It has been a while since I have updated, and I am happy to say that the semester is over, and I can finally call myself a K-State Alum! As such, I have merged this blog with my personal blog: http://dvaughn7.wordpress.com/. I’ll still be researching various things that I enjoy, but for now, my personal blog will probably predominately reflect my journey on becoming a Peace Corps volunteer. You are more than welcome, and definitely encouraged to check it out

So, what about the promised video? Long story short: I’m still working on it…

I have a video complete, but am not publishing yet as I have decided to re-do most of it. Yeah, I know school has ended, but at this point the video is so much more than just a ‘class research project.’ It’s a way to help someone who is deeply helping others…it’s my little way of helping change the world. As such, it needs to be perfect, or at least as close to perfect as possible, and at its current state, its not. That said, I will be back to constant video editing (hopefully) first thing next week! As soon as I have something that feels right, I will post it for all of you to see!

Thanks for being patient , and if that is hard for you, hopefully this will tie you over:

First, I realized that I needed to try and tell the story about the story, so I needed to tell the story about Shawn…which is actually much harder than simply telling his story. The most helpful insight to this was thinking back to when I saw Ira Glass in Lawrence. He talked about how every story has those little gems, it was just a matter of fleshing them out and being able to see what the story actually said. So, I had to shift gears and begin to think in terms of a “what being said says” mindset. You’d think that after 2 years of solid anthropology courses, I’d be good at this by now…but, it is definitely a skill that constantly needs refining (which is the nice way to say that I’m still quite terrible at it)!

So, when I went to write my script it took me being almost done with it before I realized something…I had done it all wrong. It didn’t help that I had a lot of spots to fill in once I was able to have a second interview. After the interview, I was sure that I had went about it wrong and set out trying to transcribe about an hour and a half worth of an interview, and redo the script. Entirely. ((Deep breath))

And even now that my script is completed and up for the suggestions of my peers and Prof Wesch, I still can’t help that lurking feeling that I’m still missing something crucial…I just don’t know what. After working on the script for hours on end, I’m definitely not objective enough to be able to find that missing piece, so in a couple of days I plan on returning to it with (hopefully) fresh eyes.

Something else that hit me while doing the script was that I have no idea what to use visually. None whatsoever. So, this is another area that I will have to revisit in a couple of days. The timing is perfect because I’ll be in Wisconsin, so I’ll have a new location to think in, which according to Jonah Lehrer, being outside of my normal location should (well, could) result in wondrous bursts of creativity. I sure hope so!

I know I’ve just spewed on and on about some mysterious script, but for all intents and purposes, I will not be posting this on my blog for various reasons. What I will be posting however, will be the drafts of my videos, but these will not be available for another week or so. ((Just a forewarning: they will be password protected until I receive the ‘ok’ from Shawn, so if you visit my blog during a time when you need a password just hang tight and keep checking back))

Anyway, that is the gist of what I’ve currently been up to. The next step is to perfect the script, and then I will be returning to the wonderful world of video editing!

The first is at Kansas State Anthropology Club’s Sapien Symposium, and the second is in Digital Ethnography. Although in both I will be presenting on my current research, the difference is that in the former I have 15 minutes, whereas in the latter I have 5 minutes. Yikes, right?

Although the thought of condensing a 15 minute presentation down to 5 minutes is a little terrifying, I welcome the challenge because it will force me to pick out the main, most crucial elements of Shawn’s story…which will probably be extremely beneficial when it comes down to the video.

Anyway, both of the presentations have turned  into me telling his story, but with a slight twist of what I had originally imagined. In the beginning, I envisioned telling his *full* story, which included going into detail about who he’s helped and how he’s helped. In a sense, I was focusing on the individual people affected, instead of the bigger what-does-this-say-about-humanity picture. Instead, I’m still planning on telling his full story, but with focus on everyone affected–both the YouTube community and Bangladeshi community, and the implications that arise. ((Rereading this last sentence I realized how incoherent I sound, but bear with me because I can’t seem to articulate what I mean. Hopefully by the end you will have some clarity as to my intentions. Hopefully.))

For those of you who are not going to be able to attend the presentations, here is a quick overview of what I intend to cover…

((I switch tenses so if you are an English major, be forewarned))
I plan on starting with a story that compelled Shawn to help others. Then, I give a little background on Shawn which will make the picture from the story directly connect with his desire to help. Knowing that he wants to help, I will talk about his initial plans on how to change the world, which don’t have anything to do with going to Bangladesh. From there I move to the lecture that changed the trajectory of his life (cue Dr. Jeffrey Sachs). At this time, Shawn realizes an important shift in where our generation obtains news and it doesn’t involve reading a book. Instead, it involves social media. Except at this time people don’t realize the great potential of these new tools, as evidenced by videos such as “Leave Britney Alone.” Instead of being a platform to get messages out, YouTube is being utilized as a video storehouse. Regardless, these viral videos are doing something that charity organizations lack: they connect with us. Fully aware of this, Shawn wanted to make videos about global poverty that would connect with us, and without making us feel guilty.  By using these new social media platforms he does just that. People love this. And they beg to donate. Shawn is convinced and opens a PayPal account. Donations flow in heavily. He decides to show people who there money is going to, and how it is being used. PEOPLE.LOVE.THIS. As such, he’s successfully connected the communities of the rich and poor (YouTube and Bangladesh). But moreover, he’s connecting the community within Bangladesh as well. This is illustrated with the picture of Saiful Islam and the story of the sand pond filter. Knowing that this new mode of giving, this transparent mode of giving, is highly successful, I set out to figure out *why* (from the YouTube community) and what they feel the future of philanthropy is. The answer: only time will tell.

One important thing to note is that this is the summary of my 15 minute presentation. The 5 minute one will definitely be a challenge, as I will really have to sort through and wonder about relevance.

Should be a fun time!

Well, in the “Introduction” (I know, I’m that anal retentive person that insists on reading books cover to cover, copyrights and dedications included) Ira discusses a couple of points that immediately leaped out at me. They help me because it gives me a new way to think, so hopefully they will help someone else too!

The first is on the components of a good story and what Wesch refers to as the KYHOI.

“When you’re writing stories like these, I think you’ve really only got two basic building blocks. You’ve got the plot of the story, and you’ve got the ideas the story is driving at. Usually the plot is the easy part. You do whatever research you can, you talk to lots of people, and you figure out what happened. It’s the ideas that kill you. What’s the story mean? What bigger truth about all of us does it point to? You can knock your head against a wall for days thinking that through.”

Knowing Ira struggles with this should put everyone at ease, but the part I love about this is thinking about “what bigger truth about all of us does it point to.” It is the ‘bigger truth,’ the KYHOI, that I’m still searching for. I plan on spending the next couple of days thinking about The Uncultured Project and all of the other research I’ve done in hopes of finding that “bigger truth.”

The next quote is on the power of a good story…

“They make the world seem like an exciting place to live. I come out of them feeling like a better person–more awake and more aware and more appreciative of everything around me [...] in times when the media can seem so clueless and beside the point, that’s a great comfort in itself.”

I was particularly fond of this quote because it served as a good, concise reminder of what it is I’m trying to do.

I’m at a point where I’m easily getting lost in all my research, but when it comes down to it, the point of my research and video is to move people and do exactly what Ira talked about–make people feel “more awake and more aware and more appreciative.”

So, somehow I need to move from the point of knocking my head against the wall trying to think up a KYHOI, and get to that point where I’m able to make people feel real (which is a whole other blog post in itself)!

I’m still searching for a KYHOI (for those without Weschian terminology, it stands for knock-your-head-off-idea), but I have *a lot* of information to sort through so I think it will come in time. The problem is that there are so many different things that I want to cover, or at least touch on, that it has the great chance of becoming incredibly disjunctured. Later in the week I am going to sit down and map out my thoughts, so hopefully by then I’ll be able to coherently articulate everything.

Anyway–after my interview, Shawn began to encourage people to check out my research. He sent out a facebook message, posted it on the Uncultured Project’s group wall, tweeted it, and blogged about it. In addition, he made a YouTube playlist that with all the videos that answer “Why Do You Support This?”

Helpful? You bet!!!!!

One thing is for sure: I will have plenty to sort through this week, so it should be fun! I’ll keep you all updated!

As I posted last time, I was scheduled to interview Shawn on Thursday, but unfortunately we had to reschedule. We had been trying to schedule an interview for a very long time, but due to conflicting schedules, we had been unsuccessful. So, when I first heard that we needed to reschedule I thought “whew, that’s great!” (because I had a lot of things going on), but before I could finish my thought, the daunting possibility of “oh no! what if I don’t have a story by the end of the semester” came to focus.

As Dan Savage’s mom would say here: “sh**.” (For context, listen to the This American Life podcast Heretics–I think it’s the last act).

[Deep breathe].

Saturday rolled around and as I took a break from working on transcribing my Xhosa fieldnotes, the realization that I still wanted to conduct a lot of interviews with Shawn’s supporters set in, and my mind began to race: How in the world do I go about doing this? How long will it take for people to message me back? What if no one messages me back because I’m some random stranger? What if they don’t want to be interviewed? Ahhhhhhhh!!!

Then it hit me–I need to ask the YouTube community! Why didn’t I think of this sooner? The majority of my research pertains to group formation, collective action, and what not, so shouldn’t this have been my first thought? OF COURSE, but it wasn’t, simply because I never considered myself someone to “vlog,” or actually ever have myself–like me, on YouTube.

I found most everyone who has ever created a video response to Shawn’s videos (and who have been active recently), and then set about messaging them. I explained my research and asked if anyone would be willing to create a video response if I made a vlog. After a couple of hours, I received a response from DeathOfAFatMan saying he would be more than willing. About an hour after that, AngelLife999 responded with a similar message.

From these two responses, I decided to go forth with creating a vlog in hopes that more individuals would see it and hopefully contribute as well. After about an hour (yes an hour) of recording and re-recording, I finally got one that ‘would do.’

After uploading it, I went ahead and went to bed with hopes that at least one person would respond. When I woke this morning, I had comments and video responses! Thrilled? You bet. Right now, there are 3 video responses (2 are in the process), and they are great! Definitely more than I could have hoped for! And, as for the comments, they are just as helpful!

Basically, I was interested in why individuals were compelled to support Shawn and the Uncultured Project. So far, the responses have been in line with what I had imagined–namely because it is a transparent form of giving, and because it does give people a sense of connection.

AWESOME!!!

Anyway–back to the whole interview issue.

I kept today (Sunday) completely free of anything that would pull me away from my computer, in hopes that I would hear back from Shawn. And…I DID. I received an email around noon and he said he was available “now,” so as soon as I got the message I quickly responded and immediately logged into Skype.

The interview went great! We talked about everything from his background, to his work with the Uncultured Project, and even to good sites to find cc music. Due to some of the content (privacy issues and spoilers), I am not going to post a transcript of the interview, however the sharable parts will most definitely be in my final video.

As far as other organizations similar to Shawn’s–I have looked into two: The Water Project and Kiva.

The Water Project, established in 2006, is a Christian non-profit organization that encourages individuals to make small donations in order to help bring clean water to various parts of the world. The process goes as follows: you make a donation, get matched up to a project and a partner (dependent on what type of project you prefer), and then they show you the results (via blogs, pictures, and sometimes videos). They say that they post “updates” in “near real time” but really, it appears that they use the term “updates” to refer to main/big events that are occurring. Overall, The Water Project has been very successful.

Contrasted with The Water Project, Kiva is a secular organization founded by Matt Flannery and Jessica Jackley in 2004 (you can see a timeline here). Their approach is also similar to that of The Uncultured Project, in that they also show individuals where their money goes, but it differs in three main ways. First, it shows individuals who they are lending to via a picture and a profile of the entrepreneur, which leads to the second difference in that it is based off of the concept of micro-financing. Below is an outline of how Kiva operates:

The whole process of donating to Kiva is very interesting (and money is not lost through PayPal) and also seems to be very successful. You can see a fact/statistic sheet here.

The third main difference is that Kiva gives individuals the opportunity to aggregate into “teams” (there are over 1192 PAGES of teams), and then self-organize their team. From there, they can create blogs, websites, etc., and then post the updates for their particular team on whichever platform chosen. On each group page, they have a list of people who have been matched up to their entrepreneur and you can click on the particular entrepreneur that takes you to information about them, their culture, and their status of repayment. I could go on more about this because there is LOTS more, but it would be more beneficial just to check out their website.

Both the Water Project and Kiva are excellent examples of new media being utilized as a new mode of philanthropy, but neither of them are doing exactly what Shawn is doing…not really at least. Mainly because Shawn is deeply connecting individuals and making the whole process more personal by making a direct form of interaction between the donor and the individual being helped. This is one great thing about not being a huge NGO or charity organization…he still has the opportunity to personally connect with people on YouTube, and then connect them with someone in Bangladesh.

This is about all I have for right now–but if anyone can think of something I’m missing, or should look into, please let me know!

In addition to the literature research, I also plan on looking into organizations similar to Shawn’s. Mainly, I’m going to be looking at people who he might have inspired to see how their individual efforts are going, as well as looking into unrelated projects that utilize social media in a similar fashion.

I have an interview scheduled with Shawn tomorrow, so I will update later in the week with how it goes. With all luck, he may have ideas of who else I could interview (it’d be really cool to interview someone from Bangladesh, but I’d settle for people who have worked with him and have seen his work first hand, and/or with people who have donated to him/been inspired from him). A lot of who I will want to interview in the future will depend on how the interview tomorrow goes, as I’m hoping it will give me more direction.

Anyway, if anyone has any other ideas please let me know!

Until recently, I have firmly believed that a change in the infrastructure of a society, in this case a change in technology, resulted in a change in a society’s social structure and super structure. Although I still believe this to be true (in most cases), I now realize that there is another step involved: the said change must also affect the behavior of the society. Thus, it is the adoption of this new behavior, as influenced by the new technology, that results in a change in society (Banister 2004, Deuze 2006, Meyrowitz 1985, Shirky 2008). In the case of new media, individuals have adopted a new behavior with regards to communicating with one another, and that, in turn, is currently affecting our culture at an unprecedented level.

Rather than sitting back and receiving endless amounts of information and being inundated with images, individuals have begun to “react to, participate in, and even alter a story as it is unfolding” (Shirky 2008:7). Simply put, the former audience is no longer an audience at all, but instead is involved in the production and ‘management’ of information, actively participating at all levels (Banister 2004, Burgess and Green 2009, Hirst and Harrison 2007, Leadbeater 2009, Palfrey and Gasser 2008, Rheingold 2003, Shirky 2008, Wright 2008) as enabled by the new mediascape. One explanation for this amount of participation is that “greater interactivity and direct participation on the Net means that both senders and receivers assume greater accountability for their actions, and see themselves in charge of setting the agenda” (Hirst and Harrison 2007:354).

Another important explanation is that even amidst our mediated lives, we desire a deep sense of community and human contact (Banister 2004, Meyrowitz 1985, Palfrey and Gasser 2008, Shirky 2008). That being said, what better way to feel connected to one another than to be able cross temporal and spatial divides that still physically restrain us from one another? With the many options to connect with each other, as presented by social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, LinkedIn, and more recently ChatRoulette (among others), crossing these barriers and feeling globally connected has never been easier (Adams and Adey 2008, Meyrowitz 1985, Rheingold 2003, Shirky 2008, Tapscott 1998).

But merely connecting does not inspire us to be producers of information, nor does it prove to be fulfilling the deep desire for human contact that we crave. It is in this aspect that new media have dramatically altered our behavior.

Whereas Neil Postman argued that due to the increase and betterment of communicative technologies people were becoming entrapped in a “great loop of impotence” (Postman 1985:69), the new media of today have provided a way in which people can “exercise a collective will” (Banister 2004:120) in an environment where “most of the barriers to group action have collapsed,” (Shirky 2008:22) so we are “free to explore new ways of gathering together and getting things done (2008:22).

By far, one of the largest trends in the literature was that given the highly participatory nature of our current mediascape (being able to easily share, cooperate, coordinate, and communicate), individuals are able to quickly and easily organize without organizations in support of various “causes,” and empower others to collectively act (Adams and Adey 2008, Banister 2004, Gitlin 2001, Leadbeater 2009, Negroponte 1995, Palfrey and Gasser 2008, Rheingold 2003, Shirky 2008, Tapscott 1998, Tapscott and Williams 2006). Thus, a new and powerful form of gathering—both in the virtual and “real” world has emerged.

However, even amidst the ease of gathering and coordinating collective action, it is important to note that many, like Postman, remain skeptical as to if the new media available will prove beneficial to the world, or if it will just result in impotence, similar to what Postman claimed about our (now) ‘old’ media.  Todd Gitlin clearly expresses this sentiment when he claims that “a worldwide community of the somewhat knowledgeable coexists with devastation. Aware of its distance from the theater of suffering, involved in its noninvolvement, the community of knowing makes itself at home in a world where it is normal that some are slaughtered while others watch pictures of their slaughter” (Gitlin 2001:172).

Although this may seem like what could have occurred, in reality it isn’t what is occurring. Instead, people are getting involved, and in new, different, and exciting ways…ways that are tailored to fit within the framework of our new mediascape. Based upon all of the literature I have read, I realized that no one had cited examples similar to what Shawn and The Uncultured Project have done. Namely, everyone failed to mention how social media is being utilized on a global scale by bringing different online communities together, and then bringing the online communities together with those living in abject poverty in a personal and direct way (which is only enabled by new media).

See how great this is? Due to new media, Shawn was able to blog, post videos on YouTube and pictures on Flickr, tweet, and essentially share his message and experiences with the world. But more than that, new media enabled him to begin a new form of giving in which the giver and receiver could see and interact with one another. This more direct and personal way of giving was appealing to many across the globe, resulting in over 20 countries being represented by donations.

Shawn realized that due to rise of ubiquitous media our society now connects differently than before. And because this connection is more apparent, he was able to tap into a new way of “connecting” the rich and poor, thus enabling transparent giving to be more effective than the traditional ‘send in your money and we’ll make sure it goes to a good cause’ mode.

By carefully researching The Uncultured Project, I hope to demonstrate to the skeptics that new media is changing the world, and for the better. I understand that there will always be individuals who will negatively take advantage of new media in order to achieve unsatisfactory ends, but the number of users who are using new media for the good of humanity will always trump those with foul intentions.

We are currently living in a time where we are more connected than ever before, but only a very small fraction of  our society realizes this. I have full confidence that as we continue living in an age of ubiquitous media (and soon ‘invisible’ media), the inherent love for our fellow human beings will once again be recognized, and we will finally move away from our impotence and towards a period where we begin really caring for and seeing others.

“Our social tools are turning love into a renewable building material. When people care enough, they can come together and accomplish things of a scope and longevity that were previously impossible; they can do big things for love.” –Clay Shirky

Adams, Kate and Melissa Adey
2008 Social Collaboration: Joining Forces on the Digital Frontier. Whitepaper.

Banister, Jim
2004 Word of Mouse: The New Age of Networked Media. Chicago: Agate Books.

Burgess, Jean and Joshua Green
2009 YouTube’s Social Network: The extending boundaries of a major phenomenon for millions. InterMedia 37(5):24-29.

Deuze, Mark
2006 Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principle Components of a Digital Culture. The Information Society (22): 63, 75.

Gitlin, Todd
2001 Media Unlimited: How the Torrent of Images and Sounds Overwhelms Our Lives. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Hirst, Martin and John Harrison
2007 Communication and New Media: From Broadcast to Narrowcast. New York: Oxford University Press.

Leadbeater, Charles
2009 We-Think: Mass Innovation, Not Mass Production. London: Profile Books.

Meyrowitz, Joshua
1985 No Sense of Place. New York: Oxford University Press.

Negroponte, Nicholas
1995 Being Digital. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Palfrey, John and Urs Gasser
2008 Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.

Postman, Neil
1985 Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: The Penguin Group.

Rheingold, Howard
2003 Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing.

Shirky, Clay
2008 Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. New York: The Penguin Group.

Tapscott, Don and A. D. Williams
2006 Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

Tapscott, Don
1998 Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Wright, Terence
2009 Visual Impact: Culture and the Meaning of Images. Oxford: Berg Publishers.

So far–I *really*really*really* like Clay Shirky and Howard Rheingold, so I will probably focus more on their work (but of course, this could all change).

Amazon has pretty good summaries and reviews of everything, so if you see anything that you might be interested let me know (as there is a good chance that it is in the pile on my desk), and I can pass it on.

If anyone has anything else to add, please let me know!

Adams, Kate and Melissa Adey
2008 Social Collaboration: Joining Forces on the Digital Frontier. Whitepaper.

Banister, Jim
2004 Word of Mouse: The New Age of Networked Media. Chicago: Agate Books.

Burgess, Jean, Joshua Green, Henry Jenkins, and John Hartley
2009 YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. UK: Polity Publishing.

Burgess, Jean and Joshua Green
2009 YouTube’s Social Network: the extending boundaries of a major phenomenon for millions. InterMedia: 37(5): 24-29.

Creeber, Glen and Royston Martin
2008 Digital Culture: Understanding New Media. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Debord, Guy
2000 The Society of the Spectacle. Detroit, Michigan: Black and Red Books.

Deuze, Mark
2006 Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principle Components of a Digital Culture. The Information Society (22): 63, 75.

de Zengotita, Thomas
2005 Mediated: How the Media Shapes Your World and the Way You Live in it. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Gitlin, Todd
2001 Media Unlimited: How the Torrent of Images and Sounds Overwhelms Our Lives. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Hartley, John
2008 YouTube, digital literacy and the growth of knowledge. In: Media, Communication and Humanity Conference 2008 at LSE, 21-23 September 2008, London.

Hey, Tony
2008 A Shared Digital Future? Will the Possibilities for Mass Creativity on the Internet be Realized or Squandered. Nature 455.7209 (2009): 31+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 21 Feb 2010.

Hirst, Martin and John Harrison
2007 Communication and New Media: From Broadcast to Narrowcast. New York: Oxford University Press.

Leadbeater, Charles
2009 We-Think: Mass Innovation, Not Mass Production. London: Profile Books.

Levinson, Paul
1999 Digital McLuhan: A Guide to the Information Millennium. New York: Routledge.

Marcus, George E.
1996 Connected: Engagements with Media! Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Meyrowitz, Joshua
1985 No Sense of Place. New York: Oxford University Press.

Negroponte, Nicholas
1995 Being Digital. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Palfrey, John and Urs Gasser
2008 Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.

Postman, Neil
1985 Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: The Penguin Group.

Rheingold, Howard
2003 Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing.

Rheingold, Howard
2000 The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Shirky, Clay
2008 Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. New York: The Penguin Group.

Tapscott, Don and A.D. Williams
2006 Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

Tapscott, Don
1998 Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Trend, David
2001 Reading Digital Culture. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.

Wright, Terence
2009 Visual Impact: Culture and the Meaning of Images. Oxford: Berg Publishers.

Veltman, Kim
2006 Understanding New Media: Augmented Knowledge and Culture. Alberta: University of Calgary Press.

Good blog with Clay Shirky, Seb Paquet, Danah Boyd (who are all awesome), and others (who are probably awesome)