Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Offline/Online

I found Orgad’s discussion of offline and online data fascinating. I had not really gone so far as consider separating the research of the internet in that manner but Orgad’s makes a great argument for it. I am immediately drawn to online data collection because online behavior is often bizarre and extraordinary in comparison to what we expect out of citizens of our society. The space that it creates by promoting (physical?) distance between people participating in interactions also allows for a difference in presentation of self during these interactions. This is where the possibility of offline fascinates me. The possibility to have face-to-face conversations changes the dynamic and limits the 'acceptable' within confines of society norms. An interesting example could be looking at the new trend of internet vigilantism and talking to the people ‘unmasked’. The current Canadian example would be: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/11/16/bc-teen-vigilante-predator-superhero-costumes.html.

3 comments:

  1. Have you seen the related news stories on real world vigilantism? such as: http://www.reallifesuperheroes.org/

    ReplyDelete
  2. OnLiNe/OffLiNe Data!

    Where to start, when to stop! Research is bounded by what can be achieved, by funding, by the topic itself. In this article Hines explores ethnography of the internet and the avenues she pursues: production and use, online vs. offline, internet as a social construction and social conduit. I found it particularly interesting how Hines chose to move outside of her realm to look at other material culture in order to help understand internet culture. She did so by visiting other collections (ie. insect collections etc.) in order to explore beliefs about how objects are owned, stored, ordered and other applicable qualities. This idea opened my eyes to how one might leave the current study to explore other related areas outside of the study and how this might uncover valuable information about the current study (through contrast and comparison). Though ethnographic research may not be comprehensive it still holds value if it says something interesting or advances debate.

    I do believe that online and offline social relations and interactions are meaningful but I also believe that the value they hold is inherently different. I actually have a real life practical experience that I can use to relate to this week’s readings!! I am particularly interested in this week’s readings because I just recently left Facebook (for good this time, lol) and practically everyone I have told has asked me why. I have been trying to understand my drive to do so, while also coming up with a precise and to the point response for those who ask. It’s interesting because I found it difficult to embrace online relationships. With Hines in mind, I can see how I have used my offline relationships to determine the value of my online relationships. In the end I found online relationships unfulfilling, superficial and I also found that interactions online were too much on the surface level. I prefer fewer and more in depth relationships. It helped to have an offline framework for relationships to work with in order to assess my discontent with those I held online. Orgad speaks of the difficulty of separating online from offline activity/interaction. I can agree here: Many of my close friends with whom I interacted offline were also friends on Facebook. This blurred the line because it wasn’t so easy to separate or make distinctions between my online/offline interactions with them. Perhaps I jumped the gun by deleting my account, especially since online activity is tied with offline activity these days. I will no longer get the chance to be invited to events posted on facebook and this might have a negative impact on my ability to develop stronger offline ties with those individuals. Because interaction occurs both online and offline, it has become increasingly difficult to distinguish between the value of online and offline interaction; they often occur simultaneously and are interdependent. I can therefore sympathize with Orgad’s dilemma of how to integrate the two. I will agree that online and offline data can complement each other, but may also complicate research if they contradict one another. Perhaps individuals in a study might perceive online in a different way and thus provide different kinds of responses. Perhaps individuals provide more authentic responses online or offline. Finally it is important for researchers to decide whether it is appropriate to differentiate between online and offline data or whether to present them as a coherent set. It all depends on the context of the study and the implications that either might have for the study as a whole!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hine talks about the flexibility required in the methodology you apply and the view you take in the face of complex sites of study and messy mixes of phenomena. She also mentions how you have to be prepared to range across boundaries into areas you hadn’t previously contemplated to pursue your investigation. In my research proposal I had a problem in trying to pin down a precise research vector and an appropriate scope. I started out with a narrow view of what I wanted to do and explored the literature of that area. Before long things got into a wobble and the direction veered drastically as I encountered related aspects that caught my attention while trying to establish a conceptual framework. This was a larger problem than I ever imagined at the outset, especially in the way it ate up a lot of time. I suppose, at least in the case of this assignment, the thing to do is to temper your curiosity and just settle on somethings that works reasonably well.

    ReplyDelete