BuzzDash Internet Community
view presentation (tags: 340sum08)
Popular Culture Communication and Analysis on the Web
SlideShare Link
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
BuzzDash: Polling Quirky Data in 'Real Time'
There is a new community forming online. A percentage community. One that thrives on pie graphs and statistical data...but they're a rowdier bunch than you might assume. While their format requires mass number crunching, this particular Web 2.0 application and its users are anything but dry. They have, in fact, created a far more dynamic network than other social web 2.0 concepts I've seen.
BuzzDash.com is a polling community where anyone and everyone can "solicit, measure, and share opinions” on various issues in real time. The site is composed of over thirteen thousand "buzzbites", which are customizable polling modules, topics ranging from the more traditional (entertainment, sports, politics, and finance) to the more controversial and obscure (sexual preferences, philosophy, salad dressing, office behavior, shoe lacing strategy). Also, the polling "buzzbite" widget isn't restricted to just Buzzdash.com, "the module can be embedded in any personal web page or blog". Go ahead; create your very own poll and broadcast it to the world…(via myspace, facebook, etc). The site’s unspoken anthem: what you ask is as important as how you choose to respond.
In its Terms of Service, Buzzdash releases itself of all liability regarding user content: "You understand that by using the Service, you may be exposed to Content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable...This means that you, and not BuzzDash, are entirely responsible for all Content that you upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available via the Service." That being said, there isn't much you CAN'T find on BuzzDash. Site reviews include praise and appreciation for its "easy-to-use software" that seems to cater to the "obsessively curious". Its unique approach to tracking popular opinion has earned Marina del Ray based BuzzDash.com a place on PC World's 25 Web Sites to Watch (2007). It was also voted "Best Web 2.0" on allthingsweb2.com (2008).
My particular interest was peaked when I came across its sub-category labeled “relationship” (listed on homepage sidebar under ''other''). What kinds of questions are people asking in this network about sex, sexuality, love, marriage, dating, betrayal, divorce, children, childhood? How does this Internet audience differ from other audiences polled on the web? What are the gender discrepancies of online statistical research as compared to those found in other mediums? The breadth of question on this site is remarkable. Some of the recent polls posted include “Ladies: Would you sleep with a bi-sexual man?”, “Are your parents happy with the role religion plays in your life?”, “Parents with pets: do you love your kids or your pets more?”, “Should we have the right to choose to pay child support?”, “Are you more attracted to people with a different hair color than you?”.
I would imagine that part of the reason people become “addicted” to a network like Buzzdash is because it (seemingly) provides a direct route to that ever mysterious thing we call ‘normal behavior’. While charting a particular poll’s progress, you’re not reading between the lines. You’re reading numbers. You’re reading a very simplified explanation of very complex social indicators. Buzzdash presents immediate access to ‘average’, to a so-called normative. But does the public opinion aggregated on Buzzdash accurately represent greater trends of some sort? If you are registered with site you can, in fact, explore the particular demographic responses to polling prompts. If you click on the magnifying glass in bottom right hand corner of the buzzbite you are given these categories to choose from: Gender, Age, Geography, Marital Status, Political Affiliation, Race/ethnicity, and Household income. For the relationship buzzbite entitled, "If the fountain of youth was discovered, would you take a drink?", 1999 people have voted since its post date on July 17th... the problem being not all of these 1999 pollers have provided information regarding their age, race, marital status etc. Of all those votes only 25 have identified themselves as female and even less have identified their race/ethnicity.
With such an innovative way to track popular opinion on a wide variety of issues, I hope more people (not just those fluent in the world of web 2.0) decide to join this community. It will make the result more dynamic, more accurate, and perhaps generate type of discussions that are too embarrassing or "taboo" to prompt face-to-face.
BuzzDash.com is a polling community where anyone and everyone can "solicit, measure, and share opinions” on various issues in real time. The site is composed of over thirteen thousand "buzzbites", which are customizable polling modules, topics ranging from the more traditional (entertainment, sports, politics, and finance) to the more controversial and obscure (sexual preferences, philosophy, salad dressing, office behavior, shoe lacing strategy). Also, the polling "buzzbite" widget isn't restricted to just Buzzdash.com, "the module can be embedded in any personal web page or blog". Go ahead; create your very own poll and broadcast it to the world…(via myspace, facebook, etc). The site’s unspoken anthem: what you ask is as important as how you choose to respond.
In its Terms of Service, Buzzdash releases itself of all liability regarding user content: "You understand that by using the Service, you may be exposed to Content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable...This means that you, and not BuzzDash, are entirely responsible for all Content that you upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available via the Service." That being said, there isn't much you CAN'T find on BuzzDash. Site reviews include praise and appreciation for its "easy-to-use software" that seems to cater to the "obsessively curious". Its unique approach to tracking popular opinion has earned Marina del Ray based BuzzDash.com a place on PC World's 25 Web Sites to Watch (2007). It was also voted "Best Web 2.0" on allthingsweb2.com (2008).
My particular interest was peaked when I came across its sub-category labeled “relationship” (listed on homepage sidebar under ''other''). What kinds of questions are people asking in this network about sex, sexuality, love, marriage, dating, betrayal, divorce, children, childhood? How does this Internet audience differ from other audiences polled on the web? What are the gender discrepancies of online statistical research as compared to those found in other mediums? The breadth of question on this site is remarkable. Some of the recent polls posted include “Ladies: Would you sleep with a bi-sexual man?”, “Are your parents happy with the role religion plays in your life?”, “Parents with pets: do you love your kids or your pets more?”, “Should we have the right to choose to pay child support?”, “Are you more attracted to people with a different hair color than you?”.
I would imagine that part of the reason people become “addicted” to a network like Buzzdash is because it (seemingly) provides a direct route to that ever mysterious thing we call ‘normal behavior’. While charting a particular poll’s progress, you’re not reading between the lines. You’re reading numbers. You’re reading a very simplified explanation of very complex social indicators. Buzzdash presents immediate access to ‘average’, to a so-called normative. But does the public opinion aggregated on Buzzdash accurately represent greater trends of some sort? If you are registered with site you can, in fact, explore the particular demographic responses to polling prompts. If you click on the magnifying glass in bottom right hand corner of the buzzbite you are given these categories to choose from: Gender, Age, Geography, Marital Status, Political Affiliation, Race/ethnicity, and Household income. For the relationship buzzbite entitled, "If the fountain of youth was discovered, would you take a drink?", 1999 people have voted since its post date on July 17th... the problem being not all of these 1999 pollers have provided information regarding their age, race, marital status etc. Of all those votes only 25 have identified themselves as female and even less have identified their race/ethnicity.
With such an innovative way to track popular opinion on a wide variety of issues, I hope more people (not just those fluent in the world of web 2.0) decide to join this community. It will make the result more dynamic, more accurate, and perhaps generate type of discussions that are too embarrassing or "taboo" to prompt face-to-face.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
The Internet: Bringing people with STDs closer, for comfort
Online Dating Insider:
Evans writes a couple of posts about private-label dating sites that sponsor HIV/STD infected users
The Dating Weblog:
The Dating Weblog lists these as leading sites in STD social media,
-The Edge: based out of Boston, HIV dating site
-BeOneCity: based out of Los Angeles, working on creating a site particular to the heterosexual community
-PositiveSingles, PozitiveLiving, PozMatch.com, Positive Personals
-forums for information and not just meeting others
Scientificblogging.com:
HIV denialist organizations like "Reappraising AIDS" make it their mission to spread misinformation. They have a basic distrust of authority and of institutions of science and medicine. One of the prominent HIV denial groups currently is Christine Maggiore's “Alive and Well” (formerly “HEAL,” Health Education AIDS Liaison) (http://www.aliveandwell.org/ ). Maggiore's life story is at the center of this group. Diagnosed with HIV in 1992, Maggiore claims she has since been symptom-free for the past 14 years without the use of antiretroviral drugs, including protease inhibitors [10]. She has risen to prominence, and been embroiled in controversy, in recent years after giving birth to and openly breast-feeding her two children, Charles and Eliza Jane. She had neither child tested for HIV, and did not take antiretroviral medication during her pregnancy or subsequent breast-feeding [11]. Eliza Jane died in September 2005 of HIV-related pneumonia [12], though Maggiore remains unconvinced that HIV had any role in her daughter's death [13], and continues to preach her message to other HIV-positive mothers.
Picturephoning.com
Mobile phone pictures used to diagnose STDs online: "People too shy to visit an STD clinic can upload images of their intimate problems - and get an almost instant medical opinion. The pioneering service allows men and women to reveal worrying lumps or rashes without the ordeal of a face-to-face consultation. The pictures will be examined by doctors, who will send out any advice or prescription by post or email." permalink (May 26th, 2008)
Textually.org
There is a new SMS search service that allows South Africans to locate the closest HIV/AID testing site. This same service, hosted by Karabo.org.za, Levi Strauss teamed with South Africa, provides anonymous and confidential mobile counseling services. The Cape-based organization called "Cell Life" has teamed up with mobile technology: Hannan Crusaid's 40 counsellors have been trained to use cellphones equipped with a special menu that allows them to capture data about patients' symptoms and pill taking as well as other factors that might affect their health such as lack of money to pay for transport to the clinic, or a shortage of food. The information is relayed instantly over Vodacom's GSM network to a central database, which can be accessed by clinic staff over a secure connection. In addition to their scheduled visits, counsellors arrive unannounced once every four months to do a pill count. The information they collect is compared with clinic data on the number of pills issued to patients, and enables staff to spot looming trouble. The cellphones are not used to remind HIV patients to take their pills, partly because they are encouraged to manage their own health, but also because it would not be practical to send mass alerts on a long-term basis.
Evans writes a couple of posts about private-label dating sites that sponsor HIV/STD infected users
The Dating Weblog:
The Dating Weblog lists these as leading sites in STD social media,
-The Edge: based out of Boston, HIV dating site
-BeOneCity: based out of Los Angeles, working on creating a site particular to the heterosexual community
-PositiveSingles, PozitiveLiving, PozMatch.com, Positive Personals
-forums for information and not just meeting others
Scientificblogging.com:
HIV denialist organizations like "Reappraising AIDS" make it their mission to spread misinformation. They have a basic distrust of authority and of institutions of science and medicine. One of the prominent HIV denial groups currently is Christine Maggiore's “Alive and Well” (formerly “HEAL,” Health Education AIDS Liaison) (http:
Picturephoning.com
Mobile phone pictures used to diagnose STDs online: "People too shy to visit an STD clinic can upload images of their intimate problems - and get an almost instant medical opinion. The pioneering service allows men and women to reveal worrying lumps or rashes without the ordeal of a face-to-face consultation. The pictures will be examined by doctors, who will send out any advice or prescription by post or email." permalink (May 26th, 2008)
Textually.org
There is a new SMS search service that allows South Africans to locate the closest HIV/AID testing site. This same service, hosted by Karabo.org.za, Levi Strauss teamed with South Africa, provides anonymous and confidential mobile counseling services. The Cape-based organization called "Cell Life" has teamed up with mobile technology: Hannan Crusaid's 40 counsellors have been trained to use cellphones equipped with a special menu that allows them to capture data about patients' symptoms and pill taking as well as other factors that might affect their health such as lack of money to pay for transport to the clinic, or a shortage of food. The information is relayed instantly over Vodacom's GSM network to a central database, which can be accessed by clinic staff over a secure connection. In addition to their scheduled visits, counsellors arrive unannounced once every four months to do a pill count. The information they collect is compared with clinic data on the number of pills issued to patients, and enables staff to spot looming trouble. The cellphones are not used to remind HIV patients to take their pills, partly because they are encouraged to manage their own health, but also because it would not be practical to send mass alerts on a long-term basis.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
DEL.ICIO.US Bookmarking 'Soulmate'
In 1968, James Taylor debuted "Something in the Way She Moves"-- arguably one of the most beloved folk songs in American history. The sound alone is an ode to the era: a seductive melody politely underscores the entirety of love's mid-century revolution. There was something in the way love physically moved, in the way people danced/made art/made music that inspired a peaceful prerogative. "Social movements" were made of just that, moving bodies.
Now, exactly forty years later, I'm sitting across from my computer screen--staring into a portal of digital 'bodies'--feeling moved (or, like, whatever) by an invisible person's "bookmarking" tendancies. Ah yes, how times have changed...something tells me "The Way She Bookmarks" would not emerge a chart-topper. But despite technology's distraction from physical exertion (doing stuff is so passé), the web does provide a type of revolutionary moving: movement by way of linking.
Sites like del.icio.us and Diigo.com have introduced a world of interactive, online media storage. They host an infinitely dynamic community of what are known as 'social bookmarkers'...otherwise known as researchers, journalists, students, teachers, marketers, business owners, pizza delivery guys, porno stars, housewives, housedads, 43 year-old garage banders still living the dream and in the garage...a community otherwise known as regular ol' people. Statement-making and movement-starting are something one can do via "click-click"; the harmonizing abilities of James' Taylor no longer a necessary prerequisite for pop-culture canonization. One can gain a following just by how one "likes". Relationship, one might say, is now brought to you by Window shopping (pun intended).
...So, who is my window shopping/social bookmarking "soulmate"?
Her username: annaviary. Her taste in text: superb. I knew it was love when I came across her impecable use of the term "douche hat" in a posted commentary on Chris Matthews. I mean who doesn't appreciate a little honesty?...or the vernacular versatility of "douche"?
"Annaviary" has over three thousand tagged items. The bookmarks are then grouped, or "bundled", under the following broader categories: abortion/repro.rights, culture, health, law&politics, location (geographical), and work/family. The greater groupings, while not particular to gender in title, roof a multitude of articles, blogs, and sites focusing (for the most part) on gender and gender roles in local and international media. She has specific tags for academic 'research' and 'essays'; her bookmarking "eye" is trained to seek a wide spectrum of sources but puts a strong emphasis on scholarly material, which I like. When studying gender, it is necessary to include material written by the school of thought itself in addition to material produced by the great culture, material which indirectly affects analysis. In the same way that I strive for a multidimensional perspective on my research, annaviary's resources are dynamic without losing focus. Under the "culture" bundle, she has tags that include girl.culture, dude.culture, profilemedia, dating, porn, faux.feminism, body.image, women.writers, gender, gender.roles, masculinity, femininity, anti-feminism, video.games, censorship, advertising, media, stalking, divorce, and sextoys. As they are with me, both "technology" and "relationship" are narrowed within annaviary's greater scheme of gender-perusing.
Like I mentioned earlier, I was initially drawn to annaviary through her commentary . An example of her more, em, astute quotes (not that "douche hat" isn't astute, just...brief) comes from an article entitled, "Slut is not a four letter word". Annaviary writes, "Even the coolest chicks on TV have, if anything, been too busy being, you know, Strong Female Characters—chatty single moms, super-spies, angsty students, neurotic lawyers, mega-bitches—to get too down and dirty. Until now." The article's tags include tv, sex, and pop.culture. Maybe it's because she smart and sassy. Maybe it's because she writes like I do. Maybe it's because she has a deep and well-organized rolodex of gender research and gender news sources. Whatever it is, I'm pleasantly surprised by the affection and respect I have for someone I've never met, by this kindred feeling I've developed for someone by simply snooping around their cyber bookshelf. Yup, I'm moved.
Now, exactly forty years later, I'm sitting across from my computer screen--staring into a portal of digital 'bodies'--feeling moved (or, like, whatever) by an invisible person's "bookmarking" tendancies. Ah yes, how times have changed...something tells me "The Way She Bookmarks" would not emerge a chart-topper. But despite technology's distraction from physical exertion (doing stuff is so passé), the web does provide a type of revolutionary moving: movement by way of linking.
Sites like del.icio.us and Diigo.com have introduced a world of interactive, online media storage. They host an infinitely dynamic community of what are known as 'social bookmarkers'...otherwise known as researchers, journalists, students, teachers, marketers, business owners, pizza delivery guys, porno stars, housewives, housedads, 43 year-old garage banders still living the dream and in the garage...a community otherwise known as regular ol' people. Statement-making and movement-starting are something one can do via "click-click"; the harmonizing abilities of James' Taylor no longer a necessary prerequisite for pop-culture canonization. One can gain a following just by how one "likes". Relationship, one might say, is now brought to you by Window shopping (pun intended).
...So, who is my window shopping/social bookmarking "soulmate"?
Her username: annaviary. Her taste in text: superb. I knew it was love when I came across her impecable use of the term "douche hat" in a posted commentary on Chris Matthews. I mean who doesn't appreciate a little honesty?...or the vernacular versatility of "douche"?
"Annaviary" has over three thousand tagged items. The bookmarks are then grouped, or "bundled", under the following broader categories: abortion/repro.rights, culture, health, law&politics, location (geographical), and work/family. The greater groupings, while not particular to gender in title, roof a multitude of articles, blogs, and sites focusing (for the most part) on gender and gender roles in local and international media. She has specific tags for academic 'research' and 'essays'; her bookmarking "eye" is trained to seek a wide spectrum of sources but puts a strong emphasis on scholarly material, which I like. When studying gender, it is necessary to include material written by the school of thought itself in addition to material produced by the great culture, material which indirectly affects analysis. In the same way that I strive for a multidimensional perspective on my research, annaviary's resources are dynamic without losing focus. Under the "culture" bundle, she has tags that include girl.culture, dude.culture, profilemedia, dating, porn, faux.feminism, body.image, women.writers, gender, gender.roles, masculinity, femininity, anti-feminism, video.games, censorship, advertising, media, stalking, divorce, and sextoys. As they are with me, both "technology" and "relationship" are narrowed within annaviary's greater scheme of gender-perusing.
Like I mentioned earlier, I was initially drawn to annaviary through her commentary . An example of her more, em, astute quotes (not that "douche hat" isn't astute, just...brief) comes from an article entitled, "Slut is not a four letter word". Annaviary writes, "Even the coolest chicks on TV have, if anything, been too busy being, you know, Strong Female Characters—chatty single moms, super-spies, angsty students, neurotic lawyers, mega-bitches—to get too down and dirty. Until now." The article's tags include tv, sex, and pop.culture. Maybe it's because she smart and sassy. Maybe it's because she writes like I do. Maybe it's because she has a deep and well-organized rolodex of gender research and gender news sources. Whatever it is, I'm pleasantly surprised by the affection and respect I have for someone I've never met, by this kindred feeling I've developed for someone by simply snooping around their cyber bookshelf. Yup, I'm moved.
My Pageflakes Tour
Textual Liaisons' Pageflakes
..So, aggregation of RSS feeds that pertain to both "social media" AND "gender construction"? --not easy. It felt as though the majority of sites I came across were, either, blogs dedicated to the "business" aspect of social networks or blogs dedicated to the "personal/reflective" aspect of social networks. I did not want a pageflakes composed of just online dating sites, or just social media marketing analysis, or just user statistics of either, or (perhaps worst of all) just a bunch of live journal-esque feeds about sex and old boyfriends (of which there many). I have found that, in order to strike the most dynamic perspective on this research, my 'Pageflakes' tool should include a little bit of everything--I believe it's important to sandwich the meat of my study with an "industry" side and a "community" side...two widely distanced poles of internet experience that bookend what one perceives to be a "normal" flow of engendered information.
Textually.org is weblog that looks at mobile content from around the world while taking into consideration its social/cultural/and economic implications. Textually.org is unique in that it's not just an index of software breakthroughs. The site (started by a young woman from Switzerland) reports usage and innovation while still managing to interject--albeit briefly--some sociological musings on the nature of the market and its participants.
Social Media Today, while on the heavy (and broad) business end of my research, posts important conversations being had about the industry by the industry. The very people in charge of development are, themselves, an online user audience in need of pleasing. Many of these social media "experts" wish to distinguish themselves from media "marketers", marketers being those who are mostly concerned with what online brand will lure which online consumers. A social media expert, it seems, wants to make the best 'communication channel' and NOT the best 'advertisement'...interesting how integrity is achieved and redefined between the online "inventors" and the online "campaigners".
The Dating Insider and The Dating Weblog are two different approaches to similar material. The Dating Insider is Dave Evans' blog about the industry of online dating, whereas The Dating Weblog is an experiential report of online dating--includes much more cultural and psychological commentary.
Blogging in College: The Gender and Popular Culture Project is, in fact, a university class structured very similarly to that of WRIT 340! Except, of course, ALL the blogs are focused on gender construction. The students' writing spans the breadth of all new media, not just mobile and cyber technologies. I think it's important to look at youth culture's take on youth culture.
Science Daily is an incredible news source for international gender-happenings and gender-based scientific research. While many of the articles focus on health and medicine, there is an entire section dedicated to brain and behavioral differences in men and women...some of these studies include differences in gender behavior online!
Listed under my search tools are the Universal News Search and the Universal Blog Search. I restricted my keyword to "gender" in the News Search because I found that it yielded a more dynamic and often more pertinent result than "gender AND technology" or "gender AND media". For the Universal Blog Search I included "social media" because I want to read more about people's personal experience with the internet as an interactive construction of "self".
The Pixsy Video Flake is a video search engine that I've designated solely to an "online dating" keyphrase. I want to know how 'video blogs' have impacted the expectations and behavior of men and women who play the online field. Who is getting the most "face" time...and for what audience...what are the messages being sent about gender roles, safety, and attraction?
I have also included a link to my favorite articles on gender and media via the diigo bookmarking flake and, below it, a link to similar articles tagged by a fellow social bookmarker I found through DEL.ICI.OUS.
..So, aggregation of RSS feeds that pertain to both "social media" AND "gender construction"? --not easy. It felt as though the majority of sites I came across were, either, blogs dedicated to the "business" aspect of social networks or blogs dedicated to the "personal/reflective" aspect of social networks. I did not want a pageflakes composed of just online dating sites, or just social media marketing analysis, or just user statistics of either, or (perhaps worst of all) just a bunch of live journal-esque feeds about sex and old boyfriends (of which there many). I have found that, in order to strike the most dynamic perspective on this research, my 'Pageflakes' tool should include a little bit of everything--I believe it's important to sandwich the meat of my study with an "industry" side and a "community" side...two widely distanced poles of internet experience that bookend what one perceives to be a "normal" flow of engendered information.
Textually.org is weblog that looks at mobile content from around the world while taking into consideration its social/cultural/and economic implications. Textually.org is unique in that it's not just an index of software breakthroughs. The site (started by a young woman from Switzerland) reports usage and innovation while still managing to interject--albeit briefly--some sociological musings on the nature of the market and its participants.
Social Media Today, while on the heavy (and broad) business end of my research, posts important conversations being had about the industry by the industry. The very people in charge of development are, themselves, an online user audience in need of pleasing. Many of these social media "experts" wish to distinguish themselves from media "marketers", marketers being those who are mostly concerned with what online brand will lure which online consumers. A social media expert, it seems, wants to make the best 'communication channel' and NOT the best 'advertisement'...interesting how integrity is achieved and redefined between the online "inventors" and the online "campaigners".
The Dating Insider and The Dating Weblog are two different approaches to similar material. The Dating Insider is Dave Evans' blog about the industry of online dating, whereas The Dating Weblog is an experiential report of online dating--includes much more cultural and psychological commentary.
Blogging in College: The Gender and Popular Culture Project is, in fact, a university class structured very similarly to that of WRIT 340! Except, of course, ALL the blogs are focused on gender construction. The students' writing spans the breadth of all new media, not just mobile and cyber technologies. I think it's important to look at youth culture's take on youth culture.
Science Daily is an incredible news source for international gender-happenings and gender-based scientific research. While many of the articles focus on health and medicine, there is an entire section dedicated to brain and behavioral differences in men and women...some of these studies include differences in gender behavior online!
Listed under my search tools are the Universal News Search and the Universal Blog Search. I restricted my keyword to "gender" in the News Search because I found that it yielded a more dynamic and often more pertinent result than "gender AND technology" or "gender AND media". For the Universal Blog Search I included "social media" because I want to read more about people's personal experience with the internet as an interactive construction of "self".
The Pixsy Video Flake is a video search engine that I've designated solely to an "online dating" keyphrase. I want to know how 'video blogs' have impacted the expectations and behavior of men and women who play the online field. Who is getting the most "face" time...and for what audience...what are the messages being sent about gender roles, safety, and attraction?
I have also included a link to my favorite articles on gender and media via the diigo bookmarking flake and, below it, a link to similar articles tagged by a fellow social bookmarker I found through DEL.ICI.OUS.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Blogorama (Three Posts in One)
Welcome:
Dane Cook recently gave the digital world some good advice. No, seriously. Despite his trademarked hurricane of expletives and (porta) potty storytelling, the comedian offered some wisdom into twenty first century communicating. His anthem? If someone sends you a text message, “…text them back”. Okay, sure, this doesn’t exactly scream revolutionary social commentary, but there is more to Cook’s point than reminding his audience to politely return social gestures. His decision to highlight cell phone software in a standup routine about 21st century “love and confrontation” proves fundamentally insightful. Text messaging doesn't exactly fall under traditional RSVP phone manners. There is something slightly more poignant, slightly more generationally accurate about the social rules of text messaging than the rules of other--non-digital--communication devices. During the course of his show, Cook credits computers with creating a new type of connection between people altogether, one that is specific to computer technology and has not otherwise existed before it.
The discreetness and convenience of “texting” versus that of other communication technologies has brought relationship--the presence of “other”--into venues previously exclusive to individuals. Rejection from a text message or, rather, rejection in the form of an un-replied e-mail, has the potential to access a level of vulnerability and loneliness inconceivable to other generations in history: With more ‘space’ available to bring someone there is also more void within which to feel their absence… their disinterest… their confusion. The joke is poignant because it rides on the assumption that most people (at least those in Cook’s significant American fan-base) now suffer from some version of this text messaging-related anxiety. Bravo, Dane.
Communication technology as a serious sculptor of behavioral norms and gender roles will be the primary focus of this blog. With computers and the internet responsible for “digitizing” the bulk of modern relationships, the very concept of relationship is starting to equate a particular aesthetic…a pixelated one…one, say, in the form of a myspace page, or a facebook profile, or a saved list of cell phone texts, or e-mails, or instant messenger histories, or, well, blogs. Humans’ relationship to each other, to the world, and to themselves actually—tangiblely—looks like something. The “face” of connecting, the history of a relationship’s evolution is trackable (and marketable, as we’ll soon see). Social technology is giving people a mirror to see themselves, to check-up on themselves and their endeavors in the third person. “Dating” is, in a way, something you can now do with yourself. We ‘date’ the personas we paste of ourselves onto social software…we are both the courter and the courted… perhaps believing we finally have a hand in controlling our own reputations and destinies. We pick and chose which new 2.0 application best defines us, which words, which photos (remember we're allowed to detag the ones we hate, editing out the angles we don't like to see of ourselves), which color schemes, which songs, which you tube videos (which experiences in other people's lives symbolize what we find funny about ourselves or our own personal relationships). We are constantly in the process of sculpting versions of self that will be attractive not only to others but attractive to the very self we are trying to replicate online... so much of this media is whispering, "I want to be attractive to me..."
Our pixelated personas have as much room to evolve in cyberspace as our bodies have to grow in the physical world. So is one affecting the other? Do the relationships between our pixelated selves have a direct impact on the relationships between our actual selves? With so much attention and meaning placed on the individual, with so many ways to feel lonely or rejected or beautiful or understood, how ARE we measuring connection? How DO we define quality of relationship? Dane Cook's bit on text messaging suggests the emotional infrastructure of personal contact is in the midst of revolution... boys and girls alike find themselves on equal playing ground as they type their way through the (often) awkward and uncharted territory of digital affection.
The accessibility and brevity of cyberspace simply means there are more people, more cultures, more images and literature at our fingertips. Sexual dynamics between two people come down to a lot more than just where one is from, where one works, and what he or she—or Z—‘looks’ like. So what are the patterns now? In a more connected-yet-fragmented world what are the tendencies of relationship? What is love ‘looking’ like (digitally)? I look forward to exploring these questions over the course of my journey here at "Textual Liaisons", and to embracing your feedback.
(Post #2) Profile of Blog on Dating and the Digital Market:
As I began exploring the blogosphere's interest in "gender and technology", I came across a particular website I felt applied structural elements of professionalism to an otherwise colloquial subject matter. Although the blog's creator does not approach online dating from a strictly academic perspective per say, I believe the discussion community he's managed to orchestrate around online dating could be valuable to scholarly writing on gender in the modern era:
David Evans, a Bostonian bookworm and self-proclaimed dating industry aficionado, manages a "news and commentary" blog about what it means to get acquainted online. While his postings speak primarily to marketers of emerging and established dating sites, Evans solicits considerable feedback from user clientele. "Online Dating Insider" (coupled with Evans more personal "Progress Bar”) is a perfect example of well-cited industry reporting that also thrives on non-industry feedback: reviews written from a marketer's perspective open doors to user assessments of the same product... both types of analysis conveniently listed on one website. The blog's navigable layout combined with its unique integration of consumer/creator critique have given Online Dating Insider a Technorati "authority" of 81.
One of the more outstanding features on Evans' site is his "directory" (found on the toolbar just below the blog's title). This link refers readers to an extensive software directory where, if you're signed up for an account, you're given access to Evans' online dating wiki -- something he created "in response to the lack of a single centralized resource for online dating resources". In addition to the directory Evans includes a "consulting" link (on the same toolbar) which provides counseling for companies unsure of what software is right for their particular dating service. The consulting p
age then links to a list of feedback from former clients who rave about Evans' insight into the industry, testimonials being the "bread and butter of [Evans'] reputation". The last structural element I will highlight are the "MyBlogLog" Link Stats. Embedded above the most popular links on Evans' site are tags telling the viewer in what order the links fall. For example, when the mouse grazes over the "contact" link it says "most popular outgoing link", and when the mouse grazes over the "consulting" link it says "18th most popular outgoing link"... it's clear the site is formatted by a true businessman.
Online Dating Insider has been an epicenter of online relationship analysis since the end of 2002. In the past six years, Evans has gone from posting twice a month (if at all) in 2002, to sometimes over 60 posts a month in 2008. Evans works as a consultant for online dating services and social networking websites--in addition to writing a fair amount on emerging trends in software and safety. His approach to the subject matter is articulate, well researched, and informational without getting stale. While his primary focus is business and marketing, Evans’ list of resources and breadth of experience provides some interesting sociological insight into the ways people are meeting on the web…and who people WANT to meet on the web. (Check out articles: “Taaz Virtual Makeovers” and “Managing Your Online Persona”)
Tracking the success of dating websites helps construct a barometer for online “attractiveness”. The posts on emerging social networking ideas are fascinating. Even if some of these ideas never reach full-blown cyberspace stardom, we still get a glimpse into what people are needing from the internet, from digital technology, that they are not getting in the ‘real’ world. For instance, Evans’ post on May 23, 2008 discusses a budding social service called “Why was I dissed?”—a site geared towards finding out why someone dumped you, the site itself acting as middleman. Evans quotes Alexis, one of whywasidissed.com’s managers:
Evans includes some examples from his personal life (well, not HIS personal life per say but examples from the lives of his personal friends) in order to discuss the potential success of this company. He writes, “Some people admitted they let things cool off (in past relationships) by simply not contacting the person. Others said they would at least appreciate an email saying, “I’m just not feeling you.” Evans later confesses he’s “not sure [he’d] want a third party reaching out to someone [he had gone] on a date with”, and then opens up the forum for others’ feedback. This style of blogging, while extensive in its marketing research and a great resource for links to articles on the networking industry, Evans’ blogs are not sociologically in-depth. They are not specific to gender construction in the greater scheme of human relationships. The entries are usually not much more than 300 words, his analysis begging of further discussion (at least from a scholarly perspective).
Evans’ audience seems to be a mix of people interested in USING this kind of software, CREATING this kind of software, and WRITING ABOUT this kind of software (“I have extensive experience educating journalists about online dating safety, emerging trends, social networking and social media”). My target audience is not so much consumer as it is scholar. I would use the Evans’ newsfeed on the networking industry to then derive my own sociological analysis about the nature of sexuality and identity.
(Post #3) Another Blogger's "Voice" On Relationships and Cyberspace:
Cherie Burbach found her soul mate on the Internet. Her book on the experience, At the Coffee Shop, has opened doors to a fan base composed primarily of middle-aged women in search of their own ‘perfect’ match. While Burbach blogs for a variety of venues, the majority of her writing concerns the ever-evolving dynamics of cyber love. She is a contributing editor to “The Dating Weblog” (one of those listed in Mr. Dave Evans' Blogroll). Her goal? To help others construct an online profile that accurately represents their “unique personality, and [show them] how to manage the 'art' of Internet dating”. While Burbach’s writing isn’t exactly academic, her musings highlight “gender” as a key determinant of online experience. She is not a businesswoman in the conventional sense and, though she does not blog with a marketer’s tone, is in the business of selling people…on dating. Her posts are casual though poignant in subject matter, her questions provocative. In some ways, her voice embodies the frank yet maternal spirit of a traditional matchmaker.
In her post entitled “Online Dating and Body Type”, Burbach raises a heavily engendered issue. ‘Most’ American women (Burbach sites the National Center for Health Statistics) “have a little meat on their bones”. Her use of this particular expression says a lot about her sensitivity toward women and their body-perceptions. It also says a lot about the audience she is trying to reach. The article overall seems more chastising of men than anything else…it is certainly not an in-depth, richly sited sociological analysis on body types and social media. Burbach’s style is blunt and succinct: “Hey guys?...You’re gonna have to get over it.” Her tone, reprimanding: “Many [guys] have beer guts and bald heads and yet turn up their nose at curvy gals…Maybe the solution for this is to have men actually take a look in the mirror, and women not to be so hard on themselves.” Burbach’s attempt to better engage people in, well, engaging, falls on her casual wit and simple, idiomatic vocabulary.
“Cyber Affairs: Online Cheating and How to Stop It” defines (in slightly less casual terms than her aformentioned post) the ‘new’ ways in which people are capable of cheating on one another. This blog is better cited, though mostly with links to her own articles. Her tone is still concerned and to the point—“Now [a days], partners can simply log on and find someone to flirt with or pour their heart out to”—but she manages to take a more professional approach to the information. The post does not accuse a particular gender of more sin, per say, than the other. Her conclusions are more philosophical and her guidance, while still compassionate, more definitional: "Cyber affairs...take moments of intimacy that should exist in a marriage or partnership, and replace them with a real (albeit unknown) individual." Burbach has organized the post into six sections (Cyber Affair Definition, Cyber Affairs Hurt Relationships, Cyber Affairs vs. Porn, Characteristics, Solutions, Prevention), creating a STEP-BY-STEP evaluation of this uniquely modern form of adultery. Her vocabulary stays basic, but the structure of her analysis comes off slightly more clinical and authoritative.
Overall I find Burbach’s written presence “familiar”. Her insights sound as though they were coming from the voice of a wise yet ‘hip’ aunt figure…one who maybe goes to church on Sundays…one who sticks true to her conservative morals while making the vast and foreign world of Internet dating accessible to the average American.
Dane Cook recently gave the digital world some good advice. No, seriously. Despite his trademarked hurricane of expletives and (porta) potty storytelling, the comedian offered some wisdom into twenty first century communicating. His anthem? If someone sends you a text message, “…text them back”. Okay, sure, this doesn’t exactly scream revolutionary social commentary, but there is more to Cook’s point than reminding his audience to politely return social gestures. His decision to highlight cell phone software in a standup routine about 21st century “love and confrontation” proves fundamentally insightful. Text messaging doesn't exactly fall under traditional RSVP phone manners. There is something slightly more poignant, slightly more generationally accurate about the social rules of text messaging than the rules of other--non-digital--communication devices. During the course of his show, Cook credits computers with creating a new type of connection between people altogether, one that is specific to computer technology and has not otherwise existed before it.
The discreetness and convenience of “texting” versus that of other communication technologies has brought relationship--the presence of “other”--into venues previously exclusive to individuals. Rejection from a text message or, rather, rejection in the form of an un-replied e-mail, has the potential to access a level of vulnerability and loneliness inconceivable to other generations in history: With more ‘space’ available to bring someone there is also more void within which to feel their absence… their disinterest… their confusion. The joke is poignant because it rides on the assumption that most people (at least those in Cook’s significant American fan-base) now suffer from some version of this text messaging-related anxiety. Bravo, Dane.
Communication technology as a serious sculptor of behavioral norms and gender roles will be the primary focus of this blog. With computers and the internet responsible for “digitizing” the bulk of modern relationships, the very concept of relationship is starting to equate a particular aesthetic…a pixelated one…one, say, in the form of a myspace page, or a facebook profile, or a saved list of cell phone texts, or e-mails, or instant messenger histories, or, well, blogs. Humans’ relationship to each other, to the world, and to themselves actually—tangiblely—looks like something. The “face” of connecting, the history of a relationship’s evolution is trackable (and marketable, as we’ll soon see). Social technology is giving people a mirror to see themselves, to check-up on themselves and their endeavors in the third person. “Dating” is, in a way, something you can now do with yourself. We ‘date’ the personas we paste of ourselves onto social software…we are both the courter and the courted… perhaps believing we finally have a hand in controlling our own reputations and destinies. We pick and chose which new 2.0 application best defines us, which words, which photos (remember we're allowed to detag the ones we hate, editing out the angles we don't like to see of ourselves), which color schemes, which songs, which you tube videos (which experiences in other people's lives symbolize what we find funny about ourselves or our own personal relationships). We are constantly in the process of sculpting versions of self that will be attractive not only to others but attractive to the very self we are trying to replicate online... so much of this media is whispering, "I want to be attractive to me..."
Our pixelated personas have as much room to evolve in cyberspace as our bodies have to grow in the physical world. So is one affecting the other? Do the relationships between our pixelated selves have a direct impact on the relationships between our actual selves? With so much attention and meaning placed on the individual, with so many ways to feel lonely or rejected or beautiful or understood, how ARE we measuring connection? How DO we define quality of relationship? Dane Cook's bit on text messaging suggests the emotional infrastructure of personal contact is in the midst of revolution... boys and girls alike find themselves on equal playing ground as they type their way through the (often) awkward and uncharted territory of digital affection.
The accessibility and brevity of cyberspace simply means there are more people, more cultures, more images and literature at our fingertips. Sexual dynamics between two people come down to a lot more than just where one is from, where one works, and what he or she—or Z—‘looks’ like. So what are the patterns now? In a more connected-yet-fragmented world what are the tendencies of relationship? What is love ‘looking’ like (digitally)? I look forward to exploring these questions over the course of my journey here at "Textual Liaisons", and to embracing your feedback.
(Post #2) Profile of Blog on Dating and the Digital Market:
As I began exploring the blogosphere's interest in "gender and technology", I came across a particular website I felt applied structural elements of professionalism to an otherwise colloquial subject matter. Although the blog's creator does not approach online dating from a strictly academic perspective per say, I believe the discussion community he's managed to orchestrate around online dating could be valuable to scholarly writing on gender in the modern era:
David Evans, a Bostonian bookworm and self-proclaimed dating industry aficionado, manages a "news and commentary" blog about what it means to get acquainted online. While his postings speak primarily to marketers of emerging and established dating sites, Evans solicits considerable feedback from user clientele. "Online Dating Insider" (coupled with Evans more personal "Progress Bar”) is a perfect example of well-cited industry reporting that also thrives on non-industry feedback: reviews written from a marketer's perspective open doors to user assessments of the same product... both types of analysis conveniently listed on one website. The blog's navigable layout combined with its unique integration of consumer/creator critique have given Online Dating Insider a Technorati "authority" of 81.
One of the more outstanding features on Evans' site is his "directory" (found on the toolbar just below the blog's title). This link refers readers to an extensive software directory where, if you're signed up for an account, you're given access to Evans' online dating wiki -- something he created "in response to the lack of a single centralized resource for online dating resources". In addition to the directory Evans includes a "consulting" link (on the same toolbar) which provides counseling for companies unsure of what software is right for their particular dating service. The consulting p
age then links to a list of feedback from former clients who rave about Evans' insight into the industry, testimonials being the "bread and butter of [Evans'] reputation". The last structural element I will highlight are the "MyBlogLog" Link Stats. Embedded above the most popular links on Evans' site are tags telling the viewer in what order the links fall. For example, when the mouse grazes over the "contact" link it says "most popular outgoing link", and when the mouse grazes over the "consulting" link it says "18th most popular outgoing link"... it's clear the site is formatted by a true businessman.Online Dating Insider has been an epicenter of online relationship analysis since the end of 2002. In the past six years, Evans has gone from posting twice a month (if at all) in 2002, to sometimes over 60 posts a month in 2008. Evans works as a consultant for online dating services and social networking websites--in addition to writing a fair amount on emerging trends in software and safety. His approach to the subject matter is articulate, well researched, and informational without getting stale. While his primary focus is business and marketing, Evans’ list of resources and breadth of experience provides some interesting sociological insight into the ways people are meeting on the web…and who people WANT to meet on the web. (Check out articles: “Taaz Virtual Makeovers” and “Managing Your Online Persona”)
Tracking the success of dating websites helps construct a barometer for online “attractiveness”. The posts on emerging social networking ideas are fascinating. Even if some of these ideas never reach full-blown cyberspace stardom, we still get a glimpse into what people are needing from the internet, from digital technology, that they are not getting in the ‘real’ world. For instance, Evans’ post on May 23, 2008 discusses a budding social service called “Why was I dissed?”—a site geared towards finding out why someone dumped you, the site itself acting as middleman. Evans quotes Alexis, one of whywasidissed.com’s managers:
“Calls go un-returned. Emails, unanswered. It’s like one half of the relationship fell off the face of the earth. But it doesn’t have to be that way. You can get the answers you’re looking for with WhyWasIDissed.com. We use e-mail to contact the gal or guy who’s been giving you the brush-off, ask them a few key questions, and report back to you with our findings. So you’ll have a better answer about what went wrong, and how to avoid those pitfalls next time.”
Evans includes some examples from his personal life (well, not HIS personal life per say but examples from the lives of his personal friends) in order to discuss the potential success of this company. He writes, “Some people admitted they let things cool off (in past relationships) by simply not contacting the person. Others said they would at least appreciate an email saying, “I’m just not feeling you.” Evans later confesses he’s “not sure [he’d] want a third party reaching out to someone [he had gone] on a date with”, and then opens up the forum for others’ feedback. This style of blogging, while extensive in its marketing research and a great resource for links to articles on the networking industry, Evans’ blogs are not sociologically in-depth. They are not specific to gender construction in the greater scheme of human relationships. The entries are usually not much more than 300 words, his analysis begging of further discussion (at least from a scholarly perspective).
Evans’ audience seems to be a mix of people interested in USING this kind of software, CREATING this kind of software, and WRITING ABOUT this kind of software (“I have extensive experience educating journalists about online dating safety, emerging trends, social networking and social media”). My target audience is not so much consumer as it is scholar. I would use the Evans’ newsfeed on the networking industry to then derive my own sociological analysis about the nature of sexuality and identity.
(Post #3) Another Blogger's "Voice" On Relationships and Cyberspace:
Cherie Burbach found her soul mate on the Internet. Her book on the experience, At the Coffee Shop, has opened doors to a fan base composed primarily of middle-aged women in search of their own ‘perfect’ match. While Burbach blogs for a variety of venues, the majority of her writing concerns the ever-evolving dynamics of cyber love. She is a contributing editor to “The Dating Weblog” (one of those listed in Mr. Dave Evans' Blogroll). Her goal? To help others construct an online profile that accurately represents their “unique personality, and [show them] how to manage the 'art' of Internet dating”. While Burbach’s writing isn’t exactly academic, her musings highlight “gender” as a key determinant of online experience. She is not a businesswoman in the conventional sense and, though she does not blog with a marketer’s tone, is in the business of selling people…on dating. Her posts are casual though poignant in subject matter, her questions provocative. In some ways, her voice embodies the frank yet maternal spirit of a traditional matchmaker.In her post entitled “Online Dating and Body Type”, Burbach raises a heavily engendered issue. ‘Most’ American women (Burbach sites the National Center for Health Statistics) “have a little meat on their bones”. Her use of this particular expression says a lot about her sensitivity toward women and their body-perceptions. It also says a lot about the audience she is trying to reach. The article overall seems more chastising of men than anything else…it is certainly not an in-depth, richly sited sociological analysis on body types and social media. Burbach’s style is blunt and succinct: “Hey guys?...You’re gonna have to get over it.” Her tone, reprimanding: “Many [guys] have beer guts and bald heads and yet turn up their nose at curvy gals…Maybe the solution for this is to have men actually take a look in the mirror, and women not to be so hard on themselves.” Burbach’s attempt to better engage people in, well, engaging, falls on her casual wit and simple, idiomatic vocabulary.
“Cyber Affairs: Online Cheating and How to Stop It” defines (in slightly less casual terms than her aformentioned post) the ‘new’ ways in which people are capable of cheating on one another. This blog is better cited, though mostly with links to her own articles. Her tone is still concerned and to the point—“Now [a days], partners can simply log on and find someone to flirt with or pour their heart out to”—but she manages to take a more professional approach to the information. The post does not accuse a particular gender of more sin, per say, than the other. Her conclusions are more philosophical and her guidance, while still compassionate, more definitional: "Cyber affairs...take moments of intimacy that should exist in a marriage or partnership, and replace them with a real (albeit unknown) individual." Burbach has organized the post into six sections (Cyber Affair Definition, Cyber Affairs Hurt Relationships, Cyber Affairs vs. Porn, Characteristics, Solutions, Prevention), creating a STEP-BY-STEP evaluation of this uniquely modern form of adultery. Her vocabulary stays basic, but the structure of her analysis comes off slightly more clinical and authoritative.
Overall I find Burbach’s written presence “familiar”. Her insights sound as though they were coming from the voice of a wise yet ‘hip’ aunt figure…one who maybe goes to church on Sundays…one who sticks true to her conservative morals while making the vast and foreign world of Internet dating accessible to the average American.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
