tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post1303115686365882174..comments2024-03-27T09:08:50.883-07:00Comments on Bad Mom, Good Mom: Culture and the Internetbadmomgoodmomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11569728075698885020noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post-10659952601088713362013-10-20T10:38:16.739-07:002013-10-20T10:38:16.739-07:00I don't think it's entirely technology. Su...I don't think it's entirely technology. Sure, there are features of facebook that encourage let-it-all-hang-out oversharing. But individuals can resist that, and some people use it not to show off how much more interesting their lives is than yours :-), but to really share useful info or deep thoughts. Likewise, some studies show that 96%+ of twits are absolutely meaningless, and we can all think of hundreds of examples of harmful knee-jerk responses. But I know a weather scientist who's incredibly happy with it, says it's allowed her international group of interested colleagues to communicate with each other as well and deeply as they used to do only during conferences. Of course I'm not pretending that conferences will ever be obsolete, as it's easier to communicate virtually with a group when you know the individual quirks. But what I'm trying to say is that given any technology, even inadequate ink and splitty goose quills, people who mean to have deep exchanges will manage to do it. Yes, it'd be great if technology would be designed less to show off how many thousands of friends you have, and more to facilitate thoughtful responses, and we should all be thinking about how to do that. I personally function better by email than phone or more instantaneous communication, as I think it removes the 'interruption' factor and gives the opportunity to think before I open my big mouth more. Most of the world does have important and useful things to say, when given the opportunity :-), and all benefit when they're encouraged to do so. But everyone can use existing technology, now, to foster discussion and exchange on a satisfactory level.<br /><br />While I'm here, let me say that I arrived primarily for sewing, as I like what you make. But I really appreciate all the interesting asides, comments on earthquakes and water and whatnot :-). I love you showing by example that sewing is not a symptom of innumeracy, and well, I'm not sure I should thank you for getting me addicted to things like Sociological Images :-), but I adore the eclectic nature of your blog roll. Keep it up GMBM!M-Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post-5884650661865469542013-10-19T16:00:59.002-07:002013-10-19T16:00:59.002-07:00M-C You are exactly right. Social media has becom...M-C You are exactly right. Social media has become synonymous with a handful of widely adopted sites such as FB and Twitter. But there are other forms of social media, such as this blog.<br /><br />A large reason why I enjoy MOOCs is because it is one of the few ways in which people from around the world can engage together deeply. I could write an entire post about what I learned anthropologically and economically from fellow students.<br /><br />So which social media platforms do you recommend for deeper engagement? What do they do differently from FB and Twitter? Are the differences in the depth of social engagement more due to differences in the technology (platform) or user group (population sampling)?badmomgoodmomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11569728075698885020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post-62871700392642215522013-10-19T15:17:36.599-07:002013-10-19T15:17:36.599-07:00I don't want to be too contrary, but I highly ...I don't want to be too contrary, but I highly doubt that the snarks populating much of the net care about copyrights one way or the other...<br />Also, let's not tar all net communications with the same brush. Facebook (built by a narcissistic stalker) is not ever going to be very deep, but there are plenty of forums that are fostering deep and nuanced debates, if you're interested enough to look for them. So OK, if you define social media as facebook because they thought of that term first you won't get very far, but if you consider social media as some form of net-based interaction then...M-Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post-25733030024490265412013-10-19T11:55:50.175-07:002013-10-19T11:55:50.175-07:00I hadn't thought of the fast communication/uns...I hadn't thought of the fast communication/unsuccessful protest movement connection, but that makes perfect sense. The unhappy new revolutionary has no community of fellow revolutionaries, no network, so the whole thing falls apart. Little Hunting Creekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15581836733935812927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15350975.post-30623962720999386742013-10-19T08:39:36.953-07:002013-10-19T08:39:36.953-07:00I also don't understand a lot of social media ...I also don't understand a lot of social media and have come to the conclusion that most are just time sinks with no purpose other than to waste time. I am really good at doing that mysef already. I don't need help. I especially liked the point about the lack of deep connection. SEWNhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05447977771494445400noreply@blogger.com