I did not feel as engaged with this week’s topic as I had the previous three. I chose to continue exploring the theme of employment, and specifically the legality and morality of Facebook screening employees, prospective or otherwise. Some of my colleagues chose to take an entirely new approach to this topic, and, in hindsight I might have done the same, as I felt I perhaps limited the scope of what I could discuss. This week’s post also received the lowest number of responses and comments on my blog thus far, which would suggest that I was not the only one to pick up on this.
Despite this, it was refreshing to consider the debate from a new angle. Instead of focusing on how we should censor ourselves I was able to explore the other side of the debate, and found a great deal of multi-media and information supporting the idea that companies should not necessarily have the right to judge us by our online profiles, something which many of my fellow bloggers have proposed in their work during the course of the module. I found that videos were the best form of media to help illustrate my points in the post, as they efficiently and articulately summarised many key concepts.
As I’ve mentioned, there were a variety of approaches to this topic. Two posts that I particularly enjoyed were Arthur’s and Chris’s, which discussed the ethics of cookies and the privacy of digital celebrities respectively. Both of these subjects are features in my own life, and so it was fascinating to read about their investigations into the ethics of these integral parts of the digital society. Interestingly, both posts incorporated self-generated info-graphics, a medium which I am yet to use but am slowly beginning to see the appeal of and may try to incorporate next week.
The main message from this topic is that I should perhaps think outside the box when it comes to exploring a topic, as versatility seems to be the best way to garner interest and stimulate debate.
What would Will do? 