Some steps I have taken to not give up all my information include not fully filling out forms/applications on the web. I only fill out the required information instead of going above and beyond to fill out the optional information that is asked of me. I also make sure every time I log off a computer in school or anywhere that I signed off everything I logged onto. I need to make sure that I didn’t make the mistake of leaving my information out in the open for others to see. In terms of my personal social media outlets, I try to privatize as much as I can for my personal security. Sometimes you don’t want to have random strangers sifting through your information like a creeper. Better safe than sorry. For platforms such as Instagram, I try to limit who can follow me and who can’t just for my personal security and safety. Sometimes there’s followers you don’t want following you since they could be potentially harmful in terms of harassment. I think being careful of what kind of information I put out into the web is another step I’m learning to take more often. Sometimes I think everyone is often tempted to show people more than they should so it’s important we take a step back and make sure that we’re aware of what we’re revealing to the world about ourselves.
Author Archives: jennipho
Summary of Activity on this Site
Number of Posts: 13
Number of Comments: 13
A Social Media Disaster, coming to a theater near you.
It seems that social media has become such a huge part of our lives and culture that it’s being plastered onto movie screens for us to see. First it was “The Social Network” and now it’s the upcoming movie “Chef”. According to the article I found on Mashable, the movie “Chef” is about a chef learning what a huge role social media can play into helping shape a business and the disaster it can cause. I find it interesting how social media is such an integral part of our culture and lives that it’s being made into a movie to show people how significant of a role it really does play.
You can check out the exclusive trailer of “Chef” here. Even though I saw the trailer, which is just a snippet of the film, it seems to depict both the good and bad that can come from social media. Sometimes the things we post can cause chaos, but maybe also other things we post can resolve the chaos we ensued. What do you think of films depicting how social media is integrated into our lives? The director stated in the article how he wanted to capture “where we are in time and the language we use”. From the trailer or just in general, do you think this film or other social media-based movies accurately capture the generation of our time?
Social Media Posts: Do people really care?
This article on Mashable spotlighted two videos about social media: “You are what you share” and “Everything You Wish You Could Say to Your Facebook Friends“. I couldn’t agree more with the article title “No One Cares About Your Social Media Posts”, with the exception that it only matters if it’s actually important. “You are what you share” basically summarizes a majority of people’s habits of posting on social media and people’s reactions to those posts. I noticed in the video it only highlights the social media posts that tend to seem generic and nothing really extraordinary or significant. Majority of people who are active on social media might see these kinds of posts daily so they can relate to the comments and reactions in the video. However, the video excludes social media posts that are significant, controversial, extraordinary, and outrageous. If the video included those kinds of social media posts, then I think people would actually care because we don’t always see things that shock, surprise, or amaze us. Often times, some people don’t realize who’s on the other end looking at their posts.
People always tell each other to be careful of what they post on social media because it can find a way to haunt us or get us into trouble, but when should people start caring or paying attention to what’s posted on social media platforms? How do we determine if we’ve crossed the line of posting something inappropriate for social media? Do we determine this based on how it will affect us or someone else personally/professionally? How seriously should we even take social media? How mindful/careful should we be about what we post?
Network at 35,000 Feet
I was reading this article on Mashable about how there are social seating services that allow you to connect with other people 35,000 feet in the air. It works by letting travelers choose their seat mate by looking at other travelers’ profiles on Facebook or LinkedIn. I thought this was interesting how airlines were utilizing their airplanes as opportunities for travelers to network and connect with each other. This is an innovative idea and it’s a great way for people to utilize their time while being on a plane. The article also mentioned how two professionals had the chance to be seated with each other while heading to a TED conference. It’s actually kind of cool to have the opportunity to talk to someone who you wouldn’t normally have access to. Who knew that your social media profiles could be utilized to help you meet someone 35,000 feet in the air?
However, there are some negative aspects to it such as being matched with someone unwanted or the awkwardness by being refused by a seat mate. Also sometimes people just want to wind down and escape from having to do business so planes provide that temporary liberation for them. But what do you think about this social seating service? Do you think other airlines should jump on board with social seating services and allow travelers to network and connect with each other? Do you think that more travelers are going to be interested in using this service or would this service just be for professionals to network with other professionals if the chance arises?
Generation Like
I think Generation Like is an accurate depiction of how most kids and young adults utilize social media outlets. It’s a bit trivial for someone to rely and depend on how many likes or views their posts or videos generate just to validate themselves. It’s understandable that companies would want to reach out to individuals who have generated a high amount of followers, likes, and subscribers, but this eventually transforms the individual’s social media platforms into tools to build the individual’s personal brand as well as the company’s brand. Instead of using it as a source to express themselves or post things they want to show people and not to profit by showing off the goods that the company sponsored them with, it’s more like a marketing/advertising tool for companies. It’s as if the company took over the user’s social media accounts for their own benefit.
Generation Like has shown that it’s pretty much a win-win situation for both the individual and the company that’s sponsoring that individual. In return for showcasing the company’s goods to their social media accounts, they receive free gear, cash or other forms of payment. There’s really no loser unless the individual’s followers decide to unfollow or not like the user’s posts/videos because their product reviews are deceiving. For example, the individual can just be saying nice things about a product to keep getting sponsored, when in actuality that product isn’t great quality. The individual would be losing the audience that they probably took a while to generate. Teens/young adults are being exploited and so are their personal social media platforms. I think they’re aware of their exploitation, but so long as they benefit in some way, they’re probably fine with it.
Watts and Strogatz
During our research, we found that 27 sources were cited by Watts and Strogatz in their article “Nature”. Most of the subjects that we found that they cited were in the field of physics and general science. We saw that others cited Strogatz and Watts’ “Nature” article 8,709 times. The top three authors who cited this article are: Chen, G. (76 times), Wang, B. (71 times), Zhou, T. (68 times). In our findings, we saw that mechanics was the least cited article while physics was the most cited article. Computer science was cited a moderate amount of times.
Team 2: E-Cigarettes for Kids
E-cigarettes are a good alternative for addicted smokers. However, E-cigarettes have been misused by kids because the producers of the E-cigarettes added colors and flavors to attract younger individuals. Although E-cigarettes don’t contain the chemicals as a regular cigarette, it does contain nicotine which is an addictive substance which may be a gateway to more harmful drugs in the future.
We will use the following tools to inform teenagers the negative effects of E-cigarettes.
1) Facebook – platform for past users, current users, and potential users of E-cigarettes to share their personal stories or experiences with E-cigarettes
Pros:
1. Open platform so anyone can join the group (includes health experts and advocates)
2. Free, user-friendly, and widely used 3. Embed other channels of communication/media to share in a common platform
Cons:
1. Since anyone can join, some people might encourage the use of E-cigarettes through private messaging members.
2. Spammers posting irrelevant information
3. Too many similar groups on Facebook so the power of our group is diluted.
2) YouTube – platform to create and share videos to effectively persuade teenagers not to use E-cigarettes
Pros:
1. Talking in videos is more effective, personal, and influential to get the message across
2. Easily accessible on a global basis
Cons:
1. Videos might be linked to other videos that encourage the use of E-cigarettes
2. Video titles can be copied to create misleading video
We are not using the following tools:
1) Instagram – it’s main use is for positive images instead of raising awareness
2) Vine – this platform is used more for comedic purposes
3) MySpace – nobody really uses MySpace anymore
In the Pre-1993 Era, we would use the following methods to promote the awareness of E-cigarettes:
1. passing out fliers to our local neighborhoods
2. holding a town/community meeting
3. promote through TV and radio commercials
4. advertisements in newspapers and magazines
Team 2
- Content & Design
- What content is uniquely in the paper? on the web edition?
In the paper, there’s full page ads and general ads. On the web edition, each of the ads are personalized to your interest. For the weather and sports section, the print version will only focus on the local New York area. However if there is an individual from outside the New York area that view the New York Times online, they can get personalized weather and sports. - What features and functionality are uniquely in the paper? on the web edition?
In the paper, you have the original content and it cannot be updated or changed. The paper edition can be kept and stored as an antique. On the web edition, it can be updated on a real time basis. It can also be emailed and shared in the web edition. In the web edition, you can access U.S., international, or Chinese versions. Paper version is access to what you just purchased. - What can you do with the print edition that you can’t do with the web edition? what can you do the the web edition that you can’t do with the print one?
In the print edition, you own the physical copy which you can feel and smell. Also it’s more visual and you can flip through the pages to continue the story. On the web, the story is already continued for you so you don’t need to flip through pages to continue reading. Also you can access the archive of the newspaper when you own the physical copy but sometimes you’re limited for the web edition. - How would you compare overall the design aesthetic of the two?
The front page photo is a photo is always an attention grabber or exaggerated. On the print edition, stories are cut off so therefore to continue you would have to reference to another page. Web stories are continuous reads.
- What content is uniquely in the paper? on the web edition?
- Relationship between the NY Times and readers
- What evidence can you find about ways that the web edition is received/responded to by readers online (both on the NY Times website and elsewhere on the web)?
On the web edition, you can comment on the article to share your own opinions. If the opinion is valid, then there will be a whole discussion about it. They can easily share the article through Facebook, Twitter, email and you can save it for future reference. On the web edition, there’s an email list of contributors to the article, so you can directly contact those contributors. - What if any evidence can you find that the readership of the print edition is not the same as the web edition?
Readers may contact the contributor through email and written mail. However, it requires additional time and effort to do so. For readers of the print edition, readers might feel more inclined to absorb the information whereas online readers would skim it quickly just to find the specific information they need.
- What evidence can you find about ways that the web edition is received/responded to by readers online (both on the NY Times website and elsewhere on the web)?
Author: Marc Prensky
Prensky, Marc. “Our brains extended.” Educational Leadership 70.6 (2013): 22-27. Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Feb. 2014
I used Academic OneFile to find the article.
Social Media causes Global Movement
So I came across this article on Mashable and I found it moving how a global movement can arise from sharing acts of kindness on social media. There’s a viral drinking game known as NekNominate where players film themselves drinking large quantities of alcohol and nominating other friends to do the same. One particular player, Brent Lindeque, was nominated and decided to use this opportunity to raise awareness on global concerns such as hunger and poverty through filming his acts of kindness. Instead of NekNominate, the new challenge became RAKNomination (short for Random Acts of Kindness). Soon this challenge became viral and people everywhere started filming themselves showing kindness to people in need.
First I don’t understand why people would accept a challenge to film themselves downing large amounts of alcohol and encourage others to do so. Just because something is viral doesn’t mean it’s always wise or in this case safe. However, people such as Brent utilized this viral trend as an opportunity to intervene and spread kindness through YouTube. My question is: Why do people feel inclined to use social media outlets like YouTube as a platform to encourage foolish acts instead of using it to raise awareness or make a positive impact in the world? Why aren’t more social media platforms being portrayed as tools to change the world for the better instead of tools that encourage stupidity and harm?
Pay with Tweets and Pictures
If only every store took social media posts for payment, a girl can dream. I came across this article on Mashable about a Marc Jacobs pop-up shop taking Instagram/Facebook posts and tweets in exchange for products. How cool is that?! The store is using customer’s social media posts as a sort of “social currency.” They receive gifts just for putting the hashtag #MJDaisyChain in their posts. Do you guys think this is an effective promotional tool, using social media as a “currency”? Even though they’re not profiting in revenue, they are generating a massive presence on the internet, enhancing their brand’s reputation. Do you think other brands and companies would emulate their strategy? If social media posts were a form of currency, how would you even measure the cost of each post?
Professor Lutwak
I’m currently taking Professor Nita Lutwak’s Abnormal Psychology class and am enjoying it very much. Professor Nita Lutwak is an expertise in the field of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. In addition to her Abnormal Psychology class, she also teaches the graduate students in the Masters Mental Health Counseling program at Baruch. When she’s not teaching students, she has her own private practice in New York. Professor Lutwak’s works have also been published, one of them being, Adolescence, 36(144), 641-653. Libra Publishers, Inc.
But I can’t study in libraries.
When I think about the library, I think of Baruch’s library since it’s the only library I usually go to. Ironically I don’t get much studying done in the library even though it’s a sanctuary for studying and concentration. Instead of studying like other students, I wander aimlessly on the web looking for things to amuse me. I especially like going on Tumblr to find amusing things because there’s always something new and funny I’m bound to come across.
Comments:
"This is actually a really great idea by UNICEF. It really is killing two birds with one stone since it prevents you from having the urge to touch your phone so that you could save a life. Who knew you could save a life by not touching your phone? I hope this idea is mimicked by other charities or organizations so that not only could they get people to save more lives, but they could also encourage others not to be so addicted to their mobile devices. I think this is a good way to discipline people to not be so attached to their phones especially if they know that by doing so, they're contributing to a great cause."posted on May 14, 2014, on the post DON’T TOUCH YOUR PHONE FOR 10 MINUTES
"I definitely agree that we don't know who we expose ourselves to and that's the danger in putting ourselves out there to the world through social media. I think we feed off the attention we get from these platforms because maybe in a way it gives us that self-esteem boost we're looking for from others. However, it's kind of sad that we become attached to social media just because we think getting tons of likes and comments validate who we are. Social media used to be sharing bits and pieces of your life, now people look at it as a tool to validate their identity and reputation in society. However, like Rushkoff said, people will eventually get bored and move onto other things. Hopefully more people will realize that social media is just a part of their lives, and shouldn't entirely define their lives."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Generation Like
"This is actually quite fascinating that there's a possibility to print a body part. I think this would be a major breakthrough in science and can actually help people who have physical disabilities due to missing body parts. I always thought 3D printing was just limited to printing prototypes of something but to see that it could be used to print something even greater is pretty cool. My question though is would these printed body parts perform and function the same way that our own body parts function and is there any harm or downside that can come from printing these body parts? I feel like there should be extensive research done on this just to make sure that nothing can go wrong if someone decides to have a printed body part become part of their body."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Printing body parts?
"I agree that we shouldn't use our phone as much but I think it's hard for us because it's such an integral part of our lives. I think it'd be difficult for anyone to go an entire day without being so active on their phone. I definitely agree with your point that children shouldn't be so exposed to technology especially when they're so young. When I see kids half my age playing on tablets and iPhones, I'm surprised especially since I don't even have either of those. It's nice to know that there's educational tools and apps on those devices, but I think exposing children to such devices causes them to become addicted to them. Children should enjoy playing with toys and interacting with other kids, not playing with apps. I think they lose part of that childhood experience when they would rather play with apps than play with toys."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post We are not as social as we think?
"I think technology does have its pros and cons of strengthening and weakening bonds with people. Pros would include being able to communicate with people who live far from us through video apps such as ooVoo or Skype. I think those video apps come in handy when I haven't had the chance to speak or see someone for a while so I can catch up with them. On the downside, although I can see and speak to them face-to-face, it's still over the internet so it does lack that personal and authentic interpersonal communication aspect of it. I prefer being physically there with someone and being able to see them entirely instead of just a headshot of their face. I think technology is useful for allowing us to communicate to each other, but it definitely puts us at a setback if we would rather hang out with people on Google Hangout than actually hang out in person. Technology shouldn't make us prefer interaction over the internet instead of interaction in person. As for pets, I don't think technology would strengthen our bonds with our pets. Pets should be taken care of by you, its owner, not technology. You also lose out on the intimate connection you have with your pet by letting technology take care of your pet."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Pets and Technology
"I think our current social media platforms have set the standard for any upcoming and new social media platforms. I agree with the previous comments that there will be something bigger in the future especially when technology is advancing at an exceedingly quick rate. I remember when I was younger and just learning to become adept in social media, people were using platforms like Xanga and MySpace, but now everyone's on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. Maybe Xanga and MySpace helped set some of the standard for social media platforms today, but while they did so, they eventually became a tool of the past. I can't imagine what could be bigger than our current social media platforms since each platform is already hugely popular."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post The Future of Social Media
"I think this protest was effective if people are recognizing that this is their response to Sterling's racist remarks. By wearing their shirts inside out and hiding the Clippers name, it shows that they don't even want to represent the owner and his team name. I wouldn't want to represent or even associate myself with someone who is clearly racist to his own team and other basketball players as well. I don't think the Clippers team wanted to cause a riot with their protest, I think they just wanted to show people their reaction and response to the racist comments made by Sterling. I think if the team hadn't reacted or responded collectively, then people might have assumed that they didn't want to display their reaction publicly and questioned why they didn't respond."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post LA Clippers Silent Protest
"I'm guilty of being on my phone while I'm with other people and I've also been on the other end. I think when you're on your phone while others are trying to have a conversation with you is distracting and a bit impolite. If someone is trying to interact with you but you're too focused on your phone to even listen to them, it's inconsiderate since you can't even give them five minutes of your time to listen. I think people should be more interested in having a real face-to-face conversation with someone than over their mobile devices. I'm sure your text or FB message can wait. I feel like with real face-to-face interaction fosters your interpersonal skills and also creates a stronger bond between individuals just because it's more authentic opposed to having a conversation online or through text. I think every time we're hanging out with someone, we should try to restrain ourselves from checking our phones as often as possible just so we can enjoy the time we have with people in person."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Too attached to our phones
"I think losing our phones causes us to make unwise choices because we're just so focused on trying to get the phone back as soon as possible. I don't think we actually think of our own safety as a priority and we place our priority on the phone instead. I agree that it's best for your personal safety to go with someone or call the cops to help you retrieve the phone than going alone. You really don't know what situation you're getting yourself into if you go alone. I think we care about getting our phones back so much just because in a way it's like losing something absolutely valuable since most of our memories and information are stored on our phones. Honestly, I think if we backed up all our data somewhere we probably wouldn't even be all that concerned about our phone going missing since we already backed up the data. If anything, it would just the cost to replace the phone that would probably affect us."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Smartphone Dangers
"This reminds me of what Facebook does when we don't want to see certain things posted by certain people. On Facebook, you can click on someone's post on your newsfeed and there's the option that says "I don't want to see this" to keep that person's posts from showing up on your newsfeed again. I think this option on Facebook and Twitter's mute feature come in handy when you want to filter the kind of content that shows up on your newsfeed. It's the better option to let Facebook know you don't want to see posts from someone and to mute someone on Twitter than de-friending them or unfollowing someone. It'd be quite awkward to add someone again when they didn't even realize you unfriended them or follow someone again when they thought you followed them the entire time. I feel like these options that Facebook and Twitter present to us are in a way kind of like the "dislike" button, but just more subtle about it. I think if both Facebook and Twitter added the option to dislike a post or a tweet, chaos and controversy would ensue. Instead of disliking something, we can just choose to let social media know we don't really want to see it."
posted on May 14, 2014, on the post Don’t block your friends, just ‘mute’ them.
"My question is, are social media outlets a domain in which people can freely speak their minds or in reality just virtual places that breeds hatred? It seems like social media outlets like Twitter, who utilizes hash tags are making it easier for narrow minded individuals to gather those alike with negative outlooks on various topics and ideas and spreading them like wildfire. Should we have a filter on these social media outlets to determine what is and isn’t appropriate? But on what level can we do this? You can read some of these comments It seems that most people don't filter what they say or even think of the consequences or people's reactions to their public posts. Some people might think that these platforms are their way of expressing their freedom of speech, so to censor or limit what they can or cannot say would in a sense be taking their right of speech from them. I agree that there are some things that should not be said so openly on social media because there's a time and place for things, however most people will post their opinion at their own risk without consideration of their words. People are entitled to their own opinions and allowed to express them so long as nobody is harmed because of these opinions. If someone tweets or publicly posts something that actually poses a threat to the general public, then I believe that something should be done. Also if you're aware that your opinion will instigate controversy and potential inappropriate comments, then it might just be best to keep them to yourself to not only prevent conflict on social media, but maybe for your own protection."
posted on Feb 23, 2014, on the post Coca Cola Superbowl Ad
"I think sharing our experience and our lives with others on social media has become such an integral part of our lives that we always want to share it with others, even if we are hurt or in danger. I find it odd and a little ridiculous that we find sharing such incidents on social media platforms a priority instead of seeking medical attention first. It's like when others witness a crime or a fight happening, but they would rather record and share it on social media platforms instead of calling the cops. Maybe it's the bystander effect of not getting involved or maybe we're just addicted to sharing with others that we forget our priorities to help ourselves and others first. If I was shot in the neck, I'd be seeking the medical attention that I needed instead of telling the world that I was dying. People's tweets and comments in response to your "I'm dying" post won't save your life. You need to save yourself first. You can share with everyone else that you survived after you got some help. Also do you really want your last tweet to be the announcement of your death?"
posted on Feb 23, 2014, on the post Social need to share
"I need to step my finals game up."
posted on Jan 30, 2014, on the post Love?