EOTO 2 Presentations - Online Influencers

One of the concepts I learned from others’ EOTO presentations was Online Influencers by Josie Stinson. An online influencer is a person who creates online content and gains a large following. It’s crazy to think about how different being “famous” is now in today’s digital world instead of back then. Even saying “back then” seems inaccurate because it’s not like we’re comparing today to a hundred years ago. Technology is continuously growing and influencing almost everything we do. Back then, or even ten years ago, being famous took more than just posting one picture or video that miraculously went viral. People used to be more talented with things like singing, dancing, cooking, etc., ever to get really noticed by others. Now, anyone can connect with others and grow a platform to produce content for an engaged audience. 

There are definite positives to being an online influencer and definite negatives of it. The positive, as stated earlier, is that anyone has the ability to access some form of fame. Creators can also reply, respond, and interact with their followers and other online influencers. With everyone having the ability to be an influencer, there’s a lot of communication and collaboration between creators. Social media enables people to find their kind of people, which can foster amazing connections. 

Unfortunately, there are many negatives to being an online influencer, specifically regarding the public. Influencers can receive harsh backlash and criticism from not only their particular following but outside users as well. Cancel culture can take a severe toll on an influencer’s mental health. It can be unpredictable when an influencer will be “canceled,” especially if they didn’t have some sort of recent public incident. There have been numerous occasions when an influencer's past is brought up - like Shane Dawson - and used to terminate their online influence or presence (depending on how far cancel culture goes). It’s arguable that Shane doesn’t deserve a platform, but the backlash he received drove him to try to end his own life. Whether it’s a solicited or unsolicited reaction,  it’s extremely important to remember how there’s an actual person behind the screen.

 

 

EOTO 2 - Propaganda

Propaganda is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. It’s the dissemination of information to influence public opinion and can be done through facts, arguments, rumors, half-truths, or lies. Overall, propaganda demonstrates a systematic effort to manipulate the beliefs, attitudes, or actions by employing symbols, including words, gestures, banners, monuments, music, clothing, hairstyles, designs on items like coins and postage stamps, etc. 

A propagandist is someone who produces or spreads propaganda. They deliberately further a cause or damage an opposing one by disseminating ideas, facts, or allegations. To do so, they have a specific goal or set of goals and select points, arguments, and displays of symbols to present them with the intent of maximum effectiveness for their goal achievement. Propagandists may distort the relevant facts or lie. They may also attempt to distract reactors’ attention from information outside of their propaganda, as the reactors are the ones they’re trying to influence. 

The implications of propaganda include both good and bad effects through positive and negative messages. Propaganda conveys messages about healthy eating habits, the effects of smoking, drug use, violence prevention, and drunk driving, which are all advising a beneficial change. For example, in the CDC’s “Tips From Former Smokers” Campaign, Terrie Hall explicitly shows the reality of what smoking can do to you. It advises people to steer clear of smoking by generating fear of a dangerous possibility. Propaganda can also be used to promote unity, solidarity, productivity, or harmony among people when conflict arises. Utilizing propaganda to help people or promote positive change are the two main ways its use can be for good. 

Propaganda is also heavily used in times of war. A prime example of war propaganda is Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam is a personification or symbol of the United States. Most historians believe that the name came from a New York merchant named Sam Wilson, who his friends knew as “Uncle Sam” (though the origins are subject to dispute). He began appearing shortly after the War of 1812 and became popular worldwide by the early 1900s. Uncle Sam has been a symbol of American patriotism throughout WWI and WWII by the government in many different ways, including military recruiting posters, stamps, magazines, and newspapers. Persuading the American public came close to the importance levels of manufacturing bullets, planes, and more in the time of war. Galvanizing public support became the government’s primary campaign, with Uncle Sam being a propaganda example to achieve their goals. 

A more recent example of propaganda deals with the Biden administration, Ukraine, and Russia. NBC News published an article on April 6th, “In a break with the past, US is using intel to fight an info war with Russia, even when the intel isn’t rock solid.” US officials claimed to indicate that Russia may be preparing to use chemical agents in Ukraine, which Biden even said publicly. However, a few US officials came to NBC News and said that there was actually no evidence of Russia bringing any chemical weapons near Ukraine. The US supposedly released the information to “deter Russia from using the banned munitions.” This false claim is just one of the examples of the Biden administration breaking recent precedent. The administration deploying declassified information as part of an information war on Russia is their attempt at keeping President Vladimir Putin “off balance.” Furthermore, officials have reported that intelligence agencies are devoting more staff members to work on the declassification process to avoid betrayal of sources and methods since the unprecedented intelligence releases have been that frequent and voluminous. 

In a world as digital as ours today, propaganda is more than just a way of attempting to sway one’s opinion. I see it as a pathway to instantaneous participation in any situation or conflict no matter where you are. Unfortunately, this immediate access we also have leads to breaking connections, whether it be with a family member, relative, or friend whose opinions differ. Propaganda now allows audiences to actively participate in its creation and spread, rather than just being passive consumers. It takes on exponential communication as it can go from one to another to many more than a traditional one-way street, making it efficient yet increasingly unruly. 

Privacy, Online & Off

The TED Talk by Juan Enriquez gives an eye-opening view of how our technology platforms act as our electronic tattoos. He asks, “what if they provide as much information about who and what you are as any tattoo ever would?” Additionally, he uses Greek mythology to provide precautions of technology usage, specifically our exposure. For example, the Sisphyus story shows how important it is to be careful with what you post because your post can easily affect your reputation. Enriquez emphasizes how our electronic tattoos threaten us with immortality because what we put online is out there forever. These “tattoos” will live much longer than our bodies ever will. 

Catherine Crump’s TED Talk shares how police can gather large amounts of sensitive information about every individual (that was never previously possible) due to NSA-style mass surveillance. Devices like license plate readers, cell tower dumps, StingRays, and more make cell tower usage investigations and mass location trackers possible. These technologies enable police to access sensitive information of numerous individuals. Crump emphasizes how just because we don’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not there and raises the question, “What should we do about this?” 

Christopher Soghoian uses his TED Talk to give insight on “How to Avoid Surveillance, With the Phone in Your Pocket.” Soghoian clarifies how our telephone calls and the networks that carry our calls were wired for surveillance first. This is scary for me to think about because that means someone could always be listening, and I have no idea who it could be or why they’re bothering to in the first place. However, companies like Apple make surveillance of text messages, phone calls, and Facetime calls surveillance extremely difficult. Soghoian advises us to use encrypted tools to secure our phone calls and messages.

The TED Talk by Darieth Chisolm, “Why We Need Revenge Porn Safeguards,” revolves around cyber-bullying, digital domestic violence, and revenge porn. She emphasizes the issues of posting private videos, explicit content, and nonconsensual personal information. Her talk is the scariest one because it’s so hard to see someone’s true colors until they’re shown. Girls shouldn’t be concerned about explicit photos of us or threats being made over a relationship status. This also goes for guys; no one should have to worry about their significant other violating their privacy and safety. 

These issues affect me, friends, family, and just about anyone in the world today. Technology is pretty much the foundation of daily operations, so it’s challenging to think about how it could be any different. Protecting ourselves from privacy invasion is a lot easier said than done. Having private accounts on social media platforms is more secure than having a public one. Being mindful of how much time we spend on our electronics, specifically our phones can be beneficial. The more time you invest in your phone, the easier it is for surveillance of you to be made. The unfortunate thing is, I don’t see the government caring much about these issues since society (especially the US,) depends on our electronics to keep things running. It’s crazy to think about how we’re supposed to be the ones controlling technology to our advantage, but now it’s controlling us - leaving tattoos all over. 

Diffusion of Innovations

Seeking out the how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology is the purpose of The Diffusion of Innovations Theory. This theory became popularized by Everett Roger’s book, Diffusion of Innovations, published in 1962. Rogers argues that diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated among social system participants over time. He additionally proposes that the innovation itself, adopters, communication channels, time, and a social system are the five central elements that influence the spread of a new idea. It must be widely adopted for innovation to self-sustain before it reaches critical mass. Critical mass (also known as “the chasm” lies between the early adopters and early majority boundary, as theorized by Geoffrey Moore. 

Today’s relatively new innovation, TikTok, has demonstrated increasing popularity since its release in September 2016. Diffusion can help explain its success and rapid growth compared to other social media like Instagram, mainly through switching technology. When people within a network see most of their friends take on an early adapter role by trying out or switching to a newer type of technology, they’re likely to follow suit. Only a few users switch to the new technology at first, but it grows more and more over time. The change of technology then appears over time over more extensive networks before being taken on by other networks. Others might be late adopters due to skepticism about TikTok being a newer app or because they haven’t had others switch technologies in their network. However, some people might not choose to download TikTok or be an active viewer because they think it’s an unnecessary way to spend time, making them not an adopter.

Even though TikTok is a fun and engaging source of entertainment, I do see negative consequences in its technology. The main potential yet common downside of TikTok is the possibility of addiction. The app produces an endless content feed, making it easy for viewers to spend elongated periods of time on it without noticing how much time they’re really spending on it. Another negative consequence goes for all types of social media: comparison. Comparing myself to other people online is something I struggle with, and I know there are many others out there who deal with the same battle. 

Those who chose not to download TikTok or other social media platforms are definitely a lot safer from the negative consequences of digital consumption. I feel like not having social media would positively outweigh the negatives of having it. It’s easy to acknowledge the negative consequences of being an active social media user, but it’s challenging to do something about them. Once you’re used to being on social media, it’s hard to go back to not being on it since it becomes a habit for you. Weighing the cost-benefit analysis with a new communication technology seems it would be difficult to do unless you actually experience the cost aspect. If I could go back in time I would stop myself from downloading TikTok in the first place, because I now know just how “engaging” it is and how it’s affected my mental health since first going on it. Hearing all of the benefits of a new technology masks the costs of having it, making it difficult to weigh an accurate cost-benefit analysis.

EOTO Presentations

My favorite technology learned from the EOTO presentations was the camera, presented by Sara Belles. I absolutely love taking pictures and videos for memories and having the ability to share them with anyone else. Capturing the moment is sometimes as important as living in the moment for me, so her presentation on the whole camera creation really resonated with me (along with Abby Gibbs on the camera phone). 

The camera was created by Nicephore Niepce, a French inventor who invented photography and pioneered in that field. In 1816, the first photograph was taken. Unfortunately, it was done with silver chloride-lined paper, so the picture didn’t last. The first long-lasting photograph came out years later in 1862. This development was possible with the invention of the camera obscura - dating way back to 1021 - and the first portable camera in 1685. Kodak sold the first commercial camera in 1888, leading them to be a large company today. They specialize in production related to their historical basis in analog photography. Later on, in 1939, World War II helped shape a new style of photography, giving it a more artistic and moving essence. 1948 marks the introduction of instant image development thanks to polaroid, which we’ve all likely experimented with. About 50 years later, in 1991, the first professional digital camera came out, with the first camera phone following in its steps in the year 2000. 

The camera also demonstrates vast societal impact over its course of growth and development. It’s helped further communication through Facetime, Skype, Google Duo, and Houseparty. Social media, smartphones, and streaming devices are possible and constantly innovated. Users on social media like Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and Facebook heavily utilize a camera’s possibilities to create content and connect with others. 

Cameras additionally shifted our perspective of the universe, not just our digital worlds. Photos of black holes, the use of space rovers, and views of the earth, in general, help us discover new things out there every day. Medical advances also give credit to the camera, allowing advancements in tracking diseases and 3D imaging. However, the most significant impact of the camera regards privacy. Camera phones, traffic cameras, store and home security cameras all can track our everyday moves. Having complete privacy these days is very challenging, but having cameras always catch what’s going on allows for proof, clarity, and overall enhancement of our safety.   

The Progressive Era

Hearing strong antiwar voices takes much more searching than finding news of that of the mainstream media. Antiwar is a website with devotion to non-interventionism and an audience that includes libertarians, pacifists, leftists, “greens,” independents alike, and those on the Right who agree with their imperialism opposition. Article titles on here are “NATO Planning Massive Military Buildup Along Russia’s Border” or “Mearsheimer: Russia Sees ‘Existential Threat,’ Must Win.” I’ve never heard of this site before, so looking into it allowed me to see different headlines and content than the mainstream ones. 

The American Conservative is an institution devoted to “recapturing the flag of the conservative movement” through their maxim of putting ideas over ideology and principles over party. It’s a voice I’ve heard before, but not very loudly. Exploring a website like theirs is refreshing as it gave me a varying insight to current worldwide events. The articles on The American Conservative are such as “No One Wins If Ukraine Becomes A Long War” and “Preventing War is in America’s Best Interest.” These headlines vastly differ from those on CNN, where theirs are more of “Russia Invades Ukraine.” 

There’s a difference in content between antiwar websites and mainstream media because the government wants to shield people. The central narrative of Russia’s portrayal as the only bad guy in this situation is misleading. It’s misleading because the mainstream media blatantly points fingers, leading people into mistaken beliefs. There’s much more to the Ukraine-Russia conflict than what’s given to us when we hit enter on our Google search bar or tune into a certain news channel or radio station. 

Almost every media outlet caters to their audience, the people who agree and support them. Suddenly going against the typical flow can result in doubt, confusion, and the loss of listeners. We have to seek out obscure websites to hear other strong voices because gaining clarity with the hopes of lighter bias is more challenging than just accepting. Websites like American Conservative and Antiwar don’t line up with the mainstream media, so the only voice I’ve heard from these websites is similar to that of a whisper. The volume of a whisper forces you to either lean in closer and ask for repetition to clarify or simply pretend that you heard the first time. We do the same thing when we hear something that contrasts our normality in the news. It either results in a further search, a lean into clarity - or simple acceptance since it’s the more straightforward response from an authoritative source.