I am Cyborg!

In the week 6 Lecture, Dr Kuttanien explained that posthumanism looks at humans as not singular or always rational, rather societies determines who we we are, and our feelings. She further explained that the concept of posthumanism analyses the boundaries between mechanical and the technological where such collapsed boundaries can be represented in the figure of the cyborg. I recently learnt I was some form of a cyborg. Not a robot but a cyborg – a person who has their physical abilities enhanced beyond their normal human limitations by mechanical elements (Kuttainen, 2017) See, I wear glasses to help me with my vision therefore I am a cyborg.  My vision ability are enhanced. 

Dr Kuttanien (2017) described Katherine Hayles (1999) studies which focused on the on the new form of subjectivity between humans and the computer. Hayley argued that post humanism disembodies humans. The questions thus remains, ‘How has social media platforms such as LinkedIn, Facebook and so forth become more like us?

First of all, if I wear to ask my friend Dan to search Egypt, the information displayed on my screen and his could be completely different but very high chances it could be the same. This is determined by what we both normally search and the information that we have provided on different pages. They are algorithms that are saving such data - softwares that producing and online self. For this reason, this raises that argument that mediums of social networking such as LinkedIn store information we provide and distribute user information of whatever we post. Mcneill (2012) gives an example of Facebook algorithm that tracks, directs and disseminates information about its users. This give meaning to the online life is a permanent tattoo described by Juan Enriquez  (Ted Talks, 2013). Using LinkedIn, when we follow, find, look for users or pages to follow, we access information from and about them. Hayles (1999 in Kuttanien, 2017) argues that by sharing information and as long as we stay ‘logged in’ we in fact using the same brain or on social media we share information in some form or another. 

So I mentioned earlier that I  wear glasses to help with my vision and that makes me a cyborg. Well, the same can be said about social media. when I created linkedIn the whole idea was for me get a job. however, as time has passed, I have connected with likeminded people by liking. in saying that, I have liked pages, shared these pages and commented. in return I have received the same feedback from people around the world that I know nothing about other than what they have shared on their LinkedIn. Despite the fact that I created my LinkedIn account, LinkedIn has changed the way i interact with potential employers.

When I created linkedIn the whole idea was for me get a job. However, as time has passed, I have connected with likeminded people by liking, sharing and commenting on what they share. In saying that, I have liked pages, shared these pages and commented. in return I have received the same feedback from people around the world that I know nothing about other than what they have shared on their LinkedIn. Despite the fact that I created my LinkedIn account, LinkedIn has changed the way i interact with potential employers. My online resume and what I do on my account speaks of me and acts as the first interaction with my future employers. In the nature of posthumanism, though we created social media, social media changes us and the way we interact. 

 In the nature of posthumanism, though we created social media, social media changes us and the way we interact. Social media can then be said to be and extension of us. My online resume and what I do on my account speaks of me and acts as the first interaction with my future employers. we have changed the way we socialise. Resumes no longer need to be physically handed to an employer on the other side of the world. Chances are they have already read a little about you. While social media is helping us stay connected, or rather removed for having to interact face to face, are we also being disembodied and controlled by millions of companies?

                                                                Retrieved from url

References 

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture week 6: Networked Narratives. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

McNeill, L. (2012). There Is No “I” in Network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman Auto/Biography. Project Muse, 35(1), 65-82.

TED. (2013).  Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/juan_enriquez_how_to_think_about_digital_tattoos?utm_campaign=tedspread-b&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare

TED. (2017). Retrieved fromhttps://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention?utm_campaign=tedspread-b&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare

Context over content

                              As seen on TV (https://imgflip.com/i/soofm) 

An ad showed in a local magazine will deliver a different message compared to the same message delivered to your phone. Not better, not worse but different. For millennials, Youtube, facebook, snapchat and other social media networks have become the platform for entertainment, advice and even fashion inspiration. Kuttainen, V. (2017) shared on how transformations in technology cause transformations in culture, where the evolution started from spoken word, to manuscripts, to print and now onto the age electronic. Despite these mediums still relevant and used, it affects how information should be delivered to be eventually effective. Products with ‘As see on TV’ are not as appealing as they were a few years ago. People consume information different and therefore this indirectly affects how ads, campaigns including awareness campaign are received and absorbed. The need to change how information is communicated to consumers gives meaning to the classic phrase ‘the medium is the message’.

The phrase ‘the medium is the message’ was introduced by Marshall McLuhan and collegues (1967). This referred to how the medium uses influences how the message is perceived or interpreted. The phrase further highlights the importance of context over the context. An article on the ‘what no to do when advertising your products’ on LinkedIn will convey a different message compared to the same information in a textbook.

Where this generation seems to be focussing on the next technology model rather than communication, it is vital we understand how such context will affect the content. I liked a movement page about Human Trafficking called A21 Campaign on Fb a few years ago. Despite being interested in eradicating modern slavery and enjoy reading stories about survivors, I hardly ever visited the page. Well, unless I happened to see it on my timeline. However, after becoming more active in the last few weeks on LinkedIn, I decided to follow the founder of A21 Christine Caine as well as the A21 Campaign. Funnily enough, I have read more articles shared in those few weeks compared to the number of articles I read in years on Facebook.

This is what needs to be understood, unlike LinkedIn, facebook is a social network where it focusses on social bonds of family and friends. Whereas LinkedIn although primarily aims to work as an online resume, it allows its members to join groups or online communities where they share common interests. I got engaged more on LinkedIn A21 campaign because they were likeminded people and I came to such groups with a specific interest. Furthermore, LinkedIn gives a platform engage in open discussions, get ideas, and while you are at it someone is probably watching you and about to hand you the best job.

Technology changes theway we communicate influencing how information is delivered and received. Despite digital channels being great marketing tools or as mediums for communication, to an extend most of them only serve a temporary influence. To convey messages, it’s thus imperative to understand which context is better used in to create a longer lasting influence.

References

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, week 5 slides [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved fromhttps://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au/

McLuhan, M., & Fiore, Q. (1967). The medium is the message. New York, 123, 126-128.

OUR IDENTITY IS NOT OURS ONLINE

        

Image: Posthumanism (Tech vs Human, 2017)

Albert Einstein once said, ‘it has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity’ but the question is would you agree with Einstein or argue that our humanity will always remain intact? This brings up the concept of humanism and post-humanism in network narratives. Some may argue that many still value the notion of humanism by putting their interest and values as the centre of their lives while others claim that post-humanism has taken over society as the value of self-realisation and interests are consumed by the collective interest of society. At this day and age, the collective interests of society are of technological means, asserting that the virtual network has gone from just space to an actual place in which humans are constantly visiting. It is from that virtual place that a person’s identity evolves, more or less ‘in an online virtual network, you are not the only person constructing your identity’(Kuttainen, 2017).

Networked narratives requires the participation of members in-order to be empowered, the more an individual spends time being a part  of that network,  the more that individual evolves into a cyborg, therefore the more power for the network. One of the way in which networked narratives are empowered is through the notion of ‘virtual-self narratives’ (Kuttainen, 2017) . By depicting that people are in control of what they do on that virtual network, it gives a sense of empowerment to them. Thus, the evolution of ‘online auto/biographical’ concepts (McNiell,2002) on social networking sites. These sites are portrayed as fundamental for maintaining connection and the sensation of closeness in a larger space. Thus, the increased involvement and participation of people in social sites.

Nevertheless, the concept in which social networking sites are seemingly illustrating that power of auto/biography are in the participants’ hand to shape their own identity online is merely the truth. Facebook for example has an algorithm that ‘track, direct, and disseminate information about its members activities’ which can be referred to as a “shadow biographer”(McNiell,2002) which tricks Face-bookers to think that they are the ones construction their own identity when they’re actually not. Hence, there’s no “I” in networks (Ibid).  In contrast to the social site, eHarmony’s algorithm is constructed on the  29 dimension of compatibility. It creates a virtual world that influences members to think that their personal information shared is entirely their own auto/biography when in reality members are construction their identity and personal information within the set algorithm programmed by eHarmony.  This algorithm requires specific information to then act as the shadow biographer and find another member with similar auto/biography.

The algorithm which programs eHarmony gives the power to the site to be the ‘gatekeeper’ that  controls members’ ‘filter bubbles’ (TED,2011). Therefore, what used to be face to face interaction, to have open conversations and establish relationships and friendships much like ‘the public sphere’ (Kuttainen,2017) is now limited to the complete reliance on an algorithm and software programming of online social networking sites such as eHarmony.

 By Jelintha Koyaiye

REFERENCES

Anne, J. (2011, November 30). Will technology exceed our humanity? Retrieved from https://www.jessicaannmedia.com/will-technology-exceed-our-humanity/

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, week 6 notes [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au/

Ibid, slide 9.

McNiell, L. (2012). There is no “I” in Networks: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman Auto/Biography. Biography, 35(1), 65-82. Doi: 10.1353

eHarmoney UK. (2000-2017). The eHarmony 29 dimensions of compatibility explained. Retrieved from http://www.eharmony.co.uk/dating-advice/using-eharmony/eharmony-29-dimensions-compatibility-explained#.WanfC7puKYN

TED. (2011). Beware online “filter bubbles”. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en#t-248817

Habermas,J. (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. In Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our Space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, week 6 notes [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au/

Tech vs Human: [Category: Posthumanisms]. (2017). Retrieved from: http://www.techvshuman.com/category/posthumanism/

To see or not to see – Constructed realities and the rise of the Posthuman perspective

  

(Facebook and you, 2017) (Al Jazeera, 2017)

There are several problems that arise from our increasing immersion in the Facebook reality. These problems stem from the horde of profitable personal information we allow to be used and manipulated, and are exacerbated by the design of the virtual space itself which functions with the explicit goal of creating a quasi-normative environment for the user. The results of which leave the user with a warped perspective on the world and very little chance to even realise their perspective is being altered.

McNeill, (2012) puts forward the idea that the humanist perspective has been so integrated and influenced by the online virtual world that it has given way to an increasingly posthuman point of view. Nowhere is that best seen than in the Facebook reality. Through the manipulation of data, the users interaction with the site is inherently a constructed reality built to best interest the particular user. Following this, if we accept the premise that social media has become this generation's version of the “coffee house” public sphere (Kuttainen, 2017) what then is the impact on the function of the public sphere when it is individually created to represent what the user already shows interest in. This posthuman public sphere, influenced by both the human user as well as the constructed algorithmic reality of the site, tends towards a gross misrepresentation of the true tone of the public sphere as it creates space where opposing views or opinions that may be unfavorable to the user are simply filtered out.

It is once again, the deliberate tailoring and targeting of relevent content that can have major impacts on the wider society. An example of how this is can be highly impactful can be seen in the area of political thought. Through targeted content, a political party has the ability to apear as though the issues which see them in a favourable light are much more dominent in their digital footprint than those issues which may paint them in a more negative way. This filtering of information gives rise to a new sort of public sphere, where people are blissfully unaware of why they see the content they see and dangerously unaware of the content they don’t see.

One more positive thing arising through the facebook reality is the emergence of a more constructive participatory media environment. This week, one of the major global news services; Al Jazeera made the decision to disable commenting ability on their website, citing “users hiding behind pseudonyms spewing vitriol, bigotry, racism and sectarianism” (Al Jazeera, 2017) As the reasons for moving the bulk of their audience interactions to social media. In this context facebook provides a forum where users identities are much more reliable as they are subject to the validation of the network. The benefits of this space when used appropriately bridge the gaps in the ‘coffee house’ version of the public sphere and allow for a decentralising of the media. Which, in turn, produces a much more healthy and relevant space to be devoted to public debate and the like.

It seems the Postmodern world is increasingly a world based online. A world where virtual social networks like Facebook dominate and set the standards for what is and is not propper within this construsted geography. It is imperative that when navigating these spaces, the user is aware of the constructed nature of the environment and the rules governing what is filtered. This knowledge better equips the user to identify the major power disparity within sites like Facebook and allows them, to use this posthuman perspective to benefit themselves rather than the corporation sitting at the head of the table.

By Adam Brown

Reference List

Al Jazeera. (2017, 8 30). Why we’re disabling comments on aljazeera.com. Retrieved from Medium: https://medium.com/@AJEnglish/why-were-disabling-comments-on-aljazeera-com-a9ffbac61f10

Facebook and You [Image]. (2011). Retrieved from https://trickumlegis.wordpress.com/2011/09/23/another-facebook-reality/

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Networked Narritives. week 6 notes [PowerPoint sildes]. Retrieved from https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au

McNeill, L. (2012). There Is No "I" in Network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman Auto/Biography. Biography, 35, 65-82.

"Blurred Lines" By Paige Payne

The internet has always been constant and yet every changing; in other words, the internet has a “place” doesn’t move but the “spaces” within change whether in the form of updated versions been added with new content.

The internet is what I called a “blurred place” because you can choose to become someone different through the online chats and virtual reality games or you can remain to be true to yourself through uploading pictures of daily events on Instagram or Facebook, Snapchat or other social networks.

In doing so people create narratives, stories that can be rewritten or re-edited if they want to change how things happened or add something they’ve forgotten to speak about. No other form allows this which makes the internet special.  

A funny thing I’ve noticed about this is that once something has been uploaded to the internet say a picture or a comment even if you delete it it’s never truly gone but you rewrite or edit the comment or the photo; that’s what I find funny; nothing is really gone and yet we can change it.

I love Laurie McNeill’s first line of his article “There’s no “I” in network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman auto/biography” (McNiell. L, “There’s no “I” in network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman auto/biography”, Vol 35, No 1. 2012):

“The digital era complicates definitions of the self and its boundaries, both dismantling and sustaining the humanist subject in practices of personal narrative”

The reason for this being it relates to my idea of the internet being a “Blurred place” where how our “real” and “online” selves become blurred or in other words when it comes to the internet what is our “true self”. 

https://masterfile.jcu.edu.au/masterfile6/jsp/viewfile.jsp?as_session_id=32245178DBBF7E4C9B83CFCA4617AE8BC31BE3E&as_id_nr=65005&as_page_nr=1&file_type=.pdf&as_acknowledge=Y 

When the lines between reality and the online world become blurred, it’s hard to dissociate ourselves from it because of the freedom it gives us. I write fanfiction for some of my favourite books and movies and very quickly become immersed in my stories as if I was the main character and I find it very hard concentrate and what I should be doing in reality and not get stuck in my imagination; I sometimes tend to focus more on how can I make the story make sense rather than focusing on study and revision for my subjects and I compare this to how we ourselves in reality.

We could be the shy person in the back of the room or be like everyone else crossing the street and yet we could be the most talkative person an online forum.

If our “true selves” are split into two different “places”; reality and the virtual world how can we determine who we really are?

References

Week 6 Lecture: “Our Space: Networks, Narratives and the Making of Place, Networked Narratives”

McNiell. L, “There’s no “I” in network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman auto/biography”, Vol 35, No 1. 2012 

It slowly creeps in

We dictate what the places around us mean by turning them into our own places and creating specialised networks. We trade power around to achieve our ends and attach meaning to the world around us by creating meaning to the things and words we use.
This blog has been transformed from a blank space into a tool for the dissemination of my thoughts. I used the knowledge I’ve learned about a social network to exercise power through that very dissemination of learned knowledge. I’ve also selected my words in order to shape and convey all of that to suit the message I wanted to portray.

so how does all of this intersect?  I would say that it’s in the way it all intermingles into a new world, this new world we call, online.

If in the idea of post-humanism it suggests that the technology we use can become an extension of ourselves then can the digital world that we create and use become not only an extension of us but also become a sort of pseudo-world; a cyborg world (McNeill, 2012). It’s a world that takes in our analogue thoughts and churns out a cyber translation within its own borders, its own virtual space (Kuttainen, 2017). Most of us are never more than a pockets reach away from this somewhat transitory world that is the new cyber platform. Even with this ease of access we exhibit, this new frontier still inhabits a transitory place in our lives as even if we access it habitually it’s still a temporary part of our daily experience, at least for the moment.  

I suppose building off that and relating back to concepts of post-humanism, where does our analogue world end and our digital one begin, at what point do we become so ensconced with the digital that it all blurs and fade into one. So when does what we now conceive as our normal world, what I’ve called the analogue, get engulfed to the point where they both merge together to become the new standard where if you don’t partake in digital practices you become a new form of societal fringe dweller.

it doesn’t just stop with the fact the our lives are tied in with social media and the web but everything we do is coming to be dictated by some form of technology and not  just our phones, computers etc. if we were to try and completely extricate ourselves from everything we use it would be near impossible, we’ve become cyborgs attached to some form of technology with everything our watches in order to tell the time and the vehicles we all use at some point.

Refernces

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture week 6: Networked Narratives, retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

Lynch, M (2016), Leave my iPhone alone: why our smartphones are extensions of ourselves, retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/19/iphone-apple-privacy-smartphones-extension-of-ourselves

McNeill, L. (2012). There Is No “I” in Network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman Auto/Biography. Project Muse, 35(1), 65-82. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

videohive, Word Map, retrieved from https://videohive.net/item/digital-cyber-world-04/19338271

Communication of the 21st Century

        Social networks control our lives in many ways. The way we communicate on these sites can dictate our everyday life and responses. Take for instance, when going for a job, the employer can simply look you up on Facebook or Twitter and find out what kind of person you are, or who you have portrayed to be before even calling you up for an interview. If you have said anything negative about the company or the industry, you are trying to get a job with or are currently employed by, bye-bye employment. We no longer need to write letters and wait a week to receive the mail, it is a click of a button and instantly you can talk to a loved one from a different city. Communication has changed forever with the rise of social media, are we authentically ourselves or do we become someone the virtual society wants us to be?

Social media changing the way we communicate. Willis, A. (2017)

      McNiell (2012) argues that social networks challenge the older notion of the humanist which is self as being singular making people more of a posthuman. Post humanism as stated by Kuttainen (2017) challenges the boundaries between human and nonhuman.  Although unlike Facebook, Flixster has a more Humanistic approach to the social network, communication is limited between individuals. We therefore, as the user are autonomous and self -determining and are only able to leave a review on a movie title. There is no comment section on someone’s review and there is no other way of communication between people. We can almost say that the narratives in this network are individual, the Flixster community does not fully determine who we are and our feelings towards different movies. We are able to exercise our own agency.

On the contrary, how much are we exercising our own agencies? By reading the reviews of other critics, do we in a sense take on their opinion of a movie and start to judge it the way the critics see it? This can potentially make this social network somewhat achieve the posthuman approach by encompassing the identity of the different critics. Moreover, when entering the site, depending on the posts made and the scores given for movies, the higher the movies rank on a category list. This can determine what movies are watched and what movies are completely missed. A movie that I may really enjoy could be at the bottom of the categories, because the Flixster society has communicated with the network pointing out that it was not good enough to reach a higher score.

In a nutshell, communication between people has changed dramatically, instead of heading to the movie store and hiring a movie without knowing much about it, we can go onto sites like Flixster, read reviews and determine whether we think it’s a movie worth watching. Gone are the days of the constant “I lost 2 hours of my life that I can never get back”, because of a poor movie choice.

By Cassandra Schwerin

Reference List

Kuttainen, V. (2017). BA1002: Our space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture week 6: Networked Narratives. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

McNeill, L. (2012). There Is No “I” in Network: Social Networking Sites and Posthuman Auto/Biography. Project Muse, 35(1), 65-82. Retrieved from http://learnjcu.edu.au

Zurich Insurance Group. (2012, December 6). See how social media is changing the way we communicate [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wncZPE7NMVI

Willis, A. (2017). 6 Ways Social Media Change the Way We Communicate. Retrieved from http://circaedu.com/hemj/how-social-media-changed-the-way-we-communicate/