Professional Documents
Culture Documents
NIKI CHEONG
ReWired
star2@thestar.com.my
TeChNology is advancing so rapidly that each day, digital culture seems to affect our lives in a different way. It is ironic that as we move closer to being a wireless society, our brains are constantly being rewired to cope with these changes. Starting today, Niki Cheong will address digital culture issues in our new weekly column reWired. you are invited to suggest topics and issues, or pose related questions to him via email or on Twitter using the #Star2reWired hashtag.
ARELY a fortnight ago, two people made the headlines both in Malaysia and across the causeway in Singapore. Alvin Tan and Vivian Lee came under the spotlight when their blog, featuring videos of them having sex, gained mainstream attention. Im not here to discuss the morality issues of the actions of these two young adults. Many people have already stated their opinions through media channels and online social networks. The couple also had a chance to respond to critics, making several media appearances and even releasing a Q&A video response. What is interesting about this incident, from a digital culture perspective, is in the way Lee responded in an interview. She said: I see nothing wrong in posting the nude pictures and videos of our sexual relationship on the Internet. It was intended for the world to see how much we love each other. Her statement alludes to the very public nature of online platforms, which for many is a major issue of concern when it comes to the use of Internet and social networking sites in particular. One site that has been heavily criticised for its interpretation of what constitutes public
Technology is fuelling the debate over what is public, and what is private.
Taking it public: Facebook founder and Ceo mark Zuckerberg suggests that the current social norm is that things are less private. information is Facebook. This was especially so after its founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in an interview in 2010, defended the sites move to change the privacy settings of its then 350 million users, suggesting that the current social norm is that things are less private. The evolution of the Internet over the past 15 years facilitated this change. When the World Wide Web caught on back in the mid90s, people started finding ways to post information about themselves online. Before that, conversations were already happening via email and bulletin boards. But the Web meant that you could have your own public site and write whatever you wanted on it. Free sites such as Geocities and Tripod emerged, offering to host personal web pages. Then blogs started becoming all the rage, and Internet users found that they did not need to replace old web pages with new ones. Blogs would let them add fresh content while at the same time archive all their old information on the very same site. It is no surprise then that sites which made it easier for you to talk about yourself and with design templates, too emerged. Enter the world of social networking where sites like Friendster and MySpace dominated much of the mid-noughties, allowing you to not only talk about yourself, but connect with other people friends and strangers alike to share your life with. So when Zuckerberg talks about how privacy has changed, he is not entirely wrong. Whether or not this justifies his companys decision to meddle with the personal accounts of so many users is still being debated but the fact is that digital technology has changed the way in which people view what is public and what is private. Which is why its interesting that Lee went on to say, I cannot understand why people have to make so much fuss about this. It is our private affair. That she would talk about both being public in wanting to share her life with the world, yet consider that part of her life private, shows how fluid her understanding of privacy is. It is hard to imagine that she is alone in this way of thinking. No doubt this viewpoint is increasingly common we just need to look at the public uproar at Facebooks privacy policies, yet a