KABLAM!
Just another WordPress.com weblog

Effects of Online Personas

Experiences being alotted by the internet affect how modern people deal with issues in reality and how they reflect on them as well.  In Sherry Turkle’s article “Who Am We?” she talks mostly about the use of MUD’s and how people use these kinds of programs to play out some kind of inner desire, alternate persona, or perhaps to even unleash their true personality in a way they find difficult in their everyday life.  The Internet, with its seriously interactive capabilities, forces upon the user a new outlook, another resource that will eventually begin to influence the way in which people think, feel and ultimately respond to a situation.  Someone with low self esteem could use a program like an MUD to forge relationships and build up confidence in sharing who they are with more people under the veil of anonymity afforded by the Internet.  However, a role-playing game, while important in the evolution of how we perceive and how we are perceived, may not have the desired result for someone who is looking to be freed from their shyness or insecurities.  Playing as a character could simply have the effect of allowing a normally timid person to become more comfortable within their virtual reality – instead of using those skills or lessons they have manifested in their online conquests and redirecting them to undergo a similar success with their real life problems.  Of course, online anonymity does not strictly serve the purposes of the fearful and introverted.  These types of roles that can be adopted also help to serve in allowing people to understand behavior and logic in alternate settings which form a kind of awareness they may not have previously been confronted with.  Just like small children who use their imagination to engage in moments of pretend, whether they insist on taking roles as parents, firemen or airplanes, virtual reality is also a way for internet uses to have fun in a manner that can induce revelation and understanding for a variety of subjects. 

9 Responses to “Effects of Online Personas”

  1. Here’s an interesting take on the whole “online persona” question. Mary Spicuzza, an author for the SF Weekly, a San Francisco tabloid, attempted to “out” a Wikipedia editor because this editor had crossed her sister, Jeanne Marie Spicuzza.

    Jeanne Marie Spicuzza, a self-professed “artist” who thought the vanity article she wrote about herself was wrongly removed from Wikipedia. Sister Mary, taking up Sister Jeanne’s cause, then persued the matter from the online encyclopedia onto the print pages of the SF Weekly. She misrepresented herself to several involved parties and was made to resign from that newspaper

    You can read the whole story by going to this link (scroll to “Tawdry Tabloid Journalist”):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators‘_noticeboard/IncidentArchive372#Attempted_Outing_of_Wikipedia_Editor_User:Griot_by_Tawdry_Tabloid_Journalist

  2. Griot,

    The misrepresentation taking place is your own. It was foolish for you to use a multitude of public forums for your so-called revenge. You wrongly assume that blogs are hosted by persons like yourself, who are willing to engage in or support libel and online harassment. Certain web hosts have stepped forward, banned you from making further comments and provided your IP address for purposes of prosecution. You have served to injure yourself and Wikipedia with your actions.

    The real story: http://www.sfweekly.com/2008-02-13/news/wikipedia-idiots-the-edit-wars-of-san-francisco/

    Anon.

  3. From the SF Weekly site:

    I edited this story and I can assure you that Mary did not get fired for this story or any other. Mary decided to leave the paper to take a job with a local documentary filmmaker. She gave her notice before the Wikipedia story was published. She disclosed to me early in the reporting process her sister’s fights with Griot and her sister’s role is mentioned high up in our story. Bottom line: We stand by the story.

    Comment by Will Harper, Managing Editor, SF Weekly — February 26, 2008 @ 01:55PM

  4. Well, ha! I copy edited the story for the SF Weekly. And she most assuredly had to resign after writing that article. I mean, it’s bad enough she tries to out someone just because he or she had a fallout with her sister, but then she goes and quotes her own niece several times in the article without informing readers that this person was her niece.

    It was a clear breach of journalistic ethics and she had to go.

    It really put a stain on our newspaper.

  5. What Ms. Spicuzza did was a genuine violation of journalistic ethics. We studied this case in my Journalism 202 class at Columbia. It inspired quite a discussion, and one student wrote a paper about it. It think it’s just despicable that Mary Spicuzza demeaned our profession in order to persue some kind of family problem.

  6. Actually, Mary Spicuzza did have to resign from the SF Weekly. It was a sorry episode indeed.

  7. The Spicuzza case (as it is known in journalism circles) is an interestng one. It’s hard to come up with new subjects for stories, certainly. And outing someobody online who insulted your sister would make a great story. “I finally found the person who insulted my sister. Here he was sitting in front of me, all 240 fat pounds of him. I had him dead to rights. I thought of confronting him right away with how he insulted my sisters, but I held back, I wanted to savor the moment. Etc.” A good story if it can be pulled off, but what about the ethics? Is it right to use your employer’s IT dept. to try to out someone in a family fued. Methinks it’s not.

  8. This is rich! Everybody in SF journalism circles knows the real story as to why Spicuzza “left.”

  9. The person who posted above as “Dalbot” is impersonating me, the SF Weekly copy editor who worked on Mary’s Wikipedia story.

    No copy editors worth their paychecks would ever badmouth their colleagues in the way Dalbot does — indeed, I’d imagine that would be a firing offense, never mind the ill will it would create among co-workers.

    As for the continued attacks on Mary, I reiterate my editor Will Harper’s remarks above. She *didn’t* resign; she had already given notice to go to another job. There’s no “real story,” no “clear breach of journalistic ethics,” and no “sorry episode.” The anonymous remarks above and on other blogs are personal attacks, pure and simple, and I hope my interjection here might help keep the story straight.


Leave a Reply