It's okay, not to be okay

The making of place in space is substantially categorized by language. Tuan (1991) talks about how we have begun to ignore language as a main factor in how we create place, however I think in my network it is quite the opposite. ‘Its okay, not to be okay’ draws on language and how it is so important to communicate and how the scene we set can make a huge impact on someone’s life. It also draws on how what we see is not always what we get. We need language to help us get there.

‘It’s okay, not to be ok’ is the name of my network and by just the title this little network is sending a big message. The title sets the tone for the page. If you were to stumble across this page you’d venture further and find yourself reading stories about the suffering people have gone through and their successes. Not only does the naming of this ‘place’ set the tone for the group, but also each and every author of each post set their own tone and scene for the reader.

Most posts on this page also have a picture to go with it. Mostly have the family member that the author is writing about. However, what are we to draw from a picture? Without the story behind it all we see is a smiling, handsome, seemingly ok young male. This is exactly what the creator wanted people to see. Although someone may seem to be okay, they may not be and that is okay

'It's okay, not to be okay' logo

Retrieved from: https://www.facebook.com/itsoknottobeokay/photos/?tab=album&album_id=270043826682206

References: 

 McNeill, L. (2012) There is no”I”in network: Social networking site and post humanauto/biography. Biography 35(1), 65-82 .doi:10.1353/bio.2012.0009

Tuan,Y-F.(1991).language and the making of place:a narrative-descriptive approach.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,81 (4),684-696. Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/loi/raag20

Deadly One’s and Zero’s

The spoken word, under the right circumstances, is a powerful thing.

Tuan knew this and acknowledges the power words can hold when he wrote, “[A] warm conversation between friends can make a place itself seem warm; by contrast, malicious speech has the ability to destroy a place.” (Tuan, 1991) (Unknown). With the world’s technology advancing at a magnificent rate, our forms of social and verbal interaction are constantly evolving to keep up. The language barrier between people is quickly shrinking as subtitling programs are tweaked and updated, allowing us to connect with more people than ever before. Each virtual network grows into a flourishing metropolis; every street filled with entrepreneurs and poster children for human rights. It’s makes it easy to forget the greed and malice that lurks in the shadows of those who succeed.

Used and Abused (Unknown)

Every social network has them, people who hid behind default picture and anonymous forums; and it is no different for social media Tumble. Children and adults alike are stabbing at each other with hate-filled comments behind the safety of their keyboards and touch screens with no regards for the people on the receiving end of their blows. There are many excellent examples, but the LGBTQ community on Tumblr is one that particularly stands out. There have been many cases where members of the community were harassed, some to the point of death. It goes to show that while words can empower, they can also destroy a person – turning their once beautiful and hopeful metropolis in a city of hell.

Bibliography

Tuan, Y.-f. (1991). Language and the Making of Place: A Narrative-Descriptive Approach . Taylor & Francis.

Unknown. (n.d.). thatsnotcool. Retrieved from https://thatsnotcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/infographic-1-370x240.jpg.

                                        How Language and Naming Make Place in Social Networking. 

       

How Language and Naming Make Place in Social Networking. Submitted by Esperance on September 3, 2016. The main objective of this short paper is to examine how language and naming make place in Facebook drawing on Tuan’s (1991) descriptiveness approach research about language and the making of a place. Facebook offers a platform for interaction with other friends but vital to the interaction is relaying and comprehension of speech between users. Therefore, communication which creates the essence of Facebook exists by use of language to express the users thoughts and intentions. As argued by Tuan, the use of language has a force to destroy, sustain and build. This is integrated in social network where tone and demeanor of language employed has similar effects with upshot being blocking users. In spite of that, victimization is exhibited through cyber bullying that adversely affects the victims. In this sense negative light of language comes to the fore. Conversely, in using language appropriately businesses in hospitality industry have been able to utilize Facebook and social network to reach their customers and build customer loyalty while experiencing business growth. In this regard, language works to build and create better relations on Facebook platform. Photos of self, places posted are fitted with brief description adding eloquence and allowing better comprehension of the picture in its context as recipients. This feature invokes the Chinese garden and landscaping Tuan argues that language enables better understanding of quality (personality or character) of a place, for that quality imparted by, along with visual appearance and other factors, the metaphorical and symbolic powers of language. According to that argument having account name on Facebook needs be complemented by use of language to create a presence in the minds of other users making the name to exist among fellow users over time.


references

Tuan,Y-F.(1991).language and the making of place:a narrative-descriptive approach.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,81 (4),684-696. Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/loi/raag20

                                         Do you really see yourself as self?

As previously stated in my first blog, Facebook is my virtual network and the purpose of this was to give power to human kind to share and to make the world open and connected, in another word make the world smaller and reachable by assuming that we as self, present our individuality and authenticity as a result of the humanist patterns made of this virtual network. The traditional form of Facebook was to verify your identity by producing you real name and age when you register and these are verified. View the development of Facebook and all technological details embedded, it really clear that, the original form of Facebook has shifted from the humanist aspect to post human narrative. The reason why I say this is because the way we form our identity is totally different, for example on Facebook, other people also contribute to our virtual self-narrative. On Facebook, the software itself and other people are producing an online self (Laurie McNeill, 2012.). For this reason we may see group of women creating their self-identity because of their views on a particular common belief that they have, so the meaning of self has another taste from the humanist view. Talking about the profile, we should look the profile in the context of network and its activities in which the individual life or narrative engages with others. Post human does not have to be anti-human for the reason that all the factors surrounding human contribute to the human development. Facebook has brought another compelling post human issue that emerges the cyberspace because of its design to be part of our daily consumption that have taken away the narrative and selves of Facebook. I am really conservative on this compelling issue of humanist and post humanist concepts.

References

 McNeill, L. (2012) There is no”I”in network: Social networking site and post human auto/biography. Biography 35(1), 65-82 .doi:10.1353/bio.2012.0009

Concepts of Authenticity and Self hood in Social

Networking.

Submitted by Esperance on September 3, 2016

Are people authentically themselves on Facebook and those that aren’t simply appear as

fraudsters? This will form the basis of this paper, by assessing the reliability of this

impression.

In psychology, Kuper (2001) contends that identity is the continuation of personality over

time. Implying that identity is expression of ourselves to others through ways in which we

interact thus revealing to us and them who we are. In this light, identity is thus hardly

inauthentic.

While joining Facebook contents are to be filled in the application form, once filled it creates

a visible you in the social world and resurrects relationships with acquaintances that

recognize your identity but are geographically separated, former classmates in school, or long

lost friends. This reveals interactivity with them at some point developed your identity.

Having joined Facebook you become visible and contacts from long ago recognize you and

reignite

friendship once had.

On the other hand one can opt to inputs in fake first and last names or photos of places not in

their image. Therefore, indicating a part of themselves that they can only construct in

Facebook thus becoming an extension of their life’s mind. What is not possible for them to

relay in their physical individuality they now extend into the face book platform and share in

images of photos or thoughts in text. Nevertheless, with this a rapport can be built with other

users and interactions established creating an identity.

It becomes evident that there is nothing a fraud identity but rather what one in some way was

inhibited to express in their physical being but is at ease communicating in Facebook. For that

reason they are able to live their life, mind, body and soul in Facebook.

Reference:

McNeil,L. (2012).There Is No "I" in Network: Social Networking Sites and Post human Auto/Biography. Biography, 35 (1),65-82. doi:10.1353/bio.2012.0009

Cyber-Self  

“The social networking site [is] an engagement that requires submission of the human subject to the software imperatives: [it] constructs lives and narratives.” (McNeill, 2012. p 67)

This is something not usually acknowledged or understood by users of the World Wide Web, however, it should be taken into consideration. Online networks hold the power to dictate how we (their users) represent ourselves, interact with one another, and the information accessible to us. Consequently, the similarity between our “real” and “virtual” identities becomes questionable.

Victoria Kuttainen (2016) highlights the fact that, in a cyberspace run by social media, “[we] are not the only person constructing [our] identity.”

It is easy for ones "real" self to get lost in cyberspace.

Throughout the photo-sharing application that is Instagram, there are many diverse identities. In order to construct these online identities, Instagramers post pictures whilst “liking” or commenting on others. However, this cyber-self is not always authentic. Nevertheless, in recent months the social media platform has produced an algorithm-driven feed. This means posts no longer appear in chronological order, but instead are ordered to show what Instagram (2016) has referred to as “moments… [its users] will care about most.” By prioritising previous interactions, these algorithms determine whose posts users see (and don’t see), in turn, “influenc[ing] the networked self.” (McNeill, 2012. p 76)

Author Eli Pariser (2011) refers to this personalisation as “the filter bubble” in which we get “trapped”. He warns of its negative side effects, arguing that we become isolated from diverse points of view and “don’t get exposed to information that could…broaden our worldview.”

Agreeing with Pariser, I see Instagram’s latest ‘update’ as a negative installation to the app. Instead of scrolling through a diverse and interesting social network, I am faced with a never-ending feed of likeness. However, it is thought-provoking to consider our virtual selves, and how the power of online programs influences this.

It is as McNeill (McNeill, 2012. p 79) says, “where, indeed, do we end and [social media] begins?”

Image: Barnett, S. (N/A) Be the same online vs real life. Retrieved from http://www.business2community.com/non-profit-marketing/be-the-same-online-vs-real-life-01378992#7Rps4ZqqaoLesr12.97

Instagram. (2016) See the moments you care about first. Retrieved from http://blog.instagram.com/post/141107034797/160315-news

Kuttainen, V. (2016). BA1002: Our space: Networks, narratives and the making of place, lecture 6: Networked narratives. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au

McNeill, L. (2012). There is no "I" in network: Social networking sites and posthuman auto/biography. Project muse, 35 (1), 65-82. Retrieved from https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au/webapps/Conc-camcontent-bb_bb60/items/getitem.jsp?as_course_code=13-BA1002-TSV-INT-SP2&content_id=_1242562_1&course_id=_42849_1&doc_id=42357

Pariser, E. (2011) Beware online “filter bubbles”. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en#t-527944