Digital Culture Project #4: Twitter Postmortem

During the course of our class this year, we were asked to keep an active Twitter journal to archive reactions and reflections on the topics presented in class. In this particular assignment, we were asked to find the eight best and worst examples of our Twitter activity. Below, I have put my eight best followed by my eight worst, with a one-sentence caption explaining why I consider that tweet to either be good or bad.

BEST

Marks an early understanding of cultural identities and uses a very appropriate image to do so.

Provides an example that was previously unmentioned and relates well to the main point of the readings.

Important demonstration of how a positively-viewed “hacktivist” group can very easily switch to being a negatively-viewed one if it exhibits bias.

Highlights the side effects of using an archiving system that is operated by the public.

Discusses a metaphor that was used in the text but not brought up in detail within our class discussion.

My personal favorite tweet. Ties together material from two separate lectures and comes to an important conclusion that is behind the success of certain social media websites.

One of the more topical examples I used in my reflections, and it remains a good example of the impact consumers can have on a brand.

One of my favorite examples from the semester. Shows how something as absurd as depicting characters as water bowls as being a testament to the original product’s reach.

WORST

Fails to identify the proper definition of a remix as it relates to our course.

Lack of further examination of the consequences created by said webbed structure.

Ignores the existence and importance of cultural remediation in the absence of the original.

Contradiction within the statement. Individuals with disabilities use the anonymity of the internet for self gain, is that necessarily a problem?

Vague wording at the end. Without a reintroduction of the “no girls on the internet” rule set up by the previous tweet, nobody except myself knows what that “very rule” is.

Closer to poor observational comedy than any actual analysis. Probably my weakest tweet.

Unrelated to Haraway’s usage of the cyborg as a metaphor. Instead, the tweet portrays Wii’s motion controls as a literal melding of man and machine, which was not what Haraway was commentating on when writing Cyborg Manifesto.

Mistakenly portrays The Beatles and Dr Dre as being the rejectors, when in reality it was the copyright owners EMI.

It seems from my examination that I consider my best tweets to be my most apt comparisons. When I made an example that I felt was a good reflection of a discussed topic, it felt as if I had truly understood what we were discussing. You mentioned my tweet about the flags hanging in Hermann Hall as being a good example of cultural mixing, and I remember that as being an important moment for my understanding of the material. Also, I felt the most satisfied when I was able to extrapolate my interpretation of the text and apply it to a different examples. When I discussed the value of art museums in demonstrating the value of original art pieces, I felt as if I had made a connection that was my own because I understood the material that was being presented.

Most of the mistakes that I have made on my tweets were caused by a lack of a full explanation of the thoughts presented. In my worst tweets, the ideas that I present are unsubstantiated, and can even be misleading. For example, my tweet about the Grey Album identifies The Beatles and Dr. Dre as having reservations about the remix album, when it was actually the recording label EMI who saw it as a breach of copyright. Another example was when I outlined the webbed nature of the internet in one of my earliest tweets and failed to expand on the potential consequences that could result from such a structure. Expanding later thoughts into a series of tweets was to the benefit of my arguments as a whole, as I had more room to extrapolate while still being based in the class subjects.

I felt as if there were things that would have made Twitter Journals more useful in relation to our course material. Firstly, it sometimes felt like I was shouting into the void with my tweets, none of them having any further consequences or examination. While I understand the time-restricted nature of our lectures, I would have liked some sort of utilization of the tweets at the beginning of class. That way, it gives students impetus to have their Twitter Journals updated before they come to class, and allows us to briefly review topics that we previously discussed. It would also allow you the opportunity to correct misunderstandings, allowing for more thorough understanding by students.

Additionally, I think there is room for improvement with out-of-class interaction with other classmates tweets. Sometimes I would read other people’s posts and wish that I could respond, but ultimately backed down because I felt as if it would be an invasion of their journal’s space. I feel as if some sort of encouragement for participation in this context would be conducive to a more active understanding. It would mean that individuals who are reading other classmates tweets would feel more welcome in building their opinions as a unit, and would encourage interaction with the text with the intent for showcasing. This would be an opportunity before class to have feedback and make sure the discussion from class is examined further outside of it.

Overall, I feel as if the Twitter Journals provided a valuable experience for myself as an individual, but I feel as if it could be adapted to be a more collaborative project. By encouraging group interactions and in-class discussions of said tweets, it give students a reason to be especially reflective and informed in their posts. When given the chance for further reinforcement, the material will always be better understood.

Words: 678