Comments on: SXSWi Speakers Wrap-Up: danah boyd http://www.laurel-hart.com/2010/03/18/sxswi-speakers-wrap-up-danah-boyd/ Communications thoughts and tales by Laurel Hart Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:52:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Laurel Hart http://www.laurel-hart.com/2010/03/18/sxswi-speakers-wrap-up-danah-boyd/comment-page-1/#comment-251 Laurel Hart Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:08:26 +0000 http://www.laurel-hart.com/?p=339#comment-251 Peter, you raise good points about the balance between groups gaining or losing when information is made public. I think an additional point that I got from the talk was that it's not always an either/or proposition, or one group gaining with another group losing, but a case by case determination. For example, she talked about her ability to criticize, debate or tell her story publicly, without facing many consequences. But, an immigrant in fear of deportation may not be willing to criticize or talk publicly for fear of losing the basic rights he or she holds here. In that scenario, one person's actions don't affect the other person's, but the two individuals may make different determinations of how much to share publicly based on their judgement of potential harms from sharing that information. And the examples she used about teachers had to do with things like sharing dating information, photos of the teacher socializing or drinking with friends, religious information, etc. For many people still, teachers are "Teachers" both privately and publicly. danah asked if they are allowed to fully express themselves online publicly without fear of potential school or parental rebuke. Peter, you raise good points about the balance between groups gaining or losing when information is made public. I think an additional point that I got from the talk was that it’s not always an either/or proposition, or one group gaining with another group losing, but a case by case determination. For example, she talked about her ability to criticize, debate or tell her story publicly, without facing many consequences. But, an immigrant in fear of deportation may not be willing to criticize or talk publicly for fear of losing the basic rights he or she holds here. In that scenario, one person’s actions don’t affect the other person’s, but the two individuals may make different determinations of how much to share publicly based on their judgement of potential harms from sharing that information.

And the examples she used about teachers had to do with things like sharing dating information, photos of the teacher socializing or drinking with friends, religious information, etc. For many people still, teachers are “Teachers” both privately and publicly. danah asked if they are allowed to fully express themselves online publicly without fear of potential school or parental rebuke.

]]> By: Peter Moran http://www.laurel-hart.com/2010/03/18/sxswi-speakers-wrap-up-danah-boyd/comment-page-1/#comment-240 Peter Moran Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:40:09 +0000 http://www.laurel-hart.com/?p=339#comment-240 Thanks for the nice summary; I hope to be able to attend this event one day. I'm very interested in the point you make about one person(or group of people) gaining, and another losing when certain information is made public. Do you believe clear lines exist in this balance or is everything judged on a case by case basis? I automatically think of the numerous online registered sex offender databases. This information is made public because society feels it mitigates against potential future harm to the community at large from a group often known to re-offend. Others argue that an individual who's been tried, convicted, sentenced and served time in prison like any other criminal, shouldn't be ostracized after already paying his or her debt to society i.e., it's unfair to single someone out for what they may or may not do in the future. I'm of course not defending or equating sex offenders with any of the groups you mentioned, but when do the needs or rights of the many, outweigh the needs or rights of the few or one? Always? (as Spock would say.) Who makes this value judgement in the online world? Also, not that I'm challenging your point about teachers, but could you explain more or give an example? I was trying to think of one but can't. Thanks. Thanks for the nice summary; I hope to be able to attend this event one day.

I’m very interested in the point you make about one person(or group of people) gaining, and another losing when certain information is made public. Do you believe clear lines exist in this balance or is everything judged on a case by case basis?

I automatically think of the numerous online registered sex offender databases. This information is made public because society feels it mitigates against potential future harm to the community at large from a group often known to re-offend.

Others argue that an individual who’s been tried, convicted, sentenced and served time in prison like any other criminal, shouldn’t be ostracized after already paying his or her debt to society i.e., it’s unfair to single someone out for what they may or may not do in the future.

I’m of course not defending or equating sex offenders with any of the groups you mentioned, but when do the needs or rights of the many, outweigh the needs or rights of the few or one? Always? (as Spock would say.) Who makes this value judgement in the online world?

Also, not that I’m challenging your point about teachers, but could you explain more or give an example? I was trying to think of one but can’t. Thanks.

]]>