Unspun - Chapter 10 – Hypertext

Chapter 10 – Hypertext

Matthew G. Kirschenbaum starts this section off with a play on words, calling a hyperlink a word with a wide Web of connotations and associations”. Hypertext (or hypermedia, when images and sound are employed), as defined by the author of this section, is “electronic text organized as a nonsequential system of links and destinations.” These destinations are Web “pages” or “sites”. Users of the web use these hyperlinks to jump from page to page, “following” them to construct a “path” or “trail through the connected documents”. Because there are many various ways to construct this path, no two people read the same page in the same way and they have an active participation in the reading process. The author doesn’t stop there. He goes as far as to tout it as the “technological realization of large-scale changes in human thought and perception” and even further as to quote someone who called it “a new relationship between thinking man and the sum of knowledge.”

He continues by sensationalizing the internet as a “Xanadu” and placing hypertext at the center of it. He links it to a “universe of knowledge” in a “kinetic” Information age. Hypertext is also a technical term dealing with its nature of being involved with HTML itself, whose first two letters of the acronym are translated as HyperText. “Hypertext is both a text and a technology”, but since texts ARE technologies, the line between the two is blurred. Hypertext is also both a “genre and a medium”. This affords the question of whether hypertext is limited within the confines of the concept of HTML or if it holds its own merit outside of it “aesthetically, conceptually, or computationally” rather than “just the mechanical processes of linking”.

Hypertext is older than the World Wide Web itself. Developed by a physicist named Tim Berners-Lee in 1990, it was first thought by the inventor as a “convenient system that would allow scientists to use their computers to exchange their research with one another”. Its roots are found even earlier—even earlier than the birth of the Web-- if one explores deeper. The Association for Computing Machinery held the first of many “annual international conferences” on Hypertext three years prior in 1987. That same year, Apple introduced a device called a Hypercard, “the first widespread hypertext authoring system for personal computers”, which came standard on all Macs. The first writer to utilize hypertext was Michael Joyce, whose “hypertext novel”, afternoon: a story, was circulated on floppy disks. (Eastgate Systems later re-released it in 1990, along with many other examples of “electronic fiction”.) Hypertext has its beginnings in the mid-1980’s and the term itself dates back even earlier to 1965. Theodore Nelson lectured about “hyper-text” at Vassar College, calling it “a more flexible, more generalized, non-linear presentation of material on a particular subject”. Hypertext as a concept, not as a term or as a concrete system, was first discovered in 1945 in an article of Atlantic Monthly written by Vannevar Bush called “As We May Think”. Bush proposed “an interactive desk” called the Memex that allowed people to link together microfilm much like we hyperlink text today. He pointed out that it used the same “associative thinking” that the brain uses naturally. In literature, the concept of many different endings can be linked back to 1941 with Jorge Luis Borge’s story “The Garden of Forking Paths” and to the eighteenth-century with Lawrence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy. The author even references the Talmud when citing examples of literature that is set up like hypertext.

Hyperlinks have often been compared to footnotes. Footnotes, often overlooked as a useful tool, “stratify the linear presentation of conventional prose”. It is used to reference information without interrupting the flow of the book, allowing the reader an option of whether to read it or not. There are many kinds of hyperlinks, much more than the usual click through type. While an example of hypertext is still clicking a word to open a new window with new information, there are still older examples. Drawing on the concept that hypertext is older than the Web and that systems for it were in existence before the Web, one can see that there were many different linking examples. In fact, earlier systems utilized a “one-to-many” link system, where a single click opened up many related windows with other writings and images. Systems like Storyspace tracked the user’s response and only opened windows to the degree which the user navigated through “guard fields”. Some pages were not at all accessible unless the user clicked a certain window. Guard fields “present information in carefully controlled contexts” that is individual to each user. This “one-to-many linking and guard fields” transcend the footnote.

Because of its physical nature, a footnote is limited by the book in which it is printed. While in a book, only the information that is required to find the reference is provided, the electronic footnote would be able to show the entire article or even media about the author. This new nature of hypertext requires a new study of the writing and reading of it. Some have explained it in a visual way, calling it a “map” of sorts. Bolter, a co-developer of the aforementioned Storyspace, called hypertext “topographic”, a veiled reference to the “garden of forking paths” that is cyberspace. Hypertext also allows re-examination of the structure of texts themselves. In a physical book, there is a clear distinction between the footnote and the main text and a “hierarchy” is present. In cyberspace, there is really no distinction between the two. The different structures “also result in very different reading experiences”. Michael Joyce makes it a point to distinguish between “constructive” and “exploratory” hypertexts. “Constructive hypertexts, which are more ambitious, are those that involve the reader’s active participation. Exploratory hypertexts are simply linked assemblages of materials, presented for the reader to passively browse.” Those who study this topic find the Web more exploratory, due to the multitude of lists and basic linkage systems.

To fully define hypertext, one must define text. It is commonly defined as “simply made up of words”, more specifically “sentences and paragraphs strung together to form some larger whole, be it a novel or a textbook or a technical manual”. However, in the act of reading, it becomes so much more with the addition of images and color and other embellishments. While the act of reading a novel is simple, the reading of a newspaper is closer to the idea of hypertext. Many other reading materials mimic the newspaper in the variance of ways to read it. In fact, the novel is primarily the “exception”, not the rule. Those who study literature know that “some of our most compelling works and writers have been obsessed by the pliability of textual structures and narrative forms.” From the illustrated manuscripts of the monks to authors like Blake and Dickinson, writing became more than just a simple linear, inartistic run of words. Writers like them are “identified as ‘proto-hypertexts’, meaning that they emulate in print many of the characteristic features of electronic hypertext despite the fact that they predate digital computers by decades or even centuries.” Blake is especially referenced as “the first multimedia artist”. In fact, his illuminated printing can be considered one of “the oldest language experiments on record”. This “nonlinear narrative” is not only found in hypertext, but also in art and literature in the past. However, Blake was not multi-media, as his medium was just in book form. In this way we realize that hypertext cannot really be compared and should only be considered a “computational phenomenon.”

Hypertext, by nature, is “immaterial”. There is no concrete form to hold on to; it is merely a pattern of “light projected on a computer screen”. It is both a positive and a negative aspect, as it can be seen as a “freedom” and a deficiency. Hypertext is like the book in that its “cover, binding, or typography” is dependent on the platform it is viewed. The difference between the Mac and the PC are important, with large changes in “appearance, behavior, and performance”. Hypertext is also not “ethereal”. It is “an electromagnetically coded signal in a computer’s storage system.” The concentration on platforms and systems “historically evolved to support the conceptual ideal of ‘hypertext’.” No one person owns hypertext. The variations in the programs regarding it show how varied it all is. These variations show how there are “material differences in the technology”. While annotation used to be used frequently, with the advent of cyberspace, it has become obsolete. Annotation does not exist in this medium, and the one time it was on the Web, it failed as a concept. “The way in which we use and understand hypertext is shaped not by the inherent limitations of the medium, but rather by software engineering and product design.” It should also be thought of “as part of the broader social contexts in which information technology operates.” Changes in the portrayal of it are attributed to changes in “computing, communications, and information in society and culture”.

The Web is often seen as a “vast global hypertext”, with HTML being its language. The Web is different from other hypertext systems through the involvement of the internet. These “global network protocols”, along with browsers, allow anyone with a working internet connection to access it. Furthermore, the hypertext documents can be all over the world. HTML is the “lingua franca of the Web”. It is not a “programming language”, but a “markup language”, based off of a larger language called SGML. This would make HTML “simply plain ASCII text files that include certain specialized ‘tags’”. These tags are read by the browser and translated into what one sees onscreen. Creating these documents can either be done by hand or by using programs that need little to no knowledge of the language itself. Even though it has evolved, the basic tags still apply.

Text is not just words and sentences. It has a “pronounced visual and material dimension”, as evidenced by programs like Photoshop where one can manipulate text in many ways to turn it into graphics. Because of this new penchant for images, many have abandoned the ordinary ASCII text and used images and the like to decorate the pages and embellish the content. Even without graphics, the text can be manipulated so that there are different fonts, font colors, and sizes, among other effects brought about by certain HTML codes. The first HTML code was simple, lacking even the simplest tags. Tables were introduced and are now used in ways that are totally different than the original usage. “The advent of Dynamic HTML and Cascading Stylesheets (CSS) promises to continue increasing the range of visual control over text.” Even though it’s still “primitive”, HTML is steadily being swayed to the side of graphics. Compared to earlier hypertext documents, the range is noteworthy.

Because it is “global”, at one time, the personal homepage was at the same level as a corporate one. However, the presence of corporate America is strong through “spam”. Now, the HTML link is being used to tout wares and is being controlled through “link licenses” and the like. Web rings are an example of “how the social and economic dynamics of the Web are refashioning hypertext in more restrictive modes”. These “Web rings” are ways to link together sites with similar content. All these examples of “white-collar hypertext” point “to hypertext having transcended the narrow concerns of computer science and cognitive philosophy and emerged as a major commercial asset.” Hypertext “is part of the Web’s emerging digital economy”.

Although there is a lot of emphasis on “white collar hypertext”, the author points out that it still catches the eye of artists and writers. Other than Michael Joyce, many writers have used the internet to display their writings (the author of this blog included). “Artists and writers will continue to help expand the horizons of hypertext development, much as they were some of the most aggressive adopters of the technology in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.” Furthermore, there are still many new developments that will catch their eye in the form of “kinetic or animated text” (Macromedia Flash) and “three-dimensional writing spaces”. The author closes with a very accurate statement. “What is avant-garde today online often becomes mainstream tomorrow. Such is the inexorable dialectic of the Web.”

Unspun - Chapter 9 – Performance

Chapter 9 – Performance

Online experiences can sometimes be classified as interesting because of what the author, Dietrich, calls the “performative freedoms” associated with them. No longer is a “performance” thought of only in a fine arts capacity. In this postmodern world, “speech is considered a ‘performative’ act.” There are elements of performing in the “virtual body” that has become so popular. There is a new “terminal identity” through the “human-machine interface”. “Theorists have emphasized the ‘performative’ dimension of language acts, both in terms of face-to-face discourse as well as computer-mediated communication.” After the 1970’s, the idea of performance was divided into “theatrical” and “performance studies”. While the former was focused on literary and dramatics, the latter was defined as “a nontheatrical, nonscripted type of performance.” A concept called the “metaphor of performance” created a standard of “basic human interaction” that was made evident in things like gender roles and ceremonies. “Performativity” was a term introduced to distinguish the two schools of performance. It relied on verbal and gesture signals, being able to “enact change or to cause things to happen by their utterative or gestural force.” The “performance” no longer just relies on the speaker, but the speaker’s technology.

The World Wide Web influences this “performativity” through images transferred and displayed through cyberspace. However, that which is played for the viewer is not considered “live”. The SLR uses its technology to give inventions and machines more practicality than just in warfare. They construct machines and robots to “put on a show”, so to speak. In fact, the whole idea behind these “robot wars” is considered “performativity” when it is given a “surreal presence” through pyrotechnics and the like. They are engineered to “menace one another or audience members” in a spectacle that is, in an odd way, performance art. Their initial goal was to concentrate on live experience (which “moves away from the reproduction of virtual technology ‘outside’ of copies, transmissions, and representations of technological culture”), but their website provides audio/visual broadcasting of these battles. The changing of the SLR’s philosophy was never really officially stated, but one member stated that though seeing it digitally was not as intense as the real thing, the founder could not find a good venue for the public and had to turn to the web to establish a fan base. He is quick to point out how it was not as “real” through the computer and the full effect is lost.

Through this, “one ideological movement” is transformed into another. The shift in technology is palpable. Even an authentic show is now digitized, reducing it to a video. However, the website is also seen as a social arena. So there are two totally different ways to view these battles. The author claims that this example is conducive to the new emphasis placed on the relationship between the cultures of human and computer. In this, “performance” is a metaphor for the “cyborg nature of humankind”, especially in those areas of fear “regarding electronic technologies, gender, and identity”. In the example of the SLR, there is seen a struggle between the “visible, masculine” machine and the feared “feminine technologies of cyberspace, cyborg manifestations, and introorganic processes, all of which represent an intrusion into the “text” of the body.

Machines are considered the boundary “between the natural and the cultural”, thus making one question the whole concept of a “human”. The old perceptions of masculine and feminine are found in “binary”, which is dual by nature. “The ambiguity of the human-machine interface” has led to a desire for differentiation between the two genders and in more defined self-identity. SRL draws on the masculine aspect of technology and embraces the warlike and “military” uses of machines. From the invention of the first machine, the twentieth century was a time of rapid invention. These inventions drew upon and improved human labor. These “industrial machines” were “utilitarian in function, daunting in size, and extremely noisy.” As they became more streamlined, they began to take the human form and even start to move “anthropomorphically”. This metal representation of a worker, while it “freed” him or her from manual labor, also stood for unemployment to many. It also stood for American pride back when they were marketed as “industrious robots skilled at accomplishing work that was dangerous, repetitive or simply boring.” Machines evolved into symbols for male vitality.

The advent of new mini technology like circuits and TV could not be defined in those metaphors. Likewise, “information technologies”, like the Web, are not representative of “visible power”, so they are considered feminine. The “female becomes collapsed” with the advent of postmodern machinery, thus triggering anxiety about gender identity and “bodily colonization”. Springer, while acknowledging the ambiguous nature of computers, points out that they are considered female because they are “small, fluid, and quiet functioning” and can take on another’s ego. The “cyborg” being in cyberspace is also thought of as female.

SRL is an “adrenaline rush” for those who wish to think of machines as autonomous. Bell points this out in his essay, saying that with this generation’s tendency to replace physical with virtual, performance can bring “human being back into contact with experiences of the physical body and memories of instinct.” By contrast, advertising is considered feminine. In order for SRL to be masculine in this endeavor, they must “embrace and resist the cultural tendency toward ‘surface’ and away from ‘depth’.” For them, the World Wide Web is just a substitute for something else.

“Productive” and “Reproductive cybertechnologies” are at odds in an “uneasy alliance”. Pauline’s injured hand is a testament to the comparison of actually being at SRL and watching a simulation. He signifies the masculine side of technology and aids in a “defense against a virtual age that threatens to dissolve the physical body”. It also signifies the “transition” from “autonomous robot” to “human-machine interface”. SRL sees what it does as “real” and the Web as a “surrogate”.

In the feminine “hyperreal”, “performance” is seen in avatars and 3-D websites. The physical drops away and performance lies in the language. The LambdaMOO “rape” is much like the SRL, but it lies in language and in seeing language as deeds on the Web. There is a debate if typed actions mean as much as real actions do in the real world. If it is given that much weight, there is a definite threat to our right to freedom of speech. Advocates of this law to make them equal argue that they cannot be separated. In the LambdaMOO case, there was no way to really get rid of the offending user. It affords the question about whether he/she did anything wrong legally and if LambdaMOO constituted an actual “real world”. To the user who was violated, real-life mental damage was done. Due to the nature of cyberspace, it has been both trivialized and blown up. What was eventually decided, in a way, was that there are “two directional planes” on the Web. “Performative acts bring about consequences, despite anonymity or pseudonymity, especially when these ‘acts’ involve sex violence, or self-representation.” There is a performity in language that can either be dismissed or discussed in detail. LambdaMOO confronted gender roles in their universe, as opposed to the SRL, who ignore it. One needs to be self-aware in order to confront these problems. Because cyberspace uses language and is social, it is performative and therefore cannot be thought as “risk-free”. This new concept of performativity must be studied.

Web “performances” are even more “seductive” when paired with graphics and audio. Some technology allows users to “manipulate graphics-based avatars”. In Stanford’s Virtual Theatre, one can fill any “real-life” role. The non-playable characters are “intelligent agents”, which are “lifelike”. These “agents” mark the beginning of virtual systems that engage the entire body. Virtual reality is the “successor” to interactive sites. A program called Placeholder utilizes “virtual reality and an interactive Web site.” This project played with the concept of performity on the Web. Visitors to the site can access content from the Virtual reality gear. This study of human-machine interactions brought the “physical back to the Web but through the context of performativity.” The computer-mediated communication “creates action”, rather than act as a substitute for it. In creating this program, there is a new prototype for “narrative action within virtual environments”. The link between technology and narration, as well as the language that “creates action and informs subjectivity”, shows how performativity works. The use of digitized versions of actual places coupled with interactive non playable characters gives the program a sense of “place”. The programmers had to define place both in spatial and human perception. Not only is Placeholder a marvel in technology, but it is also a “social inquiry into the nature of human-machine interactions”. The program was more than just a way to explore human-machine relationships. It became a way for users to “produce content” and also became a way of “embodied imagination”.

In order to combat incorporeality, the programmers reintroduced the body into the cyberspace world, without bringing in such things as identities and other “material constraints”. They wanted to achieve naturalness. Another program allowed one to take on other identities by touching the digital counterpart with the virtual reality software. In this way, the researchers hoped that the user would witness the “‘reconstruction’ of their bodies in the realm of the senses.” They realized the “social and cultural implications” of the body and, in essence, the virtual body. They attempted to reconstruct the “norms”. In an effort to have their users leave “marks” on the environment, they constructed virtual “voiceholders” in which users left their voices for others to listen to. In this way, the developers brought the voice into cyberspace. Most of all, Placeholder was about changing binaries: “body and machine, sound and image, body and mind”. Users could “find their bodies” and return to a new type of “physical”. The performative gestures used “challenged traditional notions of subjectivity and identity.”

These examples explain performance in a “posthuman framework”, a “‘terminal identity’ in postmodern terms.” As machines become more human and humans more like machines, the boundaries between the two entities becomes blurred. These new programs challenge this and have the users reexamine performance, subjectivity, and identity. These imagined notions “may or may not include actual, physical embodiment” and our images and televisuals replay “live performances through screening contexts.” “Our words can now have the import of actions, and we may play with our own notions of identity in multiple-user contexts.” No matter what “performance” or “performativity” may mean, it is still going to be true that “these dramatic narratives operate as part of a larger ‘textual’ exchange regarding our very subjective place in this postmodern moment.”

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 8 (Ideology)

Chapter 8 – Ideology

Ideology, as defined by Kavanagh, is neither “the opposite of ‘common sense’” or “the opposite of ‘realism’” because “all knowledge is ideological.” Sloop elaborates, explaining that “our most basic common sense is grounded on our culture’s most fundamental knowledge.” Kavanagh writes that ideology is “a social process that works on and through every social subject… like any other social process, everyone is ‘in’, whether they ‘know’ or ‘understand’ it.” Ideology, in essence, is the finding and maintaining of a sense of self. This “ideological analysis”, according to the author, investigates race, sex, and class and how they affect society along with politics. The Internet is the “information superhighway” and “begs” for analysis like this. If “ideology” is knowledge, the Web is the stronghold of it and “cultural knowledge”.

The Web is “an object of cultural discourse”. The Web is talked about everywhere in every capacity, both private and public, influencing how we think of and use this technology. Web content, by nature, is “ideological” and open to analysis. Critics have to consider the place of the Web in evaluating our decisions and as a form of media. In this way, ideology challenges our identities.

The Web has an unlimited number of destinations and one can go anywhere without a set identity. In order to analyze it, one has to consider how talk about it is considered ideological. David and Ann Gunkel explain it as “What cyberspace becomes will, to a great extent, depend on what we call it”. Because of this, one must be “active and involved” in the Web to study it. If the Web is viewed as a place for many identities not depending on “race, class, gender, and sexuality”, then the user’s view of identity in this way is changed. This example, although putting forth an “anything goes” attitude, enables the possibility that stereotypes would be employed in impersonating some identity other than the users’, with some examples becoming “hypersexualized”. Sloop writes that the class he taught “learned that the utopian discourse of freedom would work to unhinge our ability to criticize sexism, racism, classism, and the like unless [they] were careful about thinking through both ‘freedom’ and complicity.” Thinking of the Web as a utopia “creates ideological problems”. In focusing of a wonderful whole, one forgets the small factions that lie inside it. This has the ability to render the Web “linear”, rather than dynamic in the areas of identity and knowledge.

Still, there are “dystopic” ideas of the Web that are just as bad as their utopian counterparts. It is negatively viewed as a city of vice, with improper behaviors like “brainwashing”, child abuse, and “sexual debauchery”. Based on reports after Columbine, it was seen as a dangerous place which fosters hatred and encouraged terrorizing fellow students. These two representations, the negative and the positive, “reinforces and rearticulates assumed cultural values and assumed cultural knowledge”, already existing beforehand.

The ways one speaks of the Web makes it an “object of knowledge and morals” through our “dominant ideology”. Because it is a “new world”, the discussion of it must “draw upon” old-world “metaphors.” The Web is “constrained” by how one discusses it. The Web shapes the “dominant ideology”, but that ideology is also dependent on how the Web is perceived. The content is already “ideological” and “favors particular and predictable interests”, but is also a realm home to the marginal and fringe ideas and groups of the world. Because of the varied backgrounds and politics of internet users, there are differing standards on what “one will want to celebrate or condemn”. However, the author counters, this high “availability and visibility” of “alternate worldviews” can counter the dominant ideology and possibly disrupt it.

The Internet is not a “free marketplace of ideas”, with fair politics and equal say by all sides. There are many instances that prove that perception wrong. Many people who use the internet are a part of a “larger ‘dominant’ culture”, influenced by the thoughts and views of that mindset. The thoughts and opinions one has follows them online. Because of commercialism in the Web, it has become more “mainstreamed” and follows the dominant culture more closely. Because of this financial obligation by larger companies and organizations and their focus on getting more visitors, the content on these pages are to be more in tune with the dominant societal norms, their “common sense”, in a way. For every innovative webpage is one whose main purpose is to attract as many people as possible. Humans are very self-oriented, so the webmaster must take this into account and appeal to its target audience, “reaffirming the beliefs of its audience” and “reaffirm specific kinds of knowledge and values”. Each page shows a different “knowledge”. While allowing for some changes in thinking, the main “dominant ideology” is “an example of ‘ideological clawback”. Fiske and Hartley maintain this idea through pointing out the tendency to compare things and animals to humans through use of the phrases “like us” or “unlike us”. This helps the viewer classify the behaviors through its own. In a “site of discourse” and in order to critique “dominant ideology”, one must make sure their audience understand that ideology. Any critique is held up against the “dominant ideology”. Even if a site doesn’t mean to cater to its audience-as-consumers, its structure may suggest it. “Unofficial” webpages are designed to look like “official” websites. Some are designed that way to attract the subject of the page and some are designed to make it look “trustworthy”. Even when not driven by economic interests, pages still end up “reifying dominant understandings, assumptions, and ideologies.”

One must also study the “relationship between” the Web and ideology itself through “cultural consciousness and dominant media forms.” McLuhan points out that “technological form” is over “content” and that “the media is the message”. A culture’s “dominant mode of communication” has an “influence on ‘our relations to one another and to ourselves”. This mode is an extension of self “across temporal and spatial boundaries”. When media is seen as an “extension of the human being”, one can examine its influence on the “self and society”. Scholars of literacy study the transition from oral to literate to print and electronics, but a “media theorist” examines how the Web was an “extension of a man”, how culture affects it. The Web, as a dominant means of communication, changes “what we know about ourselves and our world and how we know.” The history of communication before computers or letters shows readers how to define oneself outside a group. Even if everything was written out, there would be little to no attention to them. This media allows the writers to “see the conditions of others” and enhances our perceptions of being a global village, of being one world online. Media like the television enhances a group “consciousness” and the renewal “of emotion”. Television programming, according to McLuhan, is a “product of technology”.

The Internet is used to being fragmented, as well as “linked to a number of different communities”, worldwide. While one might embrace the online friends, the friends at home are dead to them. The reader is lost in identities. Some are worried that digital might change from literate and make it obsolete, as well as a change in the “rational and linear forms of thinking”. However, there are strengths to a more free consciousness in that hyperlinking is encouraged and interaction is favored. Texts are always fluid.

Many writers, in talking about the “Self”, define themselves into “stable notions of the self” through print media. By comparison, the concept of identity on the Web is always in flux. Because there are so many identities, people examine their “own subjectivity as performative” and “not based in nature.” Baudrillard sees the internet as “expulsions of man”, rather than “extensions of man”. The internet made us realize the fluidity of our identities. If one thinks “about the relationship between media as form and cultural consciousness”, there is a mixture. Logics are more emotional, less rational. The world is thought of virtually, rather than physically. Reality becomes “less real” and more “hyperreal”. Hyperreal is defined as being when “our understanding of every activity” is influenced by how many times it is done and how it is done repeatedly. This world becomes a “world of simulations” and the “real” is continually studied alongside the “hyperreal” and the sense of self is seen as a reproduction of the past.

The way we think is influenced by the Web every day. One cannot truly understand how “ideology is shaped and altered by changes in dominant modes of communication”, but the “dominant means of communication” alter each time period. The relationship between the Web and ideology is “rich and complicated.” The Web is built for rhetoric through conversations and “public argument”. The content is shaped by ideology on the dominant level. Thinking of the Web as “form” encourages the knowledge it would produce. The Web does change thoughts and perceptions, but these must be “questioned” and “critiqued”.

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 7 (Governance)

Chapter 7 – Governance

Communications through computers worldwide is changing the perception of “individual political agency and collective government structure.” The Web provides a place for new meetings and new groups that are akin to a new culture altogether. The Web births “political movements”, “social interactions”, and helps give a rise to economic “demands”. The sites give themselves to a new type of “governance” in trying to figure out how to maintain and “patrol” “virtual spaces”. Because it is the World Wide Web, there is dissent over the methods with which to police them, especially given the differences in cultural and societal norms. Legalities are also difficult to deal with, as there is not one specific country that owns the Web.

Manuel Castells is quoted as saying that he believed that “a new world is taking shape in the end of [the] millennium” through technological, economical, and cultural breakthroughs. Even so, “this new world is greatly affected by older existing worlds in terms of its shape and substance, especially the dictates of capitalist exchange, nationalistic governance, and urbanized community.” The information networks changes society as a whole. The author states that Castells tends to overemphasize in his explanation of “real virtuality”, but the author concedes that daily life is subtly changed by it. “The proliferation of informatic networks becomes the background condition by which we explain how ‘real virtualities’ are able to occupy the popular imagination of a cybernetic society”. Castillo points out that in the time vacuum that is the internet, “dominant values and interests are constructed without reference to either past or future”. Content from both time periods are mixed in with sound clips, video clips, and hypertext.

When individuals and groups choose to maintain a site at a “digital domain”, “this domain turns into the central setting for the conduct of individual human life”. Cyberspace is more than a collection of code. It is the means to share life with others. Dizard claims that it is “paradoxical” in that it is both a uniter and a divider, concentrating on the physical “nuts and bolts” of the network. This view and the view of it as a community both need governance.

Castells makes a second appearance, saying that the changes in society and the economics of those societies is due to the ever-improving technology of the computer network. However, cyberspace is still thought of in spatial terms. In this way, it “mutates into a new plane of cultural reality with its own rules of postmodern embodiment, extraterritorial engagement, and hyperreal enlightenment”. In cyber-society, the rules are completely changed. Thus, how to govern it should be just as different. However, governance on the Web still thinks in terms of “judicial assumptions of off-line sovereignty over living bodies occupying physical territories”. There are no real rules for cyberspace, just as there was no ruler at its inception. This leads to openness that leads to people connected and also gives it a sense of autonomy. Online etiquette, called Nettiquette, still rules in its earthly form, as does earthly economics.

Those who believe in a cyber utopia believe that the “technics of computer mediated communication are simultaneously technological and political mechanisms suitable for redirecting individual collective behavior in preparation” for cyberspace. Also, these people believe that “the certainties of ordinary reality” will fade into the world of cyberspace. Bill Gates foretold his own technology and outlined in 1995 the very community-driven innovations that exist today. Indeed, computers adapt to us and mature alongside us, as well as interact in those networks that connect us to the rest of the world. He suggests that computers have become such a part of us that they are even part of our politics in civil life. He wishes for true free trade and a “perfect market”. Gates wishes the world to explore global markets, which, through the internet, becomes an entirely new “market space”. This is an innovation for the business world akin to the invention of the cargo system.

The author opens the next section with a great statement: “While political philosophers often see elements of the common good running through public projects underpinning the territorial polis, different agendas tied to private power sustain what might be called the “informatic subpolis”, which lies between politics and non-politics. The Internet is described as a “third entity”, “sub-politics”. Technology and business take on new dimensions because of this and politics and non-politics switch. As this “sub-polis” develops, it may take on the “polis” and take it over. The standard political system may be left in the dust as the internet challenges rule-making in the formal sense. Off-line democracy has the capacity to become obsolete due to the new technology of the web. The “alternate society” is to come from an online government. This is emulated by the complex network of companies that make one capable of going online. Networks aren’t tangible, but they are as important as a tangible home.

In technological terms, cyberspace is “a place of pure governance”, with its orderly system of ones and zeroes. The codes and programs enforce a lax, but still effective rule structure. “Cyberspace now constitutes another kind of built environment online within familiar built environments off-line amidst the natural environment.” Getting online involves proprietary rights especially involving the process. “Network connectivity requires, then remediates, governmentality effects in its tools, technics, and techniques of operation.” Foucault “introduces a rational economy about the management of things into… political practices”. People become tangled in the “normalizing power” and that power organizes the population and the political environments.

“Because governmentalizing techniques are always the central focus of political struggle… the interactions of populations… compel regimes to redefine what is within their admininistrative competence…” The net is, in itself, a “governmentality” machine, whose politics transcends all. In this online governmentality, software and hardware set standards for humans to follow online. Online becomes a social “project”, thus freeing the company to concentrate on “the conduct of conduct”. Cyber domains are under “self-policing”. The promise of internet wealth would not be possible without this “governmentality”. The digital politics would not be able to exist without the hardware and software.

Telecracy is not an immediate problem. Even though the Net is filled with people, there is still the urge to own it. Telecracy is evident in Microsoft, at least at the publication of this text. Microsoft had become so monopolistic that it had to be split up. This problem with whether Microsoft is a trust or a trust-breaker lies at the heart of governance. People are worried about “governance issues that arise from subpolitical choices”. The subpolis “develops with each new corporate move”.

Through domains, knowledge becomes power. This fight for knowledge is at the heart of the struggle to rule cyberspace. “Online governance now works through protocols for the processing and reprocessing of data” in a form of “exchange”. Negroponte points out a change in the norms of life and could possibly result in new tensions. Performativity is key.

Castells states that information technologies are essential to socio-economic restructuring. Networks are classified as both the “most basic means of economic production” and “cultural sophistication”. The base of the technology is “needed to police real-life places from the virtuality of cyberspace”. Castells sees it as technology shutting out those societies deemed inferior economically. “On one level, the Internet is neither governed nor governable.” Cyberspace exists separately from actual reality. The author calls it a “very good example of a working ‘anarchy’” whose governance is due to the protocols. Everyone and anyone can use the internet, thus, the internet is hard to control. The technical means of communication are policed by governments and corporations, however. The Internet is divided between those who want more freedom and those who want to experiment with less freedom and more restrictions. There is a lean towards both self-governance and “more closed expert social control”. Because telecracy is technically a way to rule, the companies that own the networks and the digital environments, which lend itself to governance. Most decisions are done for all kinds of reasons other than pure criteria. These reasons shape the media. Telecrats’ feelings on certain subjects rule cyberspace by shaping the online environment.

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 4 (Race)

Chapter 4 – Race

Lisa Nakamura points out that “the Internet is inherently democratic and color-blind because its users can engage with it anonymously”. It is this belief that suggests that the internet is race free, as there are no physical characteristics tied to online correspondence. Already, the internet breaks down divisions between writer/reader, audience/speaker and Self/Other. Search engines help by searching for information, finding news and weather reports, and becoming a portal for further online surfing. The structure of the internet was so quickly accepted that not one user even suspects it has political leanings built into its design. Furthermore, the information presented to the internet user is downright overwhelming, so the use of these “portals” and search engines help focus the reader and limit the oversaturation of information. Using the internet without these devices would come later, after the user becomes more used to surfing the web without an aid.

The structures of these portals “reaffirm traditional racial categories rather than challenge them”. The content is still identical, but the perception of it is changed. When a term is searched, the user is presented with certain choices within the parameters of the search that the engine performed. The choice of term greatly affects the returned results, as does the category that is searched under. Entering “race” returns results that don’t pertain to the definition that is being studied here. Entering “racial” gives the user a closer interpretation, but one that was grouped in a way that made it hard to cross-reference. One would not be able to study two of the categories at the same time. This structure lends itself to limitations that discourage “the possibility of alternate or hybrid definitions of identity”. The search engine leaves the user with a false sense of choice. Even the more “diverse” choices remind the author more of the “National Census form”. Unlike the search engine, the Census allows for an “Other” category that was made to accommodate the nuances of American identity. The search engine—“Excite” in these examples, was limited to “black-and-white” and choices which do not “reflect the identities of actual people who are using the Web to find information about their race in particular or about ‘race’ in general”, reducing the various ethnicities of the world into separate categories. This structure allows for a “colonialist” or “imperialist” view of it all, casting the user as white as a default and not allowing the non-white user to feel included. Gender is also a “fork”, with “men’s issues” separate from “women’s issues”.

Poster is quoted in the next paragraph as saying that there is the need for “the construction of new combinations of technology with multiple genders and ethnicities.” He also points out the “politics” of the programmers, who, for the most part, are white males. Because of this, minorities will rarely be represented at this point in time. Even though it is impossible to pin this all on an individual company, it is still a good way to examine society’s view on minorities. “Portals” allow only a limited view of the internet at large. The omission of “White/European” and “interracial” is a disservice to the internet as a whole, encouraging racial inequality. Zickmund hopes that the “openness” of the internet will become an “ally” against “bigotry and racism”. Turkle extends that by stating that the “more fluid sense of self” that the internet exhibits allows greater “diversity”. “Optimistic librarian rhetoric” outlines the idea that “information wants to be free”, thus freeing the user from their bodies by default.

However, the internet does not fulfill these hopes. It is partially the fault of those people whose online presences merely exaggerate and worsen racial stereotypes, either by being offensive and doing it on purpose to degrade someone or by accident and embracing the stereotypical images. This is evident in the rise of ninjas and geishas as avatars. This allows for an “anachronistic” view of Asians and allowing the user to enact his or her own image of that culture.

The absence of bodies is not always guaranteed. There are still outside bodies that are denied things for racial reasons. Despite the openness of the Web and the opportunity for obscurity, there are certain factors that simply cannot be erased.

“Web demographics are always in flux.” The African American community has expressed a desire to go online. However, the author points out that minorities use the internet less than the white community. Minorities are “underrepresented” because of the unavailability of the internet for them. Government “web literacy” programs tended to concentrate on white students and those in the upper-middle-class. Sadly, the government missed the fact that these students already had access, thus starting the playing field unevenly. Not only are African American web users few, but the number of African American programmers is even lower. This is a disadvantage regarding the fact that the internet is used increasingly to get jobs and get people networking, as well as heralding the “digital culture”. Because of the large discrepancy between the number of white people versus African American people, this new job-seeking technology is biased towards whites. Importantly, this is unconscious, as some young web designers are quite liberal. In this way, it is important to capitalize on this and make it so the web is not going to be biased. By doing this, there is the possibility to beat bias and racism in everyday life.

The Web is the closest thing to a “public sphere” that is available worldwide. The very nature of it allows discourse regarding “identities, racial and otherwise” and how they are presented. It is not a true public square because of the predominance of non-diverse users. Even as it has the capacity to break free, it still is more easily equipped to categorize. The author uses the example of typing in one’s last name and watching how easily it is categorized by “biologist and essential notions of race.”

The Web is elastic and the most changed medium out there. It is constantly adding on and adapting itself to new web technologies. It is not the most credible source of information, mostly because of its penchant to rank information and package the information in pretty packaging so it looks convincing. False and true information can be presented side by side and it is the duty of the online user to distinguish between the two. The same term in a search engine can return two radically different sites. Race “happens” through “content” and with the framework in which one searches. Race happens especially due to hyperlinks, which can either challenge racial choices or force the user to choose a specific race.

Anzaldua, a writer on the subject on multiculturalism, does not mention technology, but it is interesting to note how she branched out her own terms regarding race, much like her own personal search engine. Much like one explores their heritage by returning to the land of their ancestors, search engines help one explore the many facets of the person’s heritage. Both are examples of searching.

The Web, through its ability to allow different kinds of identities, both “encourages tolerance” and allows the identities that were created to “fall between the cracks of hierarchy.” This, unfortunately, makes the user choose the dominant identity, if such a thing is even able to exist. The user may fall victim to falling for stereotypes. Developers and users of the internet must take care to preserve the idea of multiethnicity while the technology is still being developed. The ability to surpass these search engines-cum-“portals” comes with learning about the technology, which is limited by socio-economic status. The user who is unfamiliar will fall into those aforementioned traps.

The author explains that it all “boils down to the need for expanded minority access and representation online.” By having minorities help build the web, the pitfalls of the homogenous programming will fall away. Even with purely ethnic websites on the rise, it does not embrace the Web’s capacity to eradicate “bigotry and racism”. “Until increased education, economic parity, and changing cultural priorities make the Web accessible to racial minorities, the medium will reflect the often unconscious racial assumptions and priorities of corporations.” Until then, the user must re-examine how they use the internet and wait for a significant change in the manner of websurfing, paying special attention to the way menus classify us.

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 3 (Gender)

Chapter 3 – Gender

Cynthia Fuchs, in the opening lines of this chapter, points out that gender on the web, though malleable, still defines one’s internet experience much like real-life identity does. It “sets limits, encodes behaviors and signs, and defines desires.” The quoted writers concur, each putting forth a different idea of identity: as a relationship, a staging of the body, and a doorway.

The author acknowledges that gender is hard to define and that it is “produced by cultures, shaped by historical conditions, and altered by power dynamics.” Out of the three quotes, Fuchs first highlights Haraway’s conclusion of it being a relationship. The relationship is defined as being between two bodies: one that of the person and one of someone else, as well as a relationship between that person and his or herself. It is also defined, in Haraway’s definition as the idea of each other’s identities. These relationships are not very constant and experiences changes throughout one’s life.

These relationships are linked to one’s identity at birth, as deemed by one’s genitals, or as others assign to someone. The identity one assumes or imagines for oneself and the identity that one performs daily are also factors. Lastly, the identity that determines and depends on one’s sexual behaviors and the like also plays a large role in these relationships. Gender is both how one acts and how one wants to act. Above all, and most importantly, gender is mutable and easy to change between.

This is especially true regarding Internet gender roles because, in cyberspace, one does not have a concrete body. This absence of a physical body means that one has to identify oneself and present oneself to the public in such a way as to define this new evanescent identity. Imagination runs rampant in this arena as evidenced by the amount of people who assume other genders. One way that gender is defined online is in the sexual preferences of the user in question. Because of this, “gender on the Web is often volatile and disturbing”.

Gender is utilized online in many arenas: academic, sexuality, and community. The third instance was especially used in the spread of information regarding transgender and transsexual people when said identities were out of place in regular society. Incidentally, transcending gender is “the great unfulfilled and unfulfillable promise of the Web”. As one can see in William Gibson’s Neuromancer, gender roles are twisted when dealing with online personas. Haraway, whom Fuchs draws upon again for research, presents the radical idea that “gender, race, and class consciousness” is a result of “patriarchy, colonialism, and capitalism.” Taking Haraway’s idea of a genderless cyborg, Fuchs points out that with the disembodiment of the online identity, such a thing is possible. Indeed, the cyborg as perceived by Haraway is found by web-goers to be an intriguing concept: a third identity if you will. This third identity in a supposedly “binary system of comprehensions and meanings” has the ability to be neither male nor female and neither computer nor human. The confusing and almost unfathomable idea of being neither sex is important because it opens avenues to reverse the old views on gender roles. Fuchs poses the following question: If one is neither human nor computer, how can one be considered one gender or the other?

Elizabeth Lawley takes Haraway’s conclusions and forms her own ideas. She touts the weaknesses that technology has and points out that there is potential to break the “linking” between the natural body and gender roles and capabilities. With the advent of the idea of these postmodern cyborgs, there is optimism among Haraway’s fellow believers that online there will soon be no concrete concepts of gender, using the cyborg as an example. In effect, these identities will have no limitations socially. In any case, gender is recognized as “a set of behavior and expectations, recognizable and readable by audiences”. Haraway reminds the reader that the cyborg’s body is not innocent and Fuchs extends that by saying that it is a “deliberate and well-staged metaphor that enables both performers and audiences to destroy previous myths and build new ones.”

Even online, gender is regularly displayed, as distorted as it may become. In the past, the idea of gender in real life is determined by set gender roles and certain behaviors and clothing. However, recently, this has been more lax. Online, this distinction is even more lax. Turkle points out that “virtual gender swapping” is a safe way to try a new identity without the risks that are incurred in real life. In fact, it sometimes is regarded as a game. This “swapping” does not come without its dangers, as there is a lot of damage done regarding falsified identities. The author describes a “virtual rapist” that was unable to be stopped because of LambdaMOO’s own ability to have its users register many times and with different identities. This instance offers the question on what online rape exactly is and how it involves the online genders. The “Babes on the Web” example presents the issue on what harassment is defined as in cyberspace if gender is not clearly defined. Other issues presented include netiquette, service provider responsibilities, and other issues that are brought up with other aspects and problems of the World Wide Web.

Furthermore, in the “Babes” example, it affords the question of how in this case, women present themselves as sexualized. These women didn’t believe that their images were going to be used in a sexual manner and idealistically believed that the very nature of the web itself would afford itself to being non-sexual. A second question is why women use popular names of celebrities and popular events just for hits. The main question, however, is how gender may be “rendered insignificant by its performance”. The author rejects, to a certain extent, Haraway’s theory by stating that both online and offline, gender roles are still “oppressive structures” and that “assumptions of gender are still in place”.

Allucquere Rosanne Stone presents the idea that any attempt at eschewing gender is based in self-delusion. Like in the Chapter on Identity, the idea of such a thing is again presented as a Cartesian mind trick that is detrimental to the body itself. Stone is an advocate for not forgetting one’s gender. This “not forgetting” (more like “a matter of remembering per se than realizing the consequences of forgetfulness, willful or not”) is important to understanding the concept of gender. The Web is an excellent place for this because it allows for the intensifying of gender “malleability” through its own inherent flexibility.

Kate Bornstein explains that through asking each other what gender is, one realizes that there is no concrete concept gender, only “what we say it is”. Even if one uses Bornstein’s definition, gender cannot be undone easily and only in small steps. The questions that then arise are in the definition of “other people” and “we”. Bornstein explains that her own concept of gender was defined by her belief that she is “not bound by the social constrictions of either gender.” She is the closest to the “cyborg” idea, not defining herself as either man or woman.

Bornstein and Stone find arenas to explain their gender identities through the Web, as do other women’s groups. This activism is found throughout cyberspace and in many guises. Each site has its own definitions and arguments regarding identity and they are able to broadcast these through the web. The whole purpose of their online exposure is a matter of that exposure and the potential effects of exposing it to the media. It is not merely for the sake of ideology or function. The Web does not limit their efforts, but is just a way to “facilitate” their “activism”. It is an affordable and easily accessible way to get their ideas onto the web. Fuchs closes the chapter by introducing Anne Balsamo’s idea that the body may be a “process”, that gender and other bodily aspects must be examined and questioned complexly. The web makes this exploration dramatic and gives it a different context.

Unspun - Chapter 2 – Identity

The author begins by stating how “we see ourselves today in and through the available media”. Unlike other mediums, cyberspace allows us to be immersed in it. “Because media are simultaneously technical analogs and social expressions of our identity, we become simultaneously both the subject and object of our contemporary media. The media which we consume becomes the media by which we are defined. The various forms of media present different sides of each subject they study. Also, at the forefront, media views a person as a “consumer”. Just as print ads and television commercials utilized graphics in advertising campaigns, the Web embraced graphical ads. However, with the advent of “streaming media”, the move from graphics to “audiovisual”, as seen in television-like pop up ads. WebTV is an example of a merge of television with the World Wide Web. Movie studios utilize the web to turn their movies into phenomena. Music executives use the internet to distribute music through pay sites like iTunes. The internet is specifically attuned to the user, a luxury that earlier media was not able to take advantage of. The sites one visits can have a direct impact on the types of advertisements that are displayed. Some suppliers take that information and sell it to the highest bidder, a practice that has come under much criticism lately. All these are efforts to reach a personalized demographic.

In order to make it a true two-way communications system, the consumer must be able to “talk back”. In this way, the consumer is also the producer. Although most do not utilize the concept of homepages, many have the technological know-how to produce a website of their own, thus becoming both the consumer and the producer. There is no difference in the accessibility of a homepage as opposed to a professionally run site; all are reachable by URL or a web address. People who cannot produce media otherwise are able to show their creativity and endeavors online with little to no effort. The “personal homepage” is one of the most important ways of establishing an online identity.

There are different formats of the homepage, from simply an online version of a business resume to an almost comprehensive study of the webmaster and his/her personality. Indeed, the possibilities of a homepage are limitless and the audience is boundless and international. There is a difference between the content offered. Some choose to be anonymous, and others feel like their webpage is a place where readers can find out everything about them. Still others treat their website as a personal scrapbook, understandable by only a small, select audience. Thus, there is a blurred line between what is personal and what is public on the web. A website does for the author what publishing a memoir or biography does: take semi-private details and broadcast them to a wide audience. However, the audience of the Web is infinitely larger than that of a standard publishing ring; the Web is, if you’ll pardon the pun, “world wide”.

Many people feel so open on the internet that they feel a need to project visuals of themselves online. The amount of picture sharing sites online grows by leaps and bounds. The webcam was introduced and suddenly entire videos (some complete with audio!) were available online. Webcams have the ability to be put anywhere there is an active web connection, so the subjects of webcams are varied. It is an odd combination of closed circuit television mixed with that of live broadcasts. It is also an interactive form of media because in some cases, the viewer can control the mechanism and has a choice of what he/she wants to see.

Still, webcams are a new development in the arena of homepages. Like the homepage, there are differing degrees of disclosure. Some have webcams that broadcast constantly in more private areas of their home, while on the other end of the spectrum there are webcams that just broadcast public places. The popularity of their webcam can make some feel like internet celebrities, where there is only fifteen seconds of fame as opposed to fifteen minutes. The concept of celebrity was drastically changed by the advent of the internet. Anyone can deem themselves an internet celebrity and make their life into a “show”. This is definitely a show of narcissism. They become performance artists who, through “media saturation”, become famous and eventually find such things second nature. Their innate behavior is changed through the broadcast of their peccadilloes.

Gergen acknowledges this in saying that all these different “relationships pull us in a myriad of directions, inviting us to play such a variety of roles that the very concept of an ‘authentic self’ with knowable characteristics recedes from view”. In many of the online communities and concepts, the creation of a new identity is needed. (MUDs and MOOs)

Early computer scientists believed that artificial intelligence would soon surpass the brain in the “analytical, rational, and transparent aspects” of thinking. MUDs and the like are more social than intellectual. The inherent playfulness of a chatroom or MUD is the main attraction of such a thing. In a way, it is like writing an electronic novel or play collectively. Character is often more important than plot in this type of medium and often, the narrative is collective. The authorship is shared and the authors can change identities with a blink of an eye. While different identities are used for various real life situations (ie. How you act with friends versus how you act with professors), the online way of different identities is more open, with gender roles often being switched. The real-time communication is in essence a show of post-modernity in that it is easily adaptable and duplicates the act of chatting personally with someone. The book describes it as “multiplicity and flexibility”. MUDs are like regular webpages because there is a set path to take, but the spontaneity that is available in this media makes it also like a novel. The hyperlinks enable it to be fluid and flexible. MUDs illustrate Joyce’s idea of “’constructive hypertext’, offering its participants a site for defining a networked self or indeed a whole series of networked selves.

Older ideas of identity were more united and homogenous. With the advent of the internet, that postmodern idea of identity challenged the Descartes concept of stability and changed the idea of an “autonomous ego”. The Web offers us many avenues in which to explore different areas of our identities, distilling them in some ways as to make them separate. This “networked self” is an embodiment of the Web’s fluidity. One is always able to change themselves and others’ perceptions of themselves through the internet. Community is not as strong, however, and it suffers because of the varying identities. Community is turned into a constantly changing group of people who, in turn, constantly change themselves.

Cartesian thought maintained a strict line between mind and body, eschewing physical characteristics. The web is straddling that line by not allowing physical limitations. Some believe that the cultural limitations linger, thus discounting the loss of the physical self as a “Cartesian trick.” However, the cultural, embodied self does make its way into an internet identity, even when one tries not to. “Cyberspace simply becomes another arena for the complex social negotiations of our culture.” If one attempts to erase those qualities, the internet community becomes boring and the norms of society take over. Electronic communication cannot deny our identities, merely disguise them. In using these technologies to examine ourselves, one finds that the internet is used to change the parts of themselves that they do not like, much like cosmetics does to our concrete body. In cyberspace, one presents the ideal self that they wish to proclaim to the world. That is the whole point of identity in cyberspace.

Foster's Study of CybeRhetorics

Foster starts his article by defining rhetoric as an eloquent form of persuasion, both used by ancient Greek philosophers and modern speakers today. Even as time passed, the three main roles have not changed; practitioners, theorists, and critics work together to present a valid point in a dialogue of checks and balances. In this relationship, the theorists guide the practitioners, and the critics examine the speech. Kenneth Burke states that Rhetoric is human nature to people and humans are simultaneously practitioners as well as critics. Burke also states that because humans practice it naturally, it is all around them and it is what makes them human beings. Indeed, he argued that acting and speaking rhetorically are the defining characteristics of human beings. Only when it becomes formal does one turn to the theorists and critics for feedback. Critics also play a big role, though their focus is different. They focus on what the speech could influence people to do, how persuasive it is in influencing them, and figure out what the writer was thinking. Also, a main job of a critic is to criticize (naturally!) the ideologies that are being put forth, as well as what is hidden between the lines. When one thinks about what a speaker really means, then one turns from a practitioner to a critic. Reviewing rhetoric helps all sides of the process.

When one posts some piece of persuasive writing online, it is not simply rhetoric anymore. It is cybeRhetoric because of the different medium that is utilized. Even a rhetorical document that was originally in print or some other form of media can become “cyberized” by being available online. Cyberspace texts are special because they utilize a language called “hypertextuality” and change the whole notion of author/text/audience by linking to many various interior references. Hypertextuality is like a more modern way of a bibliography, a series of references linked to other sources found online. This form of referencing links the original text to the exterior references in many ways. The first is “linear”, much like a book page. However, it is more “restrictive” because page one only links to page two, and so on and so forth. Unlike a book, there is no way that one can go to a random page. The reader must follow what the author has set out for him or her, with very little reader input or exploration. The second involves the author constructing his text like a “tree” of sorts, with each part linking to many other parts. There is no longer one text. The reader has the freedom to read however he or she chooses and thus changes how the text written is perceived. However, there is no “external material”, so the reading is self contained. In this third instance, the original text may be linked to an outside text that explains or embellishes on a point the author is trying to make. The two texts are woven together. The fourth requires no original text at all, merely a linking of pre-existing text in a way that is more “coherent”. The HTML format of “frames” can be used in this way, allowing two separate webpages to load in one window. Unfortunately, with this fourth instance, there is little to no authorial control, where the new linkage can alter the reader’s opinion on the work, giving the original work a new spin or perspective. The final instance involves “networked hypertext”, which is hypertext employed by many different people. There is no concrete writer for this format at all, as it all gives off a “Writerless” property. Now, there are multiple visions on what an individual author can be or in some cases, can’t be. Hyperlinks are not only used to enhance a text and give the reader a sense of cooperation and freedom, but the “hypertext author” has put that code in that specific place for a reason—to influence one more.

The way we perceive texts has changed through the years as the medium grew and developed. Foster compares Hyperlinked text to “channel surfing”. Some authors, like Tuman, fear that the traditional way to view books will be lost. Gregory Ulmer puts in his ideas by saying that hyperrhetoric is not just merely communicating, but rather a connective force. Ulmer asserts that the reader will soon be able to make their own connections regarding different texts that are presented to the reader through hypertext referencing. He hopes that one day, the reader will be able to explore the rhetoric themselves instead of relying on a strict logic.

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 2 (Cyberspace)

Chapter 6 – Cyberspace

Cyberspace is difficult to define, as it is neither a physical space nor a “void”. The author defines cyberspace as “a metaphor that conjures up an image or an idea of the potential of information and telecommunication networks which are formed by computers linked by telecommunications.” files stored in cyberspace, while not literally, seem to be on an “invisible plane of reality”. These are not the only definitions, as it is also defined as a “bioelectric environment that is literally universal”, as well as a place where one is “transported” and “transformed” by cyberspace. The nature of the definitions seem contradictory, but what was agreed upon was that cyberspace is international, equally accessible from many countries all over the planet.

Like the Internet itself, it too was viewed as a limitless, unmoderated zone, free from anything from daily life. Though it is intangible, many view cyberspace as a “real place with real potentials”. It is viewed as a “new world”.

Cyberspace, etymologically, is taken from William Gibson’s book Neuromancer. In this 1984 book, cyberspace is defined as “something like flying over a vast city lit up at night,” with buildings replaced by geometric figures, which represent computer databases. These databases only referred to the corporate kind, as personal computers were not yet widely discovered. In fact, personal users were viewed as “poachers”, who could enter the database through the “tactile relationship” of the human body to the database. There is a different feel to the internet in Gibson’s book than is usually thought of in modern times. The personal versus corporate is viewed as a “David and Goliath struggle”. This thought process led to avatars and virtual reality—an “immersion” into cyberspace.

The authors settle on what they feel is a perfect explanation, by calling cyberspace a “collective hallucination.” They go on to explain that within everyone’s brain is where cyberspace lies. Together, the public perceives cyberspace and makes it a world as real as the actual world. Paul Virillo argues his point that cyberspace distorts reality, calling it a “new perspective”, rather than a “New World” that requires a new form of “tactile perspective”. Gibson, however, sticks to his thoughts that it is like a “city”, akin to a boundless city unlike the twentieth century and unlike the medieval walled city.

However, cyberspace seems politically neutral. It also seems to be more of a place where people meet than a group of people. It is unlike a city in that there is only one kind of meeting. The authors point out that if it is a city, only the most advanced and wealthy can go inside it, thus not making it truly a city. Further study on how cyberspace is governed will make this all clearer.

Summary: Unspun - Chapter 1 (Community)

Chapter 1 – Community

Community, as the writer of this chapter states, “very well may be the most powerful of the aspirations linked to the World Wide Web.” At first glance, the impersonal feel of the internet may put the user off, but the internet can be viewed as a complex network of friends. She compares the notion of the going to a neighbor’s for cookies to the very-different definition of “cookies” in the World Wide Web. Rather than being innocuous, these internet “cookies” are ways for companies to find out and exploit your personal information. Although some cookies are only utilized to make web-surfing easier for the user, the majority of them are mere ploys to attain money from the user-turned-consumer.

The internet is full of these paradoxes and the whole concept of the internet is contradictory as well. The pioneers and early users were seen as a “grassroots” network, but this initial idea of the internet gave way to the commercialism of the late nineties. These communities are vastly different, from a group of equals to a consumer/producer relationship.

Rheingold defines “virtual communities”, basically, as groups that are formed on public forums frequently enough to warrant a feeling of a personal relationship. The people who form these groups have no alliances to each other (unless on a privatized website) and form emotional bonds with their internet peers. Without these emotions, the concept of a virtual community collapses. It is also important to note the use of the word public. While there is a sense of community, the correspondence in these forums is open to the public, thus making it unlike true personal relationships.

The image and opinion of computers as a whole has changed from an imposing technology to the web that is known today. Through small groups like those who were at Berkeley built and developed new technology to take advantage of the wealth of potential that the internet held. The first “message board” was created to evoke community, but technological problems grounded this effort. The hardware and software had not yet adapted to the mindset of the first internet visionaries. However, this was only to be true for a short time, until “The Well” was developed. This, as well as the concept of “BBS” systems, was born through the connection of computers and modems. This brought the concept of the internet and the computer as a communication tool back to the forefront. While the BBS system was limited in content, The Well was home to a plethora of information and a vast variety of people. This was the first true internet community, in the closest sense of the original definition of a close-knit, emotional community. However, the anonymity of the internet still held true. This anonymity turned out to be a boon, as it concentrated on the ideas of the user and not the bodily characteristics, therefore facilitating dialogue between many different groups. The Well was not the idealistic sounding board like it seemed. Although it was “countercultural” in nature, the administrators of this system still managed to make a profit through cheap membership and promotional free accounts for journalists and people of that ilk.

It is not to say that the concept of these communities were not without their drawbacks. “Hacking” became a problem, making the once-secure message boards into messes. As a result, the internet saw the beginning of surveillance software that allowed the moderators a better handle on their property. The virtual community, unchecked, represented a “grassroots connection” that enhanced and allowed “new opportunities” for person-to-person communication.

In the ensuing years of the seventies and eighties, the average user would come face to face with a not-so-wholesome internet, where the past forms were replaced by dangerous and controversial items like pornography and things like that. For the average parental user, this new internet of profanity, teenage innuendo, and “drivel” made them recoil. It was during this time that the Web was at an all-time low and it did not resemble at all the original idea of community.

The original joys that came with anonymity was soon met with suspicion. The possibility of the dangerous unknown was palpable and the new websites were seen as a “corruption” of “community”. The advent of impersonators and online predators, added to the more violent avatars of the internet world, highlighted the lack of constraints that the internet used. Even the database of “LambdaMOO”, created as a true virtual community, was tainted by the profane and dirty influences of the no-restraint internet. Actions were taken and it was resolved, but it displayed what the internet had become, as opposed to The Well. It seemed like the Id had taken over and all the “baser” human instincts were coming to the forefront through this medium. The press jumped into action, eventually provoking Congress to take matters into its own hands in an effort to rein them in. The Web was no longer used to “transform society” and to change the perspectives and mindsets of the users to a higher plane, but was falling into a trap of pure degradation.

The measures of Congress were later overturned by the Supreme Court because they believed that the Internet should not be put at the same level as a community. The ideals that had fallen to the wayside were too “restrictive” for such a large and “inclusive” medium. Plus, the efforts of Congress to mediate backfired when it was brought to their attention that the measures that they were to take would jeopardize not only the “communication between adults”, but also the spread of commerce online. This would later lead to the e-commerce that had become part of the business world. Also, the whole idea of an internet community was turned around. Rather than utilize it for social means, the focus was put back on marketing and commerce. Hagel and Armstrong referred to it as “Community… converted into capital.” That meant, in addition to web services like AOL, each website had an opportunity to make money through the common thread.

This new thinking of “community” merited three major changes: local communities would use the Web for physical concerns, professionals could utilize the web to increase inter-departmental communication through databases and opinion boards, and a new concept of the individual-as-professional made it possible for technology like Amazon’s “user feedback” feature.

The commerce-driven view of the internet has been frowned upon by purists who believed the internet was still a grassroots movement. Still, the return to community-like dialogues is making a comeback and both commerce and personal efforts are co-existing. There is a person-to-person feeling again, with the advent of MP3s and quick communication between groups starting to make the internet what it was supposed to be. Although it still isn’t like a friendly neighborhood, the authors point out, the feeling of “being a part of something larger” does make its presence known.

Summary: Introduction to Unspun

UNSPUN: The Introduction

The World Wide Web is an ever-changing communicative force whose symbiotic relationship with different aspects of the human life – political, social, economical, and aesthetical – makes it a very powerful medium. Indeed, it has such a large place in the lives of those who utilize it. Those who use it will define it differently than one who is not familiar with it. Even the descriptions between users will vary, as each experience with the World Wide Web is different. The Internet is a prominent partner in other modern mediums like print and television and has changed the way that these mediums communicate with the public at large.

UNSPUN begins by asking the question: “what is the Web changing?” Besides the aforementioned change, the influence of the web is palpable. The authors of the introduction even go so far as to reference the amount of times the internet has “sparked a ‘revolution’.” Their reference is very accurate, considering that with every new online technology comes the claim that it will “revolutionize” the way we do things. Besides their example of online courses, other “revolutions” that have been introduced since the book was published include online banking and voice over IP technology.

Besides examining the effect of the Web on the world, the authors want to have the readers examine how language and the web influence each other and re-examine the opinions of the web that are brought by the reader to this book. Many who are not regular users of the web draw their opinions from the press, rather than personal experience. Before the advent of “e-commerce” and professional websites (both business and personal), the internet was seen as a place full of abysmal content, thanks to the press of the time. The positive sides of the online world were overshadowed by this harsh publicity and it wasn’t until the Web had made its way into the mainstream that the world wide web was viewed as a credible source of information.

Another reason why the internet is fascinating to the authors of the introduction is that the rhetoric associated with this medium is always changing, as is the jargon of this arena is constantly in flux, along with the technology that is developed for and from the World Wide Web. The question they pose is whether metaphors of the past, including “the information superhighway”, are as stale as the old versions of the Internet. Their aim is to portray the Web as a viable chameleon-like method of communication and showcase the many ways that the average person can use it in his or her life.