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.
If you post that you’re out of town on vacation, you’ve opened yourself up for burglary.
Do people announce to the public that they're going on a vacation in real life? I wonder...
and a lack of standards or policing of these standards
This is probably one of the major distinctions between online and offline identity theft instances.
engagement
This aspect might be the key in understanding the psychology.
authenticity
It is important to distinguish authenticity and something that looks/feels authentic. In terms of marketing, which would be the priority, I wonder?
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.
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?
it also causes us to not act when we should.
A very interesting observation on the issue.
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.
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.
Many cannot access to the internet.
This is one of the reasons why I do not believe the online world truly represents the reality in which we live in. Only the small portion of people tend to have that luxury of access.
There are still things which are only analogue – a flower, a death, a book, a night with a friend are analogue by themselves.
I wonder how long it'll take for someone to invent computers/tablets that could transfer (artificial) smell.
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.
Is he speaking from an ontological point of view or a sociological one?
This seems to be an important distinction that many people who argue over the topic tend to ignore (or consciously neglect?).
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.
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?