The readings this week were very thought-provoking
and I liked that they gave us different perspectives of what a context collapse
truly could look like in various situations. The one that resonated with me the
most was Moore’s (2019) version of drawing commonalities between collapses “IRL”
(in real life) and those done digitally.
This week as I was thinking about
context collapses, I thought about the gag reels or “bloopers” at the ends of
movies. I love to see the actors “break” character for a moment and watch their
worlds collapse into one as they become their own self again for a brief amount
of time. I do not know why I love the bloopers so much, but that moment of
rupture engages me so much. On reflecting on that I thought about how much it
must resonate with other people as well, or else why would they include them at
the ends of films? Maybe people like them so much because it reminds them of
themselves, a regular human being. In
the bloopers, they no longer “act” as they break character. This goes along
with Rushkoff’s (2019) ideas of “playing the game” or “playing the part” in
society in that these contexts we create for ourselves hide our true notion of
self for fear of not “fitting” in.
On another thought about this week’s
readings, Moore (2019) states that we analyze all situations, but it is
interesting that the ways in which our analysis differs from IRL versus digital
platforms. I also found it interesting how we continue to use these “roles” IRL
and on the digital platforms in which we put ourselves. The “roles” could
reflect any piece of our “pie” or even take on new personas of their own, for
example LinkedIn versus Snapchat versus YouTube. Some people even develop a
persona just for online purposes as a sense of freedom and escape of their
normal act the same way IRL writers use pen names.
However, I think the main
difference between the two is the analyzation factor. People communicating in
person need to analyze every situation in real time throughout each day and get
a handle on the context so that we speak, act, and look appropriate for each
situation. Furthermore, as Moore (2019) mentioned a quote from Wesch (2009) in
his article stating there are “herculean social calculations [made] almost
unconsciously in the micro-second gaps of conversation” therefore, leaving
little room for error. If the person does not analyze the situation well and
the social interaction is “odd” or there could be collapses causing friction or
tension. I am sure we could all think of an awkward situation where this
happened in person possibly causing a context collapse.
Contrastingly, the analysis time
for online interactions usually are not instant. They are more calculated,
edited, re-touched, and or re-read multiple times before it is “said” or shared
on the person’s account. There is so much more time to conjure up something “cool”
or something that would fit your “act” for that platform perfectly avoiding any
context collapse.
The two are brought together when
people say things and do things IRL and those interactions become documented by
taking pictures together or posting about your current whereabouts in real time.
However, someone could post about you without you knowing causing a context
collapse. The ways in which people post things online are instantaneous, exposing
the reality that sometimes we will not have a say as to what is posted about us.
This becomes especially important when it comes to one’s professional career and
reputation.
Additionally, many social media
platforms let you tag people in posts without the person’s consent and it
occurs daily. For example, celebrities are often tagged in fan’s posts to hope
they “like” their post. However, it could truly be upsetting if someone tagged
you in a picture or tweet that may have been appropriate for their “following”,
but totally detrimental for yours. I know Facebook allows for tags to be accepted
by the user before it goes onto your profile for the public, but I do not know
of other social media platforms doing that as well.
This goes back to the class
discussion of are privacy settings really private? Not really because once it
is “out there”, someone can take it. Someone can screenshot whatever you post
and save it for themselves. Snapchat is an app that does notify you if someone
took a screenshot, however, long-term sharing platforms will not tell you.
These types of context collapses could lead to impersonation problems like the TV
show Catfish where they catch the person impersonating someone else on a dating
app. (Ironically it happens to be the same show that we had listened to last
week in class regarding the pronunciation of the word “gas”. )
In summary, after all of my
pondering this week regarding context collapse, I am left with a
few remaining questions of which I would love your feedback:
1.
What are your thoughts about “acting” in slices
of your pies and how the context collapse occurs when they flatten together?
2.
I am wondering about your reactions to context
collapses IRL and online, do you think timing is a factor in these? I am
thinking that the self- deleting sharing apps would causes less of a collapse
because of that feature, but I would be interested in your thoughts and
experiences.
3.
Given the
choice and the now increasingly more complicated digital world out there, would
you rather post generally speaking in what Moore (2019) calls “optimally
appropriate for all audiences” for all platforms? Or post spending more time
deciding who can see what in which context?
4.
I am also curious if any of you have ever had a
context collapse from a picture or post you did not know someone put up about
you? Do you think that type of censorship is something we can eventually control?
Thank you all very much for your time in reading my
thoughts. I look forward to hearing from you!
Hi Gab! I really appreciated your discussion and interpretations of our readings this week. In particular, what really struck me was your point on the more calculated and edited processes that go into the analysis of online interactions before they’re published, since I see that happening, quite literally, in my own life. My mom is relatively active on social media (Facebook in particular), and whenever she’s about to post something, she often asks me to check her English before she posts. Nevermind that she’s completely fluent in English after living in the United States for over 20 years and that I usually just return her posts unchanged at this point, but I find that in this instance it feels less of an awareness or fear of context collapse, and more like a manifestation of language ideologies as they pertain to immigrants and “non-native” English. I think this might be worth exploring in further detail at a later time.
ReplyDeleteIn response to your third question, I would generally post to the “lowest common denominator” as you describe, rather than spend time filtering and grouping my different audiences. Part of it, I believe, is because it takes so much effort and ultimately just makes things too complex for me. I think I already do a bit of filtering through my choice in platform (recalling my opinions on cross-posting), and so I post whatever I feel I’m comfortable sharing with my friends/followers/etc. as a perceived entity on that particular platform. However, I have become a little more conscious of what I post on Instagram lately. A lot of my former Japanese students (who are now in high school) follow me on Instagram, so there are some instances where I consider changing a caption or deciding not to post something onto my Story because of my role as a former teacher of theirs. Overall though, whatever I share on social media is “optimally appropriate for all audiences”. If there’s something I want to share that may not be “appropriate” (like a news article about a heated or specific topic), I tend to just directly seek out the friends that I want to hear from.
Gab, you brought up some really excellent points for reflection, some which Cheryl has kindly pointed out as well as how you extended the conversation concerning privacy and how anything can be appropriated in anyway once it's out there regardless of the intention of the author.
ReplyDeleteThis ties into your fourth question about context collapse and if one's image is used without permission. Back when I was an undergraduate, I had an online photo album where I would curate my college experience with the intended audience being my sorority sisters and friends. This was before Facebook had the capabilities that it does now for storing photos (back in my day, you could only choose 60(?) photos to put in an album so you had to be judicious). I had this album for years and never gave it too much thought (except when I would upload photos on Sundays) until one of my sorority sisters asked me for a favor. She was in her senior year and beginning her job search when she first Googled her name to see what images she would get. Here she saw some of her pictures from last weekend as well as those going back to at least two years. Although she had known that she was in these pictures (she accepted the tag), she didn't know that they would show up in a search engine. Because of this, she asked me if I could take the pictures down. Before long, other friends started making the same requests for the same reasons so I ultimately ended up closing my account. I would like to think that those pictures are erased, but who knows? I had uploaded them to a third party and maybe they still have these pictures over a decade later.
What I do know is that we have little control of what we put out there despite our privacy settings or platform (like SnapChat). This doesn't mean that I don't use these settings (or try to since I feel that customizing them is so confusing), but in order to avoid context collapses of this nature to happen, one must advocate for themselves much like my friend did in 2006.
Hi Gabb!
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post!
Your questions (1 & 3) make me think of an uncomfortable situation I had a few months ago. Basically, I moved out of the old apartment I was living in, but kept paying rent for about 9 months. Towards the end of the lease, my former housemates were afraid that our landlord would not give us our deposit back, and so I was trying to figure out why. As it happens, I usually get up very early (4:30ish), and so I decided to text them first thing in the morning not to forget. I thought I was being “optimally appropriate” by being very direct and clear, but their responses to my text indicated otherwise. I realized the hard way that accounting for tonality is very hard when texting, and so my words were understood in a way I did not intend at all. To make things worse, while I was going on rant about having paid for 9 months and possibly not getting my deposit back for some damage that my former housemates had done to the house while I was not living there, my wife pocket dialed one of them, and they heard everything I needed to say that didn’t want to say to them directly.
So, your question about “acting” different in different slices of our pies makes me wonder what would happen if we didn’t. Would that unedited self be who we really are? And how useful would that be? I do not necessarily have an answer, but as you discussed in your blog when something like I described above happens through social media I see very little opportunities to redeem yourself, which is what I was able to do with my former housemates once we had a face to face conversation.
Hi Gab! Thank you for your thoughtful reflection on the readings. To respond to question 3, I think I would try to post what I consider to be optimally appropriate for all audiences. Especially as a teacher, I have always considered the possibility of my students or their parents finding my accounts. This is one reason why my social media accounts aren't private. I never want to delude myself into thinking I could ever restrict how what I share is re-contextualized and how private is private anyway. Somebody at one of those social media companies has stored and can retrieve anything I post at any given moment.
ReplyDeleteHi Gab! Thanks a lot for sharing these thoughts and for the very interesting questions. I must confess that I have become more and more reticent over the years in terms of social media use, and even when it first started I was rather skeptical. I am really hesitant to share a lot of things online because of the fear of context collapse. So in response to your Question 3, I would say that I generally lean toward the first option, Moore's “optimally appropriate for all audiences”. That being said, I really enjoy going on social media and looking at others' posts (almost always "silently," without reacting to them by liking/commenting/sharing, etc.). What does that make me, if I were to do this IRL?
ReplyDelete