mix tapes vs. digital playlists (mediation, meaningful objects and sign values)

Last week, I conducted some user studies to learn about music libraries. One of the participants commented on how cool mix tapes were yet how rarely he creates playlists in iTunes.

I started to wonder about the differences between old and new music media formats. In particular, I was interested in the differences between mix tapes (cassette tapes created by the user from other cassettes or CDs) and digital music playlists (lists of current or saved songs in digital music players like iTunes or Windows media player). I found various theoretical concepts helpful in thinking more precisely about these differences and how we might improve the design of digital music technologies.

Does Facebook’s design change the way we take photos?

I did a structural and phenomenological analysis of Facebook’s people tagging feature.    Just today I was able to create a semi-coherent argument from the analysis.   I am curious what you all think of this:

My overall thesis for the paper is that the way that a social networking community (Facebook) is designed fundamentally changes the way that its members take photos.  Interaction designers should study and attempt to understand how social networking communities affect the way people act in the ‘real world’ and then design communities that encourage the users to act in desired, ethical ways.

Death and Facebook, Grief Online

So this morning, for the second time this year, my high school graduating class lost one of our own. She wasn’t a close friend of mine, but she was definetely someone who I loved talking to, always seemed to be smiling or laughing loudly, and had a close group of friends that loved her very much. After learning of her death (or that someone had told someone else that they had heard a girl from our graduating class had been in a car wreck), I decided I should check out the facebook to see if people had said more about the events (to confirm that they were true or not was my primary motivation). I went to her facebook profile and a friend of hers had just posted a message on her wall, stating that today she had been in a car accident and unfortunatly, had not survived. It seems that at this point, very few people knew about the terrible events. About fifteen minutes later, my NewsFeed notified me that a group had been created for the remembrance of the friend we had lost. I instantly joined the group. Approximately twenty minutes later, the group had gone from 3 members to 47 members. I am willing to bet that by the time I finish typing this blog entry, the group will have increased in its member size even more significantly, more posts will have been written on her wall, more images will have been posted showing her with her friends, more information about the car accident itself will have been revealed to the public, and people will have started a unique process of grieving that would not have been possible five years ago.

This “grief on facebook” phenomena seems to be something that many participate in. My guess is that the community of the facebook isn’t really fully realized until something such as a death of a friend occurs. The instant nature of notifications and messages to large amounts of people make the grieving process even more interesting. Individuals who are participating can share their favorite stories of their lost friend, can post images that remind everyone how great that individual was to spend time with, there might be some closure in leaving a message for your lost friends on their facebook wall. I think this would be an interesting space to research…. I know it happens each and every day for many individuals who are members of the facebook community.

Have any of you experienced similiar events on facebook?

My Paper: Goffman’s Presentation of Self and YouTube

Goffman’s Presentation of Self in Everyday Life was published in 1959 with the intent of establishing a description of meaning in social interaction.  Goffman said that people present an “idealized” version of themselves in public (front stage).  People present more consistent versions of themselves to coincide with norms and societal laws.  When not in public (behind stage), these social rules do not need to be followed.

However, I believe that technologies such as YouTube has blurred the personal and private rules to the point that there is no back stage. Technology is shifting the concept of privacy.

I want to know if Goffman’s idea still holds true.  I am going to search YouTube for “Drinking and Puking” and hypothesize that Goffman’s idea does not fit.  Seeing YouTube presentation of self, I do not believe that the distinction between front stage and back stage still holds true.  There is a reconstruction of public and private space and there is a mutual shaping of technology and behavior.

For design idea, I am going to suggest an instant removal option on YouTube because as these people go out and search for jobs, there is a need for them to reestablish their boundaries between personal and private.

What do you think?  I know there are some books out there already that look at presentation of self and technology, but I’m going to focus on the YouTube idea.

the 21st century breakup phenomenon

This article posted today to CNN speaks to the impact of technology on culture in a big way.  When I was a teenager, many moons ago, you were considered rude or “chicken” to break up with a girlfriend over the telephone.   You had to “face the music” as they say. But now things are much, much different…. I smell a good paper here somewhere.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/11/16/im.poll.ap/index.html

More than four in 10 teens, or 43 percent, who instant message use it for things they wouldn’t say in person, according to an Associated Press-AOL poll released Thursday. Twenty-two percent use IMs to ask people out on dates or accept them, and 13 percent use them to break up.

Overall, nearly half of teens age 13 to 18 said they use instant messaging, those staccato, Internet-borne strings of real-time chatter often coupled with enough frenzied multitasking to fry the typical adult brain. Only about one in five adults said they use IMs — though usually with less technological aplomb or hormone-driven social drama.

Structuralist versus Phenomenological Notions of “Intention”

Mingxian posted an excellent question late last week about the problem of intention. If we look at camera angles in Bleu or La Strada, and we perceive that they relate fortuitously to narrative themes (etc.), and we attribute that coherence to the “director’s intention,” are we leaving structuralism/semiotics and heading back to phenomenology?

My answer to her was no. I’m afraid the post got buried, so see the exchange for yourself here.

Structuralism

I know that today we were trying to find the code how to interpret those movies. We were talking about one detail give us clues about what would happen later, and the camera positions tell us blablabla. However, David mentioned that the director forced us to see the focuses and the next screen, we have no choice as an audience. Then I found I was trying to guess the directors intentions about why they put some certain background things into the stage, and how the directors put those clothes onto the actors’ body in order to express the roles’ personality.  My question is that do I come back to phenomenology from structuralism when I tried to guess and explain the directors’ intentions? Or I am using the structuralism method as far as I still decompose the movie into cloth, camera position and other aspects.

Interaction criticism in action

Yesterday a friend sent me this link, and today Erik posted it to the HCI listserve as an example “worth reflection and critique”:

http://www.infinityart.ro/

I think this site is a great artifact to which we can apply the critical approaches we have been learning in class. Using a phenomenological lens, my first thought is that this is an extreme case of intentionally designing breakdown into an interaction, something that Royer posted about a while back. When navigating most websites, a user is typically engaged in an information seeking activity, clicking on links to reveal text that they are interested in. This activity is part of the horizons most users bring to bear on a website. The expected response when clicking on a link is  taken for granted or ready-to-hand. The Infinity Art site affords this activity with typical-looking links, but then suddenly disrupts it, obliterating the screen with unexpected video images. The ‘flow’ of the interaction is interrupted and the website itself, even the user’s computer screen becomes present-to-hand.

Why would the site’s designers do this? They are an interactive design agency and presumably the purpose of this site is to express their professional identity. By introducing breakdown and making the site become so radically present-to-hand, the user is caused to reflect on who the creators of the site are and what their intentions are (as I am presently doing).  Futhermore, because the disruptive images are so unexpected, the user is likely to interpret that these designers have an inclination for creating novel, unconventional interactive designs. Finally, because the experience is so novel, users are likely to share the link and post and discuss with others, thus generating a lot of publicity.

I am curious to see what other interpretations and critiques others have.

Questions about concepts from structuralism and phenomenology

I got a question from today’s lecture, and tried to answer them by myself, however, I don’t know if my understanding is correct or not, and hope someone, for example Jeff could help ^_^

about “Connotation”:

If connotation associates with emotional things and is “subjective”, what is the relationship between connotation and “horizons” in phenomenology? They both related or shaped by individual’s personal knowledge, feelings and experiences, aren’t they?

My answer to this question is that:

Because phenomenology is trying to understand the sender’s intention, so therefore the message sender’s horizon and life world is more important, if we share horizons with the sender, we could understand her piecework. In structuralism, the connotation shaped by the receivers’ horizons. Correct?

anti-structuralism: Oh, I think I have been used to phenomenological thinking

I guess the most educational part for me in this class is the phenomenological perspective. I have to confess that I was not a very understanding person before. I often got caught in arguments with other people. When other people didn’t think the same way as I thought, my instinct was to take his view as wrong. So I was likely to declare my point in a strong and absolute way. The effect is opposite. Other people tended to take that as arrogance and they’re emotionally inclined to disagree with that kind of declaration.

After the phenomenology classes during the last several weeks, I found it easier for me to understand other people than before. When my view conflicts with them, I know it’s probably because we came from different lifeworld and we have different horizon. It’s also possible that they know something which I don’t know. So I start learning to be modest, and trying to think from their horizon before making any judgement. I am also keeping “I might be wrong” in mind and trying to avoid making any absolute declaration. I feel if your idea is really correct, there gotta be a way to persuade other people.

However, structuralism came last week. But I feel like I am still thinking in a phenomenological way. For the fashion clothes Jeff showed on Thursday, I asked “what if we don’t know it is designed by Vivienne Westwood? We won’t still interpret it correctly.” I take it as a phenomenological question, as it considers people’s knowledge as part of the source where meaning comes from. Jeff said “Vivienne Westwood” was just activating the interpreter of that code in our mind. But people like me didn’t have that interpreter of “Vivenne Westwood” before, so is it saying people’s former knowledge do affect the interpreting?

OK, so that’s where I am right now. I will try to restrain the phenomenological thinking part in my head, and dive into the structuralism in the next few weeks.