The Life and Times of

‘Privacy 3.0: We’re here, we’re public, get used to it!’

At the panel I attended during the IRGO unConference2, discussion was centred on the idea of privacy in a new culture of electronic communication and the thought that this culture is similar to ‘Privacy 1.0’, an Oral Culture. ‘Privacy 3.0’ centres on an electronic culture which leaves no room for real privacy, this is a move away from ‘Privacy 2.0’ in the previous communication culture of print.

 “Privacy is dead, and social media hold the smoking gun.” – Pete Cashmore, Mashable CEO

The idea was put forth that this new culture of communication is similar to oral culture as it is hard, if not impossible, to prevent other people from knowing which information you consume. ‘Like’ buttons and groups on Facebook, who you follow on Twitter and what you ‘scrobble’ on Last.fm means that any other user of these sites are able to quickly skim your profile and see what kind of person you are.  

This is similar to Marshall McLuhan’s ‘Global Village’ where information is spread quickly and easily and we are more involved with each other’s lives. Although it is clear that print culture was more private than previous oral cultures and the ‘global village’ we are in now, I am not sure whether the complete lack of privacy is here yet. With an emphasis on privacy settings and people becoming more aware that others can easily find out what was once ‘private’ information, there seems to be a slight glimmer of hope that we can still hold on to some private information in the electronic communication age.

The discussion then moved to Open ID and the question of people ‘trusting’ who they give their private information to, such as passwords and usernames. The Identity providers would allow a user to log in with one set of details in multiple sites; this prevents the user from having to give information to a multitude of sites they may not trust. Although this was presented as a good idea from the speakers, there were some members of the audience who believed that this still breached privacy, as one site could now see every other site you visited, unlike before when one site could only see that you have visited their site.

“Neither privacy nor publicity is dead, but technology will continue to make a mess of both.” – Danah Boyd, fellow at Harvard University

Privacy constitutes different things for different people. It could be anonymity, or simply no person knowing that information at all, regardless of whom they believe you to be. It is up to the individual to decide how much they value their privacy, and to what measures they go to protect it, be it using Open ID or not using certain sites at all.

The IRGO unConference2 was a great experience and the panel I went to had some great discussion and raised valid points that were interesting and thought provoking, if a little worrying.

The Viral Phenomenon: A shift in how we get information

The viral phenomenon of discovering and distributing information plays a key role in our Web 2.0 society. Originating in marketing, ‘viral’ refers to individuals talking amongst themselves to share, and often generate, information. As social network sites become ever more popular, user driven content becomes increasingly important, as it is often the fastest channel of reporting news. Unlike the old format of mass media, which generally did not encourage discussion, this social way of sharing information allows for more participation in a community. 

As the way information is generated moves towards social media, it puts itself largely in the hand of the ‘citizen journalist’, these users can update their Twitter, their Facebook or their personal blog within seconds of an event happening, often with photos, videos, audio and insight that conventional reporters may miss. This results in a community driven discussion as ‘friends’ of these users are able to comment on the news. These friends then tell their ‘friends’ and by the word of mouth, information is distributed incredibly quickly around the world. 

The Queensland floods that happened recently are a clear example of how we rely heavily on social network sites in order to break news and to share it with others. Videos were uploaded to Youtube of the devestation as it was happening, tweets were sent letting people know which areas were hit badly, who was safe and who needed help. The hashtag #qldfloods, which is still active, allowed people to discuss the events that were unfolding easily, on whichever format they had access to. 

The Queensland University of Technology reported that “at the peak of the Brisbane floods, the number of tweets rose to 1,200 an hour during daytime, before falling away to their normal night-time lull. Tweets also surged during the Toowoomba flood peak, as communities turned to them for vital information.”

A news story on stuff.co.nz shows how this viral aspect of social media is being used closer to home. Rachel Dunlop is using services such as Twitter, Foursquare and Facebook in order to get more people to visit businesses harmed in the Christchurch earthquakes. Dunlop hopes to attract more people to the businesses through word of mouth and help rebuild the Christchurch economy.

Social media and word of mouth allowed the Queensland community to come together and take the next step forward to helping rebuild their towns, all driven by community participation and the speed of which information could be shared. The power of Web 2.0 and the viral phenomenon is its speed and emphasis on personal participation online. Newspaper and television companies no longer control what information is distributed to their audiences, or how fast it is done. Just as the rise of cellphones with cameras and internet, this shift in our thinking towards citizen reporting and away from traditional news mediums will change how, where and when we get our information.

(Edited 28/01/11)

(Source: creativeindustries.qut.edu.au)

The Wilderness Downtown: A web based take on the humble music video

Music videos exploded in the 1980s with the rise of MTV and the change in how we experience music. Before MTV, there was no need for a video to accompany a song as nobody was likely to see it. As MTV began to dominate, a song without a music video was at a serious disadvantage as it no longer fit in with the way that people consumed music. Often this was on television, and later, the internet.

As more and more people begin to find music online, the top 40 TV music video shows and channels like MTV have been on the decline. However, just as the television revolutionised how we experience music, the internet, and in particular Arcade Fire, Chris Milk and Google, are once again attempting to change the norm. They have produced an “experimental interactive film” called The Wilderness Downtown. The short film is a web based mashup which uses Google Maps, Google Street view and music and video from Arcade Fire.

A mashup uses two or more sources to create something new. For example music mashups are used in music frequently as artists sample old songs in their new ones. A web based mash up runs in the same way, it is a page or application that takes information from two or more sources. In the previous case, images from Google Maps and Google Street view were incorporated with a standard music video to personalise the experience for the viewer. On top of this, there is also street detection, a drawing tool, synchronised windows and the ”HTML5 Canvas 3D engine renders a flocking bird simulation that reacts to the music and the mouse”.

Although this interactive short film is sometimes glitchy or slow, it could be the future of how we watch music online. In the age of social media, when the individual is very much highlighted, Arcade Fire and the team at Google have created a way in which each person can mash up a music video and their life experiences, resulting in a very intimate and enhanced take on the humble MTV video. 

Check it out at http://www.thewildernessdowntown.com/

Photo

First post on my new tumblr for Comp113

To celebrate, here is a cute kitten