiterate my intent of trying to incite debate rather than spark a trail of negativity. But stating your intent takes away from the magic of just letting your project speak for itself, and thus it seems that stating your ethical position takes away from the actual strength of your presentation.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Kevin Gaboury – Week 10 post

I’m looking forward to catching up on the current season of “The Walking Dead” during the holiday break, but, like the characters on the show often do, I’m facing an ethical dilemma of my own. Since I refuse to pay for cable, and Netflix probably won’t have the current season up until God-knows-when, I’m forced to turn to the Internet to get my zombie fix.

Peer-to-peer video streaming sites are plentiful online and are pretty easy to access, but what are the ethical issues? Am I stealing by watching the show for free? Are the people streaming the episodes the thieves? Or are we all crooks together?

An interesting survey from a few years back found that most young people think piracy is OK, but stealing a DVD from a store is a crime. By watching TV shows online, how much money are we really taking out of network executives’ pockets? I’d imagine advertising revenues for a prime-time television show far exceed the amount of money the networks are losing when their shows turn up for free online. So what’s the problem? I’d say it’s less about money and more about control.

An overarching theme of Spreadable Media is the traditional “sticky” model of distribution versus spreadability. Television networks bemoan the “piracy” and “copyright infringement” of their programs, but I think the propagation of these P2P sites is just as much the networks’ fault. By only making their product available at a certain time to television viewers, they’re leaving a large number people in the dark. And those who miss out are apt to turn to the Internet.

For my part, I try to watch TV shows on network TV or pay sites — like Netflix — as often as I can, but in some cases, P2P streaming is the only way to get caught up before your friends spoil it for you.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Week 10: Steven Wheeler – Response to Viewings

Rather than return to a question like technical literacy that I’ve already articulated ad nauseam, I thought it might be more interesting to discuss some of the ethical considerations circling around Hakim Bey’s concept of Temporary Autonomous Zones, or T.A.Z.s for short.  Described them as provisional enclaves against the powers that be that are “dissolved before they can be repressed or coopted” (Gere, 2008)  As Gere remarks in Digital Culture, the Web itself can be seen as a giant, somewhat paradoxical macro-T.A.Z. in that, at least for the present, it’s here to stay.

The question, going forward, is there anything we can do to make sure that the Web retains its current, special status?  Publications such as Wired and The Atlantic have already put out pieces heralding the end of the Web as we know it.  While a good part of me wants to believe their prognosis is premature, another, more pessimistic side also thinks that transitioning from a browser-based Internet, where many companies operate, to an App-based one, where there are currently only three real players, doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence.  As Jenkins, Ford, and Green mention in the closing chapters of Spreadable Media, Apple “curates what is made available in the App Store bbsed on what aligns with its own perceived market interests (2013, p. 245).  Microsoft’s track record is also far from stellar, and while Google’s Android platform is open source, they’ve been making subtle adjustments to it to make it less so.

Maybe this question is one best addressed to futurists like Ray Kurzweil, but what do you think?  Will we be able to maintain the Web as one of Bey’s Zones, or will we need to make a new one?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email