User:Peach/peach-thesis-outline: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:21, 16 November 2020

1. Introduction

Social networks are web applications that allow users to post content and interact with other content and content creators. Since the launch of myspace in 2003, social networks have been a very integral part of internet, and their existence affected both the online and offline experience of billions of people (whether they use social networks or not). When Time magazine dedicated the 2006 person of the year issue to user generated content, Facebook was one year old and had 12 million followers. Today, that number is around 2.3 billion.

While the popularization of social networks and user generated content has changed almost every aspect of our lives, my main focus is on political content, online communities that surround this content, and us, the individuals who interact with the content, willingly or otherwise.

1. The platform and the content

I want to start by looking at the way social media, its users and it's content evolved since the early 2000s. One thing I noticed is that over the years, the lifespan of internet memes continually got shorter, and the jokes became more absurdist. We can understand the dynamics of online communities better if we study the history of this ecosystem

      * User generated content/what types of content is more likely to go viral?
      * How do social networks affect mass media?
      * Consequences of ad revenue based business models on social networks

1. Propaganda

This chapter is dedicated to content that is created with the intention of going viral, through exploiting recommendation alghoritms or human psychology, or both. While not the first instance of social networks being weaponized in a political campaign, the 2016 US presidential election was significant for emboldening right wing content creators. I want to explore the online landscape of the US, and various other places where social networks played part in political movements. What are the similarities and what are the differences? Who are the people who are creating propaganda for specific politicans and what are their motivations? And lastly, what are the consequences of this type of propaganda?

      * Disinformation versus facts in terms of outreach
      * Recommendation alghoritms and radicalization
      * Content creators
      * Outrage, toxicity and conspiracy theories

1. The Silver Lining

While a lot of conversations around online politics can feel disempowering, at the end of everything, I want to focus on people who use their online presence as a force of good and elevate them over the toxicity. My aim in studying the online presence of fringe right wing ideologies isn't to depress, but to learn from past mistakes. While it's not possible for any one person to completely dismantle the systems that enabled hate crimes and aided oppressive governments, there are ways to curate our online experience in a way that create communities focused on solidarity and mutual aid.

      * Online activism
      *  How the internet connects us
      * Fact checking and disinformation awareness
      * Is it possible to make informative content go viral?

1. Conclusion

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-== Introduction ==
+## Introduction
-== Chapter 1: Online Culture, Memes and Social Media ==
-Chapter 1 is dedicated to defining the concepts I want to talk about in the later chapters. Since I a lot of my focus will be on social networking, I want to explore related topics within the time period where social networking became relevant, for the purpose of my thesis I want to look at a time period from early 2000s to today. First two sub chapters are dedicated to defining distinct models of websites, ones that provide the content to an audience and others that allow audience to post their own content. The last two sub chapters are about communities and content they create.
+Social networks are web applications that allow users to post content and interact with other content and content creators. Since the launch of myspace in 2003, social networks have been a very integral part of internet, and their existence affected both the online and offline experience of billions of people (whether they use social networks or not). When Time magazine dedicated the 2006 person of the year issue to user generated content, Facebook was one year old and had 12 million followers. Today, that number is around 2.3 billion.
-=== Online Journalism and Mass Media ===
-=== Forums, Social Media, User Generated Content ===
+While the popularization of social networks and user generated content has changed almost every aspect of our lives, my main focus is on political content, online communities that surround this content, and us, the individuals who interact with the content, willingly or otherwise.
-=== Online Pop Culture ===
-=== Online Politics ===
+##  The platform and the content
-== Chapter 2: Viral Advertising and Propaganda ==
-In this chapter I want to explore content that is created with the purpose of going viral. In social media as propaganda tool, I want to look at both official and unofficial political propaganda. In the chapter radicalization, I want to look into the things users are shown without their input such as ads and more importantly, recommendation of content similar to what they're already consuming. Recommendation algorithm of YouTube and it's alleged role in introducing audiences to right wing content is a potential case study.
+I want to start by looking at the way social media, its users and it's content evolved since the early 2000s. One thing I noticed is that over the years, the lifespan of internet memes continually got shorter, and the jokes became more absurdist. We can understand the dynamics of online communities better if we study the history of this ecosystem
-=== Advertising and Social Media ===
-=== Social Media as a Propaganda Tool ===
+       * User generated content/what types of content is more likely to go viral?
-=== Radicalization ===
+       * How do social networks affect mass media?
-== Chapter 3: Misinformation and Online Trolling ==
+       * Consequences of ad revenue based business models on social networks
-After exploring radicalization via social media and recommendation algorithms, in chapter 3 I want to explore misinformation (and people who create it), outrage, online toxicity and how dangerous ideologies and conspiracy theories gain traction online.
+##  Propaganda
-=== Trolls ===
-=== Reactionary Content and the People Behind It ===
+This chapter is dedicated to content that is created with the intention of going viral, through exploiting recommendation alghoritms or human psychology, or both. While not the first instance of social networks being weaponized in a political campaign, the 2016 US presidential election was significant for emboldening right wing content creators. I want to explore the online landscape of the US, and various other places where social networks played part in political movements. What are the similarities and what are the differences? Who are the people who are creating propaganda for specific politicans and what are their motivations? And lastly, what are the consequences of this type of propaganda?
-=== Online Reactionary Movements ===
-== Chapter 4: Silver Lining ==
+       * Disinformation versus facts in terms of outreach
-Chapter 4 is about the things we can do to amplify voices of people who dedicate themselves to justice and equality. I want to study the ways people organize and build communities online, and I want to explore viral content as a potential tool for effective communication.
+       * Recommendation alghoritms and radicalization
-=== Fact Checking ===
+       * Content creators
-=== Online Activism ===
+       * Outrage, toxicity and conspiracy theories
-=== How the Internet Connects Us ===
+## The Silver Lining
-=== Can We Make Informative Memes? ===
-=== Disinformation Awareness ===
+While a lot of conversations around online politics can feel disempowering, at the end of everything, I want to focus on people who use their online presence as a force of good and elevate them over the toxicity. My aim in studying the online presence of fringe right wing ideologies isn't to depress, but to learn from past mistakes. While it's not possible for any one person to completely dismantle the systems that enabled hate crimes and aided oppressive governments, there are ways to curate our online experience in a way that create communities focused on solidarity and mutual aid.
-== Conclusion ==
+       * Online activism
+       *  How the internet connects us
+       * Fact checking and disinformation awareness
+       * Is it possible to make informative content go viral?
+## Conclusion