Instagram

"Fast beautiful photo sharing" is what the Instagram slogan reads. According to the actual definition on its site, it is a place where users can take photos and then choose a filter to put on the photo. Instagram also makes it possible to share these photos that you've edited on Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr.

Now it has been a few weeks since this has happened, but as we all may know Facebook purchased Instagram for about $1 billion. This is very interesting to me because Facebook is not a site that needs more users but there could be a potential for Facebook feeling threatened by Instagram because of it's growing popularity. The Instagram app allows its users to share their photos via Facebook, so the two were already somewhat indirectly linked, now that linkage is just official. I think that this move was very strategic for Instagram due to their great reputation and user basis that Facebook has, and now that can also be the case for Instagram.

I can honestly say that I have loved using Instagram and it may have even become a borderline obesession. And this is where an app like this can get dangerous, when it becomes addictive or a main concern in life. I know that I personally am guilty of taking photos specifically for the purpose of using the filters that Instagram provides, and then posting it on the feed to see how many of my followers will like it. This is where it becomes about seeing how popular you are with other users rather than doing it purely as a photo editing application. The question I must continue to ask myself and I will pose to all you "Instagrammers" out there is this: Are you only living certain parts of your life to document them or would you still do that activity if the camera lens wasn't involved?

Here is an example of a picture I took, and the one below it has had the 'Toaster' filter applied to it through Instagram.

Through a simple filter an image can now convey a completely different meaning. The many filters you can choose from are: Amaro, Rise, Hudson, X-pro II, Sierra, Lo-fi, Earlybird, Toaster, Brannan, Inkwell, Walden, Hefe, Valencia, Nashville, 1977, and Kelvin.

Another issue of privacy

I went to the bottom left-hand corner of my screen and clicked the 'e' icon for Internet Explorer. It redirected me to MSN, as it always does, and as I was paroling through the news stories of the day I came across a very interesting case. This article I found was titled "Olympian Outs Stalker on Facebook, triggers debate". Instantly I became interested especially because of all the rising concerns regarding privacy on Facebook and other social media sites. So naturally I clicked the bolded title so that I could read more.

A woman who is training for the London Olympics this year, Adriane Friedrich, has an alleged stalker and she has decided to post his full name, explicit emails he has sent her, and his hometown on Facebook for all her friends to see. Not only is there controversy arising over her decision to take his privacy into her hands, but Friedrich is also a police officer. Since she is a police officer, I believe she should be held to a higher standard when it comes to citizens and their rights when being accused of a crime. I think this time she not only shamed herself as a woman of law enforcement but also shamed that man. Without possibly presenting the whole information, her Facebook supporters now have the right to make inaccurate assumptions.

I understand where she is coming from on this situation, because no one, especially a woman wants a stalker. The problem, however, I do have with her response is that the alleged stalker had no chance whatsoever to control his privacy within this. She has the rights to use all of what Facebook offers and she put those rights into practice, but this time against the well-being of another person. Facebook cannot control what people choose to post to their site, they can only control generic settings, so because of this there unfortunately is free reign, even if that does include demeaning another individual.

Now I want to set this straight, in no way am I saying that what the stalker did is okay because that is a crime and he should be dealt with accordingly but I am saying that this could have been handled in a more discreet way as to protect both parties involved. Social Networking Sites are dangerous for this specific reason. Not only do those who are friends with both parties on Facebook know, but now those who have read any online news today are also informed. Online is a dangerous avenue to share any information on, let alone private. This story can serve as an example to be on guard with what you choose to share and also who you choose to associate with in the online world.

To read the full story, follow this link Olympian Outs Stalker on Facebook, triggers debate

Audience: What does that really mean in an online world?

I am currently in a Composition 300 class where we read articles from a book titled Rhetorical Readings for Advanced Writers. As I was reading one by Andrea A. Lunsford and Lisa Ede called "Among the Audience": On Audience in an Age of New Literacies, it struck me how different writing is now because of all the social media aspects that contribute to a majority of the media world. In the 80's they had originally wrote an article that discussed the importance of the relationship between text, author, and audience. However, with this new article they discuss that context must now be added as a critical aspect when discussing online writings.

Another idea they mention is that how now anyone can become a writer due to things such as Twitter, Wikipedia, or blogs just like this one. Comments can be left, interactions can occur, and a group of followers can be established just by publishing one interesting article or idea. This type of writing does not require much ability or a publisher or anything of that sort, which literally mobilizes anyone to be able to post online and even get recognized on a local, national or global level.

I think that this is a great way for new writers to get recognized, but however I think it can be dangerous in some areas because it could be hard to determine whether or not the source is credible. Online can sometimes be a sticky place due to the fact that things can be cut and pasted or misrepresented. This really causes me to be skeptical of information that I find online and websites which I find them on. Since this line is blurring so much between audience and author, I personally have begun intently researching authors and their credentials so that I am not mislead. And I would suggest everyone do that as well, so that authors (such as me) are not just strictly taken for what they post online without additional needed background.

This picture is what I think of when thinking of the normal representation of a reader/speaker presenting their information to an audience. It is an active listening audience.

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/37/3791/BDCIF00Z/posters/beatnik-poet-reading-to-an-audience.jpg

This next image I believe is a representation of how there is not just one central author or speaker but rather they are all intertwined and interconnected.

http://www.virtualsocialmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/social-networking-services-300x300.jpg