Discipline, Punish, and the New Media

This fella on the right is Michel Foucault. He was a prominent French philosopher, famous for writing the "History of Sexuality" and "Discipline and Punish" (among other works). I recently read "Discipline and Punish" in a class I'm taking on the History and Theory of Punishment. While the novel focuses primarily on the prison system, Foucault spends a great deal of time talking about the reorganization of society as a whole—After all, our punishment systems are just a reflection of society at large.

There are two concepts from this that I think could directly be applied to our lives in the New Media. The first is the intensification of the disciplines, and the second is the concept of the Panopticon.

The disciplines involve distribution in space, organization in time, the ability to assemble, and the creation of standards and norms. Foucault attributes their creation to military and monastic organization, but eventually illustrates how they evolved over time to include schools, hospitals, and prisons. Basically, every aspect of society came to be dominated by the disciplines.

This in turn created dossiers of individuals, records of their lives and their standing against the group. Today we call these disciplines GPAs and Driving Records. Or, more broadly, we could include anything that we've ever generated and set out on the web, ever.

Because it's so difficult to delete anything from the ranks of the internets, we are creating larger dossiers that encompass more individual content about ourselves. Content that could be inconsequential, or not. Embarassing, or not. For example, in writing my personal narrative I have been going backwards in time, digging through my livejournal (yup, still have one), facebook, e-mail, and gchats to try and go back to where I was on April 11, 2008. This is great for research, but I'm uncomfortable with it. I hate the idea that my personal life is so easily traced and documented due to my use of the internet, and the dossier of information that has subsequently created.




This brings me to the panoptic principle. Originally, this was an architectural principle, used in the design of prisons. In the center (as seen on the right) sits the guard tower, which would be able to watch over the individual cells, forcing people to correct their behavior. Foucault takes this principle further, arguing that whether or not the tower is occupied does not matter, for people will self correct based on the notion that they are being watched.



This directly applies to the New Media. Creating content for a blog, livejournal, myspace, or facebook page presupposes an audience. Otherwise, it would not be logical to create content online. This audience then forces you to anticipate reaction, which causes you to modify your behavior. Maybe this isn't true for everyone, but it's certainly true for me (that's a screenshot of my lj, btw). What I write in my real journal is very different than anything I would publish on my livejournal, just as my personal photographs are different from the photos I allow to be posted on facebook. I am constantly grooming myself in anticipation of an audience, whether anyone reads what I write or not.

Of course, one can argue that there are people who don't care what others think, and I would agree that they exist. BUT, I would argue that they're the type of person unlikely to being using these social networking tools, because if they didn't care, then why would they have any of it?

As for myself, whether I like it or not, I'm consumed by these disciplines and the panoptic principle.

As for Mr. Foucault, well, I think that if he had lived past 1984, he would agree with me that the discplines have expanded with the advent of the internet and social technology. Of course, he would have said these things in a much more articulate fashion.

Images:
Michel Foucault: http://perroscallejeros.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/michel_foucault.jpg
Panopticon: http://www.uncarved.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/panopticon.gif
Livejournal: Screenshot of my livejournal, taken by myself

Does distance make it Personal?

To the right is a screenshot from the blog "F My Life". People post the situations that make them hate their life. Or just really awkward situations ( I mean really, what's the difference?). The posts are short, and people can vote whether or not the person deserved it. I've become addicted to reading this site. It's nice to know that there are people out there that are as awkward as I am...

The process of writing a personal narrative for this class hasn't been exactly easy for me. I chose to write about an experience that I never share with anyone. Even my roommate, whom I've known since I was 5, doesn't know about my foray into the Craigslist personals.

When I think about why I don't share this story often I usually can't come up with a good reason, other than it reminds me of a very specific time in my life, a time that needs context and set up, and feels very in the past from where I am today. But, I was compelled to blog about it here, because, in doing this project I have taken up reading Craigslist again.

Today, while working on my second draft I came across this on the "Missed Connections" page:

(This is a picture of a Post Secret postcard)

Several months ago we had sex a few times and although you used a condom you must have torn it when you put it on because a few weeks after I learned that I was pregnant and yes it was your baby because as you and I both talked about I hadn't had sex with anyone since 13 months before you. Unfortunetly I miscarried our child. I wasn't going to tell you about the pregnancy or the miscarriage due to your religious beliefs and how your family would react and disown you, but I can't hold it in my heart anymore. Even though our baby is gone we both need to come to terms that this baby was your first and even though he/she died, the baby was a creation of both of us and deserves acknowledgment. I won't tell you my name, just know that i'm someone that truely enjoyed our times together as did you and next time you have sex PLEASE make sure the condom isn't torn. As you said your parents would flip if they found out you were having sex before marriage and had an outside child.....Your name starts with an H....i'm not from ann arbor but you are.

Wow. What a loaded post. After I finished reading it, it made me wonder about the circumstances of her situation. Why didn't she call him? Did she not have his phone number? I wondered if they had met on the Casual Encounters section. Was she doing this because she knows he reads this page? Or was this more meant to make her feel better about the situation?



(This is a screenshot of the Craigslist Missed Connections)

I would agree with most people when they say
that technology has changed, and in some ways degraded, the way we interact with one another. Yet, sometimes technology enables us to say the things we need to say under the veil of anonymity, without real world consequences. I wonder though, if the experience of writing something down and posting it on the internet is enough to clear one's mind.

Craigslist, Post Secret, Fuck my Life, and countless other forums and blogs act as a space for people to share their stories and secrets with no strings attached.

Short of throwing a message in a bottle or sending an anonymous letter, this form of sharing with strangers seems to be particularly New Media to me. Does this mean that people just used to keep things to themselves more often, or do we just not share with each other anymore? At least in my case, I've found reading about other people's lives to be comforting when I'm feeling down or bad about life in general. I can commiserate with that human experience, even when I don't know the person. I also relate to the need to talk with someone, but someone you don't know, anonymously. I'm not sure why, but I've always had trouble sharing. I don't mean sharing what I did during the day or having deep conversations, but things that are deeply personal to me I almost never share. It's why I keep a real journal.

To me, these forums mean that we can be personal at a distance, something that is oddly comforting to people like myself. There are consequences to that. The fact that I can post anywhere, and say anything I need to say, means that I don't have to be close to the people that actually affect my life. I'm taking one form of social interaction and replacing it with another, more abstract version. And I'm not the only one doing this, a lot of people are. I think that will have consequences for society in general in the future. Maybe we'll continue to become more distant in person, but closer in "virtual reality"...Maybe we'll continue to post our most personal encounters on the Missed Connections page, which seems to be a fitting title.

images via:
Ann Arbor Missed Connections (Screen Shot)
Fmylife.com
Post Secret:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKD29eOBIvYcANJEvsuPGjmh9SYxS9zjNDvW1Dh6kweAEsi1U8gy_pvespGSUT6pnAUQffnVwC49Pt8cwQra4Y2W-mUpXypldtkxuKJcovrDGwfVhya13FoH6vp3GEDZ42lAmPA9rSH5ZR/s1600-h/catscratchfever.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmo4YV6hMgPWlL5yjjUHcSHHMbQ_VA0qy3XIsZevjpyc9lJFrsRRf0Qt7Ha1gg1rsdWDblOEMEhCB60l4Zp8g6NR3v4xQDHvTtWknhQubkzoF434Yt0-9JIQU1rWOFfztPdzwVkNd72nUv/s1600-h/foucault.jpg

SSSelebrity Revisited: Meeting your doppleganger

This is Kaki King. I did not know who she was prior to living in a co-op. Apparently, she is a hit amongst the cooperative types, because I keep getting told I look like her. (Of course, one should consider the amount of pot (by house-member) involved with such a comparison)








































I've also been told by O.C. watching types that I look like Rachel Bilson.














Why am I making this post? (you may be asking at this point) I am a narcissist? Do I love posting pictures of myself on the internet? Not really, but I thought I would answer some of the questions brought up in the visual image argument post.

Between Kaki King, Rachel Bilson (?), Dora the Explorer, Enid from Ghostworld, Frida Kahlo, Kelly Osbourne, Ugly Betty, and Marie Osmond I look like a hell of a lot of people. The question then becomes, does this say anything about my identity?

Is looking like a particular celebrity a good thing? Do we like these comparisons? Do these comparisons do anything to our social identity?

I want to say these comparisons don't have anything to do with my identity. This though, is not true. In high school I used to hate the Kelly Osbourne comparison. It didn't happen often, but when it did happen I would get really upset. Who wants to look like Kelly Osbourne? Especially because I was enough of a culture snob to not want to be related to anything about the pop-punk sub culture. I wanted my haircut to be mod and I wanted to relate to the MC5/Velvet Underground scene. (Or at least the 2004 reconstruction of it).

I also think that comparison went a long way in convincing me to not have short hair, and to start working out.

As far as looking like the others, well, I really don't mind it. Maybe I would if there was someone that I predominantly looked like. For the most part, I think more about what that means that the other person made that comparison rather than what it means for me as an individual. For example, the Rachel Bilson comparison makes me think that person is a megafan of the OC, but if I'm told that I look like Enid from Ghostworld, I think that person must be cool because that's a fantastic graphic novel/movie.

Pretty superficial judgement on my part, right? Maybe I do this because no one who knows me really well makes these comparisons.

Anyway, what do you all think? Are any of you compared with celebrities? Do you like it? Do you hate it? Does it damage your social identity?

Our identity is so constructed that adding the connotations of celebrity to it can really change things, even if only abstractly. It's confusing to try and define yourself one way every single day, and then have the perceptions and constructions of a random celebrity placed on top of you. It can change someone's perception of you and limits the possibilities for first impressions. If I'm Kelly Osbourne then I have a bad attitude and really like punk music. If I'm Ugly Betty then I'm really really really sweet and generally a good girl. It changes the outsider's perspective of yourself drastically, when really I just want to be me, no connotations attached. For me, the challenge is the multiplicity of personalities placed upon myself. These things usually fade when someone gets to know me a lot better, but it can really set the tone of a relationship.

To think that all of that comes with having a doppleganger, and the only thing I want out of it is a good Halloween costume—SSS

images:
Kaki King:
http://image.listen.com/img/356x237/9/2/1/6/916129_356x237.jpg

Rachel Bilson:

http://images.teamsugar.com/files/upl0/2/20652/09_2008/RBilBangs.jpg

Long Time, New Post

First, I am writing this post sick, under the considerable influence of a UHS prescription that does not allow me to drive, operate heavy machinery, or even really leave my house. (Seriously, I was told not to leave my house while I'm on this).

Have I ever mentioned before in class that I'm sort of "crunchy"? That I'm a vegan, holistic, yoga retreat type. Well, then it's not to much of a stretch to imagine that I'm not much a fan of the doctor's office, or scary prescription drugs. But alas, here I am, on said prescription drugs, blogging away while I wince due to light sensitivity.

And what, pray tell, should I blog about on this rainy Tuesday? I think I'm going to talk about podcasts. Particularly I am going to talk about the Savage Love Cast, which is Dan Savage's weekly podcast.


Who is Dan Savage? He is a sex advice columnist based out of Seattle, with a widely syndicated sex advice column. He has become infamous for redefining the names of scandal ridden politicians (Santorum) and for being an outspoken lgbt rights activist. Locally, you can read it in the Metro Times, which is print every Wednesday. Also, he has appeared several times on This American Life, including the tv episode.

Why is Dan Savage so great? His advice is really frank and honest. Sometimes he's brutally honest, making him very, very funny. I can always expect a laugh when I read his column, which is great, because I'm also getting really good advice. I also like that he takes a strong stance in support of Planned Parenthood, gay marriage, and issues that affect lgbt community. To me, his humor and wit enhances his foundation of logic, making him the perfect champion for his cause.

Below I've posted a video with him debating Tony Perkins on CNN. Tony Perkins is anti-gay marriage and gay rights. Dan Savage is particularly funny when he uses the bible to tear down his arguments.


Dan Savage's podcast is more of the same kind of humorous, solid advice. Besides trying to convince you all why Dan Savage is such a great guy, I also want to share why the podcast is such a product of the New Media. The Savage Love Cast is an example of a New Media podcast for a number of reasons:

1. It is produced exclusively for the web, as in, it never airs on the radio
2. Because of this, the language used is not dictated by FCC rules and regulations
3. The podcast comes in addition to a daily blog (as opposed to just the print column)
4. The podcast is unrehearsed, and is based on calls. This reminds me of the rawness of other aspects of new media, like youtube

These elements are important because while the idea of just listening to someone talk is pretty old media, the circumstances of the podcast are very new media. The only radio program he would be able to make it on would be satellite radio, but in the world of the internet, he can produce content without the downside of FCC regulations, and pre-programming.

I thought I would offer this up as another example of a good podcast. I also like Radio Lab, which has been featured several times on This American Life.