Identity

I could have a profile with this avatar. Would be correct signal about age and gender, but all else would be open!

The other day I was reminded of something that happened in the very, very early days of social media, long before it was called social media. I think that it’s relevant to today’s discussions about our “true identity” – online or off line or both.

Many many years ago I worked for Nordisk Film/Egmont (one of the largest entertainment groups in Scandinavia) and was part of the earliest experiments with web there. Egmont offered a portal or a community or something, I forget, think it was called EON. There, you could have a profile and chat with others on that same community.  Obviously, back then, there were only a few people on there and the majority were my colleagues from Nordisk Film and Egmont. I was never accepted by the large group of journalists working for Nordisk Film’s various television programmes. Except for the fact that I am not a journalist, I never quite understood why.

To try and understand it better, I decided to start a second profile on EON, this time not as me. But I was careful to write exactly the same kind of messages, with the same “privacy level”  and the same kind of civility that I’ve always wanted to be an exponent of.

The interesting thing was that while most of my colleagues more or less ignored me as me, they were absolutely intrigued by the other me. Although there was NO difference in the content of my posts. And, mind you, there were a lot of other anonymous users, I was not the only one. It was the norm then, to be anonymous.

I, as me, was an uneducated person who, for reasons unknown to most, had landed the attractive job as press officer for Nordisk Film. In my late thirties, a single mother, no journalistic experience but with a history from the music business they didn’t know of and weren’t interested in, anyway. So, in reality, that was what they saw when they saw my posts. Not the actual content.

However, the other me must have been rather witty and intriguing, because I received lots of attention and inquiries and was chatted up by both sexes in numerous ways. It was most disturbing and discouraging and I closed down the profile.

On Twitter I see echoes of this in some instances, e.g. people at the top of the social hierarchy (e.g. with prestigious jobs) who receive a lot of undue attention on Twitter despite their boring and uninspiring updates. In others, the opposite, where I’m extremely pleased to see e.g. heavily overweight people transcend this social handicap and gain lots of followers and have lively interactions based on the content of their tweets alone. Even though their Twitter-friends are aware of their physical appearance.

Personally, I don’t find it too difficult to draw the line between what can be uttered among colleagues at the office or at home with friends and what can be posted to Facebook and Twitter. While I may say in a circle of friends that so-and-so should get it together or something like that, I’d never post that anywhere in writing. Not because I can’t stand by my words but because you need to know the full context to fully understand it. And with hundreds of “friends” on Facebook and Twitter, it should be life rules for dummies that they are not all aware of that context (and that one’s for you, Ditte Okmann).

Please share your thoughts on this subject.

 

Share

An Apple a day

As today is a very special day for all us Apple-geeks, I’ll use some of the horrible hours of waiting to present to you a bit of nerdy news. We’re talking everything from strictly business to strictly silly.

There’s always new stuff to enhance your work/pleasure time in front of the screen. @4nd3rs from Danish Radio’s brilliant tech-programme Harddisken recommends this extra security for G-mail. Given the latest scare with G-mail accounts that disappeared (not really, they are all restored by now), this might be a good idea. Another very practical thingummy is Amplify, an add-on for Firefox and Chrome, which will let you clip and save anything on the page you’re on for instant mailing, blogging, tweeting, FB’ing or whatever. Really smart!

Do you listen to audio books? I do, occasionally, when all the brilliant podcasts aren’t filling up my time. Audiobooks, however, are often quite expensive, so there’s a natural limit to how many you’ll listen to. Funzafunza, also from the above mentioned Harddisken, mentioned Librivox, a truly original concept where you can find public domain books read by “normal people”. I’ve downloaded Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, a book I’ve wanted to read for ages. Next plane-ride, I’ll listen to it. The reader of this particular novel, a woman, doesn’t have the most pleasing voice on the planet, but I’m sure I’ll get used to her as I listen along. And, there may be other books there, read by more pleasant-sounding people. Anyway, I think it’s a brilliant concept! Do you have a pleasant voice, do you like reading to others and do you love an old book, why not give it a chance and contribute? I will, as soon as I have half a day to spend…

The eternal discussion of whether social media and the web in general is distracting us from true immersion in work, reading, etc. and making us into flimsy flutterers goes on and on. I’m biased, so I’ll only link to people who agree with me. *smirks*. Here’s the honourable Jeff Jarvis on the subject. He links back to the weightiest of previous articles in American media. It was @Elnif who pointed to that one.

And then there’s that there Twitter. Here’s what I’ve read lately on that subject. This in the Guardian, helping the positively curious to make heads and tails of it. This is a funny but not untrue infographic about the process of getting into Twitter.

Lately, I’ve been adding my bit to posterity, in this case Danish Wikipedia. Working with Wikipedia is not easy, it’s not at all like blogging, but as I’m incredibly stubborn I just keep at it. Also, I get help from kind Wikipedians (and also some pointing with a very big stick from less kind Wikipedians). So this well researched article about why women don’t contribute more (13%) to Wikipedia really hit home.

Where would you like to work if you could choose? Fast Company has picked the 50 most innovative companies. Together with Fortune’s Top 100 over the best companies to work for, we have a good starting point. That said, I’m totally happy working for myself. I’m such a nice boss, really, even though the salary s*cks.

Finally, we need something about language (from @stensamler), books and books (from @bogtyven).

Oh, and more books. (Would have loved to have embedded this charming, artistic and funny video. But since, apparently, they use a tune that Sony owns the copyright to, it can only be watched directly on Youtube. Bah!)

Share