Numa Numa Dance as one-to-many form of communication
Questions:
How did the Numa Numa Dance video become a one-to-many form of communication after it was intended as a form of one-to-one communication?
Is it possible to restrict the reception/audience of texts/videos within the virtual environment?
Is the basis of this video's appeal the fact that the video's form of communication was intended to be one-to-one, yet was somehow changed?
The Facebook
Description: An online community of college students, wherein users create profiles of themselves, which are accessible to other users based on certain criteria--a veritable database of self-reported data!
Groups:
There exist serious groups and flippant groups. How do these groups arise? What is the intent of groups in each of these two categories?
Entrance to groups is based on various criteria (open, by invitation only, etc.). How does association with various groups (and friends, for that matter) shape identity?
Some groups don't do anything in actuality -- they exist only in cyberspace and often have members who don't personally know each other. Are these groups just titled? categories? or something different?
Projecting identity through images and information:
Providing an image of oneself is optional. Given that one's image and school are displayed in searches, what importance does posting a discernable image of oneself have in a profile? What are means by which users project images (sexual, silly, serious, etc.) of themselves? How do these images compel readers to form predictable interpretations--or do they? Is there an emerging aesthetic for this new genre of photographic cyber-profiles?
Providing various forms of information is also optional. Many of the questions pertain to elements of connoisseurship. Is there an assumption that these questions are relevant to one's (projection of) identity? With the ubiquity of fandoms on the Internet, is cyber-identity formation tied to patterns of consumption?
Information posted on profiles is automatically hyper-linked. Do such hyper-links compel users to imagine relationships /identities that are contingent upon similar consumption habits?
Friends:
Establishing a Facebook requires either sending or accepting an invitation. Is the invitation system necessary to create a sense of authenticity?
What does this imply about common conceptions of identity and human relationships? or about the perceived danger that the Internet poses to these 'authentic' relationships?
Accessibility:
Users who are 'confirmed' friends with and/or attend the same school as other users have access to their profiles. This system is different from that used in Friendster, which relies solely on friend networks rather than school networks for profile accessibility. To a certain extent, the user in both systems is allowed to control access to his/her profile. Why might these systems of access be different? What effects do these different systems have? Is it coincidental that the Facebook originated at elite schools, whereas Friendster is (theoretically) open to any member of the public?
The Wall:
Confirmed friends have the ability to write on a user's 'wall,' a way of writing testimonials about the user which change the makeup of the profile. How is self-reported data visually separated from the wall? Why is it separated? How do testimonials affect identity formation, especially given that the user has full control over their content? Is this another technique that is meant to give the illusion of authenticity?
badmash.org
A web comic and mailing list which concerns itself with the South Asian diaspora.
What form(s) of communication does the site employ (e.g. many-to-one, one-to-many)? Does the website have a political agenda? How might different forms of communication inform that agenda (if it exists)? Does this website assume certain aspects of the user's identity?
catandgirl.com
How does this site compare with Badmash? What form(s) of communication does it employ? Is there a similarly normative idea of identity formation? Is hipster identity essentialized?
Like Badmash, catandgirl.com has an online store. How is the user's perceived (or assumed) identity marketed back to him/her?
gothoronot.com
Similar to the Numa Numa Dance video, gothornot.com incorporated both one-to-one and one-to-many forms of communication. Unlike the Numa Numa Dance video, both of these forms of communication are intended by the user. How does gothornot.com turn 'passing,' in the Turklian sense, into a spectacle? How does the 'many' determine whether the user fits into the goth subculture?
The purpose of the website is that users are rated by visitors based on their goth-ness. Opinions are kept anonymous and there is no means of disaggregating the information. Why is this anonymity necessary? How does this render passing important in an environment where passing is supposed to be unimportant? Is virtual identity creation sufficient when one has to 'pass'? How is the identity-creation process simplified through the (many-to-one) rating system?
members.aol.com/zoinkers13
Personal webpage.
What is the purpose of the personal webpage? How is identity projected? What is the purpose of identity projection? Is identity necessarily based on patterns of consumption, commercialization, and connoisseurship? How is authorship foregrounded?
cheep-productions.com
Webmaster presents himself and his daily life. Included are pictures of his apartment, descriptions of what he eats for dinner, among other things. How is the inclusion of domestic space a jarring experience for the user? and why? How has he integrated his fantasy life/identity into his real life/identity? Do you feel that you know Andy after visiting his website?
The website contains an art section wherein users can submit art. How does the webmaster's identity become collectively produced? How is his identity simultaneously consumed and produced? Is more authority given to the webmaster-as-artist than to the user-as-artist?
And for your pleasure, a collection of fine clipart:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
America.