Affinity Spaces, Anya, Blogging and the Internet, Readers, Spaces, Academics, BloggingJuly 29, 2005 4:30 pm

In an unprecedented outburst yesterday on DrJoolz I ranted about an article on how a mother, whilst praising the new blog craze for teens, also talked about the need to write contracts for her children to sign.

(Mental Note: Must not use blog to rant as this can be very offensive to others. Have learned valuable blogging lesson.)

Writing about that has since prompted me to think much more carefully about my view of The Internet generally and my view of blogging specifically.

Whilst I was under the impression that I was being a good little academic and aware of my positionality in relation to my work, I realise now how my experiences of the Internet are ofa very specific type- and so are those of my family .

I had not thought before about how our cultural capital extends to our online identities and that this has protected my family and I from unpleasant Internet exeriences. And how we do not ‘go’ to places that are the Internet equivalent of scarey alleyways - just cos we are not curious in such directions …

I was thinking about how I do not, (unlike many people I know) receive porn in the form of e mail spam (How have I escaped?) . I was also thinking about how I have only ever seen online pornography once. This was a pasted series of images in a comment on Justin Hall’s blog in response to his infamous crying episode. That was a link I picked up through Guy.

In fact Guy was upset about this as he felt he had inadvertently put porn on HIS blog, because he had linked to it. He felt he was tainted by association.

And our blogs’ fabrics are constituted of our links as well as our words and pictures (etc). Other people’s texts become part of ours, because we weave them in. And when we do that, we have to be careful that we do not misrepresent other people’s views (as I did yesterday), especially as we can potentially lead new readers to read the source in a way the original author did not intend - so therefore Will and Anya defended themselves in comments on my blog. (This is a great use of blog comments, to come back and say something in one’s defence.) All these affinities can be very positive and lead in the end to greater understandings as we visit and talk with each other. But my point here, is about how our blogs are continuous texts with each other; our links tie us together and are mutually constitutive (if I can say that?) . So in building texts we constantly re-affirm and regenerate what the group is. We are our associations. And that is why it is important the associations start off OK.

But look. Guy is an academic; Anya is an academic. Will is an academic. We have found each other through common interests through a series of links, through degrees of separataion. We have traced paths via each other and kept within a group with some pretty high status cultural capital. No wonder we love the web; we talk to people ‘like us’ and we go through the links on many people’s blogs in this way. Our network is safe.

Ok, back to the point. Many rightly worry that their kids’ blogs (etc.) will become tainted through association with others’.

An example: A hairdresser comes every now and then to our house to cut my daughters’ hair. Earlier this week she was talking about trying to keep her son off the net because of all the filthy pictures his friends send him via MSN. She said ‘they talk dirty’ and are nasty to each other. My daughter and I were amazed. ‘Why doesn’t he block them?’ she said. Our hairdresser explained that these were his ’so-called friends’ who he did not want to block.

Now all my daughter’s friends are ones she has met online; some of them come from a core group connected to a message board run by a charity for kids with ME. The others have come via recommendations from friends through this. So somehow they have come through a vetting system. Cultural capital of a sort. (On the other hand maybe my daughter has missed out on this essential adolescent bickering… is it important to go through? Maybe.)

In my little family I think we have kept to paths without realising. Bauman has written about how people trace paths through cities and experience cities differently from each other - and would describe the city very differently from each other.

This is what the Internet is like and I think I have taken this long to realise. So the lesson is, ‘be more patient with those who are nervous. ‘ They clearly have reasons, since they may have traced through paths which lead to areas where I never go or maybe they have only heard of these scarey areas and they might not know there are many safe places to go on the Net. I think I need to respect this a bit more and to be more aware of my priveleged position.

I have written about how our lives off line are blended with our online selves but had not thought about this in terms of cultural capital before. Our identities online remain tied to our offline selves in more ways than we know.

Uncategorized, Identity, Affinity Spaces, Anya, Blogging and the Internet, Private/Public, Reasons for blogging, Academics, BloggingJuly 25, 2005 9:26 am

I have found the DrJoolz site a lot easier to keep up with lately. (Easier to write than this site at least.) I have enjoyed just putting bits and bobs of interest on there; I have realised that as time has gone on I have been writing much more for a particular group of people who I know are reading. More and more people have TOLD me they are reading and it is this group who I think about as I write.
I wondered whether this was somehow ‘wrong’ to write for a particular group - especially a group so small, intimate even - and not really in the spirit of ‘real’ blogging. Yes I feel there is a right way to do it (!) and it is one which should assume no particular people / readers and just kind of ‘put out there’ in a sort of, I don’t know,
‘noble’?, ’self interested’?, ’self-absorbed’?, ‘intellectually pure’? way, a wholeload of things that demonstrate my mind as being purely consistent and only interested in one thing. That consistent thing would just be the theme of the blog; one thing that is pursued, that is very important, significant meaningful and deep. (Yes I know other blogs are like mine, but I feel that as an academic, there should be this worthy stuff being put out on a daily basis - preferably with some political earnestness there too.)

After I went to the UKLA conference though, I wrote a lot about it (here, here and here for example) and I realise now that I was pretty much writing to explain to Anya, as I am always grateful to her for sharing her conferences online, so I put down what I thought she might be interested in.

But I also wrote for others who HAD attended the conference; I wanted to share my view and get feedback on theirs. I knew that everyone would still be thinking about it and may want to continue to interact on the same theme. And indeed this is what happened. I got quite a lot of comments and someone even sent me a link to one of the films shown by a keynote speaker - Mizuko Ito. So why blog it? Why is this the chosen mode?
I think that one of the reasons is that people can look at any time to see what I think. It is a way of communicating to many. I can use all the affordances of the wb - not just language.

I guess I like to get the reaction of many. It is also, of course, a pretty exhibitionist activity, to blog; to hold court and then wait to see what other people will say and do as a result. In some ways it is like writing a letter, the same letter to a lot of people. Except with a blog it is a public writing; like reading out on stage or ike a town crier shouting out at people whether they want to know or not! (Although they can always ignore me online.) In other ways, I feel like the whole thing is a bit like one of those inane chat shows. I don’t like chat shows really as they are so bizarre; a group of people talking to each other,witnessed by many - a live audience in the studio, and then anther audience which watches an edited version a lot later. A blogger seems to assume someone wants to listen to her - how vain. And a blogger’s audience is also a bit multilayered; consisting of people who know her in real life and read her blog; peole who know her as a blogger only but read her posts regularly; people who might read her work (published academic stuff) and find out about her blog; then there are those whohappen across the blog once and never read again; there are those who come across it and gradually visit more and more (etc.) These readers may or may not leave comments. And so there is this thing of layers, of degrees of involvement. So it is all more compicated than being just one type of person sharing an affinity space. Some are casual, some are keen , some - wel, here and there. ( Icould maybe do a diagram here - (;-0)

It has always seemed really pretentious to me, this strange thing of chat shows where they pretending they are in a lounge at home or something, and refer to interviewees as ‘guests’ (they are paid after all) - (sofas; drinks; flowers on the table; some ‘guests’ even bring presents) - Yes, I think the blog has a lot in common with that; this sort of pretense at exclusive views on the ‘real’ thoughts and so on of a guest; and it is presented as if to a group of friends - even though it goes totally public, is not exclusive etc etc. Except that people do sometimes choose to reveal a lot of their ‘private lives’ both on chat shows and on their blogs. In this way that ‘private/public’ thing is shared by blogs and by chat shows.

Another characteristic of how I write on my blog, is that although I write with a group of people in mind, I am always hoping for more like minded people to listen - and join in. Thus the use of links for people to follow up on previous conversations, allows them to ‘catch up’. Many links will not be read by -regulars’ as they refer to old stuff. In this way it is like explaining a family joke, or a bit of social history to a new member of the group. And this of course brings us yet again, back even closer to a ned to refine ‘Affinity Spaces’ as a concept. The drive to involve more people, comes from my constant desire to interact with others; to be social; to find more like me; so I can learn from them, with them, find out stuff. Anything. I love to follow their links; I love to have a reaction from others. I like to see them

’show and tell’

too. - as Guy would have it. (When is he back btw??)

Communities of Practice, Affinity Spaces, Blogging and the Internet, learning, Private/Public, Spaces, AcademicsJuly 20, 2005 8:27 am

OK I am wanting to describe the affiliations we have on the web in our online affinities.
I am planning to write an article on blogging academics for Discourse, (and is this too public to declare that here? Is it dangerous? Or does it help me stake out a space at an early stage?)

And I want to include the idea of power, not just about a lovely, cuddly creative commons, as there is clearly a pecking order, a hierarchy etc etc. I also want something in there about how the coming together of people from a llover the world allows for exciting dynamics and the creation of new cultures online. Do these then impact on our work as researchers?

Nice phrases I am thinking about:

· Third space

· Co construction

· Satellites of temporary coherences

· Cultures of participation

· Affinity spaces

· Communities of Practice

· Emergent/divergent cultures

· Glocalisation

· Glocality

· Synthetic cultures

· Synergetic cultures

How about …. Digital Glocalities??

This is all embryonic but I am thinking hard.