Comment #2

My comment on Laura's post:

http://eyeonpeople.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/mediated-communication-slaying-trolls.html?showComment=1350974974138#c2512443463873094092

Well, as I read this I was going to comment what has already been said, so sorry if some of this overlaps, I will try to remain original!

Something else that has come up recently is the potential idea for the Australian government to introduce mandatory data retention by Internet Service Providers which would essentially rid us of much of our anonymity, which I guess operates on the premise that if you’ve got nothing to hide than you shouldn’t be scared. But most people would have certain facts or features about themselves that they wish to remain private or amongst a close circle of friends, which relates to how we form relationships and circles, in that we only reveal certain parts of our identities to those who we trust.

On another note, I don’t think that everything we do online is completely anonymous, it’s just hard for someone to track us down. Every click you make and every letter you type is logged somewhere, whether it be on the internet or on the device you are using. Further, most interactions made on the internet have your Internet Provider address attached to it, which can actually be traced to the computer used for that interaction. Though it is often hard for this to be done and as the internet is spread throughout the world it would be difficult for anyone to access enough of your information.

This then brings up problems associated with our mediated identities. In our interactions we are logged as a number (which can be modified if you know how), but this does not always correspond with our natural identity, for example, what if someone else used your computer to do it, who would be liable?
On the subject of trolls, I think this has merely become a moral panic. ‘Trolls’ have always existed, but I guess on the internet it has become more of a term for those who breach the online social norms and regulations. In the media it has become a term which has been associated with online bullying, but traditionally it’s just someone being annoying or playing some sort of joke.

Thanks for a great post as usual Laura! I think I might jump in on the other comments because it’s an interesting discussion (even though I’m probably really late to the game on this one).




I also commented the following in a comment/discussion on Laura's post:

This is a very interesting discussion here!

I think the problem with mediated communication (when compared to direct communication) is that we are not always in control of it. Last session I did a project on the media in relation to China, it's censorship and the issues surrounding Tibet.

It was interesting that the Chinese Government even provides internet access to those within the Tibetan area when so much of what comes out of there is going to be negative towards the government. In my opinion it appears to just be the PRC Government paying lip service to some sort of freedom of speech, as when the issues become heated up the government has been known to turn off internet service, as well as telephone signals and outsider access to the area.

To relate this back to sociology, I guess it demonstrates how we are not necessarily in control of our own identities, in relation to how we communicate with others. Indeed, the Tibetan identity could be seen as being modified by the PRC government in an attempt to reinforce some sort of overarching national identity.

Sorry for the late comment, but just thought I'd join in :)