To tweet the truth...

At present, I am working on a series of projects that work on the reaction/s of real time updates inserted into daily life. The interest is how others react and may interact with such social noise as part of their surroundings. Working from the premise, where once we had only one outlet for the truth, today we are all potential passersby of numerous (previously untold) truth/s that are brought to light by the visualisation of updates.

And so now we place what is 'old' into 'new' contexts. Over in Amercia our favourite I'm-not-fat-I-don't-want-to-be-thin persona Oprah posted her first tweet in April. Subsequent Twitter traffic increased expodentially. Up by 43-percent. Proof that Daytime Diva's have real appeal to housewives everywhere. Unsurprisingly, despite Oprah's original enthusiasm her traffic has now t(w)eetered off. Probably because they can't afford the 'someone paid by her' to continue to tweet on her behalf.

Over in Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, long time fan of confining and forceful levels of media 'censorship' continues to seek the denial of the basic human right to free speech. His domestic and corporate foreign policy shares much with China's Jong-Il’s technological censorship. Say no to Google etc. Rather than turn to state-owned media outlets as a strategic action one can gain insights into potential goings on tweeted from those on the ground - with access to the right technology.

One to Follow is British Red Cross aid worker Ina Bluemel, from Zimbabwe. As part of efforts to combat the ongoing cholera outbreak in the country, she has started ‘tweeting’ to the British Red Cross twitter page. Helping to educate both those at home and those at a distance about the dangers of cholera and ongoing crisis in Zimbabwe.

It might be too much (and too technologically deterministic) to say that Twitter is changing the form, style and meaning of 'worthy' and 'dependable content' - determined by situation and place.

For the most part tweets are as an impulse to potential readers and other tweeters. Then the timing and placement of said tweets is very important. Pages like the British Red Cross publish small-scale incidence and actions as they come to life. Key is observation. From the anticipated what is going on with works to how people respond and react. And then how 'we' may modify such updates.

In the constantly changing ebb and flow of real time social views we are, in effect, testing each others perceptions and potential reactions. You can tell much about someone who Follows only Oprah; compared to another who displays an element of uncontrolled Following accumulations (I count myself closest to this make up).

Much has been made of the ways in which people present themselves during social interaction. Depending on one's personal preferences (and networks, one can assume) the presentation of actions and their accompanying reactions are managed with careful negotiation.

It's going to be a story of real time break-outs… And it's already started...

Come fly with me and lets tweet away

Don't you just hate it when you can't access your social information. Damn it! if it isn't your right to be able to send emails, tweets etc. whenever you choose. So yes! to those MPs during PMs Question Time who are tweeting their replies. Perhaps there should be a live Twitter feed above the main house...

No more though are such exclusions felt then in flight - one of those increasingly rare moments when one is required to turn to Off every electronic device for fear of falling from the sky/terrorism take over risk.

Ahoy then to Lufhansa MySkyStatus. Whilst you are in the air, MSS sends altitude, location, departure and arrival updates automatically to your personal Facebook and Twitter pages. Travel is now 'fun' or at least swift for those friends with enough attention to follow your movements. Even if the most likely tweet shall be 'BA strike action. Flight delayed'...

In its own Spacebook

So beautiful.
What better for the design/er SNS Facebook, than a sleek designed office space for its worker bees.



Clearly there is reference to contemporary minimalism and sleek architecture. Overall I find that the design is inspiring - with clean cut shapes, accents of colour and natural light. By letting the outside in there is a creative space, that is as harmonious in its composition, as it is best suited to encourage socialising. And dare I add social networking.
It seems inconsequential what the offices of Facebook should look like. But the design emits such a tonal and snug feel as to encourage the rest of Facebook to feel the same.Although, at present it does look a little empty. Can I work here?...

When the task is to hate.

You will recall how Barack Obama our first 'social media President' won the election. Making You the public aware of his political stance and his more personal identity. Part of the campaign was given voice and visualised moments through various social technology platforms. A first for politics. Certainly effective. And likely to be repeated.

Obama and his campaigners sort to cultivate a presence that could be seen and heard, and amass support. In the same manner Nick Griffin leader - I use such teminology in 'name' only, rather than to indicate a leading or inspirational figure-head (yes I'm Left) - as a less advanced political type is pitching for the same opportunity to voice his views on BBC's Question Time tonight.

I am not against Griffin's participation on Question Time. I am more concerned by his parties presence on SNSs like Facebook. But does this make me a hypocrite? I'm saying: Yes, to Question Time. No, to SNS Time?

Let me explain, here lies the distinction. It is likely, but by no means absolute, that those under the voting age will choose not to participate in the viewing of Griffin's (dross) dialogue. More likely in bed, on the wii, on Facebook, MSN etc. ... SNSs like Facebook, however, offer a different political ploy/ground. Children (above the age of 12years) are allowed and openly encouraged to have a presence on such sites. The same children who do not have the right to vote or to voice political opinion.

Surely, then following this line of argument then all politicians and political associations should be banned from Facebook?... And here lies the sticking point. SNSs are public venues; for friends, increasingly for Push PR, marketing and advertising and now for politicians. And you're not considered 'political enough' or 'down with' your supporters if you do not have a Twitter feed. Thus, there is one formulation that does equate. BNP stands for intolerance and discrimination against others. So yes they have a right to an equal voice in a political setting. But not in public spaces when they deny the same rights to others.

In short, it is perfectly useless to discriminate in the same manner as Griffin and his 'mates'. But I would add straight away that anyone/party that denies an equal footing to others should not be allowed to push their politics and presence in an open and public way on SNSs.

On Facebook, In 2007, a quick search for 'BNP' returned with 98 groups. Today, there are over 500. The second largest group being supportive of the BNP holds a disturbing accumulation of site users. Although the Group Admin's claim that 'This is the discussion group for those who can think for themselves'. Change 'think' to 'hate' and you have an idea of the general tone of postings and hoody-pictured members.

SNSs are public. And are also public with users who are underage in terms of political voting rights. There is no need for the BNP to hold such a public face. If they want to 'campaign' in such a manner there are 'secret groups' that they can set up.

The real irony is that the BNP, like many of us, enjoy the freedom that such social platforms provide. The very freedom that they seek to take away from others. So let them have a soapbox, but only across forums specifically set up for politcal discussion that can equalise the relationship between prejudice and fruitful debate.

Not full of hate, Obama remains my public 'Friend' on Facebook.

Wearing separates: The stripper & the hacker

If the world were a logical place, men would ride side saddle. ~ Rita Mae Brown

Last year the FastCompany nominated (a mere) 'TOP eleven' women as the 'most influential in Web 2.0'. Immediately causing outcry about the chosen and the not chosen. In the UK, it is estimated of the near 460,000 strong IT workforce those who are 'ICT Professionals', less than 15% are women.

The technology industry has a history of overlooking or missing out altogether the female counterpart to the traditional male Geek. Nowhere was this distinction more sharply drawn than in the visibility of the girls at the Yahoo! hosted TwOpenHack09 yesterday.

Still today (that's a long time in digital circles) the event is continuing to cause controversy.

I thought that we were a long time from the days when the sight of a 'mere' woman at a commercially led (thanks Yahoo!) and 'professionally' run event would send in the lap dancers. Once in the States at an afterparty for one of the tech industries now most recognised companies (they shall remain anon) they sent in the fat-ogram. Another example of the perspex ceiling designed to be tread only by those in sensible flat shoes. Whilst there continues minimal opportunity for highheeled marks to be scratched into that ceiling, this IS happening.

It is not clear exactly how many female workers are 'in IT'. Certainly not enough. And not enough at the highest levels. But then the same could be said of Banking. I am, however, struck by the irony of the TwOpenHack09 event. Once led to believe that hacking as a subtext was to break through various walls, fire and otherwise, to infiltrate - and from a leftist ideal - reveal possible exploitation and conspiracy, as a young girl I was highly influenced by this most romanticised image of the hacker subculture. In my eyes this was a level playing field where it was talent that mattered not that if you were 'too delicate' to play on the pitch. So thanks to Yahoo! and TwOpenHack09 for bringing home the ultimate levelling message that what you wear, or rather take off, your booty matters. This separates the stripper from the hacker afterall. Women know your place!

Before I get too locked into just a M/F debate, as my handsome friend Ian Forrester will remind me, overall you have to wonder how much things have changed in Tech land. Following Ian's post 'Are you a self-described geek' as faaaaar back in time as 2005, there are cultural and race dimensions too. And the issues are worldwide.

Worldwide or not, closer to home and over in Leeds tonight is a gathering of some of the potential leaders of the tech industry. Leeds Girl Geeks we salute you. Especially with your booty's covered.

And, yes I am struck by the irony of using an image entitled 'sexy robot'. This is as a deliberate device all you commentators.

So what happens next?

As part of my most recent of 'fact-finding' missions I am working in collaboration with a host of geo-intellectuals. Our objective is the first draft of a project about the impact of coastal change. Based in Scotland, the coastal buzz is about; ecology; climate change; environmental functions and management.

In short things are about to climate and social technology friendly. Lets call this the SCOAST Project.

Based on a unique research concept, SCOAST seeks to set new rules and standards for the observation, recording and research analysis of the Scottish coastline. The intention is to promote a harmony between the natural surrounding of the Scottish coastline and wetland area as habitation and human development seek mutual standing.

Today marks the launch of Stage One: A symposium held in York exploring novel approaches and opportunities for governance and networks around environmental conditions of one coastline and wetland area.

So far my view holds that 'we' (you, the reader, me, the author, everyone else, not reading this) can be accused of being mostly laissez-faire, socially naive and cut off from discussions about environmental risk and measures for future investment.

You might #followfriday, #climatechange, #etc. but where is the action really? Certainly not in the bottom of a weekly recycle bin collection.

Today, in York, the approach is to take a community, bottom up involvement with a particular coastal zone - ecosystem and track it... information sharing, images, sound, #, blog, feedback, comments, tweets...

So given there will be considerable back and forth, not least from various research councils, academic agendas and perspectives, my role is to fine tune the opportunity for public involvement via social technology. The pivot: Coastal Progress. Ideally this all encompassing approach will encourage integration with what will be a main site with information portals about the surrounding rocky coastline and turquoise waters, as these become part of a unified, interrelated social information composition.

One could argue that opening up to such input is already riddled with potential pitfalls.These may incur an inaccurate portrayal of what is going on both in the physical place of the coastal region and then in the related social technology spaces...

Well turn on my tractor with the manure - I pooh, pooh such criticisms. Rather the aim of SCOAST is dedicated to a progressive perspective on climate and coastal change.

It IS only early days - the project has only just been launched and this is our first meet-up.

Thus, this is the blog post that will launch a thousand more. So I am not a geographer, environmentalist or ecosystem specialist. This did not stop two other guys who lack climate credentials writing a book - SuperFreakonomics - with an entire chapter about climate science.

More reports from the SCOAST-precipice soon...

Encounters: The new rules

Why it pays to be nice and not caught kissing fish

Encounters are everywhere. So much so, the dilemma often lies in the when, where and how to disconnect. Being a social scientist and etiquette being my ‘thing’ I like to fall back on the assumption that if you treat other’s as you would be done by, then this is shows ‘good form’ for all elements of social life.

Social life is full of obligations – that email you’re supposed to be replying to right now, that conference call scheduled for tomorrow. Thus, by mediating our encounters to the nth degree this can exhibit an almost neurotic orderliness as commitments are fulfilled and expectations realised. Or not.

But, where is the social structure upon which we can all rely? Presumably, we learn a good deal about the various nuances of how to handle encounters, by experiencing such interactions as they crop up in daily life. Face-to-face the ‘whatever’ that happens through social exchanges is, for the most part, kept in check by knowing both what you and I are doing at the same time. When this is mediated through various technologies, social platforms and ‘geeky’ trails’, other methods recommend themselves, however.

A characteristic of face-to-face encounters is that they occur in the immediate presence of one another. In this instant parties are usually uninterrupted from other social persistence. Increasingly social technologies make possible the same type of exchanges. Take Twitter. Real time. All the time. Here the order pertains because of what is bought to the table – or rather Twitter’s – and, thus, this is accepted as ‘normal’ for the interaction order. This is why you can’t tweet more than 140 characters.

But there are degrees of difference. Not better, nor worse, but certainly different in conventions and in protocols. For example, generationally those of my father’s age (dad you’re still young at heart and in looks – Mr Clooney has nothing on you!) tend to be more conservative. Not socially in terms of the number of friends (although this can be a truism on Facebook) but conservative as in a small ‘c’ for cautious.

This can be frustrating for many those of us who have grown up as the popularised GenX, who are confident with an array of technology gadgets and belong to more than one SNS at one time. Pervasive, yes. But this does not necessarily make us careless. In contrast to others we appear as the go-getters, what my father would observe as the ‘risk-takers’ and ‘makers’. Risk takers, because it is likely that you, like myself, hold people in your network that you may not even have ‘met’ – but share friends, work colleagues etc in common, so they make for a valuable contact. Risk makers as you actively seek choose to live daily life through various broadcast channels; to see ‘what everyone else is up to’; to ‘keep in touch’; and establish and retain your own of social presence.

Ultimately this is about getting used to living a constantly connected, pervasive and (potentially) minutely examined lifestyle. ‘Easy’, or rather second nature for technology enthusiasts. But this represents a lifestyle that is harder to understand and infiltrate for those who are at a distance from such platforms and devices.

What we all share in common, however, is the process of creativity, embracement of change and a sharpening of the resolution of our present experiences – as it occurs in the NOW. Rather than ever being ‘offline’ or ‘unreal’, by allowing the momentum of the flux and flows of social information to rise in a cacophony of noise around us takes us from sheer being into becoming. And by ‘becoming’ I mean becoming more networked and more adept to share constant updates and information with others. In short, ‘geek it good’ and avoid kissing fishes.

New/s rules for more Twitter exposure

Broken hearts. Mundane cups of tea. The Twitterverse has it all. And depending on who you are following some can more salacious and entertaining than others. Up the Tweetdebate - known for its condensed form of short messaging or microblogging as tweets, Twitter lets users update in 140 characters their succinct social status 'fact/s'.

No longer. You may have noticed - you can hardly miss amid the blaze of updates - longer tweets. Tweets that go beyond the 140 character brief. Enter, Twerbose which allows for 'all-can-type' updates. Utilised by the likes of the Lohan sisters it must be easy to use and thus has secured, already, popularity with the yoff. Take heed though, as such tweet extensions allow for longer replies and talking heads. And not necessarily of the polite and liked type.

Take Frances Bean Cobain's (@Gofackadawg) rant at mini Lohan...

This is my open letter to Ali Lohan.
Your not entitled to anything...

Unlikely to spark the next Lohan meltdown such extended tweet coverage does rather retract from the original delight and skill of the 140 character composition, not to say composure - both words and socially. As a continually Twitteriffic, nay social media, directed lifestyle this represents the fast work of fingers and thumbs able to update about everything to everyone.

Perhaps there should be a masterclass in Twitteretiquette? A new moral code highlighting the when it is appropriate to tweet, our expectations of others and how they should respond.

Following a w/e full of 'you must respond NOW' constant tweet demands from a certain difficult and cantankerous person (they are a drama queen), I was reminded of a few pet peeves in the social situating via such brief characters. Indeed, upon my i've dropped everything and have relinquished to your demands by near instantanous reply. They (that cantankerous person) then choose not to respond. In short they failed in their duty to keep to the communication rules in our treatment of others.

How rude.

Time for blood to befall their bootstraps. Or perhaps they could just read the following...

Here's a top 10 list of things that I insist upon to for tweetsuavity.

1. One does not resort to anniversay based demands or expectations. These are the refuge of the insecure and unimaginative. Facebook already tells me it's is your birthday.

2. Always be aware of Followers. This means that you will endeavour to be creative with updates. Above all, respond in kind to @replies. Unless you're Hilary Clinton, then you get your PTA (personal twitter assistant) to manage these for you.

3. Broadcast is a core element of the tweet. Keep in mind then that these act as an open invitation for commentary about potential holes, mistruths and demands which exist as part of every update.

4. Always respond to notified errors, however insignificant these may appear to be.

5. Encourage civility. And, if work related, always uphold professionalism.

6. It is within your rights to refuse Followers. Call this social standards. If one faction is a PR SPAM promoting tweeter you have every right to block. It is not about the number of people as Followers, but the quality of updates and your connection. This means that you may not want any Lohan following.

7. Never copy and paste a tweet without a 'retweet' RT tag. This is akin to theft. You will be found. You know who you are.

8. Embrace the tinyurl, photos, video and additional appi's in every way possible.

9. Remember, unless you double check your privacy settings, your personal tweet archives are freely available. This means that those intent on making mountains out of molehills could cite your words back to you, whether you intended them to be read in that way or not.

10. Work with Twitter newbies. You know the one's with less than three followers. You were one too once.

(opps one more)

11. Try not to use Twitter for professional only relationships. This is reserved for those persons you have not met irl, or if you are not friends with their friends. As an enquiry that requires more than 140 characters of content should be mediated by other forms. NOT a string of tweets.

...And finally, never make lists of 10.

Tweeting may lead you to being the talk of the town, but only ever until the next update. And the tweets never reveal what you really think do they?... Unless they're directed at a certain cantankerous nitwit...

My Buzz Paparazzi

Make it. Tag it. Share it. Are we becoming our own version of paprazzi malice?
Twitpics - emphasis on the Twit part - can be revealing. Not only from the social curiosity of 'what I am doing' details (ooo salicious), but for the Followers who are keen to see, not only where we are, but how we are. This is the danger of camera phones and Twitter mobile applications people.

New York, ever the city ahead of the game, has banned mobile phones from its Top Private Members Clubs (boo no fun, now where can we get pictures of Loopy Lohan?!) You leave your coat and gadgets at the door. Gossip Girl territory this is NOT. Unless you're James Bond and have hidden on your person something descrete intended to broadcast the indescrete.

Staying in Turkey a couple of weeks ago slicing through Kalkan harbour was yacht 'A' - owned by Andrey Melnichenko, the 36-year-old Russian billionaire industrialist. Aside from the imposing presence there exists a 'no photo (we're rich) please' forcefield. And not to be outdone another Russian billionaire Roman Ambramovich has installed an anti-paparazzi “shield”. Both are likely to have other 'lasers' too, to slice at a distance any paps caught snooping at the bow.

In sum, social media is for the sharing of personal information, yours and mine, with known friends and other friends of friends - who might be friends in the future. Or not. This level of social sharing promotes individuals as social savvy, successful and open. Unless your Jordan, then you just look needy, tacky and should probably stop tweeting it all up anyway. And keep your clothes on.

Alongside all these information shares, there should be concerns about privacy and surveillance. If you are not concerned yet, you should be. What problems exist now - such as the dilemmas about not being able to find friends, to disconnect and regrets over sharing too much - are only going to be further accentuated in the future. Are we ready for this? And what are the social and legal consequences? Will we always be seen to be part of 'fluffy' and nice communities? Or do things have the possibility to become as malicious as they are pervasive?

Hoping to answer some of these questions, is a workshop about Privacy and Security on Social Networks in Belgium next month. I intend to go - fireworks and all (its on November 5th). I shall report back from the frontline - paparazzi style for readers here. Watch this post...

The Click Have Eyes

We live in the most surveilled part of Europe. Filmed an average of 300 times when we choose to leave our homes. Feel sorry then for the people of Stratford-upon-Avon as the amount of footage is about to increase. Tony Morgan, James Woodward and David Steele have launched Internet Eyes. The site gives opportunity for those behind the eyes to reap the rewards against crime. No, not 'Them', but You. In the same week when football fans were forced to pay-per-view for a match online, at the same time viewers could choose to watch streamed CCTV footage and if you 'spot a crime' - it's a GOAL!

Alongside the Government plans for ID cards it appears that we are to live as part of increasingly 'inclusive' series of surveillance recordings as we literally zoom in and out of view. The forthcoming nationwide launch of Internet Eyes could be a profitable business. It represents the taking of a virtual journey to uncover criminal incidences just click away. For viewers this means they feel warm and fluffy having uncovered criminal situation/s (Poirot has nothing on these CCTV viewing couch surfing detectives).

Some key points
1. Should such surveillance not be in the hands of professionals and not the public
2. This can only ever work as a 'gesture' in the fight against criminal activity. And I doubt that we'll be allowed to view the CCTV footage inside bank boardrooms.
3. Internet Eyes could represent the next round for reality tv. A pay-per-view which would accumulate as a cash prize for those Spotter's of the crims. There could even be T-shirts.

So there you have it, a business proposition that profits on 'rising crime rate', social surveillance, a bit of public fear and status given to the 'eyes of good' to bring crime rates down and, in principle, convictions up.

Convinced? You could buy the T-Shirt, pay-per-view and find out.

A more exciting and unique use of CCTV has been muscially ascribed by The Get Out Clause. Watch and enjoy viewers. Best of all, no crime.

TEDx Stating the obvious?

Isaac Newton told us that when an apple fell from a tree it invariably headed towards the ground. Noam Chomsky told us we only make sense of the words of another person because we share a knowledge of the basic grammatical structure of language. Such things might seem obvious – especially when presented in a necessarily brief manner to an audience that does not share a common disciplinary background.

I am a social scientist and this means that, in common with others in my discipline, I seek to understand the social world that we all share. We do this through theoretically informed empirical research. So yes - for some people parts or all of my presentation at the recent TEDx might be dismissed as 'trivial', 'uninteresting' or 'boring'. Such critics have every right to hold and broadcast their opinions. However, in so doing they are closing their minds to the possibility of understanding or as Max Weber (another social scientist – but rather more venerable and long dead) put it ‘verstehen’ - by which (broadly) he meant to indicate that human interaction and society is so complex that it may be best understood through detailed description and interpretation. Even if this is 'just to' state the obvious.

It might be maintained that we ‘just get on with’ our interactions across SNSs and so forth. My talk was not of a ‘how to’ kind - as clearly for the audience at these events - Blogs, Twitter, Facebook and so forth are a part of everyday life. Like other social scientists (for example, Erving Goffman and more recently Anthony Giddens to name two) my concern is to ‘get under’ the everyday, the often mundane and taken-for-granted.

Does this matter in our web 2.0 world? Yes - because as social life embraces or (according to some) moves ‘online’ (an old fashioned label to some, including myself) this brings with it all the good and bad aspects of human behaviour. Indeed this shift may enhance or exaggerate and accelerate some forms of behaviour - we have all read reports of ‘cyber’ bullying, relationships damage through SNSs ‘affairs’ and so forth. More pragmatically, an understanding of how and why people move across social media will help in the design of better and sustainable resources. However, the study of such things is still in its infancy and conventional academic work struggles to keep up with the fast pace of change in social media and accompanying research.Thus, the media that you are immersed in and take-for-granted is strange, risky, fast, ephemeral and trivial to most of my academic and commercial colleagues.

My first TEDx proved to be an interesting experience - I’d like to thank my critics for their considered thoughts – I don’t (yet) have a complete answer (but then I’m not as well established, prominent or well-rewarded as the ‘great men’ mentioned above or the other participants at TEDx) - but your responses will feed into my research and the work on my book, ‘Encounters With. Social life in the network society’, in which I am exploring the issues raised in my talk as well as many others in appropriate depth.

For other hot issues on the day and social media noise about TEDxman you might also want to check out the only other female speaker; Sarah Hartley - @foodiesarah

As well as the other attendees and participants,
Louise Bolotin - @louisebolotin

Ian Aspin - @IanAspin

Kim - @Global5ocialite

Ian Forrester - @cubicgarden

And of course the photos - where one shows me uncannily smiley :-D

Saving the world by design

DURING my now long/er book writing-days, I am now taking time out between chapters and chai tea and am in development of one or two brave ideas with the Environment Department at the University of York. The latest endeavour is to take a lead with social media for a project that will record, track and follow data and information about a specific geographical area of ecological interest.

The key focus will be on the participatory nature of the digital content. Something we have seen already with regard to building specific 'web communities' (circa 1990s community spaces, newsforums etc.), but this time around usergenerated content will be a part of the creative tools to generate ‘noise’ and sustain connections. This is with the additional aim of a collaborative working approach and future publications too from an academic side of things.

So far, so innovative and full of potential with a capital 'P'. We might not save the world with our datavaillence, but there will amble opportunity for participation and a creativity in ways that academia in particular is still getting used to. Might see some whales too.