Assessment 3

Brave new world: Web 2.0

MECO 6936 Social Media Communication

Josh Byrne

SID: 312066570

The term ‘Web 2.0’ was popularised in 2004, being then defined as ‘a set of economic, social, and technology trends that collectively form the basis for the next generation of the Internet—a more mature, distinctive medium characterized by user participation, openness, and network effects’ (Musser & O’Reilly, 2007). The man who popularised the term Web 2.0, Tim O’Reilly, viewed in through the lens of business, describing it as a ‘transformative force that’s propelling companies across all industries toward a new way of doing business’ (Musser & O’Reilly, 2007). Of the eight ‘core patterns’ identified in the new Web 2.0 by O’Reilly one can be considered prophetic. O’Reilly (2007) argued that business would need to ‘engage users as co-developers and real-time testers’ extrapolating that ‘real-world user behavior provides a much more accurate model for assessing new product features than marketing requirements documents, prototypes, or any other form of non-production feedback’ and that ‘The nature of web-based applications and the creator’s ability to actively monitor how the software is used in the wild is a dramatic shift from the days of desktop software.’

fComparison of Web 1.0 vs Web 2.0

O’Reilly’s assessment is as true in 2004 as it is today. In their 2013 book Understanding Social Media Hinton and Hjorth echo O’Reilly’s assessment by arguing that Web 2.0 is the ‘transition of the internet into user-focused business models.’ These business models aim to commercialise the internet by creating strategies around the behaviour of internet users. Shuen (2008) discusses two definitions meanings at either end of the Web 2.0 spectrum, a technical definition states that internet architectures and technologies have ‘combined to trigger a phase transition—from a Web 1.0 collection of static web sites to a Web 2.0 platform for a new generation of dynamic social web applications and services’ to a more business orientated definition that describes Web 2.0 as a ‘a profitable path to growth and advertising-based monetization of network effects’ that could summarise Web 2.0 more accurately as ‘Web to wealth.’

Web 2.0’s commercialisation of the internet has only been achieved through the evolution of the internet’s capabilities, particularly in personalisation and content creation. The most influential player in Web 2.0, social media, provides users with the means to create and produce content. User created content and user generated content has enabled businesses the ability to profit from ‘the labour and creativity of internet users’ (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013). Therefore, one of the key characteristics of Web 2.0 is the ‘the transition of the internet into user-focused business models’ (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013).

The capabilities and commercialisation of Web 2.0 has raised concern over how users labour has been commodified and exploited for commercial purposes. In 2005 Livingstone wrote ‘the signs are growing that once-anarchic, perhaps emancipatory internet is subject to increasing attempts to privatise, commercialise, control and profit from the activities of consumers online’ (Livingstone, 2005). Eight years later the idea is still relevant as Hinton and Hjorth (2013) ask ‘are the users the subject of control, as their personal information and creative and cultural labour is monitored and commodified by social media companies?’ They go so far as to contextualise Web 2.0 within the ‘tension between control and freedom and between exploitation and empowerment.’ The ‘use or being used’ idea is here to stay as user generated content and user created content becomes more integrated with commercialisation and profit, as well as any individual or organisation seeking to use what is now one of the most powerful social and cultural currencies on the internet. Audiences have moved from being consumers of media to participants in it. Jenkins (2006) defines this participatory culture as ‘a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations, and some type of informal membership whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novices.’

Web 2.0 through the enabling social media and social networking sites has empowered individuals and organisations at the expense of traditional power structures and institutions. Anyone with an internet connection can now produce and reproduce content which has affected organisations such as media companies, whose monopoly over the creation and distribution of content is being challenged. The ubiquity of smart phones and power of Web 2.0 has given rise to ‘citizen journalism.’ The collection and dissemination of news content is extremely cheap, offering individuals and organisations the opportunity to create content that challenges and undermines traditional news media through the power of Web 2.0. This is evident in the worrying trend of ‘fake news’ as political agendas are pushed through the internet while traditional media systems struggle to be financially viable in the brave new online world of create-and-disseminate-your-own-content.

Social networking sites, of which Twitter and Facebook play a crucial role, have the power to harness the power of collective action and challenge social and political institutions. In 2011, The Arab Spring witnessed the fall of governments in North Africa and the Middle East. Howard (2011) analysed millions of social media posts during the Arab Spring, arguing that these social networking sites played an important role in canvassing support for the cause and acting as an organisational tool for dissenters. Indeed, Web 2.0 has the potential to serve as an interconnected locus of political activity, one that transcends geographical boundaries. In 2011, the global protest movement Occupy Wall Street used the internet as a virtual rallying point to highlight and protest the growing economic inequality in Western nations. While Howard (2011) does not believe that Facebook and Twitter were the direct catalyst for the Arab Spring, they invaluable in facilitating it.

For our presentation to the Sydney Conservatorium, we used user created content as a way of harnessing the internet cultural capital. The current set up is simplistic; posting time and dates to attract people to classical music concerts was insufficient. Instead we decided to use gifs, memes and social influencers to attract the attention of our audience (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013). Our approach, like businesses, harnesses the power of Web 2.0, particularly social media, as it is a ‘fundamentally a participative medium,’ echoing the ethos of Web 2.0 itself. The idea to use content that users would be familiar with was essential; memes and gifs we used had been circulating the internet long enough for our target audiences to identify but were reworked into a classical music context to help advertise the Con’s performances. Our approach was impossible without the capabilities of Web 2.0. As our target audiences are consumers of the internet’s content, liking, commenting, sharing etc.,  it is essential for our content to do the same.


Example of a meme used for the Con’s performances, made possibly only through the capacities of Web 2.0

Finally, as a reflection on the state of the Web 2.0 and its future, while its likely to witness more comprehensive systems of informational computation and potentially greater integration of off and online culture and social interaction, it will continue to change politics and influence, if not bypass institutional power structures. The 2016 Presidential election was heavily influence by Facebook and Twitter, serving to disseminate information, rally supports, attack the opposition and even spread ‘fake news.’ Donald Trump’s digital director Brad Parscale said ‘Facebook and Twitter were the reason we won this thing’ (Lapowsky, 2016). One of the online symbols of the Donald Trump supporters became the ‘Pepe the frog’ meme, an example of created content that served to promote the right-wing cause and since applied to the presidential election in France in support of right wing candidate Marine Le Pen. It is arguable that new political groups such as the ‘alt right’ could never have existed without Web 2.0 to promote its alternative news and gather support. The future of Web 2.0 is difficult to predict but it will undoubtedly have a significant impact on politics.


An example of ‘Pepe the frog,’ an alt right meme. Memes of Pepe the frog were circulated widely by right wing groups on Facebook and Twitter during the 2016 Presidential election.

Word Count: 1311


Hjorth, L., & Hinton, S. (2013). Understanding social media. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy’s fourth wave?: Digital media and the Arab spring. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lapowsky, I. “Here’s How Facebook Actually Won Trump The Presidency”. N.p., 2016. Web. 5 May 2017.

Lewis, D. (2006). What is web 2.0? Crossroads, 13(1), 3-3.

Livingstone, S. M. (2005). Audiences and publics: When cultural engagement matters for the public sphere. Bristol, England; Portland, Or;: Intellect.

Musser, J., & O’Reilly, T. (2007). Web 2.0: Principles and best practices. Sebastopol, Calif: O’Reilly Media.

Shuen, A. A. (2008). Web 2.0: A strategy guide. Sebastopol, Calif: O’Reilly Media.


Assessment 3 · Uncategorized

Locative Mobile Social Networks

Assessment 3 – Online Article
Zixiao Liu (SID: 450287495)
Instructor: Kai Soh, Tuesday 5-8 PM


With the representation of Facebook, social media has become an essential part of everyday life. As smart phones are increasingly, though unevenly adopted around the globe, mobile media has become an important portal for both social and locative media (Hinton & Hjorth, 2013). Smart phones provide not only easy access to the social media sites, but also functions including global positioning system (GPS), geo-tagging and Google Maps which have become an indispensable part nowadays.

Locative mobile media therefore gains popularity by using the technology. It not only provides the convenience for social media users a chance to get acquainted with people nearby, creates new kind of intimacy, redefines the meaning of place and space, but also boosts the emergence of locative and augmented mobile gaming industry.

The emergence of location service

Since 21st century, mobile phones are becoming increasingly location-aware, technological development such as GPS and tapping has empowered the device to use and share positioning data through a faster 3G/4G network, across space and between friends. Location service has become an indispensable part of social media, embedded by most Social networking sites and instant messaging applications, it casts considerable influence on the traditional definition of location and space.


Locative media applications start to emerge around 2002, as games and assistance to artist’s project (Tuters&Varnelis, 2006). In 2003, a Japanese game Mogi gained popularity when location-based services had been integrated into cell phones in 2001 (Grajski& Kirk, cited in Southern, 2003). It was a game where players collected geographically located tokens in popular locations and also allowing them to chat with users nearby.

Except the wide application to games and art projects, location-based service is gradually embedded on most social networking sites. Facebook cautious but deliberately launched their nearby service in December, 2012, an ambitious move that enables it to serve both as a local recommendation platform but also a mobile centred advertising portal (Wilken, 2014).

Whereas, in China, WeChat was designed and launched in 2011 and gradually set the location services by promoting People Nearby and Real-time location features. These features not only encourages people to share their location within a post or share, but also providing the convenience and potential to reach out to other users within a specific distance nearby.


Humphreys (2007, 2010) argued that mobile social network ultimately change the way participants engaged with and experienced the environment, adding a sense of familiarity to the original meaning of space and place. Applications and games in recent years take advantage of the surge of location service on smartphones, and attracts users to engage in an intriguing way.

Foursquare, which is designed by Dennis Crowley and Naveen Selvadurai in the late 2008, is a successful location-based social network that attracts 55 million people worldwide (About Foursquare, 2015). It combines the traditional gaming elements with the location service and coordinates various social interactions. Lefebvre (1991) demonstrated that space is understood as being socially constructed through use), by encouraging people to engage with public space to create new meanings. Therefore, foursquare has the potential to produce new understanding of place (Evens, 2014). However, there is still limitations to Foursquare, as Southern (2012) argued, it focuses majorly on the “check-in” function but neglect the journey to certain places. Locative Mobile Social Networks (LMSN), however, focus more on and in between, rather than the nodes. It is the journey, as also defined by Southern as “comobility”, that is where “both communications and sociology may benefit from artistic appropriations, interventions and experiments. (Southern, 2012)”


Proximity, Intimacy and People Nearby

LMSN has added new meanings to the notion of proximity. While nearness is related to the sense of closeness, familiarity and intimacy, distance is associated with strange and remoteness. However, the social media has changed this situation by breaking the actual geographic distance. Online social media exemplifies that social connections across vast geographical distances can be intimate. People nowadays, no matter young and old, create new forms of intimacy and different context of expressing intimacy through various technical platforms (Hinton &Hjorth, 2014).

Surprisingly though, study () shows that social interactions online often privilege relationships of lower social distance. Specifically, people would choose socially closer partners to work with even though they might not be the best choice for a partnership. When the social closeness intertwine with the geographic closeness, an application called Loopt created an alarming system which inform users when someone in their network is close to them, by notifying the distance between users and their friends online.

Online location-based applications certainly changed the traditional notion of closeness. Rather than “physical closeness which could fosters psychological closeness and mutuality” (Burgoon et al, 2002), location service creates cyber closeness through various LMSN platforms. Facebook and WeChat enables users to search and add new friends to their networks through distance-searching, while Tinder uses location service to search for friends and potential relationships nearby. Though the purposes of each platforms vary and unintentional they might be, they undoubtedly help users to build intimacy more easily.


Ingress and Pokémon Go- Locative Games

In recent years, as media follows the trends of mobilization and has become more playful by using geographic data, users increasingly interweave their everyday experience with virtual environment (Hjorth & Richardson, 2017).

Developed by Niantic, Ingress is a location-based, augmented-reality mobile game. In the game, players compete to capture and occupied the virtual portal situated in the real world locations in order to “control the world’. This game not only highlights the cultural significance of spaces but also add new meanings to it. For gamers who play Ingress, a church nearby means not simply a place where he prays, but also a valuable portal in the game.


Following the successful launch of Ingress, Niantic went on and created another location- based hybrid game by using the valuable Ingress location database. The popular game Pokémon Go has gained much attention over the first weeks of July, 2016. People from many countries downloaded the Pokémon Go application and entered an augmented reality. Users wonder around the neighborhood in search for rare Pokémon and compete with other players at the virtual gym.

Pokémon Go represents the playful turn in contemporary media culture, the omnipresence of location-based mobile media nowadays and the ongoing development of augmented media. The notion of ambient play is elaborated by Hjorth & Richardson (2014), which “mobile media create new modes of engagement that entangle attention and distraction.” Pokémon Go are undoubtedly ambient as they become a part of our daily routines, pedestrian movement and interaction with people around the neighborhood (Hjorth & Richardson, 2017).


While the game is recognized as a good experience, by connecting the virtual game with real life, encouraging users to do physical exercises and facilitating human to human interactions (Wawro, 2016). However, it is also vital to be aware of the downsides of these sorts of location-based games. It also generates debates from scholars concerning the risk, surveillance and privacy (Hjorth & Richardson, 2017). Pokémon gamers sometimes intrude into dangerous areas or private territories without permissions in order to catch rare Pokémon. Except for the risk, surveillance and privacy, locative mobile games may also cause people to generate the feelings of loneliness and inaccessibility (Bliss, 2016).

Application to our Campaign

Locative mobile media is to a certain extent helpful to our #bethefilter campaign. We ask our initial participants to take and post a photo with a banner of #bethefilter with their current locations tagged on the post. In this way, not only social media users nearby are more likely to see the post and the hash tag, but also enables us to create a map showing other potential participants that there are already many people who are from other parts of the world are into this and supports our campaign.


 Locative mobile social networking has been changing our perception of space and place by creating new orders of networks. While it create a new sense of network and intimacy, the location technologies enables the emergence of locative games which add playful elements to the notion of space and creates new interpretation of space.

It is hard to foresee what type of application and social implication which locative mobile media will creates, but critical analysis is always crucial in understanding the new technologies and its implications.


Word Count: 1423


Link to the Comment: addiction/comment-page-1/#comment-642



  • About Foursquare (2015) Available at:
  • Bliss, L. (2016, July 12). Pokémon GO has created a new kind of flâneur. The Atlantic City Lab. Retrieved from baudelaire/490796/
  • Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A. J., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002). Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 657- 677.
  • Hinton, S. &Hjorth, L. (2013). Social, locative and mobile media. In Understanding social media (pp. 120-135). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Hjorth, L., & Richardson, I. (2014). Gaming in social, locative and mobile media. Basingstoke, U.K: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Hjorth, L., & Richardson, I. (2017). Pokémon GO: Mobile media play, place-making, and the digital wayfarer. Mobile Media & Communication, 5(1), 3-14.
  • Humphreys, L. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12(5), 763-778.
Assessment 3 · Social Media Communication


Assessment 3 – Online Article
Eloise Lennen-Rodriguez (SID: 460443777)
Instructor: Cherry Baylosis, Thursday 6-9PM
Word Count: 1,462

Have you ever seen an ad that tugged at your heartstrings? That made you angry or happy or sad? That made you think and feel? If yes, try to remember the reason it might’ve made you have that reaction. It’s likely due to an experience you had, or that it touches upon something you have a personal involvement in, something you’re passionate about. Though our experiences are unique, there is a commonality that unites them (and us) all: the emotions they generate. Now, you’re probably wondering why I’m asking you about this. As an undergraduate student, my degree focused on strategic design and business management which, simply put, taught me the role design played in a business’ success within creative industries like advertising. This led me to take special interest in the way brands market themselves to the public; analyzing them more critically, trying to understand why consumers make the choices they do daily. Especially now, in the age of the internet, things are moving fast and it’s becoming increasingly important for brands to create significant relationships with their audience to convert them into customers. So, how did they manage to stay relevant?

IMAGE 1 – “Marlboro Man” print ad (source: Middlebury College)

If you think of it, an easy way companies have found to foster relationships is to build upon already existing ones. Nowadays this can be quite easy due to the prevalence of algorithms which track your every online move allowing them to anticipate your likes, needs and wants. Yet, using trends as a marketing tool to sell products is not a proprietary formula unique to the post-internet era. In the 1950s, Marlboro called upon the universal appeal of an all-American cowboy to mold the symbol of their ‘Marlboro Man’ persona and make smoking cool (“The Marlboro Man”). In the 1980s, arguably one of the most iconic television commercials ever aired was Apple’s ‘1984’ ad produced for the Super Bowl that same year. After failing miserable during market research testing (and ignoring the results), Apple allegedly garnered around $US150 million worth of free advertising from the minute-long clip that didn’t even show its product (Taube). Its strength? Playing on George Orwell’s classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, originally published in 1949. In a Forbes article discussing the ad’s commercial triumph with industry experts, Bart Cleveland, then creative director at McKee Wallwork & Cleveland, explained:

“It speaks to people intelligently by not saying too much. It doesn’t try too hard to be amazing. It is truth. It took the truth that Orwell shared decades earlier and applied it to our future. Our freedom. In 60 seconds it made you root for the underdog, which you realize is you. (Smith)

Here, Cleveland reflects on what he saw as Apple’s success in their approach; taking something familiar from the past and using it to make a point relevant to the audience’s future. It became personal, relatable, attainable.

VIDEO 1 – ‘1984’ Apple’s Macintosh Commercial (source: YouTube)

 Today, with the advent of social media, there is a cornucopia of content readily available to brands, online. They focus on what has amassed viewership and, more importantly, engagement, using analytics to support its value. Whether it’s a phrase, image, hashtag, gif or video, this content’s purpose derives from being distributed and altered by those sharing it. This concept should sound familiar to you because Richard Dawkins, an author and academic specialized in evolutionary biology, unintentionally defined this phenomenon before it was adopted by the web-browsing masses who now know it simply as a ‘meme’.

In 2013, a piece called ‘Just for Hits’ was developed by advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi featuring Dawkins performing a monologue explaining what a ‘meme’ is; a term he had originally coined in his 1976 bestseller, The Selfish Gene (Hinton and Hjorth, p484). During the performance Dawkins reveals how, in his work, he compared memes to genes depicting them as “viruses of the mind” which spread through culture similarly to the way genes spread through the gene pool. Both having the capability of withstanding the test of time due to their capacity for being shared (Saatchi & Saatchi). The piece becomes most relevant when Dawkins goes on to explain the evolution of the ‘internet meme’ specifically, as these weren’t around when he first developed the terminology:

“[…] the very idea of the meme has itself mutated and evolved in a new direction: an ‘internet meme’ is a hijacking of the original idea. Instead of mutating by random chance before spreading by form of Darwinian selection, internet memes are altered deliberately by human creativity. In the hijacked version, mutations are designed not random, with the full knowledge of the person doing the mutating.” (Saatchi & Saatchi).

Here Dawkins expands on the idea that the key characteristic of memes, including internet ones, is their aptitude to spread through human culture “infecting” it. In addition to this, internet memes also possess the particularity of having been given a creative reinterpretation by users who engage with them (Saatchi & Saatchi).

Frequency with which social networking users share content as of June 2014.png
TABLE 1 – Frequency with which social networking users share content as of June 2014  (source: Statista)
Distribution of global social content sharing activities as of 2nd quarter 2016, by social network.png
TABLE 2 – Distribution of global social content sharing activities as of 2nd quarter 2016, by social network (source: Statista)
Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 4th quarter 2016 (in millions).png
TABLE 3 – Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 4th quarter 2016 (in millions) (source: Statista)

To better understand the practice of online content sharing, we can look at data compiled by Statista which found that 59% of SNS users said they shared content at least half the time or more (TABLE 1). Additionally, Statista found Facebook led as the platform of choice with 57% of content sharing activity happening on the social network behemoth followed by Twitter with just 18% hosted there (TABLE 2). These stats aren’t that surprising when looking at the steady rise of monthly active Facebook users which went from 100 million in 2008 to 1.86 billion by the end of 2016 (TABLE 3). As the preferred SNS site globally, it makes sense for it to be the platform where this engagement is concentrated. Yet, it’s important to also look past the significance of these numbers in the present day; what we can also take away from these statistics is how significantly online communication has transformed in a relatively short time. The World Wide Web is still quite a young technology that was introduced to the public less than 30 years ago, in the early 1990s (Hinton and Hjorth, p8). Many entrepreneurs saw the web’s potential as a space of boundless connectivity and, therefore, its chances of becoming a goldmine, quickly making it the latest frontier businesses aimed to conquer and capitalize on. However, even with that foresight, many failed to understand the organic purpose of the web. As Hinton & Hjorth point out in Understanding Social Media: “[…] there was an underlying lack of interest in actually attempting to understand how people were using the internet, and how this affected business models that were still treating internet users like TV audiences” (Hinton and Hjorth, p13).

This very one-dimensional understanding of an infinitely more complex space stemmed from the complacency of companies’ strategic approach towards this new platform and was ultimately their undoing (Hinton and Hjorth, p15). That version of the web, retrospectively dubbed ‘Web 1.0’, was made static and constricted by the traditional business models applied to it. The dotcom crash of the early 2000s was definitive proof of its unsustainable nature (Hinton and Hjorth, p15). Still, the fall of Web 1.0 was not the end of the web altogether ultimately leading to the rise of Web 2.0; its coming of age as a space “[…] more concerned with providing users with the means for producing and distributing content” (Hinton and Hjorth, p18). This web revolution allowed users to contribute to what they were experiencing online, forcing businesses to stop approaching it from the top down and admit to a redistribution of power.


 However, this power shift cannot be considered a complete democratization of the web. As an article from Ad Age pointed out: “if content is king, its metadata is heir to the throne” and owning that metadata is the key to “measure, monetize, and create long-term engagement opportunities with customers” (Hunegnaw). This logic has influenced companies to turn to memes as the barometer of existing cultural trends, to inspire the campaigns which they produce; the ideal outcome being a something that becomes part of the zeitgeist. But, regardless of the popularity of a certain movement online, this is not always a guarantee. The grassroots nature of internet memes accurately demonstrates the two primary characteristics of Web 2.0 as they incorporate User Generated Content (UGC) where users simply share content made by others, as well as User Created Content (UCC), where content is made by users (Hinton and Hjorth, p17); UCC being particularly impactful as it highlights how “[…] in networked communication environments the audience are no longer simply consumers of the media: they have become participants.” (Hinton and Hjorth, p17). A failure to understand memes as more than a thoughtless act of participation is an important part of strategic planning that businesses cannot overlook, regardless of metadata. Pepsi is a recent example of a brand suffering backlash after airing a TV ad featuring Kendall Jenner misappropriating protest culture (Wong). Their tone-deaf approach to millennial political engagement missing the mark and further underlining the importance of understanding memes’ value as content shared and customized without forgetting their purpose as an embodiment of current cultural capital.

Comparison of Pepsi’s ‘Live Now’ TV ad to a photo taken of Ieshia Evans during a Black Lives Matter protest in Louisiana1208525.jpgIMAGE 2 (source: Dazed)


Cafolla, Anna. “Pepsi’S Protest-Themed Ad With Kendall Jenner Faces Backlash”. N.p., 2017. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

Hinton, Sam, and Larissa Hjorth. Understanding Social Media. 1st ed. Los Angeles, CA [etc.]: SAGE, 2013. Print.

Hunegnaw, David. “The Future Of User-Generated Content Is Owned”. N.p., 2017. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

Saatchi & Saatchi. Just For Hits – Richard Dawkins. 2013. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

Smith, Jacquelyn. “Experts And Viewers Agree: Apple’s ‘1984’ Is The Best Super Bowl Ad Of All Time”. N.p., 2012. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

Solon, Olivia. “Richard Dawkins On The Internet’s Hijacking Of The Word ‘Meme'”. N.p., 2013. Web. 26 Apr. 2017

Taube, Aaron. “Apple Changed Super Bowl Advertising Forever 30 Years Ago Today, But Its ‘1984’ Ad Almost Didn’t Make It On The Air”. N.p., 2014. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

“The Marlboro Man”. N.p., 1999. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.

IMAGE 1: Silcoff, Matt. “Marlboro Man | The Evolution Of Cigarette Advertising”. N.p., 2015. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

IMAGE 2: Wong, Julia. “Pepsi Pulls Kendall Jenner Ad Ridiculed For Co-Opting Protest Movements”. N.p., 2017. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

TABLE 1: “Frequency With Which Social Networking Users Share Content As Of June 2014”. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

TABLE 2: “Most Famous Social Network Sites Worldwide As Of April 2017, Ranked By Number Of Active Users (In Millions)”. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

TABLE 3: “Number Of Monthly Active Facebook Users Worldwide As Of 4Th Quarter 2016 (In Millions)”. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

VIDEO 1: YouTube. 1984 Apple’s Macintosh Commercial. 2012. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

VIDEO 2: YouTube. Kendall Jenner for PEPSI Commercial. 2017. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. (link:

Assessment 3 · Social Media Communication

Social Media, Social Networking Sites, and Users.

By Marlesha Havea (SID: 470308462)
Tutor: Kai Soh, Wednesdays 5-8pm

Social Networking Sites and Social Media have shifted the way in which individuals, groups, communicate and engage with each other. It has also been taken up by businesses in many ways, perhaps most importantly as a vessel for marketing. The power and sheer size of this new communication sphere begs the question; Are we using Social Media or are we being used by social media? Before unpacking this question, clarification is needed regarding the difference between Social Media and Social Networking Sites, who is using them and how. For the purpose of this article we will be  using the following definitions provided by Social Media Today (Social Media Today, 2015):

Social Media: forms of electronic communication (as Web sites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (as videos).

Social Networking: the creation and maintenance of personal and business relationships especially online.

So who is using them? In 2015, the United Nations reported that the world’s population was over 7.3 billion people (United Nations, 2015). According to Statista, over 2.3 billion people actively used Social Media in 2016, that’s a staggering 31% of the world’s population (Statista, 2017).

In that same year, over 79% of Australians had access to the internet and 68% of those internet users had a social media profile (Sensis, 2016). The top five Social Networking Sites in Australia are Facebook with 16 million users, YouTube with over 14 million active users, WordPress has 5.1 million users, Instagram 5 million, and Tumblr with just over 4 million (Cowling, 2017).

What does it mean to use Social Media?

An adequate answer to this question would include explorations of key concepts such as community formation, self representation, and intimate publics.

In a time where people spend almost two hours a day on Social Media, (Sensis, 2016) Social Networking Sites have become an acceptable form of establishing, maintaining, and strengthening relationships. Users are most likely to use and communicate regularly on Social Networking Sites in an attempt to strengthen their existing offline ties with friends, family and coworkers (Haythornthwaite and Wellman’s 1998). In a recent Australian study, 49% of participants said that social networking is one of the first things they check each day and this behaviour has been growing steadily since 2012 (Sensis, 2016). Just like the transition from writing letters to calling landlines to sending a text, social media is a reflection of our time and it is another platform for users to connect with their friends and family.

This American Life podcast below explores some of the reasons why people interact on social media and it’s importance to them.

At its most fundamental level, Social Networking Sites allow users to create some kind of online presence and articulate that with others (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013). It’s now a place where people can express themselves freely wherever they are, in any way they want, and whenever they want. Users also have the power to create their own online identity and carefully curate the self image they portray to others. Someone can choose to represent themselves authentically online or invent an entirely different persona. This is typified by the MTV Show Catfish which investigates online dating.

Social Media platforms have also played a vital role in recent, largely offline, social movements such as Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. Individuals from across the world are able to connect with others who share similar views on social and political issues, and create genuine bonds through their shared passion. Community formation through social media, particularly for the Black Lives Matter revolutionary civil-rights movement, allowed individuals from all across the world to bond over their collective disgust at racial inequalities as well as their common goal to correct institutional racism. Through the power of organised protests and social media, people were forced to acknowledge the inequality, racism and abuse African Americans face. The sharing of stories and footage using the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media sparked national and international attention. The online movement empowered people from all across the world to stand in solidarity and show their support, organising extra-institutional protests in major cities.


Are we Being Used by Social Media?

When thinking about whether or not we’re being used by social media, the concept of digital marketing needs updating to incorporate the intricacies of online algorithms and the potential issues of only being shown information on our feed that we ‘like’.

The Facebook algorithm is complex both technically and philosophically. It allows users to grow and personalise it based on what they like, click, read, and watch. This personalisation creates a unique content bubble also known as the filter bubble for all of it’s 1.86 billion active users (Facebook, 2017). This means there is effectively a limiting of information, thoughts, and content that the algorithm determines you may not like. However, this also limits potentially new information that could challenge or broaden your worldview. For example, if during the US Presidential election of last year, your political views and therefore your engagement with content fell in line with Donald Trump, Facebook’s algorithm recognises this and reduces the number of pro Hillary Clinton posts in your feed. This further complicates the process of differentiating between genuine media generated news and the now infamous ‘fake news’. Users who express their views through active participation on social media run the risk of being left only talking to likeminded people, sharing the same content, and living their online lives inside their own personalised, algorithmic, filter bubble.

Relying on this same type of algorithms, social media is now another sphere within which we are marketed to. In 10 years, active Social Media users have grown increased from 970 million to 2.14 billion (Statista, 2017). This 45% growth has meant that marketers cannot ignore the power that online communities possess, as fertile space for their content, messaging, and products. Facebook allows businesses to target specific posts to their desired audience by using paid functions that identify users gender, age, location, workplace, relationship status, interests, and more. Unbeknownst to most users, Social Networking Sites are utilised as marketing tools for business in the same way that TV ads, radio promos, and print covers have for generations. These online platforms utilise user information to generate profit from digital marketers. This new form of business through digital marketing combined with the potential for filter bubbles presents a potential dilemma for the modern consumer around the very nature of their online activity.

Eli Pariser gives a great Ted Talk about his understanding of the ‘Filter Bubble’:

So what does all of this mean?

It’s clear that there needs to be more transparency with digital marketing and further education about filter bubbles. Although the information exists it’s not easily accessible. Facebook is becoming one of the most popular sources of news for young people (Media Insight, 2015) and Digital Influencers are the new trendsetters of the 21st century. However, as long as the internet is open source, with unrestricted access, users are able to do their own research, to fact check, and can construct their own meaning from the wealth of information that exists online.

Taking into consideration the privacy concerns, seamless digital marketing, the filter bubble, community formation through social media, and self representation, (Hinton and Hjorth, 2013) presents a strong case that Social Media is fundamentally a participative medium. Without user participation it loses its lifeblood and purpose. Whether people participating online are using Social Media for their own ends, or whether they are generating data for digital marketers, users ultimately have the choice to opt in and/or out of these platforms. So long as the user maintains their autonomy over this choice, the power lies in their hands as users of social media.

For example, in a 2015 study 32% of Australian internet users reported that they never use social media and 12% said that was because of Security or privacy concerns (Sensis, 2016). Social media depends on user participation and would cease to exist without it. At face value this places users in charge of this power dynamic, however with invisible algorithms and constant changes to data storage and privacy settings, users must be by-and-large self-informed and reminded of their agency.


Ad Week. (2015). Survey: Many Users Never Read Social Networking Terms of Service Agreements. [online] Available at: [Accessed 18 Apr. 2017].

Baym, N. (2012). Fans or Friends? Seeing Social Media Audiences as Musicians Do. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 9(2), 286 – 316.

Cowling, D. (2017). Social Media Statistics Australia. [online] Social Media News. Available at: [Accessed 28 Apr. 2017].

Dijck, J. v. (2013). Facebook and the Imperative of Sharing The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Facebook. (2017). Company Info | Facebook Newsroom. [online] Available at: [Accessed 20 Apr. 2017].

Hinton, S. and Hjorth, L. (2013). Understanding social media. 1st ed. Los Angeles, CA [etc.]: SAGE.

Instagram. (2017). 700 million. [online] Available at: [Accessed 25 Apr. 2017].

Media Insight. (2015). How Millennials Get News: Inside the Habits of America’s First Digital Generation. [online] Available at: [Accessed 26 Apr. 2017].

Sensis. (2016). Sensis Social Media Report 2016. [online] Available at: [Accessed 18 Apr. 2017].

Snapchat. (2017). Ads • Snapchat. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 Apr. 2017].

Social Media Today. (2015). 5 Biggest Differences between Social Media and Social Networking. [online] Available at: [Accessed 26 Apr. 2017].

Statista. (2017). Global daily social media usage. [online] Available at: [Accessed 29 Apr. 2017].

Statista. (2017). Number of worldwide social network users. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Apr. 2017].

Twitter. (2017). About Us. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 Apr. 2017].

United Nations. (2015). World Population Prospects. [online] Available at: [Accessed 21 Apr. 2017].

We Are Social Australia. (2016). TRENDS REPORT: JUNE 2016 – We Are Social Australia. [online] Available at: [Accessed 17 Apr. 2017].

YouTube. (2017). Statistics – YouTube. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Apr. 2017].

Assessment 3 · Online Communities

Facebook Communities

By: Malinda Hadiwidjojo 460288581
Lecture: Fiona Andreallo, Thursday 12-3pm

In this essay, we will lightly touch on the explanation behind online communities, before looking at three examples to attest how distinctive these communities can be. Furthermore, we will elaborate the rules and guidelines online.

In their book, Hinton and Hjorth (2013) stated that Howard Rheingold popularised the idea of virtual communities back in 1993. His book mentioned that online communities were seen as escapism from the real world – a social isolation – but many saw its potential to be a new space for social interaction. A research conducted by Preece et al. (2003) discussed that over the years, the amount of users in online communities increased tremendously. They mentioned that ‘the internet provides virtual “third places” that allow people to hang out and engange in activities with others’.

Just like in the offline world there are countless of different communities available online, catered to each interest and serving various purposes accordingly, which brings us to the next part: examples of Facebook communities.


Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.18.22 PM.png
Figure 1 Catspotting group on Facebook

Catspotting is a closed group on Facebook where members can share cats that they encountered in unexpected places, or ‘catspot’ as they call it. It is unclear when it started but as of today, the group has nearly 93,000 members globally, all sharing a common interest: cats.

Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.19.23 PM.png
Figure 2 Post by member Jordan Schuelzke

Due to its growing audience and interest around it, the group has branched out onto Instagram where they post the best catspots, now with over 1,900 followers and a post count hitting almost 500.

Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.21.05 PM.png
Figure 3 Catspotting’s Instagram page (@officialcatspotting)

Although the group is specifically for catspots, it is not uncommon for some members to ask questions about cats when they do not know where to go, for instance on how to take care of a stray kitten that they just rescued and are planning to keep. With so many passionate cat lovers, experienced owners, and vets within the group, it is rare for these questions to go unnoticed and ignored – everyone provides answers and guidelines to someone who needs it. Unfortunately, an example of this situation cannot be provided since similar posts have been buried under the multiple posts that have been shared.

Jakarta Feminist Discussion Group (JFDG)

Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.25.05 PM.png
Figure 4 JFDG group on Facebook

In a country where feminism is still considered taboo by many due to rising conservatism in the majority of the population alongside the society’s strong patriarchal mindset (Sidarto 2017), JFDG was created as a safe space where its members can discuss and share feminist issues. As of today, the closed group has 1,800 members based in and/or from Jakarta that makes it a more local community compared to Catspotting. Some members knew each other offline whereas many became friends through this group.

Members participate in the exchange by sharing articles, videos, images, Facebook posts, and so on, which can spark discussion within the group. With this group’s purpose, users can speak their mind and debate healthily; something that can be difficult to execute in random internet spaces where the possibility of not being taken seriously by ‘trolls’ is high.

Their interaction is not limited to within the internet – it is not uncommon for them to conduct events such as meet-ups and book clubs where members can get together in real life.

Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.26.33 PM.png
Figure 5 A list of their past events

what if phones, but too much

Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.27.32 PM.png
Figure 6 what if phones, but too much group on Facebook

This group was created under a much lighter intention than JFDG that is sharing images that shun technology, particularly phones (although computers and social media are also acceptable), which they find funny. Sometimes they post satirical memes as well. At the moment, the group almost has 14,500 members.

Unlike the previous Facebook communities, there is not much discussion going on in this group because they simply bond over technology-hating memes. From observation, there are two main reasons why the members find humour in these posts:

  1. Irony – the people behind the illustrations and memes share their post in social media, complaining about social media and smartphones, through their smartphones (or other devices they may utilise).
  2. Technology will never stop growing no matter how hard humans try, but many are still stuck in the idea that their generation is the best due to the lack of internet use they were exposed to when they were younger, hence the technology-hating memes.
Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 10.28.20 PM.png
Figure 7 A meme shared by member Zane Raptor Zepik

Though these communities serve vastly distinctive purposes, they are established because of the same reason: common interest, similar to how communities in real life are formed. In these groups, it does not matter if a member would like to remain anonymous – it is not unusual for someone to create a fake Facebook or social media profile without intending to scam others, but simply to preserve their privacy – but rules and community guidelines still apply, just like in the offline world, although it is clearly stated unlike in real life where it is merely assumed.

In their book ‘Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design’, Kraut et al. (2012) mentioned that there are four elements that regulate online behaviour, which are laws, norms, markets, and technology. They also stated that when an off-topic conversation arises, people are less likely to insist to talk about it in its original post when it is redirected to a more appropriate forum. In Catspotting’s case, when someone posts their own cat, administrators or other members often point them to another relevant group after reminding them of the rules.

When members violate these rules and sometimes even upset others in the process, administrators of the group remind the person of the rules and disable comments for the inappropriate post, or even deleting it. This proves that even online, there are consequences to an action that should be taken seriously.

Application to social media project

The idea of how virtual communities bring people together (online and offline) was applied to our social media project where we aimed to attract a younger audience to attend the Greenway Series at the Con.

Our strategies revolved around how to create more user engagement across the Con’s social media networks (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube), which included sharing of tasteful images and funny memes, directly interacting with audience by replying to their comments, using open-ended questions to spark a discussion, and implementing hashtags to generate more exposure.

When the strategies are successfully executed, a community is formed, thus more people go to the Greenway Series. Although the goal of the project is achieved, there is no reason to terminate the strategies because it is important to maintain the objective.


Hinton, Sam, & Hjorth, Larissa. (2013). Social Network Sites Understanding Social Media (pp. 32 – 54). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Kraut, Robert E., Kiesler, Sara, Resnick, Paul. (2012). Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design. Cambridge Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Preece, Jenny, Maloney-Krichmar, Diane, Abras, Chadia. (2003) History and emergence of online communities.

Sidarto, Linawati. (2017) ‘Feminism in Indonesia is under siege by Muslim conservatives’. The Jakarta Post.

Assessment 3 · Uncategorized

Reduce Antipathy: User Generated Content and Advertisement Avoidance


MECO 6936 Assignment 3
Yan Zeng 460192163
Cherry Baylosis Thursday 18:00 – 21:00


The emergence of new media, such as social media platforms and video sharing websites, along with their emphasis on participation have changed the way we communicate. With the popularization of internet and mobile terminal equipment like a smart phone, we now are capable of sharing information to the whole society without limitation of time or distance. The UGC (user generated content) phenomenon then arise, users now are no longer simply consumers but also become a part of the original material as a media producer (Hinton & Hjorth, 2013). Due to its characteristic of second spreading, it soon attracts attention from academic researcher and advertising agency. However, the requirement of a dedication of time and other forms of capital (Hinton & Hjorth, 2013), it is not easy to arouse the enthusiasm of user to take part in generating content.

In this article, I will argue that when user’s psychological reactance degree towards advertisement reduces, they will tend to be more agreeable to generate related content of a campaign.

Advertisement Avoidance

“This is obviously a marketing campaign!”


That’s what most of the consumers will think of towards an advertisement. Why ordinary consumer dislike commercial campaign so much even when there are wrong about them? For example, when intermediaries post something ‘sponsored’ on their social media account, there will be some other users, usually, their followers accusing them of taking money for posting on comment. People dislikes this kind of behavior is not because they are illegal or unethical, but most of those commercial campaigns evoke a disgusting feeling called psychological reactance. It occurs in response to threats to perceived behavioral freedoms, some commercial campaigns take your freedom in a way you that think is unreasonable. In the intermediaries example, it will be taking your right to read posts that you truly care for. Psychological reactance towards advertisement and marketing is ‘advertisement avoidance’ (Specks & Elliot, 1997).

Scenario Task Setting

Cho & Cheon (2004) come up with a theoretical model, in which they consider ad avoidance can be caused by perceived goal impediment. When consumers are using the internet, they are usually goal-directed, and online ads might interrupt their goal. It will cause negative attitude towards the ad or even the brand it shows. Russell’s study in 2002 of the effectiveness of product placements in television shows showed that while incongruency between modalities and TV shows’ plots connection improves audience’s memory, congruency enhances persuasion.

The sudden appearance of ads usually interrupts what we are doing under a specific context, even when it is related to something we like and feel passionate too. Imagine you are concentrated on computer games, your partner comes along and put a plate of your favorited fruit in front the screen. You might still be annoyed by that since it interrupted what you are trying to achieve, which is winning the game.

img_0496         20150515162019_63840

(@Tastemade in Instagram shares cooking short videos for people to learn or just enjoy)

(A Chinese movie use leading man’s picture and tone to create an ad like a personal talk)

Therefore, in order to lower the degree of interruption, the most effective way to decrease consumer’s negative attitude towards an online campaign or advertisement, is making them more alike to what they are trying to achieve under the circumstances. That means we need to set up the campaign base on the scenario task of a consumer. For example, if we are going to run our campaign on Instagram, eye-catching short videos and fun posters will be more effective than plain words. Chinese social media application Wechat has a function called Moments, in which you can share and get access to accepted WeChat friends’ information. Under this scenario, the tones of many successful campaign and ads are like one of your friend sharing his or her personal feelings with you. In this case, users tend to pay attention to the information and respond to it. It can also explain why Ali pay always fail to build a social network within their own application, since consumer opens the app only try to manage their financial matters, at this point if a social ad jumps in, it is very possible that they will have a strong aversion towards the advertisement.

Admit Your Flaws

After conducting two experiments on the ‘overheard’ communication, Walster and Festinger (1962) raised three possible factors that “have been generally presumed to make overheard communications more effective”. Compactly saying, they are: listener’s defence is not prepared, listener is not supposed to hear it, and most importantly, speaker does not know the listener is there, which means as they are speaking, they are not intending to persuade the listener.


It is actually another reflection of psychological reactance, similarly, in a marketing campaign, if consumers get a sense that the campaign or ad is trying to manipulate their behavior, they will have a feeling that they are losing control of their own decision. To solve this problem, many ads choose not to emphasize their advantages blindly but also admit their flaws to let consumer reach their own decisions. Avis Car Rental was the second-biggest car rental company in the US in 1962, the ad agency Doyle Dane Bernbach tailored a catchword for Avis based on that: “When you’re only No. 2, you try harder”. It achieved an almost instant hit, within a year, Avis went from losing $3.2 million to earning $1.2 million.

Find A Right Reason

As advertisement will reduce the sense of control of the consumer, and evoke a feeling of being interrupted, even we assimilate them as their original goal, they still exist. Therefore, a right reason for the interruption will be very necessary. There are three kinds of reason that can be offered under circumstances like this, the first one is exchanging benefit. In Wechat, there are thousands of official accounts run by individual or organization to publish articles and posts for users. For those who have credibility and influence, there will be a button down their articles for a reader to tap and complete a transaction. Sometimes to increase their revenue, authors of articles will tell their readers that they will like to be rewarded by money for writing the post. This is like a reminder for the readers, that they gain information through their posts, then they should pay the author in return.


(WeChat page will jump from left to the right one for users to select money amount after clicking the red reward button on the left one)

The second one will be related information, if an ad is designed as it includes information that will benefit the consumer and reduce the sense of disgust. Take many bank advertisements as examples, instead of dephasing bank ranking or quality of the service, they will tend to create a message like: “Hard to get a loan? Interest rate from 0.1% for $100000!” In this way, it will give them a feeling that the ad can help them in a way and make it much easier for a consumer to accept the information. Moreover, since ads are designed to interrupt consumers if we could offer an ‘it can make the world a better place’ reason, the consumer might be more tolerated to them, like those donation campaigns raised by fast food giants such as KFC and McDonald’s.



Related to #BeTheFilter

When our group tries to launch the BeTheFilter campaign on social networks, is it obvious to us that we need to produce our seeding content as what people might be happy to see at platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. After marking the scenario clear, we then decided to create a short video within 90 seconds, and as prank clips are popular on social media, we also decided to make the video towards the ‘prank’ direction. Besides adding humor into our posts to draw users attention, we also thought about how to encourage them to generate similar content for this campaign. Due to the nature of the BeTheFilter, we placed particular emphasis on ‘finding the right reason’ step, since the aim of our campaign is to stop the wide spreading of rumor and detect misinformation, which will benefit users themselves and the atmosphere of social media and the whole society.


Speck, P. S., & Elliott, M. T. (1997). Predictors of advertising avoidance in print and broadcast media. Journal of Advertising, 26(3), 61-76.

Cho, C. H., & as-, U. O. T. A. A. I. A. (2004). Why do people avoid advertising on the internet?. Journal of advertising, 33(4), 89-97.

Hinton, S. & Hjorth, L. (2013). Participation and User Created Content. Understanding Social Media (pp.55-76). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Russell, C. A. (2002). Investigating the effectiveness of product placements in television shows: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and attitude. Journal of consumer research, 29(3), 306-318.

Walster, E., & Festinger, L. (1962). The effectiveness of “overheard” persuasive communications. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65(6), 395-402

Assessment 3 · Uncategorized

Mobile Media and Teen’s Social Media Use

Assignment 3 Online Article

Name: Qinwen Li

SID: 470083787

Tutorial Time: Thursday 9-11a.m., Ms Fiona Andreallo


As Boyd Danah (2012) wrote, it is really hard to count how many hours exactly one is online everyday within 24 hours because one could search the wikipedia while having dinner or could check Twitter when wakes up in the midnight. Not mention the Sensis Social Media Report (2015) of Australia shows that there are over 52% of Australians using Internet more than 5 times a day and 79% of Australians access the Internet daily. Surprisingly, the numbers are rising fast in 2016, especially in daily access. The problem is these online time is random and objective, which couldn’t be count in the same way as we count one’s sleep time. It gives Boyd a feeling that we are now living in an always-on lifestyle. What contributes to the blur between online and offline is obviously the Web 2.0, which is push forward by The cheap processors, cheap network and cheap sensors together. Among them, the popularity of mobile terminals like smartphones helps mobile media become one of the most significant styles of social media.

Retrieved from Sensis database:

According to Duggan and Brenner(2013), the proportion of teen’s usage online is raised rapidly through the years. The Internet play an important role in shaping their behaviors. And scholars are always interested in studying different aspects of teens and Internet. One of the perspectives that shown in our reading chooses a particular cultural phenomenon of flash mob. It requires a bunch of people gather together in a single point and disperse right after performance in public. With the help of mobile media, this kind of events could be spread quickly and accomplished easily. But flash mob isn’t the only one who get benefits, the emerging of mobile applications shows the bright future of mobile media. So in this article, I am going to talk about the teen’s social media use in mobile media.
Core Concept of Mobile Media
In the reading of Understanding Social Media, the author gives a couple of examples of how mobile media is in used of common people, including a girl joined by a friend who saw her uploading a photo in a cafe, a boy giving out a signal that he was safe after an earthquake by playing a LBS game and a grandma lived intimately with her grandsons by using Facebook. He inserts that mobile social media is a global phenomenon and happens everywhere. It is the smartphones that become an important portal for social media. It combines the feature of social interactivity and locativeness which makes mobile media both immediacy and hypermediacy. It provides users with new media experiences and preserves the functions of traditional media. For example, ABC, the news app allows you to read news in words and video anywhere and anytime.
The use of mobile media also has an effect on the improvement of mobile technology. 2G to 4G, the speed of getting access to internet and the cost of a smartphone are just the outcome of the extension of mobile media.

Case Study
I am so proud to introduce you an application in China called Alipay. It is now most popular online paying methods in China. The idea of this application is to make paying easier by several ways including scanning the QR codes and sound wave. Also, it is so aggressive that it works with any common applications that you could imagine like paying for your electricity, taxi calling and buying a movie ticket. Not mention almost all the restaurants that could be paid in Alipay. I have even seen a granny selling fruits on the street hanging a QR code of Alipay on her blanket. It brought me so many conveniences that I didn’t have to take anything with me but a smartphone generally. Thanks to its mobility, now I still couldn’t remember bring cash or credit cards with me from time to time even if I am in a different country.
What’s more, it is always improving its technology. Last year, news came that Alipay is trying to make a part of individual as another kind of QR code. If possible, one doesn’t need to bring anything when paying for a vertified tatoo on left hand would be a unique substitute of QR code or account number.

Reteive from google image:
Alipay does affect the teen’s paying habit but more importantly, it tries to shape itself as a social media. The first step is adding friends. Once you have friends in Alipay, you could chat with them, transfer money to each other and see what they consume. However, social media is far more than friends. Convergence is a great trend of Chinese application design. For example, Wechat, the most popular chatting application in China, is devoting to contacting everything in one application. It is almost succeed as a social media. Therefore, it could explain why Alipay is so eager to develop its social function. It is a good idea to enhance the hypermediacy as a mobile media but what Alipay did last year turns out to be a failure.
It starts with a new function of ‘Circle’ which allows people gather only with same interests. But this is just what other mature social platforms like Facebook or Instagram are doing. No surprise, no followers. What Alipay doesn’t expect is that Circle becomes a place for selling sex within hours after launching . One basic rule of Circle is that only given users could post. I assume it is set in order to strengthen the relationship in social groups. The other rule is only one with high credit points could comment. This one also make sense. But it unconsciously encourage the communication between young lady and rich guy in these cases. With the aid of digital technology, for the first time users find a way to break the law. And it is also teenagers that become the focus of Internet crime.

Practice and Feedback
In this class, my group is trying to improve the social media of Sydney Conservatorium of Music. My job is make the calender of post as well as the example posts. I like one of our events in Snapchat called A Day of Player which is intend to display a player’s life by posting from 8AM to 8PM. According to research and the Con staff, Snapchat is more and more popular among teenager users. They are willing to share private life with friends in Snapchat. So we thought it could be a good way to launch brand publicity in daily news. Sending several posts of player’s practice or jogging in a day makes the Con behave like a friend of audiences. Besides, we are planning to send a post in Snapchat as alarm before the concert begins. These two functions could be achieved owing to the advantages of mobile media.
Teenagers like to chasing fashion. I believe they will keep being the main users of mobile media. Today, more and more applications are designed to adapt to mobile platform, including mobile games and other remediation of old media. The convergence will grown-up and the divergence as well. Just as what we do to attract more teenagers to the Con. Social media like Facebook will shoulder more responsibility of holding more services as other accounts will link back to Facebook account. Meanwhile, functional media like Alipay or Snapchat will developed in more specific ways to play to advantages.

In all, teens are so easily influenced especially facing the fabulous digital world. There are so many temptations accessible simply by a click of their smartphones. We need to take teenagers into consideration when design a new function or events organized on mobile media. The mistakes happened in Alipay gave us a chance to think twice in teen’s use of social media.
1.Boyd Danah. (2012). Participating in the Always-On Lifestyle. In The Social Media Reader (pp. 71–76). New York University Press.
2.Sensis Social Media Report 2015. Retrieved from Sensis database:
3.Sensis Social Media Report 2016. Retrieved from Sensis database:
4.Duggan M and Brenner J (2013) The demographics of social media user–2012. Pew Research
5.Center’s Internet & American Life Project, pp. 1–14, Washington, DC.See Paul Saffo, Sensors: The Next Wave of Infotech Innovation, (last visited June 1, 2007).
6.Zittrain, J. (2008c). Meeting the Risks of Generativity: Privacy 2.0. In The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It (pp. 205–206). Yale University Press.
7.Hinton, S., & Hjorth, L. (203). Social, Locative and Mobile Media Understanding Social Media (pp. 120 – 135). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
8.Bolter, J.D.& Grusin, R.A. (1999) Remediation: Understanding New Media (pp.3-50), Cambridge, Mass; London: MIT Press.
ALEX LINDER ( 2016, NOV 29) Alipay’s new social networking platform accidentally turns service into a ‘booty call app’. Retrieved from: