206 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2019
    1. an algorithm to rate individual’s influence within social media

      Is this really necessary? I guess, somebody thought so. This is another great example for the notion that social media platforms simply encourage popularity competition among their users.

    1. "So it makes sense why it's happening - because I guess some people who are white-presenting feel like they're not the standard anymore. So now they're trying to do things to stay relevant and keep their popularity."

      Woooow!! Yes!!

    1. etishistic in that they want to achieve this ‘exotic’ look in order to attract black men. It seems like it’s all it is".

      Wow! That's a whole other thing to discuss that I wish this article talked about more!

    2. "It matters because it makes people in our community feel as though we’re not the best representation of our everyday selves. "They’re gaining success by appearing to look like me while I work 10 times as hard to get where I really want to be. It’s unfair."

      Exactly!

    1. To further back her claim, the influencer also shared a photo of her brother and father, which shows them with deep skin tones as well. “As you can see they also tan very easily,” Hallberg wrote. As for her hair texture, Hallberg says that also runs in her family.

      Hmmm maybe she is telling the truth!

    2. “This Swedish White girl is guilty of ‘blackfishing,’ a term used to describe someone who masquerades as a Blk person to deceive others. By extreme tanning, dark makeup & braids, this fraud is exposed!”

      I can understand the frustration!

    1. “Appropriation happens when you have a position of power…to take the parts of a culture that you enjoy, divorce them from their original meaning, and use them for entertainment value without considering their original context or having to deal with the negative ramifications that someone from that culture would have to deal with if they were to do the same thing.”

      WOW! That is a very powerful statement.

    2. Having that safe online space is how black women have been able to even come this far by letting the internet know that black is beautiful.

      This is good to talk about also. Having a safe online space is like having an online support group. I know when I look at Natural Hair Tutorials on YouTube, I feel safe posting my questions and comments on the video because I know there is a large group of black women who come here and can be themselves. When that safe space becomes invaded, where are we supposed to go? (Online spaces that is.)

    3. then it becomes a trend or “cool.”

      This is where the frustration comes into play. Image doing something so natural to you and having something you are born with that you have to fight society on all your life. Then one day, a person who can't relate with you does something you have been fighting and they are accepted immediately.

    4. they not only understand, but they are aware of the importance of culture or religion. They know that there are traditions and meanings behind what they are doing or what they like. Not only that, that person is aware that the marginalized group has a history of oppression and by no means does this act reflect that.
    5. “We’re coming into a time where you see a lot of black women really expressing themselves and stepping into their blackness, and owning it, and not being ashamed of it anymore. So it makes sense why it’s happening. Because I guess some people, who are white-presenting feel like they’re not the standard anymore. So now they’re trying to do things to stay relevant and keep their popularity.” (Thompson)
    6. Loni made a lot of great points, but something she said that stood out to me was, “She’s not making money off her white skin. She’s making money and gaining followers by her tan skin. There are no pictures of her on Instagram in her white skin during any time of the year. Each picture is in tan skin.”

      WOW! THAT'S SO TRUE! Caught in a lie. Just admit that you're doing this instead of consistently denying it.

    7. The first one was taken on August 21, 2016, and the second one was taken on January 1, 2016. Although her skin appears lighter in January, she still looks like she is mixed or a person of color. Hallberg has also denied tanning her skin. However, she posted this picture

      Oh snap! She got caught. There's no way she can deny this.

    8. Scrolling through a feed has caused so much low self-esteem, lack of self-care, lack of motivation, and identity confusion.

      I do like this point. I'm not justifying blackfishing either but I'm also not on the other side of the spectrum. Not many people would probably agree with me but I actually sympathize (like one percent) with these women who are blackfishing. Not having the capacity to love your skin tone and features enough to keep them. Everyone has something of themselves that they don't like.

    9. There is a black aesthetic

      Wow, I like that. I've never heard of "black aesthetic" but I would have to agree. The fascination of black hair for example. When an African American has really long hair, the assumption of whether or not its their real hair comes into play. The coils in the hair, braids, etc. It's not normalized, therefore its exotic, interesting and also aesthetic.

    10. There are many ways a person can appreciate a character or person without pointing out their skin color.

      This is so true! Hopefully, this article talks about this more. Instead of trying to be that celebrity or culture, use a picture of them, don't change your skin tone. Honestly, I'm not sure why people can't really understand that.

    11. Culture appropriation according to the Cambridge Dictionary, is “the act of taking or using things from a culture that is not your own, especially without showing that you understand or respect this culture.”

      Key words I see that makes appropriating and appreciating different: taking, not your own, without showing, respect.

    12. Clearly, that is not true because there’s no way that one can become that dark in the summer and their skin turns white in the winter.

      Right. If anything. her skin would be still tan but not completely white. At least I don't think so. Logically, it doesn't really make that much sense. If you're skin gets that dark over the summer, every single summer, then eventually, your skin will start to become that skin color. Not just switch back to white skin in the winter. Hmm, just my thoughts on it.

    1. “Catfishing’ refers to a scam where someone, the ‘catfish,’ creates a fictitious online identity and seeks out online relationships. These are frequently romantic relationships, and online dating websites and cell phone dating apps are fertile hunting ground for catfish. However, there are also catfish who seek out friendships and other forms of social contact. Catfishing involves significant deception

      This description of catfishing is more general than I've heard, and it allows me to see the topic from a wide range of aspects. Very useful indeed.

    2. There’s not necessarily a catch to catfishing. A catfish is often just someone pretending to be someone they’re not using the anonymity of the Internet. He or she might may have low self-esteem and build a fictitious online persona to interact with people. Or a catfish might simply find their deception amusing. More malicious motives can exist as well. Some catfish seek money, and build a fake relationship with their victims to get it

      One thing some people seem to be confused about catfishing is that it isn't always related to money. Catfishers may not always want money for their victims. Instead, they might be interested in playing emotional games with them, in case they have personal self-insecurity issues.

    3. The growing popularity of online dating has made catfishing more and more common. Estimates for catfishing victims are in the thousands, and that number is probably under representative. Catfishing victims can be deeply embarrassed and many don’t talk share or talk about it.

      I think that catfishing is only existent because of creation of the internet. This is because catfishing is always online these days. It would be hard to see it in other medias, since in order for it to be effective, there needs to be communication, interchanging of images, and even audio communication (though phone or other methods). The point of it is that the scammer needs to communicate with their victim, and what better way than through the internet using applications and specific software.

    1. On April 23, 2017, their story became a tabloid sensation in England. “My catfish became cupid,” Emma told the Daily Mirror, “And now we’re living happily ever after.”

      It's nice to see that she did found love out of all this mess. But I still wonder: what if she had reacted different to all this; what if she had given Alan a second chance; or what if Emma had cared more about the person she came to feel attached to (Alan), and not so much the physical appearance of Adem that charmed her? Then things would have turned different.

    2. On March 31, 2017, Emma sent her catfish a goodbye text message:“Alan I wanted to tell you that tomorrow I’m going to pick up Adem at the airport. And I still don’t know if it’s good or bad but I’m going to meet ‘my Ronnie.’ You built up all this shit, I’m not sure if I should thank you or detest you for that. But this is happening.”

      And there it is. She decided on completely finish every with her scammer, and move on with the rightful owner of the images.

    3. They stopped talking about Alan’s scam, and very slowly the conversation between the shy model and Emma, who had so recently been burned, became emotionally charged.

      So, it appears that Emma is falling for the person who she initially fell for. This makes so much sense. Or does it? Because the man she talked to all the time, was Alan, not the man in the pictures (Adem).

    4. Alan “needed to apologize to her face-to-face,” he said.His face was red with shame. “The hug went on for about a minute,” he told me, “I was just, like, quite tearful.” Emma pulled up an armchair and they sat uneasily side-by-side, making small talk. Then, Alan said he was sorry.He said he did it to escape the agony of loneliness. When Emma studied him, she saw a man just two years younger than her own father.

      What a turning point in the story! Alan had fallen for her and developed feeling for beautiful Emma. But at this point it seems things might now turn out the way he would have wished. After all, he only has himself to blame of things don't go his way.

    5. “I knew,” Emma told me. She typed Alan’s email address into Google.I asked what she found.“Everything, everything,” she sighed. “His Twitter accounts. Where I’ve seen his face.”“It was devastating and I felt sick,” she said. “You have no idea how much I’ve been hurt inside.”Alan was in early-morning traffic when his cellphone rang.“Is your real name Alan?” Emma asked.

      She didn't want to listen to advice from her friends or family in the first place, since she was too fixed on this online relationship and fantasizing about the character Alan had created (Ronnie). Her pain after discovering the truth is only reasonable.

    6. Alan elected to bypass the company’s selfie-based verification system, a spokesperson for Zoosk told me, following an internal investigation. He admitted using photographs of a random male model from Google that he had stolen. “I’m always nervous about posting personal images of myself,” he explained.

      I'm actually surprised that the investigators from the Zoosk application actually allowed ronnie to keep using the images from another source online (on google), just because he didn't want to show his real picture. This is probably the reason why many catfishers get away with it on the application.

    7. Ronaldo Scicluna was a fictional character created by Alan Stanley, a short, balding, 53-year-old shop fitter—a decorator of retail stores. Alan lived alone in Stratford-upon-Avon, the birthplace of William Shakespeare. Like one of the Bard’s shape-shifting characters, Alan used a disguise to fool women into romance, and to prevent himself from getting hurt. His alter ego “Ronnie” was a ladies’ man, charming, and attractive—everything Alan was not.

      This is very typical of catfishing. Although the purpose or goal of the catfisher may be different with each, the the objective is the same (to deceive their victim for their own personal gain).

    1. Job posting scammers often ask a victim to cash a check for something, sometimes an amount in excess of a payment, then send a check to cover the difference. The victim attempts to deposit the scammer’s phony check, and it bounces, usually after the scammer has already cashed the victim’s valid check.

      The most popular scam I will wire you a check to pay for expenses, so I will pay you before the job is complete, this money is for your gas, food, and suppies needed for the job all you have to do is place this check in your account. #fieldguide

    2. You know you need to do your research on an employer to wow them in the interview. But if you can’t find any online information about the company or your point of contact—if the company doesn’t have a website or mentions on Glassdoor, or your contact isn’t on LinkedIn—that’s an indicator things might not be on the up and up.

      Glassdoor is where many look for jobs but there are times when other adds pop up which seem more like eye candy and some people don't take the time to do the research if you can't Google search it many times it isn't real. #fieldguide

    3. The ad scammer’s job is not to formulate a believable job description, but to persuade as many suckers as possible to take the bait. If you can’t tell what you’d be doing, or what you need to be considered qualified, that’s a telltale sign that the ad is a fake.

      They persuade many suckers because once i was so desperate to get a job that I was in alot of the scammers jobs. No clear description and so many loop holes that were never filled. It took me going to the interview to figure out that it was a scam. #fieldguide

    1. After you have registered, you can then choose your desired profile portrait and five other additional pictures

      From my experience using the app, the additional images don't help much when preventing scammers to use it. They still find their ways to get their hands on multiple images of the character (fake) they are creating.

    2. link up your Facebook account with the app. Confirm the company’s terms of service and access to your phone.

      I think linking your Facebook to Tinder is a bad idea. This is because you never know the type of people you will find in Tinder, so you are risking them having additional personal information about you. Not only that, but you are risking your own contacts (family, friends, ect..).

    1. As soon as they make contact, they quickly try to move the conversation to another platform, like text messaging, or email. Sometimes they’ll claim they’re leaving the site, or that their subscription is about to expire.

      This is often the case, from what I've seen. And the funny thing about it is also that they will always (or normally) the ones to contact you on these online spaces. They just pop up from nowhere and ask you for personal information, then to talk with you in other platforms like email or text messages.

    2. According to the online dating site Zoosk.com, 25% of the scams reported on their platform involved people impersonating members of the military. Zoosk shares an example of what these attempts look like:

      Yes, Zoosk is one of the dating applications where you can find these type of scammers. And why not? After all, it is a great way for them to reach their victims with little or no risks of being caught by the law, since everything they says is online under a created account.

    1. No longer do we need to leave our home and join an angry mob to get angry about something together.

      This is an important aspect. The digital setting does not require any effort to form a mob. Hence, certain users may be more tempted to participate in it and allow themselves to be influenced by it.

    2. when there’s a group of people, responsibility and accountability are diffused therefore people are less likely to act

      Yet, the internet/social media is being witnessed by a global "audience". If people feel as if all the eyes are on them, what are the chances of them acting on online harassment?

    3. There’s something about being part of a collective that dissolves personal accountability and causes people to behave in strange ways.

      My assumption would be that they feel as if their actions, regardless of how damaging those may be, are justified by the group around them. Just like how a false statement becomes "the truth" by repetition, if an action is repeated by many people, it becomes "the true" reaction to an issue.

    4. Hiding behind keyboards and touch-screens, their anonymity inflates their egos and any sense of self or accountability slips away between ones and zeros.

      A crucial distinction between a digital and an analog setting that influences the user to become an active participant in a "mob". The anonymity encourages people to behave in a specific way that they would not choose to do so otherwise, indeed.

    1. In general, it’s crucial to understand that “digital” – and “online” as well – are not opposed to “real” in an ontological sense, and not opposed either to “real” in an axiological sense – “digital/online relationships are less real” – that is, less authentic.

      This paragraph alludes to the origin of confusion about the topic. The biggest mistake that people seem to make (me included) is placing digital reality and the real world in juxtaposition, and then attempt to make an argument from there on.

    1. an outdated perspective as Facebook is increasingly real and our physical world increasingly digital.

      The line has truly blurred for a lot of people, especially the younger generation who had no chance to experience "a reality" without the digital aspect, namely social media.

    2. what we do offline

      In comparison with Facebook, I can see the argument. However, other social media platforms such as Twitter, YouTube, or Reddit allow users to be anonymous. Can we make the same generalization that these people who recreate an alternative identity (hide behind the anonymity) behave exactly the same way offline as they do online?

    1. They Want to Get Serious Too Soon

      For someone online to want to be serious in a relationship with you fast, already seems like a give away of their devious intentions. And this is probably because they want to be able to ask you for money soon too. The faster they get you in the mood of being in a relationship, the faster they can start asking because you (the victim) will feel to have a commitment of some sort.

    2. Not everyone has a degree in English Lit, however many scammers will consistently use incorrect grammar and spelling because they’re from a foreign country and are portraying themselves as locals

      I see this being even more the case with many of the catfishers who are from overseas.

    3. They Will Be Otherworldly Attractive

      It makes total sense why catfishers would use images of overly-attractive people. The primary intention must be to fully seduce their victim and keep them interested. Also, to make it harder for the victim to say "no," to their demands.

    1. Many victims report that the person said all the right things, they tapped into their deepest needs and said only positive things. 

      If someone you're talking with online, who happens to be a stranger, constantly tells you everything you want to hear, then you know something is fishy. I mean, what are the odds that this person has all of your interest, tastes, likes, goals, and much more? If they do, it is obviously to try an convince you of something and gain your interest.

    2. Don’t be too quick to believe everything you read. If they claim to be a brain surgeon and part time pilot,

      This is very true. You shouldn't always just believe everything anyone online (or in real life) tells you. You always have to take everything with cautiousness, and a little bit of doubt (just in case). This is especially the case if the person you are talking with online is someone you don't personally know.

    3. You can empower yourself by starting to listen to your rational voice, and you’ll soon be separating the princes from the frogs like a pro. Here are some tips for spotting a Catfish:

      These tips are very helpful, and I wish I had come across them earlier. In fact, I wish I had come across the entire term of catfishing earlier too. The consequences can be bad both emotionally and financially.

    1. When he first asked for money to help finish a construction job, she said, “I prayed about it. I’ve always been a very giving person, and I figured if I had money … I could send him some.” That’s how she came to lose the first $30,000.

      Her example is a good one of how these scammers take advantage of good people with good intentions. Perhaps, they make such people their primary target, since they know that get what they want.

    2. In the U.S., romance scams account for the highest financial losses of all internet-facilitated crimes

      This is truly a sad phenomenon happen nowadays. So may people are deceived, when looking for love online. And the amount of money they can loose is a big concern, as a result of these people who call themselves "catfishers".

  2. Apr 2019
    1. “It’s about having the relative privilege and access to selectively engage with parts of a culture that you find interesting or appealing, without having to think or engage with the broader experiences of people from that culture.

      It's over the line from being a fan or an interested part in a culture, it's almost using its attributes as a thing to play with.

    2. “Most of the people who are accused of ‘blackfishing’ don’t directly state on their profiles that they are black, but rather insinuate it through their new appearances, the way they dress, and the products they’re selling or endorsing,” Danielle Bainbridge, a postdoctoral fellow in African-American Studies at Northwestern University, told InsideEdition.com.
    3. “Blackfishing” is defined as when a person, usually social media influencers or personalities, passes as black by altering their appearance – often their hair and skin tone. The practice is problematic, experts say, because it’s a deception by omission.

      The definition and the problem.

    1. “For instance, a preppy teen posting pictures of himself wearing goth clothes, posing in front of a wall with painted wings is totally normal and healthy. A teen who is struggling with self-image issues, posting pictures of her body and seeking comments to define her self esteem is unhealthy.”

      1,000%

    1. So, even that idea that they have to be 13 to have it, it's, you know, not reality. And it's so blatantly not reality that they don't even feel any fear to admit that they have an account.

      Very interesting...

    2. So, you're either going to teach them to swim, or you're going to watch them drown

      @_teachreadwrite...I definitely think we should bring this up at the coffee shop! The idea of "well they're going to use it anyway" feels so much like how people are complacent, but yet, in a positive way.

    1. he “really” feels about himself

      This goes back to what was mentioned earlier about how people are more likely to say [or be] things online that they wouldn't normally say in real life.

    2. expression of underlying needs

      Yup! These two worlds are intertwined, and yet can be different things, but the point is that when someone creates something, no matter what it is, it's an extension of yourself.

    3. often labeling the online self as somehow false, contrived, constructed, or performed, while the in-person self is more spontaneous, real, and genuine.

      I'll give them that! Digital dualists are saying that those online are false and constructed-they absolutely are! I don't see how people can argue that? To me, it doesn't seem debatable at all. What is debatable to me, is how far off that is from a person's "real and genuine" persona. Meaning-can't your real life persona mean that when you are online you construct your identity but in person you're more spontaneous.

      BUT ALSO how are we not talking about how people also "construct" themselves or "perform" in the physical world. People wear masks and pretend all day long, only choosing what to reveal and to whom, at their will.

    4. are actually highly intermeshed, especially given how people in social media often connect with each other in-person,

      As I drink my skinny vanilla latte, I can't help but ponder this. The anti-digital-dualists are arguing that online and offline worlds are intermeshed, but I can't decipher what their stance on the argument is. True they're arguing against the definition and idea of digital dualism, but what about the reality of it? @_teachreadwrite what do you think?

    5. anti-digital-dualists ignore the reality that experiences in virtual reality can be very different than in our everyday reality.

      I feel like this contradicts the earlier statement that anti-digital-dualists "acknowledge this fact [that what happens in cyberspace is different then in person] when they admit that chatting online or at a cafe are not the dame experience-and when the point to how people in social media deepen their relationship when they meet their online friends in-person."

    1. Is a reality augmented by digitality a good thing? My job with this post is not to answer that question, but to help make it possible.

      I think this is important because in class, we talk so much about offering a solution to some of these issues, but I think we need to ponder this line of thinking: The solution is a simple as starting the dialogue and opening up the line of thinking and conversing.

    2. The critique stems from the systematic bias to see the digital and physical as separate; often as a zero-sum tradeoff where time and energy spent on one subtracts from the other

      This is exactly what I am starting to believe. We are doing ourselves, and future generations, a disservice if we continue to have this bias, that being "present" in one space takes away from the other.

    1. Whether real or fake accounts, the message to teens about social media should consistently focus on always being in control of your own reputation, sharing things online that reflect the real you, and thinking of the long-term implications of posts. Real or fake accounts – the rules stay the same.

      Good point! Just because it's private or just for certain viewers doesn't mean it's full-proof.I feel like that's probably something teenagers do not think about.

    2. Their use of these accounts can potentially give teens more control over their digital identity, protecting themselves from users viewing and possibly misinterpreting their posts.

      Positive aspect of finstas.

    3. With this purpose, teens can feel free to enjoy their interest, or try new ones, without being worried that someone will mock them.

      Isn't this a deeper problem? One article I read talked about how technology and social media is a vice and like any vice, the reason behind the vice is the problem. Isn't this mentality of having a fake persona so you won't feel judged part of a larger issue about being yourself? Isn't this slightly counter intuitive?

    4. present a rawer, “this-is-the-real-me” personality to a smaller group of closer friends.

      Oh I had it backwards. The "rinsta" aka real instagram is the fake persona and the finsta is the real them. That's an oxymoron no?

    5. Finstas are often strategically used by teens to relieve this pressure.

      Interesting. Finstas are used to relieve the pressures of having that picture perfect online presence, meaning they dedicate their finstas to manipulating and performing to project what they want the world to see. Not what is real, but what they project.

    6. shifting in new ways in response to changes to social media platforms, the teen’s age and social context

      That makes sense! I wonder what they do with the old accounts after they move on to a new platform?

    1. Parallels have also been drawn to the Kardashians because “Kim, in particular, has been accused of appropriating black culture on several occasions down the years”, the BBC notes.

      Adding in the Kardashian effect, is this appropriating or appreciating?

    2. “With things like tanning, I don’t think I’ve done anything in a malicious way. So I don’t feel like I need to stop doing something because... why would I stop doing something that’s benefitting me or that I enjoy doing?” she said.

      So here's the other side of the spectrum where she actually believes that she is not doing anything wrong.

    3. “It takes away from actual black creators on Instagram and YouTube whose job it is to promote things,” says Nova, using the example of brands who send natural curly hair products to white influencers.

      Wow, that's an excellent point.

    1. Perhaps this augured the era of the sasaeng fan, a recently coined term that might as well be Korean for “stan”: “Sa” means private and “saeng” means life, in reference to fans’ all-encompassing obsessions with their preferred artists.

      Ohhhhhhh here we go. Masooch just looked up sasaeng on Twitter and uhhhh there's some scary stuff on there. I'm talking black market kinda stuff.

    2. The cultish devotion to pop stars isn’t geographically or culturally restricted; “stans” is the nifty neologism for crazed fans that’s both a portmanteau of “stalker” and “fan” and an homage to the 2002 Eminem single, whose eponymous antihero’s obsession with the rapper drove him to suicide.

      Something to make note of. I've heard the term and Masooch mentioned the song to me when I asked about it. From my meager understanding, the term has taken on a watered down meaning nowadays, the term "stan" taking on a verb form too, i.e., "we stan" as I hear Masooch say sometimes.

    3. Most chillingly, though, there was a deluge of death threats from crazed fans who, whether they perceived me as an actual threat to the imagined romance between Yunho and Jaejoong or merely an annoyance who should to be silenced, gave me pause in an online game that had become addictively pleasurable. “Let me show you how you shall die,” one began. “@mjjeje has only a 100+ stalkers. One order from his lush lips … and your throat shall be slit!” There were many others, but that one stuck with me — mostly because it was retweeted so many times.

      Uh. So like. @Masooch. Are... are you okay? Not that I care. But like. You and these people are... in the same fandom circles... I... This is nuts.

    1. Fanaticism appears to also have addictive and obsessive-compulsive aspects, but evidence suggests that this can be con-trolled by the individual to avoid any severely negative conse-quences, and thus, unlike many existing portrayals, fanaticism donot usually cause harm to the consumer and to others.

      Too much of anything can be bad for ya, but it can be perfectly fine if You Know What You're Doing. Masooch, take note. Hope you know what you're doing.

      Not that I care or anything.

    2. It also showed that fanaticism involves managing the fine line between extreme levels of enthusiasm that is positive and fulfilling, versus non-sustainable borderline-dysfunctional levels of enthusiasm that may turn into something darker or problematic.

      Sounds kind of exactly what Masooch wants to talk about in her project. From what I've seen in the recent research she's conducting, it's a very fine line and real easy to cross.

    3. “(I) will stop at nothing to get it... I would eatcheap food. Or, not eat. I just find ways to save money. So thatI can (make these purchases)... even essential stuff, like fixingmy car, my contact lenses, I would go without...

      Sounds like Masooch when she's saving for concerts. And yes this is a callout post.