If you take a look at the social media channels for Westercon 67, it looks more like they are currently promoting Westeryawn. The posts are uninteresting and only show limited interaction because they are so dull. Who would want to interact with plain text posts on Facebook that don't say anything that interesting? I wouldn't.
I propose that before we start trying to expand Westercon's network, we need to overhaul their content. It doesn't matter if we contact a ton of people and try and get them to interact with the current postings, we will not be successful. We need to rebrand Westercon first by having them understand who their customers are.
I believe that the people that would enjoy Westercon could be divided into a few distinct groups:
1. Those who are current fantasy, sci-fi, or horror writers.
2. Those who are interested in becoming fantasy, sci-fi, or horror writers.
3. Lastly, the segment that I believe has been wrongfully ignored, FANS.
We need content that appeals to all three groups in order to start driving more people to the event, but however, my post is not supposed to be on how to build content that would bring these people to the Westercon page, it needs to be on expanding their current network.
In all the posts that I've read about Westercon, they hardly mention who will be at the event or what will be happening. That is a horrible thing to do. People are not going to go to an event if there's nothing to be excited about, so the first channels that should be used to reach out to people need to be the central pieces, the main attraction, the popular writers that are going to be appearing and speaking at Westercon. These authors are the heart of the network. People follow these authors and would probably pay to see them and talk to them, if they knew that they were even going to be at Westercon.
Think about this for a second, Christopher Paolini, the author of the very successful Eragon books came to Provo a couple of years ago. I, along with hundreds of other people, lined up outside of the Provo library to hear him talk about writing the books, and then had our books signed. This event was only promoted a couple of weeks before it actually happened, and it sold out. This is just for one author in Provo, UT. Why can't Westercon be the same way? It can be, if we can get the authors on board with publicizing the event.
Authors need to start mentioning now that they are going to be at Westercon. If they are presenting, they need to mention what they will be talking about and what day they are going to be there. For now, once every two weeks should be good with posts increasing as the date grows closer. We don't want to overwhelm people with posts as they might get annoyed, we want to spread awareness, not drive people away. It really depends on the author as to where they will post. Are they active on Twitter? They should post there. Do they have a million Tumblr followers? That should be the best platform. The main headliner, Christopher J. Garcia, has almost 800 followers on Twitter and has tweeted almost 15,000 times. He should be mentioning Westercon at least once a week now that we are six months away from the event.
As I said before, I think that Westercon's idea of being a professional conference is hurting their attendance. If they want to interact with the younger generation, they need to be more open and accepting of people who don't see themselves as writers yet, but just as a fan. This is a key segment to helping build up the convention's attendance while also accomplishing the goal of hooking a younger audience, after all, all writers most likely start out as a fan.
To reach these fans, we need to utilize current media channels on Facebook and Twitter to help diversify the network. Take the BYU Doctor Who Club, on Facebook, they have 357 members and might be interested in fantasy or sci-fi writers. Their Facebook page is very active with posts about everything Doctor Who, but if they would be willing to discuss something that isn't related to the show, they might be a good local market to utilize. I do not think that they would be willing to post super often however unless they could come up with a tie-in to the show.
I think that these two ideas are a good place to start as they will help us build customer relationships by reaching a number of different segments of our market. Overall, utilizing these networks will help us create a more centralized and connected network that will strengthen Westercon's relationship with its target market.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Your Computer is Not a Mirror
Your online self is not your true self, it's just a small piece of yourself. Actually being your true self online in today's world is more dangerous than it would seem at first. The reading discusses the story of Stacy Snyder, a student teacher who posted pictures of her drinking online. She was subsequently fired from her job because of those pictures. Stacy's story serves as a warning to all of us, be careful of what you post online because you do not know who is looking.
However, most people today know that anyone can see what you post online, so there is a continuing trend towards regulating and building an online persona so that instead of your true self, just your online self, your best self is showing. The study that we read this week says that people with low self esteem often build up their online profiles so that they feel better about themselves which continues to tie in with the idea that only your best self is on display.
I decided to do an experiment to see if I change myself online and build this better version of myself. Honestly, before I even start to see if I do this, I'm pretty sure that I do.
This is my Twitter profile:
These two social media outlets show that there is some thought that goes into how I portray myself online. Facebook is for everyone and so I try to seem like a normal person. Who knows who will come across my page. Twitter is for the real me, but is that really safe? Can I really keep people from seeing those tweets by making my account private?
Sometimes I pull the webcam up on my computer and use it as a mirror, but even then the quality of the picture is not as clear as it would be if I looked in a real mirror. Social media online is like the webcam, it portrays a poor quality reflection of who you really are. Your computer is not a mirror, and yet we all think that it can be used that way.
However, most people today know that anyone can see what you post online, so there is a continuing trend towards regulating and building an online persona so that instead of your true self, just your online self, your best self is showing. The study that we read this week says that people with low self esteem often build up their online profiles so that they feel better about themselves which continues to tie in with the idea that only your best self is on display.
I decided to do an experiment to see if I change myself online and build this better version of myself. Honestly, before I even start to see if I do this, I'm pretty sure that I do.
This is my Twitter profile:
I only interact with my good friends on Twitter, and do you see that lock next to my name? I keep my Twitter private. No one can retweet me and I monitor who can see my 140 character rants.
Honestly, I do a fair share of ranting on Twitter. I feel that I can be more of myself because I can regulate who sees what I post. I sound much more like myself on Twitter than on any other social media outlets that I have.
This is how I sound to my friends. Slightly crazy? Yes, but the people that follow me on Twitter know that about me already. They know that I can be overly emotional, goofy and sometimes passionate about weird things like finding the perfect apartment.
However on Facebook with over 400 people that could look at my profile, I portray a different Emily.
Well, maybe not that different, but still, slightly different. I still appear to be my same, odd self, but there is one huge difference, I show myself to be a kind person here. The reason for my misfortune that day was because I was doing something kind and it didn't turn out. The comments all point out how nice I was to try and do something nice for Brandon.
These two social media outlets show that there is some thought that goes into how I portray myself online. Facebook is for everyone and so I try to seem like a normal person. Who knows who will come across my page. Twitter is for the real me, but is that really safe? Can I really keep people from seeing those tweets by making my account private?
Sometimes I pull the webcam up on my computer and use it as a mirror, but even then the quality of the picture is not as clear as it would be if I looked in a real mirror. Social media online is like the webcam, it portrays a poor quality reflection of who you really are. Your computer is not a mirror, and yet we all think that it can be used that way.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
The Broke Movie Fanatic
I love movies. While I was in high school I went and saw at least one movie each weekend. Well, if anything good was out. The summer and Christmas were the absolute best. There was always something to see and I in my younger years did not really care that I was shelling out around $11 a week to fund my obsession.
Over a year ago, I started hanging out with this cute boy who also loved movies. We saw everything together. Monday night for FHE was a movie, Tuesday was movie night, Wednesday was ward movie night, Thursday was TV night because The Office was on and I would not miss that, Friday was date night which involved going to the movies and then it was the weekend which involved more movies.
Then, I got engaged.
I've been told that it's important to have some sort of outlet, and unfortunately I picked a rather expensive outlet. The summer passed and I only saw a couple of movies that came out because my family took me to see them. Gone were the days of jumping in my car and frivolously spending money on days out with my friends. Gone were the days where my fiancé and I would splurge to make sure that we were caught up on the latest and greatest films. Christmas and my wedding came and I watched my list of movies that I wanted to see grow longer and longer, but married life leaves little money for movies.
What can a couple of poor married college students do to keep funding their obsession? Thankfully, new technology has helped cut the cost of watching movies with a little patience of course.
When I was little, my mom would take me to Blockbuster on Friday nights to pick up movies to watch during the weekend. I can remember wandering the shelves and finding VHS tapes to bring over to my mom who was always looking at all of the boring adult movies. As I grew older, I'd head straight to the new release section where I'd catch up on the movies that my family didn't go see, and finally I reached high school where I was allowed to go see movies all by myself.
Now as a true adult, I've had to come up with another way to watch my movies and that answer has come due to the miracle that is Redbox. I love Redbox. Now I can run a block or two to find recently released movies that I've been dying to see for months. This technology has completely changed my life, and it has changed the movie industry as well.
According to McLuhan's Tetrad, new technology has four impacts on society. It enhances, obsolesces, retrieves, and reverses. In the case of the introduction of Redbox, it has enhanced my ability to see movies. Yes, I do have to wait to see movies until they come out, but when they do come out those movies are just a short walk away from my apartment and just over a dollar, and sometimes free, to rent. For a broke college student, that has enhanced my movie obsession just as it has enhanced the ability for many other people to see movies because it is now less expensive and with so many kiosks, easier to access.
However, the days that I would spend wandering Blockbuster are now over. Redbox, with a little help from Netflix, destroyed the idea of the traditional video rental store. Two of the largest video rental stores, Hollywood Video and Blockbuster are both officially out of business as of the end of 2013. These stores have been completely obsolesced by the introduction of a cheaper alternative.
Now that I among many other people wait to watch movies once they come out on DVD because they are so much cheaper, one type of business is starting to become more relevant again, the dollar theater. There wasn't a reason to go to the dollar theater before I stopped going to the theaters and paying full price because I had already seen everything. The dollar theater was for repeat watches, that's it. Now that theater has been retrieved because it offers the inexpensive prices that Redbox offers along with the theater experience. If I go to the movies now, it's the dollar theater. Thank goodness for that dollar theater or else I would never be able to see Gravity in 3D for $4.
Lastly when pushed to the extreme, Redbox becomes those old video rental stores. If you keep a movie longer than 24 hours, charges begin to add up. A three day rental at Blockbuster was around the same price as a three day rental at Redbox. You still have to return your movie at a specific time to avoid those overcharges, but if you think about it, Redbox is Blockbuster with a smaller selection and a much, much smaller staff.
Even though waiting for movies to come out on DVD is tough, I still adore Redbox. Thanks to them, I can still be a movie fanatic during these financially tight times.
Sometimes the movies were not that great...
Over a year ago, I started hanging out with this cute boy who also loved movies. We saw everything together. Monday night for FHE was a movie, Tuesday was movie night, Wednesday was ward movie night, Thursday was TV night because The Office was on and I would not miss that, Friday was date night which involved going to the movies and then it was the weekend which involved more movies.
Then, I got engaged.
I've been told that it's important to have some sort of outlet, and unfortunately I picked a rather expensive outlet. The summer passed and I only saw a couple of movies that came out because my family took me to see them. Gone were the days of jumping in my car and frivolously spending money on days out with my friends. Gone were the days where my fiancé and I would splurge to make sure that we were caught up on the latest and greatest films. Christmas and my wedding came and I watched my list of movies that I wanted to see grow longer and longer, but married life leaves little money for movies.
What can a couple of poor married college students do to keep funding their obsession? Thankfully, new technology has helped cut the cost of watching movies with a little patience of course.
When I was little, my mom would take me to Blockbuster on Friday nights to pick up movies to watch during the weekend. I can remember wandering the shelves and finding VHS tapes to bring over to my mom who was always looking at all of the boring adult movies. As I grew older, I'd head straight to the new release section where I'd catch up on the movies that my family didn't go see, and finally I reached high school where I was allowed to go see movies all by myself.
Now as a true adult, I've had to come up with another way to watch my movies and that answer has come due to the miracle that is Redbox. I love Redbox. Now I can run a block or two to find recently released movies that I've been dying to see for months. This technology has completely changed my life, and it has changed the movie industry as well.
According to McLuhan's Tetrad, new technology has four impacts on society. It enhances, obsolesces, retrieves, and reverses. In the case of the introduction of Redbox, it has enhanced my ability to see movies. Yes, I do have to wait to see movies until they come out, but when they do come out those movies are just a short walk away from my apartment and just over a dollar, and sometimes free, to rent. For a broke college student, that has enhanced my movie obsession just as it has enhanced the ability for many other people to see movies because it is now less expensive and with so many kiosks, easier to access.
However, the days that I would spend wandering Blockbuster are now over. Redbox, with a little help from Netflix, destroyed the idea of the traditional video rental store. Two of the largest video rental stores, Hollywood Video and Blockbuster are both officially out of business as of the end of 2013. These stores have been completely obsolesced by the introduction of a cheaper alternative.
Now that I among many other people wait to watch movies once they come out on DVD because they are so much cheaper, one type of business is starting to become more relevant again, the dollar theater. There wasn't a reason to go to the dollar theater before I stopped going to the theaters and paying full price because I had already seen everything. The dollar theater was for repeat watches, that's it. Now that theater has been retrieved because it offers the inexpensive prices that Redbox offers along with the theater experience. If I go to the movies now, it's the dollar theater. Thank goodness for that dollar theater or else I would never be able to see Gravity in 3D for $4.
Lastly when pushed to the extreme, Redbox becomes those old video rental stores. If you keep a movie longer than 24 hours, charges begin to add up. A three day rental at Blockbuster was around the same price as a three day rental at Redbox. You still have to return your movie at a specific time to avoid those overcharges, but if you think about it, Redbox is Blockbuster with a smaller selection and a much, much smaller staff.
Even though waiting for movies to come out on DVD is tough, I still adore Redbox. Thanks to them, I can still be a movie fanatic during these financially tight times.
Monday, January 13, 2014
On Again Off Again Friendship
During junior high school, everyone I knew had at least one on again off again friend. That one person where they are BFFs one minute and the next second they can't stand each other. Now that I am an adult I've encountered a different kind of on again off again friend, the kind of friendship that is on only when the internet is on.
There's been plenty of debate whether or not online friendships and ties are just as strong as real life ties and there's been even more debate that the internet is taking away from our real world ties. Sometimes, it does seem like this is true.
It seems that the internet might possibly be a distraction from the relationships and people around us and sometimes that is true. My friends made fun of me so much for the above picture, but for the most part, at least in my life, social media has been the most important way for me to keep social ties strong, and yes, most of that social interaction occurs online, and yet, these people that I interact with only online are some of my best friends.
The article states that the internet is not a separate reality.
Let me say that again, THE INTERNET IS NOT A SEPARATE REALITY.
No matter how many studies are done on the internet and its influence on people and relationships, I feel that there's this disconnect where people believe that those people you only interact with online have a significantly different relationship with you than the people that you talk to in real life.
I say, that's ridiculous. The people that I am closest to do not live anywhere near here. My best friends are all over the world right now and most of our interactions occur online. Honestly, I cannot remember the last time that I hung out in person with my best friends, but they are still the people that I am closest to even though I haven't seen them in person for at least three years.
Don't believe me? Let's dive into my Facebook.
Do you see how many friends that I have?
There's been plenty of debate whether or not online friendships and ties are just as strong as real life ties and there's been even more debate that the internet is taking away from our real world ties. Sometimes, it does seem like this is true.
Me heading to prom, on my phone instead of interacting with people.
The article states that the internet is not a separate reality.
Let me say that again, THE INTERNET IS NOT A SEPARATE REALITY.
No matter how many studies are done on the internet and its influence on people and relationships, I feel that there's this disconnect where people believe that those people you only interact with online have a significantly different relationship with you than the people that you talk to in real life.
I say, that's ridiculous. The people that I am closest to do not live anywhere near here. My best friends are all over the world right now and most of our interactions occur online. Honestly, I cannot remember the last time that I hung out in person with my best friends, but they are still the people that I am closest to even though I haven't seen them in person for at least three years.
Don't believe me? Let's dive into my Facebook.
I know a lot of people. Now let's analyze some of these people, the top nine people that come up on my Facebook page. One of them is my husband, two of them are directly related to me and the other six are friends. One of them was my high school best friend and roommate up at school and the other five are best friends from high school that I've barely seen since I graduated three years ago. If Facebook is going to choose these people as a sample of my friends, why would it pick people that I haven't seen in years?
Because of this group:
One of my friends created this group for the specific reason for us to stay in touch even though we were heading all over the world to go to school. We tell each other EVERYTHING here. As the article says, the way for strong internet ties to exist is for those ties to somewhat resemble ties that we have with people in person, they are "frequent, companionable contact and are voluntary." My relationship with my friends online definitely follows that pattern. Sometimes I would contact everyone as a group and sometimes just by using private messages, but either way, we keep in touch so that when this happened:
I had a moment like this:
I haven't seen these girls in person for years, but through plenty of online conversation and planning, the six girls that I was closest to in high school managed to be there for my wedding. My answer the question posed by the reading, are strong, intimate ties possible online is an emphatic, YES. I was so excited to see these girls even though I haven't spent time with them in years and we have all changed so much.
Of course, this is just my experience with internet ties with people that I had previously established a relationship with. I might be just a little biased in that respect, so the article brings up another good point, can these weak ties be useful and are they reciprocated? The article mentions that "some analysts have suggested that the greater the social and physical distance between the support seeker and provider, the less likely that the reciprocity will take place." Later the article says that, "nevertheless, many Net members do reciprocate support even to weak ties." It seems that the author is still not quite sure whether or not the norm is for people to help these weak ties or not. In my own personal experience, I'd say that these ties are actually supported and sometimes in amazing ways.
One of my friends posted this on Facebook and my heart hurt for this family that lost their daughter during what is usually such a happy season. I told my friends about it even though I did not know the family, and 48 hours after the original fund had been set up, the goal of $10,000 was surpassed. The latest total shows that over $60,000 has been raised to help this family.
The number of backers is astounding and the number of comments that read something like this are even more astonishing:
People who don't know this family reached out, donated, and left comments for them during this difficult time. This fund was not widely advertised, it was spread around on Facebook and by word of mouth. People did not know who they were helping they just knew that a friend of a friend was hurting and they could help. These weak ties became a little stronger and I know that this family was in the thoughts and prayers of many people that they didn't even know.
How can you see things like that and not think that the internet has brought people together and built a stronger and more connected social network? These ties do not magically disappear when the computer is turned off just like real friendship still exists while people are apart. The internet is the builder of social ties, weak and strong, not a creator of on again off again friendships like those that exist in junior high.
Sometimes you can't even replicate those unique internet experiences in real life. I'll bet you've never had a moment like this have you? I'm sure glad I did.
The caption on Facebook reads, "I can't believe I brought a duck to our Google+ hangout..."
Thursday, January 9, 2014
The Nature of Language as Shown by Tumblr
According to our reading literature can be divided into five categories or natures:
Literature as the ‘foregrounding’ of language
Literature as the integration of language
Literature as fiction
Literature as aesthetic object
Literature as intertextual or self-reflexive construct
The author argues that any sort of writing can be considered literature, even to the most mundane instructions, so this statement should mean that these natures are found online in social media. What about the truly crazy posts? Are those literature? Would our author really consider Tumblr posts literature?
I present to you Tumblr's examples of the five natures of literature.
Literature as the 'foregrounding' of language
According to the author, "When a text is framed as literature, we are disposed to attend to sound patterning or other sorts of linguistic organization we generally ignore." According to Tumblr, when we read a text as someone intends us to, we are disposed to attend to sound patterning or other sorts of linguistic organization we generally are programed to ignore. Tumblr would argue that with all literary posts you must read them as they are intended to be read in order to make sense of what is being said.
Literature as the ‘foregrounding’ of language
Literature as the integration of language
Literature as fiction
Literature as aesthetic object
Literature as intertextual or self-reflexive construct
The author argues that any sort of writing can be considered literature, even to the most mundane instructions, so this statement should mean that these natures are found online in social media. What about the truly crazy posts? Are those literature? Would our author really consider Tumblr posts literature?
I present to you Tumblr's examples of the five natures of literature.
Literature as the 'foregrounding' of language
According to the author, "When a text is framed as literature, we are disposed to attend to sound patterning or other sorts of linguistic organization we generally ignore." According to Tumblr, when we read a text as someone intends us to, we are disposed to attend to sound patterning or other sorts of linguistic organization we generally are programed to ignore. Tumblr would argue that with all literary posts you must read them as they are intended to be read in order to make sense of what is being said.
Literature as the integration of language
In literature we are more likely to take language and find harmony in it and to focus more on the language than what is being said. On Tumblr sometimes we need to focus on the language to understand what is being said in the first place.
Literature as fiction
Fiction is about events and/or characters that are not real and is open for interpretation. Tumblr fiction is about anything and no one knows what is going on.
Literature as aesthetic object
Literature is said to be beautiful without a purpose. Tumblr shows that sometimes literature can be without a purpose and not really beautiful either.
Literature as intertextual or self-reflexive construct
Literature reflects other works of art and can renew the piece that way. Tumblr takes works of art, including literature, and then renews and combines them in interesting ways.
Does social media even know what literature is anymore? I think that if our author saw what Tumblr has created today, he might think twice about his definition of literature. Honestly, he might even think that literature doesn't even really have a nature anymore, because who really knows what anything on Tumblr is really about.
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Church Ties
In class on Monday, we discussed how social groups and social interaction influence the beliefs of those around you and also how friends, friends of friends, and friends of friends of friends can be influential. While studying the assigned reading about the early history of the church, I noticed a few influential social connections that brought people to the church. Family ties were the strongest by far, many of the family members of the early saints joined the church in droves. Friendship ties were the second most influential just as we had discussed in class. Joseph Smith's close friends were also among the first saints of this dispensation, and after they joined they reached out to their friends and began the process of furthering the church's influence through the use of social ties.
One of the most influential early church members, Sydney Rigdon, was among those who were brought into the church through these strong social ties. Rigdon was told about the church by a friend, Parley Pratt, who had heard about the church from Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith. Pratt's friends had such a huge influence on Rigdon that he ended up abandoning his old faith and joining the church. This one example shows just how the ties that our friends make influence us.
Social networks, such as the one that brought family and friends to the church, work best when there is an organized network that allows for streamlined communication, and in early church history that head of the network, the hub so to speak, was Joseph Smith. When other people tried to receive revelation for the church, Joseph Smith was quick to show that God may work through each of his servants, especially when it comes to spreading the work, but there is only one speaker, only one head of the social network chain.
There is one thing that makes this church social network chain unique, and that is another influencer that does not directly interact with people, the Holy Ghost. It is true that Joseph Smith did quite a lot for the church, but the Holy Ghost touches the heart of each convert, whether or not Smith met them. Smith might be the social heart of the church, but the Holy Ghost and through him, God, influences the church the most.
Social interactions are the reason that the church started small and then rapidly grew in just a few short years. Even today you can still see how powerful social interactions are as the prophet and apostles cry for members to reach out to those that they know and try to bring the gospel to them. Of course, missionaries can still reach out to those who do not have any ties to people in the church, but people have said over and over that members reaching out is much more effective, that these strong social ties are much more effective.
.JPG)
One of the most influential early church members, Sydney Rigdon, was among those who were brought into the church through these strong social ties. Rigdon was told about the church by a friend, Parley Pratt, who had heard about the church from Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith. Pratt's friends had such a huge influence on Rigdon that he ended up abandoning his old faith and joining the church. This one example shows just how the ties that our friends make influence us.
Social networks, such as the one that brought family and friends to the church, work best when there is an organized network that allows for streamlined communication, and in early church history that head of the network, the hub so to speak, was Joseph Smith. When other people tried to receive revelation for the church, Joseph Smith was quick to show that God may work through each of his servants, especially when it comes to spreading the work, but there is only one speaker, only one head of the social network chain.
There is one thing that makes this church social network chain unique, and that is another influencer that does not directly interact with people, the Holy Ghost. It is true that Joseph Smith did quite a lot for the church, but the Holy Ghost touches the heart of each convert, whether or not Smith met them. Smith might be the social heart of the church, but the Holy Ghost and through him, God, influences the church the most.
Social interactions are the reason that the church started small and then rapidly grew in just a few short years. Even today you can still see how powerful social interactions are as the prophet and apostles cry for members to reach out to those that they know and try to bring the gospel to them. Of course, missionaries can still reach out to those who do not have any ties to people in the church, but people have said over and over that members reaching out is much more effective, that these strong social ties are much more effective.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)