Chapter 4: A platform is a stage aka Task 1b

A few weeks ago if someone had said to me what is web 2.0? I would have looked at them with a blank expression and to be honest with no interest in developing my knowledge further.  However as I commit to developing my professional practice and study the professional communication technologies reader I have realised I am not as out of touch as I first thought which feels me with a little sense of pride!  I am a victim of the addictive nature of facebook, I have always used wikipedia when researching and look at me now I have my own blog!  Working within the competitive performing world I think I have become accustomed to the mentality of putting myself in a box of the things I can and cannot do.  Through studying web 2.0 I am breaking out of that box and realising that there is no right or wrong answer and I am therefore embodying the confidence to explore the world that the web has to offer. 

In the reader, web 2.0 is described as being made up of a series of platforms.  I find it interesting that it is described in this way. To me a platform is in close relation to a stage.  Somewhere you can express feelings and thoughts, share passion and stories in a limitless world of creativity. But it is also somewhere where you put yourself in a vulnerable position to be scrutinised and judged by strangers.  I think this is a good summary about my attitude towards web 2.0.  For me to understand how web 2.0 can help in my own practice I am going to broaden my horizons and research the advantages and disadvantages further in order to develop my own opinions and ideas on how I can use web 2.0 effectively.

Web 2.0 is described as opening up the opportunity for the reader and creator to interact and in turn the reader becoming the creator. I love the idea of sitting down with a book and then actually having a face-to-face conversation with friends about it but I think that the limitless creativity that web 2.0 provides is truly amazing.  Now my world is not limited to my friends who may have a similar opinions, literally anyone in the world can share ideas and opinions that I can use to develop my practice. Tim O'Reily's 'meme' is a strong image for me on the world that web 2.0 opens up to it's users.  The idea that it is an 'attitude not a technology' assures the accessible nature of the platforms and their ability to create an approachable attitude rather that an intimidating technology.  'Attitude' is key as this is where the reader and creator relationship builds from and I look forward to exploring this further.

I think that as a society we are so used to being told what to do that the limitless nature can become a little intimidating.  In reference to the platform I know most about facebook, this has almost become a slice of our lives that we never shared in such a public way before web 2.0.  On meeting new people it is always asked 'are you on facebook?' You proceed to add this almost stranger as a friend and they can now access a slice of your world.  I understand that as a user I am in control of how much I share but as a society I feel this sharing mentality is almost expected.  I am not a highly skilled web user and sometimes I feel I do not know enough to protect myself in this open space.  I know children as young as 12 on facebook and if I don't feel I can protect myself where does this leave them.  The power of media on young people really scares me and opening up the ability to share and comment has left the most vulnerable in a horrible place.  Even as a 24 year old woman I have been witness to scornful conversations about photos and relationships that would not have been shared in this way before web 2.0.  My strong opinion in wanting children to remain children and build relationships with friends in a natural way leaves me asking is this new way that we communicate really better?  I just think it is important to be very aware of how we use it and I think I need to apply this caution to my practice. This Baz Lurhmann track always brings home the effect media can have on human nature:

I recently read an article in a magazine with actress Drew Barrymore.  These following questions stood out to me:

Do you think the film industry has changed since you started out?
Social media has changed everything.  It's a very fast, consuming world out there.  I know that and want nothing to do with it.

So you don't facebook or tweet?
No.I do for work, but not for personal stuff.

This develops a strong theory for me of personal vs professional.  I think it is about finding that balance so that I am using web 2.0 platforms to my benefit and not letting it take control.  My techno phobia stands in the way of my web experience sometimes and I find myself dismissing ideas before trying them using excuses such as I don't have the time, patience or interest.  This attitude I find myself conveying is frustrating and something I feel I am slowly but surely beginning to address.  This links into the 'architectures of participation' that web 2.0 provides.  The excuses I listed are the same components that Hamilton (2000) refers to as barriers that when broken down lead to increase in participation.  For me I think these excuses are in my head and once I let go of them they do not actually exist within web 2.0 as it is made so accessible.  'Participation' is a key element that is crucial to the development of my professional practice.  As a society we participate through so many media levels, we like to be a part of  the story and ultimately the public has so much power now that we determine the outcome.  From voting on x factor to public protests, we participate to get results.  This participation opens up a huge community for us to work within.  Our communities used to be made up of our neighbours and family but web 2.0 creates a worldwide community and the power of it is immense.  Feenberg & Bakardjieva (2004) inspired this idea of a vast collective community that can empower change.

www.justgiving.com has used this power to help over 13 million people raise £770 million for over 9,000 charities in 10 years. People often link to their just giving pages through facebook, twitter etc.  

This power can be abused as the priminister addresses in regards to last years London Riots.  Speaking in the recalled House of Commons, Mr Cameron said: 'Everyone watching these horrific actions will be stuck by how they were organised via social media.  Free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for ill.'
http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/872080-uk-riots-david-cameron-hints-at-social-media-shutdown#ixzz1n1iaZRXS

This immensity is overwhelming but in order to understand it's power fully I need to participate in the world of web 2.0 to get my own results. 

I like Valtysson's (2010) use of the term prosumer.  I feel this theory is relevant in my professional practice as a performer.  We have to constantly put ourselves out there and producer ourselves but it is so important to consume from those around us otherwise we do not know where to place ourselves when producing.  The importance of networking in the performing world has always been addressed.  It is not what you know it is who you know and the prosumer idea works to develop this relationship through web 2.0.  I have always found the idea of imposing myself on someone in order to get a job a horrible thought and I am really not good at it.  Web 2.0 breaks down the idea of imposing and opens up the idea that people can choose to access my work if I put it out there.  It is still such a competitive world but you do not have to be a VIP anymore in order to get your work seen.  

In summary the reader in professional communication technology has definately inspired me to look into my web 2.0 practice.  It brings it's ups and downs and I aim to research this further in order to build my practice in to something I know I am in control of and using to my advantage.  A stage that I am proud to stand on and be confident that I know my track.
Hollie xx