Week 3 blog post: How to interpret the technology?
The article “The Reader-to-Leader Framework ”elaborates on
what motivates technology-mediated social participation and talks about the
four successive levels of social participation: reading, contributing,
collaborating, and leading. I’m more in favor of the side of soft
technology-determinism. The social and cultural background play a very
important role in leading the technology of social media. People maybe
enticed to adopt an artifact or practice if others they know and trust are
already involved (Rogers, 2003), so there comes out the function that
called “People you may know”; Interesting and relevant content is the
main reason for users get motivated in reading user-generated content, so it comes
out the interface that enable the users to pick up their favorable areas when
first log in; People also have a desire to stand out in a crowd, so there comes
out the likes of posts, rewarding contributions with money and awarding points
in learning systems. As we can see, the effective and popular social media
should respond to the social needs in order to meet the needs of users. A good social
app designer should not only be tech-savvy, but he or she also needs to have a
better sense of how to motivate social participation from the cultural and
social context.
Another article gives us an idea of how does Big data work
in our society? Admittedly, big data makes many more social spaces quantifiable. However,
do numbers speak for themselves? Big data Itself cannot represent an “objective
truth”. At the end of each year, the most popular social media app in China “WeChat”
will generate the big data about how many likes do the users give and receive,
how many friends have they added, etc. It is very exciting to see those data of
yourself, but it also intrigues me to think of the meaning behind these data.
Does the number of friends means the intimacy of the relationship or the metrics
for the popularity? Will frequency of contact indicate strength of
relationship? We are all the interpreters of data and different people will
have diverse interpretations. The data will lose the meaning and value if
without context.
Hi, Boen, I can't agree more with what you concluded in the end of the article that big data will be meaningless without context, which is commensurate with our reading this week. This point was also fully substantiated by your example of WeChat. Indeed, one may have +1000 friends on Facebook, Snapchat, WeChat and so on and so forth, but is the number of friends one established connections with on SNS tantamount to one's popularity in real life? Will big data be able to recognize the virtual status of one's online presence without the prior knowledge, namely the context or the background of his/her real life? I guess that's one of the important aspects worthy of more in-depth discussions for the researchers in the field and the rest of us.
ReplyDeleteHello Shunze and Boen,
DeleteI agree with you both and definitely connected with the assumption that numbers equate to intimacy and value. Facebook started to send how similar messages to WeChat where it tells us how many friends we made in the past month or gives us system-generated videos on notable friendship anniversaries. I find that a lot of the information has been superficial and we cannot divorce numbers from context. Numbers provide quantitative value but contextual analysis give us the greater picture.
Best,
Christina