Assignment 6, Option 1: Youtube Leviathan? Uh huh

From completing the ‘hunting the leviathan’ assignment, I realized that online leviathan attitude mirrors leviathan attitude in other mediums. In fact, the norms that are enforced in society are usually confirmed in CMC environment. For example, in discussion, no one wants to hear someone speak inappropriately which is why the youtube administrators, considered the leviathans are the ones who make restrictions and crack down on those who make inappropriate comments on youtube videos. Although the people who watch youtube videos aren’t all part of the same group, they all have to conform to the same norm. That norm is having a respectful, appropriate discussion of whichever video they are watching. The question to ask now is: what is inappropriate? Appropriateness is related to groupness (Wallace, Chapter 4) since the mindset of everyone who is watching is part of the ‘civil society’ and we conform to the norms of this civil society. We come to know what a civil society is based on discussions we have in other facets of life. For example, inappropriate comments on this blog will be handled rather severely; usually with a failing grade in the course. Based on our human nature code of ethics, we can determine what is right and wrong to say on a youtube comment. For example, if you are watching a video about a serious race issue and you were to make a racist comment, many times, you will either have your comment hidden or your account suspended. Also, youtube serves as a forum, similar to that in real life where people can “electronically brainstorm” the ethics relayed in a video pertaining to an issue such as racism. The “sign on the door” that youtube has is in their ‘help center’ under their ‘policy and copyright guidelines’ tab. There, they specifically mention what is “inappropriate” as well as who are “abusive users.” Under this policy, the leviathan has a more structured way of “enforcing law.” The youtube administrators cannot do this job alone, however. This is why they have a ‘report user’ and a ‘thumbs up, thumbs down’ system where viewers can rate whether or not someone’s comments are inappropriate. The aforementioned point is on the lines with the concept of the Arched Brow discussed by Wallace in chapter 4. One idea to think about, however, is the fact that many people may not interpret a comment as “inappropriate” and may have disagreements. This is called polarization, two people on the opposite side of the pole. This is why, in the thumbs up, thumbs down approach youtube has taken, if more people give the comment a thumbs up, chances are that it’s appropriate and vice versa. This concept is on the lines with the minority opinion in online workgroups approach discussed by Wallace in chapter 4. To conclude my statement, I will mention that the leviathan in youtube works in sort of a “checks and balances” method in the sense that he/she not only enforces their rules, but uses the public to help guide their decision of how to enforce the norm. After all, they are public/social norms.

Comments:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=7593157518131515169

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2774598650119543771&postID=3131659508350551693