14 thoughts on “Week 11 – New Media Identities (T2)”
Vienna
Nakamura: What this reading really did was debunk the illusion of a ‘safe space’ where you could be whoever you wanted to be regardless of sexual orientation, class or race. Now instead of judging physical appearances, users are judging based on assumptions and perceptions. The lack of empathy shown towards these Gold Farmers who are doing this as their livelihood as opposed to entertainment shows how when you are behind a screen, anonymous you are invincible. ‘With great power comes great responsibility’. No one takes this seriously on the internet due to the vastness of the scale, policing or enforcing etiquette in such arenas is going to take time. (apart from Singapore, I guess because it is small enough to control) When Prof drew the relation to migrant workers that exist in for example Singapore, I understood these leisure players a bit more. They exist in a structured system where these Gold Farmers are legal, but instead of taking their frustration out on a structure they are seemingly powerless to reform, they do what is within their limits and take it out on the Gold Farmers.
Ernie Effendi
The readings explore the idea of new media identities. What I find most interesting and applicable to today’s society, especially in youths, is the idea of a fragmented post-modern identity.
With new media, we are able to explore our identities more, reconstructing and recreating them, as Turkle states “in an environment infused with a postmodern ethos of the value of multiple identities and of playing out aspects of the self”. In the postmodern world, there isn’t a definite self, we have multiple facets of our selves and we contextualize them accordingly. We have different selves when at work, at home or with friends. We play out different aspects depending on the environment and context.
Similarly, in virtual communities, we play out different aspects of our selves. With the ability to practice impression management through profiles and curating our thoughts and actions before publicising them online, the virtual world gives more space to explore and develop these multiple selves. In a juvenile study of youths under probation, a couple of them have admitted to having multiple facebook profiles. One for their close-knitted family and friends and the other for more inappropriate and ‘criminal’ activities. Similarly, many others also practice this trend of having multiple profiles and maintaining both and developing both separately.
The virtual world becomes more obvious as a platform for multiple-identity-making when we see males ‘impersonating’ as females. This trend can be seen widely practiced through shows like catfish. But in some cases, these online personas that they take on are not necessarily not themselves, but just a different part of their self. The availability of virtual space as a place to discover and develop one’s identity has also allowed people to come to terms with their confused identity. For instance, transgender and homesexuals can feel more belong and find the virtual world as a space to discover or develop their alternate self.
Hence, while some may argue that the virtual world have just facilitate the confusion of one’s identity or self, it has also provide space for most to explore their identities, all of which makes up their self. In today’s society, the self is made up of multiple identity and is ever-changing. There is no definite static self.
Dionne See
I’m pretty sure most of us went through cyber wellness classes in schools previously and we could probably show Turkle’s article to the educators to tell them that internet is not necessarily alienating. Of course, I would not deny that addiction exists and that’s problematic. But Internet games are not necessarily all dark and should be avoided. As Turkle discusses, they can be constructive spaces whereby there are meaning-making and forging social bonds. In addition, the virtual world allows us to constantly remake ourselves towards our “ideal” self. Because of the virtual world, we are given opportunities to fantasize, which are not allowed in the real world because we are so bounded by institutions.
However, we need to understand that the boundary between the real and virtual world is so blurred now as what Nakamura would discuss. Let’s just use the example of the gold-farmers. If they have been degraded in real life due to the socio-political institutions, they may want to feel that they are important too, by going online. However, because the boundary between the real and the virtual world is so blurred, even if they go online, real-life situations are being re-inscribed online as well. The real and virtual worlds are so integrated now. As Turkle discussed, our selves online is just a “heightened” self of the real world. One example would be if one is very racist in the real life, when he goes online, especially with the level of freedom available and the anonymity, it is highly possible he will bring forth his racist opinions into the online world as well.
Also, talking about anonymous, I’m reminded of Boyd’s discussion of how we should contextualize and not in favor of the anonymity online. In fact, Boyd talks about how there is a core self no matter what. For example, multiple emails are still managed by a person and that is the core self – a reference point. The architecture of the online space has allowed us to have a fake sense of security whereby we think that the social interactions online are akin to the real world interactions when in fact, we are all confined by the architecture of the online space by the designers. They cause our online interactions to be recorded and searchable in their databases. They decide what kind of interactions we can have online – enabling and disabling comment sections, whether we can like or dislike a picture, etc.
If Turkle says that in real world, the institutions has restricted us such that our role is our self and hence hindering imagination, I would argue that the online world is also restricted and bounded by the designers (the architecture) and how we interact are based on the “rules” laid by these designers.
Sakino Tan
Individual identity construction online is such an interesting topic as it is complex to understand. Online is a totally different world for some as they can express or present an identity that is different from their real life life or be someone that they cannot be in real life due to the social norms. Social norms may cause some to feel restricted of their own identity, thus allowing to present a self online, allows some to have an outlet. It is also important to question these identities that a person portrays. Impression management by Goffman is such an interesting term as we are allowed to show different sides of us through different medias or platforms. Although it questions the true identity of a person and doesn’t allow others to get the full picture of the actual identity one has, it shapes the impression others have on you.
The fact that social media allows to be very objective on what you post, it may seem very superficial as the identity that you present may be the perfect person that you want to be. It gives people the choice to only show the ‘good’ side of yourself.
In addition, the fact that on the internet, you can be a dog, shows how dangerous the online platform is when someone creates a ‘false’ identity for social interactions or other hidden agendas. This allows people to bring out the worst in them as there is a possibility that they might not get caught. Although we live in a technological world, I try not to be too caught up in this identity dilemma as everything can be stored as archives.
Audrey
Turkle, boyd and Nakamura discuss the process of individual identity construction online. They each analyse how individuals in modern societies understand themselves and the relationships between the self and the virtual realm.
Turkle’s in-depth study of Multi-user dungeons (MUDS) of online gaming illustrates how the reinvention of the self can take place on the Internet. In MUDS, users are able to project themselves as far as their ‘real-life’ identities as they please. The term ‘real-life’ is used to represent the physical world, but the virtual realm is very much ‘real’ to some as well. What Turkle is concerned about is that we shouldn’t see the virtual and physical realms as separate realities – they are very much in a dialectic relationship. In MUDS, there is also always chance for resetability of identities. This seems similar to how people manage their identities, or participate in what Goffman calls as “impression management” on social media. After living on social media long enough, we learn how to navigate our self-projection into images that we feel are desirable. For example, there’s a function of social media that allows us to screen pictures or posts you are tagged in before allowing it to appear on your timeline
If a photo of you pops us, and you don’t like it, you simply disallow that photo from appear on your timeline and it won’t. You constantly reset, tweak, or edit.
Edit your profile picture.
Edit your post.
Edit your comment.
If we think a comment sounds too harsh, or is not witty enough, click edit – just make sure you’re not too late for someone to catch your old comment and archive it through a screenshot.
This is why boyd discusses the importance of understanding the architectures of virtual and physical spaces. Because archiving communication and information is all part of the online architecture, it is sometimes difficult to contextualize such information.
Also, the lack of embodiment on the online sphere affects how people interpret what is communicated to them, and misunderstandings are bound to happen. Non-verbal communication such as body language and tone is essential in completing entire meanings of messages – something text cannot fully convey albeit the use of punctuation marks and emoticons.
boyd is also fully conscious of the fact that our identities don’t become segmented into separate identities, but we have a singular, multi-faceted identity, with one referent point. We manage the different aspects of our selves online, in coherence to this referent point.
Nakamura debunks the notion of the democratic space on the Internet, and writes about how ‘real-life’ racism is translated onto the Internet, in the World of Warcraft game. It shows that the implications of societal structures are indeed ‘real’ on the Internet, even when people present themselves as avatars.
Iman
Being the generation that fully grew up with the Internet, this week’s topic really hit home. Turkle opines that there is a reinvention of self that goes on on the Internet. For example, how many of us have friends who are completely different in real life as compared to their online personas? Turkle further states that what the internet allows for is to exteriorise the soul. This could be an explanation as to why people project themselves so differently on the Internet. The virtual world allows them to project who they truly or are who they aspire to be with confidence as they can constantly reinvent themselves (e.g. if you don’t like who you are on this website you can just delete your account and create a new one) as opposed to the real world. This parallels to Goffman’s theory of impression management where we can control who we are and who others think we are. Another interesting outtake from Turkle is that she argues that there is a greater capacity for collaboration and intimacy which leads to the rethinking of community. For example, a lot of people are afraid to voice out their oppression in real life for fear of the consequences or even being labelled as whiny or judged in other ways. However, Tumblr has provided a safe space for various minority groups where they come together and educate themselves and others about their negative experiences and seek comfort in one another. For example, there is a viral post on Tumblr that says something like “I wouldn’t have known I was trans if not for Tumblr. I would probably have gone about life being confused and suffering with the labels imposed on me yet I do not identify with.” Henceforth, the virtual world allows for a space of intimacy without fear of judgement that exceeds offline interaction. Also, I think that the fact that these people can remain anonymous plays a huge part in their comfort of exposing who they feel they are inside.
Diyana
Level of freedom afforded by Internet, intensifies the detachment of the physical self. The allure of virtual realities is that we can narrativise and project different selves even more. With avatar creation and simulation, our idealized or reinvented selves are pinned into visual, textual materiality. What is imagined in our minds, of the image of our selves, are materialized and exteriorized into the virtual realms. For Turkle, this is constructive.
In virtual reality, “there is an unparalleled opportunity to play with one’s identity and to “try out” new ones.” In that instance, the self is explored, recreated, multiplied, and in a state of a flux. Roleplaying allows one to stand in between realities, in real life and out.
The postmodern projections of self is fluid. Metaphorically, we can’t contain water in our hands. This somehow hints at a caveat: Our multiple selves is liminal. Real and virtual boundaries can be blurred. Thus what if we can’t control our multiple selves and be overwhelmed? What if we can’t strictly keep the real with the real, and the virtual strictly with the virtual? What will happen if the virtual supersedes the real?
Especially when the virtual reality is so immersive and exemplarily evocative, I think we can get carried away sometimes, and thus this will definitely have implications in the real.
Stanley Wong
This week’s readings discusses about identity in new media. All three theorists agree that the online realm allows for the creation of space for individuals to craft their identity; however they have different notions of the implications the online realm have on the individual’s identity.
On one hand, the online realm, as argued by Turkle, allows for fluidity in the construction of identity. No longer confined to physical markers, we are free to take on an identity we want. Within her context of MUDs, this can come in the form of multiple selves, where each game account reflects a different self that we want to experiment with. To her, such experimentation opens up opportunities, like exploring gender roles, which she mentioned. Indeed, this also implies that the postmodern self is reflexive; they often take in the information they have picked up from others to recraft their self. At the same time, each self they craft is idealized; they invest effort in crafting a self that they want others to see.
On the other hand, boyd does not look at games, but from the perspective of usenet and social interactions on the internet in general. She argues that unlike real life, the online is able to archive interactions posted, resulting in these interactions being dislocated from time. This means that anyone in the future can run a search on and easily take these interactions out of their social contexts, giving room for misinterpretation. This is what boyd calls “context collapse”, where users think they have a proper definition of the situation to work with; but it is not, as their posts are public. One strategy that boyd suggests is the multifacetness of the self. This is seen through email, where we associate a context with a particular email address, which gives us a definition of the situation to work with, which helps to smooth interactions.
While both boyd and Turkle work with identities on a micro level, where the real and the online are interlinked and have implications on how people sees themselves, Nakamura argues that how online personas see each other is similar to processes found in the real world. Using World of Warcraft as an example, she argues that “gold farmers” tends to be stereotyped to be Asian, regardless of their actual identity. She further invokes the concept “avatarial capital” where one’s status within the game is a function of his investment towards constructing the avatar, and customizing it, and those who happens to have the time happens to be the leisure class, since they have time to do so. Those who lack the time to craft avatars are often labelled farmers, because mining gold and trading it for real cash is more important these these “aesthetics”. As such, it mimics the first and third world relations, where the First world citizens have time to pursue interests, wheras the Third World residents are busy working to earn money, in the process producing goods for the First World residents to consume.
Sasha Kaur Dhillon
Being wired to my trusty MacBook Air and iPhone twenty-four seven, this week’s readings presented an interestingly refreshing take on the digital world to me. While some points were relatable, others required me to take a step back and survey the world at the tip of my fingers, which I had apparently taken for granted. I suppose this is evidently a characteristic of most netizens today and “digital natives” as they call us. Nevertheless, I gleaned many interesting points and I will proceed to discuss/share them below.
Boyd:
Boyd raises a pertinent issue which is centered on how the architecture of the digital realm is deceiving and not representative of the social context that exists within it. The terms “chatrooms” and “websites” connote a sort of physical spatial existence that tricks “ people into believing that they should act in a comparable manner and will receive the appropriate feedback”. This is crucial because it creates a sort of tension between the individual and the reality of the architecture. Boyd argues that this is because the architecture of the cyber-world ( place) is totally different from the physical locations setting (space) of the physical world. Therefore, different social norms are needed to navigate the unfamiliar cyber-space.
Boyd also provides an insight into two of the main architectural differences that impact social interaction – namely the power of architecture and the lack of embodiment. The power of the architecture also encompasses the storage capacity that abounds on the online realm, whereby everything is archived. Also evident in Boyd’s argument is the fact that software designers should be responsible for conditioning the platforms on which social interaction takes place. I do not completely agree with this point. To a certain extent, the software designers do have this power but their power is also ultimately limited in the development of social cues or etiquettes. They provide us with places, but it is up to the individuals using these spaces to make meaning out of these places and to create the intangible context in which communication is supposed to happen in these spaces. This is akin to having architects build you a house, but it does not become a home until you yourself confer it with that status. Ok, a tad far-fetched but that was just how I saw it – that to hold the software designers alone responsible was too unreasonable a notion.
Also, Boyd presents the concept of a postmodern fragmented self. This involves experimenting with different selves for instant a work account interface and a separate personal account interface. Though, she still believes and argues for the oneness of self – that self can be multi-faceted but not necessarily fragmented. Pieces of the cake, ultimately form the cake and do not differ from its wholesome structure, at large. So, while the self is divided , it still wholesome and ever present. Thus, Boyd still believes in the notion of a coherent person-hood which is opposed to argument put forth by Turkle who believes in the fragmentation of the self.
Turkle:
Turkle presents her thoughts on the “unparalleled opportunity to play with one’s identity and to try out new ones”. Basically, this with regards to the cyber-world dimension of MUDs where one can construct and re-construct oneself as many times as possible. Though, this does raise a number of questions related to the true essence that is supposed to be inherent in one’s identity, Turkle presents many beneficial aspects of such reconstruction. To her, the self is not only decentered ( completely detached from the user) but also multiplied without limits.
She argues that virtual worlds provide environments for experiences that may be hard to come by in the real. We are provided with examples of a mother-daughter feud where the daughter takes the role of the mother and experiences her point of view as well as acts out of her own experiences. There was also another individual who, due to his many trials and tribulations, was unable to participate wholesomely in a social environment that allowed him to converse with people. Instead, he was able to re-create this experience on a MUDs and even woo one of the sought after characters with his charming skills. These experiences can also shape one’s identity and are influenced by it – what Turkle terms “identity workshops”. She further states that this holding power and evocative potential of MUDs is due to its many characteristics – always going on, the cloak of anonymity and the fragmentation of one’s personality into multiple identities.
Turkle’s notion of this postmodern projection of a self involves the construction of multiple selves and facets that are always in a state of flux. One can go both back and forth to morph his identity – and in a sense this is stabilizing to the notion of the true essence of one’s self. Thus, one’s identity is rootless. There is also the notion of escapism – albeit, in a non-traditional form that is to say one re-invents himself – creating a new reality, rather than running from his reality altogether.
This leads us to the notion of a psychosocial moratorium that is put forth by Turkle. This involves the idea of suspension in that we can suspend our relations with others while we work on creating our relations with them. This translates into using the virtual space to gain some semblance of control in our lives as aptly displayed in the examples of mother-daughter role discourse and the socialization of a relatively socially detached individual.
Nakamura:
Nakamura centers his paper on the Chinese gold farmers – which are basically individuals who are paid to work on selling and buying online merchandise. This is seen as a violation of the traditional game roles, since the essence of the game lies in the fact that individuals had to go through all the quests to attain these goods that they can now buy with their physical money. This relates to avatorial self-possession in the sense that it relates to uneven virtual capital – the items you own aren’t really yours, they are on a hire-purchase status.
There is then the idea or semblance of an informationalized capitalism that involves these workers working in severely harsh and almost sweatshop like conditions where they are exploited similarly to the migrant labor in textile industries for instance, in physically real third world countries. This notion of exploitation is thus very tangible and Nakamura therefore emphasizes the need to trace the political economy and that just because something is virtual in its relation to a game, it does not mean that it is not real in its consequences. This is also applicable to the virtual racism discussed here, where symbols are taken out of context and placed into the context of material reality – you are chinese if you hold a mining tool in your hand v you are white if you hold a gun in your hand.
Clarinda Ong
Sherry Turkle focused on the theme of identity, how our online interactions modify/ change the way we look at ourselves (self-identity) and our traditional notion of “identity”. Turkle believes that the computer is an evocative object. Relationships have evolved and now people are more attached to the new technologies of the world and it is worrying that with the distancing of physical bodies through the Internet spheres, there are increasing formations of intimate relationships prevalent online. These shifts in relationship statuses influence people’s perspectives about themselves. According to Turkle’s research, she observed that “there was a real passionate attachment to the computer, a possibility for projection of yourself into the machine” (Baker, 2008) This is evidence of the shift in functionality of the computer, it is now not purely just information processor, but it is an object for users to rethink about themselves, enabling them to construct and reconstruct their own identities they want to portray in different online spheres.
Identity constructed online is different from one that is seen based on face-to-face interactions, online interactions allows the user to be anonymous, hidden behind the screen and have multiple selves. Different aspects of self can be portrayed, up to the discretion and desire of the user himself. In this article, the focus revolves around the MUDs (Multi-user Domains)/ online role-playing games, users may be able to play many various selves using other avatars to play out what they can (but never be able to do in real life). There can be many transformations, constructions, re-constructions of identities online – freedom to do what you want without being controlled, you are in control of yourself.
Sherry Turkle’s article motivated people to think about the notion of “true self” – whether there is a self behind all the different selves being portrayed on the online platforms. She thinks that self constitutes a multiple connotation, everybody have many ‘self’ in different situations and circumstances (especially online) to get to a goal/ aim. For instance, one may have an avatar created just to visualize his/ her ideal life online. Even though it may not be real, but the online virtual experiences one feels are able to fulfil him/her psychologically. Turkle wants to promote increased media literacy in our culture to alleviate the potential negative future impacts.
Moving onto Boyd, she thinks that the reality has a set of properties – architectures; however, technology has created a realm where real-world architectures are being replaced. For example, it is different for face-to-face interactions occurrence, where people could not tell/ see the whole wide extension of the person’s social network, on social online platforms (such as Facebook, Tumblr, Instagram…) one can easily access the information of other’s social networks. People actually get to know who is whose friend and how, both knowingly and unknowingly. This is scary as the idea of ‘privacy’ has been undermined. Also, information online are stored and archived, hence, the past online information may come back to hunt users if the intended interpretation of the message/ picture is being distorted. People will feel misrepresented and powerless due to the wrong contexts of the message/ picture being put in.
To regain some control of information online, people are creating multiple personas online to fit into different context purposes. However, differentiating herself from theorists like Sherry Turkle, she argues that everyone has his/ her “reference self” that one will always link back to, although they may have many different facets of selves present. For instance, I am a regular Instagram user, and I find it interesting that a lot of my friends/ even me have a profile really different from the person I know personally in real life. Usually snippets of pictures – usually linked to “having a good life”, being “less stressful” are being posted, but the pictures of the reality will not be posted on the profile. This is a kind of selective process of self-identity, where one wants to portray the good side of their lives to their friends and other users.
For Nakamura, she analyses the racialization of informational labor in machinima of Chinese worker-players in the Multiplayer online role playing game World of Warcraft. The issue arises and becomes prominent when fan-produced video were produced as an extension of the representational space of the game itself, together with it, crude racist narrative space has been created to be attached to the narrative itself. Racial profiling is persistent even on a supposedly ambiguous online platform, when identities are not known to everyone.
The problem of informationalised capitalism where subjects have to be possessive individuals, making claims to citizenship according to Marxist’s theory of ownership of property (in this case the avatars). The worker-players (especially Chinese ones) do not attain/ own their avatars, but they are just working for the person who paid them to play their avatars. This is parallel to the global problem of dispossession of information workers being influenced by processes of globalization and the low-wage workers in the sweatshops/ factories. In both cases, labour has been outsourced and the workers are exploited to benefit the players. In order to level up in this game, the player has to do boring quests and tasks and this is the same in the real world, where legal or illegal immigrants are paid to do these “unwanted” jobs.
It is important to note that there are different layers to this problem: Gold Farming is also considered an issue of class in China, not only race. Players within the game has internalized certain right or wrong playing moves and hence, are differentiating “good” Chinese playing (for leisure) and those “bad” Chinese players who are doing trades for money.
Cheryl Chern
Turkle talks about how the self is not a stable entity, rather it is always being constructed and reconstructed. Online identities are thus projections of the self and role playing games online allows one to enter a place of escape, where players are able to leave their real lives and enter the game space. People are able to create identities online, giving people the ability to constantly remake oneself. There is then a shift in the notion of identity, where in the physical world, the notion of identity is stable and singular while in the virtual world, we see that the notion of identity is fluid and multiple.
Boyd focuses on the differences in the impacts on social behaviour between the physical and the digital realms and centers on the two main architectural differences – the power of architecture and the lack of embodiment. The architecture of the Internet and the digital has brought about the archiving of social interactions. This poses a danger where archives can be taken out of their situational context. This is not the case in the physical world where a typical conversation leaves nothing more than impressions. These communication also uses the subtle nature of one’s body in order to convey nuanced details, attitudes and tone. But in the digital realm, social interactions are limited by what people can convey and perceive in the mediated space. This is due to the fact that the spatial quantities of digital environments are devoid of meaning and functionality, as well as the lack of contextual cues that often leads to decontextualized interaction.
SHERRY TURKLE: Constructions and reconstructions of self in Virtual Reality
Turkle talks about MUDs as a space for the construction and reconstruction of self. She also examines role-playing online as a form enacting second chances in life. Role-players on MUDs can “think through questions about the nature of self” and life in general. However, I believe that although online spaces allow us to re-enact our lives and issues, they may not necessarily solve those issues/problems in the real world. Sure, second chances online allow users to think through issues, but what is acted out online does not go offline into the real world.
She discusses the Virtual World vs. The Real World, and discusses how users use it as a form of escape from real life and as a space to rethink and re-enact their real-world problems. In the Virtual World, users can also be their “ideal selves” and role-play characters far removed from their real world selves. Anonymity, invisibility and potential multiplicity are involved when users present different types of selves online. This form of deception is considered legit in the virtual world, as people are given the choice to role-play within the boundaries of the virtual world. Of course, role-players could be held accountable for their ‘deception’ if they bring their virtual world characters to the real world (for instance, if they fake their identities and form real-life romantic relationships with their people online).
The idea of a traditional unitary self is problematic in the virtual world, where people can construct and present various selves 🙂 This highlights the multi-faceted aspects of individuals, and how people can more effectively portray their fantasies/dreams or real-world traits online, via different personas.
Again, Turkle emphasises that identity is fluid and that it is self-constructed and presented. Online, we’re empowered to become masters in the art of self-creation and self-presentation. Thus, online personas, even those on Facebook and other social media platforms, may not be accurate representations of the true, physical humans behind them. (Eg: photoshopped pictures, glam photos, carefully worded posts, etc).
Turkle also says that real world (offline) issues such as gender, identity, gun use/gun laws are also discussed online, among users of interactive online spaces. This way, online users also provide feedback to virtual world developers –– the way users want to use their online space will prompt developers to re-code the virtual programmes accordingly. As such, users are empowered; they play a significant part in shaping their online social spaces.
The HER movie, released this year, reminds me of the “increasing tension in our traditional notions of the real and the artificial”. In HER, set in the near future, a human has a romantic relationship with his Operating System (OS), named Samantha. Samantha is computer-programmed, and she has ongoing relationships with many of her clients. It’s freaky to think that computer-operated programmes can one day intertwine deeply with humans, and it forces us to confront our notions of what’s real and what’s artificial. (Human-machine interaction, human-machine relationships.)
DANAH BOYD: Reconsidering Social Interaction for the Digital Realm
Boyd talks about one key difference between interaction online and offline. Online refers to the digital environment where everything is archived, what you do or say online does not go away, it is permanent. Offline refers to the physical environment, when humans interact face-to-face in the same physical space (not via video calls).
Online information, being archived (forever), reminds users that we cannot easily erase what we do online. Of course we can now pay large sums of money to Google and other search engines to remove a few nasty online pictures, but generally, whatever we do online is permanent.
Facebook chat conversations used to be fleeting, until they came back to haunt us. Facebook conversations couldn’t be tracked unless we copied and saved them somewhere, until about two years back. Now, full Facebook conversation histories can be easily accessed on Facebook. It shows that our Facebook conversations never went away after all, they never disappeared. They’ve always been archived in a computer server, and now they have been brought up for everyone on the social network to access.
The WWW is a scary public space (part of the public sphere), and now Internet users are careful about how they present themselves online. How do users present themselves online, when they have little to no power as to the scale of results that search engines will churn out? Search engines can find us in highly de-contextualised states (misrepresentative images, etc), which may lead others to form inaccurate impressions of us.
Boyd talks about localisation –– the separating of different user accounts for different purposes, for instance, a private email for friends and family and a public email account for professional purposes. Some personalities (celebrities, media people, etc) have public Twitter and Facebook accounts that are linked to the work. They manage dual accounts, one open account for the public to view, and one private account for family and friends.
Also, social media now provides functions and tools for users to protect their data online. (Eg: Facebook privacy settings.) At the end of the day, if you don’t one someone to know something, never share it online. (Even supposedly private platforms like email are also snooped upon by government surveillance agencies, such as the NSA in the United States.)
Anonymity also helps in protecting identities online 🙂 People may engage in verbal discrimination online without fear of being caught in real life, as they hide behind the masks of anonymity. (Fake user names, using computers located in a cafe/library, no profile pictures or contact details, etc).
LISA NAKAMURA: Don’t Hate the Player, Hate the Game, The Racialization of Labor in World of Warcraft
Nakamura discusses racialized discourse in MMORPGs –– how Asians and Chinese in particular are portrayed in degrading ways online. Usually, the games themselves do not engage in racial profiling or racist portrayals, but users are able to generate fan made videos or narratives with racist content.
Apart from the outright discriminatory nature of the videos (implying that Chinese are unwanted gold diggers, and Asians look the same, etc), it is very interesting to note how MMORPG players dissect radicalised discourse. Some claim that racism doesn’t exist, and in the first place, one is only racist if one “makes the distinction in their heads”. (LOL isn’t the distinction portrayed clearly in the videos/narratives as well?). Another claimed that “there is only one race the human race” and that they were not being racist, just “anti-cultural”. This “liberal position” distinguishes between cultural practices and differences. Only one human race, but many different cultures –– and that some cultures were better or more socially acceptable than others. This reeks of ethnocentrism, where people judge others’ cultures based on the standards of their culture. Thus, being assimilated to American culture may seem to be ideal, and one might be perceived (by some American MMORPG players) as being of a lesser culture based on one’s practices. Also, the generalisation of all Asian/Chinese players as “gold farmers” could lead to agony among Asian “leisure-players”.
This racial profiling of Asians and Chinese in general could have led to many MMORPG players to hide their race online. Also, social networks like Facebook and Instagram do not explicitly need users to state their race, indicating that race was not an important distinguishing factor for identities on social networks.
This reminds me of the memes with the phrases “Gaming Level: ASIAN” and “Studying Level: Asian” accompanied by pictures of Asians gaming or studying. In a way, this could be a form of essentialism, where Asians are attributed generalised characteristics by virtue of their ethnicity. Just because one is Asian, one is assumed to be good at maths and science, assumed to be very good at online gaming, assumed to be gold diggers, etc.
Nakamura also talks about having Physical Capital vs. Avatarial Capital. Physical Capital refers to in-game money and real money earned from selling in-game property. Avatarial Capital refers to experience gained, gaming reputation, and the ability and power to advance into different levels of the game for pure enjoyment. Unfortunately, the player-workers labouring tediously behind screens for 12-hrs each day do not get a share of physical capital and avatarial capital. They play the games not for enjoyment, and the money they earn in their games go to their respective companies. In a way, player-workers are exploited in ‘sweatshop’ factories, much like the factory workers manufacturing products such as branded goods in developing economies. (Informationalised Capitalism).
Sherilyn Tan
Boyd argued that social interaction in the digital world is often assumed by users to be the same as that of the physical world. This users may be misled into thinking that physical expectations and experiences can be easily translated to the digital realm. However, the architecture of the digital differs; it is code and is archivable. It can be easily searched for, manipulated and stored infinitely. Whatever is posted online, can be taken out of contexts and misrepresent the original intention of the user. Users have no control over how their data is used, but people sometimes fail to realize that online data still belongs to the public space. Thus whatever interactions take place online, eg. Public forum, FB comments, tweets etc remain and can be used against the posters/users. This is definitely different from oral mediums such as speech, whereby the speaker’s message is fleeting and contextual. Next, Boyd discussed the lack of embodiment. Online interaction lacks verbal and non-verbal communication cues and signals. Thus there are limited outlets for expression in the mediated online space which may lead to inaccuracy of presented information and cause a breakdown in communication. Boyd highlighted that users need to have self-awareness of how they are representing themselves online and to be aware of what they post and the consequential effects that it results in. For instance, the Miss Singapore contestant who posted a photo of a man with a hole in his shirt and passed rude comments on it, probably failed to consider the negative backlash she would receive and how it may affect the parties involved. Just because something is online and not directed to the other face-to-face, doesn’t mean that the rude comment is any less hurtful.
Turkle also talked about how social interaction in the digital virtual world differs, especially in MUDs. Social interaction is based on the users’ character in the virtual realm. Rules of social interaction are not set, users can easily define them and can choose the extent of their anonymity and roles they play. In MUDs, the users’ self is decentered but multiples without limits and they can constantly construct and reconstruct their identities fluidly. The computer functions as a medium that allows for great control and mastery for building collaboration and intimacy with the online community as well. Turkle argued that role playing games do not necessarily blur the boundaries between reality and fiction/virtual. Rather, they may be seen as parallels of each other. Real-life experiences are projected onto the virtual realm as well. Online games may be used to remake and reshape the self. The ongoing game grants anonymity, invisibility and multiplicity.
Nakamura talked about the rise of worker-players in the game WoW. They have been racialized are often discriminated against and called “Chinese farmers”. Even the online gaming world parallels the capitalist market-economy; of the developed vs. developing countries, of consumers and producers, leisure-players vs. worker-players, buyers vs. sellers of virtual goods for real money. Leisure-players blame the worker-players for destroying the essence if the game and target these worker-players in the game. Yet, they fail to see that leisure-players are the ones driving the demand for virtual goods, without wanting to put in the required time and effort. They also claim that they are not being racist.
Nakamura then elaborated on how machinima creates and sustains racist rhetoric in the game. players use it as a medium to share their views and concerns with others, regarding the issue of the worker-players who they feel are ruining the game for all players. They especially display their anger against those whom they feel act in a “Chinese” manner. Thus this ties in with their claim that they are not “racist”, but rather they are signalling out those who have unsuccessfully assimilated to the American social norms; an “anticultural” position.
Evon Thung
The theme for this week’s readings is new media identities and the 3 readings talk about aspects of it. In Turkle’s reading, she argued that “MUDs-multi-user dungeons are a new environment for the construction and reconstruction of self.” Hence, the self can be multiplied by playing with one’s identities and trying out new ones in MUDs. Such opportunities are present in the virtual space where anonymity is assured and the identity identified would be the one the individual wishes to portray to others. Therefore, Turkle found out that people use computers for 2 uses. Firstly, computers are used to work through identity issues that center around control and mastery. Secondly, computers are used as communication medium to explore a social context as well as to reflect on own nature and powers.
When individuals play games, they are partaking on new identities that may or may not represent their true self. Hence, role-playing games could be places of escapes for the individuals or places where individuals seek to engage in a significant dialogue with important events and relationships happening in their real life. Such role-playing games stand betwixt and between both in and not in real life and becomes a space for thinking about real world. Virtual world could provide the environment for experiences that is not present easily in real life. On MUD, individuals could shape a character and that character could be a projection of his inner fantasies. MUDs served as identity workshops where individuals could remake their self as MUDs are an ongoing game under an anonymous personae with physical invisibility and the possibility to be not one but many. Therefore, MUDs provide opportunities for individuals to partake in identities that they would not have the chance to be in real life. Under the text-based virtual realities, people are exploring, constructing and reconstructing their identities under multiple identities provided at platforms such as MUDs.
Byod’s reading highlighted the changes in social interaction in a virtual space. Since individuals could partake multiple identities under anonymity, what is represented is not a true reflection of that individual, there could be multiple representations and identities of the individual. Hence, digital realm affects social interaction and impacts social behaviour. It alters social structure where there are limited channels for expression and perception as well as interpersonal context clues. Individuals lack the ability to control what is represented of him/her and misrepresentations could occur. Therefore, Byod’s reading highlighted the fact that under digital realm, there is the reconstruction of social interaction which could be problematic where people are seeing representations of individuals and those representations may not be those that the individual wishes to portray to others.
As for Nakamura, her reading seems to emphasise that the existence of racialization in a particular game could be a result of how the internet shapes and reshapes the perceptions of race, ethnicity and identity. The racial identity online could be determined and defined by the racial and ethnic stereotypes that are already established in the current society.
Nakamura: What this reading really did was debunk the illusion of a ‘safe space’ where you could be whoever you wanted to be regardless of sexual orientation, class or race. Now instead of judging physical appearances, users are judging based on assumptions and perceptions. The lack of empathy shown towards these Gold Farmers who are doing this as their livelihood as opposed to entertainment shows how when you are behind a screen, anonymous you are invincible. ‘With great power comes great responsibility’. No one takes this seriously on the internet due to the vastness of the scale, policing or enforcing etiquette in such arenas is going to take time. (apart from Singapore, I guess because it is small enough to control) When Prof drew the relation to migrant workers that exist in for example Singapore, I understood these leisure players a bit more. They exist in a structured system where these Gold Farmers are legal, but instead of taking their frustration out on a structure they are seemingly powerless to reform, they do what is within their limits and take it out on the Gold Farmers.
The readings explore the idea of new media identities. What I find most interesting and applicable to today’s society, especially in youths, is the idea of a fragmented post-modern identity.
With new media, we are able to explore our identities more, reconstructing and recreating them, as Turkle states “in an environment infused with a postmodern ethos of the value of multiple identities and of playing out aspects of the self”. In the postmodern world, there isn’t a definite self, we have multiple facets of our selves and we contextualize them accordingly. We have different selves when at work, at home or with friends. We play out different aspects depending on the environment and context.
Similarly, in virtual communities, we play out different aspects of our selves. With the ability to practice impression management through profiles and curating our thoughts and actions before publicising them online, the virtual world gives more space to explore and develop these multiple selves. In a juvenile study of youths under probation, a couple of them have admitted to having multiple facebook profiles. One for their close-knitted family and friends and the other for more inappropriate and ‘criminal’ activities. Similarly, many others also practice this trend of having multiple profiles and maintaining both and developing both separately.
The virtual world becomes more obvious as a platform for multiple-identity-making when we see males ‘impersonating’ as females. This trend can be seen widely practiced through shows like catfish. But in some cases, these online personas that they take on are not necessarily not themselves, but just a different part of their self. The availability of virtual space as a place to discover and develop one’s identity has also allowed people to come to terms with their confused identity. For instance, transgender and homesexuals can feel more belong and find the virtual world as a space to discover or develop their alternate self.
Hence, while some may argue that the virtual world have just facilitate the confusion of one’s identity or self, it has also provide space for most to explore their identities, all of which makes up their self. In today’s society, the self is made up of multiple identity and is ever-changing. There is no definite static self.
I’m pretty sure most of us went through cyber wellness classes in schools previously and we could probably show Turkle’s article to the educators to tell them that internet is not necessarily alienating. Of course, I would not deny that addiction exists and that’s problematic. But Internet games are not necessarily all dark and should be avoided. As Turkle discusses, they can be constructive spaces whereby there are meaning-making and forging social bonds. In addition, the virtual world allows us to constantly remake ourselves towards our “ideal” self. Because of the virtual world, we are given opportunities to fantasize, which are not allowed in the real world because we are so bounded by institutions.
However, we need to understand that the boundary between the real and virtual world is so blurred now as what Nakamura would discuss. Let’s just use the example of the gold-farmers. If they have been degraded in real life due to the socio-political institutions, they may want to feel that they are important too, by going online. However, because the boundary between the real and the virtual world is so blurred, even if they go online, real-life situations are being re-inscribed online as well. The real and virtual worlds are so integrated now. As Turkle discussed, our selves online is just a “heightened” self of the real world. One example would be if one is very racist in the real life, when he goes online, especially with the level of freedom available and the anonymity, it is highly possible he will bring forth his racist opinions into the online world as well.
Also, talking about anonymous, I’m reminded of Boyd’s discussion of how we should contextualize and not in favor of the anonymity online. In fact, Boyd talks about how there is a core self no matter what. For example, multiple emails are still managed by a person and that is the core self – a reference point. The architecture of the online space has allowed us to have a fake sense of security whereby we think that the social interactions online are akin to the real world interactions when in fact, we are all confined by the architecture of the online space by the designers. They cause our online interactions to be recorded and searchable in their databases. They decide what kind of interactions we can have online – enabling and disabling comment sections, whether we can like or dislike a picture, etc.
If Turkle says that in real world, the institutions has restricted us such that our role is our self and hence hindering imagination, I would argue that the online world is also restricted and bounded by the designers (the architecture) and how we interact are based on the “rules” laid by these designers.
Individual identity construction online is such an interesting topic as it is complex to understand. Online is a totally different world for some as they can express or present an identity that is different from their real life life or be someone that they cannot be in real life due to the social norms. Social norms may cause some to feel restricted of their own identity, thus allowing to present a self online, allows some to have an outlet. It is also important to question these identities that a person portrays. Impression management by Goffman is such an interesting term as we are allowed to show different sides of us through different medias or platforms. Although it questions the true identity of a person and doesn’t allow others to get the full picture of the actual identity one has, it shapes the impression others have on you.
The fact that social media allows to be very objective on what you post, it may seem very superficial as the identity that you present may be the perfect person that you want to be. It gives people the choice to only show the ‘good’ side of yourself.
In addition, the fact that on the internet, you can be a dog, shows how dangerous the online platform is when someone creates a ‘false’ identity for social interactions or other hidden agendas. This allows people to bring out the worst in them as there is a possibility that they might not get caught. Although we live in a technological world, I try not to be too caught up in this identity dilemma as everything can be stored as archives.
Turkle, boyd and Nakamura discuss the process of individual identity construction online. They each analyse how individuals in modern societies understand themselves and the relationships between the self and the virtual realm.
Turkle’s in-depth study of Multi-user dungeons (MUDS) of online gaming illustrates how the reinvention of the self can take place on the Internet. In MUDS, users are able to project themselves as far as their ‘real-life’ identities as they please. The term ‘real-life’ is used to represent the physical world, but the virtual realm is very much ‘real’ to some as well. What Turkle is concerned about is that we shouldn’t see the virtual and physical realms as separate realities – they are very much in a dialectic relationship. In MUDS, there is also always chance for resetability of identities. This seems similar to how people manage their identities, or participate in what Goffman calls as “impression management” on social media. After living on social media long enough, we learn how to navigate our self-projection into images that we feel are desirable. For example, there’s a function of social media that allows us to screen pictures or posts you are tagged in before allowing it to appear on your timeline
If a photo of you pops us, and you don’t like it, you simply disallow that photo from appear on your timeline and it won’t. You constantly reset, tweak, or edit.
Edit your profile picture.
Edit your post.
Edit your comment.
If we think a comment sounds too harsh, or is not witty enough, click edit – just make sure you’re not too late for someone to catch your old comment and archive it through a screenshot.
This is why boyd discusses the importance of understanding the architectures of virtual and physical spaces. Because archiving communication and information is all part of the online architecture, it is sometimes difficult to contextualize such information.
Also, the lack of embodiment on the online sphere affects how people interpret what is communicated to them, and misunderstandings are bound to happen. Non-verbal communication such as body language and tone is essential in completing entire meanings of messages – something text cannot fully convey albeit the use of punctuation marks and emoticons.
boyd is also fully conscious of the fact that our identities don’t become segmented into separate identities, but we have a singular, multi-faceted identity, with one referent point. We manage the different aspects of our selves online, in coherence to this referent point.
Nakamura debunks the notion of the democratic space on the Internet, and writes about how ‘real-life’ racism is translated onto the Internet, in the World of Warcraft game. It shows that the implications of societal structures are indeed ‘real’ on the Internet, even when people present themselves as avatars.
Being the generation that fully grew up with the Internet, this week’s topic really hit home. Turkle opines that there is a reinvention of self that goes on on the Internet. For example, how many of us have friends who are completely different in real life as compared to their online personas? Turkle further states that what the internet allows for is to exteriorise the soul. This could be an explanation as to why people project themselves so differently on the Internet. The virtual world allows them to project who they truly or are who they aspire to be with confidence as they can constantly reinvent themselves (e.g. if you don’t like who you are on this website you can just delete your account and create a new one) as opposed to the real world. This parallels to Goffman’s theory of impression management where we can control who we are and who others think we are. Another interesting outtake from Turkle is that she argues that there is a greater capacity for collaboration and intimacy which leads to the rethinking of community. For example, a lot of people are afraid to voice out their oppression in real life for fear of the consequences or even being labelled as whiny or judged in other ways. However, Tumblr has provided a safe space for various minority groups where they come together and educate themselves and others about their negative experiences and seek comfort in one another. For example, there is a viral post on Tumblr that says something like “I wouldn’t have known I was trans if not for Tumblr. I would probably have gone about life being confused and suffering with the labels imposed on me yet I do not identify with.” Henceforth, the virtual world allows for a space of intimacy without fear of judgement that exceeds offline interaction. Also, I think that the fact that these people can remain anonymous plays a huge part in their comfort of exposing who they feel they are inside.
Level of freedom afforded by Internet, intensifies the detachment of the physical self. The allure of virtual realities is that we can narrativise and project different selves even more. With avatar creation and simulation, our idealized or reinvented selves are pinned into visual, textual materiality. What is imagined in our minds, of the image of our selves, are materialized and exteriorized into the virtual realms. For Turkle, this is constructive.
In virtual reality, “there is an unparalleled opportunity to play with one’s identity and to “try out” new ones.” In that instance, the self is explored, recreated, multiplied, and in a state of a flux. Roleplaying allows one to stand in between realities, in real life and out.
The postmodern projections of self is fluid. Metaphorically, we can’t contain water in our hands. This somehow hints at a caveat: Our multiple selves is liminal. Real and virtual boundaries can be blurred. Thus what if we can’t control our multiple selves and be overwhelmed? What if we can’t strictly keep the real with the real, and the virtual strictly with the virtual? What will happen if the virtual supersedes the real?
Especially when the virtual reality is so immersive and exemplarily evocative, I think we can get carried away sometimes, and thus this will definitely have implications in the real.
This week’s readings discusses about identity in new media. All three theorists agree that the online realm allows for the creation of space for individuals to craft their identity; however they have different notions of the implications the online realm have on the individual’s identity.
On one hand, the online realm, as argued by Turkle, allows for fluidity in the construction of identity. No longer confined to physical markers, we are free to take on an identity we want. Within her context of MUDs, this can come in the form of multiple selves, where each game account reflects a different self that we want to experiment with. To her, such experimentation opens up opportunities, like exploring gender roles, which she mentioned. Indeed, this also implies that the postmodern self is reflexive; they often take in the information they have picked up from others to recraft their self. At the same time, each self they craft is idealized; they invest effort in crafting a self that they want others to see.
On the other hand, boyd does not look at games, but from the perspective of usenet and social interactions on the internet in general. She argues that unlike real life, the online is able to archive interactions posted, resulting in these interactions being dislocated from time. This means that anyone in the future can run a search on and easily take these interactions out of their social contexts, giving room for misinterpretation. This is what boyd calls “context collapse”, where users think they have a proper definition of the situation to work with; but it is not, as their posts are public. One strategy that boyd suggests is the multifacetness of the self. This is seen through email, where we associate a context with a particular email address, which gives us a definition of the situation to work with, which helps to smooth interactions.
While both boyd and Turkle work with identities on a micro level, where the real and the online are interlinked and have implications on how people sees themselves, Nakamura argues that how online personas see each other is similar to processes found in the real world. Using World of Warcraft as an example, she argues that “gold farmers” tends to be stereotyped to be Asian, regardless of their actual identity. She further invokes the concept “avatarial capital” where one’s status within the game is a function of his investment towards constructing the avatar, and customizing it, and those who happens to have the time happens to be the leisure class, since they have time to do so. Those who lack the time to craft avatars are often labelled farmers, because mining gold and trading it for real cash is more important these these “aesthetics”. As such, it mimics the first and third world relations, where the First world citizens have time to pursue interests, wheras the Third World residents are busy working to earn money, in the process producing goods for the First World residents to consume.
Being wired to my trusty MacBook Air and iPhone twenty-four seven, this week’s readings presented an interestingly refreshing take on the digital world to me. While some points were relatable, others required me to take a step back and survey the world at the tip of my fingers, which I had apparently taken for granted. I suppose this is evidently a characteristic of most netizens today and “digital natives” as they call us. Nevertheless, I gleaned many interesting points and I will proceed to discuss/share them below.
Boyd:
Boyd raises a pertinent issue which is centered on how the architecture of the digital realm is deceiving and not representative of the social context that exists within it. The terms “chatrooms” and “websites” connote a sort of physical spatial existence that tricks “ people into believing that they should act in a comparable manner and will receive the appropriate feedback”. This is crucial because it creates a sort of tension between the individual and the reality of the architecture. Boyd argues that this is because the architecture of the cyber-world ( place) is totally different from the physical locations setting (space) of the physical world. Therefore, different social norms are needed to navigate the unfamiliar cyber-space.
Boyd also provides an insight into two of the main architectural differences that impact social interaction – namely the power of architecture and the lack of embodiment. The power of the architecture also encompasses the storage capacity that abounds on the online realm, whereby everything is archived. Also evident in Boyd’s argument is the fact that software designers should be responsible for conditioning the platforms on which social interaction takes place. I do not completely agree with this point. To a certain extent, the software designers do have this power but their power is also ultimately limited in the development of social cues or etiquettes. They provide us with places, but it is up to the individuals using these spaces to make meaning out of these places and to create the intangible context in which communication is supposed to happen in these spaces. This is akin to having architects build you a house, but it does not become a home until you yourself confer it with that status. Ok, a tad far-fetched but that was just how I saw it – that to hold the software designers alone responsible was too unreasonable a notion.
Also, Boyd presents the concept of a postmodern fragmented self. This involves experimenting with different selves for instant a work account interface and a separate personal account interface. Though, she still believes and argues for the oneness of self – that self can be multi-faceted but not necessarily fragmented. Pieces of the cake, ultimately form the cake and do not differ from its wholesome structure, at large. So, while the self is divided , it still wholesome and ever present. Thus, Boyd still believes in the notion of a coherent person-hood which is opposed to argument put forth by Turkle who believes in the fragmentation of the self.
Turkle:
Turkle presents her thoughts on the “unparalleled opportunity to play with one’s identity and to try out new ones”. Basically, this with regards to the cyber-world dimension of MUDs where one can construct and re-construct oneself as many times as possible. Though, this does raise a number of questions related to the true essence that is supposed to be inherent in one’s identity, Turkle presents many beneficial aspects of such reconstruction. To her, the self is not only decentered ( completely detached from the user) but also multiplied without limits.
She argues that virtual worlds provide environments for experiences that may be hard to come by in the real. We are provided with examples of a mother-daughter feud where the daughter takes the role of the mother and experiences her point of view as well as acts out of her own experiences. There was also another individual who, due to his many trials and tribulations, was unable to participate wholesomely in a social environment that allowed him to converse with people. Instead, he was able to re-create this experience on a MUDs and even woo one of the sought after characters with his charming skills. These experiences can also shape one’s identity and are influenced by it – what Turkle terms “identity workshops”. She further states that this holding power and evocative potential of MUDs is due to its many characteristics – always going on, the cloak of anonymity and the fragmentation of one’s personality into multiple identities.
Turkle’s notion of this postmodern projection of a self involves the construction of multiple selves and facets that are always in a state of flux. One can go both back and forth to morph his identity – and in a sense this is stabilizing to the notion of the true essence of one’s self. Thus, one’s identity is rootless. There is also the notion of escapism – albeit, in a non-traditional form that is to say one re-invents himself – creating a new reality, rather than running from his reality altogether.
This leads us to the notion of a psychosocial moratorium that is put forth by Turkle. This involves the idea of suspension in that we can suspend our relations with others while we work on creating our relations with them. This translates into using the virtual space to gain some semblance of control in our lives as aptly displayed in the examples of mother-daughter role discourse and the socialization of a relatively socially detached individual.
Nakamura:
Nakamura centers his paper on the Chinese gold farmers – which are basically individuals who are paid to work on selling and buying online merchandise. This is seen as a violation of the traditional game roles, since the essence of the game lies in the fact that individuals had to go through all the quests to attain these goods that they can now buy with their physical money. This relates to avatorial self-possession in the sense that it relates to uneven virtual capital – the items you own aren’t really yours, they are on a hire-purchase status.
There is then the idea or semblance of an informationalized capitalism that involves these workers working in severely harsh and almost sweatshop like conditions where they are exploited similarly to the migrant labor in textile industries for instance, in physically real third world countries. This notion of exploitation is thus very tangible and Nakamura therefore emphasizes the need to trace the political economy and that just because something is virtual in its relation to a game, it does not mean that it is not real in its consequences. This is also applicable to the virtual racism discussed here, where symbols are taken out of context and placed into the context of material reality – you are chinese if you hold a mining tool in your hand v you are white if you hold a gun in your hand.
Sherry Turkle focused on the theme of identity, how our online interactions modify/ change the way we look at ourselves (self-identity) and our traditional notion of “identity”. Turkle believes that the computer is an evocative object. Relationships have evolved and now people are more attached to the new technologies of the world and it is worrying that with the distancing of physical bodies through the Internet spheres, there are increasing formations of intimate relationships prevalent online. These shifts in relationship statuses influence people’s perspectives about themselves. According to Turkle’s research, she observed that “there was a real passionate attachment to the computer, a possibility for projection of yourself into the machine” (Baker, 2008) This is evidence of the shift in functionality of the computer, it is now not purely just information processor, but it is an object for users to rethink about themselves, enabling them to construct and reconstruct their own identities they want to portray in different online spheres.
Identity constructed online is different from one that is seen based on face-to-face interactions, online interactions allows the user to be anonymous, hidden behind the screen and have multiple selves. Different aspects of self can be portrayed, up to the discretion and desire of the user himself. In this article, the focus revolves around the MUDs (Multi-user Domains)/ online role-playing games, users may be able to play many various selves using other avatars to play out what they can (but never be able to do in real life). There can be many transformations, constructions, re-constructions of identities online – freedom to do what you want without being controlled, you are in control of yourself.
Sherry Turkle’s article motivated people to think about the notion of “true self” – whether there is a self behind all the different selves being portrayed on the online platforms. She thinks that self constitutes a multiple connotation, everybody have many ‘self’ in different situations and circumstances (especially online) to get to a goal/ aim. For instance, one may have an avatar created just to visualize his/ her ideal life online. Even though it may not be real, but the online virtual experiences one feels are able to fulfil him/her psychologically. Turkle wants to promote increased media literacy in our culture to alleviate the potential negative future impacts.
Moving onto Boyd, she thinks that the reality has a set of properties – architectures; however, technology has created a realm where real-world architectures are being replaced. For example, it is different for face-to-face interactions occurrence, where people could not tell/ see the whole wide extension of the person’s social network, on social online platforms (such as Facebook, Tumblr, Instagram…) one can easily access the information of other’s social networks. People actually get to know who is whose friend and how, both knowingly and unknowingly. This is scary as the idea of ‘privacy’ has been undermined. Also, information online are stored and archived, hence, the past online information may come back to hunt users if the intended interpretation of the message/ picture is being distorted. People will feel misrepresented and powerless due to the wrong contexts of the message/ picture being put in.
To regain some control of information online, people are creating multiple personas online to fit into different context purposes. However, differentiating herself from theorists like Sherry Turkle, she argues that everyone has his/ her “reference self” that one will always link back to, although they may have many different facets of selves present. For instance, I am a regular Instagram user, and I find it interesting that a lot of my friends/ even me have a profile really different from the person I know personally in real life. Usually snippets of pictures – usually linked to “having a good life”, being “less stressful” are being posted, but the pictures of the reality will not be posted on the profile. This is a kind of selective process of self-identity, where one wants to portray the good side of their lives to their friends and other users.
For Nakamura, she analyses the racialization of informational labor in machinima of Chinese worker-players in the Multiplayer online role playing game World of Warcraft. The issue arises and becomes prominent when fan-produced video were produced as an extension of the representational space of the game itself, together with it, crude racist narrative space has been created to be attached to the narrative itself. Racial profiling is persistent even on a supposedly ambiguous online platform, when identities are not known to everyone.
The problem of informationalised capitalism where subjects have to be possessive individuals, making claims to citizenship according to Marxist’s theory of ownership of property (in this case the avatars). The worker-players (especially Chinese ones) do not attain/ own their avatars, but they are just working for the person who paid them to play their avatars. This is parallel to the global problem of dispossession of information workers being influenced by processes of globalization and the low-wage workers in the sweatshops/ factories. In both cases, labour has been outsourced and the workers are exploited to benefit the players. In order to level up in this game, the player has to do boring quests and tasks and this is the same in the real world, where legal or illegal immigrants are paid to do these “unwanted” jobs.
It is important to note that there are different layers to this problem: Gold Farming is also considered an issue of class in China, not only race. Players within the game has internalized certain right or wrong playing moves and hence, are differentiating “good” Chinese playing (for leisure) and those “bad” Chinese players who are doing trades for money.
Turkle talks about how the self is not a stable entity, rather it is always being constructed and reconstructed. Online identities are thus projections of the self and role playing games online allows one to enter a place of escape, where players are able to leave their real lives and enter the game space. People are able to create identities online, giving people the ability to constantly remake oneself. There is then a shift in the notion of identity, where in the physical world, the notion of identity is stable and singular while in the virtual world, we see that the notion of identity is fluid and multiple.
Boyd focuses on the differences in the impacts on social behaviour between the physical and the digital realms and centers on the two main architectural differences – the power of architecture and the lack of embodiment. The architecture of the Internet and the digital has brought about the archiving of social interactions. This poses a danger where archives can be taken out of their situational context. This is not the case in the physical world where a typical conversation leaves nothing more than impressions. These communication also uses the subtle nature of one’s body in order to convey nuanced details, attitudes and tone. But in the digital realm, social interactions are limited by what people can convey and perceive in the mediated space. This is due to the fact that the spatial quantities of digital environments are devoid of meaning and functionality, as well as the lack of contextual cues that often leads to decontextualized interaction.
SHERRY TURKLE: Constructions and reconstructions of self in Virtual Reality
Turkle talks about MUDs as a space for the construction and reconstruction of self. She also examines role-playing online as a form enacting second chances in life. Role-players on MUDs can “think through questions about the nature of self” and life in general. However, I believe that although online spaces allow us to re-enact our lives and issues, they may not necessarily solve those issues/problems in the real world. Sure, second chances online allow users to think through issues, but what is acted out online does not go offline into the real world.
She discusses the Virtual World vs. The Real World, and discusses how users use it as a form of escape from real life and as a space to rethink and re-enact their real-world problems. In the Virtual World, users can also be their “ideal selves” and role-play characters far removed from their real world selves. Anonymity, invisibility and potential multiplicity are involved when users present different types of selves online. This form of deception is considered legit in the virtual world, as people are given the choice to role-play within the boundaries of the virtual world. Of course, role-players could be held accountable for their ‘deception’ if they bring their virtual world characters to the real world (for instance, if they fake their identities and form real-life romantic relationships with their people online).
The idea of a traditional unitary self is problematic in the virtual world, where people can construct and present various selves 🙂 This highlights the multi-faceted aspects of individuals, and how people can more effectively portray their fantasies/dreams or real-world traits online, via different personas.
Again, Turkle emphasises that identity is fluid and that it is self-constructed and presented. Online, we’re empowered to become masters in the art of self-creation and self-presentation. Thus, online personas, even those on Facebook and other social media platforms, may not be accurate representations of the true, physical humans behind them. (Eg: photoshopped pictures, glam photos, carefully worded posts, etc).
Turkle also says that real world (offline) issues such as gender, identity, gun use/gun laws are also discussed online, among users of interactive online spaces. This way, online users also provide feedback to virtual world developers –– the way users want to use their online space will prompt developers to re-code the virtual programmes accordingly. As such, users are empowered; they play a significant part in shaping their online social spaces.
The HER movie, released this year, reminds me of the “increasing tension in our traditional notions of the real and the artificial”. In HER, set in the near future, a human has a romantic relationship with his Operating System (OS), named Samantha. Samantha is computer-programmed, and she has ongoing relationships with many of her clients. It’s freaky to think that computer-operated programmes can one day intertwine deeply with humans, and it forces us to confront our notions of what’s real and what’s artificial. (Human-machine interaction, human-machine relationships.)
DANAH BOYD: Reconsidering Social Interaction for the Digital Realm
Boyd talks about one key difference between interaction online and offline. Online refers to the digital environment where everything is archived, what you do or say online does not go away, it is permanent. Offline refers to the physical environment, when humans interact face-to-face in the same physical space (not via video calls).
Online information, being archived (forever), reminds users that we cannot easily erase what we do online. Of course we can now pay large sums of money to Google and other search engines to remove a few nasty online pictures, but generally, whatever we do online is permanent.
Facebook chat conversations used to be fleeting, until they came back to haunt us. Facebook conversations couldn’t be tracked unless we copied and saved them somewhere, until about two years back. Now, full Facebook conversation histories can be easily accessed on Facebook. It shows that our Facebook conversations never went away after all, they never disappeared. They’ve always been archived in a computer server, and now they have been brought up for everyone on the social network to access.
The WWW is a scary public space (part of the public sphere), and now Internet users are careful about how they present themselves online. How do users present themselves online, when they have little to no power as to the scale of results that search engines will churn out? Search engines can find us in highly de-contextualised states (misrepresentative images, etc), which may lead others to form inaccurate impressions of us.
Boyd talks about localisation –– the separating of different user accounts for different purposes, for instance, a private email for friends and family and a public email account for professional purposes. Some personalities (celebrities, media people, etc) have public Twitter and Facebook accounts that are linked to the work. They manage dual accounts, one open account for the public to view, and one private account for family and friends.
Also, social media now provides functions and tools for users to protect their data online. (Eg: Facebook privacy settings.) At the end of the day, if you don’t one someone to know something, never share it online. (Even supposedly private platforms like email are also snooped upon by government surveillance agencies, such as the NSA in the United States.)
Anonymity also helps in protecting identities online 🙂 People may engage in verbal discrimination online without fear of being caught in real life, as they hide behind the masks of anonymity. (Fake user names, using computers located in a cafe/library, no profile pictures or contact details, etc).
LISA NAKAMURA: Don’t Hate the Player, Hate the Game, The Racialization of Labor in World of Warcraft
Nakamura discusses racialized discourse in MMORPGs –– how Asians and Chinese in particular are portrayed in degrading ways online. Usually, the games themselves do not engage in racial profiling or racist portrayals, but users are able to generate fan made videos or narratives with racist content.
Apart from the outright discriminatory nature of the videos (implying that Chinese are unwanted gold diggers, and Asians look the same, etc), it is very interesting to note how MMORPG players dissect radicalised discourse. Some claim that racism doesn’t exist, and in the first place, one is only racist if one “makes the distinction in their heads”. (LOL isn’t the distinction portrayed clearly in the videos/narratives as well?). Another claimed that “there is only one race the human race” and that they were not being racist, just “anti-cultural”. This “liberal position” distinguishes between cultural practices and differences. Only one human race, but many different cultures –– and that some cultures were better or more socially acceptable than others. This reeks of ethnocentrism, where people judge others’ cultures based on the standards of their culture. Thus, being assimilated to American culture may seem to be ideal, and one might be perceived (by some American MMORPG players) as being of a lesser culture based on one’s practices. Also, the generalisation of all Asian/Chinese players as “gold farmers” could lead to agony among Asian “leisure-players”.
This racial profiling of Asians and Chinese in general could have led to many MMORPG players to hide their race online. Also, social networks like Facebook and Instagram do not explicitly need users to state their race, indicating that race was not an important distinguishing factor for identities on social networks.
This reminds me of the memes with the phrases “Gaming Level: ASIAN” and “Studying Level: Asian” accompanied by pictures of Asians gaming or studying. In a way, this could be a form of essentialism, where Asians are attributed generalised characteristics by virtue of their ethnicity. Just because one is Asian, one is assumed to be good at maths and science, assumed to be very good at online gaming, assumed to be gold diggers, etc.
Nakamura also talks about having Physical Capital vs. Avatarial Capital. Physical Capital refers to in-game money and real money earned from selling in-game property. Avatarial Capital refers to experience gained, gaming reputation, and the ability and power to advance into different levels of the game for pure enjoyment. Unfortunately, the player-workers labouring tediously behind screens for 12-hrs each day do not get a share of physical capital and avatarial capital. They play the games not for enjoyment, and the money they earn in their games go to their respective companies. In a way, player-workers are exploited in ‘sweatshop’ factories, much like the factory workers manufacturing products such as branded goods in developing economies. (Informationalised Capitalism).
Boyd argued that social interaction in the digital world is often assumed by users to be the same as that of the physical world. This users may be misled into thinking that physical expectations and experiences can be easily translated to the digital realm. However, the architecture of the digital differs; it is code and is archivable. It can be easily searched for, manipulated and stored infinitely. Whatever is posted online, can be taken out of contexts and misrepresent the original intention of the user. Users have no control over how their data is used, but people sometimes fail to realize that online data still belongs to the public space. Thus whatever interactions take place online, eg. Public forum, FB comments, tweets etc remain and can be used against the posters/users. This is definitely different from oral mediums such as speech, whereby the speaker’s message is fleeting and contextual. Next, Boyd discussed the lack of embodiment. Online interaction lacks verbal and non-verbal communication cues and signals. Thus there are limited outlets for expression in the mediated online space which may lead to inaccuracy of presented information and cause a breakdown in communication. Boyd highlighted that users need to have self-awareness of how they are representing themselves online and to be aware of what they post and the consequential effects that it results in. For instance, the Miss Singapore contestant who posted a photo of a man with a hole in his shirt and passed rude comments on it, probably failed to consider the negative backlash she would receive and how it may affect the parties involved. Just because something is online and not directed to the other face-to-face, doesn’t mean that the rude comment is any less hurtful.
Turkle also talked about how social interaction in the digital virtual world differs, especially in MUDs. Social interaction is based on the users’ character in the virtual realm. Rules of social interaction are not set, users can easily define them and can choose the extent of their anonymity and roles they play. In MUDs, the users’ self is decentered but multiples without limits and they can constantly construct and reconstruct their identities fluidly. The computer functions as a medium that allows for great control and mastery for building collaboration and intimacy with the online community as well. Turkle argued that role playing games do not necessarily blur the boundaries between reality and fiction/virtual. Rather, they may be seen as parallels of each other. Real-life experiences are projected onto the virtual realm as well. Online games may be used to remake and reshape the self. The ongoing game grants anonymity, invisibility and multiplicity.
Nakamura talked about the rise of worker-players in the game WoW. They have been racialized are often discriminated against and called “Chinese farmers”. Even the online gaming world parallels the capitalist market-economy; of the developed vs. developing countries, of consumers and producers, leisure-players vs. worker-players, buyers vs. sellers of virtual goods for real money. Leisure-players blame the worker-players for destroying the essence if the game and target these worker-players in the game. Yet, they fail to see that leisure-players are the ones driving the demand for virtual goods, without wanting to put in the required time and effort. They also claim that they are not being racist.
Nakamura then elaborated on how machinima creates and sustains racist rhetoric in the game. players use it as a medium to share their views and concerns with others, regarding the issue of the worker-players who they feel are ruining the game for all players. They especially display their anger against those whom they feel act in a “Chinese” manner. Thus this ties in with their claim that they are not “racist”, but rather they are signalling out those who have unsuccessfully assimilated to the American social norms; an “anticultural” position.
The theme for this week’s readings is new media identities and the 3 readings talk about aspects of it. In Turkle’s reading, she argued that “MUDs-multi-user dungeons are a new environment for the construction and reconstruction of self.” Hence, the self can be multiplied by playing with one’s identities and trying out new ones in MUDs. Such opportunities are present in the virtual space where anonymity is assured and the identity identified would be the one the individual wishes to portray to others. Therefore, Turkle found out that people use computers for 2 uses. Firstly, computers are used to work through identity issues that center around control and mastery. Secondly, computers are used as communication medium to explore a social context as well as to reflect on own nature and powers.
When individuals play games, they are partaking on new identities that may or may not represent their true self. Hence, role-playing games could be places of escapes for the individuals or places where individuals seek to engage in a significant dialogue with important events and relationships happening in their real life. Such role-playing games stand betwixt and between both in and not in real life and becomes a space for thinking about real world. Virtual world could provide the environment for experiences that is not present easily in real life. On MUD, individuals could shape a character and that character could be a projection of his inner fantasies. MUDs served as identity workshops where individuals could remake their self as MUDs are an ongoing game under an anonymous personae with physical invisibility and the possibility to be not one but many. Therefore, MUDs provide opportunities for individuals to partake in identities that they would not have the chance to be in real life. Under the text-based virtual realities, people are exploring, constructing and reconstructing their identities under multiple identities provided at platforms such as MUDs.
Byod’s reading highlighted the changes in social interaction in a virtual space. Since individuals could partake multiple identities under anonymity, what is represented is not a true reflection of that individual, there could be multiple representations and identities of the individual. Hence, digital realm affects social interaction and impacts social behaviour. It alters social structure where there are limited channels for expression and perception as well as interpersonal context clues. Individuals lack the ability to control what is represented of him/her and misrepresentations could occur. Therefore, Byod’s reading highlighted the fact that under digital realm, there is the reconstruction of social interaction which could be problematic where people are seeing representations of individuals and those representations may not be those that the individual wishes to portray to others.
As for Nakamura, her reading seems to emphasise that the existence of racialization in a particular game could be a result of how the internet shapes and reshapes the perceptions of race, ethnicity and identity. The racial identity online could be determined and defined by the racial and ethnic stereotypes that are already established in the current society.