Blog Six: Discussion Leader

This week's readings:

• Digital Na(t)ives by Hargittai
• Content Creation on the Internet by Hoffman et al
• Mind the Skills Gap by Hargittai & Shaw
• Digital Inequalities and Why They Matter by Robinson et al
• The Digital Production Gap by Schradie
• Extending the Digital Divide Conversation by Eastin et al

The articles for this week's discussion had many overarching themes, but the one that stood out to me the most was the digital divide. This divide is made up of socioeconomic differences, along with many other characteristics (e.g. race, ethnicity, etc.). I had never taken the time to think about the digital inequality that exists today, because I take for granted my access to the Internet and the skills I've learned.

It was particularly disheartening when I read, "…as things stand, the more privileged stand to benefit from it more than those in less advantageous positions raising concerns about possibly increased rather than decreased inequality resulting from the spread of Internet use across the population” (Hargittai, 2010, p. 109-10).

I had always thought that the main problem with this divide had to do with access to the Internet. However, these articles forced me to look at it from another side. Many times, children may have access to the Internet but have no skills in this area. These two factors work together to form the digital inequality that exists today.

Initially, you would think that this inequality is only spread throughout different ethnicities and races, but as Hargittai and Shaw point out, gender is a factor as well. This was something that was a little surprising to me. I had never taken the time to look at Wikipedia to see who all was editing and creating content, but the article shows that it is primarily male-dominated. I would like to compare the levels of skill among those on social networking sites to see if the gender gap is as wide on these platforms. Do males or females create more content on sites like Facebook and Instagram?

Because I am one of the discussion leaders for this week, I will be presenting an in-class demonstration of a website that brings low-cost Internet to families. EveryoneOn.org also has a Knowledge Center that brings an understanding of how to use the Internet to these families. The two factors discussed in the readings (accessibility and skill) are brought together in hopes of closing the digital divide.

These articles opened my eyes to the digital inequalities around me that many minority groups continually face. These persisting problems must be countered if the playing field is ever going to be leveled for all players. I look forward to discussing my notes from each of the articles with the class this week.

Blog Five: "The Attention Merchants" by Tim Wu

Tim Wu's book offers incredible insight into the world of online advertising.  He explains chapter by chapter how individuals are targeted online for their attention.  Gaining this attention, according to Wu, has become the ultimate goal for online strategists - and they're extremely good at it.

Wu details information regarding what he refers to as "attention merchants," who have the sole responsibility of gaining our attention.  These merchants are at our every turn, especially with our increasing internet usage.  Advertisements are all around us, but those that are online are catered even more to a particular individual or audience.  Wu explains how we are not even in control of our own attention, because it is constantly being targeted as we spend hours online.  He encourages readers to take back their lives and to block out as much of this as possible.   

What is most interesting about Wu's findings is that from the early 20th century to today, this practice has become increasingly widespread.  He explains how advertisements were shaped during the early part of this period, to how they are shaped now.  It is truly astounding to see how these attention merchants take over our online presence and use it to their advantage.  It made me think about the advertisements I see while I'm on social media sites and on regular websites for leisure or shopping.  It is incredible when I think about how, for instance, many times the advertisements I see are for items in which I have just previously researched.  These systems analyze my data and present me with what they know I would be interested in.  This is amazing, but scary at the same time.  Have we as consumers dropped the ball when it comes to our awareness of these practices?  This served as a wake-up call for me.

Wu's epilogue spoke clearly to me as well, especially when he mentions the fact that millennials are growing weary of advertisements and do not mind paying for exclusion from such ads.  This rings true with me as well.  For instance, even the music I listen to on Pandora or Spotify comes with ads.  However, the option remains for me to remove these ads by paying for the service.  Wu explains how this is not good news for attention merchants.  They would like to have the most exposure possible for as many people as possible. 

Wu says that our attention has become a commodity, and professionals are constantly looking to gain this attention and to keep it.  He expresses the need for us to reclaim our own attention once and for all - to be more mindful of these attention merchants and their desire to take over our online thinking.

This book also pointed out the differences in how this attention was gained through other media.  For example, television advertisements were very much different from the ads we see online.  They were less tailored to specific individuals and more tailored for the masses as a whole.  

Wu says we must take back our online freedom and become more aware of these attention merchants who are around our every click.  He says, "And then we must act, individually and collectively, to make our attention our own again, and so reclaim ownership of the very experience of living" (Wu, 2016, p. 344).  

Ref.:

Wu, Tim. (2016). The Attention Merchants: The epic scramble to get inside our heads. New                               York: Alfred A. Knopf.   

Blog Four: "Analytic Activism" by David Karpf

David Karpf, in Analytic Activism, explains how analytics work and provides a base of understanding for a topic that can seem overwhelming.  The digital listening he describes is not extremely new, but more and more pollsters and political experts are turning to this as a real strategy.  Karpf provides an interesting way to look at this process.  We immediately recognize the opportunity for people to speak politically online, but we rarely take the time to listen to what is being said.  He explains how beneficial this listening can be.  He describes how these hashtags and other ways of communicating online make up a wide array of data.  This data can be used to understand political changes and desires among the people.

Karpf focusses on fundraising for a portion of the book, explaining how analytics are used to target certain groups.  This makes it easier to understand which members would be more apt to donate and which would not.  Before this technology, the opportunity to contribute was out there, but the motivations behind those clicking the button were not completely known or understood.  This was perhaps the most interesting part of the book to me.  It is amazing how this technology can target individuals (even me) to donate to certain causes that are part of my online footprint.  This makes raising money for political causes and/or candidates easier than ever before.  People behind the analytics can now know which candidate(s) or cause(s) to present online users with.  This is incredible.

Karpf also explains that "petitions are the most flexible and essential tool of analytic activism" (2016, p. 59).  He compares the difference of using social media to "like" or "share" material, versus signing an online petition.  The main difference is that when you "like" or "share" something on Facebook, it is signaling a person's stance on an issue, but it is not leaving behind as heavy of a digital footprint as if you sign an online petition.  When an online petition is signed, the user also has to type in his or her email address.  This is what increases the digital footprint and helps with the analytics.  

The use of big data, Karpf warns, can be overwhelming and at times not as dependable as you may wish.  He explains how it is not always a safe bet to make when depending on the numbers and that sometimes numbers are not fully representative.  He warns readers not to become overly reliant on numbers.  This reminds me of the reliance on numbers during the 2016 presidential election.  Many pollsters were led (by the numbers) to believe a different turnout on election day.  This data turned out to be historically inaccurate.

This book was great. I believe anyone interested in political fundraising and/or polling should read it.  It offered in-depth explanations of subject matter that is usually drowned in numbers that are not easily understood.  Karpf explains the power behind this business, if used correctly and responsibly.  It opened my eyes to a different side of social media.  Usually I concentrate on what the masses can say online and not so much on what is being said.  It is important to listen to the masses, and this listening brings with it massive amounts of data.    

Ref:

Karpf, David. (2016). Analytic Activism: Digital listening and the new political strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.