citation work

‘ F re s h l y G e n e r a t e d f o r Yo u , a n d B a r a c k O b a m a ’ H o w S o c i a l M e d i a R e p re s e n t Yo u r L i f e

j Jill Walker Rettberg

A b s t r A c t

j This article discusses the ways in which social media help us craft the narratives of our lives. Many discussions of social media look at self-presen- tation and the construction of identity on social network sites in particular and the Internet in general. This article switches the focus from the moment of self-construction and instead looks at ways in which social media repre- sent our lives by filtering the data we feed into them through templates and by displaying simplified patterns, visualizations and narratives back to us. The article argues that social media help users to see themselves by taking their raw data and representing them in structured form, and gives examples of different ways in which this data is presented. j

Key Words blogs, cultural templates, narrative, self-portrait, social media

A personal annual report

In January 2009, the social network site1 Dopplr.com sent each of its users a customized one-page visualization of their travels during 2008. Dopplr.com is a fairly simple site where you can enter details of your trips, connect with friends or acquaintances, and receive alerts when you’re going to be in the same town as somebody you know.

451

European Journal of Communication Copyright © The Author(s), 2009. Reprints and Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Vol 24(4): 451–466. [10.1177/0267323109345715]

Jill Walker Rettberg is Associate Professor of Digital Culture, Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies, University of Bergen, PB 7800, 5020 Bergen, Norway. [email: [email protected]]

j for Author name

j for abstract text

452

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

When I received my report I was surprised: I had entered trips some- what inconsistently, but my report lined everything up along a coloured timeline complete with photographs of the cities I’d visited. Looking at the report, I realized that I hadn’t logged all my trips, and that there were some errors in the trips I had entered. The portrait of my travelling year was incorrect, and it upset me! I swiftly logged into Dopplr and made the corrections. And sure enough, I later received an updated report (Figure 1).

In the email containing the customized pdf, Dopplr also included a link to a blog post titled ‘Dopplr presents the Personal Annual Report 2008: freshly generated for you, and Barack Obama. . .’ (Jones, 2009). In the blog post they explained these personal reports, showcasing a report they’d created for Barack Obama. Obama’s report was far more information- rich than mine, with dozens of lines in different vivid colours along the timeline as well as notes about how far he’d travelled and which of his col- leagues had spent the most time in the same place as him. My report also included the timeline and the notes but, because I had travelled so much less than Obama, there was less content in the report.

The report fascinated me because no social network site had sent me such a portrait of my life before – and as a researcher of social media I’ve signed up to dozens of social network sites. By organizing my data in this way, Dopplr created a story2 for me, a representation of an aspect of my life. They put my little story alongside one of the most well-known stories of

452

Figure 1 A visualization of the trips I told dopplr.com I was taking in 2008. This is the updated version they generated after I’d made corrections to the data I’d originally entered.

453

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

2008: that of Barack Obama and his successful campaign for the presidency of the United States. Obama’s story, so familiar, became a cultural template or a filter for my own story.

One of the ways we find our place in our culture and among our friends and families is by creating and consuming stories and images. These representations of ourselves and of others connect to larger cultural templates, which we adopt, adapt or reject. The sequence: ‘fall in love, get married, have a baby’ is one such cultural template. So is the idea of the hard worker who starts out small, works diligently and finally succeeds. Others are more negative. All are in some sense stereotypes that most of us, on the individual level, will not match. But we still consume and spread these cultural templates in fairy tales, nursery rhymes, fables, say- ings, popular songs, movies and narratives, as well as in visual images. We create our own stories about and representations of ourselves – in conversa- tion with friends, in diaries, scrapbooks, Facebook profiles and YouTube videos – and when we do so we cannot help but respond in some way to these cultural stereotypes, whether we adopt them unthinkingly, adapt them to suit ourselves, or reject them explicitly.

I have previously discussed how we purposefully create various kinds of self-representations online and how important these are to us, arguing that they express our newfound subjectivity as individuals able to represent ourselves rather than simply succumb to the generalizations of mass media (Walker, 2005). In this article, I look instead at the representations that are created of us by social media. I discuss representations of user data that have been gathered over time and that have been compiled by the social network site into a report, narrative, visualization or other representation intended to provide the user with an overview or image of his or her own activity. I argue that such representations provide us with new ways of connecting to larger cultural templates.

Patterns

How, then, are these representations organized? Dopplr’s visualization plots my data along three different axes: temporal (there’s a timeline of the year), social (there’s a list of which of my friends were in the same cities as me) and geographical (the map is marked with cities I’ve visited).

Temporal or chronological organization is the most common in narra- tives and in social media. The standard way of telling a story is with a beginning, middle and an end, as Aristotle stated in his Poetics, although there are many exceptions to this. Social media are also heavily time-based, but the standard chronological organization is reversed: on Facebook,

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

454

YouTube or a blog, the most recent item is usually presented at the top of the page, privileging the instant and the now rather than the whole story.

Even in traditional narratives such as we find in novels or movies, there are ways of organizing events other than their temporal succession. Gerard Genette, one of the most well-known narratologists, writes about how events in a plot can be connected in the narration by different kinds of kinship, such as space or time. He calls all such ‘anachronic groupings’ syllepses:

Geographical syllepsis, for example, is the principle of narrative grouping in voyage narratives that are embellished by anecdotes. . . . Thematic syllepsis governs in the classical episodic novel with its numerous insertions of ‘stories,’ justified by relations of analogy or contrast. (Genette, 1980: 85)

Organizing plot events by anachronic syllepses is not very common in traditional narratives. In fact, Genette’s note is literally a footnote in his treatise on narratology. However, these sorts of anachronic syllepsis are often used in hypertext fictions (Walker, 1999), which were among the first narratives to be created specifically to be read on computers (Hayles, 2008). They are also common in non-time-based and non-narrative repre- sentations, such as visualizations, graphs and diagrams.

The kinds of grouping – or, to use Genette’s word, syllepsis – that were apparent in Dopplr’s report of my travels are typical of the ways in which social media sites organize our personal data for us. As noted, Dopplr uses temporal, social and geographic organization. A fourth com- mon form of organization in social media is close to that which Genette calls thematic syllepsis in narrative. Perhaps it would be more accurate when speaking of social media to call it semantic organization, as it has to do with meaning and semantic connections.

Often the live feed of a social media site allows users to choose between different ways of viewing data that correspond to these four kinds of organization. From the front page of Flickr.com, a popular photo-sharing site, I can choose to look at the most recent photographs uploaded to Flickr in general (temporal organization), at photos taken by my friends and family (social organization), at photographs taken in a particular loca- tion (geographic organization) or at photographs about a particular topic that are specifically tagged (semantic organization). However, the reports and summaries generated by social media sites – like the report sent by Dopplr – tend to emphasize just one or a few kinds of syllepsis.

Let me give you some examples of representations that emphasize each of the four kinds of organization.

455

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

Temporal organization

Organizing our data by when they were created or when they were uploaded is probably the most obvious and often the most effective form of structure, just as it is the most common form of organization in narra- tive. Temporal syllepsis tends to narrativize information. When we see a list of events or a set of images one after the other we tend to assume that they are organized chronologically, and we also tend to fill in the gaps to create a causally coherent narrative (Iser, 1988).

Two of the best known temporally organized sets of digital photo- graphs are Miles Hochstein’s ‘Documented Life’ (2009) and Noah Kalina’s popular time-lapse video ‘Noah Takes a Photo of Himself Every Day for 6 Years’ (2006). Hochstein has gathered photos of himself from each year of his life, leaving space for the remaining years he hopes to live. Headshot after headshot is presented in a grid on the first page of the site, and if you click one of the images, you are presented with a page showing more images and some verbal narrative about the photographs and about his life that year – thus the photos function as both a summary of his life and as a table of contents providing easy and organized access to more details. This kind of organization is automatically generated by Flickr, where you can view your archives shown as a monthly calendar with a photograph displayed on each day. While Flickr, unlike Dopplr, does not send these calendars out as ‘Personal Annual Reports’, they do function in a similar way, providing the user with an automated diary of his or her life.

Noah Kalina took a photo of his own face every day for six years, and put them all together into a 5:45 minute video showing him slowly grow older. The video, which Kalina posted on YouTube, became immensely popular and started a craze of similar videos. Today sites such as daily- booth.com and dailymugshot.com prompt users to take daily photos of themselves with their webcam. The sites provide a social infrastructure where users can follow other users and watch their photo streams; but the main goal of the sites seems to be the ways in which they will organize the photos for you, for instance in a video form very similar to Noah Kalina’s original.

Another kind of temporal organization of data is provided by Trixietracker.com, a site where parents can enter data about their babies: when they eat, sleep and have their nappies changed. The system generates graphs showing patterns from day to day, allowing parents to see trends in their babies’ activities and to compare their babies’ sleep patterns to other babies of the same age.

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

456

You enter data into Trixietracker.com much as you do at Dopplr.com, though far more frequently. You click a button when you put your baby down to sleep, when she actually falls asleep and when she wakes up – or when you give up on trying to get her to sleep. Over time, the system will not only show you graphs of each day, as seen in Figure 2, but will also generate graphs showing the probability of your baby being asleep at any particular time or day and allowing you to compare your baby’s sleep patterns to other babies that age.

There are many other sites that allow you to track anything from your moods (moodlog.org) to how often you have sex (www.bedposted.com: ‘For your eyes only, Bedpost offers zero social networking features other than partner logins’). These sites generate overviews for you, displaying your data based on time – allowing you perhaps to discover that you’re more likely to be grumpy at 4 p.m. than in the morning as you had thought.

Figure 2 A graph of my baby Jessica’s sleep patterns at four months based on data I entered at Trixietracker.com. The grey and white bar at the top shows probabilities of her being asleep or awake at any time of the day.

457

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

Social organization

There are dozens of social network analysis tools for visualizing explicitly articulated social networks online. One of the more well-known examples is the Facebook Friend Visualizer, which is an application you can add to your Facebook profile that will generate visualizations of your network of friends on Facebook, showing connections between groups of your friends. There are a number of other tools that will perform similar tasks for other social network sites, such as Twitter Friends. Maps of blog networks are often drawn with lines between blogs representing the frequency of the links between them. Likewise, Flickr will allow you to view your photos according to how popular they are – how often they have been viewed, commented on and made a favourite.

Reports emphasizing social organization tend to be in diagrammatic rather than narrative form, although they may include images and other content.

Semantic organization

I mentioned the calendar view of a user’s photos on Flickr as an example of temporal organization. Flickr also allows users to access the archives of their photos on Flickr through the key words they have used to ‘tag’ each photo. So you might click on the tag ‘Mum’ and see all your photos of your mother, in a sense generating a visual diary of your relationship to your mother over the time you have used Flickr.

Semantic organization filters data according to meaning rather than according to time, geography or social connections. So photographs can be organized according to who is in them or what is happening – ‘sleeping’ or ‘smiling’ or ‘eating’ are common tags. Semantic organization may become more common as search engines become more sophisticated: for now, the most common kinds of semantic organization are based on meta- data explicitly entered by the user: tags on photos as on Flickr, for instance, or happiness levels as on the knitting site Ravelry.com.

Ravelry.com is a site where knitters and crocheters document their projects and discuss projects, yarns, patterns and supply shops. Each user has a ‘notebook’ (rather than a profile) where all his or her projects are displayed. This notebook is organized very much as a scrapbook or, literally, a notebook, where the user stores information for her or his own future use, such as whether she or he liked the yarn, what the gauge was knitting that yarn on those needles and any modifications made to the pattern.

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

458

Ravelry doesn’t generate automated reports, but the notebook becomes an important documentation for the user. It can be viewed in chronological order, but also using semantic organization, for instance showing the projects in order of ‘happiness’ and using each project’s happiness ranking according to how much the crafter enjoyed making it. On Ravelry, a user is thus represented by the knitting and crocheting she or he makes, as well as by blog posts, contributions to forums and patterns that the user has designed and shared.

Tag clouds or text clouds are another way in semantic relationships can be shown. These so-called clouds measure how frequently a word is used in a text, on a blog or by a user and displays the most frequently used words in a cloud where the most used are shown in larger, bolder type than the others. Sometimes words that tend to be used together are shown more closely to each other. Figure 3 shows a cloud of the text of this essay. While the semantic organization in such a cloud is currently limited to font size representing the frequency of word use, when a user generates a cloud from a blog he or she has kept for years, it can be a powerful representation of issues that are important to the user – and that the user has perhaps not been conscious of prioritizing as clearly as shown by the cloud.

Geographic organization

As GPS is becoming built in to more and more of our cameras and phones, geography is one of the simplest and most effective ways of organizing user content. GPS-enabled devices allow photos, text and other content to be automatically placed on a map, but sites often also allow users to place them- selves on a map manually, as with Google maps. Dopplr’s report uses geographical organization heavily. I can choose to see my photos in Flickr

Figure 3 A tag cloud or ‘wordle’ generated from the text of this essay at wordle. com. Font size shows which words are used most frequently.

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

459

displayed on a map, and sites like Brightkite.com and Plazes.com allow users to ‘check in’ and log where they are, displaying this information as a timeline or organized on a map. On a larger scale, there are visualizations of blog posts or Facebook activity shown on maps of the world, generating represen- tations of our activities similar to pictures of lit-up cities taken from space.

Cultural templates

Although I never thought of doing so, I could have created a visualization of my travel like the one Dopplr generated on my own.3 There are many ways in which people do regularly document their lives, from compiling photo albums, creating elaborate scrapbooks and writing diaries for personal or family use to the annual Christmas ‘round robin’ letters written as a summary of the year, photocopied and sent to a hundred friends. These forms of media creation have been little studied by media and communica- tions scholars, who have largely focused on the dominant mass media of the 20th century. Recently, Marika Lüders coined the term ‘personal media’ in opposition to mass media (Lüders, 2008). This term includes not only analogue media as mentioned earlier, but also online media, including much social media.

Personal media can be created freely, for instance on blank paper or a blank journal, or it can use predetermined templates. For instance, many parents buy preformatted baby journals and simply fill in the blanks: baby’s first smiled on this date, first walked on that, here’s a photo of baby on the day she was born and here’s a lock of her hair obediently placed in a thoughtfully provided little plastic envelope. Social media sites similarly provide templates for users to fill in, structures in which users can upload their photos, videos, texts, data or simply type a quick response to Facebook’s prompt: ‘What’s on your mind?’4

While preformatted baby journals are already normative, the auto- matically generated digital ‘reports’ of our lives – or of our babies’ sleep patterns – are even more controlled. If you don’t like the prompts given on a page in your baby journal, you can tear the page out or glue a large photograph over the text. I can’t change anything about the layout of my Dopplr.com or Trixietracker report (although I can download the data from Trixietracker.com and format them myself in Excel). I can choose not to fill out all the information they ask for, but the generated report will simply report the gaps as well, and the lack of information is itself showcased: Doesn’t she have more friends than that? Why did she choose not to allow Dopplr to calculate the carbon footprint of her flights?

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

460

In her book Mediated Memories, José van Dijck (2007: 7) calls preformatted baby journals an example of ‘normative discursive strategies’ that ‘either implicitly or explicitly structure our agencies’. In an article on art and user-generated content, Lev Manovich (2009) compares the corpo- rate structures of social media and user-generated content to Adorno and Horkheimer’s critique of the cultural industry:

Given that a significant percentage of user-generated content either follows the templates and conventions set up by the professional entertainment industry or directly reuses professionally produced content, does this mean that people’s identities and imaginations are now even more firmly colo- nized by commercial media than they were in the twentieth century? In other words, is the replacement of mass consumption of commercial culture in the twentieth century by mass production of cultural objects by users in the early twenty-first century a progressive development? or does it consti- tute a further stage in the development of the culture industry as analyzed by Adorno and Horkheimer in The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception (1944)? (Manovich, 2009: 321)

These are clearly important perspectives to be aware of, but perhaps they are too generalized and abstract. Later in his article Manovich admits that, for all the mediocre copies, there are also works of great artistic quality created by amateurs online. And, of course, most people who use social media or who create personal media are not trying to create great art. Indeed, José van Dijck goes on to note ‘it is quite remarkable how many people gain creative energy out of shaping their own histories and subjectivities in response to existing cultural frameworks’ (van Dijk, 2007: 8).

In this article, I am not so much interested in the quality of what we create as in the ways we connect our contributions (baby sleep patterns, travel data or knitting projects) to larger cultural templates, templates that are certainly often exploited by commercial media but that are not the sole product of them. Even without a preformatted baby journal there are cultural templates we will tend to follow. In western culture, we all see a baby’s first smile, first teeth and first steps as important milestones, and we are likely to document them in some way. Parents who don’t own a preformatted journal or a mass-produced memory box with instructions are still likely to save a lock of hair from a child’s first haircut and to keep the first milk tooth a child loses. Documenting these events helps us struc- ture our lives and our memories. They also help ground us in our cultures.5 The relationship between these cultural templates and commercial forces is symbiotic, not one-way.

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

461

Implicit and explicit data

Many of the sites discussed in this article are examples of Web 2.0 services, a term Tim O’Reilly first coined in 2005, and that he later summarized in 2008 as the ‘design of systems that harness network effects to get better the more people use them, or more colloquially, as “harnessing collective intel- ligence” ’. Web 2.0 is a much-maligned term, but one that has proved to have staying power, and it broadly encompasses the sites and services that we tend to think of as social media. Thinking of social media through the lens of technologist Tim O’Reilly rather than from the point of view of media and communications studies is valuable because it emphasizes different things. One of the points O’Reilly has most frequently made about Web 2.0 is that it’s about data. It’s about our data – both the data we contribute explicitly and the data that are implicit; that we’re not aware of contributing. Likewise, social media aren’t just about the contributions that people make deliberately or explicitly, such as when you upload a video to YouTube, update your status on Facebook, write a new blog post or contribute to a discussion on an online newspaper. Social media are just as much about our implicit contributions. Google knows what I search for and which search results I choose to click on. Twitter knows how often I log on and how often I post. Amazon knows which books I view, which books I purchase and which I don’t. Facebook logs how long I spend on their site at a time and which kinds of ads I click. Ninety-nine percent of YouTube’s users may be lurkers, never posting a single video, but YouTube still knows how they rate videos, which videos are liked or at least visited by the same people, and which videos are the most popular.

Companies harvest our data because they can use it to sell better ads, but also in order to create better services for us. Previously this collection has often been somewhat hidden to users. Companies use such data internally, of course, and show us some results – Amazon tells us which books it thinks we will like based on our purchases, for instance. When I tell Dopplr.com where I’m travelling, it can use the data to customize their service to me, to tell advertisers where their users travel and to build further services.

When Dopplr.com sent me the visualization of my travels in 2008, they made the explicit and implicit data I contributed to their service visible to me in a new way. They showed me my own story. They showed me the patterns of my travels over the course of a year. Obviously I already knew the information they were showing me – I was the traveller. But I hadn’t seen it all put together in that way. Google’s Web History is perhaps even more striking in its display of our implicit data. When I search for

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

462

something on Google I don’t think about how the data will be collected by Google. But when I signed up for Google’s Web History, Google started showing me monthly calendars, colour-coded to show how often I searched on each day of that particular month (see Figure 4). Before the Internet, most representations of me would have been completely made by myself or by my friends and family – home videos, diaries, photo albums and so on. Today, commercial websites generate representations of me based on my data. They are perhaps doing little more than a mirror. But they are also normalizing the idea that surveillance is constant and even to my benefit.

A common early reaction to bloggers was that they were narcissistic. In Greek myth, poor Narcissus was so infatuated with the image of his own face, reflected in a pool of water, that he finally fell into the pool and drowned. Online, an often-discussed risk of gazing at your own reflection is that the information you put online may be seen by and abused by stalkers,

Figure 4 If you sign up for Google Web History you can see calendars showing how frequently you use Google search on different days. This is an example of temporal organization; you can also see what search terms you use most often (semantic organization), which sites you visit most often or simply all the sites you’ve visited.

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

463

paedophiles and online bullies. In these cases, malicious individuals generally put information together manually. A more systemic concern about our increasingly prolific sharing of our own personal data is that our data is automatically aggregated by the sites we frequent, often in ways we are not aware of. Facebook’s executives probably don’t read our individual status updates (although they certainly could) but their systems know a great deal about us: data we’ve explicitly entered (name, sex, age, residence, education, friends) as well as data they gather implicitly (When are we most active on Facebook? Which friends do we communicate most with? Which ads and applications are we most likely to click on? How popular are we? How many photos do we appear in?). Likewise, Google, Yahoo and other large companies have vast quantities of data about our use of their services, and through advertising networks, often about our behaviour on external sites as well.

This data is primarily used for advertising. Facebook apparently doesn’t sell the data itself, but they sell ads and promise advertisers that ads will be shown to the users who are most likely to be interested in the product. However, there are more nefarious uses of personal data. In China, Google and Yahoo have given the government access to information about dissidents that has led to their conviction for political crimes. The EU’s data retention directive (Directive 2006/24/EC) requires member coun- tries to store data about all Internet and telephone traffic for at least six and up to 24 months. This information is only supposed to be accessed in the case of suspicion of a ‘major crime’, but protesters have objected that this total surveillance or dataveillance (defined by Roger Clarke [1988: 500] as ‘the systematic monitoring of people’s actions or communications through the application of information technology’) is a serious breach of privacy. Reports about our travel patterns and graphs of our babies’ sleep patterns remind us that the technologies that please us and help us docu- ment and understand our lives can also be used against us, for commercial or ideological purposes. And yet we continue to feed our information into the system.

Filtered self-portraits

In previous research (Walker, 2005) I have argued that our fascination with creating digital self-portraits is indicative of our collective coming of age where we as a culture are discovering that we have voices online and can express ourselves rather than simply accepting the mass media’s views of the world. Like an infant discovering her or his own image in a mirror or a teenager trying out different styles of clothes, handwriting or makeup,

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

464

in the early 21st century we are becoming accustomed to the Internet and finding out who we are in this context.

The generated portraits of ourselves that I have discussed in this article are similar in many ways, but are to a greater extent controlled by commercial interests and limited by the strict templates applied to our data. Beyond entering my data, I have no control over the way Dopplr.com portrays me in their personal annual reports. In a sense, this is a partial return to mass media. In this mass customization, each individual is fed into the same template. Perhaps this is exactly what we want. For by seeing my data displayed in exactly the same way as Barack Obama’s or a friend or celebrity, I see aspects of my own life from outside. And as I do so, my place in the larger stories and cultural templates of the world is confirmed.

Notes

I would like to thank the European Journal of Communication for inviting me to think about these issues in more detail, and for the excellent feedback I received in Padua from the editors and the other contributors to this special issue. Finally, contributions from my colleagues and friends at the University of Bergen and in social media in general have been very valuable. I posted drafts of this article online and asked for feedback on my blog and on Twitter, and am grateful for wonderful comments from scholars, students and professionals including Scott Rettberg, Hilde Corneliussen, Myriam Coco, Daniel Jung, Daniel Apollon, Anders Fagerjord, David Brake, Elin Sjursen, Chuck Tryon and Kjartan Michaelsen.

1. I follow danah boyd and Nicole Ellison’s definition of social network site (boyd and Ellison, 2007): ‘We define social network sites as web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.’ While the sites discussed in this article are social network sites, I am here more concerned with the way the individual interacts with the site than how the social network is articulated and functions.

2. This report is a story or narrative in a very minimal narratological sense: it presents events in order, but causality, which is required in some definitions of narrative, is not shown. However, as the intended reader is primarily the per- son who has experienced the events that are represented, one might argue that causality is implicit.

3. New York designer Nicholas Felton’s annual reports on his personal activities, all beautiful examples of personal information graphics, are excellent examples of how people can craft such reports themselves. But Felton is an exception rather than the rule. See feltron.com for examples.

R E T T B E R G : H O w S O C I A L M E d I A R E P R E S E N T Y O U R L I F E

465

4. Prior to March 2009, Facebook asked ‘What are you doing right now?’ 5. Van Dijck notes that ‘Western European and American practices of remembering

and recording significantly diverge from Asian or African mores in this area’ (van Dijck, 2007: 6). It is worth considering how this affects a more globalized online society. We often assume that simply translating the language of a web service is sufficient, but this may not be the case. An example is the meaning of the built-in way of RSVPing to events in Facebook, where users can choose between ‘Yes’, ‘No’ and ‘Maybe’. These words are faithfully translated into many different languages, but work differently in different cultures. In a study conducted by Lucie Sejrup (2009), Norwegian users tend to answer ‘Maybe’ when they mean no, because to give an outright no would be considered rude. However, users from other countries have indicated no qualms about answering ‘No’. Similarly, the ways in which social media summarize our contributions and digital memories to us may be culturally specific. Thank you to Daniel Jung and the Study Group for Social Media at the University of Bergen for these cultural comparisons.

References

Boyd, Danah M. and Nicole B. Ellison (2007) ‘Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(1); at: jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html

Clarke, Roger (1988) ‘Information Technology and Dataveillance’, Communications of the ACM 31(5): 498–512.

Genette, Gerard (1980) Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. New York: Cornell University Press.

Hayles, N. Katherine (2008) Electronic Literature: New Horizons for the Literary. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Hochstein, Miles (2009) ‘Documented Life: An Autodocumentary’; at: www.documentedlife.com/autodocumentary.htm

Iser, Wolfgang (1988) ‘The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach’, in David Lodge (ed.) Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. London: Longman.

Jones, Matt (2009) ‘Dopplr Presents The Personal Annual Report 2008: Freshly Generated For You, and Barack Obama . . .’, DopplrBlog, 15 January; at: blog.dopplr.com/2009/01/15/dopplr-presents-the-personal-annual-report- 2008-freshly-generated-for-you-and-barack-obama

Kalina, Noah (2006) ‘Noah Takes a Photo of Himself Every Day for 6 Years’, YouTube, 31 July; at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B26asyGKDo

Lüders, Marika (2008) ‘Conceptualizing Personal Media’, New Media and Society 10(6): 683–702.

Manovich, Lev (2009) ‘The Practice of Everyday (Media) Life: From Mass Consumption to Mass Cultural Production?’, Critical Inquiry 35(2): 319–31.

E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N 2 4 ( 4 )

466

O’Reilly, Tim (2005) ‘What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software’, O’Reilly Radar, 30 September; at: oreilly. com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

Sejrup, Lucie (2009) ‘Facebook Uses: How and Why? Uses and Gratifications Keeping up with the Technology’, Master’s Thesis, University of Bergen.

Van Dijck, Jose (2007) Mediated Memories in the Digital Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Walker, Jill (1999) ‘Piecing Together and Tearing Apart: Finding the Story in Afternoon’, paper presented at the proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, Darmstadt, Germany, 21–25 February; at: bora.uib.no/handle/1956/1073

Walker, Jill (2005) ‘Mirrors and Shadows: The Digital Aestheticisation of Oneself’, paper presented at the proceedings of the conference Digital Arts and Culture, Copenhagen; at: bora.uib.no/handle/1956/1136