Last week kicked off on Twitter with Tim
Berners Lee talking about a new model for privacy on the internet. The
discussion focussed on the need for people to take control and ownership of
data, and that the fear of big data and being spied on has make us
distrusting......
...therefore do we need to be more comfortable in sharing
information and does there need to be better ways of protecting our privacy?
Of
course, when apps request potential access to your data, without telling you
what they might use it for, it’s easy to see why people might be distrustful. I
was always taught that data protection meant not collecting data that you don’t
need, and telling people what you are going to do with that data ( see the
recent Whisper stories for an example of companies approaches to privacy and
changing terms and conditions).
We often don’t pay much attention to the permissions
requests when we sign up to new services. There is a growing distrust of what
companies are doing with our data, and I wonder if that has a knock on effect
to our ideas of identity and openness?
At the other end of the extreme Pyschology today published
an article on why
we over share online and the disinhibition effect. The article talks about
how anonymity and invisibility cause people to behave in very different ways.
It ends however with a bit about authority and how people can feel there is
more equality online so they feel more empowered to say the things they may not
say offline. I wonder if that is true when it comes to peer creation and peer review?
Most e-safety training starts with asking people if they
have googled themselves, or what kind of digital footprint they are creating. (For
the record, my take is that we should create positive footprints online, and
therefore I encourage adults and young people to use the net creatively, actively
and positively : if they want to). Which moves me on to perceptions of others.
Most humans worry about what others think of them, even those who say they
don’t. When asking a group of teenagers about freedom online this weekend, they
were very clear that they had freedom, but that with that freedom comes
responsibility; to act appropriately , but also to be called into account if
you do something wrong. They also told me how they managed their media. So if
they were friends with family on Facebook, then they self-edit what they post
there.
But what does this mean for the developing, networked
professional? As this week on H818 is about Openness and Privacy, it seems
right to be thinking about what this means to me. In the “offline world” I
approach people, tasks and work in very different ways, depending on my colleagues,
the audience or the environment. It’s a
bit like deciding what clothes to put on. Different audiences require different
approaches, in order to engage at the right level (I am thinking about power
here), be culturally sensitive, and to communicate the right messages. I am
pretty sure this is true when it comes to digital scholarship too. You have to
figure out which are the groups you need to join, how to communicate and which
communities/resources/publishers are the ones that you need. But where do you
start if you are outside of academia. This is something that I will be
investigating.
In fact, these thoughts of identity pervade all aspects of
our life, whether it’s getting a job, a partner, or a publishing deal. Some of
the things that I am involved in outside of work, are partly as a result of
what I do in work. I am lucky that I have found a passion in my work, which
means I want to part of the bigger debate and I want to be an active voice in
making change. However, does my involvement in these things impact my work? I
am after all a spoke-person for my organisation, but it doesn’t mean that I am
always talking on behalf of my organisation. Hopefully, given that we are
values-based, there won’t be too much conflict, but I have become acutely aware
of this, and just as I wrestle with my identity and openness as an online
practitioner, so I wrestle with my identity and openness as an “offline”
practitioner. And this takes me back to the
end of the last blog post. Sometimes, we cannot decide what we share or how
open we are, as our jobs (think teachers using Facebook) or circumstances (say
foster parents) tell us otherwise.
“My job does not
define me”. This was one of my take-away notes following our staff conference,
where we were talking about collaboration and team-working across teams and
finding and developing expertise. But in order for people to understand this,
they need to engage with me, talk to me, work with me, and see my creations.
And I think this is the same journey that one must take as an online
practitioner. I will be defined by what people see, what I do and how I engage.
I want to end this post with this fab video from iDea. I think it's a great poem and visual about collaboration and some of the questions that I have (despite me not really be part of that generation)
No comments:
Post a Comment