Soc 167 Quiz 1 Key Terms
"you are the product"
"If you're not paying, you're the product." Renting your eyeballs to an advertiser -says this in the social network
The WELL
(Rheingold: "a slice of life in my virtual community) -writing about his experiences in 80s with virtual communities -his first virtual community interaction was thru the whole earth (e)Lectronic Link -how do they see the first virtual communities vs how do we see virtual communities today: the average age of users is def older but also there is no mention of ppl being immature -the level of diversity is def lower, Reingold says it is a very diverse group but most of them are white, all middle classish, all seem well educated lots of them have come thru some kind of tech connection -Introverted ppl might have been using this medium more but today everyone uses social media
interpretive flexibility
(orlikowski 1992) -Interpretive flexibility: the degree to which users can alter and decide how they want to use the tech -higher degree of interpretive flexibility means use, meanings, effects of tech can be different from intended purposes -ex: the iPad is incredibly flexible, the concept is a hardware design that is in it of itself flexible bc apple doesn't create apps for it the public creates apps and then ppl download these apps onto their iPads (u make this iPad do whatever u think it should do bc u design the application, there is a YouTube app on ur iPad which is also flexible bc u can add all kinds of content, live stream or upload dif videos, a tech determinists would say the bc tech is so flexible it could go in a dif direction but orlikowski sees it as us having more control) -our tech today is more flexible than ever, in the past tech wasn't designed this way which results in unintended consequences bc u can use it for different purposes -Interperetive flexibility is influenced by the material artifact, characteristics of human beings and the characteristics of the context (society) (attaching a camera on phones was a rly key moment bc even tho the camera sucked, ppl cold have given up and said let's just keep cameras separate but overtime we decided that the camera phone was so important and valuable that we keep experimenting with it, has to do with human beings bc the problems with cameras are that u never have them when u need them, now only ppl into photography have cameras, a tech determinist would say this is an example of tech changing our society but an SCOT author would say this is an example of society saying no we want camera phones)
actor network theory
- is not specific to technology but is talking largely and in general about what is something that is social: calls into question a fundamental social question at large, traditionally in sociology we assume social= ppl and therefore when we study social phenomena we assume ppl are the most important actors -actor network theory is trying to get us to see things differently and see that things can have just as much social impact or implication as ppl (an object has much impact in the social world) -actor= what has the power to act (in sociology it is typically assumed that these is only ppl but Actor network theory is trying to change that -ex: the mosquito -our current society so highly values the media and frequency of contact, constant contact is very different from 100 yrs ago and the kind of technology that you use to communicate could filter your experience of those relationships (some ppl sound totally different over text, you have to think about how the communication technologies are impacting the relationship and you may not even be aware of how texting vs. calling vs seeing in person is impacting the relationship -John Law (1992) not founder of the theory but a major proponent (your reading is a summary) -Michel Callon and Bruno Latour most notable names -some key principles : networks = how the forces effect each other, the causes and effects -what causes homelessness? -ex: yes ppl but also geography, housing, access to materials 1. Networks are materially heterogeneous 2. objects and materials must be analyzed as actors too! 3. Equality of analytical importance assigned to different agents in a network "we should not assume that there is a macro social system and a micro social detail and that macro is more important than micro" -when we analyze things in a conflict/ family dynamic u should also take a look at the stuff in ur family
social shaping
-"the consequences of technology use arise from a mix of affordances"- the social capabilities, technological qualities enable and the unexpected and emergent ways that ppl make use of those affordances "- N. Baym (2010) (technology<--> society) -affordances is referring to all the capabilities u get bc of technology (not getting lost is an affordance ur phone gives u bc it has maps) -not necessarily totally independent of SCOT, SCOT sort of discusses this
second generation medium theory
-Joshua Meyrowitz and other contemporary authors -linking medium theory to everyday social interaction -looking at the relationship between social identity, social roles and information (media) -how are ppl different in these 3 periods of time -ur social identity is defined by ur social roles and influenced by ur access to info -social identity is based on ur social roles as defined by ur social network -triad of social roles (1. group identity- role affiliation or being (male vs. female, could aso be race, ethnicity etc) 2. socialization -role of transition or becoming (child to adult, teenagers = a category of transition) 3. hierarchy- role of authority or position (employer vs. employee, impbalance power, teacher -student ) -ouer identity comes from a conglomerate of these social roles, information is a key part of each of the aspects of the triad (in group identity info is shared between members of the group but scared, women learn about being a women from other women, men learn about being a man from other men, used to not know about periods, this has kind of changed bc of electronic media, media affects info and info affects social roles, in socialization you slowly get more information, you learn by getting little bits of information at a time, in hierarchy- info is nonreciprocal some ppl have more info than others) -rooms analogy- media determines the walls (separates ppl from each other based on their social roles) ex: print media creates walls that segregate based on age, sex, and status -books are written to specific populations, target men, women, kids etc -ex: tv media makes walls more translucent, allowing more knowledge of other ppl's lives (even integrates diverse groups of ppl into more similar categories by minimizing differences (group of ppl into the same room who are traditionally more diverse)
internet addiction
-claim: the internet is addictive, this is not a new claim, it is just something u hear ppl say sometimes and it does raise the question of what does addiction mean (part of it is what I think it means for someone to be addicted part of this narrative is a movement to have internet addiction as a legitimate clinical addiction, colloquially we might say addicted but what does that mean) -the debate: is excessive internet use a clinical disorder requiring treatment? yes, the internet is addictive, internet use= a drug, triggers hedonistic dopamine system, it is a physical thing, its not just how much are you on ur phone there is a reaction that is somewhat chemical -NO, the internet is not addictive, the empirical evidence isn't strong enough (correlation- possible symptom of another disorder, measurement relies on self report and is inconsistent, the argument is technologically deterministic, not very specific in terms of what u are talking about don't rly distinguish the different uses of the internet -diagnosis = self report thru surveys ( the survey would ask u about ur own reflection about ur internet use, that already will be somewhat flawed, measures -negative consequences, lack of control over use) -prevalence (different measurement tools in various studies make it harder to compare across countries, prevalence ranges from 1.5% in Greece to 10.7% in South Korea (European/ american at 8.2%) (it isn't that 1 in 10 ppl have a clinical disorder that requires treatment they are just measuring different things -predictors= personality creates that correlate with using the internet more, these traits mean u may have a more addictive personality and there would be more addicted to the internet (low extraversion aka introversion, low agreeableness, low emotional stability, resourcefulness, certain uses (that ppl are on the internet for, Facebook and twitter, games) , are we addicted to information then, what does that really mean bc a lot of this is informational -argument for the DSM (some argue that the internet use should be included in the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, in the US the DSM is the basis for the psychiatric diagnosis, there are some extreme stories of some ppl destroying their own lives and others -the internet is not a drug, compulsive behaviors may not themselves be addictive -Is someone who prefers phone conversations to F2F addicted to the phone? -the most updated DSM is at a we need more research and information at this point bc we do not have substantive enough evidence to categorize it as a disorder -the dopamine thing is true about a lot of things (we don't usually go to the point of saying these are addictive ex: exercise, there are disorders of extreme exercise but saying you are addicted to exercise is an oversimplification of what ppl go thru -you can be reliant on caffeine but we do not see it as a clinical addiction -IS it to the level that it is addictive and then even still is it an oversimplification it does not capture the experience of addiction -points to the medium not the content -the empirical evidence isn't strong enough- no consensus of measurement, cross sectional not longitudinal, relies on self-report measures, cultural lags are rly important bc we need time to figure this out we have no idea what the effects of having 4 hrs of screen time a day throughout middle and high schools
robotic moment
-daughter says they could have used a robot instead of a turtle in a zoo bc she was both concerned for the imprisioned turtle and unmoved by its authenticity -In our culture of stimulation, the notion of authenticity is for us what sex was for the victorians- threat and obsession, taboo and fascination -love and sex with robots author says that relationships with robots will become very common (analogizing of robots to gay ppl demonstrated that for the author future intimacy with machines would not be a second best substitute for finding a person to love + machines would bring their won special qualities to an intimate relationship that needed to be honored in its own right -older depressed woman with the paro the seal -we are emotionally and philosophically ready to connect intimately with robots -ppl seem comforted by the belief that if we alienate or fail each other robots will be there programed to provide simulations of love -we are psychologically programmed to not only nurture what we love but to love what we nurture so even simple artificial creatures can provoke heartfelt attachment -socioable robots promise a way to sidestep conflicts about intimacy and they express a wish for relationships with limits, a way to be both together and alone -the blurring of intimacy and solitude may reach its starkest expression when a robot is proposed as a romantic partner, -even when we are not "at work" we experience ourselves as "on call"; pressed, we want to edit out comlexity and "cut to the chase"
the ability to informate (zuboff, 2015)
-events, objects, processes --> visibile, knowable, and shareable -"the world is reborn as data"-we can quantify everything if u have enough data u can learn about another person -new way of learning -examples: sports advanced analytics, work place productivity and habits -driving habits and traffic accidents
hyper personal space
-hyperpersonal nature of cyber space= clearly more utopian, the data doesn't prove this but she is saying that maybe it suggests that the internet is a better place to make connections, she is saying bc if u want to make friends then u can -computer mediated communication is generally more free of social judgement -less emphasis on appearance -emphasis on ur content/ thoughts -don't have to do with in person rejection -therefore computer mediated communication prompts deeper connections -the data is nowhere near conclusive -utopian narrative
big data
-large amounts of data -collected passively from digital interactions (there are privacy settings u can go incognito but even then there is data that u leave behind) -with great variety and a high rate of velocity -came up bc of tech hardware revolutions, we never had computers that could process and store this info -Joe toscano Tedx Lincoln (2019) = we areche ones who teach these robots how to do things bc they collect all our information and then our AI uses it to learn how to do these things -there are ppl who can use the same examples that is extremely positivity -this whole narrative around medical info and if we were to release the medical protections and collect all the info we would learn deeply about cancer research and be able to figure out how to cure cancer big data= huge data sets that contain billions or trillions of points of data that require new, powerful computational resources to process -google's sources of data (zuboff, 2015) 1.computer -mediated transactions 2. sensors (body, place, objects) 3. corporate/ government data bases 4. surveillance cameras 5. individuals and computer mediated actions (your searches, texts, emails and likes etc) -how google s a multibillion dollar industry even tho they don't sell a single product, you are giving them data and they don't sell it directly but they use that data to create models and then they employ the model to create services for other businesses (advertising basically) what do they rly know?-location info, search history, your consumer profile / your ad profile, apps that u use, YouTube history, calendar, emails, conversations, groups, word and google drive , takeout.google.com- you can download all the data google has on u, -Initially they sell it to u for free and then they sell u stiff and then they use the data on that stuff to sell u more stuff (when u use it u are helping them create an intermediary service between consumer and all these other companies)
medium theory (1st generation)
-medium: the means by rich something is communicated or expressed -medium theory: a system of ideas that explores the potential influence that communication technologies apart from content have had -areas of emphasis: unique features of each means of communication, how these features affect micro and macro social interactions) -ex: speed of medium, bi-directional vs. unidirectional, simple or complex communication (simpleness to complexness-texts> phone call> video call -1st generation: harold adams innis and herbert Marshal McLuhan (said they can define and form all of human history based on 3 different media). -control over mediums-- social control (ex: church and power over religious texts, information monopoly, BUT monopoly broken by printing press-> a more decentralized and diffuse understanding). - permanence of medium (ex: stone tablet-> stable society, ex: light papyrus paper - Roman Empire spread and social change)
moral panic/ techno panic
-moral panics (Cohen, 1972): widespread social fear over a group of deviants who display a behavior that is considered evil -fueled by media -ex: 3d printing of guns is not wreaking havoc but it was a panic -technopanics= moral panics about contemporary technology 1. focus on new media forms 2. pathologies young peoples use of this media 3. cultural anxiety manifests itself in an attempt to modify or regulate behavior ex: to catch a predator (lots of media outlets talking about how there were sexual predators online and this show gave u a sense that sexual predators were abound on the internet -whenever we have new tech we go thru a phase of very dystopian narratives
utopian discourse
-more supportive networks -shinking of time and space -Increase in network diversity -connect with similar others -greater political engagement -freedom -support for belief in "hyper personal" nature of cyberspace (clearly more utopian, the data doesn't prove this but she is saying that maybe it suggests the internet is a better place to make connections, she is saying bc if u want to make friends then u can -some on the utopian side: connecting marginalized community, making quick connections to ppl u identify with has lots of benefits that should not be discounted
interactivity
-not all media are alike in their interactivity -Interactivity = how u interact, what u are allowed to do to engage with ppl in the space -ex: twitter limiting the # of characters changes the kind of community that will develop -most anxieties about new media have to do with their interactivity (use displaces "real" communication, we form virtual instead of real relationships, we shut out everyone but our closest ties, we shut out our closest ties for everyone else, we do not exercise the same caution)
3 periods of history
-oral socieities /traditional societies= physical presence needed-> limitation on ideas, space, and individuality (I can't take an idea and just let the idea fly off to a far away country, unless I go there, if I want to spread an idea that will bc completely limited on my travel, well being and health, your identity is tied to space bc ur parents are tied to space) ideas came from ppl -print societies/ modern societies =words become alienated from the person (pretty radical bc it doesn't matter who u are and where u came from now u can learn from multiple sources and have different ideas from those around u who have had the same experiences, church loses control after the ringing press, and u have a deeper sense of individualism), ideas move from aural and temporal to visual and spatial, leads to focus on ideas, rationality, individualism -electronic societies- global societies (return to oral tradition, sensory communication brought back but now recordable, print= shared product, electric = shared experience, print= ideas, electronic= mood, appearance, compassion, emotional connection (a lot easier to cry in a movie than in a book ) now its not just the ideas but it brings back the humanness
Goldilocks principle
-ppl can't get enough of each other if and only if they can have each other at a distance in amounts they can control= the goldilocks effect, just right) -not too hot, not too cold, just right -we want control over our relationships - we're afraid of intimacy but we don't want t be alone
punctualization
-punctualization: we simplify the networks into singular objects and ignore other connected networks -most objects are simplifications of the whole network -ex: TV (even before streaming services you didn't really watch tv bc you turned it on and it was connected to some kind of cable network) -ex: human body (ex: Im feeling depressed/ sad/ happy and your body is a complex network of past associations, learned behavior, psychology, there are so much complex effects about what makes you happy or sad -heterogenous networks are comprised of many punctualizaed substances (ANT often interested in uncovering punctualized substances -ex: ya u can look at ur phone but maybe u should look at ur phone differently
loneliness v. solitude
-self discovery--> security --> meaningful relationships/ connections -lack of self identity --> insecurity --> inability to have meaningful relationships -only out of solitude that u can reach other to another person, if u are lonely all the time u can't reach the to other ppl and make connections -when u engage with ppl u think of urself when u are constantly insecure (u don't rly notice ppl, it is filtered thru this idea that u only matter in terms of whether or not u approve of me, using other ppl as spare parts of ur ego) -If ur rly secure and self discovered u would call ur friend to hang out bc u think their a fun person instead of the fact that u are lonely (ur not inwardly focused, ur outwardly focused, its not I need u -concerned that tech prevents us from making that move bc it short circuits our loneliness as we just keep connecting instead of having deeper and more difficult convos and relationships we never get to solitude
duality of technology
-social constructivism- the duality of technology orlikowksik 1992- an example of how technology and society are embedded in one another, orlikowski argues for the structurational model of technology- a dialectic understanding of the interaction between technology and social structure (she rly likes social structure and she is going to explain everything in terms of social structure, would argue that there is a constant back and forth embedded in tech) -technological imperative model aka technological determinism (tech--> organizational dimensions aka social strucuture) -strategic choice model aka in some form SCOT (organizational context--> decision makers--> technology) -ex: laws affect google who creates or impacts tech -who is in control here? society -duality of technology: technology is the product of human action while it also assumes structural properties (technology is not objective force or socially constructed product (false dichotomy) ; tech is physically constructed and socially constructed) -however once developed technology becomes reified, institutionalized and more independent (not autonomous)(once we make it has a perception that it is as if its own entity, still under the umbrella of ppl) -Its not either or its always both
social media
-social media has become an everyday part of social/ political life in America -this course wants to look more specifically (and strategically to understand how virtual communities and social media is changing our society -social media = websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking (through use of technology, content created by (lay) ppl (instead of official sources), part of a social network/ virtual community, often mobile and pervasive (something that you can bring with you that you can easily access) -a virtual community is the ppl, social media is where they meet - a moving target, constantly influx what ppl do with social media, who uses social media and participates in virtual communities, -very high growth of social media and internet use -the fact that ppl can be famous on social media is distinct to the US, way less common in other cultures -social media= tools used to create and interact in virtual communities and online networks -compared to traditional media, social media is often: mobile, far-reaching, accessible, editable (if I print something wrong in the newspaper I have to wait till the next day to reprint, but if I made a mistake on twitter I can just delete it ) - now the news cycle is just hrs, immediate
surveillance capital
-surveillance capitalists have taken advantage of a policy/ legal lag -leads to a new logic of accumulation: -not about capital but about info/ data/ surveillance -Information quantifies, describes and identifies life -Info is capital, that is the new currency (what is google based on (not old capital which would be machines) new capital) -a new logic/ way of thinking about the economic system
heterogeneous network
-the social is a network of heterogeneous materials -networks are composed of ppl as well as machines, animals, texts, money, architecture and many other materials -social "stuff" always requires material -ex: knowledge (ex: textbook, the way that you learn knowledge requires you to know how to read and that could change the way you engage in society and what is valuable in society) -ex: communication -ex: universities (made of stuff: buildings, sports teams) - yes you are paying for an education but there is a material aspect to it and a question of why do you need to build expensive libraries, gyms and cafeteria food, bc of competition, berkeley needs to compete with Stanford and on these tours you look at buildings (you can't talk about edu without stuff) -social agents are never located in bodies alone, but in pattered network of heterogeneous relations (context changes the way you act, working mothers more motherly at home bc ur sense of self is affected by the physical environment) -listenitng to music while walking changes your attitude and experience of your surroundings (all very subconscious)
temporal structure
-varies across social media -synchronous or asynchronous
social cues
-varies across social media -this has evolved tremendously bc of emojis, sarcasm is almost impossible in text form so we had to create some way of communicating
Third places (first and second places)
-virtual communities as "third places" : the 1st place is your home, the 2nd place is your workplace, the 3rs place is a civil society or public space (social space in public) ex: bowling alleys, malls, bars -"the keyword is my cafe"
technological determinism
-when we rly tackle issues of moral panic, the solutions that come from technological determinism are not helpful and sometimes harmful -direct causal link -examples: google is making us stupid, video games make us violent, medium theory -"the medium is the message" -McLUhan -technology --> society tech drives social change or social progress ( could be either positive or negative, usually tends to be more negative bc of the idea that if tech has more power then do and that is negative) -Its not about how we use technology it is just the fact that this medium exists, transforms society in a certain way -that is why we have no say in how tech is changing society -technological change comes from outside society as part of an autonomous scientific development -autonomous= a key word and it is this attitude about how u see science and tech, something that happens outside of societal control -ofc human beings make the tech but it is outside of human prediction or control -technologies have their own inertia totally separate from the influences of ppl ex: the evolution of artificial intelligence (a tech determinist would argue that no matter how much ppl say we shouldn't invest in AI it is still progressing ) -at the extreme, technology CAUSES social change -consequences for technological determinism: at the macro leve, tech causes social and historical changes, at the micro level tech affects social and social psychological process as individuals use tech and tools
alone together
-why we expect more from technology and less from each other -as sociable robots propose themselves as substitutes for ppl , new networked devices offer us machine mediated relationships with each other, another kind of substitution -Irony of technology: increased interconnection butincrerased alienation -on 1 hand it is the thought that we can use robotic to help the elderly feel companionship but on the other hand we are coming to expect more from tech than each other and we are not dealing with the problem of loneliness of the elderly in American Society (we are not willing to struggle with these issues, we want to create a tech solution) -most qualititative data, lots of interviews -robot moment: quickly humans ascribe emotions to robots/ technology (even the creators do this, ex: robot dogs, sex-robot) -emotional detachment: less physical communication--> less emotionally aware communication (ex: criticizing and bullying without knowing the effects) -decrease in privacy: post 9/11 generation value privacy--> oversharing on social media (leads to a cycle of devaluing privacy, privacy supposedly super important to developing our sense of self -how does self discovery happen 1. in real face to face relationships (including making mistakes, dealing with the boring, having real conversations, engaging with emotions, this is how u learn who u are, these messy interactions force u to engage in emotion and with another person's emotion, when u make mistakes the other person reminds u that u offended them, teaches u how to have conversations with others which teaches u how to have convos with urself -u need to have a very strong sense of self so that u don't like use other ppl from ur spare parts of ur sense of self -If u have a very strong sense of self then u can appreciate other ppl for who they are
strength of weak ties
?? ask about during lecture
YMMV (your mileage may vary)
??? ask about in reveiw session
google is making us stupid
an example of tech deterministic + dystopian narrative -laziness, google makes us dumber -ppl were very persuaded by that Car article bc we find info too easy so it becomes harder for our brains to read longer texts -very technologically deterministic, the structure rewires ur brain and we don't know how to do work to find info anymore
virtual communities as "real communities"
are virtual communities "real" communities? - if your just liking posts is that to superficial to be a real community, can you be anonymous so can you be a real member of that community -what is a community : a social unit of any size that shares common values, may manifest differently in different cultures, the meaning of community can be very different for your own context based on your own experience: gemeinschaft (communal society): traditional, relational society vs. Gesellschaft (associational society): rational, culturally defined, ex: an american society, we don't know everyone in american society but we share values, loses its closeness, its tightness -personal vs. non personal or small, rural vs. large urban (strong ties vs. weak ties, conflict between them? maybe that's what rein gold was so excited bc online communities were so small) -Yes community exists online: ppl share common values and goals, support is exchanged, social ties in virtual communities resemble social ties in offline communities: "intermittent, specialized and varying in strength"
dystopian discourse
ex: social dilemma is an example of a larger narrative that we are all very familiar with, fake news, manipulation, disconnection (sort of the opposite of what rein gold and tufeki where saying about the internet, they are just talking about generic tech not even AI, little bit more ppl on the dystopian side ( in the US social media has contributed to the destruction of politics in the US, humans have turned the tech into an addiction, so much of social media si routed in comparing yourself to others, some on the utopian side: connecting marginalized community, making quick connections to ppl u identify with has lots of benefits that should not be discounted, lack of government control and the ability of the gov to protect themselves, yes good things have come with socia media but at the end of the day the owners of these platforms are using these platforms for things that are not socially responsible -"technology should be assumed guilty until proven innocent" -David brower (as if we are devolving with tech, tech is not neutral, and we need it to prove to us that it is good, not trying to get us to change our mind but to get us to understand and articulate our views and defend them as valid -dystopian shallow communication (memes, the cross article that talks about how Facebook is making us dumber, it is not a causal argument, the data cannot prove that google makes us feel worse but it does find that face to face interaction do make us feel better while Facebook makes us feel worse. Perhaps there is a difference in the level of feed back etc -dystopian narratives tend to be more common -ex: social isolation: we are more disconnected with each other, we try to stay present but our phone pulls us away -ex privatism: hyper individualism, u see ur own thoughts as ur own and that's it, disconnect between urself and uplift and the rest of the world, see ur thoughts as not worth sharing -ex: laziness: google makes us dumber, ppl were very persuaded by that Car article bc we find info too easy so it becomes harder for our brain to read longer texts, very technologically deterministic, the structure rewires ur Brian and we don't know how to do work to find info anymore -ex: moral degradation: more to do with content, pornography, u can learn how to make a bomb -distractions and multitasking: the evidence and data is insane and it seems a little exaggerated and some of this research is biased , the research says ppl in the work place are interrupted every 3 minutes and the average work person switches tasks 500 times a day, multi-tasking= switching tasks very quickly but it takes our brain time to get back into that task -whenever we have a new tech we go thru a phase of very dystopian narratives -often times the panic around dystopian narratives is destructive but the fears are often based in a small nugget of truth -ppl use language in a very dystopian way bc it is easier to get ppl to pay attention tu
rich get richer
if u are good at making friends, u will be good at making friends online
social compensation
if u are more introverted u compensate for that by making friends online
seek and ye shall find
if u believe in it and look for it and are going online to find friends then u have much higher odds of actually finding and making friends
social constructivism
social construction of tech: tech <--->society -new technologies are a consequence of social factors -technology <--society -human being sin particular but social actors determine what kinds of technologies are produced and how those technologies affect society -tend to have a more positive view bc we are in control and therefore we can always develop some kind of adaptive tool to transform the way tech affects society in a positive way -tend to focus on how society has control -ofc we understand that tech changes society but ultimately it is still the social actors (and specific social actors) that has ultimate control over technology -definition= has roots in social constructivism and the sociology of scientific knowledge (ex: gender is a social construct, race is a social construct; these are ideas that are socially produced; technology is a socially produced idea) -views development of tech as an interactive process or discourse among technologists and relevant social groups: technologists, R&D ppl, governments, consumers there is a kind of discourse that happens between these groups that produces and determines how tech is used in our society (interactive sociotechnical process that shapes all forms of technology) -SCOT is not positive or objectivist -both technical processes and social process (ex: supply in demand, what ppl want etc) -Social Constructivism- the duality of technology Orlikowski 1992 - an example perhaps of how technology an d society are embedded in one another -orlikowski argues for the structurational model of technology - a dialectic understanding of the interaction between technology and social structure (she rly likes social structure and she is going to explain everything in therms of social structure, would argue that there is a constant back and forth embedded in technology) -strategic choice model aka in some form SCOT (organizational context--> decision makers--> technology, ex: laws affect google who creates or impacts tech, who is control here?? society
Fear of missing out
the sense of anxiety -ex: you check your phone before you go to bed and right when u wake up
virtual community
virtual communities and social media have become an everyday part of social/ political life in America -this course wants to look more specificially (and strategically) to understand how virtual communities and social media is changing our society -virtual community= a community of ppl sharing common interests, ideas, and feelings (a lil more contested) over the internet; a social network, not geographically bound (in the 70s 80s or 90s u were friends with ppl that u were physically close to, didn't have social networks outside of that space, not tied to space) -through use of tech -virtual community is the ppl social media is where they meet -virtual communities in some form or another existed for a very long time (even in the 70s u had emails but this was limited to the researcher academic community ) -an element of technology has always been social and they become more vibrant and pervasive -potential of virtual communities: " when the ubiquity of the world telecommunications network is combined with the information-structuring and storing capabilities of computers a new communication medium becomes possible" -Howard Reingold , "social aggregations that emerge from the [internet] when enough ppl carry on those public discussions long enough with sufficient human feeling to form webs of personal relationships in cyber space" -Howarda Reingold -not necessarily how we or the average person sees virtual communities today -how has the virtual community changed over time?- increasingly multi-media, image based; participants are increasingly anchored to their bodies (less being completely anonymous, you are more and more tied to some identities and forced to log in (bc of cat fishing)) -how has the virtual community stayed the same: community of interests rather than proximity, historically ppl created their social networks based on geography, ur just roommates with ppl but now it is easier for u to not be friends with ur roommate -continued evolution: still evolving, still shifting power to the ppl (u have more control overall, (there is still a debate here)), high diversity!(age is the biggest growing diversity group, used to just be young ppl), purposes, levels of interactivity, length of interaction change along with social forces -
