Chapter 5: Social Has a Shape: Why Networks Matter AND Chapter 6: How (Using) the Web (Mindfully) Can Make You Smarter by Debbie Bagnato

Howard Rheingold, in his imitable style, covers a lot of important areas that impact our online space and daily live, in these final two chapters. Networks—like communities in the old-fashioned sense—have structures which influence both people and their online behavior. Think of Facebook or Twitter and how their similarities and differences identify them. Modern social networks maintained through voice and human connection, place them beside the roots of civilization. Our technologies today expand that reach so one’s voice can be heard, or more directly, read and responded to globally. Online networks that support social networks, which is most of them today, share unique characteristics of both people and network interaction.

A line from the John Guare 1990 hit play, Six Degrees of Separation, suggests that humans are all separated by six people. This concept originated with social scientist Stanley Milgram’s 1967 study. He proved through his “path length”, it took each person an average distance of 5.5 steps to get information, via the US mail, to one contact person in Boston. His study later prompted Duncan Watts and Steve Strogatz in 2001 to recreate Milgram’s test using email instead. The outcome also proved about six steps, validating both the original study and the new one which substituted online resources. This illustrated that our world is a large network BUT with our connections added, becomes far more manageable. Watts and Strogatz even demonstrated how large networks appear much smaller by bridging them together.

A spinoff of the Framingham Heart Study entitled, “Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study” is devoted entirely to discovery of what makes and keeps people happy both in online and traditional communities. The study is based on 4739 participants tested from 1983 through 2003, using a four item scale with a broad array of attributes involving social networks and diverse social ties. The outcome was clusters of happy and unhappy people, dependent on relationships within the study. Happiness or its opposite, extends up to three degrees of separation. Ultimately, those surrounded by happy people who themselves were central in their network, indicated current happiness and probability of future happiness. Happiness breeds happiness both online and in real time. “The surprising implication is that due to online resources, at least part of your happiness might depend on people you never met” (198).

Each network is influenced by how much connectivity occurs between its nodes or connections.  David Reed, one of the original architects of the Internet, clarified Sarnoff’s, Metcalfe’s, and his own law regarding the value of connectivity. Group-forming networks grow faster because they serve the special interests of many. Hence, Reed’s Law:”…shows the value of the network grows proportionately not to the square of the users, but exponentially” (199).

Social Network Analysis (SNA) can be a form of both socialization and centrality crucial to business opportunity. Being a bridge or one who links two networks can benefit all connected. Marc A. Smith explains that people give their time, talent, and support online in exchange for: “Social capital, knowledge capital, and communion” (204). Mark Granovetter further elaborates and explains how this tie is strengthened by: “…the amount of time of the emotional intensity, the intimacy…and the reciprocal services which characterize the tie” (206). Through Rheingold’s discussions with Wellmann, the importance of densely and sparely-knit ties is clarified. As in traditional associations, some “heterogenerous ties” are essential to cover needs our close-knit alliances cannot. Despite our societies and lifestyles becoming networked, we the individual are central to our society. Many different connections result in our centrality.

A major parental concern is Networked Individualism, which began with the portability of phones, and the breakdown of connection to our children’s callers. In the early days of cell phones, we often inquired where our callers were; the novelty of being somewhere other than home was a new feature. It was an exciting time but also an end to knowing who was calling for our kids, and that sense of control. Now we must accept our children hold the world of online devices in their hands and can tweet, email, and Facebook anywhere or time they choose.

Social capital is beautifully described in Rheingold’s recollections of Philcat and the friendship which grew out of their online community. True social capital was established through their friendships that evolved naturally online. Reciprocity is also an essential element for online communities, networks, and collaborations as are trust and cooperation. Rheingold states: “Unlike financial capital, trust increases when you use it and becomes depleted if not used” (220). Bonding, bridging, and linking are all different but necessary aspects of connecting networks and people from different communities with diverse talents.

Growing a PLN is simplified into steps one might confidently try as the process is completely demystified. The facts of Facebook and its lasting power and traceability are showcased.  The importance of privacy and being mindful about what we put on the Web—especially Facebook--is made simple; persistence, replicability, scalability, and searchability. Because of social media, things can almost always be found. So we must always remember the invisible audience, context collisions, as well as public and private convergence.

Looking at the final chapter, Rheingold reviews all the tools he has given us through this journey. We take a look at dataveillance through playbor, Facebook, and Google clicks, and pay attention to important issues like identity theft and personal privacy issues. The public sphere must always be understood and respected as it will bring private into the public realm.

Habermas theory that well-funded public relations can change or mold public opinion is questioned by Rheingold, with the advent of online resources. His question is ignored by Habermas, leaving one to question his position. But the point is proven by recent online efforts and persuasive social media results that: “Powerful forces most certainly do influence public opinion” (242). Remix ethics are also discussed as we remember Napster and the days of free music and movies, prior to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. While the artist’s rights are protected, the creativity of others is stunted. Technological enclosure is far more problematic as it leaves the door open for even greater restrictions on all Web activities.

Parents fears are allayed by both Rheingold’s insight of digital culture and danah boyd’s sound advice, stressing communication and remembering what really concerns parents the most. Open dialogue is recommended and the ability to listen and connect to your kids. In closing, Rheingold reminds each reader of the lessons he gave throughout this delightful guide; his five literacies in a nutshell. Then he reviews attention, crap detection, participation, collaboration and network smarts. These tools coupled with literacy, our greatest tool, can protect and advance each of us in our digital world of today.

I have personally found these tools and the depth of information very helpful. I have also enjoyed Howard Rheingold’s comfortable and direct style. Thriving online is crucial in today’s society, and the more comfortable one is with online practices, the better they can function. The following are just some thoughts I would like to throw out for thought and discussion.

1.      Because of the proven effects of others in my networks on my happiness, should I strive to be the central force to promote happiness or remove myself from groups that are devoid of happy and upbeat relationships?

2.      Based on the amazing story of Rheingold’s Virtual Community, and the social capital that grew from their friendships, would you aspire to form your own community? Or if you are involved in one, do you feel inspired to take it to a more personal level?

3.      Because of the transparency of Facebook and the likelihood of comments, photos, and relationships to be traced, are you still comfortable with posting regularly or do you feel compelled to rethink your account settings?

Mozilla, Computers, Kids, and the Mystery of The Kracken! by Debbie Bagnato

Where do I begin with this topic? I thought this was such a fantastic program, and had trouble making up my mind on which activity to follow through to the end. After dabbling in a couple, I followed through on “Kracken the Code” and had my own virtual classroom with myself—I did well though guys, because I followed the suggestions on the Legit-o-Meter (which is simply crap detection for kids) and was not hoodwinked! The reason I landed here was mainly because my oldest grandkids are eight years old and that is the suggested age for this “Web Literacy Basic.” Also, let’s face it, if I want to teach something I better know how to answer all questions; some of the other activities, I would have had questions of my own…But, looking up the Kracken was great fun, and I was impressed with its colorful history and the amount of scholarship written on this big old squid. Lord Alfred Tennyson, The Kraken (1830) is pretty important stuff, not to mention the references in Moby Dick! This gigantic sea urchin has been written about since the late 13^th century; however, there is no concrete evidence—not even in the London Magazine or Gentleman’s monthly Intelligence (straight out of Harvard College Library). The bottom line is that in the twenty minutes allotted, I was able to quickly locate these sources, check for dates, authors, sites, spelling, publish dates, domains, and judge the validity of all the above. That is an amazing feat, when I recall the hours it used to take to track information sitting in the library and scanning through books, periodicals, and gaining access to old magazines which could not leave the reading room! More importantly, it was fun; this was like a game to try and prove the big fish OR disprove its existence. The outcome was a draw, due to its legendary but unproven history, but the practice was entertaining and educational.

If this simple lesson could attract me, I am sure it would be much more fun to do with young students, split into groups and given the same instructions for their task. What I don’t understand is why this is not a regular part of the curriculum for elementary school students. When my children started grammar school in the late 1980’s, they had computer class a few days a week. By the 1990’s, the classes were in a different school, but they still had to attend and were not as thrilled by any of it as I would have thought. The reasons were simple; not enough time to really learn how to do many things on there, all of the computers were not equal in how they worked, and the lessons they might have benefitted from were simply not there. This may have been there school(s)—I had four children so they would have had different experiences over the years. Or, it may have been the mentality that it was not as important a course so, therefore, was not given the necessary time and attention by anyone. What I found so astounding was in Laura’s blog, she describes the same mentality towards computer literacy by elementary schools today as my children experienced over twenty years ago. Yes Laura, I believe you have nailed it completely; Computer education most definitely should be the fourth “R.” Because of the necessity of computer skills, each school should have this course of study implemented as a regular part of their curriculum. Instead, however, this is not the case in most areas, and when children could be learning the tools they will need to master as they grow, they are only getting a very basic introduction to computers with little opportunity to grasp the potential they have in their hands.

Students should have this tool as part of their studies and it should be treated as an equal to the other core courses, with extra help available. Not all students may have parents who are computer-savvy at home, or the skills they need to master may not be things the parents are familiar with. The programs looked so intriguing and inviting on this website, my initial reaction was that perhaps many schools use them. In reality, that is not so. My granddaughter had little to no computer-time in her school in Manahawkin and only now, in private school, is she getting some training. My grandson’s school, down in Cherry Hill area, has about the same. Both programs are limited at an age when they would really benefit from programs like the ones we just explored here, on Mozilla. From the simple beginnings, such as navigation, and search tools through the crap detection, security (kids have to understand this!) and web mechanics, that I could use a class in, these tools are so important for young students to learn now so later, they can progress with ease to the more complex things.

Composing, remixing, and designing skills are far more complicated to master if one cannot easily navigate their way around a computer. Why would the precious time when students can easily master the basics being ignored, and then these same kids will have a harder time acquiring the skills later to move forward with their computer “know-how.” I wish I could have that sense of familiarity with all things online, and I think students today should be given that opportunity. The need for accessibility is growing and these students will need to be able to find their way around in this global, fast-paced world. Getting them started now, right along with the other needed classes to groom them for the world, should be without question. My vote is in for the fourth “R”…How about you?

Howard Rheingold's "Social-Digital Know-How: The Arts and Sciences of Collective Intelligence" By Debbie Bagnato

First and foremost, I would like to personally thank Tim Berners-Lee for his helpful idea back in 1989 (otherwise known as the World Wide Web).

I am eternally grateful for this time-saving medium, which has come to my rescue on many occasions for a variety of needs. The "Web" is so ingrained in our lives that we would be hard-pressed if we found ourselves without it. I reflect on the manner we had to prepare for assignments when I was a kid or in high-school, and see myself hopefully awaiting periodicals in the library, counting my coins for the copy machine, and lugging a stack of reference books, encyclopedias, and God knows what else--simply to begin. Yikes! The beauty of the Web is the variety available of scholarly articles, factual accounts, and diverse information on which one could build their discussion, research, or use for whatever their agenda entails. At one's fingertips. Also, the availability of other like-minded individuals who can enhance, challenge, and encourage the follow-up we might--alone and tired--avoid.
I really enjoyed the information from McGonigal on the International Olympic Committee. This really brought gaming to the forefront and exemplified its far reach! I have a few "gamer" buddies and respect their obsession even more after reading this than before.The dependency on others in a collaboration such as this is crucial. Participation and direct experience are invaluable to perfect online collaborations of this magnitude.

Collective intelligence is not a new phenomenon; simply broadened because of the global implications and availability the Web affords its "spoilers."
Virtual Communities was of great interest to me, as these participants became more than online confederates. They became friends, online, through their shared interests. Sociologist Barry Wellman defines it this way: "communities are networks of interpersonal ties that provide sociability, support, information, a sense of belonging and social identity" (163). That sounds like friends in a neighborhood to me! Albeit, their community is online, it still requires the time, attention, and participation any thriving community needs. In truth, it may serve more people because of the availability from one's very home at any time of day or night. I find this fascinating; the idea that Natural hosts emerge in these communities makes it more inspiring. Many who might function more confidently in semi-anonymity might truly blossom in this setting. There is also a need for caution by those involved, but all those outlines are simply stated. This is a wonderful forum for people to explore and befriend others who have similar interests, and take it to a somewhat larger level than a tweet!

Crowdsourcing hinges on big business practices and is an important way to raise money, create enthusiasm for many, create substantial followers, bigger endorsements and simply motivate the masses. If I ever need to do this, I will closely research its possibilities...And I can because it's on the Web! Social Production reeks of capitalism BUT there is money to be made on free collaboration. Quite simply, none of these are new practices but the simplicity of using them for the masses (we simple folk) all go back to the creation of the World Wide Web and Tim Berners-Lee idea. I am happy that Wikipedia got a good word--I have always looked there for other sources and to see what their basic overview looked like, usually to good advantage. The three C's: coordination, cooperation, and collaboration all have a hand in the fluidity of web-based EVERYTHING! They are useful tools in any capacity (another C...) but have proven invaluable in all matters on the WWW. I bet Tim Berners-Lee never thought this would be the outcome--he was just looking for a simple solution. I'd say he got that--as did we--and so much more! And that's all Debbie has to say--for now.

Crap Detection-Then, Now and Always and the Power of Participation in a Media-Based Culture by Debbie Bagnato

This week’s readings proved quite enlightening at times, and served as a review / reinforcement of online tools and practices I have become familiar with over the past few years as a returning student. Both Howard Rheingold and Scott Rosenburg recommend “whois” as an expert source for detecting “crap” and though I have never personally used it, I have heard of its potential for this sort of detection. The other tips I liked from Rosenburg’s “In the Context of the Web Context: How to Check out any Web Page” include; checking the site’s established date, paying attention to the ads, checking for feedback options, and plugging in pieces of the text to Google to check for originality. I also liked the idea of googling the URL or reaching out to the author/ site owner. Most of these are not new but can be effective when a site is questionable. His insight was appreciated and very much to the point. Neil Postman’s “Bullshit and the Art of Crap Detection” was my favorite of all the readings. Delivered originally at the National Convention of Teachers on 11/28/69, using the phrase coined by Ernest Hemingway, his words can be applied to the art of crap detection discussed in relation to web research today. Postman covers pomposity, and fanaticism in writing, often more visible now due to the broad spectrum of online “writers” we are faced with daily. I especially liked his reference to “inanity” as everyone has an opinion and people, particularly celebrities, seem to have more weight with the public and the media due to their following rather than their true understanding of the situation at hand. Postman said that crap detection is embedded in one’s value system. One needs to be aware of their own personal values/ beliefs so as not to be taken in by another’s. That is all that crap detection really is—whether online or in life! He goes on to say that one needs a keen sense of the ridiculous, and crap detection is inborn once anyone becomes their own person. His recommendation that children should be taught how to identify false communication, back in 1969, made me stop and think. Wow! Now, students need that ability both for everyday life AND to thrive online. Howard Rheingold’s Net Smart is a thoroughly constructed guidebook for working and playing on the web. He finally gets down to business in “Crap Detection 101” and the similarities between his and Postman’s dated yet timeless essay are numerous. Rheingold passes along some websites to verify the validity of search engines as well as tips for using the web to advantage while researching projects. Many of his suggestions are common knowledge, even to an older, returning student such as myself. But some sources prove helpful along with his personal process for checking credibility and being mindful when online. Students and all web users first need to apply the rules or ideas suggested in Postman’s witty, down-to-earth essay from 1969. If one learns how to detect bullshit in all aspects of life, particularly what people try to impose on you as a student, and then place personal values as the metronome for their personal crap-detector, they will discover that common sense goes a long way in all fields. If something seems wrong for you—or wrong as a scholarly source—then it deserves further investigation. Another point Rheingold made was the tendency of people to follow sources that “reinforce their own beliefs” (95). Better to research all information and try to challenge one’s own views, in an effort to truly grasp all aspects of a project. This is where infotention and mindfulness become important factors. Infotention is, sadly, a fact of life but one that can be remedied by blocking all distractions and placing focus on the present task. Easier said than done—yes, but far from impossible. Anyone who has children, or has babysat kids or pets knows it is a learned skill. Participation Power, after the negative connotations of detecting crap, felt like a breath of fresh air. The information on blogs, blogging and blogosheres was encouraging and curation—now that I understand its function—is a wonderful tool as well as an agent to help and in return, be helped. The reciprocity these online tools offer is something worth exploring. And I agree with Scoble’s advice to. “Pick something very specific and become the world authority.” In the world of online sources, better to be an expert in one small area then try to cover many places with little facts to back oneself up. I really liked Rheingold’s discussion of Twitter, as this is one forum which is still fairly new to me. I agree that the benefits derived from using it for a purpose such as promotion or connectivity can be a very beneficial experience. And Martha, the U.S. Department of Conspiracy Theories, IS a conspiracy…