Module 2

This week’s module focused on participatory culture, virtual communities, and what it means to develop a public voice online. Reading Chapter 3 of Howard Rheingold’s Net Smart really expanded my understanding of how engagement in digital spaces isn’t just about clicking “like” it’s about becoming part of a community. Rheingold explains that participation helps shape digital culture, and that when we actively engage by creating content, responding to others, and contributing ideas, we’re not just using the internet. One part that stood out to me was Rheingold’s Power Law of Participation. It shows how online engagement ranges from low-level interactions like tagging and liking to high-level leadership actions like moderating or writing.  I realized that even though I scroll a lot and occasionally comment, I’m more of a lurker. To really participate, I need to be more intentional about joining conversations and contributing original content, especially as I build my blog. Rheingold’s description of a public voice versus a private one also felt relevant. When we post online, we’re entering a public space. That means our ideas should be backed by facts and consideration for others. Just having followers doesn’t mean we’re engaging publicly if we’re only talking about personal things. A public voice responds to its audience and considers its impact.

The article “Read the Room!” from Writing Spaces added to this by showing how platforms like TikTok operate as discourse communities. We gain influence not just by posting frequently, but by creating content that matches the platform’s style and audience expectations. That made me reflect on how tone and style matter just as much as what you say. You earn trust and attention when your content feels relevant and well-placed in the larger conversation. These ideas have made me rethink how I approach my own engagement online. If I want my blog to grow and feel meaningful, I have to move past passive consumption. I need to think about what others care about, how I can provide something useful, and how to respond when others join in. That’s how I’ll start becoming part of a virtual discourse community, not just an observer.

Dead Internet Theory, a pretty unsettling idea that much of the content we see online may actually be generated by bots or AI not real people. After watching Did Bots and AI Kill the Internet?, I learned that bots account for nearly half of all internet traffic, with one-third of those being "bad bots" designed to harvest personal data (Shao et al., 2018; Imperva, 2023). The theory suggests that a lot of what feels like online interaction could actually just be bots talking to other bots, which honestly makes me rethink some of the content I scroll past on social media.

The reading by Rudolph, Tan, & Tan (2023) explored how AI tools like ChatGPT are being both welcomed and banned in academic settings. Their key point is that AI shouldn’t replace learning it should support it. That stuck with me. It tends to be wordy, robotic, and often unoriginal. It’s helpful for checking grammar or generating ideas, but it can’t replace thoughtful writing or critical thinking. It also struggles with tone, structure, and nuance, which are the exact things that make digital content stand out.

What this week really drove home for me is that digital literacy now includes AI literacy. If we want to succeed as content creators or researchers, we have to know how to identify and ethically use AI tools. Just like with media literacy, this means understanding not just what content says, but where it came from and how it was made. If we want people to trust our blogs or engage with our work, we have to be honest about how it's made and take ownership of our writing.

For me, this means continuing to use my own voice in my blog while maybe using AI to brainstorm ideas or clean up phrasing. If everyone used AI to write, then everything would start to sound the same, and no one would stand out. 

Question to Consider:
Where do you see yourself on the Power Law of Participation? 

How do you feel when you realize something you’re reading or watching was created by AI?

Citations:

Rheingold, H. (2012). Net Smart: How to thrive online. MIT Press.
Driscoll, D. L., & Powell, J. (Eds.). (2012). Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing (Vol. 2). https://wac.colostate.edu/books/writingspaces2Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. C. (2023). ChatGPT: History, Issues, and Possibilities of AI in Education. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. C. (2023). ChatGPT: History, Issues, and Possibilities of AI in Education. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.08091

Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018). The spread of low-credibility content by social bots. Nature Communications, 9(1), 4787. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7
Imperva. (2023). Bad Bot Report. https://www.imperva.com/resources/resource-library/reports/2023-bad-bot-report/


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Module 1

This week focused on three core types of literacy that are essential in today’s digital environment: information literacy , digital literacy , and media literacy . Each of these plays a different but connected role in how we search for, evaluate, and use information online. In “Googlepedia: Turning Information Behaviors into Research Skills,” Randall McClure highlights how most students start their research with Google instead of academic databases. He writes that “nine out of every ten students begin the process of searching for information on the Web” (2011, p. 221), which shows why information literacy is more important than ever. Information literacy helps us identify what we need, find it effectively, evaluate it for accuracy and credibility, and use it responsibly. Digital literacy builds on this by adding the technical skills needed to navigate online tools and platforms. It includes everything from knowing how to search databases and use online collaboration tools to unde...
Read more

Module 3

This week we focused on digital authorship :  how writing online transforms not just the way we write, but who we are as writers. One idea that really stood out came from Sean Michael Morris, who wrote that “digital writing is action.” He explains that once something is written and shared online, it starts to move and evolve without the author’s control. Readers become part of the process, and authors don’t get to keep full control of what their words will mean or how they’ll be interpreted. That idea connects to Barthes’ Death of the Author , which basically argues that readers create meaning, not authors. It’s the audience’s job to interpret a text and digital writing makes that interaction even more visible. Blogs, for example, blur the line between writer and reader. In Adlington and Feez’s article, they explain how blog comments help shape future posts. In that way, readers actually co-author content. It made me think about how I’ve responded to online content before, and how...
Read more

Module 5

Image
This week focused on how digital writing can influence real-world change🌎. In Public Writing for Social Change , Holmes says that writing in the public sphere means being aware of what’s happening around you👀, social issues, politics, culture, and using that to create timely, relevant content. It’s not just about your message, but how it connects to people and invites them to act. Rheingold adds onto this idea by pushing us to be active participants online. Even small actions like liking a post or signing a petition, what some call clicktivism💬,  can lead to real offline engagement. Whether people call it lazy or not, it still spreads awareness and brings people into important conversations.🙀 We also learned about social capital , or the value we get from our connections. Bonding capital is about close relationships, bridging connects us with new people, and linking ties us to institutions. These networks, through platforms like LinkedIn, TikTok, or Change.org, can help us ac...
Read more