Comment 3: CMC-Online week

Here is my comment on Cat's blog post: 

I love your post, it's so unique and fits in with the theme of anonymity so perfectly! I thought it was a really interesting take, well done! I totally agree how easy it is to create a fake identity online these days, it's as simple as a sign up and using your creative brain to come up with a name, a person and an identity. I think it's pretty dangerous in that a lot of bullying stems from anonymity, due to the ease of access. I liked the examples of front stage and back stage, and how anonymity links to backstage in things like making such harsh and offensive comments anonymously. Great post!

Comment 2: Cracking the codes of my friends

Here is my comment on Taylor's blog post:

Hey Taylor, I enjoyed your blog post mostly because I could totally relate to it! There are certain unspoken codes that exist without us really realising it, except in situations like yours where you're on a train, and your friends have some sort of "inside joke". I'm really familiar with that because my friend and myself tend to do that at times, but my other two friends do that with each other too, and I sit there not completely understanding what's going on. People make their own codes, is what I'm trying to say. And it's set and established unless you're let in on it. You have to learn to crack the code yourself, and with the permission of those who create it. It's a hard job!

And for some reason, no matter how RIGHT ever word capture I complete is, it won't let me comment.

Comment 1: A Praise for Profanity

Here is my comment on Elle's blog post:

I really enjoyed your post as well. The three different points that were perfectly explained allowed me to understand your perspective on profanity. I believe it's a fundamental kind of language, and I think it's mostly to do with the changing of the times and fitting in with social norms today. It really can help align social groups in particular contexts, depending on who you're with and where you are. I definitely agree on you in terms of emphasising feelings and emotions in ways that other words probably aren't able to (especially the emotion of anger). Losing face is a problem, though! Then again it depends on the context. :)

Profanity.

FUCK. I forgot to upload this post! See what I did there? Emphasis... use of profanity provides emphasis.

And I guess that's the moral of this weeks topic of profanity. Use of profanity provides emphasis on what you're trying to say. Turns out there's a number of uses for such words as 'fuck' in establishing some sort of identity within society, and following certain codes too. I have a quote extracted from Elle's blog: Jay (2009) states that profanity is an “emotion in ways not realizable in normal non-taboo language”

It is an aspect of our daily lives, and the more time goes on the more normal it is to utilise swear words in daily conversations, music, tv shows, etc. Less words are becoming hidden or beeped out. This is because it's becoming normal, it's becoming sociable and actually entertaining to hear such words. This is a reflection of times changing, and of different social codes coming in to place and replacing old ones. Interactions have changed between males and females and within society overall in the past 100 years. This is also a reflection of the change within society. Everything comes with it, even the swearing!

Data Presentation (Week 12)

Hey guys,

Here is the link to my data presentation! Enjoy :)

Tiana

http://prezi.com/ab9ibn745gmf/data-presentation/

My Independent Research Project

-->

Independent Research Project

By Tiana Vitlic

The purpose of entertainment of the X Factor show is present in the setting of the show, where judges, a contestant auditioning and an audience provides for a stage-like sort of entertainment, and a strong and exciting atmosphere where all forms of entertainment are expected. All contestants audition from across the country in order to showcase their singing voice and get through to the next round, the ultimate aim being the winner of X Factor. There generally would be genuine contestants that aim for this goal. However, questions are raised when cases such as “Ablisa’s X Factor Audition (Full Version)” occur, where there could potentially be underlying intentional acts in order to receive high ratings and provide more entertainment for the show, resulting in an interaction between the contestant, judges and audience that is not necessarily genuine. The contestants are perceived to be genuinely auditioning for a spot on the show, however when situations like ‘Ablisa’s audition occur, many question whether these are intentionally placed in the show for the purpose of entertainment of an interaction, though possibly framed and scripted, of the judges and the contestant.

The basic situation of the audition consists of two apparent friends named Abby, 18, and Lisa, 17, or together titled Ablisa, auditioning for a role together on the X Factor. Their audition provides much entertainment for the judges, audience and for television viewers as the contestants break many social and moral codes and rules of conduct during their audition on live television. The entire atmosphere of the audition is set as thrilling from the moment the girls start showing the judges and audience attitude, and especially when Abby has a tantrum and exits the stage. This causes shock for the judges and the audience, clearly shown in the gasps of surprise coming from the audience, and as the judges question whether Ablisa will return on stage. Once the contestants joint the stage once more, they are joined by a cheer and surrounding “boo’s” by the audience, and judges who merely would like to continue with the show. Ablisa perform, with Abby’s back to the audience perceived to be due to shame, and once they complete their audition, Lisa does not agree with what she hears by both the judges and the audience in terms of her audition with Abby. This causes Lisa to react in a rude and inappropriate way, as the judges do not satisfy her needs, and the constant reactions from the audience only fuel her anger. Once she makes a comment that is entirely inappropriate, Abby walks off in embarrassment of her friend, not before physically assaulting her publically on stage.

Both Abby and Lisa break rules of conduct throughout their audition, causing not only Abby to have to save face, but the judges have to save face for the show and for the audience. Lisa begins by making rude and unnecessary comments, simply and causally blurting them out of her mouth and causing an already established interaction between the judges and the audience that sees Lisa as being socially rude. This is evident in the following extract:

LISA: She was saying you were really fit the other week, sorry! (laughs)

SIMON: Louis?
LISA: Yeah, Louis. And I said he’s an old man, sorry! (audience begins to laugh  

           and react) I said, like, he could be the same age as my granddad, sorry! 

           (audience laugh)

            LOUIS: What do you mean “old”?
            LISA: Erm, pardon?
            SIMON: No, Louis, Louis..

The excerpt above allows for an understanding of the interaction going on in this particular scene where Lisa does not adhere to social rules about politeness, especially to your elders and on live television where the aim is to gain the support of the judges and the audience. Abby is clearly embarrassed by Lisa’s attitude and forwardness, especially when Lisa tells the audience to “stop laughing” at her and her use of profanity when she tells the audience to “shut up!” when their reactions are not to her satisfaction. This attitude is seen as a conduct of misbehaviour as it is not a regular act for a contestant on the X Factor. Goffman (1967) states that rules of conduct are a “guide for action… impinge upon the individual in two general ways: directly, as obligations, establishing how he is morally constrained to conduct himself; indirectly, as expectations, establishing how others are morally bound to act in regard to him”. The expectation is that Abby will adhere to rules, and her obligation is to do so. The consequence of Lisa not following the rules of conduct is that she ultimately embarrasses herself and Abby, and that she loses face throughout the audition, and makes no attempt to retrieve it. Goffman also emphasises that “when a rule of conduct is broken we find that two individuals run the risk of becoming discredited” in which case both girls do become discredited by the end of their performance. Wieder (1974) states that treating the rules of the code as maxims of conduct that is to be followed and enforced upon one another provides a traditional sociological explanation for the regular patterns of non-deviant behaviour observed. Any deviant behaviour allows for a noticeable breaking of the code, which can lead to several consequences as shown in the audition by ‘Ablisa’. It is expected that the contestants will behave a certain way, however when they do not meet the audiences expectation, and do not meet their obligation to behave a certain way, it causes upheaval. Goffman (1967) states that once it is clear that a person may meet an obligation without feeling it, the obligation which is felt is something that ought to be done, and may strike the obligated person either as a desired thing or as an unpleasant or pleasant duty. Clearly, neither contestant felt the need to meet their obligation and went through with acting in an unordinary way.

Lisa does not make any attempt to save face, apart from when she has a defensive attitude and informs the audience and the judges that she does not care for their thoughts on her voice. This suggests insecurity in terms of her voice or self, and is attempting to save face. Lisa loses face completely, however, when it comes to the performance of ‘Ablisa’. Goffman (1967) states “when an individual becomes involved in the maintenance of a rule, he tends also to become committed to a particular image of self. In the case of his obligations, he becomes to himself and others the sort of person who follows this particular rule, the sort of person who would naturally be expected to do so”. The pure act of deference implies that the performer basically possesses a sentiment of regard for the recipient, according to Goffman (1967), but in this case Lisa had no sentiment for the audience or the judges. She did not care how she presented herself, was quite rude and impolite throughout the audition, and did not attempt to save face for her audition with Abby or for Abby herself. This essentially suggests that this audition could have been staged entirely purely for entertainment, as this is not a regular act on a live television show as it causes both the audience and judges to be in shock. Goffman (1971) states, “there is the popular view that the individual offers his performance and puts on his show ‘for the benefit of other people’”. Similarly, there is the idea that perhaps either girl did not realise they were putting on an act, but believed their act to be reality in that they went along with the audience and the judges reactions in order to boost the attention their audience gave them. Goffman (1971) states that a performer can be sincerely convinced that the impression of reality in which he stages or performs is in fact the real reality, when the audience is also genuinely convinced by their performance. Goffman (1971) also raises an interesting point where he states that all cynical performers are interested in deluding their audiences for purposes of what is called ‘self-interest’ or private gain. This is shown as Lisa continuously loses face despite obvious attempts by Abby to save face, and despite the reactions of the audience and judges. This is similar in the case of Abby, where she loses face in a number of ways with her repetitive use of profanity, walking off stage, and the moment she physically assaults Lisa. This tears moral and social code, as it is expected as a contestant she will adhere to the rules of the show and is obligated to do so. Though there are multiple attempts to save face, more so than Lisa, she loses face most of all. The difference is that Abby tries to follow the rules of the show, and attempts to save face, as she is embarrassed of the way Lisa is acting and presenting ‘Ablisa’.  She tries to gain the support of the audience where she states in the following extract:

            LISA: Basically, at the end of the day we don’t care what you guys say, we just 

           came up here- (cut off by Abby)

ABBY: At the end of the day, yeah, obviously we care what you think but she’s

 just being a bit over the top..

Due to the fact that Lisa continuously loses face throughout the entire performance, Abby no longer tries to save face for ‘Ablisa’. Instead, she attempts to save face for herself, noticing the extent to which the audience dislikes Lisa’s rude attitude, and ultimately their performance. Walking off the stage was Abby’s initial reaction due to Lisa’s comments obviously being embarrassing, but returns to stage with a fresh attitude in order to perform their piece. Throughout their performance, however, Abby has her back to the audience, suggesting that she is possibly insecure about performing in front of the audience, especially after the initial reactions after Lisa’s disrespectful and ungracious attitude caused such upheaval prior to their performance. Facework is “an image self-delineated in terms of approved social attributes” (Goffman, 1967), leaving ‘Ablisa’ with loss of face as the social audience do not technically approve of their behaviour.

The reactions of the judges are what make the scene typical in terms of a live television show and saving face for the judges themselves and for the show. Simon Cowell, who is a well known, and who is ultimately the head judge of the show, maintains most of the face in this scene. His reactions towards the audition by ‘Ablisa’ are considered to be most crucial to the workings of the show. He conducts certain judges, and the audience, in silence in order to give the contestants a chance to perform without being interrupted. He is adhering to the social rules and rules of conduct of the show in terms of being a judge, maintaining face verbally and physically. When he orders the audience to calm down, he raises his hand in order to allow Lisa, who is clearly frustrated by the audiences reactions, to speak. He defends the audience, however, when Lisa orders the audience to “Shut up!”, even though it is not her place to do so.

            SIMON:          Can I be honest with you two? You have the worst attitude of any

contestants I have ever met on any of these shows. I mean seriously, seriously, rude.

LISA:              Like, when you’re up here, yeah, and they’re there like (points to the audience) “boo!”, yeah, you’re not gonna be like up here normal, are you?

SIMON:          Yeah, but Lisa, you did tell them to shut up before you even started to sing.

            LISA:              I know..

ABBY:            At the end of the day the audience are entitled to their own opinion, so let them just say what they want to say.

Louis is genuinely offended by the remarks Lisa makes about him in the beginning of their audition, and this is seen as a breaking of the social and moral code as Lisa blurts out remarks that are taken and seen as rude comments, although she might not initially perceive what she says to be at all rude. Her demeanour is seen as rude and offensive, and Louis’ facial reactions and reactions reflect that. Natalie’s reaction to Lisa’s comment of “Who are you?!”, in reaction to Natalie informing the girls that the audition “wasn’t very good”, ultimately caused Abby to walk out and physically assault Lisa in the face on live television. Natalie was simply performing what she was required to do as a judge, give her opinion on their singing performance, not any other performance  throughout their audition. Lisa, again, blurted out a comment that breaks social and moral code and caused Abby to once again be embarrassed of her, which ultimately left them both losing face in the end. Cheryl Cole’s shocked reaction of “She punched her in the face? She punched her in the face!” and overall disbelief of the situation clearly conveys that this act is not a normal act to perform on live television, and definitely unexpected.  

The performance conducted by ‘Ablisa’ is clearly entertaining, however many social and moral codes are broken with Lisa’s blurting out and rude attitude and demeanour, and the physical violence seen by Abby and her rude attitude shown on multiple occasions. This leaves the audience and judges shocked, with the judges trying to save face and maintain the image of themselves and ultimately the show. Facework is evident throughout the audition, and the way in which the girls present themselves is shown to be careless. The code is ultimately broken, and the interaction between the contestants, the judges and the audience provides for an entertaining yet unusual scenario for a live television show.

 References

Goffman, E 1967, ‘The Nature of deference and demeanour’, Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face behaviour, Doubleday, Garden City, NW, pp47-95.

Goffman, E 1971, ‘Performances’, The Presentation of Self in Everyday life, Harmondsworth, Penguin, pp28-82

Jimerson, J B, & Oware, M K 2006, Telling the Code of the Street: An Ethnomethodological Ethnography, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol.35, no.24, pp24-50.

Labov, W 1972, ‘Rules for ritual insults’, Studies in Social Interaction, Free Press, New York, pp120-169.

Mouzelis, N 1992, ‘The Interaction Order and the Micro-Macro Distinction’, Sociological Theory, vol.10, no.1, pp122-128.

TheXFactorUK, 2010, 'Ablisa's X Factor Audition (Full Version) - itv.com/xfactor', accessed 01/11/2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrNbLBS1D2Q

Wieder, DL 1974, ‘Telling the code’, Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings, Penguin Education, Harmondsworth, pp144-172.

Week 10: Online Interaction

LOL. LMAO. WTF. HAHA. ;) 

Communication. Technology. Everything changes over time. Look back centuries ago, and I'm pretty sure everything is almost completely different. The days where there were no phones, internet, mobiles, tvs... were the days when everyone made a physical effort to communicate. Now? It's as simple as picking up your iPhone and sending an iMessage, or posting on someone's wall on facebook.. you don't have you use your voice. You don't have to move your body. All you need to do is use your thumbs and you're good. We have become so lazy.

The language of online social interaction is also different, with the use of text speak. I'm sure you know what they all mean so I won't bother explaining. I've even found myself saying "LOL" in real life... which is totally weird when you think about it. I type lol and haha and don't even mean it. I'm not actually laughing out loud, it just makes the conversation seem more light and funny and not as serious. These informal ways of speaking are of popular use on social networking sites (and it seems in real life too). You have to use text speak in a certain context too, so you don't want to be too informal in some forms of communication because it could be rude. It depends on context, too. Online interaction is like a whole new world!

This new way of social interaction has it's benefits, sure (like talking to relatives across the globe), but it also can be a simpler ease of access to certain individuals to bully others. Social media can negatively impact upon individuals in terms of Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr, which allow people to remain anonymous and comment or create a fake identity to harm others. Anonymous sites such as Formspring are also a major impact upon the rise of cyberbullying.

Group Presentation on 'Mediated Identity and Interaction'

Here are the slides to my group presentation. 

Week 8: The Code

Mean Girls Rules (Code of Conduct):

1. "On Wednesday's we wear pink."
2. "You can't wear a tank top two days in a row.."
3. "..and you can only wear your hair in a ponytail one day a week." 
4. "We only wear jeans or track pants on Fridays." 

What happens if you don't adhere to the rules, no matter how "popular" you are? "You can't sit with us." 

___________________________________________________

Rules. We're all familiar with them, we know what they mean. Some of us abide by them, some of us rebel against them... but somehow, we all know they're there to guide us and to be followed. Codes of conduct occur in society in all shapes and sizes, in different communities and groups, with different rules and consequences. Codes, however, are more so social unwritten laws that basically seem just as important as actual government and council laws. 

Wieder's 'Telling the Code' basically looks into a convict code amongst inmates, which again is unwritten and unofficial, but shapes and affects the way the inmates behave and communicate with each other. It's a set of guidelines that govern the values and beliefs of in the inmates, resulting in a sense of unity, order and alliance within the inmate community. All inmates are required to abide by these unwritten rules in order to maintain the order of the community and not ever challenge the code, otherwise they cause distress and are singled out. 

This is quite similar to all of society as a whole. There are unwritten rules everywhere, in workplaces, schools, bathrooms, you name it! Everywhere. And to maintain social order, we follow these rules. Sometimes they're challenged and sometimes they're rebelled against, but in the end - nobody can deny that we all follow some sort of rule in the community that is society. 

I enjoyed this week's topic thoroughly because it made me realise just how unnoticed these rules go, but we all follow them. Strange, huh? 

Week 7: Ethnomethodology

Ethno...tongue-twister! I still can't pronounce it without getting stuck. The topic was even more so complicated in understanding the definition of 'Ethnomethodology'. Once I got it, it was a relief! For me, Ethnomethodology is a theory that focuses on the way we understand and make sense of the world. I like how this leads back to Goffman's theory of Dramaturgy and Presentation of the self in that people are seen as rational actors, but have practical reasoning rather than logic to make sense of and function in society.

In class today, we were tricked by Group 4 in that our group work was set to making sense of key definitions and going to a different group and explaining it to other members. Group 4, however, were secretly asked to make annoying noises and sounds and constantly ask 'WHY?', conducting what's known as the "breaching experiment" by Garfinkel. I did not notice the tapping of the pen sound, nor when we went into a different group when the Group 4 member constantly started asking "Why?" and "It doesn't make sense!", causing me to repeatedly analyse and describe the definition. I guess in another circumstance I might have found it annoying, or if that person was a close friend of mine, but because it was a class situation I genuinely fell for it, gullible! When we found out at the end of the discussions that those strange little happenings were purposeful, a resounding "Ohhhh!" broke out from class members who were shocked but finally understood why they were being asked so many questions!

In another case, understanding "Documentary Method of Interpretation", our tutor was quite helpful in terms of examples of that definition that helped us understand it better, considering it was quite difficult to understand. She used a great example of a train station situation, where a man would be running through the station, occaisonally bumping into someone accidentally. In another context, we might consider this a rude act, but because it's a train station, we rationalise this person's behaviour because of the context. What this means is, we rationalise our behaviour and other people's behaviour based on what patterns are in our head! We don't tend to think about our reasons, it's just automatic and subconscious! That makes it a little scary.

Week 6: Dramaturgy - "Social life as a game"

“All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely
players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages …”

- Shakespeare 1623. As You Like It Act 2 Scene 7

I enjoyed this week's topic quite a lot! Particularly because I'm very fond of 'Drama' and acting, as I've performed for the past ten years! I also relate to the quote above.. every time I hear it, I remember performing in my high school's adaption of Shakespeare's 'As You Like It'. 

But more importantly, this topic sparks thoughts in each and every one of us, making us question how we perform and act in day to day interaction. A lot of us might not think about our impressions on other people, and vice versa. Do intentionally give off certain attitudes and, essentially, impressions? Do we think about how our attitudes and behaviours affect others and their opinions of us?

Goffman, and the lecture, basically reflect Shakespeare's notion of social interaction in the real world... He highlights the idea that social interaction occurs exactly like that upon a stage. The world is a stage, and the actors act in response and depending on a time, place and audience. This may not occur all the time and for every individual, but there comes a point where we perform, but it might not be our true selves. Perhaps we've put on a front (or in other words, we're acting), so we can maintain our image and basically "fit in".

I like what Goffman is trying to say, particularly because I can relate to the idea of acting and performing. In other words, Goffman is saying we're not ourselves all of the time. We react based on a social setting and any pressures we might feel in upholding our image. In other words, it's acting and putting on a mask. And I know exactly how that feels. You become someone else, except in this situation.. it's real life, and we act depending on whether we think other's are going to judge us or not. I'm loving Goffman's readings, even though they're way too long!

Week 5: Presentation of Self

Hi guys!

Not entirely sure if I'm doing this correctly, just bear with me. So last week's lecture was on presentation of the self. This week's reading is 'The Nature of Defence and Demeanor' by Erving Goffman, focusing on (you guessed it!) the self. Yourself, myself... You! The reading and the lecture both reflected a strong definition of 'the self', basically stating it as being socially constructed, and shaped through different social processes.

I actually found this week's topic to be quite interesting, exploring the self and the social processes associated with that. Not only that, both the lecture and Goffman describe 'the self' as being much more than just a simple concept... it makes you realise just how complex 'the self' can be! And I think that's what opened my eyes while going through the reading and the lecture. It's a lot more than just about you, it's got to do with your demeanor. But not only that - it's also about how others percieve you! Now I've highlighted that because I think that's what Goffman is trying to get at. It's all about the perspective of others and their perception of you. Though you would like to think that everybody sees you the way you do, they really don't. It kind of opens your eyes.. I mean the way others percieve you might not actually be how you are, but it all depends on how well they know you, how you hold yourself and how you act. Now this is something interesting I thought was brought up to do with 'the self' - upholding your image. Do we tend to do things we may not particularly want to do, just to maintain or improve our image? The thing I liked most was that Goffman actually got me really thinking about 'the self', and others perceptions.