Com 125 Assignment 5- Privacy and "Facebook Stalking"

Privacy is defined as "the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves and thereby reveal themselves selectively (Wikipedia)." I see privacy as a way for people to protect themselves by keeping their most valuable and personal information secretive. In our everyday lives, we innately keep certain things private. For instance, we have been trained since a very young age to never give out personal information until we have come to know and are comfortable with the other person. Therefore, privacy is generally something we don't worry too much about in our everyday lives because we are always instinctly protecting ourselves.

However, privacy becomes a problem with the age of the internet. We cannot be as carefree when it comes to this medium because with it, it is so easy for our privacy to be breached. Every move we make on the internet has the ability to be tracked without us knowing. We have never faced a situation like this before because we have never had to worry before about someone putting a "tracking device" on us and watching us wherever we go. The internet is different though. It implements several technologies to serve this exact purpose such as cookies and ISPs. Therefore, in the world of the internet our previous methods used to protect our privacy do not apply. It isn't as simple as not giving out our personal information to strangers anymore. Online, we need to now watch what we do and where we go because we never know who could be tracking us.

The aspect of the internet that I worry the most about privacy with is social networking sites. I use facebook numerous times a day and could see how if I'm not careful, my privacy could be breached. I have opted not to include certain information, such as my place of employment and my residence in my profile, but I have many friends who do. People think that because they have made their profile private, they are protected. However, anyone who is friends with someone on their "friend list" can have access to their profile. Also, if a person posts something on another's wall, anyone on that other person's friend list can see it.

Because people are under the impression that only their friends have access to their site, they tend to include information about themselves that they ordinarily would not disclose to a stranger. Susan B. Barnes in her article explains that the types of information revealed online includes names, addresses, birth date, location, and numerous forms of contacts, including email, screen names, and links to personal Web pages. She says, “Because [teenagers] are revealing a considerable amount of personal information, as well as multiple ways to contact them online, the danger of cyberstaking and communicating with strangers online is a serious issue” (A Privacy Paradox). Most teens and young adults even recognize the reality of stalking on facebook, even poking fun at it by sending “bumper stickers” that in various ways say to the receiver, “I’m stalking you.”


Danah Boyd explains that the networked structure makes it easy for motivated individuals to find an individual through their friends. She says how most people on social network sites are naive to assume they are safe. She says, “Most participants on social network sites live by ‘security through obscurity’ where they assume that as long as no one cares about them, no one will come knocking. This puts all oppressed and controlled populations (teenagers) at risk because it takes just one motivated explorer to track down even the most obscure networked public presence" (Social Network Sites: Public, Private, or What?) What I find especially concerning is that the “explorer” now doesn’t even need motivation. The newer “minifeed” component on facebook allows someone who is not friends with you, but a friend of a friend, to see what you are doing as soon as they sign on facebook. They don't need to seek you out anymore to gain information about you; it's all right there in front of them.


I, personally don’t know of anyone who has been negatively affected by “facebook stalking,” but Barnes explains in her article the worst outcomes of this kind of situation can include “children being exposed to pedophiles, and teenagers being raped by people they meet on social networking sites” (A Privacy Paradox). However, I do personally know of an instance when privacy was breached on facebook. Last year, my boyfriend’s facebook account was hacked into and his password was changed. The hacker changed his personal information and blocked certain of his friends, I being one of them. As you can imagine, I was not happy being blocked from my boyfriend's profile. It took a while for him to regain access to his password and his profile. The people at facebook were sympathetic and promised he would experience no future problems. However, that didn't turn out to be the case because a couple weeks later, his facebook was hacked into again and his password changed. Eventually, my boyfriend gave up and cancelled his facebook account altogether.


The hacking demonstrates why Boyd rejects “security through obscurity.” I’m sure my boyfriend was thinking, “Why would anyone want to hack into my facebook?” But obviously, someone did care enough to violate his walls of privacy. This proves that everyone on facebook is a target. “Obscurity” protects no one, and if someone really wants access to your profile, they will find a way. Therefore, everyone must be extremely careful not to include any information about themselves in their profile that someone else could use to track you. Even when you sign up for facebook, be careful not to include information like your address and phone number because if someone hacks into your account as they did with my boyfriend’s, they could then gain access to that private information.

Sources:

Barnes, S. (15 August, 2006). A Privacy Paradox: Social Networking in the United States. Retrieved 25 September, 2008, from First Monday Web site: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_9/barnes/index.html

Boyd, D. (2007). Social Networking Sites: Public, Private, or What? Retrieved 25 September, 2008, from Creative Commons Web site: http://www.danah.org/papers/KnowledgeTree.pdf

Various. (25 September, 2008). Privacy. Retrieved 25 September, 2008, from Wikipedia Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy

Com 125 Assignment 4- "Giving Back with the Online Gift Economy"

What exactly is a gift economy? When we think of the word "economy" we typically have a certain type in mind: one that is driven by money. This particular economy is considered a commodity economy, however, it is just one of many different kinds. A gift economy is something completely different and has nothing to do with money. Instead, Wikipedia explains it as a "social theory in which goods and services are given without any explicit agreement for immediate or future quid pro quo." That is, when a giver sends a good or service to a receiver, there is no promise that the receiver will choose to reciprocate that action back to the giver. The online community can be explained as a gift economy. However, in this particular type of gift economy instead of tangible goods and services being exchanged, it is information and advice that is being sent from giver to receiver (Economies of Online Cooperation).

In the online community, it is particularly confusing why so many people are willing to offer their own, valuable information so freely. Online, people are anonymous so it is therefore, impossible to assume that a particular person benefiting from the advice will reciprocate the favor back to the original giver. So then why do people do it? Peter Kollock has the answer when he explains, "While a balanced reciprocity with a particular individual may not be possible, there is a sense in which a balance might occur within a group as a whole." In saying this, he means that by giving out information not to one person, but to an entire group in the internet community, the giver is likely to receive help from some other member of the group in the future (Economies of Online Cooperation).

Thanks to Com 125 class, I participate in a certain type of an online gift economy called blogging. Each week, I provide information, as well as my beliefs on a particular topic that is posted online for the world to see. My "gift" is then reciprocated back to me when I find useful information in other people's blogs that I can benefit from. In the discussion of online gift economies, the term "public goods" is often used to describe the benefits resulting from information exchange in cyberspace. A blog can be considered a public good because anyone can benefit from it, regardless if they contributed to it or not. Also like public goods, blogs are indivisible, meaning that one person reading a blog does not mean that the amount of information will be reduced when the next person reads it. Finally, blogs can be considered public goods because they are non-excludable. Therefore, anyone that is online can benefit from blogs, no one is excluded simply because they don't have an account with blogger.com (Economies of Online Cooperation).

The other day when I was watching the Today Show, I came across a perfect example of how blogs represent online gift economies. There was a story about a woman named Stephanie Nielson who was a frequent blogger. Her blog was called Nienie, and it contained some parenting advice, but was mainly a blog about the joys of motherhood. Mothers everywhere were inspired by her enthusiastic take on being a mother, with her blog receiving 2,000 hits a day. Unfortunately, Stephanie was involved in a plane crash about a month ago and was critically wounded, with burns covering 80 percent of her body (ksl.com).

When Stephanie's online following was informed of her accident, her "gift" of providing invaluable advice and inspiration on motherhood was reciprocated in a big way. After the crash, her blog received 30,000 hits a day with people who wanted to help. They raised $100,000 in donations for Stephanie and her family, coming from all around the world in places like Australia, Germany, Israel, and Spain. Thanks to their donations, Stephanie and her husband, who was also involved in the plane crash, are undergoing skin graphs and are on the road to recovery (ksl.com). If anyone is interested in seeing the complete story, here is the segment I watched about Stephanie Nielson on the Today Show:




Stephanie’s inspiring story illustrates how the internet is now becoming a thriving gift economy. The fact that so many people came to know Stephanie and her parenting skills because of just one blog says something about the internet's ability to broaden the scope of gift-giving. The reciprocity, on the other had, is really what is amazing about Stephanie's story because people did everything they could to give back to someone who had helped them. They spread the word and got as many people as possible involved to help someone they had never even met. Prior to the internet, this would have never been possible. The sheer size of the medium has allowed the gift economy to reach greater lengths and more people than ever before.

Sources

Jeppesen, R., & Prichard, L. (8 September, 2008). Bloggers from around world help plane crash victims. Retrieved 16 September, 2008, from KSL Newsradio Web site: http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=4208540

Kollock, P. (1999). The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace. Retrieved 16 September, 2008, from the University of California, Los Angeles Web site: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/economies.htm

Various. (7 September, 2008). Gift Economy. Retrieved 16 September, 2008, from Wikipedia Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

Com 125 Assignment 3- Copyright Has No Place In The Blogosphere!

Copyright has been a matter of great importance throughout history, with our founding fathers deeming it significant enough to be included in the writing of our Constitution. Copyright was originally purposed to give content creators rights to benefit financially from their works, which was used as an incentive for them to keep creating. The public could also benefit from copyright because they would have the right to freely use the work (after its copyright law has expired), and as the creators continued to form new ideas, the public would continue to benefit from them (Information in Cyberspace). However, over time I feel that that this delicate balance has been disrupted, and the copyright laws have gradually leaned in favor the content creators, neglecting to protect the public good.


Today, copyright infringement is a serious crime, generating fines in the thousands. The problem with copyright infringement is that many people are not aware that they are doing it. There is a very blurry line between copyright material and what is considered free use (an exemption of a copyright holder's rights). The criteria that determines whether a work is fair use or not is: (1) the purpose of the use (2) the nature of the copyrighted work (3) the amount and sustainability of the portion taken and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market (Concurring Opinions). Copyright law has many complexities and exceptions that several people find it hard to keep up with it, let alone publish within its guidelines.


In the age of the internet, copyright law is more confusing than ever due to the overwhelming wealth of new information that is the web. The new digital environment "gives users the ability to create, modify, distribute, and present information on a scale that has not been possible before (Information in Cyberspace).” People are creating new information on the web everyday, which can be changed or updated at any given moment. Information itself is very different on the internet compared to other mediums. This is because web information is digital and not in a tangible form, such as a book or movie. As a result, copyright law needs an update in order to keep up with the ever growing and changing digital environment.


I believe that copyright law when applied to the internet, is too strict. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998 attempted to transfer copyright law from tangible works to intangible ones (digital information). However, the act worked too hard to protect the content creators, and not the public. It focused too much on the technicalities, implementing several technologies, serving to protect content. I feel that these anti-copying technologies are too strict because the technologies don't allow for copying of any sort, even if it's copying that would ordinarily be allowed with copyright exemptions or fair use (Information in Cyberspace). However, the main problem with the act is that it neglected to address that the fact that the internet above anything, a social environment, where people should be able to exchange information freely and openly.


I fear that with the growing popularity of blogs, copyright enforcement will soon make its way into the blogosphere, much like it did for music file sharing. This is because blogging often entails copying a great amount of information and images from the web (much like I did in this post). In addition, bloggers are less critical of how they are citing their sources compared to writers of other works, such as print (Concurring Opinions). This is because bloggers feel less at risk due to the open feeling of the blogosphere and also, its current, lenient copyright enforcement. However, some people theorize that this policy is about to change soon. Vauhini Vara offers this warning in writing for The Wall Street Journal:


"Bloggers, beware: That photo of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes on your Web site could be fodder for a lawsuit. Stock photography companies like Getty Images Inc. and Corbis Corp. are using high-tech tools to crack down on Web site owners who try to use their photographs without paying for them.While music and movie studios remain suspicious of the Internet, many stock photography companies have digitized their collections so that customers can easily access them online. At sites like GettyImages.com and Corbis.com, advertisers, publishers and others looking to license professional photographs can browse and purchase millions of high-quality images. In making it easy for customers to find pictures, though, the sites have also made it easier to swipe a copy of an image and post it on the Web (Wall Street Journal)."


Vara points out that one thing that is great about blogging is the capability of including images and video clips in blogs, making them more personal and noticeable. If bloggers played it safe, and stayed away from all images and quotes because they were unsure of where they originated, the blogosphere would be a very boring place. If copyright laws were enforced more in blogging, it would likely turn off many current bloggers because of fear of copyright infringement and also, the inconvenience of attempting to paraphrase all of their information instead of using direct quotes (Concurring Opinions).


As the blogosphere continues to grow and become more profitable, I believe it is more at risk than ever to increased copyright enforcement. We need to protect the current state of the blogosphere as a free and open place, where people can state their opinions, and report on issues without much thought about if they are following the guidelines of free use. I believe the way to do this is to battle the current, strict copyright laws on the internet before they can be applied to the blogosphere.



Sources

Administration (29 August, 2007). Information in Cyberspace. Retrieved 10 September, 2008, from the University at Texas Web site: https://cyberspace.ischool.utexas.edu/course/five/intro.php


Solove, Daniel. (15 December, 2005). What If Copyright Law Were Strongly Enforced In the Blogosphere? Retrieved 10 September, 2008, from Concurring Opinions Web site: http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2005/12/what_if_copyrig.html


Vara, Vauhini. (14 October, 2005). Photo Agencies Scour the WebFor Copyright Violations. Retrieved 10 September, 2008, from The Wall Street Journal Web site: http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB112897424251164666-0mFu92_5xrCHDRrqLE9YeCOfOnI_20061015.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

Com 125 Assignment 2- "To Chat or Not to Chat"

Today, the online chat room is a widely popular form of internet communication. In chat rooms people from around the globe can gather to have live, real-time conversations with several other people at the same time. People chat for various reasons including to exchange information, to talk about common interests, and to establish friendships or even romantic relationships. Dave Roos captures the essence of modern-day chat rooms in his article, "How Chat Rooms Work.” He says, "It's like a virtual cocktail party, where strangers gather to flirt, argue about politics and sports, ask for advice, talk about shared hobbies and interests, or simply hang out." Now, you can find a chat room devoted to every topic imaginable. This makes it easy for people to find a chat room geared towards their specific interests and filled with others who are just like them.

The American public was first familiarized with the chat room in the mid-1990s with the increasing popularity of AOL chat rooms. However, most people are unaware that chat rooms actually date back much further than that. The CompuServe CB Simulator is credited as being the first real-time chat room. It was first introduced to the public in 1980, and its users exchanged real-time messages on 40 different channels, leading to the evolution of the concept of rooms.

In the mid-1980s, a company called PlayNet developed the idea of combining real-time chat and online games. Its users could play chess or backgammon against an online opponent and talk to them (mainly trash talk) at the same time. PlayNet licensed its software to a company called Quantum Link, or Q-Link, that began a chat room service called People Connection. Quantum Link then changed its name to America Online (AOL), a name in which we are all familiar with. By the late 1990s, the AOL chat rooms under the name People Connection were the most popular in the world.

Unfortuately, chat rooms have been found over time to not be such perfect creations. Several negative characteristics have been known to be associated with chat rooms. One problem with chat rooms is their anonymity. Because people feel invisible, they will often say whatever they want, no matter how inappropriate. As a result, many chat rooms are plagued with graphic, sexual talk, even ones that have nothing to do with sex or dating. The reality is that most of the people who are being exposed to and even participating in this sexual language are children. In Canada, it has been reported that nine percent of children ages 7-1o use chat rooms daily and 10 percent of them visit them a few times a week. A seven-year-old does not understand what the sexual language really means. This can make it very easy for someone older who does understand to take advantage of the young child.

The media has recently exposed chat rooms as being breeding grounds for pedophiles and sexual predators. There have been several, high-profile news stories concerning adults that pretend to be teenagers and use chat rooms to lure in underage teens and even children. An alarming statistic is that of the 45 millions children ages 10-17 engaging in internet use, 1 in 5 of them have been sexually solicited.

In exposing sexual solicitation online, the use of chat rooms has really propelled the movement towards internet safety. The public now realizes that there are dangers in internet use, and they must take the necessary precautions in order to protect themselves. Today, almost every child knows to never give out any personal information online, and to never arrange to meet someone they have met on the web. For parents who are interested in additional tips that are useful for protecting their children online, a very good website for this is: http://www.sdcda.org/protecting/children_parents.php.

One great development in educating the public on internet safety is through the exposure of real, online sexual predators on the Dateline NBC show, "To Catch a Predator." The show uses a decoy that poses as an underage male or female and lures in sexual predators through the use of chat rooms. The decoy then arranges to meet the solicitor in person, which is where the police are waiting to arrest the predator. What they have found is that the suspects are often not who you would expect. The following clip is of a middle school teacher, who they found to be engaging in chat room use for sexual solicitation of a minor:



“To Catch a Predator” has succeeded in exposing online, sexual criminals and showing that many of them are just your everyday, normal people. I believe that in watching this show, the public has become more cautious of their online use and realized that people online may often not be who they say they are.

Thinking back to when I made my first screen name, Singing7 (I was seven at the time), I realize just how in danger I could have been. At the time, my sister and I would spend hours in chat rooms chatting with people who we believed to be the same age as us. My parents were skeptical of these online chat rooms and being good parents, they refused us to go into them anymore. That was the end of my chat room experience and knowing what I know now, I’m very glad that my parents put their foot down. I believe that all other parents should do the same, and take control of their children’s internet use when they are too young to understand the dangers of the situation. If this were to occur, I think we would see a dramatic drop in the number of cases of online sexual solicitation.

For better or for worse, the chat room has succeeded in changing the reputation of the internet for good. Before the chat room, the internet was viewed as somewhat of a huge playground. It was where people felt free to roam and opportunities were endless. However, chat rooms proved that playgrounds can be dangerous too. They can be places laden with criminals. Therefore, we must all realize that we can have fun, but still always remain aware of the dangers so we can protect ourselves and have a safe internet experience.