Privacy Concerns

While I think it is important to discuss and understand privacy, particularly for the sake of literacy, I left Thursday's discussion asking myself 'so what?' How does privacy affect me on the long run, and if I come into to a situation where I feel as though my privacy has been violated, what will I do about it? The fact of the matter is, legal action seems to be our only real recourse when it comes to privacy violations. In fact, each of us has probably found ourselves in more than one situation in which we would be within our rights to sue, but we don't because except for the more extreme commodity-related cases, there would be seemingly no point.

This is why I brought up the idea of some sort of 'privacy council.' While one could argue that the law and the judicial system serve the function I posited, privacy issues seem to dance on both sides of the line between legal and personal matters. As such, it would seem to me to make some sense to at least form a group that could address issues. Dan Solove's Understanding Privacy seems to treat the issue as such a community-based one that it makes sense to have a community body that can at least say 'from my non-binding survey, it seems that we, in general find X to be private, so be aware when X comes into your interactions with others.'

Perhaps the results would be as ineffective as our judicial system. However, it seems to me that problems regarding privacy are not solved by simply talking about them, and mostly litigious action seems too extreme. I'm reminded of Jason Fortuny who posted fake ads on Craigslist. These ads were very graphic, requesting extreme sexual acts. Many responded, and Fortuny posted their information online for all to see.

There's a pretty clear legal case in this instance. Fortuny broke many laws in attempting to pull this off. Indeed, as of a year ago, there were two lawsuits pending against him. However, while legal recourse may make sense for someone whose livelihood was hurt by this person, that action is going to do nothing to prevent others from falling into similar traps. It seems to me that it makes sense to have a body of publicly sanctioned figures who can at least make people aware of the potential for violations or miscarriages of privacy. This group could equally be responsible for taking the temperature of a group in regards to controversial issues.

It would be difficult to make any actions this group took legally binding, and indeed it would probably be a mistake to do so. After all, the law should be saved for the most extreme cases. But most of the time the situation isn't so dire, it simply becomes that way because both perpetrator and victim lack a proper understanding of their actions. If we continue to advance technologically we're going to continue to create opportunities for our personal information to slip through the cracks. Doesn't it make sense to have someone to point out the dangers to those who don't know any better?

Worshipping Rock & Roll with Battlestar Galactica

David Hesmondhalgh's essay Rock Culture and Visual Culture touches on something that has bothered me for a while. Why is the popular music of my generation seen as so unworthy praise in comparison with which my parents were raised? Hesmondhalgh argues, essentially, that the golden age of rock has been mythologized. This isn't a particularly controversial thesis, but it is particularly interesting when discussed in the context of Battlestar Galactica , a show that has taken the mythologizing of the golden age of rock to a quite literal level.

By the end of the show's third season, seven out of twelve models of Cylons - the human-looking machines bent on destroying humanity – had been revealed. Every one had at one point seemingly been human with a later reveal of the true nature that often spun the show in a different direction. After three seasons of these reveals, the audience was very much prepared for five more. What no one could prepare for though was when a central character drunkenly blurted out the first line of Bob Dylan's 'All Along the Watchtower.' Imagine the shock, then, when four main characters each quoted a line from the song, thus signaling the realization of their true nature as Cylons. Few fans were particularly shocked at the revelation Most are still trying to understand the diegetic significance of Dylan's classic.

Ron D. Moore, the show's executive producer, has discussed the fact that the song is exists to demonstrate a connection between our world and the show's. It is not that Bob Dylan exists in their Galactica universe, but that this song, like the inclination to explore or the fear of God, is part of human consciousness. As the show has progressed, though, 'All Along the Watchtower' has become like Ezekial's chariot, a signal of the divine.

The use of the song on Battlestar Galactica seems to be another portent of Hesmondhalgh's mythologizing of classic rock. Both its composition and lyrics are dissected by the show and given enormous power. The music, now laden with sitar and duduk, becomes an integral part of the show's score in the fourth season, always coupled with a transcendent experience. The show has been noted for its diverse score that ignores cultural or geographic boundaries. The music veers away from orientalist stereotypes. Japanese Taiko drums, signal that the Galactica is ready for battle, while a piano solo inspired by Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata," accompanies the alien Cylons on their geometrically schizophrenic Basestars. Through all of this, though, it is the American rock classic that is tied to the great mystery of the show.

A central theme of Battlestar Galactica is questioning what it means to be human, as well as what it means to believe in God. 'All Along the Watchtower,' as it is used on the show, seem to represent the best of humanity and of our beliefs. The song is apparently something so beautiful and profound that it is nothing short of divine. In fact, it's function is to push the audience to do what the characters on Galactica cannot: look into our past and marvel beauty we have created rather than looking into our future in search of our next conquest. This is particularly ironic for a show that has had to constantly overcome the inclination of viewers to look back and compare the show to its source, the 1970's Galactica .

Galactica does not harp on popular culture – after all, it is popular culture – the way those who revere Dylan and Hendrix over modern musicians often do. On the other hand, it's interesting to note that out of all the touchstones it could use to signify the grace of humanity, the chose a rock classic. Though critics will continue to argue about whether or not the use of the 'All Along the Watchtower' enhances or destroys the narrative, there can be no doubt that it was a bold decision. It was also one that shows how much, for better or worse, we still worship the golden age of rock and roll.

Mapping, Play and Web [shudder] 2.0

Our mapping project [ born out of this prompt: 'Using Google Maps, you should explore how everyday life can be represented and made productive through mapping.  More information will be handed out in class. ] , Stalking Consciousness, didn't reveal many new things to me. This isn't to say that it wasn't a good learning experience. However, I think our hypothesis were kind of obvious, and, and I think anyone familiar to the technologies and locations we were monitoring would have drawn the same conclusions pretty easily. Even in cities, the more actively, populated centers will contain more active, individually conscious people. Similarly, people using technology will be less conscious of their surroundings, more conscious of their own desires, intentions and goals. The combination of these two results in a kind of hypernetworked, hyperindividualized drone, tuned in to so much information, and driven towards personal goals. Remove either and this effect is reduced, remove both, and a person becomes much more aware of what's around them. This effect is not universal, but can be measured with relative regularity. All in all it wasn't a particularly controversial hypothesis, and it was proved easily.

On the other hand, I found it interesting because it embodied the kind of play/work/life fusion that I think a number of the technologies which have been placed under the rubrik of Web 2.0 While blogging, social media and wikis may not be new technologies, they were certainly given a new context and adopted with enthusiasm unseen in the previous decade. There are a number of factors that I'd suggest contributed to the public's enthusiasm for Web 2.0.

For one thing, the generation that Dannah Boyd says ' hearts' social media was too young to use social media in its previous 'web 1.0' incarnation. [Author's note – I can't stand the term web 2.0, but it's the common parlance, and it's a part of the article to which I'm responding, so I'm speaking in its terms.] They may have e-mailed a bit, but they couldn't use it as a serious socialization tool. Similarly though there were communication technologies such as AOL chatroom, IRC and instant messengers, these technologies were often restricted by parents of what were then young children. Now that they've grown up, the technology is presented to them in a fresh way.

The technology now exists on different levels of complexity. Those who are not tech savvy can figure out facebook pretty quickly, while those who are can use the social network as a development platform. In the past, IRC was daunting to those without at least a little technical know-how. Meanwhile AOL Chat was dauntingly vanilla to those able to use something like IRC. Things are such now that we have the same blogging platforms being used to publish gossip blogs as are used to blog about web development.

So at this point, we have everybody involved and playing on the same turf, regardless of what their game is. Though I use the analogy of a game, there is a great amount of play in all that we are doing online. I found Kristi, Onion and Bill's map interesting because it told a story. It was a kind of treasure map. At the same time, the data itself was informative. I now know about many different places to get local food. My group's project on the other hand, attempted to retrieve more ethnographic or sociological data, and yet in order to do so, we wound up playing a little game, following people around, writing things down. We were all like little detectives, and the map that we came up with, while maybe an interesting illustration, is really a sort of memento of the game we were playing.

I think what those of us who study the field need to consider is how that changes the way we engage with information when our interaction can turn into play. Should we embrace that or does it delegitimize serious intentions. How far can we really take the idea of play, and where is it simply never going to be welcome? In an office setting, for instance, its tough to think of any kind of playful interaction that would benefit the business. It might be good for worker moral, but in regards to aggregation or manipulation of data, I'm not sure.

I will say that this project made me personally want to map more. It made me yearn to move around, to have interesting encounters in a multitude of places, such that I could put them all down for posterity. Ultimately, I'm not sure if that map would be anything more than a geodiary. I'm hoping to discover some way to make it mean more, or to serve some other purpose for those who find it.