Cybertypes vs. It's My Revolution: Learning to See the Mixedblood

I see many parallels between Dr. Arola's article titled, "It's My Revolution: Learning to See the Mixedblood" and Lisa Nakamura's book Cybertypes. One prominent discussion I see going on in each piece is the notion of racial identity in online spaces. While Nakamura focuses on the assumptions and identity tourism, that is the "raced" identity of someone online who does not hold that identity in real life. However, Arola takes that idea and portrays in a way that makes it more "authentic". Rather than discussing how people take on other identities or races online that do not hold true to their real ethnicity, Arola explored spaces where people self-identified (or did not identify) as a particular ethnicity that in fact mirrored their offline identity. So in a way, these two works are pushing against one another, offering the reader a more broad view of racial representations in online spaces in ways that are authentic vs. stereotyped.

Jamie's profile refutes Nakamura's notion that everything is a copy online and as Arola argues "Jamie has more 'authentic' markers of what some of us might recognize as being Indian, and in this way we might even see Jamie as Indian, and perhaps not necessarily as mixedblood" (Arola 222). Does this notion of 'authentic' pose some dilemma for who Jamie really is? This makes me think of The Matrix and Nakamura's discussion of the native in online spaces, and how her argument that authenticity is lost pushes against the type of online presence that Jamie's Myspace profile hopes to convey.

Another topic that I saw throughout each piece was the limitations online spaces provide in identifying ethnicity. Arola and Nakamura both discuss the limitations "checking a box" provides us with, and how there are not enough options available to accurately portray everyones racial identity. As Arola notes, "mixedbloods don't fall into a neatly decided category" (Arola 215). I thought it was interesting that out of the Myspace profiles observed, two out of the three users couldn't remember if they had chosen a race identification, which to me seems to indicate that "identifying" didn't matter as much as the other information they chose to share on their profile page in terms of how the users wanted to be portrayed. Is this because there was no way to identify as more then one race? If there was the option to do so, would more have identified? These are important questions to consider.

This gets me thinking about Nakamura and identity tourism, and her argument that in online spaces "everything is a copy...nothing has an aura" (Nakamura 6). I wonder, if presented with this notion, Arola's examples would have felt offended or inadequate. Additionally, I was interested in Arola's discussion of biological signifiers of identifying as Indian, noting "distinctive physical appearance that many accompany those connections--imply a stronger claim on identity than do more distant ones" (Arola 215). Thinking about this in online spaces, I gravitate towards Adam's Myspace profile. Adam chose not to identify as mixedblood in his online profile. However, if we consider Arola's idea of biological identifiers, wouldn't that be difficult to conceal in your Myspace profile picture? Perhaps it's just the poor image quality, but to me, viewing Figure 1 and Adam's profile picture looks to have some type of mask or bandana covering part of his face. I wonder if this is intentional, as to cover the biological connection to his mixedblood identity. This depiction in the online world mirrors his identity portrayal in real life, as Arola indicates that Adam "rarely identifies as native or mixed in his daily life except in academic circles where he engages directly with native philosophy" (Arola 220). This reserve echoes Nakamura's discussion between "Western user and the discourse of race and racism in cyberspace" (Nakamura 7). As Arola mentions, part of Adams decision to leave out the mixedblood on Myspace stems in his inability to articulate what it means to him, however, could it also be a fear that he is afraid of being 'raced' in a negative way online? As Nakamura notes, "symptoms of modernity create a sense of unease that is remedied by comforting and familiar images of 'history' and a 'native' that seems frozen in 'a different time and a different place' (Nakamura 7). This seems to me to accurately convey Adams hesitation to portray his mixedblood identity online, and also confirms why he feels safer discussing that mixed blood in different social circles such as academic communities. The 'different time, different place' notion speaks to almost a compartmentalizing of identity, and that you can highlight certain aspects of your identity in different communities.

In short, as Nakamura argues, "race must be understood as a function of consciousness rather than something that is visible and written on the body" (67). However, how we choose to display "the body" or our identities in online spaces primarily indicates how we'd like to be seen both offline and online, and for Arola, it gets messy when considering the mixedblood. Do we choose to embrace the biological implications of race? Do we hide them? What about the mixedblood who doesn't necessarily hold those biological signifiers? What about the mixedblood that does and prefers to identify otherwise? Comedian Trevor Noah explores these issues in his standup act titled, "African American". I've pointed Mark and Jennie towards this episode in the hopes that they'll incorporate it in today's class. I think a lot of the issues of the mixedblood identity are presented in a way thats helpful in understanding Nakamura's ideas about identity tourism, Arola's investigation of mixedblood identity in social media, and other readings we've looked at for this week. I've included a segment from Noah's standup below that discusses the mixedblood:

Cybertypes: Race Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet by Lisa Nakamura

I am going to try my best at scaling down the length of my response for this book :) 

Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet by Lisa Nakamura offers what I believe to be an introduction into the problematic representation of race issues within online (and offline) communities.

To begin, chapter one titled, "Cybertyping and The Work of Race in The Age of Digital Reproduction" discusses the role of race in the digital workforce. This notion doesn't necessarily represent the online workforce but rather a population employed to enhance and maintain technology and digital spaces (engineers, computer scientist, laborers, etc.). As a precursor to chapter two, which deals with the different "head hunting" approaches to recruit a specific racially stereotyped Asian worker, chapter one aims to first explain and understand race in the online world. Lisa Nakamura has coined the term "cybertypes" as "the process by which computer/human interfaces, the dynamics and economics of access, and the means by which users are able to express themselves online interacts with the 'cultural layer' or ideologies regarding race that they bring with them into cyberspace" (3). This notion can be seen in the digital identity tourism that Nakamura discusses in chapter one. The notion of "going native" or viewing the native as a means through "identity tourism" presents several problems of racial representation online. According to Nakamura, "When natives stop acting like natives---that is to say, when they deviate from the stereotypes that have been set up to signify their identities--their 'aura' is lost: they are no longer 'authentic" (6). In turn, Nakamura goes on to argue that in the Internet, nothing is authentic because it is a copy of the offline world. However, in the online world race is something that can be concealed, or an identity that can be created or utilized which deviates from "real life" representation. The notion of access is a concept we were introduced to first by T.V. Reed and I was happy to see Nakamura touch on it as well in chapter one. With this notion of access, the idea of representation from racial minorities is (to be expected) much less then an Anglo European of white user. Nakamura also notes that studies are now indicating the number of racial minorities online has gone up, however she notes that when the number was so low to begin with, any increase at all would signify an overall increase. The notion of identity tourism is a huge issue throughout the book and I feel is one that is of crucial significance in today's society. As Nakamura notes, under this concept of identity tourism, individuals "rather than "honoring diversity, their performances online used race and gender as amusing prothesis to be donned and shed without 'real life' consequences" (13-14). Essentially, what happens is a more intensified "othering" of racial minorities and stereotypes, often depicting their online identities to fit into these stereotypes rather then transcend them (I noticed in the book Nakamura focused heavily on Asian avatars and stereotypes and was curious as to whether or not had she been perhaps African American or Hispanic if this emphasis would have shifted towards another minority). The rest of the chapter focuses on a Westernized "American" globalization to an online participation, where Nakamura notes that "rather than destroying authenticity, cybertyping wants to preserve it" (20).
Chapter two titled, "Head Hunting on The Internet: Identity Tourism, Avatars, and Racial Passing in Textual and Graphic Chat Spaces" discusses identity on the Internet and how the identities constructed actually play into racial stereotypes rather than aim to defeat them. According to Nakamura, avatars are the "embodiment in text and/or graphic images, of a user's online presence in social spaces" (31). These avatars also enable users to virtually be anyone they'd like in a digital chat room or video game. However, what's interesting to note is that aside from choosing to be white, Nakamura cites that the second highest identity is Asian, and specifically a female. This identity construct goes beyond the notion of merely choosing a sex and race, and begins to construct such an identity based on the racial out-dated stereotypes commonly associated with that group. Avatars presented as geisha's in kimonos and males with samurai swords speak to a population that has long been outdated, especially considering its place in the online community. Who are affiliating with these avatars? Nakamura notes that the majority of people operating under the female Asian identity are middle aged white men! (43). The psychoanalytical reasons for such choices could be their own book, however, the main focus is that Nakamura argues that this is part of the problem rather than the solution, and that constructing an identity based on their racial stereotypes sets up a preconceived notion of what Asian presence "should be" in an online space. As Nakamura notes, "Analyzing the ways that icons and avatars are raced in cyberspace allows us to lay bare the principles of ethnic image-building on the Net" (51). Looking at the ways in which racial identities are stereotyped online can teach us a lot about the beliefs and perceptions people hold about race offline.
Chapter three titled, "Race in the Construct and the Construction of Race: The 'Consensual Hallucination' of Multiculturalism in the Fictions of Cyberspace"discusses the genres of cyberpunk and the representations of race in the media. Most notably, Nakamura goes into an extensive discussion of the movie The Matrix and discusses the role of race and gender and how they relate to a power hierarchy within society. I thought the movie paired nicely with this whole notion of racial identity online specifically in the antagonistic view of the machines being the villain and race being the "resistance" to conforming to a monolithic society. What I found particularly interesting was how the main character and "the one" was in fact a Asian American. This notion that as Nakamura puts it supports that "race must continue to exist, especially in the terrain of cyberspace, where so many foundational notions of identity as anchored in a body have become contingent, problematic, and difficult" (67). Though this idea to me is a two-edged sword because Neo is in fact still partially white and as a result, is seen as the superior character over his female accomplice, Trinity, and his African American teacher, Morpheus. Both Morpheus and Trinity are consistently viewed in advertising promotional posters and trailers standing behind Neo, as to suggest that they cannot exist or have purpose without him. Nakamura's discussion of The Matrix and how it can serve to better help our understanding of society and the implications it has on race speaks to how we can view multimedia and cultural representations of this power struggle between technology and minorities is the second main point that stuck with me in the text. The best explanation I found that was represented by Nakamura states the following:
                      The Matrix constructs a new discourse of race in the Digital Age, one that plugs us in                           to our own dreamworlds about cyberutopians and cyberfutures. And like any dream,                             it is conflicted; it opens a window into our cultural anxieties, fears, fantasies, and                                   desires about the Internet and the roles of blacks, whites, machines, and all                                           combinations thereof. Like the Internet, the matrix looks the way we want it to look                             or have made it look: it is symptomatic of our vision of utopia. (79)
Visions of a digitized "utopia" is a good way to segue into Chapter four titled, "Where Do You Want To Go Today?: Cybernetic Tourism, The Internet, and Transnationality" talks about the idea of bridging gaps between cultures through the use of technology. Compaq specifically designed a series of posters and advertisements aimed at globalizing the use of technology as a means for people to "tour" other countries, cultures, and practices. I found this advertisement campaign to be a little disturbing, and felt as though the campaign was essentially arguing that through technology, one could gain complete insight into other cultures. As Nakamura argues, "If technology will indeed make everyone, everything, and every place the same, as "Anthem" claims in its ambivalent way, then where is there left to go? What is there left to see?" (93). So whats the agenda behind these advertisements? And what are they trying to achieve in these campaigns to promote exotic and native culture? As the text asserts, "these ads claim a world without boundaries, for us, the consumers and target audience, and by so doing they show us exactly where and what these boundaries are, and that is ethnic and racial. Rather than being effaced, these dividing lines are evoked repeatedly" (94). This whole concept of race and lines that are drawn is a continually explored throughout the text. It is an important question to consider. How are we globalizing our digital spaces? How are we "othering" those who don't fall into the white upper class? How do our representation of other minorities speak to the digital divide and the dividing line?
Chapter five titled, "Menu Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online" discusses racial representations online, and specifically self-chosen representation. The notion of "checking the race box" is discussed at length, noting that at times, options available will force people to identify with just one race, rather than multiple. For example, There is no "Asian American" selection for some individuals and therefore they have to make a choice as to how they'd like to be represented. Portals are also another Web-based screening which directs you towards specific keywords or searches based on your initial prompt. Nakamura notes that "the structure of this menu works to close off the possibility of alternate or hybrid definitions of racial identity" (104). The notion of racial masquerading online is reintroduced and emphasizes how this notion future stereotypes the stigmas or perceptions commonly associated with a specific type of minority (does anyone else feel Nakamura has a tendency to be overly redundant?). About 2/3 of the way through the chapter, Nakamura introduces the "101 Ways to Tell if You're Japanese American". This is an incorporation that I could identify with, as we see many examples of such "lists" available through social media and email chains today. However, what I thought was important to note was the fact that many of the recipients of this email were not Japanese Americans but rather a person who knew someone and could relate, therefore establishing a sense of community (in sort of a racist backwards way). As Nakamura notes, "When they receive this list they are being interpolated into a racial identity search engine of sorts that accommodates--indeed, welcomes--their hybridity" (131). Lastly, Nakamura ends the chapter by stating, what I feel is representative towards an overall way to view race online, in that "race is under construction in cyberspace" (134).
The conclusion titled, "Keeping It (Virtually) Real: The Discourse Of Cyberspace As An Object Of Knowledge" discusses the role of race in academia. The Internets role in academia opens up many new arenas of study. However, as Nakamura notes, "What is missing, however, in the scholarship is attention to race as an important component of online identity and community" (138). Learning that many "new" professors are faced only with the possibility of teaching within their racial identity is troubling to me. To end, as Nakamura states " cyberspace is a place where racial identities are created, maintained, received, and performed, a user's position as raced offline counts for something" (143).

Part 2: Digitized Lives: Culture, Power, and Social Change in the Internet Era

Part 2 of Digitized Lives: Culture, Power, and Social Change in the Internet Era starts off with chapter six titled, "Does the Internet Have a Political Bias? E-Democracy, Networked Authoritarianism and Online Activism" which discusses the role technology plays in providing a sense of "community" for political activism, as well as the cyber realms of terrorism, and government censorship. In the beginning of the chapter, Reed discusses the advantages and disadvantages to online voting. While online voting makes the voting process more accessible to some such as the disabled, those who did not grow up in a "digitized" society often are at a disadvantage in their mere inexperience and lack of understanding. As Reed puts it "the potential is great, but at present the drawbacks largely outweigh advantages" (122). One of the biggest problems technology faces is the issue of security. Although Reed notes that "voter fraud" is particularly low in countries such as the US and the UK, it still poses some risk (122). Digital political presence can also have advantages during campaigns as well as within the voting process. Some believe that the Obama campaign won largely due to the online presence of the Obama campaign organization. However, Reed notes that "Obama had a built in advantage with younger voters who are both more likely to vote liberal and more likely to be deeply connected to digital cultures" (123). Whatever the case may be, it is undeniable that political presence online creates awareness and is a tool for political advertising, though Cass Sunstein notes that "most people using the Web to follow politics do not seek out a variety of perspectives, but instead seek out informational and opinion sources that match their existing ideological biases" (123). I agree and disagree with this statement and believe it is an important facet of the text to discuss. Through the use of social media, I've come to find lots of articles and research on positions and political ideologies that I wouldn't have necessarily "sought out" based on my own personal political beliefs. A statement that really resonated with me in this chapter was that "likes become locks; zeroing in only on what a user already believes" (123). This profiling that is done through social media makes me skeptical to "like" anything. I don't necessarily like leaving a "social" footprint in public places, and especially not a political one. Chapter six also discusses the notion of political activism, and how using digital spaces for political reform can have great impacts on society. Reed notes in reference to globalization, activism has been a crucial role in maintaining freedom in digital spaces. The biggest protest to date which protested the U.S. war with Iraq was largely organized and communicated via online, which refutes the argument that online activism discredits actual face-to-face activism. This goes along with another issue raised in the chapter about e-petitions. As Reed puts it, critics argue "that the very ease of digitally signing an email or online petition has cheapened the experience, rendered it less impactful then personal letters snail mail the old-fashioned way (129-130). I would argue quiet the opposite, as later on Reed describes a group that simulates Harry Potter to fight for social justice and raise awareness about issues present in the face-to-face community. Different online petitions raise awareness and though it may be from a distance, it is still a tool for networking and exposing people to real issues offline. Other groups utilize what Reed refers to as "maptivism" to help raise awareness and gain a global target for things like domestic abuse and assault such as the organization "Hollaback". Another issue targeted in chapter six are the issues of hacking, cyberterrorism, and wiki-leaking. The chapter discusses how terrorists can utilize the internet to network with others in their group around the world as well as obtain confidential information from other governments to purposefully cause death and destruction in the online and offline world. Lastly, the notion of protests and digital murals are discussed, offering that digital murals are a way for a variety of people to view political art as they are able to be re-sized and reproduced.

Chapter seven titled, "Are Digital Games Making Us Violent and Sex Crazed, or Will They Save the World? Virtual Play Real Impact" discusses video gaming culture the the assumptions and truths that surround them. The main question that I believe Reed asks in this chapter is what do we take away from video games? Reed argues that video games are educational, and that much of what we do while were gaming helps us understand and process the real world. Reed argues that through theories of gaming such as "narratology, which focuses on storyline in games or ludology, concentrating more on interactions and rules shaping game play" (142) we can apply and utilize much of what we see in the gaming world and transcend it into our understanding of real life. Another theory that surrounds the gaming culture is called assemblage theory and has to do with the understanding that our avatars and digital roles we play in games do not define our identities outside of these roles online. Throughout the chapter, Reed addresses the notion of whether or not video games make us violent. His view on this matter is that they don't, citing evidence that I'll discuss later that serves as more of a correlation then a causation. In reference to education and video games, Reed states that "digital games teach you how to learn" (144). This is something that I wholeheartedly believe to be true. Through much of the stereotyping in video games, gaming can teach us about the outside world around us and the injustices we face. I thought Reed did an excellent job of highlighted the sexism and gender stereotyping present in games. The gender roles that are present in games somewhat reflect the oppressions that are present within current society. Whether it be depicting women as non-relevant roles in Grand Theft Auto, or increasing the boob size of Lara Croft, there are apparent gender stereotypes present within gaming culture, and gaining insight and awareness about these issues can teach us a lot about the offline world. Reed devotes a whole section in this chapter to the question of whether or not video games make us violent. To this notion, Reed states that "millions and millions of young men all over the world play violent video games, and do not commit acts of murder" (145). Sure, there are always correlations when looking at populations of people, however, the correlations are multiple, and honing in on one small, but present correlation skews the understanding of the issue at large. As Reed notes, "people don't watch pornography and then run out to commit rape" (146). In turn, Reed discusses how this argument for video gaming contributing to violence as it pertains to the military and the utilization of gaming by the military for personnel training. However, as the chapter notes, some military personnel worry that the depictions made by these shooter games do not actually depict warfare stating "concerns have been raised historically that pilots flying bombers that never see their bombs land on human targets may be shielded from the realities of warfare, and that they may suffer retroactively when that reality hits them" (149). This separation from reality and the gaming depiction of warfare can be dangerous, as can issues of race and gender in the gaming world. Reed offers that two things that can move us away from issues of race and gender are agency and complexity. Agency refers to "the ability to impact the world" (152). Depicting females in strong protagonist roles such as Lara Croft can help to achieve a sense of equality among gender in the gaming community. Complexity refers added dimension in a character and depicting them as strong and intelligent. Lastly, Reed addresses the question of whether or not video games can save the world. In this passage he quotes Jane McGonigal nicely, and I think it summarizes a general positive attitude towards approaching video games as a medium for growth and social change, stating that some people view "the real world as 'broken' in that most people experience the sense of excitement, accomplishment, or involvement in their everyday lives that they experience in games...in order to unbreak the world, to make it a better place, we need to learn from digital games how to transfer the elements of excitement, accomplishment and involvement found in games to solving real-world problems" (161). So well put!

Chapter eight titled, "Are Kids Getting Dumber as Their Phones Get Smarter? E-Learning, 'Edutainment' and the Future of Knowledge Sharing" discusses the educational impact of technology in the classroom. This chapter was of particular interest to me as this is a segment of composition that I am genuinely invested in. Reed supports the claim that children as learning digitally and I believe it is our role as educators to utilize that technology to help bridge the gap between what students already know to what they are learning in our classrooms. Although, Reed notes that as a younger generation, our youth are "increasingly resenting social media as a burden; many are fed up with the inanity and lack of privacy...though paradoxically they are sharing more personal information" (164-165). This awareness of digital presence and the notion that what you put out on the internet leaves a trail is a concept I'm glad to see younger generations recognizing. As Reed argues, "computers are neither the problem nor the solution to issues in education and the twenty-first century" (166). To me, it is how we utilize technology to promote engagement and understanding in the classroom is where the real difference is made. Reed consistently refers to computers as tools, nothing that "good teachers recognize that digital technologies create opportunities, but opportunities that only careful, thoughtful pedagogy can take advantage of" (166). One way to accomplish this is by focusing on the different learning modalities (visual, aural, kinesthetic, etc.), to which Reed argues "the great virtue in education is their capacity to individualize the learning process" (166). Much of what my research in my thesis focused on was the different ways in which we learn. By using technology to effectively illustrate these different learning styles, Reed argues we can enhance our knowledge and understanding of the world around us and the problems we face outside of the digital realm. To fuel this argument, Reed illustrates evidence that students learn more when they don't feel bored. By integrating technology into the classroom, students are utilizing mediums that they're already exposed to outside of the classroom, therefore as the text notes students and teachers can use/assign technology to depict their understanding of course content through what Reed calls "skillful use of multimedia digital pedagogy" (168). Perhaps what I feel the most relevant argument and issue Reed presents in this segment of reading is the notion that technology "personalizes situations where one-size-fits all education is foisted upon a classroom of 20 or 30 or 40 students, each of whom has a different learning style, pace and set of needs" (168). In my thesis, this was the entire basis for my argument of incorporating multimodal pedagogy into the composition classroom to teach literature. Many instructors teach within a liberal arts curricula where they see students with a diverse range of majors. By utilizing technology in order to effectively "reach" them and allocate for an understanding of course content, students are better able to make meaning and arrive at an understanding of the text. This is largely where multimodal projects come into play in the classroom, as students are able to illustrate their understanding of course content through their projects. Reed notes there is a difference between using technology and integrating technology in the classroom and that most teachers "use" technology but few are integrating it in a way that makes sense pedagogically and allocates for some relevance within the learning process. With this integration of technology, Reed argues that parents need to focus more on not what technology is present in the classroom, but rather how it is being utilize to foster and encourage learning in the classroom. To accompany this, the notion of online learning communities is discussed. Having taught a course entirely online, I will argue that there are some benefits as well as setbacks teaching an entirely digitized composition course. I agree with Reed that "the transition to online teaching has brought many college professors to think more carefully about pedagogy" (172). I have certainly had to think about the lessons I taught in a face-to-face classroom, and how they could needed to be adapted in order to be successful in the online classroom. Sometimes, after carefully analyzing the pedagogy behind my teaching I found that the revision of the course to better fit the online realm led to a revision of the face-to-face lesson as well. One thing is for certain, as Reed argues, online classroom spaces lead to more student interaction (172). Whether it is the ability of a less-confrontational way to participate, or rather the extra time to really carefully develop a response, online learning environments typically generate more thoughtful and course-specific discussion (much like a graduate seminar). Lastly, I was also happy to see that the chapter references HASTAC, which is a scholarship I plan to apply for, as I am interested in aspects of the digital humanities and how technology can bring learning communities together to achieve great things in the academic world.

Chapter nine titled, "Who in the World is Online? Digital Inclusions and Exclusions" focuses on the notion of the digital divide, and who does (and doesn't) have access to technology, and as a result what that can say about us a culture as well as a global society. Reed reminds us that the World Wide Web isn't necessarily "World Wide" as many people do not have access to technology in even first world countries. According to the evidence presented by Reed "70% of the world's population have no engagement with digital culture at all" (180). This is a truly staggering amount considering the globalization that occurs through the use of technology. Reed attributes this lack of access largely to three main issues: "lack of economic resources, lack of computer literacy skills, and lack of information relevant to many cultural groups combined with a lack of information on the benefits of the Net for those groups, and lastly relative lack of linguistic and cultural diversity in the material available on the Web" (180). Within these populations, Reed notes that the predominant population that utilizes technology comes from North America and Europe (Anglo-European Cultures) (180). In reference to access, the notion of who needs the internet is discussed. Due largely to socio-economic disparities, we generally see a lack of access in people below the poverty line. In a time of what Reed refers to as a "digital divide" he argues that "the digital divide is the [human] rights issue of the 21st century. Why? Because the internet is (potentially) the greatest educational invention since the printing press" (183). This is a human rights issue because lack of access is a notion that is creating more discrepancy between social classes to which Reed argues "if not dealt with, lack of meaningful digital access will increase all forms of poverty (economic, social, and informational) and deepen all forms of inequality" (183-184). Mark Warschauer describes a way to combat this digital divide called "technology for social inclusion" which emphasizes a more proactive approach to new media (185). Within these digital inclusion projects, Warschauer argues that one must have "physical resources (hardware), digital resources (culturally relevant content to a full range of potential users), human resources (in terms of people competent to assist in helping users achieve techno-literacies of various kinds), and social resources (in the form of a supportive culturally competent cohort of fellow users)" (185). However, with the argument that access to the online world as a human rights issue, Reed also brings up the notion that people are simply putting too much online for the world to see. With this comes the notion of intellectual property rights, which fight to keep cultural traditions and practices akin and original to their origin (in other words, not be snatched up by users on the Web and taken or sold to gain profit. The chapter ends with the push for a conversation about why digitizing matters, and particularly how we can look to technology as a way of understanding (and being ready for) what's to come. However, in order to look to the future, emphasis on lessening the divide between the digital "have's" and "have nots" needs to close.

Lastly, chapter ten is a summative conclusion focusing on the concept of "Hope, Hope and Possible Digitized Futures". Reed begins the conclusion by noting that "which technologies get developed, which become widely used, and how they get used (to better our lives or make them worse) will be up to us, not to the technologies" (195). I think this is a really profound statement because it gives the ownership back to us, as humans and dismisses the notions that our lives are controlled by technology. We are in control of the technology we choose (or choose not) to incorporate into our lives. How dependent we are on those technologies is entirely by choice. Reed mentions the medical breakthroughs with technology and how technology can be utilized in a way that can sincerely benefit peoples lives in the medical world. Additionally, Reed also introduces the notion of Artificial Intelligence and what kind of implications such AI's can have on our society. Lastly, Reed leaves us with the task of considering what kind of world these new technologies will thrive in. Will it be a society akin to The Hunger Games? I certainly hope not. Or perhaps, as Reed notes, do we wish to "use our human intelligence and astounding technology to make the world a place where all beings, human and otherwise, can thrive"(198).

I like this image to portray this week's section of reading because I think it pairs nicely with the common perceptions and assumptions made in reference to technologies role in the classroom. Notice the far right picture which is the actual depiction focuses as the students using the technology, not the teacher. To me this is a successful integration of technology in the classroom and not just "using" it like you would a projector in the slide before it. The teacher is actually standing over the students, clearly directing them in what he wants them to accomplish.

       

Digitized Lives: Culture, Power, and Social Change in the Internet Era Pt. 1

T.V. Reed's book titled, Digitized Lives: Culture, Power, and Social Change in the Internet Era explores issues of digital technology and its impact on culture. Chapters 1-5 specifically deal with understanding this digital culture and the confusion that surrounds this evolving cyberspace, as well as the advantages and disadvantages technology poses within our culture.

Reed begins by breaking down the terminology into fluid and easy to understand rhetoric in chapter one titled, "How Do We Make Sense of Digitized Cultures?". As understood by Reed, culture is defined as "values, beliefs and behaviors that are typical and defining of a group...Cultures are fluid, not neatly bounded entities. Recent anthology argues that 'cultures' are always fictions, are always artificial constructions of observers" (Reed 2). In referencing technology, he argues that within culture, the introductions of technology are leaving a profound impact on culture. Asking questions about the impacts of technology on individuals, and how to utilize these new technologies in a positive way is consistently addressed as Reed explores issues of community, identity, and social justice in online realms. Reed consistently refers to technology as a tool, arguing that it can be used for good as well as evil in reference to issues of cyberstalking or sex trafficking, which are issues explored later in chapter five. Within chapter one, the subtitle of the text is fleshed out, defining the terms culture, power, and social change in reference how they pertain to the utilization of digital technologies. This attempt to explain and articulate digital technologies influence and presence in these three discourses of economic and social justice is the first main point I believe Reed aims to address in the first half of the book.

Reed begins by defining culture, power, and social change and their relationships between one another. From there, the different genres of digital and cultural analyses are addressed. One that caught my eye specifically was the notion of textual analysis in digital spaces. According to Reed, textual analysis examines the following:

The verbal (written and spoken words), visual (colors, layout, still and moving images), and aural (voice, music, and other sounds)…Much digital text analysis focuses on what we most often mean by text, the written word, examining the verbiage on a web page or the conversation in a chat room, doing the close reading associated with literary analysis. (14)

This is an aspect of digital technology and culture that is particularly interesting to me as a scholar and a teacher. Examining technology and multimedia works allows us to view technology under a more critical lens, understanding its form and process, rather then just using its features. In the composition classroom, I feel as though textual analysis through a digital lens can have a profound influence on the composing process both written and through multimedia projects.

The end of chapter one focuses on divides and how the real world vs. digital can have intense separation based on economics and user access. Lastly, the notion of digital terminology and the study behind this discourse is introduced, offering what I believe to be Reed’s second main objective in the first half of the book: “the culture surrounding and embedded in the devices and processes” (28).  

Chapter two titled, “How is the Digital World Made? The Dreamers/ Workers/ Users Production Cycle” digs deeper into the understanding of the history of the Internet where Reed notes, “the Internet is more of a process than a thing” (31). From initial military use, to open access, chapter two takes us through the transitions from a military and scientific origin of the WWB to the radical hippies of the 1960’s and 70’s which created Silicon Valley, one of the largest technological innovation centers in the world. To me, chapter two really begins to tie in these ideas of culture and social justice through the theme of access. Throughout the history of the Internet, the transitions of user-access raise questions of geographical and social limitations, and the access barriers people often face as a result of these limitations. From moving to different Internet “hosts” such as Netscape and Internet Explorer, the Web 2.0 is born, which is an attempt to “commercialize digital spaces” (37). These technologies transcend from the computer to other interactive devices such as smart phones to digital tablets and video games. Through the development and evolution of the Internet, Reed begins to explore globalization and how digital production and competition is fueled by an attempt to surpass and compete with other companies at the cost of poor labor conditions and excessive electronic waste. The last portion of the chapter focuses on the wastes and conditions of the lower class workers in these massive technological companies, noting that often times women and young children are often exposed to harmful chemicals and long, labor-intensive work.

Chapter three titled, “Who Are We Online? Digital Masquerade, Privacy, Anonymity, Community and Cyborg Dis/Embodiment” centers around the theme of digital identity. Questions such as “Who are We Online?” and whether or not we create fake identities is presented. Reed argues “cultural identities in our postmodern era are less stable, more malleable than they have been historically, and that ICT’s are playing a role in that destabilization” (54). The role of technology then provides a “mask” for users to hide behind, which Reed argues isn’t necessarily a bad thing. By utilizing these digital spaces and playing with identity, people are able to form communities and interact in a way that they may not feel comfortable in “real life” spaces.

            The next notion that Reed introduces in chapter three deals with issues of privacy, and how much access the government has to material on the Internet. The statistics presented in this section are shocking and troublesome. As a Facebook user, I was uncomfortable at the limitation of privacy that users have, even if one sets their preferences to “private”. Reed also sheds light to the notion of disclosure, and how digital spaces provide a safety for individuals to disclose personal information that they might not otherwise share with one another in a face-to-face setting. As users of the digital interface, we are also afforded certain legal rights, which are listed and explained within the chapter. From there, Reed touches on the idea of cyborgs, and how interconnected individuals are with technology, noting, “What all posthumanists have in common is the sense that computers are prosthetic, and like the prosthetic devices used by amputees, they give us capabilities we would otherwise lack” (67). This addition of technology to our lives is surely a benefit, but to how much are we dependent on it? As a result of this dependency, Reed discusses cyberbullying and that “Eighty percent of young people interviewed about bullying said they were more likely to bully online than offline” (71). Cyberbullying has become such a problem in our society the rate of suicide as a result of bullying has dramatically increased. In contrasts, Reed discusses the notion of virtual communities, and how the Web can be a place for people to connect for all intentions (political, romantically, socially). Though critics of online communities note that “some authentic human relation is lost when people connect only through online media” (74). This quote brings us to the topic of how much is too much? Though online communities are a great way for people to interact, Reed discusses language and how important verbal language is to human interaction. Lastly, the notions of cultural hegemony and imperialism are addressed, and how people can become oppressed in online realms and spaces.  

Chapter four titled, “Is Everybody Equal Online? Digitizing Gender, Ethnicity, and Dis/Ability” discusses equality in online spaces. Cynthia and Richard Selfe discuss the terminology associated with technology, and how one can argue that the terminology such as “desktop” or “interface” can speak to a specific population that is typically dominated in online realms: the white upper-middle class male. This can largely be attributed to the fact that this population was primarily responsible for the creation of the WWB, however, it’s interesting to consider these precedents, and how technology and user access is largely catered towards a specific population. Reed argues “the most effective way to overcome these cultural biases has been to bring greater gender, class, and ethnic/racial diversity into the design and implementation of digital devices and processes” (87). Offering ideas such as, creating more racially diverse avatars in video games, and perhaps making a more gender-neutral packaging for the games themselves can begin to combat these discrimination's present within technology. I found the story of the women who was attacked in a video game because the participants were male and recognized her voice as female to be very disturbing. Reed poses the question as to whether or not the Internet is a man, and I can see some validity to this argument based on the stories like the one discussed in the chapter. Consequently, the feminists’ movement has made a deep online presence in advocating for women’s rights on the Web. Issues of racial equality are fleshed out by Lisa Nakamura to which she refers to newer digital versions of racial stereotypes as “cybertypes” arguing, “the shift to real identities online helps get rid of racism” (97-98).  By making your racial identity known online, Nakamura believes it makes online users more aware of their language and their racial commentary. Lastly, Reed discusses disability and how digital spaces can be a safe place for disabled people to interact, without the emphasis or attention on their disability as identifying who they are as individuals. The issue of technology in regards to disability poses a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the text offers that it breaks down the “otherness” often present within disability. In contrast, Reed argues that it then makes disability invisible, which isn’t necessarily a good thing because it should be a “choice by people with disabilities online, not something foisted on them by putatively able-bodied folks who’d rather not know” (103).

The last chapter in this summary is chapter five titled, “Digitizing Desire? Sexploration and/or Sexploitation”.  In this chapter Reed makes the argument that “ the problem with the Web is not that there is too much sex on it, but that there is not enough” (109). Virtual sex education and a way for individuals to gain awareness about sex is a complex issue to which parents have to monitor and people decipher between. Within issues of sex, cybersex refers to “sexual acts performed through the medium of digital technology” (111). Whether this is through wanted or unwanted sexual performance, Reed notes that there is a definite sexual presence in online spaces. Pornography, which is largely dominated by female executive roles, is a medium to which is easily accessible. As a result of the porn industry, Reed touches on the issues of sex trafficking and sexual exploitation and how technology has provided a way for this oppression to easily occur. In reference to queer identities online, Reed notes that “the Web has provided safe spaces with a degree of anonymity that have allowed some people whose sexual orientation is unwelcome or treated with active hostility in their home communities to find each other, share knowledge, and offer support” (118). However, there is also a very negative presence online that leads to gay bashing and oppression to queer individuals because as noted previously the “mask” of hiding behind a computer screen allows those individuals who have something homophobic and oppressive to say the success of saying it anonymously.

The image I chose depicts several different themes I believe is represented in this segment of reading. Perhaps the main points are user accessibility and dependency, but I hope we get to touch on these images and explanations more in class J