http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2d7X9xEozgM
Facebook launched the Internet in February 2004. It was invented by Harvard students, who later drop-out of school to pursue Facebook full-time. In the beginning, Facebook users were only student from Harvard. Then, Facebook engage into other universities such as Yale and other prestigious colleges. The Founder of Facebook and his partner saw the growth of their website, opened it up to other schools, universities, and businesses. Lisa Nakamura in Digitizing Race, discussed this transformation as a “commodity-delivery system for vastly expanded media companies (Nakamura 3).” It allowed society to express their thoughts about class, education, identity, race etc. In the U.S, people were color-blinded or wanted to be color-blinded by other people around them. Facebook is a social network that engages in a conversation about freedom to your identity. However, it was a controversial topic about engaging everyone to the Facebook website. It was restricted to college students only. Now that Facebook became popular, they allowed high school students and others network. Facebook users feel like their privacy have been open to everyone around to see such as photos, video, wall post, information etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpLNlSKugHw&feature=related
As I watched the youtube clip about facebook, I wondered, if Facebook really a freedom of speech. Recently, jobs and university have done background checks of a person through Facebook users’ profile. Is this the beginning of the emerging hegemony of neoliberalism? Is Facebook a way to commodify people in the media? Do you think that the Founder of Facebook wanted to gain capital or a social life? How is facebook digitizing the image of identity? How is the internet portraying people identity?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think this is a great post to start off saying! I can completely see your aim when it comes to this topic and area of discussion, my mom is anti facebook because she believes that it will hinder me from receiving a job. I do believe that facebook use to be a place where there was a freddom of expression, but now that the new area has risen and the farther we become in the 21 century, the more we are sheltered. You have to be careful what you display on facebook because and employer see it and fire you or not offer you the job. You have to be careful what you say and what you do. Or you have to make sure everything is restricted on your page so that no one can search you or find you and use it all an incriminating information. In the article written by Nakamura, it states; "It is crucial that scholarship assess these
ReplyDeletepractices to evaluate the Internet as a popular environment for representations
of identity. Visual culture provides a powerful methodology for parsing
gender and racial and ethnic identity in these digital signifying practices that
became so prominent at the turn of the century" (Nakamura 5). This helps to explain help wide spread this representation is but yet, as you go farther in the article you learn some of the hindering factors. And if the portraying identity on the internet is not interpreted the correct way then then there will be misleading interpretations. I do believe facebook did not start out as a form of commodification, but as time has passes I believe that it has. If you notice on the right side corner of your facebook page there are always ads, and those ads are ads that facebook generates specially for you that matches your profile. They are giving media and business the availability to be able to commodify our personal life style that we have told facebook we lead.
I feel like this post really opened my eyes to the level of internal privacy barring and insertion that not only the United States Government and many other shareholders have but that Facebook also serves as a vehicle for digitizing racial and freedom of speech sentiments openly. The idea that our information is being sold or even found out for uses unknown to us is an example of just how easily and unaware we are of our possibilities to be monetary and ethically commodified. According to Nakamura, "While the policy rhetoric around Internet access may have been inflected strongly with the neoliberal discourse of color blindness and nondiscrimination--a paradigm in which failure to overtly discriminate on the basis of race, and the freedom to compete in the "open market" despite an uneven playing field in terms of class, education, and cultural orientation constitutes fairness--the Internet has continued to gain uses and users who unevenly visualize race and gender in online environments (5)." As stated here, there is an equivalent amount of discrimination taking place with regard to our information and how it's chosen to be utilized by companies that are willing to pay for it. They have the ability to see our preferences and even begin to form patterns regarding our racial sentiments, the ethics surrounding open market freedoms, freedom of speech and even how we perceive the things that are happening in our lives.
ReplyDeleteAs the media and methodologies like Facebook are taking our information and deciphering how it illustrates the users as citizens, we are simultaneously allowing the disjunction to form between who we are and allowing our friends to see that versus those using who we are for their own monetary and profitable gain.
Interesting. To comment on a post above --the US was not colorblind...the rhetoric, as Nakamura was envoking a colorblind discourse. Her work is going against this discourse as to say not only are people not colorblind, they are bringing their identities and racialized and gendered bodies online. I liked how the book challenges even our understandings of Digital Divides. She is concerned with degrees of access and a virtual capitalism and how people use their virtual capital to represent themselves. At the end she also challenges research in its focus on women and minorities as consumers vs. producers which I think is also important.
ReplyDeleteYour discusson on Facebook makes me think of a book I was reading about White flight on the internet. It was about how a lot of white elites were leaving myspace for facebook which was seen as like an internet gated community (myspace was seen to many as 'ghetto' because of its wide range of customization etc).
Litteral consumption is interesting but I think equally interesting is how the bodies of women and minorities are consumed in digitized spaces and how technology serves as signifiers of difference.
woah, tiff; i'd never read about this white flight business from facebook to myspace; it's interesting!! but of course, when the demographics of a community, either virtual or physical changes to reflect an identity with which you do not associate, FLIGHT happens. so, myspace got ghetto, and the white elite fled.
ReplyDeleteit's interesting to me especially, in response to this post, that having questionably colored, indecipherable and alien communities participating in your own...is MORE threatening than the scarily obvious surveillance that is taking place between ourselves and our national government.
sure, there can be policing of my behavior in a country where we are all innocent (until proven guilty), if those police are white, of the same socioeconomic background as me, and definitely NOT immigrants (spies).
Nakamura, talking about the beginning of this "information superhighway" references reactions made by Al Gore in Kyoto--he said that some of the internet's key features would be its "private investment, market-driven competition, flexible regulatory systems, non-discriminatory access, and universal service"--maybe he didn't realize that the internet community would eventually become so big that it too would eventually sort itself into an academic sphere, a juvenile sphere, a ghetto world and a rich one.
is this wrong? i think our ability to disassociate with things we don't understand only got EASIER with the internet....but getting over your confusions got easier, too....
thoughts?
Interesting post!
ReplyDeleteIn her article Nakamura says: "It is crucial to examine users in their embodied subject positions,modes of production, especially amateur and low-end- do-it yourself digital cultures... and the paths by which images of the body are appropriated from other offline media" (6).Facebook is the perfect example for this, and as the video posted shows, serves to calculate and establish a market.
It is interesting the idea of embodiment in the virtual space, because it also allows you to create another reality. In this sense I have to agree with the first post because information about users can be misleading for the companies. On the other hand users have a certain freedom to choose their subjectivity in the virtual world like in 'cyber latina slut'... the question is do users are aware of this cyber power? or there's no such thing? I mean look at the guys who created Facebook, it started as a small thing, now is a phenomenon.
Yes! I definitely think that Facebook is a way of commodifying the self. Nakamura discusses how we are literally constructing ourselves on platforms like Facebook - and part of this is continually "visualizing race and gender." This is because difference is commodifiable - as we've learned through this course. But, I think another helpful way to think about Facebook and similar self-promotional websites is in context with a larger cultural trend that allows for something that is essentially like self-advertising.
ReplyDeleteI think Sut Jhally offers some helpful insights, I know sorry this is a reading from weeks ago!! - media does not commodify culture with a motivation necessarily. This is just the nature of a private, corporate media. In the case of Facebook, Internet culture has led the way to sites like Myspace and Facebook. They did not arise out of nothing. This is not to say that this is what "the people want" necessarily, but there is a definite cultural context that should be accounted for. Power relations become translated onto these virtual spaces, not because Facebook or Myspace inherently has power relations set up within them but people, culture has adapted these spaces.
Tiff's comment about the "white flight" is such a great example of this - and it's also so interesting! I also had never heard of this!
I remember being in high school and everyone had a facebook page and I was odd ball because I didn’t know what the hype was all about. I remember thinking that facebook was just outlet that was used for everyone to be in everyone else’s business. However when I started college I remember becoming addicted to it, I just ahd to check everyday then it turned into checking it every couple hours. This addiction would fade after someone stole pictures of me and created an account under different name passing themselves off as me. This when I realize the danger of facebook. So to answer your question about how the internet is portraying people identity? Facebook allow someone to use my identity for over 3 years portray me as this superficial, trash talking girl from OHIO. And this portrayal has not stop because facebook refuses to respond to my emails.
ReplyDeleteI remember being in high school and everyone had a facebook page and I was odd ball because I didn’t know what the hype was all about. I remember thinking that facebook was just outlet that was used for everyone to be in everyone else’s business. However when I started college I remember becoming addicted to it, I just ahd to check everyday then it turned into checking it every couple hours. This addiction would fade after someone stole pictures of me and created an account under different name passing themselves off as me. This when I realize the danger of facebook. So to answer your question about how the internet is portraying people identity? Facebook allow someone to use my identity for over 3 years portray me as this superficial, trash talking girl from OHIO. And this portrayal has not stop because facebook refuses to respond to my emails.
ReplyDeleteThe flight from myspace to facebook is interesting with respect to the website layouts and the aesthetic qualities of each site's design. The design of facebook reflects the audience it was created for: students at elite institutions. There is an orderliness to the manner in which all your data is displayed. Customizability is limited, so there is a fluidity in navigating everyone's profile. These qualities are in great contrast to myspace. This reminds us that taste and class are complexly intertwined.
ReplyDeleteGreat blog posting! In my opinion the Founder of Facebook probably wanted to gain capital as well as create a forum for socializing. Facebook has been an excellent venue to stay in touch with people and meet new people. Since many individuals have created facebook accounts with the assumptions that their information would be secure the internet has been a negative portal of people’s identity. The things that people disclose on the internet are things they would only share with their friends not necessary co-workers or employers. According to Nakamura (2007), “The internet has continued to gain uses and users who unevenly visualize race and gender in online environments,” (pg. 5). I agree with Nibia the information that is posted online is misleading and doesn’t not speak to one’s ability to be able to be effective or ineffective in a particular role.
ReplyDeleteI think it is safe to assume that the creators of facebook did not expect the increasing popularity of their website. Therefore, I believe that the creators of facebook created this website for capital. Facebook is a very popular commodity today where not only college students are using it anymore but everyone from parents, aunts, uncles, big companies who create fan pages and advertise, teachers use facebook to create class pages and etc...
ReplyDeleteFacebook as Lisa Nakamura talks about in her piece is digitizing the world we are in. Everything is on facebook now and as you discussed in your blog, even our identities. Facebook has become a commodity for big businesses, friends and family to openly view the lives and identities of people. The internet seems to portray people's identity as an accessible commodity that can be used to determine whether or not a person can get a job or not.
Tichina says, "[t]he idea that our information is being sold or even found out for uses unknown to us is an example of just how easily and unaware we are of our possibilities to be monetary and ethically commodified." I think it is really beyond human comprehension all the implications the Internet and virtual media have on us and society; same applies to institutions other than media. How can one really be aware of how his/her identity (or identities) are commodified? Nakamura references the Internet as a "popular environment" or space in which negotiation of identity and understanding of the world around us, through discursive practices and representation, takes place. Reading through the comments about Facebook caused me to question people's intention for and for not using Facebook. Is it mostly a social tool, a networking tool, a popularity contest tool, etc? Why do you use Facebook and do you care that you are being profiled to be marketed to? By having an account, you are handing over your privacy in a way. I know people lose their jobs or don't attain jobs because of "dirt" found on Facebook. I still struggle with how I feel about this. Yes, people should be conscious of how they represent themselves because employers can be watching, but where is the line? Are we really only "safe" when we're in our homes detached from technology? If we're constantly being "watched," then is the Internet an example of a Habermasian type public sphere? I would argue it provides a medium for audience agency, yet inherently power relations are embedded within its foundation to perpetuate inequality and top-down controlling of a so-called democratic media institution.
ReplyDeleteI think that Facebook definitely is proof to an emerging hegemony of neoliberalism in regards to technology and the internet. Facebook is used all over the world, and other countries which may have had the means to produce this kind of network do not have the ability to do so because Facebook is like a monopoly of social networking sites. This probably the result of the roots of the internet in popular society taking place during the period of "nineties neoliberalism" as Lisa Nakamura describes it. Also, that video was pretty creepy. I had no idea that Facebook is allowed to give your information away to third parties. I think that Facebook is a freedom of speech technically, but is a freedom of speech in the same way that talking on a phone that is tapped is.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting post, but I am torn. I am a fan of Facebook, but I have learned to control myself. Like Bola, I remember being confused about the whole social network thing while in high school (I still do not have a myspace page, and I barely started Twitter), but once I got in college, I was obsessed. I had to check it every hour. However, once I realized that I was wasting more time on Facebook than on my school work, I had to deactivate it for a while and "fast" from Facebook. One I got back on, I am now a moderate user. Facebook is a great way to keep in touch or reconnect with loved ones, since my whole family is on Facebook now. In addition, my 40-year-old long lost sister found me on Facebook and were able to do a DNA test that proved that my dad was her father (no joke). I do think that Facebook is a way to commodify oneself, but we have really do not have a choice but to stay with the times of this ever-changing technology.
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting post! Yes, I also agree with you all that the digital selves of people are commodified by Facebook. Facebook is a space that people construct the identities that they want to present to other users (not necessarily their friends in real life). When I was looking for a one-week vacation sublease and for roommate from out of town, people usually suggested to add each other as Facebook friends. By looking at one’s photos, interests, friends, and organizations on Facebook, we can get a general idea of what kind of people s/he is. Regardless of using a fake identity on Facebook, I guess it has become a very powerful space to “meet” people. To some extent, people nowadays do take the presentation of self on Facebook seriously.
ReplyDeleteFacebook has become a powerful space to gather people socially and politically. Just think about fan pages of politicians, and pages of campaign and events. After learning about the “White Flight,” it urges me to think the demographics of users of different social networking spaces, on one hand, create meanings of the spaces; and on the other hand, the spaces manipulate the demographics to create boundaries and identities, to exclude some people. The demographics of users and the created identities of the spaces reinforce each other. As China has blocked the access to Facebook since the riots of the Uygur autonomous region Xinjiang in July 2009, I am wondering if Facebook has been used as a symbol of liberalism and freedom of speech by those who are anti-Communist or anti-Chinese government. The huge population of Facebook users in China are waiting to be “liberated.”
I agree with you all about this issue. Theresa Senft wrote a wonderful book about the new age of social networks called CAMGIRLS. You should all really read it. It's a very short and exciting book. Furthermore, I knew this was coming. It seems only right to write about facebook being as though it is a part of this new social network phenomenon. I also feel that Facebook has created a space where strategic essentialism comes into play. Also, it is an issue of identity as well as techno-ethicality as girls and men are being seen as people with fake identities or fully exposed ones. This is detrimental either way. Furthermore, there's really no liberation on alternatives to using social networks because you are still judged by society and your identity is put out there so that the world could see you as something either authentic or not to that specific culture. This may or may not enforce stereotypes of any kind.
ReplyDeleteTiff what book are you speaking of, my room mate told me about it one time but could not remember the title.
ReplyDeleteANYWAY:
As far as social vs. capital goes, I cannot speculate on what the founders of facebook wanted to do and if it was a clear binary between making money and becoming differently socially connected with people.
Facebook is such a fascinating case study in and of itself as it reflects the internet's complexity of power relations in relation to immediate revision, interpretation, and creation of content. Facebook seems not to be a simple representation of the self as it holds qualities that face to face interaction does not and to act like one is just like the other would quite humorous (as I'm sure weve seen facebook costumes and thought how absurd it would be to walk around literally with all of that information, and likewise how many of our friends post personal information as seeming cries for help to a somewhat public forum).
It definitely complicates the ideas of who we are and who we want to be projected as and further how we want to be perceived as individuals on the internet. The relations also get complicated when things from facebook transcend to the offline world, not just privacy issues with employers and the govt, but between people. How many of us have had miscommunication between what we think is going on offline and what is going on on facebook? How many times have people taken personal drama to social networks life facebook?
I don't think that the dudes that created this website could have forseen the social complications this media would create, but one things for sure, it's a part of a much larger want to connect with others on a mass scale.
I totally just found out how facebook really works not to long ago and I really thing that now facebook was gimmic set up as a tool. AFter reading everything I truly wished I had not gotten a facebook just because nothin you do is private. Facebook is used by everyone and noe i truly think it is just a way for higher powers like companies and the media to get information on us lower people and know what it is that we want and feed it to us.
ReplyDelete