text:
Ethical Debates in Connected Culture 2019/Freedom of Information

Introduction
The concept of the freedom of information has become heavily debated following the takeoff of social media in the late 2000's. Content that we publish online in the public domain has become scrutinised by what we can use from sites like Facebook and Twitter, as well as the rules around what can be published and the nature of the content we present.

The laws surrounding the use of information have become outdated thanks to the speed and ease that people can share information or media content like pictures and videos online, and now that they have become so difficult to govern given the large audience in a connected world, it’s clear that there are faults around how our information is handled online. Ways in which we see information being used and handled fall foul of the various laws in place, but given how easy it is to break them, it’s hard to see how the issues we discuss are going to be resolved.

Our discussion will look at how free we are to use public information online for our own purposes, how we govern people who publish offensive content online, and the ways which the media have become intrusive with information deemed free to access online. We are also going to draw on various real life examples that relate to these issues and highlight the main debates that arose from the case studies referenced.

Peter Johan Lor (2007) consider the debate surrounding if we can have a knowledge society ever without the freedom to access information. He wrote:

“The question arises whether an information society and, more critically, a knowledge society can develop in the absence of freedom of access to information, freedom of expression and freedom to access the digital economy.”

Now, as we approach 2020, the question can be asked differently, and ask if we can have a digital society that shares knowledge and information with an ever growing audience despite the tough questions surrounding the freedom to information posted online. The volume of information on social networking sites is forever expanding, and controlling it is only going to throw so many challenges in the way based on the issues we discuss below.

Copyright
One of the major constrains of publishing information in a digital environment is that it becomes challenging to control the rights and ownership of any given information posted in a public domain. Social networking sites would be the biggest example of this, as it has become very easy to lift information from people's pages and then recycle it for another person's use or requirements.

It instantly becomes very difficult to govern who has illegally lifted content online because despite having such access to various types of information online, the number of people using said information for the wrong purposes is too big to police. There are over three billion people using social media actively (Investopedia, 2019), so regulating the matter of someone taking information they are not entitled to is far too loose for acts like copyright and freedom of information to be implemented correctly.

It is assumed that the person or organisation who has originally posted the content holds ownership to the information they have posted online, but most social media websites enable users to republish or share information with such ease and very quickly. That especially applies to user created content such as photos, audio files, and video files. Yet given how easily content like this is shared, it can very easily be made to look like it belongs to another user if someone was to take the information posted and use it maliciously.

The capacity for information to move quickly through various social channels bring the element of ownership into serious doubt as the information can pass through numerous outlets at a worrying pace. Charles Ess refers to this concept as "greased information" (Ess, 2014) and highlights the serious risk to privacy that comes attached with this matter. Given the speed at which information can travel, the ability for someone's information to be used multiple times by a separate person becomes a major risk, therefore when it comes to controlling the information you have published, it can be very hard to track where it has actually ended up.

Kardashian V Muñoz
One example of copyright issues causing a stir online is the fallout between Khloe Kardashian and photographer Manuel Muñoz. Khloe posted an image of herself and her sister Kourtney on her Instagram account. The incident was later taken to court in California by the photographer, and the photographer's agency sued the Khloe for using the photo without permission (Press Gazette, 2017).

This incident instantly throws up the question as to what is owned by who online, because by standard copyright law, the photo is rightfully under the ownership of Muñoz. However, given the freedom at which Kardashian had to share the photo on social media, and how she was able to access the picture and republish it at ease, it makes the copyright law very difficult to police with how large the audience is on social media.

If people are free to republish photographs online by retweeting or sharing images taken by photographers, the idea of taking photos without consent from online sources becomes increasing difficult to control, and given the high profile following the Kardashian’s have online, the number of people with the freedom to access the photo in question will be too difficult to prevent sharing the picture.

Lopez V Splash News
Another example came when Jennifer Lopez used a photograph on her social media from Splash News and Picture Agency. The picture was taken in November 2017 when Lopez and her fiancé Alex Rodriguez were snapped holding hands and having breakfast in New York (USA Today, 2019).

Splash sued for $150,000 in damages following the use of the picture on Lopez’s Instagram account, which currently has 102 million followers. Given that Lopez saw the picture was of herself and had been taken by paparazzi, she short sighted the copyright laws and used the picture for her own good, which given how often celebrities are snapped by press photographers, wasn’t a shock given how many have made the same mistake.

The defence of the press organisation revolved around the harm it would cause to further marketing of the images taken that day, and the case was settled in favour of Splash News. This, and the Kardashian case, highlight not only immediate adaptations to the copyright law to be made to include social networking usage, but it painted a worrying picture that showed how many celebrities could get caught in the same situation in future. Various forms of digital media are published online, and absentmindedly lifting content from other social media users and organisations is going to be a much more regular occurrence as the wealth of celebrity figures on social media continue to look for content that involves them.

What Defines Offensive Content?
Being offensive to individuals, groups, societies, regions and countries in any forms or ways(such as images, comments and videos) are all offensive content.

The extraordinary speaking opportunities are provided to a broadly-defined "speakers" by the Internet. Online users could express their opinions and make them available to worldwide audiences easier than before. (William, 2001) Although the Internet has given people the freedom to express different ideas and opinions, it has also posed ethical challenges in the digital media era. Offensive language has become a big problem threatening the health of the online community and individual users. For the online community, the spread of offensive language gradually destroys its reputation, dissuades users from participating, and even directly affects its development. For users, viewing offensive language can harm their mental health, especially for children and young adults. As Spinello points out, "the issue of free speech and content control in cyberspace has arguably become the most controversial moral issue of the emerging information age." There are mainly the following difficulties in controlling and regulating the distribution of offensive content:

1. There are too many platforms for online speech, and the amount of speech is too large. With the help of network communication, network speech is widely connected to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, SNSs and other platforms, connecting all corners of the world.

2. Offensive content on the Internet covers a wide range of topics, including sexism, racial discrimination, hate speech and pornographic information etc. Some information even exerts subliminal influence on users through disguise. The development of online platforms makes it difficult to distinguish the true from the false. Whether such information involves infringement requires someone with expertise to identify, and regulators sometimes cannot manage and restrain such a large group of Internet users.

3. It is challenging to obtain illegal evidence of offensive content, while the network is a virtual space, and it is difficult to obtain sufficient evidence because the evidence may be destroyed in a flash.

Elon Musk Twitter Fallout

The chief executive of Tesla, Elon Musk, is set to go on trial in December 2019 after mocking British diver Vernon Unsworth by calling him a paedophile in a Twitter post on his personal account last July. He also dismissed the tech multibillionaire’s act for rescuing the football players as a "PR stunt" in an interview with CNN. Then the submarine built for a rescue mission was derided by Unsworth. Musk lashed out at Unsworth via his 22.5 million followers Twitter account just because of these comments (The Guardian, 2019).

A federal court judge in Los Angeles set an Oct. 22 trial date, that rejected the Tesla chief executive's attempts to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Unsworth. Musk claimed his insult was not protected by law, but the judge in charge of the case disagreed. Los Angeles district judge Stephen Wilson said the jury would decide whether Musk's allegations against the diver in 2018 constituted defamation. Wilson ruled that the case must be heard in December.

The comments came as a shock to many on social media given the heroic efforts Unsworth and his team went to to save the football team from the cave after they became trapped when heavy rainfall flooded the entrance to the cave and trapped the youngsters. However, given the way social networking sites like Twitter allow you to share whatever messages you like, Musk was in far too easy a position to defame Unsworth. That's where we look to organisations like Twitter to police this behaviour, and control comments like the one made by Musk, but given the size of the population using Twitter, that becomes near mission impossible to control comments from every single user online, and the freedom to post whatever information you choose, falls quickly out of Twitter's hands.

Katie Hopkins "Final Solution" Backlash
Another example of information online causing harm and offence came in 2017 when British radio host Katie Hopkins caused upset on Twitter in the wake of the Manchester bombings (The Guardian, 2017). 22 people were killed when a terrorist detonated a bomb following an Ariana Grande concert at the Manchester arena. Hopkins, who at the time hosted a show on LBC Radio channel, tweeted:

"22 dead – number rising. Schofield. Don’t you even dare. Do not be a part of the problem. We need a final solution Machester [sic].”

She later cited the tweet to be a typo after sparking outrage by referring to the final solution, a term used by Nazis during the mass killings of millions of Jewish citizens during the second World War. LBC Radio immediately sacked Hopkins, and a complaint was made to Metropolitan Police over the incident.

Much like the Elon Musk example, Hopkins was free to post the tweet online in the wake of the attack in Manchester, and will have considered the tweet to be a matter of free speech or opinion. Yet given the huge backlash that followed the tweet, this again is where the problems lie around the debate of what can and can't be said online. The raw emotions felt by people distressed by the events in Manchester will have been hit by Hopkins' remarks, and her comments will have caused greater upset given how soon her comment was made online.

The majority of the population in the UK who used social media that night to stay connected to events in Manchester and keep up to date with everything in the aftermath of the attack will have been able to see the comment, and this shows the speed at which a large audience can be harmed by an offensive comment by a high profile figure online during a sensitive time. Again the argument around policing Twitter and other social networking sites comes into play, but this time, the big argument is whether social media platforms should do more to repeat reoffending by people who have caused harm online.

Hopkins still has her social media account to this day despite her offensive tweet being pushed as a complaint to the police. Do we have to bring in stricter laws against people who have used the freedom of speech and free will to publish information of their choosing that has caused harm, or can people get away with posting offensive content into a public domain? Regardless of the incident, Hopkins still has 1.1 million followers on Twitter, and that audience are easily susceptible to her often offensive and harmful tweets, so social media platforms need to consider taking stronger actions against people who have posted harmful content online.

What Is Media Intrusion?
We live in a time of great technological advancements and ubiquitous and pervasive media. The boundaries between reality and virtuality have become blurred and the media can intrude on people's lives inadvertently. Media is intrusive and this character can be felt in various fields such as politics, private lives and the government. In politics area，the power of the media has become irresistible and the result has been a media takeover (and distortion) of the democratic process. There is also the phenomenon of media invasion in people's lives; for example, the media will record the portraits of the individuals in the images without the permission of the individuals when interviewing an event. When the press invades people's lives, you don't know how your information will be used.

Examples Of Media Intrusion
Example 1: Natural disasters, social issues and celebrities’ tidbits will easily attract the attention of the media. Media reports sometimes will influence people's lives in order to obtain first-hand information and will alter our behaviour when looking to uncover more details on certain stories.

Take one media intrusion issue in China for example: In 2015, Yao Beina, a well-known Chinese female singer, died of cancer. On the evening of January 16, a journalist from Shenzhen Evening News disguised as a doctor's assistant entered the morgue to take photos of Yao Beina's body. The issue was met with online protests and backlash from thousands, and in the early hours of January 18, 2015, Shenzhen Evening News issued an apology for the incident.

Media law varies in several countries, and in the UK, the publication of pictures of a deceased body would receive severe punishment, but the human reaction to seeing such graphic content online will be worse and if not spark other separate reasons for fallout, such as harm and offence.

Example 2:

The TV is the second most popular source of political news (Herzenberg, Aling’o & Gatimu, 2015). Many people prefer to watch TV at home rather than engage in political activities. Therefore, it soon become a medium for politicians to bombard the viewers with political purposes and project themselves as the best leaders. Some media platforms become powerful electoral actors (Herzenberg, Aling’o & Gatimu, 2015).

The 2016 us presidential election ended with a victory for Mr Trump, who had little experience in politics, over Mrs Clinton, a veteran politician. Behind the big reversal, the important role of social media should not be underestimated. Trump is a standard American "web celebrity". His popularity on social media has reportedly soared since his candidacy began 2015 June, with 10.3 million twitter followers and 9.9 million Facebook followers. By comparison, Clinton has 7.78 million twitter followers and 4.8 million Facebook followers. Using social media platforms, Mr Trump has made a successful political marketing pitch. Mr Trump is not the first person to use social media to win an election. As early as the 1990s, network media, as a new form of media, has entered the stage of history and intervened in political communication.

In 1996, republican candidate Buchanan used his personal website to run for the first time. Some media once commented that "The key factor in determining the outcome of the presidential election is not who understands politics better, but who knows the Internet better." In the 2008 US presidential election, the influence of social media began to emerge. Obama took the lead in using social media such as Twitter and Facebook and succeeded in the ranks, thus achieving the reputation of "Internet President". In 2012, Obama spent more on social media than he did in 2008, 10 times more than his rival Mitt Romney, with more than 21 million twitter followers and nearly 32 million Facebook followers, far more than Romney. He also employs a team of more than 100 people to run his social media accounts. He also employs a team of more than 100 people dedicated to operating his social media account. Since then, social media has been regarded as a disruptive medium in political communication, which will bring about a revolution in political communication.

Concluding Remarks
With the rapid development of network information communication technology, the emerging media represented by the internet rose to prominence in the field of public communication, revolutionized the way of human information transmission, and achieved unprecedented development in human information freedom. The network information transmission which based on the internet, maintains the citizen's freedom of speech, freedom of expression, the right to know and to supervise the implementation to a maximum extent, but at the same time, network information anonymity, the spread of disorder and arbitrary characteristics also provides the possibility of abusing in terms of freedom of expression, freedom of speech and contributes strong impact on the public interests, national interests and private interests.

It leads to diverse interests damage problems become increasingly vital. While fully enjoying the freedom of information on the internet, the users should also fulfil their obligations to maintain the order of the internet and the security of national information and public order. The internet has provided an unprecedented platform for diversity of speech and the free flow of information, and the freedom of information provided by the internet is not absolutely free.

Change can be expected given the issues the freedom of information online has posed, and given these matters are still technically in their infancy with how new these challenges from online networks are, it may be a while before real change is implemented. But the debate over who's freely entitled to what information and what they can share in the public domain will be sure to rage on for years to come.


text:
Ethical Debates in Connected Culture 2019/Offence and Antisocial Communications

Introduction
The 21st century is called “the Information Era” and the mass of network information has provided a lot of convenience for the majority of Internet users. However, it is undeniable that netizens are not only enjoying the convenience of network information but also suffering from the distress caused by bad network information. As Manuel Castells stated in the book Mobile Communication and Society, the rapid development of network information technology not only brings convenience to Internet users, but also has hidden dangers. All kinds of network crimes damage the rights and interests of Internet users such as personal life and property. For example, in recent decades, social media has become an important carrier of youth violence and has greatly changed the pattern of violence. Cyber crime has caused great damage to Internet users in terms of property, privacy and spirit. Effective governance of cyber crime is urgent. To improve the governance mechanism of network illegal behavior, firstly, it is necessary to discuss the definition of network crime, the causes of network crime, the characteristics of network crime and the types of network crime. And then try to put forward effective measures to control network crime, so as to create a safe and convenient network communication environment. Damaging network communication behavior can be roughly divided into the following three parts, their damages increases from top to bottom are: 1.Dissemination of cyber violence and discriminatory information 2.Antisocial games on social media 3.Terrorist Propaganda on Social Media In the next part, we will try to explore the different negative effects of immoral and illegal information on individuals and the society, and try to analyze its characteristics and causes, so as to put forward feasible suggestions to reduce the harm caused by malignant network information.

Definition and overview
Cyber violence is a form of violence with extensive harm and bad influence. It is a kind of behavior phenomenon of publishing harmful, insulting and inflammatory words, words, pictures and videos on the Internet, that is, using words, words, pictures and videos to attack others on the Internet, which is commonly called "network violence". Internet violence can cause reputation damage to the parties, and it has broken the moral bottom line, often accompanied by infringement and illegal criminal behavior, it is urgent to use education, moral constraints, legal means to regulate. Internet violence is the violent behavior of netizens on the Internet and the extension of social violence on the Internet. It is different from the physical violence in real life, but with the help of the virtual space of the network with language to hurt and slander people. These vicious remarks, pictures and videos are often published by netizens of a certain scale, because some of the comments posted on the Internet violate human public morality and traditional values and touch the bottom line of human morality. These languages have evil, words, pictures, video, vitriolic, and other basic characteristics of cruel, are beyond the scope for normal comment on these events, the party in the event not only for personal attacks, malicious slander, more will this damage behavior from the virtual network to the real society, the event is to carry on the "human flesh search", will be the true identity, name, photo, details such as personal privacy. These comments and practices not only seriously affected the mental state of the parties, but also disrupted their work, study and life order, and even caused serious consequences.

Classification of cyber violence
Cyber violence is mainly manifested in the following three forms: 1.Netizens publish false and harmful, insulting and inflammatory remarks on the Internet about unverified or verified Internet incidents, thus causing damage to the reputation of the parties concerned. Even more serious, to the parties and their friends and relatives of the normal life of action and speech intrusion, resulting in the loss of their personal rights. Internet violence about irrational human flesh search is everywhere, and the movie “Caught in the Web” well reflects this problem. The movie is about the cyber violence caused by the “give up your seat” incident on the bus. The heroine in the movie was so devastated by her sudden diagnosis of cancer, and then on the way to her home she forgot to offer her seat to an old man on the bus, it was filmed video on the network, resulting in group decision, on the network attack by means of written words, images, human flesh search engine and network violence will eventually tying into early death. In many cases, netizens habitually take sides with those who think they are just and judge others with moral force. However, they do not know that in this process, they act as executioners, but fail to make their own judgment to distinguish the truth. However, the way to trigger Internet violence through human flesh search and ultimately hurt the parties is very inadequate, and no one has the right to use moral power to judge others. 2.Disclose the personal privacy of the parties in real life on the Internet and violate their privacy. An earlier example was a 22-year-old South Korean schoolgirl whose face had been altered when photos of her appeared on a photo-sharing website in 2006. After seeing the photos, her friends called her repeatedly to confirm the situation. There are many privacy issues on the Internet, which can cause serious harm to the victims. 3.Network prejudice mainly focuses on racial discrimination and prejudice. Researchers believe that online racial discrimination includes the phenomenon of derogating or excluding an individual due to racial issues expressed by symbols, sounds, images, texts and geographical representations. Online racial discrimination can occur in social networking sites, chat rooms, BBS, web pages, text messages, online songs, online videos and online games. One experiment, for example, showed white college students black, white and robot avatars on a computer and asked them to choose which one they liked. The results showed that the majority of white college students chose white avatars, and they preferred to use white avatars as their online gaming partners and virtual coaches. In particular, white students with high racial prejudice had a significantly higher preference for robots than black students. This study shows that cyberspace has become another place for racial discrimination. Another study on online racial discrimination showed that the depression and anxiety of individuals subject to online racial discrimination would increase significantly, and the harm to women would be especially serious.

Causes of Formation
There are many root causes of Internet violence, one is the anonymity of Internet users, so there is a lack of legal system and moral constraints on the Internet; the other is the low quality of some Internet users; the third is the lag of the rule of law and spiritual civilization construction in the society itself. The virtuality of the network enables participants to conceal or fabricate their identities, which makes the norms and constraints that should be observed in real life lose their due binding force. This is undoubtedly a paradise of freedom for some netizens who are not impulsive and indulgent.

Prevention and control measures Prevention and control measures
Network is a virtual world, but also a parallel with the real world, integration of the real world;With the openness, interactivity and anonymity of the Internet, it is easy for some netizens’ irresponsible words and deeds to turn into cyber violence, which infringes on the privacy rights and other legitimate rights of the parties concerned and causes great mental and psychological harm to them. Therefore, the whole society must attach great importance to it. Experts believe that prevention and control network violence must be combined, comprehensive prevention and control. Through effective publicity and education, it is necessary to improve the moral self-discipline consciousness of Internet users, especially the majority of young people, enhance their ability of discrimination, choice and immunity to vulgar culture, cultivate a healthy mentality and sound personality, and advocate civilized and responsible network behavior in the whole society. Relevant functional departments should speed up the legislative research on the protection of personal information, introduce relevant regulations and systems as soon as possible, intensify the punishment according to law, regulate people's network behavior through legal means, and purify the network environment.

Definition of antisocial games
If we define antisocial games on social networks as cyber violence or obscene games, then we ignore its harm, because the two are entirely different. We tend to overestimate the harm of cyber violence games. It is difficult to define whether violent online games are harmful. Some scholars have stated that video games involving negative content such as violence, gore, and obscenity have no direct correlation with juvenile delinquency. Patrick and other statistics from 2007 to 2011 The relationship between game sales and crime rate, it is found that when the game sales increase, the number of violent cases during the same period has also decreased significantly. This phenomenon is particularly apparent when well-known obscene and violent games such as "Grand Theft Auto" are released. Compared to the harm of online games Difficult to define, antisocial games mean complete crimes. Antisocial games that rely on social network transmission exist in the form of organizations. All players are members of the organization. It controls players with thought control or threats of violence. So once players enter the game, it is difficult for them to get out. At present, no scholars define antisocial games In a way, antisocial games are a cult that controls people's minds. They rely on social media to continually develop new players. The setter of the game plays the role of God. Other participants were both criminals and victims. We can understand its dangers and characteristics from a typical case.

what is the blue whale game
"Blue Whale", also known as "Blue Whale Death Game", "Blue Whale Challenge", and "Wake Me Up at 4:20", is a social network game originating in Russia and has now spread to many countries. The reason why the blue whale game is named "Blue Whale" may be related to the behaviour of the blue whale stranding suicide. Like many ordinary games, players of the blue whale game need to upgrade by completing various tasks until the game is completed. The difference is that the “Final Victory ” of the blue whale game means the end of the player's life. The game administrator declared that "the best things in life start with the Russian letter 'С'，-семья ́ (family), суббо ́ а (Saturday), секс (sex), and самоуби ́йство (suicide)" and they tried to manipulate the players undefined minds, which is similar to the brainwashing of some cults."Blue Whale" game participants are usually required to post blue whale patterns on their social network platforms, or even Use a sharp weapon to draw a blue whale pattern on the body. Participants are required to provide picture or video evidence each time they complete the task. After 50 days, in order to prove "win the game", participants will be asked to commit suicide Russian police are investigating the relevance of the "Blue Whale" game to 130 suicide teenagers who occurred in Russia between November 2015 and April 2016, all of the members of the same Internet community. On May 10, 2017, Philip Budeikin, the founder of Blue Whale Death Game, was accused of instigating at least 16 girls to participate in his blue whale suicide social media game. He told investigators that they were all "happy to die", although the founder already arrested, this "death game" has not been terminated as a result. Because of its nature of spreading through the Internet, this "game" has spread from Russia to other countries, and related suicide cases have appeared The United Kingdom, Argentina, Mexico and other countries have issued relevant warnings, calling on parents to pay attention to their children's online behavior. One information shows that more than 200,000 people in Russia have participated in the "Blue Whale" game, and this game continues to expand to the world.

The “tricks” of the blue whale
Blue whale games are typical of anti-social games, and there are many ways to expand and control members. 1spread using social media Instigating suicide is not a new thing, the most traditional instigating suicide is only through face-to-face communication between two people, and the spread is minimal. The prosperity of paper media such as newspapers and books provide a new carrier for instigating suicide. In 1993, the book Complete Suicide Manual written by Wataru Tsurumi was released in Japan, and 500,000 copies were issued in just one year. However, The Internet makes the development of abetting suicide more rampant, and the timeliness of the network has dramatically enhanced the spread of the blue whale game. Social media crime is not the same as cybercrime. The former is more interactive and secretive. It is easier for managers to control new players. At the same time, social media is highly private, which involves the private sector. It is difficult for the government to monitor it, which gives the space for "blue whale" action. 2 absolute control of the player The first is information control. The most common method is to block the player's information exchange. The Manager controls the player's time and environment, so that members do not have enough opportunities to access other information. For example, players are required to get up at 4:20 and do the task, such as watching horror movies all day, or not communicating with the outside world. So that participants are exposed to harmful or death information every day. The second is behaviour control. The standard method is “Deindividuated”. Why some kind people on the battlefield become the villains who make the Holocaust? Why can an ordinary person become fearless and take Suicide attacks? This is often because they have lost their "individuality" in long-term brainwashing, treating themselves thoroughly as a role in the collective, and only doing this role "should do". Participants have more than once The ground was ordered to carve "blue whale" totems around his body by means of self-harm; at the same time, this totem appeared as an organizational mark in every scene of the game, which reminded the game participants "You are People in this collective role "," You are not yourself but a role ". Finally, it is personality destruction. A standard method is "Learned Helplessness" to destroy the individual's entire self-confidence system. "Learned Helplessness" refers to the act of being at the mercy of repeated failures or punishments. This theory dates back to 1967. American psychologist Seligman proposed it through animal experiments. He locked the dog in the cage, and as soon as the dog touched the cage door, he gave the dog an unbearable electric shock. After many experiments, even if he opened the cage, the dog will no longer run away, but will only curl up in a cage. Just like the desperate dog in the experiment, once the player realizes that no matter how hard he tries, he cannot change the inevitable result, he will give up all effort and showing negative emotions such as helplessness, hopelessness, and depression. Organizers raise questions from time to time to make participants doubt and deny life; crackdown on participants' self-esteem (including abuse); use naked photos to threaten participants do not quit. Participants end up in extreme depression and even suicide.

Characteristics of antisocial games
From the typical case of Blue Whale, we can summarize the characteristics of antisocial games on social media.

strong diffusivity
In 1967, Stanley Milgram wanted to depict an interpersonal network linking people and communities. After an experiment, they found a "six-degree separation" phenomenon. In other words， "No more than six people will be separated from any stranger, that is, you can know any stranger through a maximum of six people. which also means that on social media, we have a high probability of being exposed to antisocial organiser. Antisocial games are not far away from us, and the development of social media gives us more access to anti-social games.

inflammatory
There have been beautification trends of dark things on the Internet, such as the beautification of depression, self-harm, and anorexia, which have attracted young people to follow suit. In 2012, the Atlantic Magazine of the United States proposed "beautify pain" in the online community. It is believed that social platforms represented by Tumblr are portraying suicide, depression, eating disorders, and self-abandonment as beautiful, romantic, profound, and dark. Just as the blue whale game instigates suicide by beautifying pain and sacred death. Social games confuse players by shaping a pathological value and enhancing the rules of the game.

strong hidden
Strong hidden is a common feature of all cybercrimes. We can identify illegal activities in real life, but virtual communities blur the boundaries of crime. The internet is a virtual space, and the Game creators and managers often use false identities. Due to the anonymity and virtual nature of the network, it is difficult to find offenders. Due to the anonymity and virtual nature of the network, it is difficult to find offenders for us.

Overview
Cybercrime refers to crimes committed using computers and networks. It is also defined as "crimes committed against individuals or groups with criminal motives, using modern telecommunication networks such as the Internet and mobile phones, directly or indirectly damaging the reputation of the victim or causing physical or mental injury or loss." With the rapid development of the Internet, the problem of cybercrime is increasingly rampant. Traditional areas of Internet crime include: hacking, copyright infringement, illegal surveillance, sexual assault, child pornography, etc. In 2014, a McAfee report estimated the annual cost to the global economy at about $445 billion. In 2018, A study by the Centre for strategic and international studies (CSIS) and McAfee concluded that nearly $600bn (almost 1 per cent of global GDP) was lost to cybercrime each year.

In recent years, the concealment and immediacy of the Internet make it an advantageous tool for criminal organizations and terrorist organizations. As described in a McAfee report (2018), cybercrime is relentless. Given its low cost and high return, it seems unlikely to stop. .This chapter will explore two typical Internet crimes that have received close attention in recent years: Black market on dark Web and Cyberterrorism. Through the analysis of these two types of criminal activities, this chapter will explore the characteristics of Internet crime, harm and countermeasures of various countries.

Criminal Activities on the Dark Web
The Internet is seen as an ideal way to spread information and propaganda. However, its open nature also provides a fast, cheap and anonymous way for criminal organizations and extremist groups to communicate. The dark web is a classic example of Internet abuse.

What is the dark web?
Contrary to imagination of public, the dark web is a very small but inaccessible part of our internet. The Internet has connected a large number of computers, servers and other devices, and it has realized the cyberspace we use. However, this cyberspace is actually divided into two parts: surface web that can be accessed or searched and deep web that are difficult to access. The former is the Internet that the public is familiar with and can be accessed through search engines such as Google and Yahoo. The latter is a hidden network space for most network users, which is difficult for ordinary users to access. Deep web are considered to occupy most of the Internet space. It is estimated that deep networks are about 4,000 to 5,000 times larger than surface web. Most deep cyberspace has legitimate uses. In fact, individuals often visit deep networks, such as social network accounts, network disks, and timely communication data. The dark web discussed in this section is defined as a small part of the space that is difficult to access in deep networks. It is estimated that it accounts for less than 0.01% of websites on the Internet: there are approximately 45,000 dark websites and hundreds of millions of ordinary websites. The only way to access the dark web is to use a special browser, such as an onion router, which usually also requires a password. The dark web is usually anonymous, which makes it easy to become a safe haven for cybercriminals. Due to access difficulties, it remains largely unregulated by the government.Well-known networks on dark web include Freenet, Tor, and I2P.

Child abuse information
Child abuse and child pornography are the largest part of dark web traffic. In a study by the University of Portsmouth, researchers observed that more than 80% of Tor's traffic requests to hidden sites were directed at known child abuse sites.

Illegal trading
The drug trade is also an integral part of the black web market. The Silk Road is one of the largest and most notorious dark web markets. The site is suspected of drug trading, forged documents, hacking, stolen goods and money laundering services. American Ross William Ulbricht developed and launched the site in 2011. When the FBI shut down the site in October 2013 and arrested Ubudricht, the Silk Road has already generated more than $ 200 million in sales and Ubudricht received a commission of $ 18 million. The black market on the Silk Road is largely similar to the traditional black market. Like the traditional black market, the site is not subject to economic regulation by the state government, nor is it regulated by the state government's formal legal mechanism for interference in the transaction relationship, the federal government.

Terrorist activities
As the jihadist movement expands globally, the use of the Internet by Islamic extremists and jihadist groups has increased. Some reports claim that thousands of jihadist sites support the ummah of these organizations and distribute recruitment videos, strategy papers, presentations, and combat computer games. Extremists watch, share, and transmit violent terrorist videos through the dark web. Chen(2011) collected the entire contents of about 300 terrorist forums (author, title, post, post, time tag, etc.) through the dark web. Researcher also perform regular updates. Some large radical websites have more than 30,000 members and publish nearly 1 million messages.This Studies have proved that the dark web has a huge role in spreading terrorist videos.

Conclusion
Although the original intention of the construction of the dark web was not a criminal act. For example, the original purpose of the Tor network was to pass information to the US Navy. In fact, most of the traffic on the dark web was illegal.Government departments need to pay attention to dark web crimes. The legal framework is essential to support criminal investigations. In dealing with cases of child abuse websites on the dark web, current U.S. law does not seem to keep up with technological developments. The disposal of the "Silk Road" is an example of a less successful US government strategy. Despite the arrest of operator Ross Ulbricht, there has been an explosion of illegal goods on the black market since the FBI closed the Silk Road in October 2013. Multiple black market websites continue to appear, and try to further expand the size of the black market. The judiciary needs to seek further strategies to strengthen the handling of illegal websites.

Terrorist Propaganda on Social Media
Since 2014, Social media has proven to be an extremely useful propaganda tool for terrorist organizations and is well-suited to the audiences it intends to target. Globalized social media, such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, allow ISIS's promotions to reach the world in real time and target those who are potential supporters.ISIS successfully used these platforms to attract a large number of extremists and their families to participate in terrorist activities. This section will explore terrorist organizations' promotion strategies on social media and possible response policies

Seduction strategies for women
ISIS recruitment of women is considered successful. They recruited female staff and advised female supporters, including information on how to move to the Islamic State and launch terrorist attacks. Erin Marie Saltman, a Senior Counter Extremism Researcher for the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), confirms that the islamic state policy has been quite successful because it creates a level of comfort in talking to another woman.Talking to women can ease people's tension. The details of the case of three schoolgirls in London illustrate the power of social media to induce vulnerable young people to join ISIS.In February of 2014, Amira Abase, just 15 years old, and her friends, Kadiza Sultana, 16, and Shamima Begum, 15, took a bus to Gatwick Airport and boarded a flight to Istanbul.From there they took a bus to Turkey's border with Syria where they were met by ISIS operatives who took the girls by car into Syria.Investigators believe that Shamima, one of the three London schoolgirls, connected online via Twitter with Aqsa Mahmood.In November 2013, Aqsa Mahmood left her own moderate Muslim family and their affluent home in Glasgow, Scotland, and made her way to Syria.She was 19 years old at the time.Mahmood's family believes that Asqa was also likely radicalized online, making contacts online with others who persuaded her to join the extremists in Syria.

Seduction strategies for adolescent
Recruitment policies for young people by extremist organizations are similar to those for women. ISIS is good at using social media to meet Muslim youth in Western societies, and most of them have been discriminated against.Considering that Muslim parents have limited knowledge of social media, they generally cannot interfere with their children's behavior on social media, which opens the door to Islamic State's confusion.

Participatory interaction on social media
ISIS publishes images and videos about terrorist activities and beautifying its domination through social networking sites to attract more people to join them.But that's not all. Research reveals that Islamic State has adopted participatory propaganda on social media.The Arabic program 'The Dawn of Glad Tidings' (or simply 'Dawn') developed by the organization on Twitter allowed thousands of activists to repeatedly tweet tags. This directly leads users to see the information of terrorist organizations in the first time when searching for keywords that may be related to the organization Even, Islamic State supporters launched a Twitter tag # the-FridoyofSupportingsis written in Arabic, asking supporters around the world to wave flags of terrorist organizations in public, shoot movies themselves, and upload clips on social media, This tag attracted more than 20,000 mentions on Twitter

Preventive solution
Blocking the accounts of terrorists on social media is doomed.Once an account is closed, another account will appear. In addition, the closure of social media accounts is also suspected of banning free speech.Blaker argue that a better option is to track accounts of terrorist groups and their members with social media platforms and ISIS, and identify groups of potential supporters that ISIS is trying to reach.Only through social networks to find out the real reason why Western Muslim groups are attracted by terrorist organizations, can we completely eliminate the foundation of terrorist organizations' publicity on social media.

Concluding Remarks
This section discusses behaviors of offence and antisocial communications that exist in social media and other Internet communities. This article introduces for the first time the definition and status of cybercrime and antisocial social activities. Then this article discusses three different levels of cyber-hazardous activities according to their severity. Cyber violence and discriminatory speech belong to the first level of activity. Studies show that discriminatory behavior and cyber violence are widespread in our online community. Although this level of cyber antisocial behavior remains verbal, its behavior has violated legal and moral regulations.The second level of activity mainly refers to anti-social games on social media. Such activities are often manifested by adults' deliberate misleading and mental control of underage minors, ultimately enticing them to harm themselves. Such incidents should alert the community to the online social security issues of adolescents. Finally, this article explores serious crimes on the Internet. The third section selects the illegal trading on the dark web and terrorist propaganda as cases, discusses the harmfulness of Internet crimes, and discusses possible countermeasures. We hope that through the discussion in this chapter, we will explain our analysis process and perspectives on Internet offence and anti-social communication and explore possible responses.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Talk:Ethical Debates in Connected Culture 2019/Offence and Antisocial Communications

Welcome to your essay discussion page. Please log all discussion for the essay here, as instructed in the workshops and assessment briefs.
 * GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

=Essay Discussion= Hi guys! We can use this section to post any literature related to our project. I think our project involving this theme:   crime and illegal activity on Internet. We can approach this topic from these following examples: 1.Black market on Internet, like Silk Road on dark web 2.Internet fraud, like pyramid selling on Internet 3.Terrorist propaganda on social media Find the relevant literature about these topics and we might find something useful. Knowers (discuss • contribs) 16:00, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

I think Chen xi's division is very clear.We can each be responsible for a part and look for some examples.--MingchenTeng (discuss • contribs) 21:11, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Is this article useful for our topic? It is a survey about the link between media use and crime.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08838150701308143 --MingchenTeng (discuss • contribs) 00:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. It involves traditional media (Television). This topic talks about offence and anti-behaviour on Internet, especially on social media and online communities.Knowers (discuss • contribs) 10:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Well done, friends. but I think offence and antisocial communications not only involves the crimes you said, but also some antisocial psychological control. For example, the blue whale."Blue Whale", also known as the "Blue Whale Challenge", is a social network phenomenon dating from 2016 that is claimed to exist in several countries. I think this is a typical case of anti-society communications. It's an anti-social organization that spreads and expands through social media. Maybe, we should find more ideas about our topic.--Zhang xinli2012 (discuss • contribs) 10:51, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

hay guys - some really useful work in here so far. You outline some very interesting and original topic areas to discuss in relation to the chapter topic "offence and antisocial communications". I would counsel that you do take care in your research here as some of the topics you suggest are sensitive topics. But the main focus for research is secondary, desk-based research for the purposes of this essay, so it shouldn't be too much of a problem. There's some interesting points made in the above paragraph on "blue whale". I'm not familiar with this, but it seems to relate to nudging and manipulation online (if I'm reading things correctly)? which would be a really productive take on this topic.

I would absolutely advise that you get writing on the main essay page asap - the more time you give over to the drafting process, the more you will be able to spread the workload and ease the burden of trying to complete work at the last minute. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 14:34, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion and we think these suggestions are very useful. We will start writing the essay right away. Ok, according to everyone‘s hobbies, we are now beginning to divide the work. part1, Emily, Dissemination of discriminatory information. part2, Lily, anti-social games on social media. part3, Steve, Dissemination of cybercrime. Zhang xinli2012 (discuss • contribs)

hey again! I just found a couple of really useful sources in the university's online library resources relating to your topic: Lewis Levenberg, Tai Neilson, and David Rheams book Research Methods for the Digital Humanities has a chapter on how researchers might approach aspects of Dark Web for research (Gehl, "Archives for the Dark Web: A Field Guide for Study") - not that you need to conduct primary research here, but it will give you a sense of some of the stuctural aspects of dark web that you might be able to discuss. The other thing is Chen's collection Dark Web Exploring and Data Mining the Dark Side of the Web which is also available in the library online catalogue and has a number of case studies that relate quite closely to the areas you discuss. Hope these are useful! GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:16, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your recommendation! These literatures are very useful for our project.Knowers (discuss • contribs) 19:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

For the case study of your part, I found two interested articles: https://npf.mlpol.net/mlpol/archive/src/1518807632316-0.pdf https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM17/paper/view/15670/14790 I think these articles will provide clear definition and theoretical framework about hate speech for you. Knowers (discuss • contribs) 19:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I would list the references and prepare for the outline now.--MingchenTeng (discuss • contribs) 23:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys! Pay attention to typesetting. I think my writing part should follow yours.Knowers (discuss • contribs) 16:26, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Okay, and I made a section for us to post suggested reference for our essay, which in the bottom row. It's not easy to finish a a page on Wikibook, thanks to our cooperation to reduce stress.:)--MingchenTeng (discuss • contribs) 16:47, 28 November 2019 (UTC) @GregXenon01:Thank you for your suggestion and we think these suggestions are very useful. We will start writing the essay right away.   Hi guys! We can use this section to post any literature related to our project  I have submitted the content of "Anti-Social Games on Social Media" for your reference. Zhang xinli2012 (discuss • contribs) Please pay attention to the submission format of the references. Please fill in the reference  in the text area instead of  in the reference area. Zhang xinli2012 (discuss • contribs) Thank goodness, I finished it! Now I'm writing the Wiki Exercise #4: Collaborative Essay Critical Evaluation-the last assignment.--MingchenTeng (discuss • contribs) 04:08, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Suggested Literature
1.Tynes, Brendesha M. Umaña-Taylor, Adriana J. Rose, Chad A. Lin, Johnny Anderson, Carolyn J.(2012). Online racial discrimination and the protective function of ethnic identity and self-esteem for African American adolescents, Developmental Psychology. 2.Daniels, Jessie. "Race and racism in Internet studies: A review and critique." New Media & Society 15, no. 5 (2013): 695-719. 3.Halder, D., Jaishankar, K., & Jaishankar, K. (2012). Cyber crime and the victimization of women: laws, rights and regulations. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. 4.Gehl, R. W. (2018). Archives for the Dark Web: A Field Guide for Study. In Research Methods for the Digital Humanities (pp. 31-51). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 5.Chen, H. (2011). Dark web: Exploring and data mining the dark side of the web (Vol. 30). Springer Science & Business Media. 6.Alfifi, M., Kaghazgaran, P., Caverlee, J., & Morstatter, F. (2018). Measuring the Impact of ISIS Social Media Strategy. 7.Blaker, L. (2015). The Islamic State’s use of online social media. Military Cyber Affairs, 1(1), 4. 8.Farwell, J. P. (2014). The media strategy of ISIS. Survival, 56(6), 49-55. 9.Peresin, A., & Cervone, A. (2015). The Western muhajirat of ISIS. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 38(7), 495-509.

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: COLLABORATIVE ESSAY
br> Grade Description for Collaborative Essay:

Collaborative Essays of this standard roughly correspond to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:

 * Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory standard work may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. It may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. It may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. Attainment of most of the intended learning outcomes in evidence, some more securely grasped than others, resting on a circumscribed range of evidence and displaying a variable depth of understanding. The wiki markup formatting will need some work.

General: In addition to the common marking scheme, there are three broad criteria widely employed in the Division, which are used to help assessors evaluate your work in a more general sense:

Quality of research: is there evidence of critical engagement with set materials?; is there evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Originality of thought: Is argument well-articulated and well-supported?; is there evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position)?; is there evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections)?; is there evidence of independent critical ability? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Satisfactory

Clarity of expression: academic writing style and structure, and organisational skills For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Poor

Specific Feedback:

 * You have submitted a fairly well thought out response to the brief. Here you outline a number of arguments that specifically address the theme of antisocial behaviour related to gaming culture, and also to the unregulated Web. Your discussion of the research evidences a familiarity with a range of scholarship on your chosen topics. The examples that you have chosen to discuss your theme are fairly well-chosen although the overall effect is rather disjointed at times, and this is due to the fact that on occasion you do not make explicit connections between the different sections as the argument builds. In addition, the standard of writing is variable and needs a lot of work.

 * The essay is written in a fairly disjointed style as noted above, but your argument does make a lot of sense once the reader gets past the problems with grammar and syntax etc. Most of the essay is critically engaged, and you have demonstrated some awareness of the contradictions inherent in the theme itself. So, overall, some room for improvement here, particularly in terms of effectiveness of communication, but there is some good material in there that, although needing a little further development in places, evidences potential.

'''N.B.: Feedback for your individual Essay Discussion Page contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. That individual feedback should be considered in relation to the feedback here, because of the fundamentally connected nature of the two tasks. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.'''

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Ethical Debates in Connected Culture 2019/Privacy 1: The Private Sphere

Welcome to your essay discussion page. Please log all discussion for the essay here, as instructed in the workshops and assessment briefs.
 * GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Essay Discussion
Hi guys, we could use this section to post any interesting literature we come across related to our topic. I found two brief articles explaining where the concept of 'private sphere' came from:

https://inpropriapersona.com/articles/jurgen-habermas-on-the-public-and-private-spheres/

https://www.thoughtco.com/private-and-public-spheres-3026464

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 19:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Nicola, for the articles, we will definitely use them. I think another excellent literature for our topic is "Papacharissi, Z. (2010) ‘A Private Sphere’ in A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age pp. 131-167" from our week one reading. There is one chapter only dedicated to Private Sphere.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Agreed! Thank you for that reference it's a really good one. Following our discussion today I'll be posting the content sections we'll each be focusing on for the final essay very soon. We can then start posting any literature/drafted content to get going :)

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 19:15, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi girls, any new from the professor? Did he approve our topic? Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Not yet, but I would suggest we start researching the subject. Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 15:39, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Here's a re-cap of what we discussed and agreed earlier this week:

Proposed research question - How is social media affecting the private sphere?

Structure of the essay:

1 Introduction

2 Private Life (Klara) - This section will centre around the individual self on social media, addressing questions such as 'How private is the private sphere online?' and 'How is our data being used/misused?'

3 Political Sphere (Sara) - This section will focus on literature surrounding social media's effect on democracy (examples: social movements, political identities)

4 Case Study (Nicola) - This section will explore the relationship between our private selves and the political atmosphere on social media, using the Cambridge Analytica case to emphasise the literature that will be discussed earlier in the essay.

5 Conclusion

It's really important that the literature relates to the case study.

Please add on to this if you've thought of anything else after our meeting.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Here are two useful videos explaining the Cambridge Analytica case in brief: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrnXv-g4yKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q91nvbJSmS4 There is also a very interesting documentary on Netflix called The Great Hack which explores the scandal in greater detail. Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 16:18, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've just posted a drafted summary describing the Cambridge Analytica case in about 500 words on the actual essay page. This is just a draft so I still need to clean it up, add references, etc. I would love to get your feedback on it :)

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 14:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

On another note, a large part of my section depends on the literature you mention in your sections, as it will be good for me to refer to it in the case study part. So please let me know when you have some literature written. Thanks!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Great job so far on your section! Once I will have some literature I will put it here. I will add my part on Friday evening before we meet on Sunday. Did the professor reply? Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Thanks! Ok that would be great! Since we have lectures all day on Saturday I might need some more time to incorporate the literature into the case study, but I will continue to add on as much as I can before Sunday. I didn't receive an email back yet. Maybe one of you could try to email him too? Just in case?

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 18:56, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've added some more content using literature to discuss the case study. However, this will definitely need some editing once your sections are uploaded as I will be able to link the content.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Whilst writing I came across some interesting articles which talk about the public/private spheres in relation to social media. Here are two which I found to be very useful:

Pariser, E. (2012). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK.

Ford, S. M. (2011). Reconceptualizing the public/private distinction in the age of information technology. Information, Communication & Society, 14(4), 550-567.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 17:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi team, how's the writing going? If you come across any literature that you think is useful to all of us please post it here. It would be really helpful :)

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 17:04, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I am writing my part now. I have a question, how would you say that private life, private sector is connected to the theory always-on? I am thinking about how to put it into sentence for the last 20 minutes and I cant figure out! Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Hey Klara, so the main question you can be addressing here is how digital media is affecting the private sphere, how being 'Always On' is influencing the private sphere, and if digital media users are aware of the boundaries between the digital sphere and the public sphere anymore. Digital media has given users a platform to express themselves while giving them the sense of being able to control their privacy settings on their pages and that no one can view their information beyond their friends/followers, giving them a false sense of online privacy (arguable), and this brings about the notion of digital illiteracy among users, which you can expand further on. Hope this helps! Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs)

I agree! And this could be a good way of introducing the idea of anxieties over privacy as you noted in the main essay page. Well done guys!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 14:57, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Let's explore this in class later this afternoon :)

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:50, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Klara! I've looked at your drafted outline on the main essay page and I think it's great. If I could suggest one thing I would also refer to Pariser's work on The Filter Bubble. Pariser really focuses on the notion that information in today's digital world is largely personalised, which gives rise to serious questions in relation to the political sphere (which Sara will then be focusing on). For example, since the information we receive on our Facebook feeds greatly validate our beliefs, can we really say that our political opinions are our own? Or are we being manipulated by advertisers to think in a particular way? I believe this could be a good point to focus on before moving on the the Political section of the essay. What do you think? I'd love to get your feedback!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

hey guys - some really excellent work so far, and I absolutely encourage you to keep up the good work! The section below is very useful, and I am expecting that you will build on this in the next few days. The work here will form the raw materials for your drafting process on the essay page. What I would advise, is that the example below (Papacharissi) is quite compressed - lots of ideas in here that are an accurate reflection of her arguments, but also, these are expressed here in very short form. So... building on this work I would take each of the sentences in this annotation, and expand on them, as each is an important element that could be built upon to establish your argument. In other words, follow up on each statement by a careful reading of Papcharissi herself, but ALSO each can be expanded upon through reference to further reading. e.g. "They create their own space where they reflect and act alone but not isolated" relates to Nancy Baym's work on blogging. It also relates in some ways with David Gauntlett's work on Making is Connecting perhaps? GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 14:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

hi again: I found this on the university library online catalogue... Privacy : A Very Short Introduction by Raymond Wacks chapter 4 on privacy and free speech. I think it could be really useful! GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:22, 16 November 2019 (UTC) this ^^^ might be of use to you too, right?! GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! We will definitely refer to it. I'll add this to our suggested literature section below too.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 15:52, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey guys, I would also just like to suggest a topic we should later on discuss in the discussion section. We can discuss the economics of big data, with regards to the commodification of human data specifically, many scholars are now stating that data is the new oil, it has become a much more valuable resource and it is a fast-growing industry, big tech companies and third-party organizations are making huge profits through trading and leveraging user data. I have added a relevant article in the section below for your reference. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 11:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree I think that's a really important point to explore. Thank you for that. The documentary on Netflix called The Great Hack really delves into the value of information in today's world. It is definitely worth watching.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 13:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey again guys, I just had another read of the most recent content we all included, and I have realized that we are talking about two different aspects at the same time. In the political life section, we mentioned that social media as a catalyst of social change and thus giving way to democracy, whereas Nicola you have mentioned in your discussion on the CA scandal that social media is depriving users of their democracy. However, I've also noticed that there is no unified consensus on this claim, and most of the literature points out to both of these claims and they can both be correct, so maybe we can expand more on this and include both sides of the argument throughout the article? What do you think? Also Papacharissi could be a great reference for this [User:Sara Hamad El Niel|Sara Hamad El Niel]] (discuss • contribs) 13:12, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey guys, I added some information to my part. I will be adding some more things into the use/misuse of data part after I will do some more research. I am very happy with our progress and I think we are on the right track. Also great catch Sarah! I think it will be great that we point out there is no unified claim about this problem, as you said! Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Thank you Klara. It looks great. Well done to all, we're on the right track!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 19:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys. Sara you are right about this and thank you for pointing it out - there is no one correct answer as social media can be seen in both a positive and negative light in relation to democracy and the political sphere. I agree that the literature included in the essay should touch upon both of these points. It shouldn't be disregarded. At the same time, we need to keep in mind that we are talking about social media and politics in relation to the private sphere, and not in a general context. This is why we chose to focus on the Cambridge Analytica case in the first place - because it gives rise to questions surrounding privacy at a political level. So, even though I believe that it is important to mention both sides of the argument as you're suggesting, I think the focus still needs to be on this idea that social media and politics give rise to privacy issues.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 19:24, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, to add on to this point I came across an interesting video with the journalist who first broke the story about Cambridge Analytica. Here she is discussing the damages to democracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUa34097Xrk

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 22:10, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've added on to my section and incorporated the literature being used for the Private Life section (boyd, Turkle and Pariser) into the Discussion part about the private life by linking the theory to the case study. I think that we're doing a great job and it's all linking together very well.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 18:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

I still need to work on the political part of the Discussion section. Sara, what do you think about the point made earlier? I think it's best that I work on linking your section with the discussion once we've agreed on the direction we'll be taking for it, so as to build our work in a consistent manner.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 18:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Nicola, yes, I agree with the approach you mentioned earlier, I will rework my part a little to mainly focus on the private sphere and linking it to the CA and FB case study, but still shed light on both sides. I'll also include the same in the introduction. Hey Klara, can you please just add a short paragraph for your part in the introduction? then I will complete the rest of the intro. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 09:37, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sara, perfect. I will work on my part for the discussion in the same way. Pariser's (2012) work touches on the points we've been discussing quite a lot and I'll be including his work if you'd like to refer to it too.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:37, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Klara, you might wish to refer to the reference suggested by Dr.Singh as part of the introduction to our essay as it "examines our need for privacy and why it is valued so highly, as well as what constitutes an invasion of privacy" :) You may read more from: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/privacy-a-very-short-introduction-9780198725947?cc=gb&lang=en&

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Sara, I just added on to my section about social media and the political life, it is still not finished but I put it in as it is for now just so that we can help each other in making sure that what we are saying is consistent. There is an article by Peter Dahlgren (I've added it to our reference list below) in which he talks about participation and citizenship. Even though he is mostly concerned with the public sphere, I believe there are some useful points to be extracted in the context of our work. Let me know what you think.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 20:54, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi ladies, great job on adding more information to our essay. As you said, I think we are doing a great job. Also, thank you, Nicola, for the great reference. I totally forgot on this one! I will definitely use it for the introduction. I will be adding more information to my part next week after I will be done with my topic research!

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Great! I'll also be adding on to the introduction too in the coming days.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 19:29, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey ladies, great work so far indeed! and I will be looking through the references you guys mentioned above and write accordingly. I am aiming to have my part completed asap. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, great. Please also keep in mind to reference accordingly. It can be a little time consuming but doing it whilst writing is helpful.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:02, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've concluded my main part and inserted all of my references. Sara, I still need to refer to your part if we're going to touch upon the point of social media as a positive tool. We have 3 days left to finalise everything ladies, we're almost there but there are still some things we could refine till then :)

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

This is another interesting article describing the negative effects that the Cambridge Analytica scandal created surrounding political implications https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3720-cambridge-analytica-and-the-death-of-the-voter

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 17:46, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I've been trying to insert an external image to the essay but I'm not too sure how to go about it. Do you know how by any chance please? Thank you!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 18:37, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Nicola, sure thing, I am working on it right now and will hopefully be done with it by tonight. Also, regarding the image, maybe this link could help? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Adding_image Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 19:33, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Perfect, and thank you for the link!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 16:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi again guys, so I included in a paragraph in the introduction and I have updated the political life bit too - so after doing my research, the main consensus here is that social media could be used both as a tool for users to voice their beliefs and for political parties to suppress democracy simultaneously, as it is a free space after-all, it can be used as a tool for both sides. Also Klara, I moved your introduction bit to the top 'Introduction' section as I feel like it would be more suitable there, I haven't made any changes to it in case you still have changes to make - so let me know what you think? Shall we move it to Introduction of keep it in the private life section?. Looking forward to receiving your feedback guys! Still work in progress though. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 22:37, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sara, sounds good to me I think that makes sense to mention. For the part about social media being a tool for users to voice their beliefs, I mentioned a part in the discussion touching upon this and raised the question: "What if our political opinions are not really our own?" This is because even though social media provides the space to voice our opinions, there are instances (such as the CA case), whereby political parties manipulate our opinions through targeted adverts served specifically to sway your beliefs. So, how sure can we be that our opinions have not been decided for us? Political parties might be suppressing democracy in this way.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, the information mentioned in the introduction is very useful, well done. However, I do think we could cut it down. The introduction seems quite long as it is. We can revise it during our meeting tomorrow and decide where to place all of the useful information we have been discussing and drafting.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 16:35, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

I think that the introduction is better in the top section too! I was thinking of doing it as well. I will be adding some more information to my part tonight, so we can discuss everything tomorrow! And I agree with you Nicola that the introduction is a bit too long.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Great ladies, I think we are all in agreement. See you later.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 09:06, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Klara, I think your part is great. Do you think we could shrink the size of the image you inserted slightly? Also does the image need to be referenced?

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:21, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nicola! The most important part of the image is to be able to read the privacy settings and that is tough to read it when I make it smaller. I will try at least a little! Also, I used the picture from Wiki Commons, so it doesn't have to be referenced. :)

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

You're right, if it isn't legible in a smaller size we can leave it as it is. Ok that's perfect. I'll also include a couple more images too.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:38, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey guys, what do you think if we add our main research question as a heading in our introduction? I realised that it isn't really introduced.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Nicola, good point and yeah I think we should add it somewhere below the introduction just to make sure what we're talking about is clear. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 12:57, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok I'll amend it now! I've also re-structured my part slightly and moved the discussion part to a new section, as we discussed since it flows better this way and concludes the essay nicely.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

In references, we mention boyd and Turkle twice. We should agree on the reference name, so its under one reference. How should we call them?

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Hi Klara, thank you for pointing this out! I've amended them accordingly. We should be good now.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 13:30, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sara, in your part you refer to the Me Too social movement - I focused one of the wiki exercises on the subject if you would like to refer to it as I explain its aims and its effects on politics.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 18:07, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi guys, I think yesterday's meeting went really well. I've just read through everything this morning and made slight changes to the flow of the essay and tweaked the references. Sara, there is a reference you mentioned for Tucker et al. (2017), could you please send it over as I cannot seem to locate it myself. Thanks!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 11:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Nicola, here you go: Tucker, J. A., Theocharis, Y., Roberts, M. E., & Barberá, P. (2017). From Liberation to Turmoil: Social Media And Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 28(4), 46–59. doi: 10.1353/jod.2017.0064 - let me know if you need anything else. Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 15:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Added it in. Please let me know what you think of the essay. It would be great if you could have a final read through it.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 15:19, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

I think it looks good! We did a great job.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

The chapter looks great, great work guys!!! Sara Hamad El Niel (discuss • contribs) 00:36, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Perfect. Well done!

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 09:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Literature and Annotated Bibliographies
Hello ladies! So following our lecture this morning I'm creating a section for us to use where we can post any useful and suggested readings for our essay :)

Suggested Literature
Ford, S. M. (2011). Reconceptualizing the public/private distinction in the age of information technology. Information, Communication & Society, 14(4), 550-567.

Pariser, E. (2012). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK.

Papacharissi, Z. (2010) ‘A Private Sphere’ in A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age pp. 131-167

Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Hachette UK.

Wacks, R. (2015). Privacy: A very short introduction. OUP Oxford.

Loi M., Dehaye P. O., (2017) If Data Is The New Oil, When Is The Extraction of Value From Data Unjust?. Philosophy and Public Issues. Retrieved from http://fqp.luiss.it/files/2018/10/PPI_06_Loi-Dehaye_vol7_n2_2017def.pdf

Dahlgren, P. (2006). Doing citizenship: The cultural origins of civic agency in the public sphere. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(3), 267–286.

Annotated Bibliographies
Papacharissi, Z. (2010) ‘A Private Sphere’ in A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age pp. 131-167

Here is an annotated bibliography I wrote for our engagement portfolio. I knew it would good for our Essay :)In “A Private Sphere” chapter, Zizi Papacharissi is rethinking what “private sphere” means. People use the digital space as a contingent private sphere, to express and discuss political matters. They create their own space where they reflect and act alone but not isolated. Papacharissi includes five new civic habits that emerge in the new digital space as a result of this. She also sees these habits as tendencies and not established habits. This chapter is an excellent reference for any research in the Private Sphere. Furthermore, it is a fresh engagement with some of the most important questions facing democracies today. Papacharissi concludes with a statement that the private sphere is an attempt at a new space and new sociality.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

'''boyd, d. (2012). Participating in the always-on lifestyle. In The social media reader (pp.71-76). New York: New York University Press.'''

That's perfect thank you! For the second wiki exercise I actually wrote an annotated bibliography on danah boyd's work: boyd, d. (2012). Participating in the always-on lifestyle. In The social media reader (pp.71-76). New York: New York University Press.

In this chapter, danah boyd, an exemplary academic in social media, delves into the phenomenon of always-on culture. boyd asserts that, in today’s world, people are interruptible at all times of the day. This is because being connected to networks of people online is constantly assumed as a result of developments in technology. In this way, the online world is always nearby and we never really go offline. In response to the growth of technology, boyd focuses on understanding how to embrace the notion of always-on by striking a personal balance between attention and time. This chapter is useful in understanding the ways in which society interacts, including how we participate and engage online as individuals and with others through this online network.

Since you are focusing on the 'Private Life' section of the essay I actually think this could be a really useful source.

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 14:38, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

'''Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Hachette UK.'''

I found a good annotated bibliography for Sherry Turkle's book Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other here: https://seminar28.wordpress.com/2015/06/28/annotated-bookshelf-alone-together-why-we-expect-more-from-technology-and-less-from-each-other/

In her book, Turkle confronts the notion of connectivity describing a world in which the relationships between people and technology are tethered through language, behaviour and embodiment. Turkle divides the book into two main sections to explore the subject. "The first half of the book focuses on the development of social robotics, while the second part “turns to the online life as it reshapes the self”, the psychological effects of social networking on its users. Turkle emphasises the symmetry between these two moments: “just as we imagine things as people, we invent ways of being with people that turn them into something close to things”. Throughout, Turkle asks what is lost in the “split between the screen and the physical real”, and she worries that although “we are connected as we’ve never been before…we seem to have damaged ourselves in the process”."

Nicolasmall (discuss • contribs) 15:09, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: COLLABORATIVE ESSAY
Grade Description for Collaborative Essay:

Collaborative Essays of this standard roughly correspond to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:

 * Merit. Among other things, work of this standard will make a clear point in a clear way. It will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. It will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). This work will demonstrate attainment of virtually all intended learning outcomes, clearly grounded on close familiarity with a wide range of supporting evidence, constructively utilised to reveal appreciable depth of understanding. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.

General: In addition to the common marking scheme, there are three broad criteria widely employed in the Division, which are used to help assessors evaluate your work in a more general sense:

Quality of research: is there evidence of critical engagement with set materials?; is there evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Originality of thought: Is argument well-articulated and well-supported?; is there evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position)?; is there evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections)?; is there evidence of independent critical ability? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Clarity of expression: academic writing style and structure, and organisational skills For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Specific Feedback:

 * You have submitted a fairly well written response to the brief. Here you outline a number of arguments that specifically address the theme of private sphere (although a lot of your argument seems to be addressing issues of public sphere in all but name). Your discussion of the research evidences a familiarity and good working knowledge of a range of scholarship on your chosen topic. The example that you have chosen to discuss your theme is fairly well-chosen because of its public visibility and relevance.

 * The essay is written in a fairly fluid and accessible style, and your argument is very well structured generally, is critically engaged, and you have demonstrated some awareness of the contradictions inherent in the theme itself. This is good work.

'''N.B.: Feedback for your individual Essay Discussion Page contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. That individual feedback should be considered in relation to the feedback here, because of the fundamentally connected nature of the two tasks. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.'''

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:36, 19 December 2019 (UTC)