at16g13

Open access is a topic that I have studied previously during my course, and last week’s blog post caused me to revisit the debate.

Previously, my focus had primarily been on open access within academia, but after reading the blog posts of others, I have now realised that the debate can be extended to all online content in some respects. For example, the music industry is one that has been rocked by innovative new methods of distribution, namely streaming. Whilst open access within academia is seen to have the benefit of reducing the cost for the consumer without necessarily affecting the costs of the author, streaming reduces the cost for the consumer whilst denting the former profits of the content producer. My comment on Hannah’s post highlighted this difference: for a musician, the commercialisation of their product is necessary for subsistence, whilst the scientist is funded by other means.

So, whilst I argued in my original post that open access is more positive than negative for academia, I have now come to realise that for other content, this may not be the case. In effect, we must decide whether we value the remuneration of musicians, or cost saving and convenience for music consumers.

Furthermore, large parts of the Web are also heavily concerned with free access to content. An article in “The Drum” predicted that by 2016, more than 90% of online content would be behind paywalls. However, this is clearly not the case. Websites seem to have decided that it is not worth trying to make Internet users subscribe for content and advertising has come out as the clear winner. Ad-blocking services such as the browser extension AdBlock threaten to upset the status-quo as online businesses are deprived of an estimated $22 billion in advertising revenue, as more than 200 million Internet surfers now use ad blocking software. No clear solutions for these problems present themselves, and content producers are going to have to work hard to fix revenue issues.

Nevertheless, my opinion remains that as a society we should champion free and equal access to content for all, especially content that is informative, and educational.

My Comments:

Comment 1

Comment 2

Open Access is an initiative to widen the availability of content, such as information and even entertainment, to a larger audience who might have been previously out of access due to prohibitive costs, through the distributive powers of the Internet. It is an issue that has been increasing in importance as many traditional methods of information and research dissemination, have become increasingly expensive (e.g. traditional published scientific journals), and new, easy, and cheap methods of distribution have sprung up on the Internet (green open access) as well as a rise in open access physical publishing (gold open access).

Open Access presents many positives and negatives, which has stirred fierce debate about whether it should be adopted.

Pros:

• Content can reach a wider audience
• Greater propagation of information leads to higher quality research
• Money that may otherwise have been spent on subscription fees can be saved by academics and academic institutions, and spent on other things such as further research
• Articles can be published quicker

Cons:

• Lacking the reputation of respected journals
• Could lead to poor quality work
• Model may not be sustainable

Whilst it is easy to understand both perspectives, eventually the scientific community is going to have to decide how it wishes to proceed. In my personal opinion, the benefits here outweigh the negatives, but can the community as a whole be convinced? It has been noted that scientists are often wary of changing the way things have been done and are likely to cling onto established practices. It is understandable that greater trust is placed in long standing peer-reviewed journals, but “green” open access (open access delivered via online repositories) has been growing and many repositories such as the Social Science Research Network and PubMed Central, now dominate their fields.

Another point of contention, are the costs of open access publishing. The most widely known format for providing open access content, charges the author for submission of a scientific paper, which has caused many to question the open access method. However, the Directory of Open Access Journals has reported that roughly two thirds of open access journals do not charge author-side fees, whereas up to three quarters of non-open access journals do.

To understand more about the differences between the methods of open access publishing, watch the following video:

The majority of my post has focused on open access from a higher-education academic perspective but it is important to note that open access can also benefit other parts of education and society. An interesting and beneficial organisation is the Khan Academy which provides high quality and free online education for anyone, in the form of articles, tutorials, and videos. The content is wide and varied from subjects such as Maths, Computing, Economics, and even Art.

Whilst it is clear that open access initiatives are increasing in number and scope, proving wrong those who have insisted that the majority of content would be behind paywalls by now [see here], the lasting success of open access remains to be seen.

Sources:

Open Access: Six Myths to Put to Rest (2013). The Guardian. Last Accessed: 6/5/16. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/oct/21/open-access-myths-peter-suber-harvard

Education Finally Ripe For Radical Innovation by Social Entrepreneurs (2013). Forbes. Last Accessed: 6/5/16. Available: http://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/04/07/education-finally-ripe-for-radical-innovation-by-social-entrepreneurs/#c88eb2b7a557

Open Access Explained! (2012) . PHD Comics. Last Accessed: 6/5/16. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L5rVH1KGBCY

90% of Online Content to be Held Behind Paywalls in Three Years Media Company Survey Suggests (2013). The Drum. Last Accessed: 6/5/16. Available: http://new.thedrum.com/news/2013/04/12/90-online-content-be-held-behind-paywalls-three-years-media-company-survey-suggests

Dramatically Bringing Down the Cost of Education with OER (2012). Wiley, D., Green, C., and Soares, L. Last Accessed: 6/5/16. Available: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535639.pdf

This week’s topic was one about which I have been thinking a lot recently, due in part to the topic of my dissertation (privacy, Edward Snowden, and public opinion), and in part to a personal interest in the matter. Whilst the scope was broad, I was instantly drawn to the area of data and privacy.

Data mining is a subject that has often been in the news recently due to the ethical grey area it inhabits and the range of subjective opinions it elicits. Reading the blogs of others has only caused me to further consider the wide range of attitudes that exist. Eleanor’s blog post in particular talked of how variances in culture can lead to different attitudes towards online privacy in different societies. This prompted me to think back to the interviews I had conducted in my study, and the possibility of receiving completely different opinions if my participants had been from a different country. The more I think about it, the more I realise that no matter how you approach ethical issues and grey areas, it is impossible to do the right thing in the eyes of everyone.

I also tried to read blog posts about other types of ethical issues. On Stuart’s blog, I came across further privacy concerns, but this time in the context of employers delving into the social media of potential employees. Whilst it is understandable that an employer may want to learn more about a candidate’s behaviour and disposition, it is worrying that in future, no one will have a safe space to express themselves naturally for fear of potential retribution for anything considered unsavoury.

Also, on Richard’s blog, I read about the digital divide, and the issues of low broadband connectivity that still plague low income countries. This led me to conduct some research into initiatives to improve Internet access. I found articles about low cost 4G phones and data contracts being introduced in Africa, which to me seems like an ingenious and cost effective way of eschewing the broadband problem.

Overall I enjoyed topic 4 and found all of the ethical issues raised to be stimulating.

Below are links to both of my comments.

Comment 1

Comment 2

In the increasingly networked society we live in, for those wanting to stay connected, avoiding the use of social media seems impossible. Social networks such as Facebook have grown to a massive scale, and now exist as a platform where multiple independent parties can interact, be it people, businesses, political parties, charities, etc.

Whenever you interact with a business, an event, a third party app, or even the social network itself, it is likely that you will be asked to part with some of your personal data. Often, promises are made that your data will be kept confidential and only used for the stated purposes… but it is an ever growing ethical issue, as to how much data is it acceptable to ask for, and what is done with it. Then there are the companies who mine publicly available social media data with whom you might not have had any interaction whatsoever.

For example, a company called Rapleaf Inc claims to have mined social data on more than 389 million individuals by crawling the Web, specifically sites such as forums, social networks, blogs, review sites, and collecting as much publicly available information as possible. This information is used to build up a profile for any given individual, so that this data can be sold to marketers or businesses wishing to market. This is a brilliant opportunity for them to learn more about their customers – who may have no idea that this is being done.

These kinds of practices raise many ethical issues:

• Is it right to collect peoples’ data without their consent?
• If the data was made publicly available is it all just fair game?
• Is it ok to profit off the personal data of others?

Some may disagree with the unwarranted collection of their data, but what if it is genuinely improving their user experience of the Web without them even realising? Is it ethical then?

Where we really run into unethical grounds, is when businesses mine data that was never public to begin with, without express permission. The social media sharing and messaging service/app Path, ran into trouble with its users when it was revealed that it was collecting data such as phone numbers without consent. For many, this was a blatant breach of their privacy and trust.

However, one thing can be agreed: it is necessary for free online services to find ways to make money, or else they will go bust. Data mining remains a straightforward and profitable way to stay afloat, especially when users are so used to services being free that many would not consider paying for them.

Check out the video below for the opinions of some students on data collection on social networks.

Sources:

Tech Insider (2014). Social Big Data: The User Data Collected By Each Of The World’s Largest Social Networks — And What It Means. Last Accessed: 23/4/16. Available: http://www.techinsider.io/social-big-data-the-type-of-data-collected-by-social-networks-2-2014-1

Simply Zesty (2012).  The Rise Of Big Data And How Social Media Uses It. Last Accessed: 23/4/16. Available: https://www.simplyzesty.com/blog/article/august-2012/the-rise-of-big-data-and-how-social-media-uses-it

Mashable UK (2010). How Companies Are Using Your Social Media Data. Last Accessed: 24/4/16. Available: http://mashable.com/2010/03/02/data-mining-social-media/#oKX5LBCmhmqD

Venture Beat (2012). Your address book is mine: Many iPhone apps take your data. Last Accessed: 24/4/16. Available: http://venturebeat.com/2012/02/14/iphone-address-book/

Reading through the blogs of others has caused me to consider new aspects of online authentic profiles that I had not thought of before.

In my original post, I highlighted the importance of trying to find a good balance for how much information you should include about yourself on professional social media sites such as LinkedIn – not too little as an employer will want to find out about you, and not too much as you don’t want an overload of information. However, I started to think about how perhaps you should not focus on manufacturing your profile so heavily as to seem inauthentic. This is because after reading SotonSam’s post, my attention was drawn towards a study where participants were asked to describe themselves both authentically, and ideally. These descriptions were shown to independent parties, who were generally able to identify which descriptions were authentic and which weren’t. So it shows that whilst you want a good balance of information about yourself on your profile – you should make sure you don’t manufacture your profile to the point you seem insincere.

Another aspect for building authenticity caught my attention on The Marketing Fresher’s blog post. Whilst I had mentioned in my post briefly the possibility of linking to a portfolio of your work, I did not explore in depth the benefits of this as described in this blog post. It seems like an incredibly good idea to back up any claims that you make on a digital professional profile with evidence to give some clout to your claims. You are much more likely to be seen as authentic if you have proof for everything you say about yourself.

One final tip that I had not considered before, via Hannpress’s post, is to consider how your professional profile looks. It can only help if your profile is visually engaging and easy to navigate. If it isn’t easy on the eyes, would you want to spend time looking at it?

My comments:

https://sotonsam.wordpress.com/2016/03/12/topic-3-building-a-professional-digital-profile/#comment-17

https://missceospeaks.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/topic-3-building-a-professional-digital-profile/#comment-14

In the modern workplace it has become increasingly important to have an authentic professional digital presence. Employers like it when they can see that a potential employee has invested time in maintaining an online presence be it in the form of a blog, or their own website, or even on professional social media sites just as LinkedIn. It shows initiative, and you would be surprised at the opportunities that can arise from being noticed online [6].

Running a blog is one way to draw positive attention to yourself and is a useful way to help build up a professional digital profile. It can allow you to express your creativity and passion in a way that a potential employer may not be able to see otherwise [1]. It shows motivation and dedication when you make an effort to frequent post and create original content and it helps to provide authenticity as to claims you may have made about yourself. Similarly, having your own website can provide the same benefits. You can make frequent informative posts, or you can link to a portfolio of your work to show potential employers just what you are capable of – solid authentic proof of your skills.

Also beneficial, is the use of professional social media sites. One such site is LinkedIn, which allows you to create a profile where you can detail your employment and educational history, your skills and experience, and your desires employment wise. Having information about yourself on LinkedIn along with a profile picture and links to the network of professionals and recruiters (who may just offer you a job) also helps to cement your authenticity. Furthermore 77% of all job postings are on LinkedIn – almost half of which are not posted anywhere else, and 94% of all recruiters use LinkedIn to search for employees [4].

Across all of these methods for building a professional digital profile, it is important to know both how much and which information you should be providing. It is unwise to have very little information about yourself, otherwise you do not gain very much from the presence you have created online and your authenticity is weak. At the same time, you should not bombard people with a sea of information – they simply may not have the time or will to read it all [2]. It is best to highlight what you think the key information about yourself is, and make this clear and prominent within the webpage [5]. And finally, I shall remind you of the woeful tale of Justine Sacco, whose ill-conceived tweet in poor taste caused global mass offence and cost her her job – the moral of the story being, check everything you post and make sure it could not be misconstrued in any negative way [3].

Sources:

1. The Employable (2014). How Blogging Can Help You Get a Job. Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: http://www.theemployable.com/index.php/2014/10/28/blogging-can-help-get-job/
2. BBC News (2013). Job Hunting: How to Promote Yourself Online (video). Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25217962
3. Jon Ronson (2015). How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life. The New York Times Magazine. Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html
4. Lisa Harris (2014). Using Social Media in Your Job Search. University of Southampton: Web Science MOOC. Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: http://moocs.southampton.ac.uk/websci/2014/03/13/ill-tweet-job-spec-snap-cv/
5. Ohio State University: Building Your Professional Online Presence. Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: https://asccareerservices.osu.edu/sites/asccareerservices.osu.edu/files/Building %20a%20Professional%20Online%20Presence.pdf
6. Aaron Crouch (2013). Creating A Professional Online Presence Is Crucial For Today’s Job Market: Here’s How. Makeuseof. Last Accessed: 13/3/15. Available: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/creating-a-professional-online-presence-is-crucial-for-todays-job-market-heres-how/

This week’s topic has helped me to think about online identity in ways I hadn’t before. First of all, it got me thinking about my own online identity. In my previous post, I mentioned that I have multiple online identities that could be split up into personal, very personal, and professional – and in a comment, someone asked me to elaborate on this.

My professional identity is reserved for websites such as LinkedIn, where I am likely to be in contact with colleagues and potential employers. My personal identity is represented on the majority of my online interactions, namely my Facebook account – where I interact with friends, close friends, and family alike. My very personal identity consists of my Tumblr blog about which not many people know, where I voice my opinions completely freely and will often reblog content that is “NSFW” that I wouldn’t share on Facebook. This account is not linked to the rest of my online identities in any way and cannot be found unless I was to disclose my username/url.

Therefore, my own preference clearly is in the camp of multiple tailored online identities – however, this is my own choice. Tom’s post got me thinking about how for some people, multiple online identities is an absolute necessity (my comment). I had not before considered the fact that some people have no choice regarding how to present themselves online – for example, journalists requiring anonymity for their own safety must often create fake profiles or limit any information released about themselves, and some minorities may need to hide certain aspects of their online identities from certain groups.

Whilst I have sung the praises of multiple online personalities, I also came to see the benefits of a multi-purpose personal/professional identity, as mentioned on Ellie’s blog – (my comment). One of the benefits of this is that a potential employer would be interested to find out about your personal life and preferences to see how you would fit into a team but my personal preference would still be to keep these separate as I would prefer to maintain a little privacy in this scenario.

Overall I have found this topic very interesting and have reevaluated my own online presence.

Online identities are an increasingly important concept in the age of the social Web. In the past, Internet users may have been more likely to experience the Web behind a shield of anonymity with few ties to their offline persona. Today however, it is likely that a person will have at least one online identity, if not multiple, as the ever expanding collection of web services and social networks ask us for more details about ourselves, and we willingly upload them. As Krotoski (2012) points out, having fully fledged online profiles helps to encourage authenticity, and this has become critical to the success of social networks such as Facebook. Confidence that someone is who they say they are, helps to place much greater trust on the network.

However, as illustrated by Costa and Torres (2011), a new dilemma is facing those who interact with the Web, is it better to have one unified online identity, or multiple? It is rare that a modern user of the web will interact with only one website on which they create an online persona – there are several popular social networks alone on the Web today. Such a large amount of online spaces where one can have an identity presents a problem – should the same persona be presented for each, or is it better to be tailor it for each platform?

Arguments For One Identity

• One important factor to think about is simplicity and convenience. It is much easier to manage one unified identity across all the web services that one uses. This also makes one more easily identifiable across networks (Diaz, 2010) – consistency regarding things such as usernames and profile pictures make it easier to be found across the Web.
• Consistency also leads into authenticity. One is more likely to be perceived as being authentic if their online profile remains consistent, and complete anonymity is always likely to provoke suspicion.

Arguments For Multiple Identities

• Most people use the Web for both personal and professional purposes. The majority would prefer to have a clear separation between their personal and professional spheres online, so that they can present themselves in one way when interacting with friends, and in another way when interacting with others. Some types of interaction may not be appropriate for all online connections.
• Even if one was to try and maintain a single unified identity, as Costa and Torres (2011) point out, information can be added about us by others and so not everything on our profiles is within our control (e.g. pictures added by others, comments, tags in posts).

Each individual may have different reasons for how they decide to curate their online identities – mine for example is very much split up into personal, very personal, and professional.

Sources:

Costa, C., and Torres, R. (2011). To be or not to be, the importance of Digital Identity in the networked society. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias , 9, 47-53.

Diaz, Z. (2010). 7 Steps To Building Your Online Identity. Retrieved February 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UlcOX1fZW4

Internet Society. Manage Your Identity. Retrieved February 2016 from: http://www.internetsociety.org/manage-your-identity

Krotoski, A. (2012). Online identity: is authenticity or anonymity more important? Retrieved February 2016, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/apr/19/online-identity-authenticity-anonymity

Since posting my summary on Digital Visitors and Digital Residents, I have read the views presented on the blogs of others and been presented with things I had not considered before.

The most interesting to me was the statement on Agnieszka’s blog that one’s position on the visitor/resident spectrum is likely to change at different stages in one’s lifetime. My current position being closer towards the resident end is due to my current situation. I am a university student who needs to be constantly using the Internet for things such as conducting research, contacting my peers for things like collaborative studying or for socialising, managing aspects of university communication like email, submitting assignments, etc. These activities are all things that I am likely to be doing frequently for large parts of the day, and hence lead to my digital residency. Having lots of free time as a student, I am also liable to use the Internet to access multimedia such as music and video for entertainment. There are very few tasks for which I use the Internet as a digital visitor: these may be things such as shopping or online banking.

This led me to consider that in later life as my situation changes, it is likely that I will become less of a resident and more a visitor for certain aspects of my digital life. Being a Web Science student, during my working life my dwindling residency is likely to be limited as I will probably still use the Internet most of the day – however, perhaps in different ways than I have before. This links to another part of Agnieszka’s post that I found quite interesting. She had visualised the aspects of her web presence regarding visitor and resident traits. It built a clearer picture of where she is on the scale, and shows that one need not just pick a lone point on a line, as most people are likely to be visitors in some aspects and residents in others.

Delving deeper into the topic, I began to think about why some may be more adept at using certain technologies and have higher levels of digital literacy than others. Socio-economic factors that could limit digital literacy are quite easy to think of, such as a lack of access to technology and the internet due to price barriers, but more difficult to propose are potential cultural factors. I wondered if it could be attributed to a lower importance being placed on technical abilities in certain cultures, or perhaps a language barrier due to tech and Web content being unavailable in certain languages, or even restricted access in countries where Internet censorship exists. Overall, this topic has made me think more about the way people use technology and the Web, and the reasons why.