Levenson Chap 8 and 7

Michael Tomasello

Web-Exclusive Video: You + Me = We.

Lecture video

Chapter 7 Facebook Vs MySpace

Levenson wrote

” Whatever their objective differences and advantages, their ultimate value is the good they do for each individual user’s needs.”

Tomasello wrote

“In contrast to our nearest primate relatives, human beings communicate with one another co-operatively. This co-operative structure pervades all aspects of the communicative exchange. Thus, human communication depends fundamentally on: (1) a joint attentional (or intersubjective) frame that provides the common ground necessary for reference; (2) the mutual manifestness of the communicative act itself, which generates both relevance inferences and interpersonal obligations; (3) the co-operative motives to help and to share experience with others (even if embedded within a selfish, deceptive motive); and (4) the ability to collaborate with others in joint activities, specifically to ensure that the receiver comprehends the sender’s message as intended.”

Eric wrote

“What matters is the content not the tool so understand your message and use any tool that fits.” 

Eric/Ivory wrote

(me)”My point on a constant human need versus the tools we use I think still holds. If I go with your line of thinking (Ivory)“A blog fulfills a person’s need to believe that they matter, that someone is paying attention to them.” (me again) FaceBook and Twitter both do that but they are specific tangible sites where as Blogs are not. “

Social tools for social needs

A tool to what end?

Facebook can be used as a tool, Levenson mentions “Facebook Friends as a Knowledge-Base Resource.” and ” Facebook Friends as Real-Time Knowledge Resources.”

Ok, with ya so far. Sounds like FB is a good tool for sharing knowledge. Facebook may work as an information sharing tool, but I doubt that’s why it’s a success.

Levenson seems to love McLuhan so he should understand social media is an extension of human nature.

Facebook and Twitter are great tools, only because of human nature.

It may be a horse and buggy way of looking at things.

Comparison Time again

Think of the word tool, not a specific tool, just the general notion of the word tool.

Now lets pick a tool. Lets say a screwdriver. Can you see the screwdriver yet?

My version of chapter 7

I have two screwdrivers, they both work well. One handle is blue, the other is red. The red one is great at poking holes in plastic buckets. The blue one has a better reach.  They both work fairly well. The red one doesn’t work with all screws, but neither does the blue one. So, try them both and use the one you like best. 3

Chapter 8

Been there done that.link1, link, link5

Lets play a game.

Pick a number between 1 and 10.

My guess

Last Post for Me On Levenson Chapters 7 and 8

almost Levenson chap 7 and 8

Tool

Something regarded as necessary to the carrying out of one’s occupation or profession.

Anything used as a means of accomplishing a task or purpose.

Social

of or pertaining to the life, welfare, and relations of human beings in a community.

noting or pertaining to online technologies, activities, etc., that promote companionship or communication with friends and other personal contacts: social Web sites such as Facebook; the use of social software to share expertise.

living habitually together in communities, as bees or ants.

Dispatch

to send off or away with speed, as a messenger, telegram, body of troops,

Levenson chapter 8 Immediacy

After reading chapter 8 I thought a lot about time

Twitter is fast. In nano-seconds I could tweet about grandma dyeing. (link)

The Morgan factor

En3177 has a structure that depends on our relevant content.

Morgan grades how relevant and timely our content is.

Our personal understanding of the course must show in our content.

Short day, I’m back in the stone-age. The Wifi is down. (3gworks)

Again I get off topic. That’s ok isn’t it guys? At least we’re not talking about Chapter 7.

Twitter was meant for speed.

Jack Dorsey Twitter CEO and Founder said

“I want to have a dispatch service that connects us on our phones using text.”

The software is built to send words forward, and that’s really it. Do we really care about the “immediacy of thought” and how it goes from Brain to finger?

Enough of time

On to Levensons mention of oral communication.

“immediacy of thought conveyed to the tongue only reached as far as anyone within hearing distance.”

Compare:

Tweet in class: I’m going 2 bar !!! #tgif

Shouting in class: I’m going to the bar! Thank god it’s Friday.

Shouting is intrusive. Tweeting is passive. Your tweet Must be sought out.

What you say to whom, when you say it, and how loud all depend on your level of freindship. (sorry still working on links to one part 1, or is it part 4)

Sorry guys it is late. We will need to finish this up later.

Levenson Chapters 7 and 8

Levels of friendship

How can we apply the Morgan factor to this one.

Blogs I read before New new new new media chapters 7 and 8.

Beth’s

Kevin’s

Kelley’s

Erika’s

I skimmed others so don’t feel neglected if you didn’t get a mention. The above links just had content that worked for me.

Mind prefixed

Chapter7 was exactly as most posts had led me to believe.

Chapter 8 was an odd mix of McLuhan type thoughts.

Shandy Hall

and no miraculous coincidences.

Writers need to have readers

Great another talk about tools.

If you want readers use any tool you can get your hands on. A tool in gaining readers is to comment on others work. Sneaky yes, well maybe.

Non-Marketing

Writers need inspiration to create good content. So, pick a tool that fits you style. If you’re a fast thinker that shoots from the hip. Go tweet, if you need more go for more find your pond and jump in with both feet.

Disclaimer

My next post other posts will come came in an odd order and will have linked content that may not work. Looking forward to making my Readers work hard.

almost Levenson chapters 8 and 7

Links to the last page on the internet are ok. Until I finish part one they won’t work.

First post from my phone… Wifi is down.

Enjoy part 3.

Header 1

For those that may not know. Kevin left me a wonderful comment in regards to my post on Levenson’s chapters 7 & 8. His last sentence was a question.

“Are we really supposed to define ‘social’ as interaction only with people who are nowhere near you?”

Before we move on, we must remember to consider the Morgan factor (link)

Levels of friendship. (link)

If you die who will know?

Brooke Lorren wrote

“Many people today have friends that they chat with on message boards, via private messages, on Facebook, or in online games. Sometimes these friends drift away for a while, others move on to other interests. What would happen if one of these friends died? Would you know? Would your online friends know if you died?” link to post

Side Effects of Social Media

I’m with Kevin on this one.

“I first went to college back in the eighties, and then, before class, students engaged in conversation, now before classes classrooms are often as silent as tombs, because students are texting instead of talking”

Mobile media has allowed humans to take the easy route. We can feed our need to be social without having to risk face-to-face conversation. No fear, we aren’t doomed, or anything just a big lacking in basic human interaction.

Elizabeth Landau comments , on John Cacioppo’s research, bring to light a drawback of weak link friendships. Cacioppo describes an Emotional contagion effect, and how loneliness is transferred through social networks

Dr. Rachna Jain does a great job describing so of the way social media has changed things in his post titled; 4 ways Social Media is Changing Your Relationships. Number 2 is a good one.

Back to Kevin’s Question

I took your question as being of the rhetorical variety. Since rhetorical questions, by definition requires no answer. (hint follow the link)

The moral of the story

Don’t give up your real friends or nobody will know you died.

Immersion into social media can happen anywhere.

Texting and walking can be dangerous. link

Don’t forget the Morgan Factor

Almost Levenson Chapter 7 and 8

Chapter 7 Levenson seems competent

I agree with Beth. (this time)

Levinson on Facebook actually started out as a MySpace vs. Facebook debate which seemed pointless to me. Maybe three years ago when this book was written this question was useful. link

Not wanting to waste my dear readers time we shall say no more of chapter 7. My apologies if you feel cheated in any way.

Chapter 8 Twitter

Levenson, when referring to “total immersion” said

“Mobile media, to the contrary, work against this immersion. If we’re looking at Wikipedia or YouTube or writing a blog from a mobile device, we are usually more in touch with the outside world, and with people around us, than if we are engaging those media from a desktop computer.”

I disagree with Levenson’s stance on a immersion and mobile devices.

In order to fully give credit to my argument we must mention the dreaded chapter 7. Bear with me as we step backward in time.

Chapter 7

James the brown-noser was asking about “information overload” Levenson responded by saying

“I do not think “overload” is the problem we face; the challenge is how to cope with “information underload,” or not enough information to get the most out of new new media to successfully navigate the Web. Human are, after all inherently multitasking organisms.”

Chapter 8

Sorry again for that, we are now able to continue with all due diligence.

Immediacy and timeliness deserved more.

“This means that Twitter is not only the most immediate written medium in history…”

The End

Getting back to the beginning, and the matter of my disagreement with Levenson. Mobile media’s effect in immersion really depends on context.

Questions

Does constant access delivered by Mobile media trump the advantages of a desktop in regards to immersion?

Levenson believes humans are natural multi-taskers. If we are able to multi-task could we then mix networks our virtual social world with real life? If so, would we then be technically more immersed in our technology?

Can you see mobile devices creating a world were we can’t help but be immersed 24/7?

Answers I have none

To participate one must have a sence of “Immediacy”.  At this stage; a post on Rettberg chapter 1 would matter, but lack relevance. There is regret in my mind at my lack of timeliness. Keep in mind the Morgan Factor.

Rettberg’s Blogging Chapters 2 and 3

While reading/skimming chapters 2 and 3 of Blogging I ended up getting lost thinking about the death of print, Social Network Theory  and how our technology dictates social behavior. (Technological Determinism) When I get lost like that I find it hard to grasp what the author is intending to tell me. So today I decided I wouldn’t worry about what she did and concentrate on the connections it forced into my mind.

Retterg starts chapter 2 by pretty much telling us what to expect.

This chapter traces the history of communication and publication as it relates to blogs…Towards the end of the chapter, we’ll discuss how these cultural and technological aspects can be thought of as influencing each other, either by seeing one as leading the way or by seeing them as mutual participants in a process of co-construction.

Why is the history of communication even important? Peter N. Stearns wrote a in his post for the American Historical Association the following.

In the first place, history offers a storehouse of information about how people and societies behave. Understanding the operations of people and societies is difficult, though a number of disciplines make the attempt. An exclusive reliance on current data would needlessly handicap our efforts. How can we evaluate war if the nation is at peace—unless we use historical materials? How can we understand genius, the influence of technological innovation, or the role that beliefs play in shaping family life, if we don’t use what we know about experiences in the past?

If you accept history as important then what does Rettbergs little history lesson mean for the students of en3177? First it shows us communication will not remain static for long as technology changes so does communication. Example: Friendster. (I bet a lot of you have never even heard of it Friendster) The second but more abstract idea is that some things do stay the same. At times there is a constant that carries from one form of communication to the next. These two historical aspects of communication seem benign but for a class called Weblogs and Wikis they are almost everything. Blogs are dying not rapidly but year after year they lose their foothold. An article from the New York times points out what I’ve felt for years. (link)

Blogs were once the outlet of choice for people who wanted to express themselves online. But with the rise of sites like Facebook and Twitter, they are losing their allure for many people — particularly the younger generation.The Internet and American Life Project at the Pew Research Center found that from 2006 to 2009, blogging among children ages 12 to 17 fell by half; now 14 percent of children those ages who use the Internet have blogs. Among 18-to-33-year-olds, the project said in a report last year, blogging dropped two percentage points in 2010 from two years earlier. Former bloggers said they were too busy to write lengthy posts and were uninspired by a lack of readers. Others said they had no interest in creating a blog because social networking did a good enough job keeping them in touch with friends and family.

I’m not putting the final nail in poor Blogs coffin just yet. I could be wrong there are many people that disagree with the Times assertions. Narayana Rao in his post titled “Has Blogging Reached Its Peak? No. There is Lot of Headroom Still ” seems to be saying the opposite is true. He feels blogs are strong and have a long way to go before they become outdated. Blogs may or may not be dying at this very moment but someday they will be dead. And that is a concern for those of us in Weblogs and Wikis.

Don’t fret too much Rettberg’s chapter 3 will give us some hope. Social Network Theory is covered well enough to give you just enough knowledge on whats going on behind the scenes to get an idea of why Facebook and Twitter work. Communities and Networks are concepts that tend to be more universial because they are based on human nature and not as dependent on the current technology. Friendster died, MySpace died but Facebook and Twitter took what was constant about communication and moved it to the next phase. People didn’t change that much, our human nature didn’t change that much. All that changed was the tools we used to be social and to communicate ideas. Blogs and blogging are just tools nothing more. If they die content will continue and odds are it will follow human nature. The methods used to build and maintain social networks will come and go but the need for them will not.

Both history and Rettberg seem to be telling me that social media is the key. I could Tweet, Blog, self publish, create a Facebook page of poems it doesnt matter. What matters in the end isn’t the tool I use. Some of the best art in history came from something as simple as a pencil. What matters is the content not the tool so understand your message and use any tool that fits.

Comments

I find myself writing about things I like but don’t fully understand. Most of the time my thoughts are limited to a personal perspective that fits the way I see the world. Comments change that, they give me a way to see things from outside my own paradigms.
Comments good or bad are all welcome and encouraged. I don’t mind being wrong so feel free to be honest. Just know I live by that motto and if I think your wrong I will say so. But if your right I thank you in advance for helping me understand things a little better.