Right to be Forgotten or Right to be Forgiven?

“In a nonappealable ruling, the European Court of Justice gave individuals the right to redact results on searches of their names — for wrong information, out-of-date information and, it seems too, just unflattering information. This new right — immediately enforceable — presumably extends to politicians, and perhaps corporations, if not governments. In other words, it’s the end pretty much of search as we know it. Or, arguably, it is the end for Europe — serviced by denuded search engines (the ruling applies to all search engines) and kept from knowing what the rest of the world knows.” – Michael Wolff

A small part of me cheered when I first read about the ruling in Europe – yes, citizens can actually have control of their privacy and online identities! Yes, this large juggernaut of a company with so many resources will finally be pushed to use some of it’s capital to help people trying to reclaim their lives after it’s been tarnished online! But I thought about it. I thought about American ideals about the free market and free speech and it reminded me of my own idealistic dream – the right to be forgiven.

As the article linked above states, Americans care about having access to information. Free expression has been woven into the fabric of this country and citizens believe that having information (even if it is handed to them through one major gatekeeper) will benefit them more than not having it all. These are things I believe. And this has caused the EU and US to butt heads over how to uphold privacy (a principle having different weights in each region). There are many articles talking about the difficulty of reconciling the EU’s and US’s perspectives on the “right to be forgotten” because each group comes from very different backgrounds informing how they want to protect their citizens. But for me, although dealing with companies that primarily conduct business over the Internet means that there should some sort of international standard, I’ve spent time pondering what can practically be done to help people growing up on in the United States deal with having their personal lives splashed all over the web.

Legislators have seriously considered the idea of allowing children, or potentially new adults, to erase search results leading to things posted online in a moment of youthful folly, but that solution, just like the right to be forgotten, doesn’t completely lead to the end result one hopes for when proposing these policies – the ability  to never be harmed by things posted online. While forcing the primary gatekeepers to this information to delete search results probably has a profound affect on diminishing the chances of that information coming to light, it doesn’t remove it. The articles and pictures one hopes to forget and never see again are still online. They may continue to be organized in internal website searches. Deleting a search result doesn’t delete the memories of acquaintances that recall that one time you did that one thing and it spread through your friend group online like wildfire. Getting rid of search results doesn’t get rid of information (although it will bury it). What I hope is that, like criminal records for those under the age of 18 are sealed, the digital artifacts of one’s life from the time they were younger than 18 (or 25, when the judgement center of our minds finish developing) can’t be used to discriminate against an individual. Just like an employer shouldn’t make a decision influenced by race, gender or age when looking at job candidates (although these factors can be discovered and unconsciously influence an employer after a quick Google search), maybe they shouldn’t be able to judge you based on your youthful indiscretions.

There is one huge difference of course – we try to provide equal employment opportunities so that people are not discriminated against for things about their person that are out of their control. And some may say you can control your digital identity but with each individual becoming a publisher, I’m not so sure how true that is anymore. A right to be forgiven or a protection from discrimination falls more in line with the fundamental value of free speech. People can publish what they want about each other but we can change how we react to it. Although learning proper online reputation management skills will go a long way in giving young people a chance to not be influenced by one or two early bad decisions, at the end of the day I’d rather know that I will be forgiven than hope that my digital mistakes are completely forgotten/hidden as I try to carve out a career and an adult life.

In all honesty, I have no idea how feasible this idea is. And considering some of the crazy, disrespectful, harmful things some people post online, I’m not sure we should turn a blind eye to everything done before one is 18 (although I hope the law comes into play at the time of action if what a kid does is truly despicable). But I think this line of thinking may still be the future.

Are Professionals Taking Over YouTube?

It’s been a while! With a new job, studying for the LSAT and applying for law school, it’s been a long time since I’ve taken the time to write. Somewhere along the way, I made the mental decision to only post if I felt strongly about something. And that something has occurred: big brands and big money are becoming more ingrained in the user content creation space. While that statement in itself isn’t surprising, it was disheartening to learn that on YouTube, one of the most supposedly democratic content sharing sites on the web, videos from top dogs (i.e. corporations) are now getting the most eyeballs.

This shift in consumer choice wouldn’t have come to my attention if I hadn’t read a cleverly titled article on Mashable, “Where Have All the Cats Gone? Professionals Now Rule YouTube”  (which was originally published by The Atlantic). I was just skimming over the article until it burst my bubble about SteveKardynal’s video Miley Cyrus – Wrecking Ball (Chatroulette Version). The hilarious guy shocking random people who still use ChatRoulette is a spokesman for Ford? Seriously? Even though I still think the video is ridiculously funny, it left a bad taste in my mouth to learn that a car company may have in some indirect way been sponsoring the video. Is nothing sacred? Although I’m accustomed to a few megacorporations ruling other realms of the Internet (search, social networks, online shopping), the article made me realize that even the final frontier of homebrew digital content had been settled by powerful players. YouTube favors the businesses that bring in more views and now users do too.

What’s more, YouTube, in at least the gaming video realm, seems to be sheltering the established (revenue generating) channels while slapping less well-known channels with copyright infringement suits. Although I don’t want to get into the legality of the complaints, YouTube itself is clearly favoring the ‘established,’ business-like channels. Although these channels may have started as a new series developed by individuals taking a chance, they reflect the same favor for professionally created content.

I don’t in any way blame the corporations or the ‘managed’ channels. That’s their job – create great material that will attract people to their products/work. Nor do I think there’s anything wrong with this shift in viewer taste. Although the occasional amateur video can still garner tens of millions of views, it makes more sense that dazzling, big production videos draw the most viewers. But I can sigh with nostalgia, can’t I?

The professionalization of YouTube reminds me of slow decline of local businesses in competition with Amazon and chain department stores. When it comes to content production, we’ve moved into a new era online. There will still be amateur-made hits. And I think it will be that way for a long, long time. But people will always want the best products, or in this case content, regardless of where it comes from. If that means corporations rather than the little guy, who are we to complain when we still get our laughs?

My Apps Tell the Story of My Life

This weekend, I downloaded an app from Safeway, an app for recipes and an app for home decorating ideas. This is the latest “wave” of downloads that mark a different stage in my life. The last wave included about 3 different apps that allowed me to search for rentals in Silicon Valley. Before that I downloaded a wave of job hunting apps and several months before that I was downloading city maps and language learning apps during my time spent abroad.

My apps are telling the story of my life. My phone, and its distinct collection of icons in its own personalized arrangement, have become another fingerprint. It has a unique mix of apps that represent my interests and needs. Anyone call tell, looking at the mix of social media and practical applications that I’ve recently moved and I’m looking for a way to decorate my new space. Considering the job apps, they can probably also tell that I just started a new job. Add the fact that I have Snapchat, Instagram and Zipcar, and I think it’s also clear that I am or was recently a student.

I use my phone to make calls, check my emails, and take photos. But it has also become my profile. This is the only phone that marks off the hostel I stayed at in Rome or knows directions to all the apartments I’ve visited before I settled into my new home. It’s as telling as my resume and my Facebook profile. It’s one thing to say that smartphones have become important parts of our lives, but it’s quite another to sit back and realize that it has become a reflection of your life.

I just  think it’s interesting to note that our online and mobile activity are their own timelines. Going through my phone is a walk down memory lane. And it’s an easy way for someone else to find out details of my life that I wasn’t conscious I was l laying bare. Once again, I have to take a step back and think about what it means to be constantly connected.

10,000 Hours of Typing

I remember being incredibly jealous of a friend during our middle school keyboard class. While the rest of us were just starting to pay enough attention to learn that our keyboards were laid out in QWERTY order, she was typing what seemed like a million words a second, without even glancing at the keys. Since we were all on MySpace, I knew that all of us used keyboards at home. How was she so skilled? How could she type so much better than us?!

And now I know – she practiced, practiced, practiced and put in her 10,000 hours on a keyboard. Like I have at this stage in my life. Like many (but not all) other people my age. I don’t need to look at the keys to type. I’ve written most of this article through muscle memory. This doesn’t mean I’m perfect or that I don’t mess up, but I’ve reached a point where even fixing my typos is part of a streamlined process for me.

It struck me recently that the only thing I’ve externally ever put so much time into, rather than an instrument or a sport, is typing. It’s the gateway to my digital/real life so I’m not surprised but it’s definitely not a realization that I thought I’d come to years after reading Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers. That was the the book that first introduced me to the idea that intense practice (maybe mixed in with talent and interest) over a long gap of time is what allowed various superstars reach the pinnacle of their careers. When you read about how Bill Gates and athletes and other really awesome people became stars in their field, you imagine putting in those hours in your own profession. Writing. Talking. Coding. Designing. I never thought that I would stop and think about how much time and practice affected my keystrokes.

Somehow, the fact that i type quickly makes me terrified of how much time I spend on computers and how much time I’ll spend on computers in the future. But it has also rekindled my drive to put those hours somewhere else. If I can unconsciously master the keyboard by never leaving the computer, I wonder how good I can become at writing. Or dancing. Or…something. What have you put your 10,000 hours into so far? And what do you plan to master later?

 

Video Apartment Tours Should be Standard

I recently completed a rental hunt in Silicon Valley and one thing stumped me – why aren’t online video tours common? Nothing beats stepping into a place and getting a chance to imagine yourself living there, but it would save a lot of time on the renter and rentee’s part if you could see a video walking tour of the place before going to an open house.

I was initially across the country when my housing search began and I tried to read into every nook and cranny of posted images. Ultimately, I had to ask friends to attend open houses for me since I didn’t want to miss any gems  in such a steep market.  One of the houses that I didn’t bother sending anyone to was one listing that had a link to a short tour of the home on Youtube. I saw it and knew the house wasn’t for me, but I was shocked that I hadn’t witnessed other realtors/land-persons/home owners being so forward thinking. It’s become commonplace for universities to do this; we can do it on the local level as well.

Anyways, when I landed and started my house hunt on foot, I used video to show my roommates (also moving in from afar) places that I was looking into. Want to hear something rental seekers never say? Video is terrible; send me pictures.  Video adds depth that photos on Craigslist can’t.

So how do you make a video tour of your apartment or home for sale?

1.  Grab your tablet or smartphone (or borrow one. Or use a point and shoot digital camera. There are a lot of options.).
2.  Open the camera and switch it to video.
3.  Walk around your apartment. Vocalize some interesting features.
4.  Hit the share button on your phone and upload to Google Drive, SkyDrive or Youtube – your choice.
5.  Make to set the privacy settings so that only those who have a link can view it. And once the place is sold, take the video off the web.

And you’re done! You’ve just added a lot of richness to your house listing and made a house hunter’s life much easier.

Why did no one tell me Pinterest was a design haven?

I’m not a homemaker. I don’t do crafts. I have never personally created a meme or quote block. But I’m still a little shocked that someone hasn’t dragged me onto Pinterest. The designer in me is jumping with glee now that I’ve finally signed up for an account. Although I’ve gone to Pinterest for inspiration a number of times, I think part of the joy of actually having an account is the constant flood of colors and quotes and examples from all across the web. Following boards on Pinterest is inadvertent advertising and inadvertent inspiration all wrapped up into one.

If that’s the case, why is Pinning such a guilty pleasure? Only a couple of my close friends have told me that they maintain an account and only a sprinkling of other people from my wider social network have connected their accounts with Facebook. It is different from other social networks – you’re connected to a community of people based on interests rather than familiarity. But that’s also why I think it has the potential to be incredibly beneficial on a professional rather than personal level.

Although I read a lot of articles about Pinterest when it was on the rise in 2011 and a lot of analysis of Pinterest’s users, I still think there’s a lot of potential for profit if they cordoned off a certain section of their site to those more career-minded in the maintenance of their boards. Although people are already creating boards for the top examples of magazine layouts, yearbook pages, and web design, it would be interesting to see some type of visual or social accreditation system that allows people to promote their boards themselves as something that people can learn from rather than all of pages external to Pinterest itself. Food for thought.

There’s half a chance this has all been said before. Pinterest is an Internet establishment at this point. When I was first exploring the site, accountless, I simply scrolled through the home page with its endless list of dresses and recipes; while I enjoyed them for a while, it wasn’t the type of thing that got me hooked, line and sinker. But I think it’s time for me to reconnect with the world’s 3rd largest social network.

Why I Still Carry A Notebook

For the past few weeks, I’ve been thinking about what direction to take this blog. I love writing and sometimes I think I can share insight into whatever topic has gripped me at the moment (i.e. potential legal response to hacking video game characters). But I took a long break from blogging because I felt like I should probably create a game plan going forward if my blog was something I want to continue to dedicate time to. Jump to about seven months later and I’ve finally figured out some sort of diretion! Yay!

And I did it by grabbing a Moleskine notebook I own and finally writing down my ideas. The key here (for me) is that I finally stopped staring at my screen and physically wrote something down. Although I’ve always been aware that I just function better when I write things down by hand, it’s hard to stop prowling the Internet for ideas and articles that will give me inspiration. The Internet’s so magical – it has to have a solution? Right?

Although this is not always the case, when it comes to just thinking things through and solidifying all the ideas bouncing around in my head, paper is still my best friend. I don’t know if it’s because the public school system trained me to learn by spelling out my thoughts or if it’s purely because of my own personal inclinications, but I need my notebooks. And I need to remember to use them. 

I will probably always need an agenda. I’ve tried apps like Studious and Any.do and while they are lovely, it’s not the same as permanently crossing something off my to-do list (by the way,  one of the best feelings in the world). And I will probably also hoard all the free notebooks I receive at different events because I will at some point write in them. Writing works for me. It’s probably what works best for a lot of other people. And although I forget it with my millenial social media/tech/app obsession, that’s not a bad thing (except for the trees. Oops.) Technology isn’t always the answer!  For some people the pen is mightier than the key, and that’s ok. 

Character Hacks

I recently read an article on the Wall Street Journal Digits blog entitled, “Is Hacking Videogame Characters Legal?” The copyright and video game nerd in me jumped at the link and I read through the article, getting an overview of the how the court system might choose to examine a case of a video game fan repurposing a popular series by making the lead a heroine, rather than a hero. From there I went back and read the original article that specifically focused on how some fans, in the past and today, are changing games in some of the industry’s most time-honored franchises (like Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Bros.) in order to fight sexism. As the title of the article states, programmers are “taking the damsel out of distress, [and] put[ting] them in charge.”

At the game’s end, Jumpman and the Lady are reunited. A typical game ending that fans are choosing to change. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While I applauded the article discussing problems of sexism in the video game industy, the article about the legality of hacking made me pause.  I’m enough of a fan of video games/media that I also like to read about what’s happening in the industry. And I’ve already spent time reading academic papers about the reception and representation of women in video games and the industry itself. The fact that the story of  how Mike Mika changed a classic game for his daughter rekindled this conversation was exciting. It’s a decades old problem, that, despite constant commentary, hasn’t really been dealt with.

But the question of whether or not what Mika and other programmers are doing with these classic characters and franchises is legal seemed somewhat…self-evident. It’s one of those lingering question that may be brought up occasionally but is never really answered or dealt with, for good reason. Copyright is an incredibly important (and unresolved, at least in the digital era) issue, but “hacking” is deeply engrained in media culture and fandom. Hacks and cheats are a part of gaming. They are not just something that a fan does to a video game; including easter eggs in video games has been part of the industry since (apparently) 1978. Hidden characters and items are part of what  keeps players engaged. They expand the world that the developers have created. There are hacks to gain more money, or more ammo, or change a character’s outfit or unlock a side story. And for a long time, gamers have taken the expansion of their video game worlds into their own hands.

I remember playing The Sims as a kid and being fascinated that there was a community of fans online that were making their own customized furniture, appliances and all the other gizmos you would want to add to your home in the orginal Sims. And as programmers and games have become more sophisticated and the industry has diversified with different consoles and capabilities, there are even more “hacks” out there now. Mika’s project is one of thousands and more than anything, I think it shows devotion to his daughter and gaming. Although it doesn’t make up for the legal murkiness of their action, people don’t hack and recreate games they don’t care about. Although this relationship between the gamer and the game is not something the legal article was meant to even touch upon, in my mind this concept is linked to hacking itself.

Another reason why the copyright article gave me pause was that gamers are not the only ones out there that show their love for media by “hacking” characters. More than anything else, I think fan fiction is probably the greatest example of a “character hack” (see how I said hacking was part of media fandom and not just gaming fandom earlier?). I know hacking really only refers to  hacking code, but I think it can loosely be applied to how fans  who write online work with established stories. Book fans spend their own free time commandeering worlds and characters from beloved franchises and retelling the stories in their own ways (or continuing them, or writing the ending they wanted, or setting them in a different universe,  and ad nauseum). What’s more, as Sherr pointed out in his article, no one is selling these games or stories and trying to compete with the original story or game – they are distributing them freely to friends and a wider community that may be interested in their project. In this case specifically,  people most likely haven’t paid this much attention to the original Donkey Kong in years. And although one day there might be backlash for all of this “character hacking”, as of now it’s condoned. “Hacking” characters in a programming or literary sense allows fans to continue to interact with stories after they have already played with a video game for untold hours or reread a book for the millionth time. It’s how some people stay hooked  to these franchises forever. As media has changed,  and as the Internet has allowed a passive audience to develop a participatory culture in which they have a chance to give back to the worlds they love, I don’t think a straightforward question asking about the legality of hacking a media entity fully encapsulates all that has changed in our expectations of how consumers expect to be able to interact with media.

I guess all my media studies in college stuck. The question about whether or not changing damsels into heroines is legal is a significant question. But I see it as a complex question rather than just a question of how the courts would interpret the law in a hypothetical case.  Answering this question will have a fundamental impact on how fans interact with media (in the game world and beyond). Although there might be a silent agreement today to let the small number of fans participating in this counterculture slide,  that might not always be the case. But asking whether or not hacking characters is legal seems to be far more than a programming question.

The Web’s Answer to Graduating

After making a yearbook, and readjusting to campus life, and now doing some preparation to leave college (permanently this time) I have finally gotten back to my blog! I was fascinated to find this infographic to help graduates cope with life after college. What interested me most was in the section listing “How to Handle It All;” it gave a nice list of web resources, a lot of which I actually trust. I’m looking to apply to Law School so I jumped the gun and joined Noodle. We’ll see if it’s helpful. Either way, I wanted to share the infographic in case it has any resources anyone else could use.

How the Book Industry Represented Women

The MissRepresentation movement is both a watchdog and information hub about how women are being portrayed in the media. Today, I saw their video reviewing Hollywood’s  performance in 2012. According to MissRep, Hollywood failed, despite a number of powerful, and I think impactful, female protagonists from this year. Although some people tune into Honey Boo Boo, I am going to firmly hold out hope that more people went out and saw the incredible characterization of Katniss in the Hunger Games instead.

Regardless, the most interesting part of the video for me was actually the comments section. There was a quite a bit of discussion from Game of Thrones fans about the portrayal of women in the series. Although I have never seen the show, I’m currently two books into the books series, A Song of Fire and Ice so I was intrigued by how that show specifically was a point of contention. Some viewers  made the claim that the story includes a varied portrayal of women, both strong and weak. Others said that the show still objectifies women through old tropes of a woman’s role as a mother and caretaker.

As I read the comments, I couldn’t help but wonder why no one was commenting directly about the books. And that made me go a step further – why did the video and comments ignore the portrayal of women in this year’s top books? Although we have grown to be a more visual culture, this doesn’t mean that men, women, boys, and girls aren’t still consuming thousands of words through news articles, non- fiction and fiction. How does the printed word measure up in their portrayal of women?

Personally, I’ve had the opportunity to read about a diverse array of female characters this year. From the Golden One, in  Ayn Rand‘s Anthem, to an amazing protagonist named Vin in Brandon Sanderson‘s Mistborn Trilogy, to Aliena and Ellen from Ken Follett‘s Pillars of the Earth to Sophie Kinsella‘s latest hilarious lead character, Poppy from I’ve Got Your Number, I’ve encountered multitudes of stories of older and younger women. Although TV has definitely been a major part of my media consumption, it has not been the only way that I’ve engaged with women in the media. Whether the characters were incredibly complicated or just downright silly, these books offered a diverse range of portrayals.  There was no thoughtless heavy-handed objectification. I would argue that my reading list for 2012, including one of the Game of Thrones series, passed muster.

Unfortunately, one can never generalize from personal experience. Looking at the top selling books in 2012, I’m not so sure this past year can be commended. The top selling book this past year both digitally and in print was EL James’s Fifty Shades of Grey. Although the book has had a tremendous impact on self-publishing, the book industry, and popular consumption itself, I’m not entirely sure what the verdict would be on its portrayal of women. I can’t and won’t judge a book I haven’t read, but maybe we should look beyond movies and reality TV and look at the books that mothers and fathers are passing on to their children. Even though Fifty Shades deservedly won this year’s Popular Fiction Book Award, maybe it also deserves a little scrutiny from an entity like MissRep. Maybe it’s time for people who care about women’s portrayals in the media to examine books at the top of the bestseller list.

The MissRepresentation campaign does an amazing job of making us take note of what’s on our screens. I wonder who can or will make us take note of the words printed on the pages we hold? Should we even bother? Even though there may be some lingering ideas about the romance of an author spending hours alone, writing by candlelight to construct a perfect story, people who write for, direct, and produce television care just as much about the work of art they create. If there is a formal organization that takes note of their representation of women, should books have a similar watchdog/commentator? There may be cultural diversity in what we appreciate and commend, but there might be a problem if that never fully translates to the bestseller lists.  Media is an all enveloping word for the different ways people communicate and obtain information. Maybe it’s time for books, the oldest form of mass media,  to join its digital brethren as part of the ongoing discourse on how both women and men are being represented.