Online Friendships

Technology is an apparent part of our lifestyle such that its absence will cause a massive chaos in the real world. Today we turn to technology or more specifically, the computer, to not only look for information or for our entertainment, we use it to build bonds and form relationships with people online. Is it safe, you ask?

Computer Mediated Communications (CMC) has definitely allowed us to forge relationships with others and it transcends the boundaries of space and time. No matter where you are, you are able to talk to others online.

Normally, we look for people with similar interests and from there, we get to know each other. So, how do we look for people with the same interests as us? We would obviously enter the sites that we like. For example, gamers proceed to gaming sites and fans of a certain band will go to the band’s fan club page. From there, these people make friends with those that enter said sites Even through the social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter can we locate buddies of similar interests!

I am sure that all of you practice CMC and do have “online friends”. For me, I register in forums and participate actively in the community there. As an avid kpop fan, these forums fulfil my needs to follow the artistes that I like and at the same time, make friends with people that like them too. One such forum that I am actively involved in is the ukissmeSG forum, a place for Singapore fans of U-Kiss, the Korean boy band. Through interacting with the members of the forum, bonds are ultimately forged. In fact, instead of just being friends online, the ukissmeSG family are friends in real life too! Just recently, some of us met to fly kites and just enjoy each other’s company.

This, my friends, is an example of an online community formed through CMC, existing in real time. Personally, I do not really have any qualms communicating with people online as honestly, there is only so much that they can do to me.

Despite my own “fairytale” example of online friendships, I still value communications in real life. To me, communications offline are more personal as we see the other person’s expressions while communicating and also hear the tone of their voice. This reduces any chances of miscommunicating. Some may argue that Skype and other webcam-oriented chat sites also enable us to see and hear the other person. But is it personal? Nothing beats face to face communication. I guess frequent meetups allow the ukissmeSG family to be tightly knitted. Like I said, nothing beats face to face communication and here, communicating in reality reinforces our friendship.

Some may question whether it is safe to make friends online. I guess the answer to that is: to each his own. There will never be a clear cut answer to this as different people have differing views on the safety of CMC. As many articles have popped up, a lot of people have been manipulated online and conned into thinking that they are in a relationship with someone when in fact that person was just putting on a façade. So how do we know what’s real and what’s not, when everything on the Internet these days are so grey? What to do you think of making friends online?

YOG

As all of you should have known by now, Singapore will be hosting the 2010 Youth Olympic Games (YOG) from 14 August to 26 August this year. As the inaugural event is drawing near, have you noticed the increased exposure about the YOG by the media? This, my friends, is an example of the agenda setting function.Through repeated news coverage, the importance of YOG is etched in the public’s mind, forcing us to anticipate the arrival of the actual event.

What makes the media successful in setting their agenda, in this case, highlighting the importance of YOG? One of the reasons is the unobtrusive nature of this issue. Although Singapore is the host for this said event, not all Singaporeans are taking part in the preparation of it. As such, whatever news coverage that mentions YOG, most Singaporeans will tend to believe it wholeheartedly as they have no direct experience with the mentioned issue. Furthermore, the amazing amount of news coverage on YOG also contributes to the agenda setting. There is a wide variety of media that covers YOG, such as online journals, blogs, official website, newspapers and radio. The abundance of news coverage further highlights the importance of this event. As most political persons are involved in YOG and have in one way or another promoted the event, the public are more inclined to be “moved” by what the government officials do/say. For example Ministers like Dr Vivian Balakrishnan and Mr Masagos Zulkifli played a part in this agenda setting function by giving speeches at separate events related to YOG (here, here). As such, the public will view YOG as something that is important as “important people” are promoting it.

Not only the politicians, but schools and other organisations are also promoting the event, helping in the success of the agenda setting function. For example, SIMGE has been raising awareness by asking for volunteers to help out in YOG. Organisations like the NTUC and Girl Guides Singapore are also asking for volunteers and of course, they will be sending in their own batch of volunteers. Through the massive coverage and the huge number of assistance needed for this upcoming event, the public will definitely see the importance of YOG and the amount of effort put in by everyone to make it successful

As media represents the view of the powerful elite and by promoting and providing extensive coverage on YOG, clearly, it is to remind us that YOG is taking place in Singapore and the importance of it relative to our overall status.

I am most definitely looking forward to this inaugural event as, agenda setting or not, YOG is obviously a respected event and for it to be held in Singapore is something to be proud of. And! Micheal Phelps is the ambassador for it, so of course I’m excited!

group think!

Have you ever wondered how a group is able to gel so well and work together to achieve a common goal? What is it that brings certain people together and forms a group?

In my opinion, a group is a collection of individuals who interact and work together based on similar interests. Over time, these individuals will work together towards a common goal.

The Vancouver Winter Olympics that is taking place during this period holds numerous apt illustrations of group communications and the importance of it. Team events like ice hockey, speed skating and ski jumping are all examples that paint the dynamics of a group and the importance of group communication.

How are teams formed? What made these individuals form a group and participate in the Olympics? Though it may be true that the formations of the teams are out of their control as it is based on talent (i.e. only the best of the best are chosen to form a team and take part in the Olympics), undoubtedly, the individuals in each team share similar interest and passion towards the same sport. For example, individuals in the ice hockey team obviously share a passion for ice hockey and by being selected to represent their country in the Winter Olympics, they are now working as one towards a common goal, which is to earn a medal and do their country proud.

With similar interest/passion and a common goal, how do these individuals develop their relationship and at the same time, achieve their goal? Members of the group must be able to juggle 2 roles – task and maintenance roles, in order for the group to work well.

Take the amazing Austrian ski jump men’s team for example who recently won gold for the Olympics ski jump team event. How did they achieve this amazing feat?
Wolfgang Loitzl, Andreas Kofler, Thomas Morgenstern and Gregor Schlierenzauer made up this team that did their country proud and pushed Austria up to 7^th place in the medal standings. The fantastic four were able to work together despite their differences in age and level of experience and perform remarkably towards their goal. In addition, through trainings they had prior to the competition, these boys forged bonds with each other and I doubt the bond will be broken when the Olympics end.

The oldest in the group, Loitzl took on the role of a leader and an encourager, pushing the team forward during trainings. Whenever someone in the group feels like giving up, Loitzl will be the one to encourage them to look up and stay positive.
Kofler, one of the pioneers in the group is the one that coordinates sessions together. Being one of the ski jumpers with a good record, the rest respects him and will usually follow him.
Morgenstern is the most experienced and well respected member in the group despite his young age. Having won a lot of competitions in both team and individual event, Morgenstern is the person that the members look up to for advice to improve on their skills. As the saying goes, age is but a number and in this case, experience is valued more.
The youngest, Schlierenzauer (aka my favourite), is the group’s rising star. With 32 World Cup victories under his belt, he is seen as the one who will eventually top the charts. As all groups, the youngest are usually the ones who gels the group with their weird antics. Schlierenzauer is responsible for maintaining the group’s energy.
Despite the roles that they have, every one of them contributes to the social development of the group. Strong relationship within the group is important as it makes achieving the common less of a burden. Each knows that every one is there for each other and this acts as a reinforcement that everything will proceed smoothly if they just believe in each other.

I have presented the point that each member assumes two roles in a group. What if the members have a common goal (task) but they lack social relationship with each other? Can the group proceed and achieve what they have set out to do?

how we perceive, depends on who we are

The recent news surrounding G-Dragon’s Shine a Light concert caused a great ruckus in the KPop world, especially among his fans. For those who have no idea as to what I am talking about, click here and here. G-Dragon (real name: Kwon JiYong), leader of the awesome Big Bang, recently held his solo concert on 5^th December 2009. Apparently, according to fan reports, during one of his performances, “Breathe”, he was literally dry humping his dancer on a bed on stage. To add to that ‘misconduct’, he sang 2 songs (“She’s Gone” and “Korean Dream”) that were reportedly labelled as inappropriate as it contained vulgarities. These acts landed him a ticket to be interrogated for his ‘improper’ behaviour in public. Why, you ask, is this wrong?

Well, since he did not set an age restriction for his concert, it is inevitable that minors were part of the audience. Obviously, such acts are considered inappropriate for their pure minds. Furthermore, South Korea is still very much considered to be a conservative country so sex on stage (albeit with clothes on) is very much a no-no in their culture.

Personally, it all boils down to PERCEPTION. The process whereby we make sense of the world around us, perception is influenced by both psychological and social factors. Whatever we see, hear and experience, undergoes a thorough process before we finally perceive things. We select, organise and eventually interpret the information before forming our own conclusion of it. How is it applicable here? The fans who went weren’t complaining, so why did the ‘authorities’ interfere? I shall attempt to break down their thought process upon arriving to such conclusions, for both the fans and the authorities.

In the eyes of the authorities, G-Dragon’s stage stunt totally crossed the line. Since he is a singer/musician and a role model to many (personal constructs, cognitive schemata), he should not have performed an explicit bed scene especially since there were minors. Furthermore, as his concert had no age restrictions, all the more he had ‘no right’ to perform such acts on stage. His role as a singer and position in society made the authorities take action. In addition, the responsible figures might also have been concerned about how his actions and his obscene act can affect the audiences’ future behaviour (punctuation). For example, the minors may take it the wrong way and assume that public display of over affection is acceptable in their community. When this happens, they may bring said value to their future and practise it (interpretation). Like mentioned, South Korea is still a relatively conservative country. As such, G-Dragon’s stunt would not have been approved by the older generation Koreans. Influenced by the community that they are living in and the consequences that they have to bear in the event that someone complained, the authorities probably figured that they should be the one who makes the first move and interrogate the severity of his misconduct.

The fans, on the other hand, have a different story to tell. According to fan accounts, many were unperturbed by his bed scene, saying that it was no worse than any Western films with bed scenes in them (But hey! You really can’t compare because western culture and Korean culture is different). Being fans, they probably think that as a singer/musician, G-Dragon has a task to carry out, that is, to entertain and satisfy the fans with his music and performance. Instead of zeroing on the figure (the focus of attention) like what the authorities are doing, the fans take the whole concert as a package by itself (the ground i.e. the entire environment), not just a single performance, to conclude GD’s whole show. Despite their conservative culture, it is without a doubt that the youngsters are moving away from the norm and adapting a more Westernised lifestyle. They are more open minded to such exposure and would obviously not follow blindly the actions of their idols.

I guess it is reasonable that the authorities are interrogating him. Despite the absence of an age restriction to his concert, I am quite sure that the fans know what to expect in GD’s concert. And since the fans weren’t complaining, shouldn’t the authorities just let it go? As William Shakespeare said, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”. We see what we want to see and we perceive things as who we are. Undoubtedly, our surroundings (culture, family, society) play a part in influencing our thought process but ultimately, we interpret it as how we would like it to be.

“A primary function of art and thought is to liberate the individual from the tyranny of his culture in the environmental sense and to permit him to stand beyond it in an autonomy of perception and judgement.” - Beverly Sills
I think GD did just that and then some.

Watch the video and do share your opinion! :D

Deconstructing A.VA.TAR.

Clinching Best Drama at the recent Golden Globes award, Avatar, is THE movie to catch. Directed by James Cameron, the Oscar-winning director of “Titanic”, this 3D action-adventure movie will definitely keep you on your toes throughout the entire duration.

For those who have not gotten the opportunity to watch this awesome show, here’s a synopsis for you, to get a brief idea on what it’s about.

Through this movie, I finally have a concrete idea of what the social constructionist perspective, where communication creates individualists, is about. Jake Sully, an ex-marine, was given an opportunity to ‘serve’ his country and replace his slain twin brother, Tom, on a mission to mine valued ore on the planet of Pandora. Enticed by the outcome that it’ll bring him (pragmatic approach!), Jake agreed to take on the role. Before going to Pandora as his Na’vi self, scientists, army colonel and basically everyone who worked for the mega corporation, warned him about the Na’vi, the humanoid natives of Pandora. When he actually experience living in that world for himself, Jake discovered that the humans were wrong about the Na’vi. What he expected to experience was far from what he went through. The social constructionist perspective of communication is no doubt apparent here. Jake formed his own impression of Pandora through what has been communicated to him about it, without even questioning the reliability of the sources. Only after he directly experienced the world of Pandora, he saw the vast difference in what has been communicated and what is ‘real’.

As the movie proceeds, Jake finds himself in a dilemma – to help his human race or to help his adopted race, the Na’vi. He knows that it is not right for the humans to be invading the homes of the Na’vi but if he helps the Na’vi, wouldn’t he be betraying his own kind? Influenced by logos (appeal to reason), pathos (appeal to emotions) and ethos (persuasive appeal to his character), the social constructionist in him eventually intervened and he ended him helping his adopted race.

Here, we see that Jake chose to let his believes and sets of roles/rules decide his next move, when his attempt at a pragmatic approach failed, even if it means to turn his back on his own kind. If you were to be in his shoes, would you do the same? Honestly, when I watched this movie, I truly hated the humans. Granted, they did not exactly have an accurate knowledge about Pandora as what they know is the things that have been passed on from person to person and not what they directly experience for themselves. However, when Jake recounted his experiences with the Na’vi, the humans chose to brush it off. So forgive me for hating them at that point of time.

This leads me to question the world that we live in. As the model of social constructionist states, we are surrounded by communication, which holds our world together. With that, are we really living our lives or are we merely living like we’re told to, based on symbolic codes, our cognitive customs, cultural traditions and the set of rules that guide our actions? Is our world truly unreal?

I guess we would never know for sure but I'd like to believe that we eventually form our own sanctuary in our minds through our experiences.

Feel free to comment!(: