Reality v. Representation...

Jean Baurdillard puts it pretty simply...

In our postmodern society, we have developed such reliance on 'virtual reality', we have actually lost touch with our true reality that preceded these technologies, platforms, models, applications and maps (cited in Felluga 2011b).

 

Simulacra is referred to as something that replaces reality with its representation.  The theory behind simulacrum (plural: simulacra), as Baudrillard asserts; is that it is not merely a copy of what is classified as 'real' but rather it becomes 'real' in its own right.  Hence, representations of the truth turn into truth in one's mind, often referred to as hyperreal.

 

Hyperreality is defined as simulations or images that "distort the reality it purports to depict or does not in fact depict anything with a real existence at all, but which nonetheless comes to constitute reality" (Collins English Dictionary, 2013).  Take a look at Jean Baudrillard's 'hierarchy of simulation' which consists of 4 levels (orders).

 

EXAMPLES OF SIMULACRA...

The Sims

a life simulation game that depicts life as we know it.  "....lets you play with life like never before.  Create and control new Sims with mind, body and heart.  Build their unique worlds" (The Sims Official Site, 2013)

Dungeons & Dragons

modern role-playing fantasy game

Avatars

a representation (generally graphical) of a online user and their characters/ego's etc.  These may be employed in virtual games or as an icon in online communities, forums, video clips

Robots

mechanical machines controlled by computers or electronics, which enable replacement of humans!

 

 

 

CHECK OUT THIS YOUTUBE CLIP  - very interesting!

 

 

 

Baudrillard, asserts that there are 5 main causes of simulacra evolving:

1. MEDIA CULTURE... contemporary media (internet, TV, film, magazines) controls us as consumers by playing on our desires, needs and wants, encouraging us through virtual and fictional concepts and images, to move from reality to hyperreality.  Encourages us to remove ourselves from reality (Felluga 2011b).

2. EXCHANGE-VALUE... the capitalist culture converted citizens from purchasing goods in terms of use-value, to instead terms of 'what can it be exchanged for, how much is it worth'; hence exchange-value.  This has created a loss of material value and appreciation of 'real' goods, instead a culture based around money and personal gain (Felluga 2011b).

3. MULTINATIONAL CAPITALISM... As industrialisation develops more complex processes, we are losing touch with the basics and the underlying reality of the production of goods/services including the material labourers.  For example, how many could 'identify the actual plant from which the coffee bean is derived from?' (Felluga 2011b).

4. URBANISATION... through its expansion & development of geographical boundaries, it creates a larger space and hence citizens get lost in a large world; losing touch with the natural world (Felluga 2011b).

5. LANGUAGE & IDEOLGOY... Baudrillard asserts that we rely so heavily on language to 'structure our perceptions' and language in modernity today is constructed by simulacra.  Therefore, this is another avenue that allows simulacra to overcome true reality (Felluga 2011b).

 

 

Jean Baudrillard argues that through simulacrum, we have lost the ability to distinguish between reality and representations (Felluga 2011b).  Baudrillard posits that through modernity, real life and virtual fiction are being blended together so that there is no clear distinction, lulling humans into a false world.  Humans are becoming absorbed into an online world where you can control interactions, feelings and emotions...

 

Sherry Turkle's (2009) research suggests that the online virtual world; communities, games and interactions are numbing individuals, especially adolescents.  The virtual world allows our youth to escape and short circuit tough face to face conversations and uncomfortable situations, that are not controllable through a device.

 

My thoughts...

It encourages adolescents especially, to step out of reality and lose touch with 'real' emotions, feeling and empathy for one another; desensitising the generations that are forming our future!  Connecting and somewhat escaping online is disadvantaging kids by diverting them from learning and gaining experience in basic social tools that enable 'real' personal growth and self-esteem.  

References

Anon., 2013. [Online]
Available at: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/hyperreality

Felluga, D., 2011. "General Introduction to Postmodernism". [Online]
Available at: http://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/baudrillardsimulation.html

Hedges, W., 2010. Art & Technology 8.2 Baudrillard & Simulacra. [Online]
Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MmSPo5gg2E

Swinburne, 2013. [Online]
Available at: https://ilearn.swin.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_group=courses&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2FdisplayLearningUnit%3Fcourse_id%3D_149973_1%26content_id%3D_3796657_1%26framesetWrapped%3Dtrue

Turkle, S., 2009. Interview Sherry Turkle [Interview] (22 September 2009).

Vaughan, R., 2013. Introducing the Sims 4. [Online]
Available at: http://www.thesims.com/en-au/the-sims-4#/what-is-the-sims

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To Leak or not to Leak....

 "...States have national security concerns, we do not.....we have concerns about human beings" Assange (cited in Cadwalladr).

WIKILEAKS... is a non-profit organisation, explained as a new form of investigative journalism, (Kinsman 2011), that provides everyone with a chance to share and receive news and information through an anonymous channel; referred to as an "electronic drop box" (Wikileaks.org 2013). The goal is to update and inform the public sphere.

 

Initiated by Julian Assange in 2006, WikiLeaks is based upon the principle of freedom of speech and media publishing, in particular Article 19 which states that "everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers" (Wikilieaks.org 2013). 

To find out more, visit http://wikileaks.org/About.html 

 

WikiLeaks agenda claims to provide truth to everyday citizens and their main way of doing this is to make governments and other powerful authorities accountable through 'transparency'....

Bertot, Jaeger and Grimes (2010) suggest that transparency, particularly through governments, is now regarded internationally, as "essential to democratic participation, trust in government, prevention of corruption".  Assange defends that this is exactly what WikiLeaks is produced around and the leaks are fulfilling a gap and providing a service to society.  This supports Henry Jenkin's view  that participatory and convergence culture enables ways to 'democratize and diversify who gets to participate in our culture' (Jenkins 2014).

Kinsman (2011) also confirms that WikiLeaks is part of the revolution of participatory culture, whereby it plays a large role in 're-shaping the relationship between citizens and the state', supplying humans with far more power and information, than ever before.

The controversy...

With this new movement of public involvement and participation, there has been much controversy in particular to  founder Julian Assange, as to whether he is a activist, terrorist, hactivist, or just a plain whistleblower - see this interview to decide... 

 

Some posit that WikiLeaks is immoral, breaches privacy and in the case of the '250,000 diplomatic cable leaks' viewed as vandalism, whilst also producing scepticism and unnecessary concern, which threatens  national leaders and security.  Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton claims that the leaks “..puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines [US] efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems" (cited in Kinsman 2011).Despite accusations like this, there has been little to prove that Julian Assange is liable for any activity that crosses any legal boundaries.  The Supreme Court rules that WikiLeaks was in its legal jurisdiction to 'accept and publish such leaks' (Kinsman 2011).  In comparison, one's like Private Bradford Manning who allegedly smuggled information on Afghanistan to Assange, are likely to be liable for breaching codes of conduct and privacy. 

 

In this case of the cable leaks, the leaked documents were extended to over 700 internet sites, not including the newspapers which Assange sent information to.  Interestingly, though it is alleged that Assange actually withheld some information that was reported as "salacious without being significant" (Kinsman 2011).  This to me, illustrates two key elements; one is the scope and coverage that WikiLeaks has, secondly, that the motive of providing useful, informative information may just be the main goal of WikiLeaks, rather than as suggested; acts of terrorism, destruction or troublemaking. 

 To gain further insight on Julian Assange, take a look at this interview...

What the future holds...
Some argue that WikiLeaks will create stricter legislation on publishing information and increased surveillance and security facilitating greater restrictions and secrecy in Governments.  Alternatively, WikiLeaks if carried on, will foster greater democracy and truth, but possibly more social conflict and mayhem!

My thoughts are this...
WikiLeaks is quite within its rights, like everyone other citizen; to publicly share information that is provided to them.  I think that the awareness of this accountability and transparency should ensure that governments, authorities and individual leaders become more diligent and honest through their work as they know that their every move can be circulated globally for intense scrutiny!

References

Anon., 2013. Julian Assange Asylum Seeker - 60 Minutes Australia, s.l.: s.n.

Asaange, 2006. Wikileaks. [Online]
Available at: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Australia
[Accessed 19 January 2013].

Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T. & Grimes, J. M., 2010. Using ICT's to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), pp. 264-271.

Cadwalladr, C., n.d. Julian Assange, monk of the online age who thrives on intellectual battle. [Online]
Available at: http://tm.thiememeulenhoff.nl/waspreporter/201000/?pagkey=201000
[Accessed 22 January 2014].

Jenkins, H., 2014. Confessions of an Aca-Fan - The Official weblog of Henry Jenkins. [Online]
Available at: http://henryjenkins.org/
[Accessed 19 January 2014].

Kinsman, J., 2011. Truth and consequence: The Wikileaks saga. [Online]
Available at: http://www.irpp.org/en/po/from-climate-change-to-clean-energy/truth-and-consequence-the-wikileaks-saga/
[Accessed 19 January 2013].

Leigh, D., 2010. US embassy cables leak sparks global diplomatic crisis. [Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cable-leak-diplomacy-crisis
[Accessed 19 January 2013].

  
 

 

Politics....all within just a click of a button!

It is predicted that in the coming years, politics and election campaigns through the use of social media will be the way of the future.  It is also forecasted that young voters will become far more engaged and involved....

Political consultant expert Paul Begala (cited in Kennedy 2013) claims that the way to connect and reach young demographics is through presence on social media sites. He also believes that if politicians do not keep up with the ever changing and evolving social media platforms, they run the risk of being seen to be 'out of touch' as well as having a disadvantage with less online presence and publicity.

"Obama's victory post was the most 'liked' photo ever posted on Facebook" (Kennedy 2013).

Kennedy's (2013) research claims that social media platforms facilitate greater trust and passion for politicians and their campaigns, mainly through trusted sources such as family/friends posts and thoughts. This is far more personal and persuasive than unknown figures talking on traditional media.  In a recent study with students in America,  recent government elections were perceived as "personal, interactive, and directly targeted to them" (Kennedy 2013).  This feedback reflects Henry Jenkins and Howard Rheingold's theory of participatory culture.  Rheingold believes that with a basis of technology and humanity, the online revolution will create social change through the emergence of virtual communities and participatory culture.  Rheingold also asserts that this shift to participatory culture is a driving force in creating greater equality by removing hegemony power from traditional media, authorities & governments. 

 

Professor Clay Clemens (cited in Kennedy 2013)  has similar views asserting that campaigns through social media create far more interactive avenues for individuals to feel connected and informed..... WE are being invited to be involved in political campaigns reflecting a move to a more egalitarian and democratic world!   

 

So how do people use social media for political purposes?

According to studies conducted by the Pew Research Centre, "66% of social media users have employed the platforms to post their thoughts
about civic and political issues, react to other's postings, press friends to act on issues and vote, follow candidates, 'like'
and link to others' content, and belong to groups formed on social networking sites"

 

So what works for me?

 

Political campaigning through social media platforms for me, supplies a more explanatory message with simplified terminology through creative ways that catch my attention.  I find myself relating to the YouTube clips, the groups/pages and updates that have a brief and simple message or agenda.  Compared to a newsreader or politician being interviewed where information overload and political jargon is constant...this is where boredom sets in for me and I politically 'switch off'!  I think we very  much needed a new approach to excite and involve the public sphere about politics.

I think campaigners, associates and supporters/opposer's need to be careful that there is not too much 'political activity' presented online, especially on social networking sites, which could have the reverse effect and put users off!  

Online campaigning is centred around accountability and image whereby politicians are under much scrutiny; with one small wrong move threatening to discount their credibility.  I think this is a positive for the public as it allows for more honesty and less 'scripted' behaviour.  

One more concern and as Young's  (2011, p.212) research suggests; there is little debate on how the internet has increased the VOLUME of information and opportunity to participate in politics, yet is this enabling a fair opportunity for the wider audience?  Young (2010) discusses the issue of accessibility, providing the example of indigenous people, the elderly, low-skilled employees and or the unemployed; often with limited resources, hence no internet access.  Where does this leave them in this political outreach?

Finally, in line with Paul Begala, I think politicians need to be aware of the power that today's youths hold in determining our future and must recognise the most effective way of reaching them.  Extensive research suggests this is done by constantly updating campaigning in order to reach the most advanced and active audience.....through SOCIAL MEDIA!

What are your thoughts?

I encourage you to think about if or how you USE social media in relation to politics?  Should you participate more or less?  Do you think it is a valid method of campaigning or do you think this is devaluing and or mocking the fundamentals of politics?  Do you see the significance in reaching & involving today's youth in order to achieve in the future? 

 

References

Anon., n.d. Wikipedia. [Online]
Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_culture
[Accessed 10 January 2014].

Islam, Z., 2012. tom's guide. [Online]
Available at: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Barack-Obama-Facebook-Liked-Twitter,news-16278.html
[Accessed 10 January 2013].

Kennedy, K., 2013. Use it or Lose it: Social Media in the 2012 US Election. [Online]
Available at: http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/social-media-role-young-voters-increase-future-US-elections-Obama-Facebook-Twitter
[Accessed 8 January 2013].

Rainie, L. et al., 2012. Social Media and Political Engagement. [Online]
Available at: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Political-engagement.aspx
[Accessed 8 January 2014].

Rheingold, H., 2005. The new power of collaboration. [Online]
Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html
[Accessed 9 January 2013].

Young, S., 2011. News, political reporting and the Internet. In: How Australia Decides: election reporting & the Media. New York: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 10, pp. 203 - 228.

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is it?....a quick insight into Digital activism!

What is digital activism...

Defined as actions or practices which are campaigned primarily through the use of 'digital network infrastructure' to achieve a specific goal generally related to political or social change (Sivitanides & Shah 2011, p.2).  The term digital technology infrastructure refers to the "combination of networks, code, applications, and devices" which have evolved to be our digital world (Sivitanides & Shah 2011, p.2).

 

Compared to traditional methods of street protests/demonstrations, media interviews (if you're lucky) and walking the streets leaving petitions, it seems digital activism has provided a revolutionary way to have a voice...FREE, QUICK, MOBILE, TRANSLATABLE, EASY & WITH GLOBAL ACCESS!

Take a look at this interesting article written by Ethan Zuckerman, principle research scientist at MIT Media Lab and director of civic media at Massachusetts Institute of Technology...

 

 

 PRO'S...

• Connectivity/Geographic reach; a global audience!

• Cost effective - most online activity is free; saving paper/printing/advertising costs

• Time effective - much more EASILY ASSESSABLE avenues e.g tweets, forums, creating youtube clips, blogs, social network sites - posting updates, creating pages & groups, emails....all this compared to physically walking the streets to get your message across, or having a physical meeting to discuss or protest. Eliminates travelling and time consuming activities

    CON'S...

• Weaker ties and lack of hierarchical structure compared to traditional methods 

• Encourages anti-consumerism, brand activism for example, which can have negative effects on large multi-national corporations; which in turn can affect the economy and globalisation

• Greater opportunity for misinterpretation(cultural differences) opposed to face-to-face interaction

• The new methods of control can also benefit destructive users such as hackers and terrorists  organising and structuring detrimental acts

Scholarly thoughts...

Sivitanides & Shah (2011) assert that technology is the key element to digital activism success.  With the technology as the means, there are two other factors that contribute to the effectiveness; 'geographic reach' and 'support for the cause' (volume of organisations and individuals that react or empathise to this activism). Their view is that overall digital activism allows individuals to have greater say through quick, cost effective tools (technology), hence more opportunity to bring about 'change' in political, social and economic landscapes.

 

Malcolm Gladwell (cited in Cummins 2010) interestingly disputes digital activism, claiming that "activism is tied to relationships and shared experiences - a person is more likely to protest if they know a friend will be by their side".  He argues this point, through the example of the most effective mass protest - the American civil rights movement, by indicating that the strength of this was the "intimate friendships and shared experience, and directed by hierarchical power" (Adams 2010).  Digital activism facilitates the opposite; power/control within the individual, removing the power from traditional hierarchical structures.

 

Mary Joyce, co-founder of DigiActive.org, suggests that the 'easy' part is to join a group, like a page and affiliate yourself with other forms of digital activism.  Although this can somewhat educate and reach a wide population, she does recognise that sometimes these actions won't actually eventuate to any direct result.  She puts some of this down to some users lacking activism experience and knowledge.

 

My thoughts...

Digital activism excels in reaching a global audience, educating and creating awareness in a capacity that could never be achieved without technology.  I suggest that a couple of digital activism's greatest attributes is the resources it provides for organising events and the global connectivity 24/7, with it's downfall being that it allows for inexperience, lack of structure and perhaps too much responsibility on individuals.  Whilst digital activism provides far greater accessibility and tools for activists, I recognise that this is also providing destructive users such as hackers or terrorists with easier and greater opportunity.  So it seems, as with most things in life, digital activism brings great advantages yet also disadvantages...

 

References

Adams, T., 2010. Twitter and Facebook cannot change the real world, says Malcolm Gladwell. [Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/oct/03/malcolm-gladwell-twitter-doesnt-work?guni=Article:in%20body%20link
[Accessed 10 December 2013].

 

Cummins, J., 2010. The Guardian. [Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/oct/06/digital-activism-facebook-twitter-gladwell
[Accessed 10 December 2013].

Joyce, M 2011, 'Complex and contradictory: a new way to think about digital activism', The meta-activism project, 29 August, http://www.meta-activism.org/2011/08/complex-and-contradictory-a-new-way-to-think-of-digital-technologys-effects
(Accessed 21 December 2013).

Sivitanides, M. & Shah, V., 2011. The era of digital activism, Conference proceedings of CONISAR 2011, Conference for Information Systems Applied Research held in Wilmington North Carolina, USA, http://proc.conisar.org/2011/pdf/1842.pdf
(Accessed 8 December 2013).

Zuckerman, E., 2013. Political Activism is as strong as ever, but now it is digital - and passionate. [Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/15/political-activism-on-digital-platform
[Accessed 4 January 2013].