"Metaphors continue to play an important, but misleading, role in generating popular awareness of the Internet. Advanced users, while recognising the cultural significance of these metaphors, are careful to realise that the Internet is a unique phenomenon which might, in some ways, be analogous to other systems (phones, libraries, etc) but has its own peculiar dynamics. It is not so much that the Internet is like these comparator phenomena and systems but rather that, to understand something as new as the Internet, we need to imagine that it is similar". (Allen n.d)
“The nature of the World Wide Web is unfamiliar to most people. In order to make sense of this foreign environment people describe the unfamiliar in terms of the familiar. Metaphors are often used for this purpose. Since it is important to use the Web effectively it is important to acquire insight on user perceptions.” (Lee Ratzan)
The use of metaphors when explaining the Internet is very common. We have all heard the terms “surfing the net” and “the information superhighway”, this creates a friendly approach to a newcomer. To make comparisons to the net being a library, or an encyclopedia is not quite right but is done all the time. How do we best explain what is the Internet if not for the use of metaphors? At best it is a communicative medium, but try explaining how that works to my 62 year old mother without making a comparison to a phone or a fax machine.
Metaphors are important, but as stated in the concept they are also misleading. If it is not analogous to a library, fax or a phone, then what else is it comparable to? Why do we feel the need to strike up a comparison to have the user feel more comfortable with its capabilities? The Internets own “peculiar dynamics” are what make it the Internet. It is a combination of everything we have, and so much more. Considering the popularity of the Internet as a communicative medium, it would seem that somewhere along the way, the description, however inaccurate got through.
The concept of consenting to a hallucination is fascinating. I do this every time I log on and more so when chatting with friends. Anything is possible and that I can go anywhere is the Internets major appeal for me. As a bonus I also get to create, communicate, learn and be entertained. The “hallucination” of being somewhere, while being nowhere is enormous. I often lose time on the Internet. So consumed in what I am reading, learning, or who I am talking to that “real” time passes me by and I am in a place where there is no such thing. The Internet is a one stop 24 hour shop that allows you to browse at your own leisure... more metaphors...
The best description I have studied and the one I would have to be most satisfied with is that of the “ecology” on the Internet. This far from makes everything more simple to understand, but for me it was perhaps the most accurate. A communication network wrapped in an information warehouse which is the environment for which we as the users can shape by being active members of the Internet society.
The metaphor was such an important part of the Internet in the 1990's because it was embraced by different individuals who had it described to them in a particular way. The techno-jargon that would have accompanied a 'real' description of the product would have lost all of those it was new to simply because it is difficult to understand. The metaphor helped the Internet then, but now with many people born into a society that has never been without the Internet, the need to describe it as anything but 'The Internet' will cease to be important. Instead we may go the other way when educating the new generation about past technologies.. the tape deck or the walkman for example. We may find ourselves saying “It was the iPod of the 1980's and 90's.” to help them to understand why we had clunky music players and a box of tapes with us in a backback.
Bibliography
Site 1: Ratzan, Lee (2000) "Making sense of the Web: a metaphorical approach". Information Research, 6(1) Retrieved July 4, 2008
http://informationr.net/ir/6-1/paper85.html
This paper is dedicated to the Internet Metaphor Project. A research into using metaphors to describe the Internet and how it affects us as users. It is focused on the way in which we find out how, what advanced and basic Internet users describe the Internet as. The real information is in the last section of the paper where Lee Ratzan concludes his findings and opens them up for discussion. The content overall is informative and useful. A clinical and fact driven paper for the Rutger's University that is more for those who like a numbers based survey type reference.
Site 2: Coblentz, Clayton (1995) “Metaphorically Interactive: The Rhetorical Examination of World Wide Web Home Pages. MA, Regent University. Regent journal of online communication (ROJC)
Retrieved July 21, 2008
http://www.regent.edu/acad/schcom/rojc/coblentz/coblentz.html
ROJC, sponsored by the College of Communication and the Arts at Regent University supports research and discussion that is communication based. This particular journal explores the early Internet and its capabilities then delves into what we now recognise as common internal metaphors(“those metaphors of a visual nature existing within a home page which determine the interaction, purpose and meaning of a website”) and external metaphors (“the most identifiable descriptors currently used to understand the various components which comprise the World Wide Web”). Investigatory analysis of how the web increases communication via its web home pages through the use of metaphors and why they are effective metaphors for a new genre of communication.
Site 3: Allen, M. (n.d) Internet Communications, Concepts Document Concept 15.Retrieved 6th August 2008
http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
7. Netiquette
"An overwhelming and many-faceted aspect of using email and similar asynchronous communication systems over the Internet is 'Netiquette'. Netiquette describes 'good' and 'bad' conduct in online communication (amongst other forms of Internet use). But what is important about Netiquette is the concept that there are these 'agreed' rules of what is good and bad." (Allen n.d)
Initially when taking on the concept of Netiquette, I thought that I would be writing on a level of courtesy and manners online. What all users knew to be the 'correct' way to behave online and to treat others. I was wrong for when researching I discovered that when Allen writes in the concept above “there are numerous differences and disagreements about the 'rules'”, he isn't wrong. I found the idea of flaming about flaming intriguing and considered that angle but decided that the 'rules' themselves needed to be analysed. What I found out was that netiquette like etiquette is different depending on the mode of communication and to whom you are speaking.
Flaming is defined as being the “hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users” (Wikipedia). To think that Internet users are so passionate about what the 'rules' are they are willing to break them to get their point across is irony at it's best. Here in lies the problem. While I believe that netiquette rules should be adhered to initially, I don't necessarily think that the rules always apply. The problem with setting rules for a communication medium is that everyone has different ideas on what is acceptable depending on who they are communicating with. Do we have rules for phone use, letters or face to face? Yes, but there are quickly broken down. I think Internet communication takes this same path.
Participation on public sites, Newsgroups, Chat rooms etc will always have to be formal and I can think of no better place where this is a rule that should never be broken. The equivalent of a crowded cafe or a classroom environment, the group discussion must be on a level where all parties feel safe in their surroundings and have their opinions respected. A level needs to be adhered to to maintain the level of comfort one feels when entering an at times, intimidating space.
Each of the various different modes of synchronous and asynchronous communication online have their own rulebook so to speak and even then it is a difficult thing to pin down, netiquette, because of the familiarity of the those conversing. Advanced users of the Internet practise netiquette in order to maintain and grow the future of the Internet. "The danger is that we -- and even more so, the young people who grew up on the Web -- may start to mistake hatefulness for wit and intelligence."(Willow 2008) is an excellent insight into the way the future of the net could go if we as 'advanced' users do not use correct netiquette. If a first timer is introduced to a public forum and is greeted with bad manners, the user then is also less likely to revisit and is going to remember their Internet experience as being a negative one.
The rules of netiquette are not black and white, and while the differing of opinions on the matter are full of valid points I can think of no better advice than to use your commonsense. I think that that should really be rule number one. I am not a user who is easily offended but I know that it is still my responsibility to adhere to certain levels of courtesy because not all individuals have the same level of tolerance for what I do.
Bibliography
Site 1: Willow Bay (2008, April). Bile in the Blogosphere. Town and Country, 162(5335), 116. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID: 1439861521).
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=1&did=1439861521&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1217463399&clientId=22212
A periodical written for New York based Town and Country magazine, the author's commentary is focused on the Web 2.0 aspect of netiquette, blogs in particular. "It's harder to be smart than to be snide" is a great quote from the reading and sums up the concept for me. The relevance of the article to what I am doing blog-wise was very beneficial and I found the information related to 'rules' sensible for the purpose of this concept. "Values... manners and morals" are touched on to great effect here and serve to give this article great shape as a positive aspect to the free speech of the Internet that is often negatively described.
Site 2: Kevin C Smith (2002,April). How not to get involved in an Internet 'flame' war. Dermatology Times, 23(4),58-60. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID:113197098).
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdwebdid=113197098&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=22212&RQT=309&VName=PQD
A staff columnist, the author here is concluding a previous article with this one. Concentrating on 'flame wars', he goes on to discuss with the reader what is and is not acceptable if you find yourself in a difficult situation online. The article offers useful tips on inter office relations with reference to emailing and one on one messaging. Perhaps the most useful section of the paper is where the author quotes Martin Farquhar Tupper (1810-1889): "Well-timed silence hath more eloquence than speech." A resource that when read made very good sense, and was useful for the purpose of this concept.
Site 3: Lurkers, trolls and sock puppets. (2007, February). Personal Computer World, Retrieved July 30, 2008, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID:1169302021).
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdwebdid=1169302021&sid=2&Fmt=3&clientId=22212&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Site 4: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)
Site 5: Allen, M. (n.d) Internet Communications, Concepts Document Concept 7.Retrieved 6th August 2008
http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
17. The impact of text-based real-time chat
"Real-time internet-based text chat is a significant part of contemporary internet use. The question then to be asked is: what is the difference here that makes this mode of communication popular; and then what impact does it have of the kinds of communication and social interaction that take place?
Whether this effect of real-time communication will survive the rush towards AV conferencing is a moot point. However, a skilled Internet user will appreciate that text is, in some circumstances, a highly effective mechanism for communication." (Allen n.d)
Text based chat surviving Audio Video (AV) conferencing? Absolutely. The belief that text chat is “a highly effective mechanism for communication” (Allen n.d) is firmly in place with millions now communicating via instant messaging. The introduction of audio video could quite possibly enhance the experience, but I can see more reason to not switch on the camera/mic.
Online gaming is huge, and in Clive Thompsons experience in Voice Chat can Really Kill the Mood on WoW, he expresses how switching to AV after using text for hours destroyed the “social milieu” of the space and that “many players are now discovering that voice tweaks the social environment -- and sometimes kills off part of what made their favorite world so much fun.” A perfect example of how imagination depicts a “fictive” scenario that is destroyed by the introduction of AV.
Would the transition to AV alter the mood in a chat room just as it did in WoW, if so, why? AV takes text based chat and opens it all up. Not only revealing a more 'realistic' you, but destroying the illusion you have created for yourself of the other person. The “consensual hallucination”(Gibson cited by Allen n.d) is where we choose to go and where we see what we want to see, feel what we want to feel and do what we want to do. All of which, is harder if presented with the realistic nature of AV.
Judgements are made as to whether or not socially we are isolating ourselves by being online and using text chat instead of AV and to a greater extent face to face interaction. Is this form of communication (text) superficial? Many would argue that text chat is anything but real, I would have to disagree. The safety in using this medium allows a deeper exploration of yourself in a controlled environment which leads to very real discussion. This is definitly a positive effect of text based chat and why it will not only survive AV but outlive it.
Bibliography
Site 1: Arnold, Bruce. Caslon Analytics Messaging:chat (2005)
http://www.caslon.com.au/messagingprofile7.htm
Retrieved 16th July 2008
Calson Analytics is an Australian consultancy firm that concentrates on information technology and regulation. The intersection of law, business and society enables the site to offer a vast array of services to different facets of government and business. The author goes into a brief history of chat and the emergence of audio/video in the world of instant messaging, and the social impact of both. While helpful for understanding the concept be aware this site is devoted to generating business for the consultancy firm and there are a few pages that touch on that but as a whole I found that information to not be obtrusive and distractory to the information provided.
Site 2: Thompson, Clive. Wired: Games without Frontiers (2007)
http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/commentary/games/2007/06/games_frontiers_0617
Retrieved 17th July 2008
Wired is an online magazine devoted to articles relating to computer technologies. This particular article is a commentary on the insurgence of audio video chats in online gaming, specifically World of Warcraft. The author's blog like commentary is his experience with AV and the effect that it had on his gaming. Further into the site the reflection on the introduction of AV into other areas of communication using instant messaging makes for interesting reading and some points which I felt were valid. The issues of gender and introversion are touched on and the authors opinion here resonated with me as user.
Site 3: Lam, Francis. (2006) Cherio: Creating Expressive Textual Communication and
Anthropomorphic Typography.Program in Media Arts and Sciences
http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/francis/francis_thesis.pdf
Site 4: Ward, D and Kern, K.K, Combining IM and Vendor-based Chat: A Report from the Frontlines
Retreived on 16th July 2008
http://muse.uq.edu.au.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v006/6.4ward.pdf
Site 5: Allen, M. (n.d) Internet Communications, Concepts Document Concept 17.Retrieved 6th August 2008
http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
23. Human-computer interfaces
"The Internet lessens the recognition of difference between humans and computers because, at a distance, it is often feels similar to communicate and act on the Internet regardless of whether one is speaking with a human or a machine.
Interacting with websites feels similarly impersonal or, more subtly, further indicates the extent to which humans readily accept the presence of machine-like ‘intelligence’ in their lives." (Allan n.d)
Does it matter who we are communicating with? What is the relationship between human and machine? ''People should think of a computer interface less as a tool and more as a extension of themselves or as extension of their mind.'' (Shoemaker cited by Markoff). Increasingly it is becoming evident through blogs, and social networking sites that the nature of communication either through a status update or a journal-like blog is a very healthy thing for us humans to be doing. It relieves stress and those who do these things seem to enjoy it, even when there is no response. The connection between human and machine is interesting because communicating via this medium makes the human more machine-like and the machine more human. At what point do we become one? Is it enough for us to be “talking” to a machine or do we do so because of the hope that someone/thing will “talk” back. And if that is the reason, does it matter who, or in this case what it is.
Having never spoken to a machine (so far as I know), I am pondering whether or not the recognition of difference even matters to me personally. If my needs are met and I am happy with the interaction that is occuring, do I care whether or not a machine has satisfied me? Is it really any different from the domestic appliances helping us on a daily basis, or more personally, the movie that evokes an emotional response? Maybe so, but maybe our reliance on machines is just being taken to the next level here. I don't think being online really feels impersonal at all but that may be because I have accepted “the presence of machine like 'intellegence'” in my life in many forms prior to the Internet.
Of course where there is opportunity, we will see liberties being taken. Exploiting the unseen user on the other end of your communication is a given in my opinion when using the Internet as a communicative tool. You censor yourself to a degree or enhance your better qualities. How is that any different to talking to a machine who is basically telling us what we want to hear. I have an issue with the robot impersonating a human to gather information for marketing purposes or personal information to steal your identity etc, but I use programs and machines every day to help make life easier. Why not on a personal level? While quite contraversial, if you could program a robot to counsel you through troubled times and so on why is that harmful? Maybe suicide would be on the decline if the individual could be counselled by a thing instead of a person that can make judgements. It may make the experience of 'offloading' your problems much less traumatic and not to digress but that is why people love the company of pets and use them as soundboards on occasion.
Using tools the computer gives us is contributing to a machine like society. We are accepting many machines into our lives to make things less difficult on a daily basis. Are we really outraged at the prospect of conversing on a personal level with a machine instead of a human? Maybe all that needs to change to embrace artificial intellegence is the honesty level. If the user is aware that the information they are giving out is being responded to by a robot then they may actually seek that out in preference to a human.
Bibliography
Site 1: Donath, J.S., (2000) Being Real. (K. Goldberg, ed.) The Robot in the Garden: Telerobotics and Telepistemology in the Age of the Internet, MIT Press
Retrieved 9 July 2008
http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/BeingReal/BeingReal.html
An published article by an associate professor for the MIT Media Lab. The author specialises in the social aspect of computing and is a pioneer for the design of the computer interface. She writes a thorough insight into the more notorious cases of artificial intelligence in this paper, and concentrates on how it affected us as users. The social consequences as a result of programs in discussion forums was particularly interesting and a useful insight when considering this concept. The discussion on avatars and our personalities online was useful for me when concluding the work.
Site 2: Markoff, J., (2008) The New York Times: Coming Soon, Nothing Between You and Your Machine (Late Edition) pg. BU.4
Retrieved 21 July 2008
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=5&did=1442570141&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1216788568&clientId=22212
An article that is splashed with referncess to Nintendo Wii, Apple and the iPhone as examples for the technological innovation in the forward thinking computer interface. Even so, an informative article that highlights the disappearance of 'tools' when using these new ways to directly manipulate the computer. A few good historical facts on personal computing and its growth helps to establish a grounded article. A glimpse of the future is given toward the end of the article with an insight into voice being used to navigate the computer of the future.
Site 3: Luff, P., Gilbert, N.G., Frohlich, D., (1990) Computers and Conversation. Acedemic Press.
Retrieved 9 July 2008
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=S_oR1mgkuQAC&printsec=frontcover
Site 4: Bugmann, G., ,Wolf J.C., Robinson, P,. The Industrial Robot. Bedford: 2005 Vol. 32, Iss. 6; pg. 499, 6 pgs
Retrieved 21 July 2008
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=17&did=953605551&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1216788867&clientId=22212
http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
