I enjoyed reading both of these chapters. After reading Filtered Reality I agree that “it is interesting that all the definitions and examples the OED lists for filter as a noun or as a verb emphasise the removal of unwanted content or impurities” (Rettberg 21). Normally, when I use a filter on a picture I do not think anything is wrong with the picture. I just think I am enhancing or “adding to the image” (Rettberg 21). Normally, a picture I choose to filter is a picture I have to like in the first place.

Even with that being said, it is kind of surprising I find that statement to be surprising. I will admit I do refrain myself from filtering what I deem to be a lot. I think in a way it does have a negative vibe attached to it. I care about what people think, and I just think some people say or think to themselves, when they see someone always filtering their pictures, does she/he have low self-esteem? I even think some people do not consider the person to be attractive anymore. To me, filtering can be compared to using makeup. In both cases, I refrain from using it too much.  

Below, is a picture I filtered.

                                

Furthermore in the next chapter Serial Selfies, I found what Brown and Antin did to be really interesting. I think Brown especially reinforces the idea that you can use pictures to get a message across, and like the other readings mentioned teach. I think people assume when you take a lot of pictures you are stuck on yourself. I like how this chapter shows the positive side of taking a lot of photos. This chapter really makes me not care about how many I choose to take.

 

 

 

 

                                                   

Right from the jump what caught my attention about White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook by Danah Boyd, is the fact she chose not to focus on how technology is changing and improving people’s engagement but how people are not changing and how technology is reinforcing their resistance to change. I like the fact she is showing negatives in a world that it embracing, reinforcing, and loving technology. Sometimes, these platforms make a person’s hatred less noticeable, and I never would have thought about MySpace in the way Kat described it before this article. Yes, everyone heard and maybe even said Facebook was more professional, but who really took that comment to the extreme? Just because one chooses to use MySpace, does that really mean they are not professional?

I actually had MySpace at one point, and I honestly miss some of the features. The only reason I was reluctant at first to switch over to Facebook was because I felt like everything gets played out and it was only a matter of time before Facebook did. In a way, I felt pressured to “switch to” Facebook even though I was content (Boyd 3). I felt like a lot of people I knew had and talked about it, and that caused MySpace to indeed like Kat said become boring. If you did not have Facebook, you kind of felt like you were missing out.

Furthermore, I really enjoyed the comments made about why one preferred either Facebook or MySpace. I could identify with a lot of them, and I was actually happy I have Facebook and had MySpace. I was able to understand, agree, or disagree with the points the author or the people she cited made more. In addition, this article and the other article Self-Segregation: Why It’s so Hard for Whites to Understand Ferguson by Robert P. Jones brought up this whole issue of lenses. Jones article made me think about Martha’s discussion question Monday. I agree with Dr. Zamora I think one of our problems is people refuse or do not attempt to understand other people’s perspective. Some people just care about themselves and only value what they think.

What I enjoyed the most reading these blog posts is looking at the syllabuses. I never really thought there was so much to do, before this class as far as activities, when it came to selfies. I think these blogs make you see how much our classes are changing and how now more than ever we need to be familiar with the internet. I think it is refreshing to see teachers who are being creative and finding ways to keep the students and themselves entertained. At the same time, it looks like these classes are worthwhile because they are hard and have some assignments that require skills a regular English class would. I think they basically found a good middle ground, and I like the fact the people mentioned represent what our class is fundamentally about which is “openness” and collaboration (Cronin). Collaboration seems to be something a lot of these authors and teachers value.

In addition, I was also interested in the blog Selfie Pedagogy III: Networked Spaces, Slut Shaming and Putting Selfies in Dialogue with Theory. Some topics were addressed that will always be important and probably have been addressed in other classes as well. So, with this blog there is this idea of interconnectedness, and I think some of these blogs were in fact connected to my presentation on Monday in Composition Studies Research and Methods. The statement “because students ‘were all making selfies or could make them,’ they could more easily make the intellectual leap to paying more attention to networked spaces” made me think back to transferability which was mentioned in Writing in High School/Writing in College: Research Trends and Future Directions by Joanne Addison and Sharon James McGee (qtd. in Losh, Selfie Pedagogy III). Moreover, I thought it was interesting Radhika Gajjala in Elizabeth Losh’s article Selfies, Snapchat, and Distance Learning does something with her students very similar to what we are thinking about doing for our final project. That alone confirms that some of the ideas my classmates and my teacher purposed are indeed really tied into what we are learning in class.

I just want to start off by saying I think it is really interesting how previous class discussions in several of my classes can somehow always be tied to the readings. Something I found particularly interesting in chapter 5 of Net Smart is the “research results” by James Fowler and Nicholas Christakis which said “people’s happiness is influenced by how happy their friends, neighbors, and coworkers are” (qtd. in Rheingold 197). I have always noticed that about myself, but I honestly just thought it varied depending on the person and their personality or heart. I agree “The surprising implication is that at least part of your happiness might depend on people you never met” (Rheingold 198). Maybe that explains why I cry so easily when I see strangers sad or crying. But, one of the most important points made is “network awareness might be vital to health and happiness” (Rheingold 198). I definitely agree with it having a connection to happiness. You can find yourself in stressful situations when your class and even society nowadays revolves around technology and you just know basic information. Which is why, I wanted to take Composition Theory and New Media Studies. I wanted to become more familiar with technology and that is what I thought would happen when I became a part of this class. I would like the final project to be a combination of my strengths and weaknesses. Like Dr. Zamora mentioned in class, I want to “learn new tools” to improve my weakness, but I also want to display my strength. Since I want to become a teacher, “learning new tools” would be beneficial to me, but I also agree with Maria “we should write.” Dr. Zamora and my class discussion on Monday taught me you should never get too comfortable in anything and there is always room to grow. Even Rheingold points to never knowing everything or enough in chapter 6.  With that being said, there is still a lot I need to learn when it comes to writing, and I would like for this project to somehow build upon networking.

 

          Browsing through the website took my mind right back to Net Smart and our class conversation with Howard Rheingold. Some of the comments Howard made in his book or stated during our class discussion were further reinforced on the website. To my knowledge, Teaching How to Read, Write, and Participate on the Web: Web Literacy for Educators is a place to gain awareness, necessary digital information, and creativity. The website stressed collaboration or people doing group assignments and had some solo work. I initially thought this website was going to be for kids, but after roaming through the site and reading what some of the activities were about I would argue contrary. Like we discussed in class, I think it all depends on your level of engagement with the computer.

Furthermore just like in Howard’s book, the first activity I tried taught me new websites I knew nothing about. While doing the first activity, I was surprised to see that this attitude of choosing convenience over reliability is habitual, and I was further convinced of Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss research in which “twenty-four college students revealed that they would be willing to compromise certainty about credibility for speed and convenience” (qtd. in Rheingold 82). On the other hand, a password like “qwerty” I would never think to use or even consider it to be bad, but SplashData cites it frequently. Lastly, I was really thrilled to know a password I used in the past was considered good.

With that being said for the second activity, I experienced ease and discomfort. In Follow Your Data Trail it was really easy for me to do the assignment, but in this case that might not necessarily be a good thing. Fear arises when I think about evil people knowing the information the activity invited me to reflect upon. I think it would be harder to keep up with someone who has a busy schedule compared to someone who has a routine. This website and Rheingold basically taught me how much I am being followed.

            

A lot of the information presented in “Social-Digital Know-How: The Arts and Sciences of Collective Intelligence” was interesting. While reading this chapter, I thought about comments I made, classroom discussions, and my own personal feelings about collaboration. Trust is mentioned several times in the chapter and I do believe or agree that “a lack of trust prevents” collaboration (Rheingold 153). You have to trust the people you are working with will not only do the work but do it well. And if there is no trust, people are inclined to work by themselves. My last blog mentioned Facebook helping me realize what I needed to work on. While reading this chapter Facebook was mentioned again, and I believe it rarely “enables trust building” (Rheingold 155). Instead, I think it makes you not want to trust people more and isolate yourself. I believe that what some people see and what some people have experienced makes them not want to collaborate.

But what I like about this book is it finds a way to make people want to be a part of something online that incorporates others because of the benefits.  If you were not a part of a “virtual community,” Rheingold would make you want to be (162). I want to have “moral and physical support from people around the world” (Rheingold 162). I want help. Unfortunately, I think some people are so focused on doing better and in some cases winning that helping is nonexistent. Competition is definitely a hindrance in collaboration.

Moreover, Rheingold’s chapter helps me see flaws in my own behavior, and I learned as well. I learned from McGonigal

Scientific research shows that we have both the ability and the desire from early childhood to cooperate, to coordinate activity, and to strengthen group bonds─in other words, to make a good game together. But this potential can be lost if we don’t expend enough effort practicing collaboration. (qtd. in Rheingold 157)

In conclusion, we should all strive to improve not weaken positive skills.

 

In “Crap Detection 101: How to Find What You Need to Know, and How to Decide If It’s True” by Howard Rheingold I love the fact he decided to use Ernest Hemingway’s quote to open up chapter two. I agree with anyone who thinks we already “have a built- in automatic crap detector operating inside” us (qtd. in Rheingold 77). Sometimes, it is simply a matter of people ignoring it, which Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss confirmed, and sometimes I do agree “disinformation can be well crafted” (Rheingold 80). When reading this chapter, I could not help but think back to high school and the first couple of years in college. In high school and college, it was really instilled or drilled in us to do some of the simple things Rheingold mentions. In fact, teachers aided in the process by writing or making comments about statements or sites that were questionable. But as I read more and more, I realized that there is still a lot I need to learn myself. Besides the websites I knew nothing about, Rheingold says in chapter three, “(part of attention self-training consists of cultivating the ability to stop reading something that promises to be toxic)” (114). Facebook has made me realize my lack of talent in this area, and Rheingold’s statement makes me think about what I said to my group members for the exercise last class.

In addition while reading, there were moments when my desire to use books increased. For example when he said, “you could be somewhat confident that someone checked the author’s claims about facts before the book was published” (Rheingold 77). I have always preferred using books over anything that involves using the internet. At the same time, I love the fact I feel like I am a part of this “participatory culture,” and I know my contribution “isn’t all about individual advantage” (Rheingold 113-114). What I realize and appreciate with Rheingold is he never really lets you be completely satisfied with anything. One moment you are loving books and then the next moment you are reconsidering your habits. He follows his own advice and makes sure his own work is not considered bias.