Seven deadly spams

OK, so it was pure irony and I was having a laugh. My last post 'Twitter made my head explode' was just me letting off a little steam (the picture was a subtle clue). My head didn't really explode, and I don't really believe that overuse of the Internet leads to ADHD or autism, or that prolonged use of screen technologies might lead to diseases such as cerebral vascular accident (CVA or 'stroke') or the big 'C'. I was just having some fun at the expense of a few pompous scientific types who maybe should think more carefully before they commit their unsubstantiated ideas to press. But seriously, there are some potential dangers out there in the social network world. They are more social than physical though...

We have all heard about the employees who have lost their jobs for badmouthing their employers on their blogs. The case of the 'Petite Anglaise' - British worker Catherine Sanderson, who was sacked from her Paris job - is a classic one. She eventually won a court case against her former employers for wrongful dismissal. We don't often hear though, about those bright young things who have left university looking for high flying jobs, yet who cannot find good jobs. We don't hear how their potential employers trawl through Facebook and find images of them engaged in dubious or colourful activities. And then there's the thing we are all affected by: the spam that increasingly invades our e-mail accounts and social spaces. Patricia Wallace once said that the act of daily deleting spam is the psychological equivalent to 'weeding the garden.' It's annoying but necessary. Last month we all suffered a Twitter attack (keep taking the pills), where targeted users had their accounts hijacked, spam messages were sent out in their name, and others lost personal data.

Cloudmark is a company that services the social networking industry, policing its clients servers for spam. They recently released "the seven deadly sins of social networking spam." One of my favourite bloggers Robert X Cringely has expanded it a little in his own inimitable style. It's a real hoot, so I hope you enjoy it as much as I did:

1) Dating spam. Sorry to break it to you, but "Sultry Svetlana," that 23-year-old hottie from the Ukraine who thinks you're fascinating, is really Ugly Ivan, a 46-year-old scammer from Minsk. Take a cold shower and forget about her.
2) Profile and IM lures. Suddenly, you're Mr. Popularity -- only your newfound friends want to lure you to a fake profile page or IM conversation, where they can steal your information. The moral: candy + strangers = bad news.
3) Redirection to dangerous sites. Uh oh, somebody has posted naughty pix of you at an external site -- better go look. No, you won't find naughty pix (at least, not of you), but you might get a drive-by malware infection.
4) Nigerian attacks. That same deposed foreign minister who wanted to share $35 million in embezzled funds with you on e-mail now wants to do it on Facebook. Let me know how that works out for you.
5) Fake jobs. A fantastic job opportunity awaits you. And if you're lucky, your new "employer" will only clean out your bank account and not steal your identity and/or get you arrested along with it.
6) Competitor social network lure. Lesser social networks may try to steal you away by posting comments on your page pretending to be from your friends. Is that pathetic or what?
7) Religion-based spam. Have you accepted the Alien King Rondelay as your one and true savior? Spammers may use social networking sites to convert users for various religions. God help us all.

Wow, who ever thought social networking could be so exciting?

(Image source: http://blog.smithsonianchannel.com/2008/09/19/spam-tastic/)

Twitter made my head explode

It's official. Facebook can give you cancer. Prolonged use of the Internet causes autism. ADHD. Heart disease. (And Twitter may make your head explode). Baroness 'Susan' Greenfield's recent comments in the House of Lords have caused no end of consternation. Her controversial claims are about the effect of computers on children's health. Greenfield seems to think that there may be links between autism and the prevalance of 'screen relationships' where kids interact with their peers predominantly online. Her basic premise is that the skills we draw upon when communicating face to face wither and die when we persist in technology mediated communication. She mentions body posture, vocal intonation, and even pheromones. To cap it all, the fragrant baroness suggests that prolonged use of screen technologies might be linked to a rise in ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). She is quoted as saying: "It is hard to see how living this way on a daily basis will not result in brains, or rather minds, different from those of previous generations." This she says, will lead to shorted attention spans and increased recklessness.

Other respected psychologists weigh in with similar opinions, including Dr Aric Sigman who suggests in the journal Biologist that 'a lack of face-to-face contact could alter the way genes work, upset immune responses, hormone levels and the function of arteries'. There is even a danger, he says of cancer, strokes, heart disease and dementia. There is no scientific evidence for this he warns, but lack of proof should not stop us from believing there are long term effects to exposure to social networking sites and other internet activity. Just because a women from Cancer Research UK dismisses the claims, doesn't mean we should ignore them. (Here's some video footage of a BBC TV Newsnight programme framing the debate).

After all, these scientists are above reproach and therefore they cannot be wrong, can they? Dr Ben Goldacre of Bad Science thinks they are both wrong. But what does he know? He runs his own blog so he must be biased. Perhaps Facebook does give you cancer! I must admit I am more that a little worried by these reports. For example, I am now worried that my mouse will give me a sexually transmitted disease, or that prolonged use of Twitter will cause my head to explode in a manner reminiscent of the movie 'Scanners'.

Well if all these very respected human scientists are telling us that children's health is at risk because of their use of screen technologies, I suppose we must believe them mustn't we? Eat manure, they tell us. Why? Because fifty billion flies can't be wrong.

(Image source: www.pro.corbis.com)

Wiki rebus

I gave my second year student teachers a 7 day project to tackle this week. It involved them going off in pairs and researching the psychology of the internet, as represented in a number of activities including blogging, using social networks, and effects such as the reduction of social cues, respellings through txting or 'rebus', and the nature of online relationships. They were asked to address a number of questions related to their research topic, and not only post them to their Wetpaint wiki, but also create a PowerPoint presentation (some incorporated these into the wiki) for discussion by the whole group.

They uncovered some useful websites on internet psychology - Problogger (Darren Rowse) figured prominently in their reviews with his excellent post 'the psychology of blogging', as did Dr Rudhran's blog on the psychology on the web and a number of other blog sites. They are also using John Suler's superb hypertext book called 'The Psychology of Cyberspace'. All good stuff. It was probably the psychology of online relationships presentation that created the most amusement for the group, but the most heated discussions came about as a result of the presentation on txting. The discussion centred on whether txt language was actually an evolving language, or simply an aberration of acceptable English. The presentations continue on Tuesday and so will the fun. I'm particularly looking forward to seeing what the 'psychology of the wiki' group come up with.

This has been a great group activity, and with the Wetpaint wiki there to capture and link together all of the results, there should be a fine legacy resource for the students to draw on when it comes to writing up their assignments. So if anyone out there is stuck for a teaching idea to try out....

(Image source: gasear.wikispaces.com)

Camera-derie?

The new Nintendo DSi games console will be on sale in UK and US stores as early as first week in April. Here in the UK it is expected to retail for around £150, and will be available in any colour you like, as long as it's black (or white). It has already been available in Japan since November 2008, and has been selling like hot sushi (What?? - Ed.)

According to the report from Webuser, the new DSi still sports the familiar dual screen technology, one of which is a touch screen, but also comes with new features such as a 256 Mb storage space for games downloads. And get this - the DSi also has a pair of tiny cameras, one facing in and one facing out. Sounds like a cue for some cool videoconferencing, possibly in conjunction with Pictochat. Will the DSi cameras create opportinuties for some new forms of social interaction during games playing? Will DS gaming become the new social networking? What new forms of visual collaboration might emerge? We will have to wait and see. But I can't wait, so I will probably get one as soon as they are available in the UK stores. I don't have the yen to fly over to Tokyo, unfortunately. And I wonder if the excellent folk at the Handheld Learning Conference this year will be offering free ones for early bird registrations, like they did last year?

Learning with wikis

Today I sent back the corrected proofs for a new article due to be published next month in the journal Learning, Media and Technology. I know you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but LMT must be one of the most attractive journal covers I've seen. It's also a quality publication, so I'm delighted the article has been accepted. I co-authored it last year with my wife Dawn, who was working with me as an associate lecturer in Education at the University of Plymouth. She is now back in the secondary sector teaching English at Saltash.net Community School, but this is a nice reminder for us both of the research we did together looking at how wikis can be used to promote quality academic writing. The article is titled 'Using wikis to promote quality learning in teacher training' and the reference is below. I'm posting this here because some of my Twitter friends told me they wanted a heads up on the article before it's published. Here is is, and I hope it is useful...

This paper discusses writing as a social practice and speculates on how wikis might be used to promote higher quality academic writing and support collaborative learning. This study of undergraduate teacher trainees' online learning activities focuses on how shared spaces – wikis – might be used to communicate ideas and generate course specific content. The study also explored how students, through such activities, were able to improve their academic writing skills and engage more critically in learning. Data captured from student discussion boards and a post-module e-mail questionnaire (n=35) were used to map student perceptions of the usefulness of wikis in support of their academic studies. The data indicate that most students raised their skill level in writing directly to the publicly viewable wiki space, in sharp contrast to the more informal content they posted on the discussion boards. The scope of collaborative writing was limited due to students' reluctance to edit each others' work, but students appreciated the shared environment as a means of discussing their work and the content of the course. Students reported that their academic writing skills had improved through their formal participation in the wiki.

Wheeler, S. and Wheeler, D. (2009) Using wikis to promote quality learning outcomes in teacher training. Learning, Media and Technology, 34 (1), 1-10.

Sea food

The whole event is going to be quite memorable. The 4th Plymouth e-Learning Conference in April is attracting delegates from all over the world and is shaping up into what will be a great two-day event. So far, delegates have registered from Australia, New Zealand, and from all over Europe, Russia, Jordan, Pakistan, Iran, Nigeria, the list goes on. The most interesting recent development is that on Friday I finally managed to negotiate the venue for the conference dinner which will be held on Thursday 23rd April. We will be enjoying our meal in the wonderful surroundings of the Atlantic Reef area in the National Marine Aquarium, located on Plymouth's Historic Barbican area. I can't think of a more spectacular indoor venue for a dinner than the Atlantic Reef. There are only 110 tickets available for the dinner, and over 60 have already been snapped up. There will be welcome drinks, a fully licenced bar, a four course dinner (fish is on the menu) and a tour of the entire National Marine Aquarium - and we will have it all to ourselves!

The venue for the two day conference is also a sight to behold. The Roland Levinsky building has to be experienced to be fully appreciated. It is a superb conference venue. We have around 80 papers scheduled for presentation during the two days, as well as a number of demonstrations such as the 3-D immersion cinema and Learning Labs facilities, and a whole host of workshops, on subjects such as Web 2.0, mobile technologies, micro-blogging and e-assessment. A large contingent of e-learning researchers and students from Germany, Poland and Ireland will also be attending the conference as representatives of the Atlantis Project. Atlantis will have its own special track at the conference. One and two day tickets for the conference are still available, so book now to avoid disappointment!

Several major exhibitors will be present at the event and there will be plenty of great opportunities for networking in and around the excellent atrium of the Levinsky building. Oh, and did I mention the three keynote speeches? I promised another Devon Cream Tea and that's what we will have, at tea time on the second day! On behalf of the Conference Organising Committee, here's your invitation.... I really hope you will be able to join us.

Being there

Well, I finally managed yesterday to get some time to complete a proposal for a workshop at ALT-C 2009. I co-authored the abstract with Tara Alexander, who is in the Faculty of Health and Social Work here at the University of Plymouth. I won't spill the beans on the workshop topic just yet, but it is ironic that, if it is accepted, and we both travel for several hours all the way up to the University of Manchester to present it, that most of it could be done remotely without us, or any participant, actually being there. People will be able to participate for most of it sat at home on their Internet linked computers if they choose. It's nothing new. I have been delivering remote classes for over 15 years and so have others. But I still find it interesting after all these years that people still want to come together face to face to do workshops, seminars, participate in lectures and demonstrations, and generally network in a co-present manner. This despite all the issues of travel pollution, rising fuel prices, travel delays, terrorist threats, stress and anxiety, and so on.

People still have an innate need to meet together face to face, and just about every survey and study I have read on the subject reports that face to face is still valued as the richest social experience. Well - of course - you reply. Yet I wonder just how long this might last, with emerging technologies increasingly mimicking and even replicating co-present experiences.

Second Life has its detractors, but the majority of SLifers I have spoken to talk about the 'other worldliness' and addictive interactive nature of the multi-user virtual environment saying they love it and invest a 'lot more time on it than they should'. Millions of people play almost obsessively on massively-multi player online role-playing games (MMORPGS) such as World of Warcraft and interact socially on another plane. My own children spent an inordinate amount of time on MSN and Bebo talking to their friends in the evening, even though they have spent all day at school with them. We are a technologically mediated society, and I could go on, and on, and...

Here's a question: Is Western industrialised society becoming a world in which we are reluctantly substituting our favoured forms of communication for synthetic versions? Are we migrating to virtual forms of social interaction because we don't have the time or space to meet personally anymore? Or is it simply the case that we are learning and practising new communication skillsets as we increasingly spread our lives ever more thinly across so many spaces and technologies?

I'm looking forward to going to ALT-C again this year - I will be there physically, but I will also be there virtually through my blog, Twitter, Flickr, Blip.tv, Crowdvine... through my iPhone...

Safe is as safe does

There is a lot of talk at the moment about how safe personal spaces are, and about how secure our personal data is on social networking sites. Over on our online e-learning community Digifolios and Personal Spaces we are busy debating some of these questions. As I ponder these issues, I'm mindful of the movie Forrest Gump, starring Tom Hanks as a cognivitely challenged individual who works hard to make his way through life. When people call him 'stupid' he simply deflects them with a quote from his mother: 'stupid is as stupid does'. The meaning behind this is clear - no-one is inherently stupid - it is ultimately their behaviour that makes them so.

By the same token, I believe that no online environment is inherently 'unsafe' - Richard Clark famously argued that all media are neutral until content is placed within them. I believe this to be true. A personal online space is only unsafe for me if I behave in an unsafe manner. Giving away personal details such as your mobile phone number in an environment which is open for viewing, can definitely be considered unsafe, unless of course you are actively seeking strangers to contact you. Same goes for posting your image up on Facebook or Flickr. Some photos may capture someone in an embarrassing situation or 'compromising position' (read 'drunk and behaving badly'), but it all depends on whether that individual is intending on applying for a high profile job, or has a clean reputation to uphold, if this is actually perceived to be unsafe.

My reasoning is this - every individual has (or should have) control over the content they post to represent themselves digitally. What you choose to divulge on an open, public social networking site must ultimately be down to you. If you don't have control, something is wrong, (e.g. someone may have wrested control over some of your personal details or content, or may have posted a photo of you up onto the web without your knowledge or consent) - if that is the case, then litigation is an available option. If we each maintain control over our own content and profiles and are careful with what we divulge, the onus is then on each of us to represent him/herself appropriately.

What are your views on the safety of personal online sites? Comments are also being posted here.

Hard cell

Readers of this blog will know that most schools throughout the UK and in many other countries have a long standing ban on the use of cell/mobile phones within school grounds. This is due in part to a number of distressing incidents involving phone cameras that have been used to record and glamourize so-called 'happy slapping' and other aggressive, anti-social acts. There are also concerns over distraction, disruption and other intrusive effects of mobile phones in the classroom. Add onto this doubts and concerns over child safety, health risks through non-ionising radiation and the possibility of theft or loss of expensive small items, and the result is a ban that has shown no signs of being lifted within the forseeable future.

I gave a lecture to a group of 80 or so PGCE Secondary students this morning in which we discussed these issues. The general consensus of opinion seemed to be that mobile phones had the potential to be used for good, but that the problems seemed to be intractable. My solution was to set up some controlled pilot trials in a few schools to demonstrate how mobile phones can provide added value to the learning experience if used responsibly and equitably.

Out of the blue tonight in a timely manner, came an e-mail from Tom Hanson over at OpenEducation.Net. Tom writes:

Needless to say, the general consensus regarding cell phones and schools is that the two simply do not mix. However, a new study from the UK gives strong indication that schools should give greater consideration to putting these handheld mobile devices to work.

Tom's post goes under the title of Cell Phones - Time to Lift the Ban on Mobiles in the School Setting? It's an engaging read and provides both perspectives in the discussion. Although the jury is still out, and the cell/mobile phone is still in the dock, this post may add a little balance to the ongoing debate. What is your view on cell/mobile phones in schools?

(image source: Sonofthesouth.net)

Imagined worlds

Here's my last post reviewing the new publication 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures'.

When we started out writing our chapter on cybercultures, Helen Keegan and I didn't know that it would eventually end up being the final chapter in the book. We first hit on the idea for the chapter while we were talking together at Online Educa - a conference held at the end of every year in Berlin. Because Helen lives in Manchester and I live in Plymouth, the best solution for our collaborative writing turned out to be Google Docs. It worked superbly. We wrote in different colours so we could track who was doing what, and eventually, the chapter was completed. We are very pleased with the result. Entitled 'Imagined Worlds, Emerging Cultures', chapter 17 focuses on the experiences found in technology mediated communication within virtual environments and we attempt to identify and explain some of the emerging practices, behaviours and self-representations. We pay particular attention to the 'imagined' elements of social networking services and multi-user virtual environments (MUVEs), and specifically on relationships:

It is often the fantasy component and the freedom to let one's imagination run riot that first attracts adherents. Imagined worlds facilitate a number of experiences that could never be conceived as possible in the real world, but they also mediate familiar experiences. One familiar feature of the human experience - friendship - is increasingly mediated through new technologies and social spaces. For some, even this fundamental human experience may need to be reconceptualized (p 262).

We go on to discuss a number of experiences such as 'virtual promiscuity', weak and strong social ties, the clash of old and new media and the implications on formal learning, and discuss the breaches in cultural boundaries that have been caused through liberalized social media such as YouTube ('Star Wars Kid' for example) and Facebook. We also compare the popular digital clan cultures of Flickrites and Facebookers. We conclude with a discussion on how shifting perceptions of privacy, identity and ownership as well as friendship are being redefined due to the imagined worlds we inhabit for increasing proportions of our time.

Give PLEs a chance

This is my penultimate post in the series reviewing the new book 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures'. This post features Graham Attwell's chapter on the social impact of personal learning environments (PLEs). Graham, as director of the Wales based independent research agency Pontydysgu (Bridge to Learning) is deeply embroiled in the study of emerging learning technologies. In his chapter, he concentrates on learning in the workplace, and predicts that PLEs will have:

a profound effect in systems for teaching and learning, on pedagogic approaches to learning, and on knowledge development and sharing (p 120).

Graham Attwell shows how industrial models of education and training fail to address the needs of contemporary society, and argues that it is the PLE concept, with all its associated content generation and sharing tools, that will provide solutions. He argues that most learning takes place informally outside the boundaries of traditional school environment:

Learning is taking place through engagement in social networking, both by young people of school age and by older people in work. Furthermore, learning takes place in multiple contexts, in work, in the community, and in the home as well as in the school, yet our schooling systems remain wedded to attainment against a narrow curriculum of formal knowledge. Informal learning is hardly acknowledged, less still fostered and facilitated (p 125-6).

Attwell makes some compelling arguments for change in the school system, calling on teachers to revisit the concept of learning. For him, the PLE is the weapon of choice for those who want to survive and thrive in the shifting sands of a challenging and volatile world of work. It's another cracking read for all those who are interested in how learning technologies, education and training will prosper in the coming decade.

(Image source: replacement-software.co.uk)

Cyborg nation?

Here's a continuation of my post-publication review of the highlights of 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures' - the book on cybercultures in online learning released last week by Information Age Publishers, USA.

Chapter 12 is called 'Cyber Theory and Learning' and was written by Vasi van Deventer of the University of South Africa. Vasi has written an engaging and stimulating account of how humans integrate new technologies into their lives, thoughts, and in some extreme cases, even into their bodies. The cybernetic organism, or 'cyborg', Vasi claims, is something we are all a lot farther down the road to becoming than we think. Adopting Andy Clark's 'natural born cyborg' thesis, Vasi argues that Net Generation people have a mindset that is:

...a way of engaging with the world that is distinctly different from the mindset of those who grew up in the industrial age. In this mindset, computers are not experienced as technology, but form an integral part of what the world is all about (p 178).

van Deventer also argues that it is the Internet and not TV that becomes the primary source of information, and that the cyborg generation need to create through consumption, even if it is merely copying and pasting from multiple sources to create a new mashup text. There are controversial views here - harking back to Marc Prensky's digital natives and immigrants theory, Mark Bullen's rebuttal, 'net generation nonsense' and even a challenge to the rules that govern what we currently consider to be plagiarism, copyright and intellectual freedom. This chapter is not hard to read, because it is written in an accessible style, but some may find it hard to come to terms with - that we are probably irrevocably marching down a long road which will lead to symbiotic relationships between human and computer that may not only be indistinguishable, but also inextricable. What are your views on this position?

(image source: blog.wired.com)

The end of civilization? Revoicing txt

I borrowed the title for this blog post from an article by an old friend and colleague of mine, Victoria Carrington, who is sadly no longer with us (she returned to Australia, see). Victoria introduced the term 'squeeze text' or 'txt' to describe the respellings that have emerged due to short message services where 160 characters or less prompt abbreviations and other contrivances. Words and phrases such as gr8, cu2moro and l8r, (a short glossary is available) have caused consternation amongst purists of grammar and spelling, hence the 'end of civilisation' imprecation. Such respellings may however be simply evidence of a continuing process of evolution for the English language. In the new volume 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures', a chapter written by Tim Shortis explores this notion in greater detail. Tim considers the way texting is challenging the orthodoxy of spelling, and shows that there are...

...textual pressures that act on users' choices. ICT and the Internet have not so much changed spelling as reregulated what counts as spelling, and in doing so, there is a challenge to the official educational discourses of literacy, and particularly as they apply to literacy (p 225).

Tim is very vocal in his belief that text respelling is nothing new, although the technology being used to convey the messages is. The 'vernacular orthographies' - slang and reduced spellings used in txt messages - have influences, he says, which go beyond the limited 160 characters, embracing a number of other influences including trade names and popular culture. This is a well written and challenging chapter, and I suspect the purists amongst us who baulk against the idea of txters creating their own new spellings of words, will probably be in no position to complain in 30-40 years time when 'Generation Y' have become the captains of industry, head teachers and military commanders, and we have all joined the ranks of the retired.

(picture source: georgevanantwerp.com)

The embodied self

Continuing with my post-publication commentary on my new book, the edited volume entitled: 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures', today I feature Chapter 5 by Hugh Miller and Jill Arnold: 'Identity in Cyberspace'. I remember when I read the first draft of this chapter, thinking, wow - this has a real incisiveness about it. Hugh and Jill have done a very thorough job exploring the multiple virtual worlds we find ourselves drawn into, such as Facebook (for the 'flat' representations of self) or Second Life (where our avatars are 3D and mobile). They are very much concerned with the psychology behind the way we re-create ourselves when we venture into these imagined worlds. They write:

Our own research has shown that the psychology of identity and self presentation on the Web is best understood in terms of how people draw on those same signifiers of who and what we are as are used elsewhere: use of photos, claims made of achievements, hobbies, geographical origins, etc. We argue that when people enter into cyberspace they bring with them expectations, challenges, and vulnerabilities from every day life experience and the experience of managing an identity in various circumstances, and here was just another mode (or exciting new theatre) to explore and to play out being oneself (p 58).

Miller and Arnold are here arguing that the self we project into cyberspace has all the components of our real life self, but that there is the potential for fantastic or even outlandish new representations of that self, within the affordances of the virtual environment. This of course, implies that all of the outworkings of people's avatars (the gender bending, species swapping, age reassignment, fantasy representations and so on) lay inert within the person's psyche, and are enlivened (or made possible) within say, Second Life as the environment gives them licence and utility. I would be interested to hear people's views on this interesting perspective (do you agree with it?), and how such ideas might be applied to learning, whether formal or informal....

Tribes, clans and totems

Now that my new edited volume 'Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures' has finally hit the bookstore shelves, I have a little time to reflect on the contents of the 17 chapters, by 19 authors. Over the next week or so, I will post up some (very brief) excerpts from the book and add some of my own post-publication commentary. As I do, I hope that you will respond with some of your own comments and views, so that we can promote some new debates right here, right now.

Now I have the final version of the book in my sticky little mitts, I've been revisiting one of my own chapters, entitled 'Digital Tribes, Virtual Clans', (Google Books has partial content here) a contribution which in retrospect could be considered quite a bold one. In Chapter 6, I take the reader on a tour through what I consider to be a number of 'virtual clans' within the 'Internet Tribe', and argue that these clans are emerging as a direct result of sustained interaction through social networking tools and other technology mediated communication. I argue that as clans (e.g. Flickrites or Facebookers) become more specialised, the generation of their artefacts becomes more pronounced. One of my favourite sections in the chapter reads:

Each clan ... has a totem, a symbol that represents it and distinguishes it from other, possibly rival, clans. In primitive clans, the totem was often a representation of an animal or tree. Durkheim suggests it is easier for clan members to project their feelings of awe toward a totem than toward something as complex as the clan itself. For ... virtual clans, their totems - the traditional rallying points for all tribal activity - are patently the social networking tools within the World Wide Web. Not only are these digital spaces objects of intense interest and rallying points for the clans, they also act as transmitters of units of cultural knowledge (p. 67).

I would be interested to hear how other people perceive social networking services, and whether subtle differences can be detected in the way people generate their content, represent themselves and interact with others. Flickrites, Twits, Plurkers, Facebookers, Myspacers, Beboids, etc. Are the social networks acting as totems, or am I ...um.... barking up the wrong tree? (Image source: daltontrail.com)