# Reading Responses
***
## Set 1
***
### January 16
***Superconnected* by Mary Chayko**

Modern smartphones are powerful tools, designed with various functions to assist our daily lives. As described in Mary Chayko’s *Superconnected*, one of the most crucial to the modern individual is its facilitation of human connection. Digital communication allows for individuals to stay in touch anywhere, anytime -- making access to information, resources and companionship more convenient. Chayko describes the benefits and detriments of “superconnectedness;” although modern technology amplifies connection and ease of coordination, this can also lead to negative cognitive and emotional outcomes in its absence.

Chayko cites a portrayal of the phone as both an object of utility and a source of emotional support -- with many keeping it close to feel “constantly connected to the world and therefore less alone” (Clayton et. al., 2015, Srivastava, 2005). This constant connection allows for microcoordination (the ability to make plans on a smaller scale) and affords a constant, mobile source of recreation. While these attributes can be useful, convenient and comforting, they also facilitate user dependency. Ease of access can cause users to take valuable aspects of life -- such as connection and leisure -- for granted. This depreciation is described in various forms throughout the article: users feeling “anxious, lost and unmoored when disconnected,” less attentive when making plans, and less tolerant for boredom.

Chayko also navigates the various cognitive and emotional outcomes of “superconnection,” including: heightened inclination to multitask, stress, overstimulation, dependency, addiction and mood disorders. While a large portion of this section is dedicated to negative consequences, she also mentions an important benefit of the device: providing comfort and security in times of emergency. The article concludes by discussing the overarching theme of technology as a means of “plugging in to society.” A large part of mobile devices’ widespread appeal is due to the human need for connection, to belong to a larger whole.

I would be interested in further exploring cultural differences (both past and present) that emerged with the internet's increased prevalence. In my visual communications class, we discussed technological determinism more in depth (the theory of how technological development determines human behavior.) I often feel conflicted by this idea, because on one hand, the technology in our lives does often seem to shape our behavior -- such as the affordance of constant stimulation increasing the prevalence of multitasking. I also wonder if technology instead assists emotion in determining human behavior -- as it is often used to meet emotional needs for things such as connection, comfort and stimulation.

***
### January 19
**"How the Web Works" by MDN, "How HTTPS Secures Connections: What Every Web Dev Should Know" by Hartley Brody**

On the internet, everything is not what it seems: when you look at your computer screen you may think you are just looking at the displayed images and text. However, a completely different world lies behind what is visually apparent – background interactions simplifying and enhancing your experience. “How the web works” by MDN compares the internal processes of the internet with walking to a store. It discusses the various components of accessing a website including your internet connection, TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP, component files, code files and assets. All of these interconnected parts navigate, decode, and display the component files of a website.

These elements are often protected through HTTPS – a means of securing connections, and the subject of Hartley Brody’s “How HTTPS Secures Connections: What Every Web Dev Should Know”. Brody discusses public key encryption, a “cryptographic system where each party has both a private and a public key which are mathematically linked to each other.” He uses a color analogy to describe the private transfer of messages over the internet. Brody further discusses authentication (using certificates) to help people verify with whom they are interacting. These certificates can have a deeper level of protection via a more thorough vetting process.

These class readings reminded me of concepts covered in Lev Manovich’s “What Is New Media,” an article which discusses how the qualities of a computer – numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability, transcoding – impact the ways in which media is spread and understood in the modern era. Computers’ underlying algorithms allow for the instantaneous creation and reproduction of media. This has allowed for a new culture to emerge on the internet that is different from previous means of communication. Ultimately, it is important to understand the background processes of computers and the internet, as these hidden mechanisms play an underestimated role in societal interactions.

***
### January 26
**"The Science of Successful Learning" by Brown et al.**

Wash. Rinse. Repeat. How can we make our lives better? Brown et al.’s Make it Stick: The Science of Successful Learning provides readers the experience of better, more inspired learning. Initially engulfed in deeply misguided ideas about the proper way to “study and learn”, Brown et al.’s book walks readers through a boot camp to undo bad habits and embrace new ones. Noting the challenge when adopting any new lifestyle, Brown et al. ensures readers to stick with it because the end results far outweigh those of the old regime. Brown et. al. further encourages “elaboration” (5): finding meaningful connections to stretch the plasticity of your brain. Despite the counterintuitiveness, they claim making mistakes and correcting them is critical to higher learning. They revisit this idea throughout the text, utilizing case studies–a pilot whose training informs you the cockpit is scary!–spaced appropriately so the reader doesn’t feel overwhelming deja vu. The authors walk through the stats showing the engaged learning style leads to higher, sustained learning. Moreover, they note low stakes tests HELP learning from telling you what you don’t know, and by helping to interrupt your forgetting (20).

I enjoyed Brown et al.’s message: Out with the ol’ rereading and repetitive rote memorization; in with the new “interleaved” (4), periodic practice retrievals. After all, it seems … fun. Albeit the former–so comfy in its familiar, yet false, sense of security–is hard to abandon, particularly because you are being asked to do something harder and seemingly less productive. It’s like trying to run–utilizing intermittent sprints–when you are more than proficient at walking long distances. Your cardio and respiratory regulation improves so much more running short distances spaced by regular fartleks. The idea of a teacher wanting us to make mistakes is equally inviting–if only our grades could be positively correlated with our failures–the more we err, the better our GPA. Bottom Line: study less, but more engaged; the effort’s short term pain yields learning’s long term gain. Brown et al.’s other helpful tidbits affect all aspects of life: add some spice and variety to your studying routine, reflect on life and what you are learning … and get some sleep, because nurturing and maintaining a positive, growth mindset is no passive activity.

***
### February 2
**“Super Cooperators” by Martin Nowak, "1. Comment, The Bottom Half of the Web" by Joseph Reagle**

“Survival of the fittest” has been the motto of evolutionary survival for generations. According to Martin Nowak, “Go along to get along” is a better fit. Nowak’s math-based “Super Cooperators” lays the groundwork for understanding the role of cooperation in multi-party dilemma outcomes using payoff matrices. Starting with the Prisoner’s Dilemma game, you learn the “value” of cooperating versus “defecting”; cooperating can ensure a better outcome for both of you but not the best outcome for one of you. Nowak further notes that evolutionary natural selection undermines the cooperation strategy because mathematically cooperators have a lower fitness (lower productivity) than defectors; over time cooperators will die off. So how can we change the ending of that sad saga? How can the good guys win? Nowak’s research showed that cooperators tend to be the competitors who punish less, reward more, and think about the overall public good – especially when their good deeds are on public display. This “altruistic” behavior of giving up a little individually for the overall good of the group ultimately made them winners. Conversely, the narcissistic, competitor defectors who seemed to distrust the law, felt cheating was okay, and sought punishing revenge – ended up finishing last. Cultural evolution can help ensure the good cooperators win and thrive as a whole; although an individual cooperator may have less fitness than a defector, as a group the cooperators have higher productivity than defectors. So the key is to grow more cooperators. Nowak suggests five ways we can do this including direct and indirect reciprocity, spatial selection (i.e. forming networks), multilevel selection (i.e. making many small cooperating groups), and kin selection (cooperating closely only with family). There can be limitations with some of these mechanisms, however. For example, the multilevel selection needs to ensure “the ratio of the benefits to costs is greater than one plus the ratio of group size to the number of groups.” (Nowak 46). Fewer large groups won’t work. Spatial selection may have a limit in size as well; groups larger than 150 may lose some of the charm. Joseph Reagle notes in “1. Comment: The Bottom Half of the Web” (2019) that gossip blogs and online communities tend to work well if in line with Dunbar’s number: 150. Groups larger than that “complain that the magic has gone” and begin to negatively break down with on-line arguments, “graffiti and scams”. Reagle explains that the large size becomes too difficult and complex to maintain. That said, Reagle’s application of Dunbar’s number supports Nowak’s kin selection rule as it is unlikely for someone to have more than 150 close relatives.

***
### February 6
**“Social has a shape,” by Howard Rheingold**

Why is 6 an important length–for optimal connection in the virtual world, or optimal separation in the real world? Rheingold’s 2012 chapter “Social has a shape” has a lot of advice about social networking that coincidentally applies to life. He describes how we transform our social networks from “carbon” to “diamonds” as our bonds (connections) grow, and he explains that the average path length to best grow togetherness in small world networks is 6 (ironically, in real world Covid we needed 6 feet of separation). Rheingold explains the explosion in growth is especially affected by power curved networks and the ol’ 80/20 rule: 80% of popularity is made up from 20% contacts. He elaborates on public health social network analysis results stating “if your friends’ friends … are obese, smoke, or are unhappy, you are likely to be [the same]” (p. 197); the article argues the importance of fostering friendships with those who reflect one’s desired values. Moreover we learn the difference between Sarnoff, Metcalf and Reed’s Laws: network value increases 1:1, by squaring, or exponentially by the power of 10, respectively.

It becomes clear how our society is transformed, when applying these laws to globalization, decentralization, and community building taking place. In describing the pros and cons of different parts of Social Network Analysis, Rheingold notes the importance of bridge figures, which can be an indispensable link to other networks (and for Social Capital building too!) Rheingold points out that when trying to figure out from whom to seek answers in SNA, it’s good to have a Personal Learning Network. This Digital Age class’ website and the overall shape of the course immediately comes to mind. Rheingold further parlays about media multiplicity where, counterintuitively, the more people physically see each other, the more they use the internet. Discussing Networked Individualism, Rheingold reiterates the importance of large, diverse networks not exceeding Dunbar’s 150 to ensure manageability, and having group working skills–particularly in tech–is helpful. Concerning Social Capital, he reminds us that genuine kindness is the best builder–very similar to the message from the “Supercooperators”. Rheingold explains that trust in social networks spreads from people learning it; but it gets depleted if it goes unused. He also notes that civic engagement networks where diffuse reciprocity is expected can make the cost of defecting too high; his ultimate counsel: it’s better to maintain good Social Capital with a positive online presence, and stay away from gossip.

***
### February 9
**“What kinds of people 'catfish'? Study finds they have higher psychopathy, sadism and narcissism” by Evita March, "Romance scammers' favorite lies exposed" by Emma Fletcher, "Do You Love Me? Psychological Characteristics of Romance Scam Victims" by Monica Whitty**

“I want to provide for you and be that person that you can lean on” … but I need some cash first. In their respective articles, Evita March and Emma Fletcher discuss the traits of romance scammers, while Monica Whitty describes the traits which make up their victims. March outlines the “dark tetrad” characteristics of romance scammers: narcissism, sadism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism. While it may seem obvious that a scammer would be a bad person, their efforts to conceal their deceitful intentions go a long way. Romance scammers will often contact their victims first, love bomb, avoid direct contact, and ultimately manipulate their victims into giving them money. Fletcher depicts the most common method of money solicitation is frequently through gift cards. While most might assume that higher education would decrease an individual’s vulnerability to scamming, Whitty’s article cites evidence of the contrary. Typical romance scam victims tend to be well educated, middle-aged women. So why do they fall for online deceit? As Fletcher delineates, scammers often resort to a similar repertoire of lies, most commonly relating to personal emergencies, investment fraud, military service, among other manipulations.

Monica Whitty’s romance scam victim profile highlights the psychological characteristics of people who have been scammed, compared against those who have not. In addition to being well educated, middle-aged women, her study also found that victims are ”more impulsive … less kind, more trustworthy, and have an addictive disposition” (p. 105). In the Catfish Online episode, “My Wife sent $250,000 to a Romance Scammer,” Sarah (the victim) shares most of these traits. She is a middle aged woman, she does not seem to have empathy or respect for her real-life relationship with her husband, she seeks the positive sensation that comes from online relationships (impulsive), and seems to have obsessive tendencies that could be linked to addiction (penis memorabilia.) Ultimately, she wound up being an easy target for the scammer because of her willingness to throw away the things she already had. Before even giving away her money, she willingly risked her relationship, demonstrating she was willing to sacrifice a lot for something that she couldn’t reliably trust. Similar to how we evade fake news, mis-, dis- and malinformation, it is important to use critical thinking when engaging in online discourse with others: you never know who is on the other side of the screen.
***
## Set 2
***
### February 29
**"I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience" by Alice E. Marwick and danah boyd, “BeReal and the Doomed Quest for Online Authenticity” by Brooke Erin Duffy and Ysabel Gerard**

People pleasing has reached a whole new level with the development of social media curation. Alice E. Marwick and danah boyd’s “I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience” discusses the impact of social media’s “imagined audience” on authenticity. Their study focuses on Twitter users and their various approaches to balancing tweets with different facets of “audiences.” Because social media is a form of asynchronous communication, all audiences will see the same message in the same context (regardless of time), creating a sense of singular audience. Simultaneously appealing to various groups often requires more “strategically curated” posts, challenging authenticity. Writers use tactics such as self-censorship to ensure that “wrong” messages don’t reach the “wrong” people – ultimately creating a false version of themselves in the impossible pursuit of pleasing everyone. Brooke Erin Duffy and Ysabel Gerard’s “BeReal and the Doomed Quest for Online Authenticity” discusses the attempted creation of a platform that authentically captures users’ day-to-day lives. Duffy and Gerard describe, “BeReal gives users just two minutes following a prompt to submit a dual front-camera/back-camera image. Only after posting their own BeReal are users able to view their friends’ [posts] of ‘the moment and the reaction’” (2). The authors point out the mistiming of its’ marketing, as the app launched during a period of “social media fatigue,” which will likely contribute to its’ failure. They quote one user, noting that she doesn’t respond to poorly timed “BeReal” notifications; instead “wait[ing] for [her] day to be interesting” or “post[ing] … a blank screen” (5).

As a recovering people pleaser, these articles resonated with me; I have personally been working on developing the courage to be more authentic – even if that means sometimes making mistakes. One thing I have learned is that honesty is its own justification; fear of “being wrong,” of making mistakes, only inhibits growth. Expecting to inherently meet every standard of moral, social and political correctness, without doing the work and learning that comes from reflecting on mistakes, is not only ridiculous – but impossible – and generates a culture of performativity. For genuine social progress, it’s important to develop the courage to admit fault, as this is crucial towards combatting ignorance. Ultimately you can’t please everyone; when self-worth is measured by external validation, that metric shifts depending on who you talk to. Developing a sense of personal values, and sticking to them, while also reflecting on genuine criticism, is a better use of social feedback than always pursuing praise and congratulations, but sacrificing authenticity.

***
### March 15
**“The Big Lies People Tell in Online Dating” by Christian Rudder, “Why Online Dating Can Feel Like Such an Existential Nightmare” by Derek Thompson, “It’s quite soul-destroying’: how we fell out of love with dating apps” by Robyn Vinter, “Living alone in America” by Joseph Chamie**

In a world where you can set up a few of your best photos, write a witty bio, match with, and reject people – all without leaving your house, why would you? Digital communication has fostered a broader, more individualistic means for people to connect with one another. Rather than having to rely on one’s own family, friends, and community to meet others, the technological age has allowed for people to expand their reach to meet anyone, anywhere. This shift has come with both benefits and shortcomings, which are relayed in the following four articles: Christian Rudder’s “The Big Lies People Tell in Online Dating” recounts common fabrications in dating profiles such as height, income and date of photos. “Why Online Dating Can Feel Like Such an Existential Nightmare” by Derek Thompson discusses the various cultural changes regarding how people meet one another through past and present generations. In the past, people relied on their communities for connection; the presence of social media and dating apps has allowed for people to meet asynchronously, promoting individualistic pursuits of companionship, but elevating the pressure of various life choices. Robyn Vinter poses various case studies that illustrate the consequences of “dating app fatigue” in her article “It’s quite soul-destroying’: how we fell out of love with dating apps.” Through these examples, Vinter highlights a decline in dating app usage, as people move away from the evaluative, demoralizing, and at times overwhelming aspects of digital dating. Joseph Chamie’s, “Living alone in America” is pretty self-explanatory. It covers various data findings illustrating drastic increases in solitary living among next generation adults.

With people relying less on community ties, online dating is increasingly becoming the norm, despite pitfalls which don’t go unnoticed by users. I don’t have any personal experiences with online dating, however I can reflect on observations from various friends, peers and influencers who have relayed their experiences. From what I have seen, my friends either use it as a means of boosting self-esteem or for hook-ups. I have only encountered one person who met her husband through Hinge, although I have heard from third hand accounts that relationships do develop. While some are returning to in-person means of meeting, data shows that the individualistic nature of digital socialization has had impacts outside of the internet, with more people living alone now than in decades past.

***
### March 18
**"Online Advertising" by Rob Stokes, *How ads follow you around the internet* by Cleo Abrams**

"For $450,000 you can make a down payment on a nice condo in Boston's Seaport District – or place a banner ad on a Yahoo homepage that lasts only one day – take your pick." Chapter 11 of Rob Stokes’ (2014) eMarketing introduces readers to online advertising and explains different concepts – from different types of display advertisements to how they are priced to where they appear. Stokes describes the various objectives of advertisers – building brand awareness, creating and then satisfying demand, ultimately leading to sales. He discusses the publisher’s objectives as well – maximizing profit! Stokes relays six main types of online advertising beginning with Banner adverts (the most common) – image or animation based ads on a web page. Banners typically come in an array of standard sizes and can be in a variety of formats: GIF, JPEG Flash, video, JavaScript, or HTML5 – the latter four are dynamic and allow for user interaction. Interstitial Banners are (annoying) ads that display before a user enters another page. Popups – even more annoying – are ads that appear randomly in their own window as you navigate a page; pop-unders are ads that appear under the web page window. Floating advertisements are similar to popups but appear as a layer over the content of the page. Wallpaper ads take up the background of a web page. Map adverts are displayed on online maps, typically displaying local businesses. Stokes runs through the various payment options available to advertisers, from cost per thousand – paying for every thousand times the advert loads on publisher’s page, to cost per click - paying only when advert is clicked on. There are variations including cost per engagement or cost per acquisition; these diverse payment options also relate to where/what medium sponsors the ad (website, video, etc.). Advertisers can also choose to pay flat rates or a sponsorship fee, the latter providing exclusivity – no outside competition! While advertisers spend money to display their ads, they also reap big benefits: Cleo Abrams’ notes in her YouTube video *How ads follow you around the internet* that advertisers can profit by using third party cookies to track user activity, collect information and then sell it to different businesses. Stokes forays into the various advertising networks and exchanges with a more detailed discussion of social media’s role – including those of the more popular forums: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn. He discusses the benefits of ad servers targeting and optimizing your ad – from Frequency Capping and Sequencing to Contextual advertising. Stokes reiterates the benefit of online ads being trackable and the importance of tracking. Closing the chapter, he discusses an example of a Toyota Prius ad, and gives readers a 9 Step Guide for DIY advertising with a summary of the advantages and challenges faced today in this digital specialty.

Something I’ve noticed about online advertisements is that it follows the same trend as other concepts we’ve covered in this class. Video ads in particular are becoming increasingly brief, with some even playing on the fact that they know viewers might click “skip ad”. I wonder if there is a way to make advertising more engaging, less inconvenient while still generating a similar amount of profit.

***
### March 21
**"Manipulated: Which ice cube is the best?" by Joseph Reagle, "Fake reviews are illegal and subject to big fines under new FTC rules" by Geoffery Fowler**

"Are you for real?" When posing that question to a reviewer, 2 out of 5 times the answer is likely: No! Reagle’s Chapter 3: “Manipulated: Which ice cube is the best?” in Reading the Comments explains how our dependence on reviews, ratings, rankings and comments has led to a societal decline as these measures are often fake, “take advantage of our social networks for commercial interests… [and] we are all increasingly tempted to take advantage of each other”. Virtual imposters (“sockpuppets” and “strawman puppets”) parade on the Internet as someone else while giving critical feedback on their own or others’ products. Categorizing these manipulators into “fakers”, “makers”, and “takers” (the latter two fake for a fee), Reagle provides entertaining (and disturbing) examples of how the fakery industry has grown. (Gone now is my love for “faker” Scott Adams and his sarcastic cartoons.) This illicit industry became large, leading some (such as Amazon and Yelp) to try and root out the impersonators. Software (i.e. Captcha and Amazon’s “human-backed” mechanical Turk – MTurk) initially helped, but the charlatans always found a way back in. Even “honest” reviewers can be held hostage by companies who become threatening if feedback is not positive. This “racket” led to the “social graph” where consumers came to rely more on their friends’ comments – a.k.a. “sponsored stories” (instead of strangers’ ratings), yet that led to manipulation; Facebook, for example, began charging consumers a fee for the sponsored stories! Reagle ends the chapter describing our collective loss of innocence, as we are all encouraged to be dishonest.

Reagle’s chapter, published in 2015, gives a grim view of product review trustworthiness. Pissed Consumer and MTurk might be relatively okay, but most of the raters (including BBB, Angie’s List, Amazon, Yelp, Ripoff Report and KlearGear) had integrity issues. Moreover, Reagle notes the FTC between 2009 and 2013 rarely enforced such rules as “disclosure of non-obvious ‘material connections’ (such as payments or free products) for consumer endorsements”. Geoffrey Fowler’s 2023 article “Fake reviews are illegal and subject to big fines under new FTC rules” gives us hope that the tables are about to turn. Fowler discusses how the FTC is now going to put serious fines (i.e. $50,000 per violation) on people who write fake reviews. Outside research discusses Fakespot, Reviewmeta, and AI as good tools for spotting fakery. The deception present in online reviews reminds me of class discussions around fake news, and I think this problem could be approached similarly. I don't see a realistic means of regulating reviews to ensure everyone is "being honest," as opinions are subjective. A better solution would be to educate consumers on critical thinking: learning to triangulate the credibility of a seller, considering the authenticity of the presented product, and whether it's valuable enough to take the risk of purchasing online.

***
### March 25
**“7. Bemused: WTF!” by Joseph Reagle**

Posting your thoughts to the internet can be a fun and valuable way to connect with others, except when your fingers move faster than your brain. Reagle’s chapter 7 “Bemused: ‘WTF!’” in Reading the Comments is a collection of anecdotes where people mindlessly make nonsensical reviews/comments – many of which become entertaining retweets and memes. Reagle begins with the bemusing – noting much of the mindless “slapdash” reviews are born from the race to be FIRST to comment. Why do people rush? Apparently, early birds get rewarded with product freebies, and later comments don’t seem to make it to the discussion board. Reagle recounts the woman who gave a 4 out of 5 star rating for a carbon monoxide alarm that she claims saved her son’s life. The bemusing part: why only 4 out of 5 stars … isn’t she happy her son is alive? Reagle then lays into the ridiculousness of rating scales – particularly those used in the medical field: quantifying pain on a scale is inherently relative and inexact, yet physicians rely on it for prescribing narcotics. In addition, there are reviews – by people or AI – that lack logic and, particularly when out of context, become bemusing. Reagle segues into some real mistakes that people have made on social media – from accidentally tweeting out inappropriate pictures to public iMessages that were meant to be private. One story involves an 18-year-old gamer named Justin who spent five months in jail for making a hyperbolic, joking, sarcastic statement about shooting schoolmates and eating their hearts. Additionally, Reagle points out that implicit biases may impact split-second decision making common to online interaction. He cites the example of a Facebook page, “I Fucking Love Science”; followers who did not know Elise Andrews’ identity revealed their implicit assumptions upon learning that she is a woman. Reagle follows this up with the excuse of “I’ve been hacked” that people use to try to undo their embarrassing, social media faux pas. He ends the chapter discussing a strange phenomenon claimed by various social media participants – a “pleasant” sensation experienced while doing something relatively mundane: AIHO, a.k.a. Attention Induced Head Orgasm, or AIE (Attention Induced Euphoria). This last section explains Reagle’s latter half of the chapter title: “WTF!”

The section of this chapter regarding implicit (and explicit) bias online made me think of marginalized groups in gaming: in multiplayer games (particularly first person shooters,) people often have to rely on voice chat for team coordination. Because the gaming community can often be overtly bigoted, many people with marginalized identities will be harassed and discriminated against when using voice chat. Because of this, there have been campaigns to remove voice chat features from gaming; that being said, a better solution would probably be to address and dismantle the “edgy” culture that reinforces this behavior.