Creativity plays a huge role in the modern education process. Whether it is teachers choosing unorthodox methods of sharing their knowledge, or pupils trying unconventional ways of acquiring information, an innovative approach is always beneficial.
To begin with, state-of-the-art technology provides teachers and lecturers with an opportunity to educate young people in a more creative and engaging way. A monotone and repetitive talk can be replaced with watching a topic-related film or browsing the Internet together in order to find the desired information; such activities are, undoubtedly, present in every student's day-to-day life and will transform their academic experienced into a pleasantly spent time, instead of a dull necessity.
Yet, it is not just teachers that can use creativity to improve the quality of the class. Thinking "outside of the box" is certain to make an individual presentation or a group project more enjoyable - both for the teacher and the classmates - and have an impact on the final grade. Possibly, it can even draw the pupils' attention to certain topics and issues, therefore broadening their knowledge even more.
Finally, creativity proves to be helpful not only during the class, but also when studying at home. Homework does not necessarily mean hours spent reading textbooks - a person that is not afraid to use their imagination can surely find numerous ways of looking for the needed information that usually are less time-consuming and might provide them with even more valuable knowledge.
The modern world creates various opportunities for those that desire to learn or share what they already know, if only one is willing to try a different, previously unavailable approach, certain to improve one's academic performance.
22 December 2018
7 December 2018
What role does music play in life? [short example essay]
Just as there are many different genres of music, this branch of the arts might also serve various purposes. From helping a person achieve a well-deserved rest to becoming a valuable source of income, music provides numerous ways for it to be enjoyed.
First of all, listening to music can be relaxing or help one calm down - there are many songs and albums created specifically for this purpose. The biggest advantage of such a way of resting is that there is usually no need to take any medicaments to alleviate the stress it is important to remember, however, that if painkillers or other drugs have been prescribed, they should always be taken.
Additionally, music provides an opportunity for a person to be met with a cathartic experience. It might seem similar to relaxing, but requires one's own effort - creating lyrics and songs - rather than simply listening to other artists. It is a fine method of confronting negative emotions that prevents one from upsetting others or harming oneself.
Lastly, as music is highly commercialised these days, composing one's own pieces might not only help cope with personal struggles, but also become a way of making money. Surely, not every musician is talented (or lucky) enough to sell millions of records worldwide, but it should not discourage anyone from trying to advertise their own creations the alternative scene is also popular, especially among the young, and can provide a chance for wider recognition.
Beyond any doubt, music serves numerous purposes, and can be used as a means of improving a person's well-being - both psychological and economic - without unnecessary medical or other external intervence.
First of all, listening to music can be relaxing or help one calm down - there are many songs and albums created specifically for this purpose. The biggest advantage of such a way of resting is that there is usually no need to take any medicaments to alleviate the stress it is important to remember, however, that if painkillers or other drugs have been prescribed, they should always be taken.
Additionally, music provides an opportunity for a person to be met with a cathartic experience. It might seem similar to relaxing, but requires one's own effort - creating lyrics and songs - rather than simply listening to other artists. It is a fine method of confronting negative emotions that prevents one from upsetting others or harming oneself.
Lastly, as music is highly commercialised these days, composing one's own pieces might not only help cope with personal struggles, but also become a way of making money. Surely, not every musician is talented (or lucky) enough to sell millions of records worldwide, but it should not discourage anyone from trying to advertise their own creations the alternative scene is also popular, especially among the young, and can provide a chance for wider recognition.
Beyond any doubt, music serves numerous purposes, and can be used as a means of improving a person's well-being - both psychological and economic - without unnecessary medical or other external intervence.
30 November 2018
The role of creativity in a person's life [short example essay]
Usually associated with ar or innovative inventions, creativity can also come in handy in day-to-day life. This particular trait can definitely help one in a variety of circumstances, from improving work performance to discovering uncomplicated methods of self-help.
Many people, especially those who have struggled to find their current job, are afraid of losing the position, and thus do not consider taking any risks or carrying out their ideas of how to increase their chances of promotion. While such an attitude is understandable, not taking advantage of whatever capabilities a person might have - in this case, creativity - is sure to prevent them from progressing, which can have a negative influence on both their career and mental well-being.
Alarming and potentially dangerous consequences of numerous situations can also be alleviated by an original approach. From actions as simple as figuring out how to open a tightly sealed jar to evading a car crash, one should always consider imagination an important resource.
Finally, a person who feels sad and distressed can easily count on their creativity to help them break out of their bitter mood. Obviously, one should always seek professional help if it is needed, but it is important to remember that something almost effortless - like a new hair colour - can make a day better.
The work "resourcefulness" might have negative connotations, but when used to describe the simple ways of advancing the quality of someone's daily life, nobody should refrain from using their creativity to benefit themselves or others.
Many people, especially those who have struggled to find their current job, are afraid of losing the position, and thus do not consider taking any risks or carrying out their ideas of how to increase their chances of promotion. While such an attitude is understandable, not taking advantage of whatever capabilities a person might have - in this case, creativity - is sure to prevent them from progressing, which can have a negative influence on both their career and mental well-being.
Alarming and potentially dangerous consequences of numerous situations can also be alleviated by an original approach. From actions as simple as figuring out how to open a tightly sealed jar to evading a car crash, one should always consider imagination an important resource.
Finally, a person who feels sad and distressed can easily count on their creativity to help them break out of their bitter mood. Obviously, one should always seek professional help if it is needed, but it is important to remember that something almost effortless - like a new hair colour - can make a day better.
The work "resourcefulness" might have negative connotations, but when used to describe the simple ways of advancing the quality of someone's daily life, nobody should refrain from using their creativity to benefit themselves or others.
9 November 2018
Is studying history a waste of time? [short example essay]
Nowadays, people - especially the young - are so focused on their day-to-day life and concerned with their future that they minimalise the importance of the past, thus not paying much attention to history lesson. Such an approach, however, is likely to prevent one from acquiring valuable knowledge, affecting both one's academic and personal chances of success.
It is often said that whoever does not know history is sure to repeat humanity's past mistakes. the belief appears to be true, as the world is continuously troubled with military conflicts, as well as social and economic issues; the reasons for said disturbances, more often than not, happen to be very similar to those that sparked past conflicts.
Studying history can also be very helpful if a person desires a stable job or a fruitful career path. Positions such as an archaeologist or a politician are usually well-paid and respected, but unattainable without a higher level of historical knowledge.
Last but not least, past events have made every person who they are today - this tendency is especially visible in regions that have been damaged by wars or troubled by various other conflicts. Familiarising oneself with the origins of such situations can become a valuable asset on one's path to self-discovery.
Being preoccupied with living in the moment should never be an obstacle on a person's path of rediscovering the past. What has already happened can undeniably happen again, and whoever is familiar with history can certainly use it to their advantage.
It is often said that whoever does not know history is sure to repeat humanity's past mistakes. the belief appears to be true, as the world is continuously troubled with military conflicts, as well as social and economic issues; the reasons for said disturbances, more often than not, happen to be very similar to those that sparked past conflicts.
Studying history can also be very helpful if a person desires a stable job or a fruitful career path. Positions such as an archaeologist or a politician are usually well-paid and respected, but unattainable without a higher level of historical knowledge.
Last but not least, past events have made every person who they are today - this tendency is especially visible in regions that have been damaged by wars or troubled by various other conflicts. Familiarising oneself with the origins of such situations can become a valuable asset on one's path to self-discovery.
Being preoccupied with living in the moment should never be an obstacle on a person's path of rediscovering the past. What has already happened can undeniably happen again, and whoever is familiar with history can certainly use it to their advantage.
19 October 2018
What can be learnt from studying literature [short example essay]
Literature, like many of the subjects that form a part of the liberal arts, cannot be thoroughly defined or subjected to strict rules, due to the variety of material and subjective interpretations. Such freedom, however, does not make studying literature chaotic, but rather creates many different possibilities of acquiring valuable skills and helpful habits.
Firstly, literature classes can help students learn historical facts by introducing them to the chosen creators. A large number of poets and writers, especially those living during the times of war and unrest, were involved in politics, serving in the army, or simply encouraging civilians to fight through their literary work; some of them, like the famous Polish poet Krzysztof Baczyński, became significant historical figures.
Secondly, studying various literary texts allows one to learn the vocabulary they would not otherwise encounter during their daily reading activities, such as opening a newspaper or checking social media profiles. Literature classes include pieces of work comprising of rich and sublime vocabulary that can undoubtedly improve the student's academic performance.
Finally, familiarising oneself with literature enables a person to learn the correct way of creating texts. By observing the structure and other core features of a literary piece, one can more easily create one's own work, as well as avoid common mistakes and misconceptions.
To sum up, studying literature proves to be beneficial for those involved in it - from helping deepen historical knowledge to allowing students to become more fluent in a given language, literature is definitely a subject one will not waste one's time on.
Firstly, literature classes can help students learn historical facts by introducing them to the chosen creators. A large number of poets and writers, especially those living during the times of war and unrest, were involved in politics, serving in the army, or simply encouraging civilians to fight through their literary work; some of them, like the famous Polish poet Krzysztof Baczyński, became significant historical figures.
Secondly, studying various literary texts allows one to learn the vocabulary they would not otherwise encounter during their daily reading activities, such as opening a newspaper or checking social media profiles. Literature classes include pieces of work comprising of rich and sublime vocabulary that can undoubtedly improve the student's academic performance.
Finally, familiarising oneself with literature enables a person to learn the correct way of creating texts. By observing the structure and other core features of a literary piece, one can more easily create one's own work, as well as avoid common mistakes and misconceptions.
To sum up, studying literature proves to be beneficial for those involved in it - from helping deepen historical knowledge to allowing students to become more fluent in a given language, literature is definitely a subject one will not waste one's time on.
23 September 2018
Activism [women in social media - part 3]
Previous two chapters described unquestionably negative factors contributing to a female celebrity's online experience related to social media. It it important to notice that the ordeal was also involuntarily; an unforeseen consequence of seemingly innocuous actions, rooten in the trust put into leading Internet companies, and, obviously, other users.
Among the undeniably adverse occurrences, it is, however, necessary to remember that famous American women are not fated to encounter problems every time they log into their accounts; social media, above all, provide an opportunity not only to defend oneself and respond to criticism and comments about sudden vulnerability, but also to take a stand against it, as well as other forms of mistreatment experienced by the victim, and others.
Moreover, besides expressing internal, personal feelings, social media allows users to share concepts and ideas they support with a large and usually diverse audience.
The term “activism” might bring to mind taking literal physical action and steps towards reaching a chosen goal or drawing a wider attention to a situation or a problem. Examples of such processes involving or centering around women can be traced – most noticeably – from past decades (suffragettes being probably the most recognisable one) to the present day (Iranian women publicly opposing mandatory veiling in hopes to regain the right to present themselves in accordance with their beliefs and will).
Even though those movements, among others, were, and still are, widely discussed and popularised through the Internet and, ipso facto, social media, they did not specifically start within the online community. In his book, Tweets and The Streets. Social Media and Contemporary Activism, Paolo Gerbaudo (2012) informs the reader that online activism is not as foreign and unfamiliar of an occurrence as it might seem.
“Where self-managed activist internet services like Indymedia and activist mailing lists were the media of choice of the anti-globalisation movement, contemporary activists are instead shamelessly appropriating corporate social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. Commenting on this enthusiastic adoption of social media, pundits and journalists have readily resorted to expressions like ‘the Facebook revolution’ or ‘the Twitter revolution’.” (p. 2)
As with many popular movements, online activism gets divided into categories and manifests itself within different realms of focus. The types of activism described in this chapter are going to be divided into two categories: societal issues and political activism.
Aforementioned mandatory veiling can be considered related to the first category, however it is associated with a law upheld in a Middle Eastern country. In Women and Politics in Iran: Veiling, Unveiling, and Reveiling, Hamideh Seghdi (2007) details the coercion to the reader:
“From the outset, unveiled women became a social anathema but veiled women acquired revolutionary credentials. Extolling the concealed women, women's bodies were ordered to be disguised like “pearls protected inside a shell”, as street murals conveyed and communicate today. Veiling guarded Islam, but significantly, it hid women's sexual power/energy from eliciting public disorder by distracting and arousing men sexually.” (p. 211)
Taking cultural differences into account, one might wonder what decree or societal norm western women, especially those who are famous, might struggle or have issues with? From being the first to be granted the right to vote, to being in a complete control over their lives and choices (which, sadly, still cannot be attributed to women and girls in numerous contemporary societies), the lives of the female part of the populations of North America and Europe appear desirable and praiseworthy.
However, behind the facade of liberty, there are various concerns and questions, still unanswered, that shatter the seemingly perfect notion of such life, and, by the fact itself, motivate female celebrities to try to have a say in discussions and debates about a certain commotion.
In the early seventies the Supreme Court in the United States decided that providing an access to abortion as well as the procedure itself would no longer be treated as a criminal offence. The infamous case is known as “Roe vs Wade”, as those were the name and the alias of the opposing sides that took part in the case. Since the legal settlement American abortion clinics have been providing approximately 300000 terminations every year. In their book, Abortion Politics: Public Policy in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Marianne Githens and Dorothy Stetson (1996) describe the long-lasting effect of the case:
“(...) In 1973 the Supreme Court ruled in the case Roe vs. Wade that abortion fell within a woman's zone of privacy and struck down a restrictive Georgia abortion law in the companion case Doe vs. Bolton, the right to obtain an abortion has continued to be hotly debated (…). The case for an against abortion is regularly made in homes, in churches, in the media, and in legislatures across the country.” (p. 7)
Abortion and access to contraceptives (often called “reproductive rights”) for many seem to be a big part of western women's liberation. Even though the concept of a woman's right to choose her own way of living is mostly seen as positive, the meaning of liberation varies. Just as the accessibility of medical procedures mentioned above might be seen as an improvement on women's life, there are those – also females – that bear a different perspective.
One of the most influential pro-life advocates is a famous California-born journalist Lila Rose. As Marsha Vanderford (1989) explains in Vilification and Social Movements: A case study of pro‐life and pro‐choice rhetoric, the term “pro-life” (as opposed to “pro-choice”) is a name given to a person or organisation that disagrees with abortion, as well as any other form of ending a human life by another person. They also support adoption and promote taking care of the elderly, both of which are alternatives to terminating pregnancies and providing an access to euthanasia for people who are close to their natural passing or death caused by severe or terminal illnesses. Interestingly, in her book, the author also mentions the abundance of pro-choice personalities in media, therefore making the case for activists like Lila Rose:
“Patterns (...) delineated powerful individuals in media, business, and politics as pro-choice supporters. Media executives were consistently linked to pro-choice action.” (p. 171)
Rose, on her website, describes herself as: “a speaker, writer and human rights activist. Lila founded and serves as president of Live Action, a media and news nonprofit dedicated to ending abortion and inspiring a culture that respects all human life.”
Besides more traditional form of online presence, like websites, Rose uses several social media platforms that help the advocate spread her message.
Similarly to Facebook, Twitter does not only allow its users to share content and comment on it in a conventional form. Adding the commentary directly above the shared post is a popular feature which allows the user's remark to be seen by everyone, not just those who directly open the comment section. Rose seems to use this function a lot in order to target a larger audience.
The Twitter posts quoted below come from the activist's account (@LilaGraceRose) and are written in a form of the described reply.
"Since 2015, at least 16 babies were born alive in Florida after failed abortion attempts. We don't know what happened to these little ones. Were they given sufficient medical care to survive? Will we ever get to hear their stories?" as a response to "Over the past few years, according to online reports, there have been 16 abortion survivors born after abortion attempts in the state of Florida."
"Thank you, Nebraska @GovRicketts for ending federal funding to Planned Parenthood through Title X. Planned Parenthood is the largest recipient of Title X funding, and every dollar frees the abortion giant up to pay staff and lobby for more tax dollars." as a response to "Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts signed a budget Wednesday that will eliminate federal family-planning funding to Planned Parenthood of the Heartland."
"Your [Planned Parenthood] abortionists violently tore apart 900 children today, some of them old enough to survive outside the womb. All were helpless.
You took money from parents who were scared and struggling and sold violence and death as a solution to their struggles." as a response to "Everyone has the right to lead a life that is healthy & free from violence (...)"
The tweets, obviously, give the reader and users an insight into the author's view, but, simultaneously, help them understand how social media has alleviated a woman's ability of signalling ideas and engaging in discussion.
Even though a female celebrity might already have a degree of recognition and capability to use long-established means of sharing her opinions (interviews, authoring a book), a direct message with an option of an easy engagement in conversation creates a sense of ability – and, in many cases, the ability itself – to actually take part in a case one is interested in supporting or debating. Davidson (2008) details the importance of such opportunity:
“Managers and leaders routinely use a variety of techniques, such as encouraging informal social interaction and creating and maintaining strong organizational to help people feel a part of the whole organization (Schein, 1985). One's sense of feeling included is most crucial because it strengthens affective commitment to the organization.” (p. 172)
Societal issues – abortion and adoption being not only not an exception, but a popular and returning points – are thoroughly linked to politics. On the other hand, they rarely stem out of it, however, an issue discussed publicly by a politician or a party might start a nationwide debate, involving, besides ordinary voters', the opinions of those with an already established fanbase and following.
The 2016 American presidential election seems to be a good example of such involvement.
One might safely assume that the fact that Hillary Rodham Clinton became one of two main candidates in the race to the White House greatly encouraged female celebrities to start social media based political commentary. Since the wife of the former president, Bill Clinton, had the chance to become the first female to take the office, numerous famous women used their Internet platforms to show their encouragement.
However, similarly to the previously discussed issue related to abortion, there were also those who disapproved of Clinton's candidacy. The opponents did not hesitate to detail their stance by using social media accounts as well, and – what was easily predictable – both sides drafted a wide attention for their activity, which resulted in a great number of favourable, but also, what seemed inevitable, critical comments.
It is important to remember that the purpose of this chapter is to present the famous American woman's availability to debate political turmoil (that had an impact on them as citizens) that presidential elections usually bring, and analyze the experience. The examples and quotations presented below do not ai at judging the person's position or opinion, but are supposed to illustrate and provide details of said online environment.
During the presidential campaign in 2016, Katy Perry (full name Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson) – one of the best selling American pop artists worldwide - became a prominent and dedicated supporter of Clinton. Among various public ventures, notably designing shoes named after the candidate and dedicating one of the songs on her album Witness to the loss of the supported Democrat, Perry used her Twitter account, which is currently followed by over 100 users, to show her approval for Clinton. By adding a popular hashtags created by other supporters, she announced:
“YOU GOT THIS @HillaryClinton #DEBATES”
"She's smiling with ease cause #shesgotthis #ImWithHer #debatenight"
"RT if you're already preparing a seat at the table for @HillaryClinton"
As mentioned above, despite the tweets being targeted mainly at the singer's fans and the followers of the Democratic candidate, Perry also faced criticism for her posts. Under the article of the writer Jerome Hudson (Katy Perry Begs Democratic National Convention To Vote For Hillary Clinton), working for the political news site Breitbart, they commentators demonstrated their contempt for the woman's plea and actions. The author of the most popular (given the most votes by other readers) comment claims:
“(...) EMPTY mind, you vapid c_nt. Empty, not open. Make an IQ of at least 110 a prerequisite for voting rights, and all America's problems will be gone. Make it a requirement for performing in public, and we'll never hear from Katy Perry again.”
The statement clearly indicates the person's derogatory attitude towards the woman in relation to her gender (“vapid c_nt”), as well as doubt in her mental abilities, calling her mind “empty”. Even though it is unknown whether Perry saw the comment, it is safe to assume that she must have been aware of the opinion others have of her for supporting the chosen candidate, since the post, as previously mentioned, gained a big applause of the readers of the article.
Nevertheless, since there were two candidates hoping to become the resident of The White House, both of them gathered supporters amongst the famous.
Keeping in mind the point made earlier – that Hillary Clinton could have become the first female president of The United States – it seemed that she was the one to have the majority of female celebrities as allies. Scholars Bremner, Soufer, McCarthy, Delaney, Staib, Duncan, and Charney (2001) support the theory in their article, Gender Differences In Cognitive and Neural Correlates of Remembrance of Emotional Words:
"Studies suggest that men and women have important differences in specific cognitive functions. (...) women rely on emotional content to a greater degree in the processing of information." (p. 56)
The emotional aspect of having a representative of their gender among American leaders was undoubtedly an important factor that lead many female celebrities to show Hillary Clinton their appreciation. Nonetheless, her rival, Donald John Trump, managed to attract various popular names as well.
Kaya Jones (real name Chrystal Neria), a singer raised in Nevada, who was once performing with a popular all-girl music group The Pussycat Dolls, did not conceal her support for the Republican candidate. Similarly to Perry, Jones decided that Twitter would help her spread her opinion and approval:
"I want to show other celebrities who voted for @realDonaldTrump it’s ok to come forward. Better yet let’s show the world how many Americans stand with him. Bullies shouldn’t be allowed for almost a year and a half to bully us without cause. If you voted for him just Like or RT"
She even used a hashtag invented by Trump's opponents to show her support:
"Trump that’s who. Himself even more fabulous #CouldBeatTrumpIn2020"
The statements received a negative feedback as well. In an interview with Willie Pena, as an answer to the question about being criticized for openly supporting the candidate, the woman admitted: “Yes. I've received death threats.”
Jones, however, is not the only famous ally of Donald Trump. Blaire White, a political commentator with a following of almost 400 thousands users on her YouTube channel, admitted to voting Republican in the 2016 election. White is usually considered as phenomenon, since transsexuals have always been associated with the opposite side of the political spectrum, a theory that is backed in Rawyn Connell's (2012) Transsexual Women and Feminist Thought: Toward New Understanding and New Politics:
"The political meaning of transsexuality began to be negotiated in the US New Left (...). Several small, radical transsexual/transvestite groups formed, and they issued a manifesto calling for social justice." (p. 4)
White shares her experience from the point of view of a trans female who has publicly voiced her approval of the candidate. Marie Solis adduces White's interview with Newsweek, where the YouTuber describes a physical assault she has endured:
"I have never been assaulted for being trans. I’ve never had anyone on the street say anything nasty to me about being trans. But I was assaulted for wearing a Trump hat. I think that speaks for itself."
Although such reaction to someone expressing their political leaning might seem exaggerated, Henrik Urdal reminds that, surprisingly, it is to be expected in countries like The United States: "The opportunity literature suggests that the opportunity for political violence is greater the less autocratic a state is (…)" (p. 613)
In summary, the chapter described a new opportunity for famous women not only to join a discussion, usually related to a popular or controversial topics, but also to spread their message and opinions more easily. Despite already having an audience, social media allows a celebrity to engage with followers and commentators in a way that is quick and gives the impression (and, obviously, the real experience) of having an impact on The United States and the world's current struggles and events.
Among the undeniably adverse occurrences, it is, however, necessary to remember that famous American women are not fated to encounter problems every time they log into their accounts; social media, above all, provide an opportunity not only to defend oneself and respond to criticism and comments about sudden vulnerability, but also to take a stand against it, as well as other forms of mistreatment experienced by the victim, and others.
Moreover, besides expressing internal, personal feelings, social media allows users to share concepts and ideas they support with a large and usually diverse audience.
The term “activism” might bring to mind taking literal physical action and steps towards reaching a chosen goal or drawing a wider attention to a situation or a problem. Examples of such processes involving or centering around women can be traced – most noticeably – from past decades (suffragettes being probably the most recognisable one) to the present day (Iranian women publicly opposing mandatory veiling in hopes to regain the right to present themselves in accordance with their beliefs and will).
Even though those movements, among others, were, and still are, widely discussed and popularised through the Internet and, ipso facto, social media, they did not specifically start within the online community. In his book, Tweets and The Streets. Social Media and Contemporary Activism, Paolo Gerbaudo (2012) informs the reader that online activism is not as foreign and unfamiliar of an occurrence as it might seem.
“Where self-managed activist internet services like Indymedia and activist mailing lists were the media of choice of the anti-globalisation movement, contemporary activists are instead shamelessly appropriating corporate social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. Commenting on this enthusiastic adoption of social media, pundits and journalists have readily resorted to expressions like ‘the Facebook revolution’ or ‘the Twitter revolution’.” (p. 2)
As with many popular movements, online activism gets divided into categories and manifests itself within different realms of focus. The types of activism described in this chapter are going to be divided into two categories: societal issues and political activism.
Aforementioned mandatory veiling can be considered related to the first category, however it is associated with a law upheld in a Middle Eastern country. In Women and Politics in Iran: Veiling, Unveiling, and Reveiling, Hamideh Seghdi (2007) details the coercion to the reader:
“From the outset, unveiled women became a social anathema but veiled women acquired revolutionary credentials. Extolling the concealed women, women's bodies were ordered to be disguised like “pearls protected inside a shell”, as street murals conveyed and communicate today. Veiling guarded Islam, but significantly, it hid women's sexual power/energy from eliciting public disorder by distracting and arousing men sexually.” (p. 211)
Taking cultural differences into account, one might wonder what decree or societal norm western women, especially those who are famous, might struggle or have issues with? From being the first to be granted the right to vote, to being in a complete control over their lives and choices (which, sadly, still cannot be attributed to women and girls in numerous contemporary societies), the lives of the female part of the populations of North America and Europe appear desirable and praiseworthy.
However, behind the facade of liberty, there are various concerns and questions, still unanswered, that shatter the seemingly perfect notion of such life, and, by the fact itself, motivate female celebrities to try to have a say in discussions and debates about a certain commotion.
In the early seventies the Supreme Court in the United States decided that providing an access to abortion as well as the procedure itself would no longer be treated as a criminal offence. The infamous case is known as “Roe vs Wade”, as those were the name and the alias of the opposing sides that took part in the case. Since the legal settlement American abortion clinics have been providing approximately 300000 terminations every year. In their book, Abortion Politics: Public Policy in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Marianne Githens and Dorothy Stetson (1996) describe the long-lasting effect of the case:
“(...) In 1973 the Supreme Court ruled in the case Roe vs. Wade that abortion fell within a woman's zone of privacy and struck down a restrictive Georgia abortion law in the companion case Doe vs. Bolton, the right to obtain an abortion has continued to be hotly debated (…). The case for an against abortion is regularly made in homes, in churches, in the media, and in legislatures across the country.” (p. 7)
Abortion and access to contraceptives (often called “reproductive rights”) for many seem to be a big part of western women's liberation. Even though the concept of a woman's right to choose her own way of living is mostly seen as positive, the meaning of liberation varies. Just as the accessibility of medical procedures mentioned above might be seen as an improvement on women's life, there are those – also females – that bear a different perspective.
One of the most influential pro-life advocates is a famous California-born journalist Lila Rose. As Marsha Vanderford (1989) explains in Vilification and Social Movements: A case study of pro‐life and pro‐choice rhetoric, the term “pro-life” (as opposed to “pro-choice”) is a name given to a person or organisation that disagrees with abortion, as well as any other form of ending a human life by another person. They also support adoption and promote taking care of the elderly, both of which are alternatives to terminating pregnancies and providing an access to euthanasia for people who are close to their natural passing or death caused by severe or terminal illnesses. Interestingly, in her book, the author also mentions the abundance of pro-choice personalities in media, therefore making the case for activists like Lila Rose:
“Patterns (...) delineated powerful individuals in media, business, and politics as pro-choice supporters. Media executives were consistently linked to pro-choice action.” (p. 171)
Rose, on her website, describes herself as: “a speaker, writer and human rights activist. Lila founded and serves as president of Live Action, a media and news nonprofit dedicated to ending abortion and inspiring a culture that respects all human life.”
Besides more traditional form of online presence, like websites, Rose uses several social media platforms that help the advocate spread her message.
Similarly to Facebook, Twitter does not only allow its users to share content and comment on it in a conventional form. Adding the commentary directly above the shared post is a popular feature which allows the user's remark to be seen by everyone, not just those who directly open the comment section. Rose seems to use this function a lot in order to target a larger audience.
The Twitter posts quoted below come from the activist's account (@LilaGraceRose) and are written in a form of the described reply.
"Since 2015, at least 16 babies were born alive in Florida after failed abortion attempts. We don't know what happened to these little ones. Were they given sufficient medical care to survive? Will we ever get to hear their stories?" as a response to "Over the past few years, according to online reports, there have been 16 abortion survivors born after abortion attempts in the state of Florida."
"Thank you, Nebraska @GovRicketts for ending federal funding to Planned Parenthood through Title X. Planned Parenthood is the largest recipient of Title X funding, and every dollar frees the abortion giant up to pay staff and lobby for more tax dollars." as a response to "Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts signed a budget Wednesday that will eliminate federal family-planning funding to Planned Parenthood of the Heartland."
"Your [Planned Parenthood] abortionists violently tore apart 900 children today, some of them old enough to survive outside the womb. All were helpless.
You took money from parents who were scared and struggling and sold violence and death as a solution to their struggles." as a response to "Everyone has the right to lead a life that is healthy & free from violence (...)"
The tweets, obviously, give the reader and users an insight into the author's view, but, simultaneously, help them understand how social media has alleviated a woman's ability of signalling ideas and engaging in discussion.
Even though a female celebrity might already have a degree of recognition and capability to use long-established means of sharing her opinions (interviews, authoring a book), a direct message with an option of an easy engagement in conversation creates a sense of ability – and, in many cases, the ability itself – to actually take part in a case one is interested in supporting or debating. Davidson (2008) details the importance of such opportunity:
“Managers and leaders routinely use a variety of techniques, such as encouraging informal social interaction and creating and maintaining strong organizational to help people feel a part of the whole organization (Schein, 1985). One's sense of feeling included is most crucial because it strengthens affective commitment to the organization.” (p. 172)
Societal issues – abortion and adoption being not only not an exception, but a popular and returning points – are thoroughly linked to politics. On the other hand, they rarely stem out of it, however, an issue discussed publicly by a politician or a party might start a nationwide debate, involving, besides ordinary voters', the opinions of those with an already established fanbase and following.
The 2016 American presidential election seems to be a good example of such involvement.
One might safely assume that the fact that Hillary Rodham Clinton became one of two main candidates in the race to the White House greatly encouraged female celebrities to start social media based political commentary. Since the wife of the former president, Bill Clinton, had the chance to become the first female to take the office, numerous famous women used their Internet platforms to show their encouragement.
However, similarly to the previously discussed issue related to abortion, there were also those who disapproved of Clinton's candidacy. The opponents did not hesitate to detail their stance by using social media accounts as well, and – what was easily predictable – both sides drafted a wide attention for their activity, which resulted in a great number of favourable, but also, what seemed inevitable, critical comments.
It is important to remember that the purpose of this chapter is to present the famous American woman's availability to debate political turmoil (that had an impact on them as citizens) that presidential elections usually bring, and analyze the experience. The examples and quotations presented below do not ai at judging the person's position or opinion, but are supposed to illustrate and provide details of said online environment.
During the presidential campaign in 2016, Katy Perry (full name Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson) – one of the best selling American pop artists worldwide - became a prominent and dedicated supporter of Clinton. Among various public ventures, notably designing shoes named after the candidate and dedicating one of the songs on her album Witness to the loss of the supported Democrat, Perry used her Twitter account, which is currently followed by over 100 users, to show her approval for Clinton. By adding a popular hashtags created by other supporters, she announced:
“YOU GOT THIS @HillaryClinton #DEBATES”
"She's smiling with ease cause #shesgotthis #ImWithHer #debatenight"
"RT if you're already preparing a seat at the table for @HillaryClinton"
As mentioned above, despite the tweets being targeted mainly at the singer's fans and the followers of the Democratic candidate, Perry also faced criticism for her posts. Under the article of the writer Jerome Hudson (Katy Perry Begs Democratic National Convention To Vote For Hillary Clinton), working for the political news site Breitbart, they commentators demonstrated their contempt for the woman's plea and actions. The author of the most popular (given the most votes by other readers) comment claims:
“(...) EMPTY mind, you vapid c_nt. Empty, not open. Make an IQ of at least 110 a prerequisite for voting rights, and all America's problems will be gone. Make it a requirement for performing in public, and we'll never hear from Katy Perry again.”
The statement clearly indicates the person's derogatory attitude towards the woman in relation to her gender (“vapid c_nt”), as well as doubt in her mental abilities, calling her mind “empty”. Even though it is unknown whether Perry saw the comment, it is safe to assume that she must have been aware of the opinion others have of her for supporting the chosen candidate, since the post, as previously mentioned, gained a big applause of the readers of the article.
Nevertheless, since there were two candidates hoping to become the resident of The White House, both of them gathered supporters amongst the famous.
Keeping in mind the point made earlier – that Hillary Clinton could have become the first female president of The United States – it seemed that she was the one to have the majority of female celebrities as allies. Scholars Bremner, Soufer, McCarthy, Delaney, Staib, Duncan, and Charney (2001) support the theory in their article, Gender Differences In Cognitive and Neural Correlates of Remembrance of Emotional Words:
"Studies suggest that men and women have important differences in specific cognitive functions. (...) women rely on emotional content to a greater degree in the processing of information." (p. 56)
The emotional aspect of having a representative of their gender among American leaders was undoubtedly an important factor that lead many female celebrities to show Hillary Clinton their appreciation. Nonetheless, her rival, Donald John Trump, managed to attract various popular names as well.
Kaya Jones (real name Chrystal Neria), a singer raised in Nevada, who was once performing with a popular all-girl music group The Pussycat Dolls, did not conceal her support for the Republican candidate. Similarly to Perry, Jones decided that Twitter would help her spread her opinion and approval:
"I want to show other celebrities who voted for @realDonaldTrump it’s ok to come forward. Better yet let’s show the world how many Americans stand with him. Bullies shouldn’t be allowed for almost a year and a half to bully us without cause. If you voted for him just Like or RT"
She even used a hashtag invented by Trump's opponents to show her support:
"Trump that’s who. Himself even more fabulous #CouldBeatTrumpIn2020"
The statements received a negative feedback as well. In an interview with Willie Pena, as an answer to the question about being criticized for openly supporting the candidate, the woman admitted: “Yes. I've received death threats.”
Jones, however, is not the only famous ally of Donald Trump. Blaire White, a political commentator with a following of almost 400 thousands users on her YouTube channel, admitted to voting Republican in the 2016 election. White is usually considered as phenomenon, since transsexuals have always been associated with the opposite side of the political spectrum, a theory that is backed in Rawyn Connell's (2012) Transsexual Women and Feminist Thought: Toward New Understanding and New Politics:
"The political meaning of transsexuality began to be negotiated in the US New Left (...). Several small, radical transsexual/transvestite groups formed, and they issued a manifesto calling for social justice." (p. 4)
White shares her experience from the point of view of a trans female who has publicly voiced her approval of the candidate. Marie Solis adduces White's interview with Newsweek, where the YouTuber describes a physical assault she has endured:
"I have never been assaulted for being trans. I’ve never had anyone on the street say anything nasty to me about being trans. But I was assaulted for wearing a Trump hat. I think that speaks for itself."
Although such reaction to someone expressing their political leaning might seem exaggerated, Henrik Urdal reminds that, surprisingly, it is to be expected in countries like The United States: "The opportunity literature suggests that the opportunity for political violence is greater the less autocratic a state is (…)" (p. 613)
In summary, the chapter described a new opportunity for famous women not only to join a discussion, usually related to a popular or controversial topics, but also to spread their message and opinions more easily. Despite already having an audience, social media allows a celebrity to engage with followers and commentators in a way that is quick and gives the impression (and, obviously, the real experience) of having an impact on The United States and the world's current struggles and events.
7 September 2018
Hacking [women in social media - part 2]
Identity theft is only one of many misconducts that, with the popularization of the Internet, started to occur online. Though similar, as it involves stealing personal data, the purpose of hacking differentiates from creating a fake persona. In her article, Why Do People Hack?, Carol Finch describes various reasons for such activity, one of them being especially relevant in cases of the famous being the victims:
“Some hackers use their skills for criminal activities. On a personal level, a hacker might break into someone's computer and take control of it -- this could give him access to passwords and financial information that he could then use to defraud the individual. On a larger scale, groups of hackers might target companies as part of a wider criminal operation. For example, in 2014, a group of Russian hackers accessed systems in various companies around the world and stole over 1 billion usernames and passwords from over 400,000 websites.” (Finch, 2015)
The vulnerability of well-known American women to being targeted by illegal hacking to can be illustrated by the example of Celebgate, a 2014 controversy, where numerous female celebrities fell victim to an organized picture leak.In the summer of 2014, users of a popular image board-type forum, 4chan, began publishing personal, mostly nude, pictures of female celebrities. As it became obvious that the images had not been previously shared by the people depicted on them, the situation was understood to be a leak, either coincidental or intentional.
Eventually, it turned out that the published pictures had been deliberately stolen. An online cloud service, iCloud (a part of Apple Inc.), was found to be the “culprit”; the later investigation revealed that the hackers exploited the service's insufficient security measures which allowed them to guess any user's password, thus gaining access to the stored data. The even had been given the name “Celebgate”, an obvious implication to The Watergate scandal; the idea originated from the people responsible for the leak.
Celebgate, as an example of an invasion on famous women's privacy, can be examined in various aspects, including, inter alia, the motive of the hackers, and legal consequences of such misdemeanor. The description of the original actions of the individuals accountable for Celebgate should help one correctly discern the subsequent events, as well as the case itself.
The person officially charged with illegally obtaining the pictures was Ryan Collins, a Pennsylvania resident, whose methods are described in detail in an article published two years after the incident by U.S. Attorney's Office in California:
“He sent e-mails to victims that appeared to be from Apple or Google and asked victims to provide their usernames and passwords. When the victims responded, Collins then had access to the victims’ e-mail accounts. After illegally accessing the e-mail accounts, Collins obtained personal information including nude photographs and videos, according to his plea agreement. In some instances, Collins would use a software program to download the entire contents of the victims’ Apple iCloud backups.”
Apple itself provided an explanation as to why individuals other than those contacted by Collins beforehand were also subjected to the hacking, shedding a light on the technical side of the problem:
“After more than 40 hours of investigation, we have discovered that certain celebrity accounts were compromised by a very targeted attack on user names, passwords and security questions, a practice that has become all too common on the Internet. None of the cases we have investigated has resulted from any breach in any of Apple’s systems including iCloud® or Find my iPhone.”
The characterization of the process raises two substantial issues: the aforementioned mistakes in security precautions taken by the creators of Apple's storage system, and the seemingly effortless practice – involving the victims' participation - that let Collins collect the information necessary to temporarily take control of the accounts he was interested in. The first point, being a technical issue disrupting the usage of a product, is distinctly connected to the legal proceedings resulting from the incident, while the second has a psychological and societal basis.
Using Apple's - an international, well-known company - products, rarely raises concerns in a user, as a business this size appears to have gained trust of many. A customer, in many cases rightfully so, does not suspect such corporation to have problems securing the content stored by the user, let alone allowing a third party to view and copy it, unbeknownst to the owner.
In their research, Xin Li, Traci Hess, and Joseph Valacich (2008) provide an explanation as to why users remain unsuspecting of any technical issues:
“When the trustor has no prior interaction with a trustee, he/she cannot develop trust based on direct experience with or first-hand knowledge of the trustee. Instead, the trustor will depend on other sources, such as second-hand information, contextual factors, or personal intuition to make trust inferences. For example, before having direct interaction with an information system in a specific context, a trustor can build initial trust in this system based on their experiences with other systems, their knowledge about this system used in other contexts, and/or others’ opinions about the system.” (p. 41)
Such prevalent and understandable conviction seems to be one of the aforementioned factors - that are rooted in societal beliefs - which made an incident like Celebgate possible. Yet, it is not just the victims of the leak who were afflicted by Apple's mistakes; Collins, after discovering the security loophole, had decided to use it to his own advantage.
In an interview with Marlow Stern, one of the victims, actress Teresa Palmer describes her experience and attitude towards the leak, as well as a specific connection between her gender and falling prey to Collins:
“It was difficult,” says Palmer. “It certainly was such an invasion of privacy, but also scary on a universal level that nobody’s stuff is safe. Thank god for me I didn’t really have anything too risqué, but it’s really scary to know that I have so many photos of my son, my birth video, all of my stuff that I know is in the hands of someone that’s hacked into my computer.” (…) “You know what’s so unfortunate?” Palmer says. “All the women got together and talked it out. We all had photos of boyfriends—some are famous, some are not—who are naked, and none of the photos of famous men were ever released. It was all women. So, it was a personal attack on women, and trying to shame women. I just think it’s disgusting that there were no men—I think there was only one male victim—so women were specifically targeted.”
It is important to pay attention to how Palmer reacts to the idea of being vulnerable to having private data published against her will: she calls it “scary”, which supports the claim that companies like Apple have the reputation of being trusted providers of expected services.
Interestingly, the actress' ordeal mirrors another famous' woman struggle with her image being used against her will. In the further part of the quote, Teresa Palmer stresses that it was not just pictures of her that were exposed to Collins; stored were also images of her son, which, though not illicitly published, were also viewed by an unapproved party. This claim resembles what Aimee Gonzales, the victim of catfishing, admitted happened to her children when Angela Wesselman decided to impersonate her online – even though the minors' identities were not stolen in the same way as their mother's was, they were also indirectly involved in the process. This instance yet again demonstrates how a child can suffer collateral consequences, however small, of the actions of those who decide to target the mother, whether to fulfill their personal agenda (Wesselman), or to induce a controversy, as in Collins' case, causing troubles for both the victims and the provider of the service.
The last part of the quote, in which Palmer mentions even more people concerned, gives one an insight into the hacker's mind and motive, as from the perspective of a person affected. According to the actress' statement, the women whose accounts were hacked, also kept saved private pictures of their male partners, whose depictions were similar to those of the victims. Nonetheless, none of the pictures were leaked. Palmer understands this as an example of a perpetrator specifically targeting women in order to put them in a situation that might expose them to ridicule and humiliation. She does not, however, fully explain her logic as to why she believes so. Roxanne Gay, a writer for The Guardian, in an article related to the Celebgate, provides what Palmer failed to in her interview. According to Gay:
“It’s not clear what the people who leak these photos hope to achieve beyond financial gain and a moment of notoriety. (...) These hackers are not revealing anything the general public does not already know. BREAKING: beneath their clothes, celebrities are naked. What these people are doing is reminding women that, no matter who they are, they are still women. They are forever vulnerable.”
Teresa Palmer concludes her talk with Stern with a clear statement:
“I’ll be in the bath with my son and my husband will take a picture of us. I’ve just given over to the fact that, ‘You know what? This may end up on the Internet' (...) I think I have a pretty healthy perspective on it, but I know some of the other girls were really traumatized by it.”
Unfortunately but obviously, not all victims eventually reacted to the leak with such confidence. One of them was a popular actress, Jennifer Lawrence. In an article for Vogue, Ellie Davis reminds the reader what are Lawrence thoughts on being targeted by Collins:
“When I first found out it was happening, my security reached out to me. It was happening minute-to-minute - it was almost like a ransom situation where they were releasing new ones every hour or so,” (…) I feel like I got gang-banged by the f***ing planet - like, there's not one person in the world that is not capable of seeing these intimate photos of me. You can just be at a barbecue and somebody can just pull them up on their phone. That was a really impossible thing to process.” (Davis, 2017)
The easiness of sharing the pictures, mentioned above by Lawrence, calls into question the issue of trust once again. This time, however, it can be described from the perspective of Collins. The hacker, besides his technological knowledge, has used persuasion to obtain any information necessary to access the pictures. Marian Friestad and Peter Wright (1999) describe the aim of the technique used by Collins. Their explanation might be linked to that of Li, Hess, and Valacich in an instance that the hacker used the well-known name of the company to convince the victims to provide him with desired information. In this case, however, the trust in security measurements was deliberately taken advantage of by a single person, and not just by the users' belief that Apple's precautions were sufficient. According to Friestad and Wright:
“Persuasion knowledge (...) is an especially important interpretive belief system because it tells people about situations where an intelligent purposeful outside agent is skillfully trying to alter their inner self (their beliefs, their emotions, their attitudes, their decisions, their thought processes) and thereby alter the course of their lives. (...) The resources that enable someone to competently manage the numerous influence attempts that other people direct their way are their personal persuasion related beliefs. Individuals who allow unnoticed or uncontrolled invasions of their internal psychological world, and consequent changes in their behaviors, do not survive and prosper.” (p. 186)
The cases described above relate to a violation of privacy where a personal, private data, previously stored within websites that mainly provide related services, was involuntarily published on an image-board type page, consisting of anonymous posts and users. Both domains – iCloud and 4chan - however, are not widely understood to be a part of personalised, customisable social media profiles. Whereas, after discussing the origins and course of Celebgate, one can undoubtedly state that the leak has greatly contributed to how the victims perceive their online presence, and how it has affected not just their Internet activity, but also their sense of intimacy, the responses, reactions, and role of utilities like, amongst many others, Twitter and Facebook, cannot be omitted or underestimated.
To support the claim of what constitutes social media in the first place, it is apt to familiarise oneself with how Thomas Poell (2013) defines it:
“Social media can be roughly referred to as a "group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of the Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content" ([20], p. 60) The quick rise of social media platforms in the first decade of this century was part of a more general networked culture where information and communication got increasingly defined by the affordances of web technologies such as browsers and search engines. Social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well as user generated content sites, including YouTube and Flickr, became the core of a host of web-based applications that together formed an expansive ecosystem of connective media.” (p. 5)
The “quick exchange of user-generated context” can be understood as crucial in describing a female celebrity's experience. Since social media allow users to easily portray themselves in a desired way by sharing text, pictures, and various other types of data, it can also, paradoxically, enable others to depict the famous in any chosen way. Again, such actions bear a resemblance to catfishing; however, the aim differs from creating a fake online persona, as the content revealed during celebgate hack shares even more features with the phenomenon of “revenge porn”.
Scott R. Stroud (2014), besides explaining what the foregoing term represents (revealing private materials, previously shared between consenting individuals, usually after their relationship has come to an end), specifies the incentives behind it:
"Posting revealing photos of non-consenting others along with identifying information potentially leads to humiliation, embarrassment, and could increase the potential for online and “real life” harassment. (...) This harm is enabled by the anonymity provided to the posters of this information, and those who run the sites that allow for such posting. As research on user-generated content for news sites has determined, anonymity often increases incivility and immoral behavior (Singer & Ashman, 2009)." (p. 9)
Clare McGlynn and Erika Rackley (2017) compare the phenomenon to sexual abuse:
"Advances in technology have transformed and expanded the ways in which sexual violence can be perpetrated. One of these new manifestations of violence and abuse is the non-consensual creation and/or distribution of private sexual images: a phenomenon we have conceptualised as image-based sexual abuse." (p. 1)
The issue of being anonymous, mentioned in the first quote, can undoubtedly be attributed to social media as well. Since it has already been discussed what triggers one to act accordingly in circumstances characteristic to the events surrounding Celebgate, it is essential to describe the consequences of the behaviour.
The statements from Teresa Palmer and Jennifer Lawrence concern their feelings related to the hack itself, not their attitude to appearing on social media afterwards (although Palmer provides the reader with the idea on how she hopes to deal with the aftermath of Celebgate, she focuses on her daily life, simply revealing that she is now aware that any type of personal data might get stolen and uploaded online). While the two women are, undoubtedly, not the only ones that concentrated mainly on the fact of being subjected to Collins' shenanigans, and not the direct reactions of others, their way of coping with the trauma in the media should be considered to be as legitimate as the response of those who chose to publicly share their views on the engagement of Internet users and followers with the case, since methods of dealing with stress vary greatly according to one's personality and numerous psychological traits.
The experience of another victim of Collins, actress Mary Elizabeth Winstead, gives one a detailed insight into the struggle of online presence following the leak. Winstead used her Twitter account to voice her concerns and describe her attitude at that time:
"To those of you looking at photos I took with my husband years ago in the privacy of our home, hope you feel great about yourselves."
"Knowing those photos were deleted long ago, I can only imagine the creepy effort that went into this."
"Going on an internet break. Feel free to my @s [mentions] for a glimpse of what it's like to be a woman who speaks up about anything on twitter"
These three simple messages (in 2014 Twitter's 140 characters limit still existed) thoroughly describe the actress' approach to the situation. She feels not only that her privacy and personal freedom have been violated but also does not understand why users are interested in content that was never intended to be viewed by third party. Winstead is also surprised with the effort put into looking for the photos even after most of the copies have been removed. Finally, she informs that she is not going to respond again, stating that the reaction to her posts is what a woman in a time of stress is likely to experience from her online following, and other users, curious about a given case.
Bernie Hogan (2010), however, appears to have answered Winstead's question concerning the users motives to keep looking for the pictures: "To expect privacy online is not to imply that one has something worth hiding or a presentation that may contradict one’s role in other spheres of life" (p. 4). The author suggest that the interest was fueled by the actress' general image: in the opinion of the public, Winstead was never considered to be a person that would agree to appear in such pictures; such impression had probably been caused by the woman's public demeanor and the impression that occurred from it.
While Winstead's reaction might have seem harsh and incited by anger, another actress afflicted with the hack took a less exasperated, however still firm approach. Yvonne Strahovski, whose career, similarly to Palmer, flourished in the US, chose Instagram to publish her statement:
“It is with great sadness and disappointment that I address this hacking issue. To my fellow actresses whose privacy has been invaded – my heart goes out to you. I'm so disappointed that there are people in the world who feel the need to commit these criminal acts. Some of these pictures are fake, my own included. Regardless – I ask you all – do not share the links. Don't even look at the photos. Just let people have the privacy they deserve. Integrity is sacred.”
The response, besides calling for respect and voicing Strahovski's attitude towards the person responsible for the leak, also suggests yet another issue the woman had to face: despite the pictures being fabricated, there was still the need to address the situation.
Obviously, a person unfamiliar with photo processing might not have been able to recognize the pictures to be fake. This might be understood as beneficial, since the actress' privacy has not, in fact, been invaded. Nonetheless, even if Strahovski's plea not to distribute the links prevented a given number of people from seeing the pictures, those who have already viewed them were not certain to also see the discussed Instagram post, and therefore remain under the impression that they have come across a genuine depiction of the actress. In such case, the woman has not been hurt directly by having her privacy violated, but by false assumptions that lead to both reactions similar to those Winstead experienced, and having been wrongly accused.
Carolyn Hole, Naomi-Ellen Speechley, and Ross Burnett warn of the severity of the described kind of situation:
"It is apparent that for those wrongly accused the effects are likely to be devastating(...) they may have a substantial impact. Some allegations (...) may still affect their subjects’ employment or standing in the community. Others may be aired in employment tribunals or family courts, and even when they are not substantiated, their consequences may be severe. (...) Significant damage may be done to alleged ‘perpetrators’ in circumstances where there has been no finding of guilt." (p. 4)
To conclude, violation of privacy in a form of illegally obtaining private data is yet another factor that a famous American woman's social media experience comprises of. Albeit similar to catfishing, its reach and effects are considerably greater, as events like Celebgate involve not just one person (or a small group of people) that is meant to be deceived, but the victim's online following, as well as a global audience, interested in the situation. Such leaks create a sense of doubt in security measurements of even the biggest Internet storage providers, which, along with the feeling of humiliation (especially when confronted with direct comments) and uncertainty (in many cases related to the fear of losing business opportunities and inability to pursue chosen career path), might make social media usage more of an ordeal, than a pleasant and work-facilitating activity.
“Some hackers use their skills for criminal activities. On a personal level, a hacker might break into someone's computer and take control of it -- this could give him access to passwords and financial information that he could then use to defraud the individual. On a larger scale, groups of hackers might target companies as part of a wider criminal operation. For example, in 2014, a group of Russian hackers accessed systems in various companies around the world and stole over 1 billion usernames and passwords from over 400,000 websites.” (Finch, 2015)
The vulnerability of well-known American women to being targeted by illegal hacking to can be illustrated by the example of Celebgate, a 2014 controversy, where numerous female celebrities fell victim to an organized picture leak.In the summer of 2014, users of a popular image board-type forum, 4chan, began publishing personal, mostly nude, pictures of female celebrities. As it became obvious that the images had not been previously shared by the people depicted on them, the situation was understood to be a leak, either coincidental or intentional.
Eventually, it turned out that the published pictures had been deliberately stolen. An online cloud service, iCloud (a part of Apple Inc.), was found to be the “culprit”; the later investigation revealed that the hackers exploited the service's insufficient security measures which allowed them to guess any user's password, thus gaining access to the stored data. The even had been given the name “Celebgate”, an obvious implication to The Watergate scandal; the idea originated from the people responsible for the leak.
Celebgate, as an example of an invasion on famous women's privacy, can be examined in various aspects, including, inter alia, the motive of the hackers, and legal consequences of such misdemeanor. The description of the original actions of the individuals accountable for Celebgate should help one correctly discern the subsequent events, as well as the case itself.
The person officially charged with illegally obtaining the pictures was Ryan Collins, a Pennsylvania resident, whose methods are described in detail in an article published two years after the incident by U.S. Attorney's Office in California:
“He sent e-mails to victims that appeared to be from Apple or Google and asked victims to provide their usernames and passwords. When the victims responded, Collins then had access to the victims’ e-mail accounts. After illegally accessing the e-mail accounts, Collins obtained personal information including nude photographs and videos, according to his plea agreement. In some instances, Collins would use a software program to download the entire contents of the victims’ Apple iCloud backups.”
Apple itself provided an explanation as to why individuals other than those contacted by Collins beforehand were also subjected to the hacking, shedding a light on the technical side of the problem:
“After more than 40 hours of investigation, we have discovered that certain celebrity accounts were compromised by a very targeted attack on user names, passwords and security questions, a practice that has become all too common on the Internet. None of the cases we have investigated has resulted from any breach in any of Apple’s systems including iCloud® or Find my iPhone.”
The characterization of the process raises two substantial issues: the aforementioned mistakes in security precautions taken by the creators of Apple's storage system, and the seemingly effortless practice – involving the victims' participation - that let Collins collect the information necessary to temporarily take control of the accounts he was interested in. The first point, being a technical issue disrupting the usage of a product, is distinctly connected to the legal proceedings resulting from the incident, while the second has a psychological and societal basis.
Using Apple's - an international, well-known company - products, rarely raises concerns in a user, as a business this size appears to have gained trust of many. A customer, in many cases rightfully so, does not suspect such corporation to have problems securing the content stored by the user, let alone allowing a third party to view and copy it, unbeknownst to the owner.
In their research, Xin Li, Traci Hess, and Joseph Valacich (2008) provide an explanation as to why users remain unsuspecting of any technical issues:
“When the trustor has no prior interaction with a trustee, he/she cannot develop trust based on direct experience with or first-hand knowledge of the trustee. Instead, the trustor will depend on other sources, such as second-hand information, contextual factors, or personal intuition to make trust inferences. For example, before having direct interaction with an information system in a specific context, a trustor can build initial trust in this system based on their experiences with other systems, their knowledge about this system used in other contexts, and/or others’ opinions about the system.” (p. 41)
Such prevalent and understandable conviction seems to be one of the aforementioned factors - that are rooted in societal beliefs - which made an incident like Celebgate possible. Yet, it is not just the victims of the leak who were afflicted by Apple's mistakes; Collins, after discovering the security loophole, had decided to use it to his own advantage.
In an interview with Marlow Stern, one of the victims, actress Teresa Palmer describes her experience and attitude towards the leak, as well as a specific connection between her gender and falling prey to Collins:
“It was difficult,” says Palmer. “It certainly was such an invasion of privacy, but also scary on a universal level that nobody’s stuff is safe. Thank god for me I didn’t really have anything too risqué, but it’s really scary to know that I have so many photos of my son, my birth video, all of my stuff that I know is in the hands of someone that’s hacked into my computer.” (…) “You know what’s so unfortunate?” Palmer says. “All the women got together and talked it out. We all had photos of boyfriends—some are famous, some are not—who are naked, and none of the photos of famous men were ever released. It was all women. So, it was a personal attack on women, and trying to shame women. I just think it’s disgusting that there were no men—I think there was only one male victim—so women were specifically targeted.”
It is important to pay attention to how Palmer reacts to the idea of being vulnerable to having private data published against her will: she calls it “scary”, which supports the claim that companies like Apple have the reputation of being trusted providers of expected services.
Interestingly, the actress' ordeal mirrors another famous' woman struggle with her image being used against her will. In the further part of the quote, Teresa Palmer stresses that it was not just pictures of her that were exposed to Collins; stored were also images of her son, which, though not illicitly published, were also viewed by an unapproved party. This claim resembles what Aimee Gonzales, the victim of catfishing, admitted happened to her children when Angela Wesselman decided to impersonate her online – even though the minors' identities were not stolen in the same way as their mother's was, they were also indirectly involved in the process. This instance yet again demonstrates how a child can suffer collateral consequences, however small, of the actions of those who decide to target the mother, whether to fulfill their personal agenda (Wesselman), or to induce a controversy, as in Collins' case, causing troubles for both the victims and the provider of the service.
The last part of the quote, in which Palmer mentions even more people concerned, gives one an insight into the hacker's mind and motive, as from the perspective of a person affected. According to the actress' statement, the women whose accounts were hacked, also kept saved private pictures of their male partners, whose depictions were similar to those of the victims. Nonetheless, none of the pictures were leaked. Palmer understands this as an example of a perpetrator specifically targeting women in order to put them in a situation that might expose them to ridicule and humiliation. She does not, however, fully explain her logic as to why she believes so. Roxanne Gay, a writer for The Guardian, in an article related to the Celebgate, provides what Palmer failed to in her interview. According to Gay:
“It’s not clear what the people who leak these photos hope to achieve beyond financial gain and a moment of notoriety. (...) These hackers are not revealing anything the general public does not already know. BREAKING: beneath their clothes, celebrities are naked. What these people are doing is reminding women that, no matter who they are, they are still women. They are forever vulnerable.”
Teresa Palmer concludes her talk with Stern with a clear statement:
“I’ll be in the bath with my son and my husband will take a picture of us. I’ve just given over to the fact that, ‘You know what? This may end up on the Internet' (...) I think I have a pretty healthy perspective on it, but I know some of the other girls were really traumatized by it.”
Unfortunately but obviously, not all victims eventually reacted to the leak with such confidence. One of them was a popular actress, Jennifer Lawrence. In an article for Vogue, Ellie Davis reminds the reader what are Lawrence thoughts on being targeted by Collins:
“When I first found out it was happening, my security reached out to me. It was happening minute-to-minute - it was almost like a ransom situation where they were releasing new ones every hour or so,” (…) I feel like I got gang-banged by the f***ing planet - like, there's not one person in the world that is not capable of seeing these intimate photos of me. You can just be at a barbecue and somebody can just pull them up on their phone. That was a really impossible thing to process.” (Davis, 2017)
The easiness of sharing the pictures, mentioned above by Lawrence, calls into question the issue of trust once again. This time, however, it can be described from the perspective of Collins. The hacker, besides his technological knowledge, has used persuasion to obtain any information necessary to access the pictures. Marian Friestad and Peter Wright (1999) describe the aim of the technique used by Collins. Their explanation might be linked to that of Li, Hess, and Valacich in an instance that the hacker used the well-known name of the company to convince the victims to provide him with desired information. In this case, however, the trust in security measurements was deliberately taken advantage of by a single person, and not just by the users' belief that Apple's precautions were sufficient. According to Friestad and Wright:
“Persuasion knowledge (...) is an especially important interpretive belief system because it tells people about situations where an intelligent purposeful outside agent is skillfully trying to alter their inner self (their beliefs, their emotions, their attitudes, their decisions, their thought processes) and thereby alter the course of their lives. (...) The resources that enable someone to competently manage the numerous influence attempts that other people direct their way are their personal persuasion related beliefs. Individuals who allow unnoticed or uncontrolled invasions of their internal psychological world, and consequent changes in their behaviors, do not survive and prosper.” (p. 186)
The cases described above relate to a violation of privacy where a personal, private data, previously stored within websites that mainly provide related services, was involuntarily published on an image-board type page, consisting of anonymous posts and users. Both domains – iCloud and 4chan - however, are not widely understood to be a part of personalised, customisable social media profiles. Whereas, after discussing the origins and course of Celebgate, one can undoubtedly state that the leak has greatly contributed to how the victims perceive their online presence, and how it has affected not just their Internet activity, but also their sense of intimacy, the responses, reactions, and role of utilities like, amongst many others, Twitter and Facebook, cannot be omitted or underestimated.
To support the claim of what constitutes social media in the first place, it is apt to familiarise oneself with how Thomas Poell (2013) defines it:
“Social media can be roughly referred to as a "group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of the Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content" ([20], p. 60) The quick rise of social media platforms in the first decade of this century was part of a more general networked culture where information and communication got increasingly defined by the affordances of web technologies such as browsers and search engines. Social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well as user generated content sites, including YouTube and Flickr, became the core of a host of web-based applications that together formed an expansive ecosystem of connective media.” (p. 5)
The “quick exchange of user-generated context” can be understood as crucial in describing a female celebrity's experience. Since social media allow users to easily portray themselves in a desired way by sharing text, pictures, and various other types of data, it can also, paradoxically, enable others to depict the famous in any chosen way. Again, such actions bear a resemblance to catfishing; however, the aim differs from creating a fake online persona, as the content revealed during celebgate hack shares even more features with the phenomenon of “revenge porn”.
Scott R. Stroud (2014), besides explaining what the foregoing term represents (revealing private materials, previously shared between consenting individuals, usually after their relationship has come to an end), specifies the incentives behind it:
"Posting revealing photos of non-consenting others along with identifying information potentially leads to humiliation, embarrassment, and could increase the potential for online and “real life” harassment. (...) This harm is enabled by the anonymity provided to the posters of this information, and those who run the sites that allow for such posting. As research on user-generated content for news sites has determined, anonymity often increases incivility and immoral behavior (Singer & Ashman, 2009)." (p. 9)
Clare McGlynn and Erika Rackley (2017) compare the phenomenon to sexual abuse:
"Advances in technology have transformed and expanded the ways in which sexual violence can be perpetrated. One of these new manifestations of violence and abuse is the non-consensual creation and/or distribution of private sexual images: a phenomenon we have conceptualised as image-based sexual abuse." (p. 1)
The issue of being anonymous, mentioned in the first quote, can undoubtedly be attributed to social media as well. Since it has already been discussed what triggers one to act accordingly in circumstances characteristic to the events surrounding Celebgate, it is essential to describe the consequences of the behaviour.
The statements from Teresa Palmer and Jennifer Lawrence concern their feelings related to the hack itself, not their attitude to appearing on social media afterwards (although Palmer provides the reader with the idea on how she hopes to deal with the aftermath of Celebgate, she focuses on her daily life, simply revealing that she is now aware that any type of personal data might get stolen and uploaded online). While the two women are, undoubtedly, not the only ones that concentrated mainly on the fact of being subjected to Collins' shenanigans, and not the direct reactions of others, their way of coping with the trauma in the media should be considered to be as legitimate as the response of those who chose to publicly share their views on the engagement of Internet users and followers with the case, since methods of dealing with stress vary greatly according to one's personality and numerous psychological traits.
The experience of another victim of Collins, actress Mary Elizabeth Winstead, gives one a detailed insight into the struggle of online presence following the leak. Winstead used her Twitter account to voice her concerns and describe her attitude at that time:
"To those of you looking at photos I took with my husband years ago in the privacy of our home, hope you feel great about yourselves."
"Knowing those photos were deleted long ago, I can only imagine the creepy effort that went into this."
"Going on an internet break. Feel free to my @s [mentions] for a glimpse of what it's like to be a woman who speaks up about anything on twitter"
These three simple messages (in 2014 Twitter's 140 characters limit still existed) thoroughly describe the actress' approach to the situation. She feels not only that her privacy and personal freedom have been violated but also does not understand why users are interested in content that was never intended to be viewed by third party. Winstead is also surprised with the effort put into looking for the photos even after most of the copies have been removed. Finally, she informs that she is not going to respond again, stating that the reaction to her posts is what a woman in a time of stress is likely to experience from her online following, and other users, curious about a given case.
Bernie Hogan (2010), however, appears to have answered Winstead's question concerning the users motives to keep looking for the pictures: "To expect privacy online is not to imply that one has something worth hiding or a presentation that may contradict one’s role in other spheres of life" (p. 4). The author suggest that the interest was fueled by the actress' general image: in the opinion of the public, Winstead was never considered to be a person that would agree to appear in such pictures; such impression had probably been caused by the woman's public demeanor and the impression that occurred from it.
While Winstead's reaction might have seem harsh and incited by anger, another actress afflicted with the hack took a less exasperated, however still firm approach. Yvonne Strahovski, whose career, similarly to Palmer, flourished in the US, chose Instagram to publish her statement:
“It is with great sadness and disappointment that I address this hacking issue. To my fellow actresses whose privacy has been invaded – my heart goes out to you. I'm so disappointed that there are people in the world who feel the need to commit these criminal acts. Some of these pictures are fake, my own included. Regardless – I ask you all – do not share the links. Don't even look at the photos. Just let people have the privacy they deserve. Integrity is sacred.”
The response, besides calling for respect and voicing Strahovski's attitude towards the person responsible for the leak, also suggests yet another issue the woman had to face: despite the pictures being fabricated, there was still the need to address the situation.
Obviously, a person unfamiliar with photo processing might not have been able to recognize the pictures to be fake. This might be understood as beneficial, since the actress' privacy has not, in fact, been invaded. Nonetheless, even if Strahovski's plea not to distribute the links prevented a given number of people from seeing the pictures, those who have already viewed them were not certain to also see the discussed Instagram post, and therefore remain under the impression that they have come across a genuine depiction of the actress. In such case, the woman has not been hurt directly by having her privacy violated, but by false assumptions that lead to both reactions similar to those Winstead experienced, and having been wrongly accused.
Carolyn Hole, Naomi-Ellen Speechley, and Ross Burnett warn of the severity of the described kind of situation:
"It is apparent that for those wrongly accused the effects are likely to be devastating(...) they may have a substantial impact. Some allegations (...) may still affect their subjects’ employment or standing in the community. Others may be aired in employment tribunals or family courts, and even when they are not substantiated, their consequences may be severe. (...) Significant damage may be done to alleged ‘perpetrators’ in circumstances where there has been no finding of guilt." (p. 4)
To conclude, violation of privacy in a form of illegally obtaining private data is yet another factor that a famous American woman's social media experience comprises of. Albeit similar to catfishing, its reach and effects are considerably greater, as events like Celebgate involve not just one person (or a small group of people) that is meant to be deceived, but the victim's online following, as well as a global audience, interested in the situation. Such leaks create a sense of doubt in security measurements of even the biggest Internet storage providers, which, along with the feeling of humiliation (especially when confronted with direct comments) and uncertainty (in many cases related to the fear of losing business opportunities and inability to pursue chosen career path), might make social media usage more of an ordeal, than a pleasant and work-facilitating activity.
8 August 2018
Identity Theft [women in social media - part 1]
(Based on the movie "Catfish".)
Identity theft, according to Saounders and Zucker (2010), is usually associated with illegally obtaining one's personal data in order to use their credit card or bank account. Accordingly, it might also refer to collecting a person's ID to perform various actions (from buying adult beverages to taking a loan) in their name. Whereas such definitions are still the most commonly used and accurate, as technological advancement progresses, people have started to share their identity online.
Blazka (2017) further links the concept to its traditional form by explaining legal consequences behind such activity:
“As online impersonations are a relatively new concept legally speaking, there are not always specific laws in place. Furthermore, with Section 33.07 of the Texas Penal Code under fire, it would be wise to consider whether existing laws, on either a state or federal level, might be positioned to provide relief. Each case being different, and the specific laws as written varying by jurisdiction, some of these legal theories might be seen as applying in the general sense.” (p. 37)
Communities like Facebook require providing real name and surname in order to use it correctly, although Mark Zuckerberg's Internet giant is, as for now, in a minority, since most networks allow their users to pick a chosen nickname. If identity theft is understood in the sense described earlier, one might rightfully assume that users of Facebook are more prone to becoming the victim of such thievery. The more anonymous networks, however, even when the anonymity is limited only to a name, play a more significant role in faking or stealing identity online.
To describe the reason why the users of aforementioned platforms are exposed to the danger of online identity theft in more detail, the phenomenon itself ought to be defined first. As Hancock (2009) describes it, “deception in the context of information and communication technology, or what I will call digital deception, which refers to the intentional control of information in a technologically mediated message to create a false belief in the receiver of the message.” (p. 3)
Deliberate deception among social media users - commonly called “catfishing” - derives its name from Nev Schulman's documentary “Catfish”. In his film, the director depicts his relationship with Megan, a young woman he met online, who later turns out to be Angela Wessselman, a middle-aged mother who has been posing as Megan by using pictures of a model, Aimee Gonzales.
Besides introducing the concept of catfishing to a larger audience, the film also illustrates the psychology behind the act. Schulman, eager to portray not only the motive of the catfish but also the feelings of the impersonated model, decides to additionally conduct an interview with Gonzales herself (who, at the beginning of their talk, has no idea that hundreds of her pictures have been used to fabricate a persona). Thanks to the director's efforts, the story in “Catfish”, as well as the interview with Aimee Gonzales, besides its educational aspect on the dangers of online relationships, also illustrates, even if not directly, the involved model's experience.
Most social networks offer picture sharing as a basic method of establishing a user profile; yet, their targeted audience might vary. While services like Flickr allow professional photographers to share their work, Instagram – being currently one of the most popular online platforms in general – tends to focus on more amateur work. According to Hu, Manikonda, and Kambhampati (2004):
“Nearly half (46.6%) of the photos in our dataset belong to Selfies and Friends categories with slightly more self-portraits (24.2% vs. 22.4%). We also notice that Pet and Fashion are the least popular categories with less than 5% of the total number of images. This corroborates with some of the recent discoveries in popular news media. Other categories – Food, Gadget and Captioned photo contributes to more than 10% individually but are approximately same among themselves. This is in line with the conventional wisdom that Instagram is mostly used for self promoting and social networking with their friends.” (p. 597)
Gonzales, despite being a professional model, used the Internet to share amateur pictures as well. As revealed in the film, while the young woman's artistic work was what had drawn Wesselman's attention, the personal photographs were used to establish a network of fictional profiles – a step necessary to make Megan's identity seem genuine.
Whilst discussing the catfish' methods, the questions might arise: why does one decide to steal someone else's identity to build a fabricated one online? How and why can a famous woman become a part of such forgery? To explain the reasons behind and causes of the first issue, it is necessary to understand the psyche and environment of Angela Wesselman. The film, especially the part after revealing the true identity of Megan, gives the viewer an insight into both of these factors, greatly helping to comprehend the concept of and logic behind catfishing.
The main factor affecting those who decide to stage a fictitious online life appears to be low self-esteem. An issue that existed long before the era of social media, or even the World Wide Web itself, seems to have increased due to the availability of access to the Internet. As Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard (2005) discuss in their study:
“If people have a low opinion of themselves and find it difficult to socialize because of their shyness or lack of self-esteem, they may use the Internet as an alternative form of socializing, in which they can open up and gain confidence without having to interact face to face. However, as it was mentioned earlier, the direction of the relationship is unclear, as a low self-esteem may be a consequence of excessive Internet use, rather than a cause.” (p 568)
In the film, the viewer is introduced to the real personality and life of Angela Wesselman. The middle-aged woman lives with her youngest daughter and second husband, Vince, in a small town in Michigan. The family's life revolves around Vince's two sons from his previous relationship – both of them are severely mentally handicapped and require continued medical care, and the parents' attention. Though Angela is fond of her step-sons and is the person responsible for fulfilling most of their needs, she expresses grief over her career as a painter that she has never had a chance to further pursue due to her commitment to Vince's children.
In her limited spare time, she continues to paint (although does not have a platform or an ability to share her work with a wider audience), but also tries to find a way to the fruition of her fantasy of a life she has never managed to experience. She decides to create a Facebook profile, where she poses as her daughter, Abigail, shares her paintings as the girl's, and, finally, befriends Nev, the director of the film. As their friendship continues, Angela's lies – but also the relationship - become more complex. The woman sends Nev her original paintings (while still pretending they were Abigail's), and claims that the girl has her own gallery in Michigan.
This part of Angela's continuing deception is well illustrated in the beginning of the provided explanation of how low self-esteem plays a role in online identity theft. By claiming to be Abigail, she can experience – however faint and artificial – the feeling of being a young and critically acclaimed artist. After years of being able to only fantasise about reliving her youth and achieving fame, when the dream materialises in online world, Angela becomes more indulged in her lies than she initially planned – which supports the claim that identity theft is not just the result of low self-esteem, but can also be caused by easy access to the content available online. Boyd (2008) explains Angela's mindset to even greater detail:
“Imagine that you are screaming to be heard in a loud environment when suddenly the music stops and everyone hears the end of your sentence. Most likely, they will turn to stare at you and you will turn beet red (unless exposure does not bother you).” The author also describes why it was easy for the older woman to create such elaborate lie: “Participants were not likely to post secrets, but they often posted information that was only relevant in certain contexts. The assumption was that if you were visiting someone’s page, you could access information in context. When snippets and actions were broadcast to the News Feed, they were taken out of context and made far more visible than seemed reasonable.” (p. 14)
Although not clearly stated in the film, it is suggested by Wesselman's further actions that pretending to be Abigail, however joyful it might have seemed at the beginning, would not fulfill all the expectations related to the Internet friendship the woman has developed over time.
Through Abigail, she desired to feel youthful again, which, at the beginning, she achieved. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the girl, oblivious to her mother's actions, was only eight years old, both in reality, and Angela's shenanigans. As it is revealed at the end of the production, the woman did, in fact, started to falsely believe that the world she had created truly existed, but it did not happen up until establishing a whole group of fake facebook identities. At the point of realising that the character of Abigail might not be sufficient for her needs, Angela was fully aware of what she was doing, and, most importantly, of her authentic identity, and hence, emotions.
What was previously the aim, has become an obstacle, as the woman started to – genuinely – develop romantic feelings towards Nev. Abigail's age, despite being the most important factor preventing any kind of an emotional bond other than friendship and admiration for talent, was not the only reason behind Wesselman's decision to indulge into even more complex deception.
The idea of admitting the lies to the man, and thus proving herself to be dishonest and untrustworthy was upsetting the woman, yet, surprisingly, not as much as revealing her actual, physical frame. Such thinking might paint Angela as shallow and deprived of principles in the viewer's eyes, but one should not forget the circumstances surrounding the already perplexing situation.
Knowing Nev to be in his mid-twenties at the time of encountering Abigail, Angela suspected that he would most probably not be interested in a relationship with a much older woman, focusing on this fact even more than on her already having a life partner. She also deduced that even if those two matters were somehow overcome, her physique might have played a deciding role in stopping any further romantic involvement. Such realisation greatly distressed Angela, which exemplifies the validity of Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard's theory.
Wesselman's insecurities, deepened by her use of the Internet, did not, however make her refrain from continuing the relationship with Nev. Being aware of the legitimate happiness posing as Abigail had initially provided her with, she decided to create another fabricated online identity, which would not only be an embodiment of past desires, but also the current ones.This stage of Angela's deception was when Aimee Gonzales, unbeknownst to her, became involved, and where the famous woman's experience with identity theft ought to be explained in greater detail.
Gonzales' was de facto not introduced in “Catfish” in person, yet her involvement was equally as important as Angela's. The viewer has a chance to familiarise themselves with the image of Gonzales through many pictures of her shown in the film, yet not only, at the beginning, does not see the model and photographer directly on the screen, but also does not learn her true identity. The reason for such bizarre participation was Angela's aforementioned decision to not abandon her fraudulent online activity because of the limitations of Abigail's persona.
The Internet was the Washington-based model's main platform to share her work, both as a photographer and a model. She used networks aimed especially at people interesting in photography, but also websites like then-popular MySpace, where she posted more personal and not professional work. Fully aware of praise and criticism resulting from sharing any kind of craft online, Gonzales had not expected her pictures to be misused in any way. When asked about “Catfish” and her reaction to Wesselman's actions, in an interview conducted in 2010 by Gina Piccalo, the model admitted: “She [Angela Wesselman] went to my MySpace page, my Model Mayhem page. She was even quoting things that I would say on my pictures and she would use that on her own pictures.”
How exactly Angela found Gonzales' work remains unknown, yet it is not difficult to understand why she chose the model's image to be the face of her newly invented character. Bearing in mind the older woman's already existing and newly developed self-esteem issues, as well as her unreciprocated romantic attachment to Nev, Aimee's persona appears to be what would alleviate the problems had Angela had the chance to possess the model's physical features. What was undoubtedly not possible to attain in an offline world, became certainly achievable online. Encouraged by the success of Abigail's bogus profile, especially after gaining enough experience in using a fake online persona thanks to it, Angela constructed a completely new character, a nineteen years old Megan Faccio.
This is the name the viewers know Aimee Gonzales by in Schulman's production. Soon after establishing Megan's profile, Angela tried to use it to befriend Nev again, this time as a woman in her late teens (to validate the sudden Facebook invitation, Megan was introduced as Abigail's older sister).
As the relationship between Nev and Megan quickly developed, Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard are proven to be right yet again. Angela became even more invested in pursuing the lie as Megan (but did not stop to contact Nev as Abigail, hence her new remained to seem genuine to the man). The preference of the character of Megan can be explained by both alleviating Angela's problems with self-image and the enacted possibility of romantic interactions.
As mentioned earlier, Abigail's fake persona allowed Angela to, however briefly, fulfill her artistic ambitions, and Megan Faccio, accordingly, personified the physical qualities the woman desired in order to form a stronger bond with Nev. The existence of Abigail's older sister profile can be explained from the perspective of both the catfish and the catfished, the first clarifying the reason behind its creation, the other describing the outcome and consequences, in this case, experienced by a famous woman.
In Rob Frappier's interview with Nev Schulman, his brother, and a friend, who helped to shot and produce the film, the director talks about his attitude towards Megan, and his attachment to the sisters met online:
"The depth of the interaction and the extent of it was much more personal for me. (...) And it’s been a great lesson in sort of understanding why you allow yourself to, or convince yourself of something that you want — and the power of flattery and the fantasy and the escape element in all of us, in that we want something that doesn’t make sense or is unobtainable. (...) I guess I was at a point in my life where I felt like, okay, I’d like to get to the next level with a woman. I’d like to feel a really deep connection with someone, as I think everybody does, and I hadn’t found that in New York City. And so, when something came along that was so different and so unusual that I thought, “Maybe that’s why. Maybe I haven’t been looking in the right place.” Maybe there’s something so organic and genuine about this family that it will sort of take me out of this world that hasn’t worked, in regards specifically to the perfect girl, and I’ll find it somewhere else where I would least expect."
The quote, obviously, describes Nev's opinion and feelings, but can also be used as means of understanding Angela's emotions and logic. Being in a relationship where the needs of the children were the most important issue, Angela might have longed for the romantic connection she once experienced with Vince. Even though the circumstances were clearly different, as the woman thought she lost the attachment, and Nev had never been in love, they both deduced that a loving partner was what they desired at that time.
They considered, after becoming Facebook acquaintances, that they would try to find their significant one in a place different than usual – for Nev, a native New Yorker, it was Michigan; Angela looked online for what turned out to be a refreshing, but ultimately specious bond, which involved two more, unsuspecting, yet truly affected, people – Aimee Gonzales and Vince Pierce.
Accordingly, feelings seem to be the most important among Nev and Angela's shared experiences. “Organic and genuine”, they let both of them believe that they had found exactly what they needed. Although it might appear bizarre that a man would genuinely fall in love with a woman he has only ever seen in pictures (and, later, on the phone, heard what was supposed to be Megan speaking), it is, at the same time, not unimaginable; even though there was no physical contact, communication and appearance – both essential in forming a bond – were present.
The catfish' emotions, however, happen to be more difficult to understand. While Nev had no idea he was being misled, Angela, despite slowly losing sense of reality, still knew the basis of the relationship was artificial. As mentioned earlier, a connection without any physical contact was sufficient for answering the woman's needs.
Though based on elaborate lies, the affair between the catfished and the catfish would most certainly not be possible without the engagement of Gonzales. The interview with Gina Picallo comprises not only of the description of Wesselman's online activity, but also describes the model's feelings. “Gonzales says: “Your natural response is, ‘Oh, it’s OK.’ And it’s not. It’s not OK.” Wesselman-Pierce even used the name of Gonzales’ 8-year-old daughter to identify an imaginary dead pet snake. “I definitely felt violated and just completely drained,” says Gonzales, who also has a son, 6. “I don’t think I’ve ever felt so tired in my life.” The fragment allows a better insight into Aimee Gonzales' experience both as a person whose identity has been hijacked and as a famous woman sharing her work and image on social media.
What might draw the reader's attention first is the model's children being included in the scam as well. Although Wesselman was not aiming to hurt the children, identity theft is assuredly among the dangers the Internet possesses for minors.
Posting children's pictures and personal information online is prevalent among parents who use social media. Although majority of them does it simply to share the joys of parenting, the data, as any other information that enters the world wide web, might end up being viewed by a previously unintended party. Whether it is an online predator preying on children, or someone, like Wesselman, who does not intend to hurt the child per se, a minor's privacy can easily be jeopardized, which, if the child is mature enough to understand the situation, but not to confront it properly, can lead to serious health issues. Murburg (1994) states :
“The neurophysiological activation seen during acute stress is usually rapid and reversible. When the stressful event is of a sufficient duration, intensity, or frequency, however, these changes are not reversible. (...) In the adult, with a mature brain, the increases in catecholamine activity associated with the stress response may result in sensitization. In the developing brain, however, neurotransmitters and hormones play key roles in neuronal migration, differentiation, synaptic proliferation and overall brain development (Lauder 1988) and, therefore, the tremendous increases in neurotransmitter activity seen with severe or prolonged stress would be expected to have a significant impact on brain development.” (p. 4)
It is worth mentioning that the threats above were described as an experience of an ordinary parent and child, who, although are vulnerable to identity theft, usually do not get recognized and purposely searched for. A public person, however, attracts a bigger online following, which, most of the time, leads to the public being interested not only in their idol, but also in his or her environment. In extreme cases, such fascination heads to stalking, but it might take a less physically damaging (for the victim) and demanding (for the wrongdoer) form.
Aimee Gonzales, as a mother herself, besides her professional and amateur work, shared information and photos related to her family as well. Wesselman, in order to make the life she had crafted on Facebook more believable, decided to use the model's child's (and, as the film reveals later, other members' of the family too) persona. One might wonder: would the chances of Angela claiming the identity of the youngest members of the Gonzales family have been lower if the young woman was a private person? Since Wesselman never explained how exactly she found Aimee's photographs, in this particular case, it might seem impossible to give a direct answer to such question; however, there are certain premises that suggest the correlation between Gonzales' profession and her children being in jeopardy of identity theft. The easiness of finding a person modeling online, the number of available pictures (which Angela collected hundreds of), and, deeper than in the case of a private individual, interest in the famous' personal life, all contribute to Aimee Gonzales, as a famous woman, being in a greater risk of the theft of her and her relatives' image than someone who has not exposed themselves on the Internet to such extent.
The violation of the children's privacy is a serious and thought-provoking matter, and undeniably related to the model's work, yet it is not the woman's only concern linked to being catfished. In the interview, even before the mention of her son and daughter, Gonzales describes her first response – or what she thought would be her proper reaction – to the situation.
In one of her blog posts, Sara F. Hawkins, an attorney, reminds the reader:
“Nearly every photo taken gives the author (the one who takes the photo) a protectable right to prevent others from using or reproducing that image. Of course, there are exceptions, but generally, the photographer owns the copyright. This is actually very important to know should you ever hand your camera to someone else to take a photo.” (Hawkins, 2011)
The quote defines the legal aspect of picture sharing. Shortly after finding out about Wesselman's shenanigans, the model contemplated pursuing legal action against the catfish, yet later chose not to, as Piccalo's interview also discloses: “Initially, Gonzales considered reporting Wesselman-Pierce to some authority to see if she had any legal recourse. In the end, though, she decided to let it go. “She didn’t really financially gain anything from me,” Gonzales reasoned. “I’m not a person that really deals with confrontation very well. I just kind of avoid it. It didn’t make sense for me.””
Since there were no authorities involved, and the woman focuses on her emotional reaction to the theft, Gonzales' mental attitude needs to be construed in greater detail.
The first – and for many, the logical – response to someone stealing another person's photographs is that the uploader should be aware of the risks of publicising content online. From negative commentary to more malicious, or even illegal, actions, there is no method of fully protecting oneself from the dangers the Internet possesses, and since, a person, at least in the cases where no illicit activity was present, should not feel disturbed or upset by falling a victim to such wrongdoings. The conclusion seems to be especially relevant when the famous are involved, as, usually, they are fully aware of the reaching of the Internet and easy access to the shared data.
Gonzales', however, seems to disagree with aforementioned mindset. She admits to having felt “drained”, and refuses to simply ignore the situation she has found herself in. Although she does not openly provide a specific reason – besides, obviously, the unexpectedness and bizarreness of the situation – one might easily guess the model's conflicted emotions. Is Gonzales' chosen profession the main reason for her being exposed to such trauma? The quantity of and uncomplicated access to the pictures (also the professional ones) made her an easy target for perpetrators like Wesselman, who need a large amount of images to successfully pursue their lie.
In conclusion, the unexpected relationship between Aimee Gonzales and Angela Wessleman illustrates one of the dangers awaiting a famous woman who decides to use social media, especially when it is meant to be a tool for sharing the work that has made them a public figure in the first place. Personalities like Mrs Gonzales become more vulnerable to identity theft, not only because of its expanding definition, but also due to a complex combination of other users' struggle to manage their own emotions correctly and deeply rooted convictions of what physical and mental features are considered superior.
Thanks to Nev Schulman's film, one is able to understand two concepts that have already existed for a very long time – identity theft and problems with self-image – in a completely new way, as those problems both exist now, besides their traditional form, in their contemporary, online variant. Yet, first and foremost, the production is well suited to be an example that specifies and helps one introduce themselves to the issue this chapter is focused on.
Because of what was supposed (since, as mentioned before, the specific model's beauty and youth was what Angela thought Nev would be interested in) to be her assets, Aimee Gonzales fell prey to the unexpected behaviour of a member of her Internet audience, who, yet again, was initially meant to solely admire or criticise the content they had encountered. The continuous theft, unnoticed for a time long enough to let Wesselman develop a believable new online persona on another person's expense, caused the young woman a psychological unrest, a consequence that the thief failed to consider while progressing her malpractice. It is also important to remember that the trauma was not caused only by Gonzales's reaction to her image being used as a mean to deceive others, but comprised of discovering that her daughter was involved in the hoax as well.
The story presented in the film, provides a suitable example of a photographer struggling with identity theft, although, it is, undoubtedly, just one of numerous cases of online thievery and deception involving a well-known woman.
Identity theft, according to Saounders and Zucker (2010), is usually associated with illegally obtaining one's personal data in order to use their credit card or bank account. Accordingly, it might also refer to collecting a person's ID to perform various actions (from buying adult beverages to taking a loan) in their name. Whereas such definitions are still the most commonly used and accurate, as technological advancement progresses, people have started to share their identity online.
Blazka (2017) further links the concept to its traditional form by explaining legal consequences behind such activity:
“As online impersonations are a relatively new concept legally speaking, there are not always specific laws in place. Furthermore, with Section 33.07 of the Texas Penal Code under fire, it would be wise to consider whether existing laws, on either a state or federal level, might be positioned to provide relief. Each case being different, and the specific laws as written varying by jurisdiction, some of these legal theories might be seen as applying in the general sense.” (p. 37)
Communities like Facebook require providing real name and surname in order to use it correctly, although Mark Zuckerberg's Internet giant is, as for now, in a minority, since most networks allow their users to pick a chosen nickname. If identity theft is understood in the sense described earlier, one might rightfully assume that users of Facebook are more prone to becoming the victim of such thievery. The more anonymous networks, however, even when the anonymity is limited only to a name, play a more significant role in faking or stealing identity online.
To describe the reason why the users of aforementioned platforms are exposed to the danger of online identity theft in more detail, the phenomenon itself ought to be defined first. As Hancock (2009) describes it, “deception in the context of information and communication technology, or what I will call digital deception, which refers to the intentional control of information in a technologically mediated message to create a false belief in the receiver of the message.” (p. 3)
Deliberate deception among social media users - commonly called “catfishing” - derives its name from Nev Schulman's documentary “Catfish”. In his film, the director depicts his relationship with Megan, a young woman he met online, who later turns out to be Angela Wessselman, a middle-aged mother who has been posing as Megan by using pictures of a model, Aimee Gonzales.
Besides introducing the concept of catfishing to a larger audience, the film also illustrates the psychology behind the act. Schulman, eager to portray not only the motive of the catfish but also the feelings of the impersonated model, decides to additionally conduct an interview with Gonzales herself (who, at the beginning of their talk, has no idea that hundreds of her pictures have been used to fabricate a persona). Thanks to the director's efforts, the story in “Catfish”, as well as the interview with Aimee Gonzales, besides its educational aspect on the dangers of online relationships, also illustrates, even if not directly, the involved model's experience.
Most social networks offer picture sharing as a basic method of establishing a user profile; yet, their targeted audience might vary. While services like Flickr allow professional photographers to share their work, Instagram – being currently one of the most popular online platforms in general – tends to focus on more amateur work. According to Hu, Manikonda, and Kambhampati (2004):
“Nearly half (46.6%) of the photos in our dataset belong to Selfies and Friends categories with slightly more self-portraits (24.2% vs. 22.4%). We also notice that Pet and Fashion are the least popular categories with less than 5% of the total number of images. This corroborates with some of the recent discoveries in popular news media. Other categories – Food, Gadget and Captioned photo contributes to more than 10% individually but are approximately same among themselves. This is in line with the conventional wisdom that Instagram is mostly used for self promoting and social networking with their friends.” (p. 597)
Gonzales, despite being a professional model, used the Internet to share amateur pictures as well. As revealed in the film, while the young woman's artistic work was what had drawn Wesselman's attention, the personal photographs were used to establish a network of fictional profiles – a step necessary to make Megan's identity seem genuine.
Whilst discussing the catfish' methods, the questions might arise: why does one decide to steal someone else's identity to build a fabricated one online? How and why can a famous woman become a part of such forgery? To explain the reasons behind and causes of the first issue, it is necessary to understand the psyche and environment of Angela Wesselman. The film, especially the part after revealing the true identity of Megan, gives the viewer an insight into both of these factors, greatly helping to comprehend the concept of and logic behind catfishing.
The main factor affecting those who decide to stage a fictitious online life appears to be low self-esteem. An issue that existed long before the era of social media, or even the World Wide Web itself, seems to have increased due to the availability of access to the Internet. As Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard (2005) discuss in their study:
“If people have a low opinion of themselves and find it difficult to socialize because of their shyness or lack of self-esteem, they may use the Internet as an alternative form of socializing, in which they can open up and gain confidence without having to interact face to face. However, as it was mentioned earlier, the direction of the relationship is unclear, as a low self-esteem may be a consequence of excessive Internet use, rather than a cause.” (p 568)
In the film, the viewer is introduced to the real personality and life of Angela Wesselman. The middle-aged woman lives with her youngest daughter and second husband, Vince, in a small town in Michigan. The family's life revolves around Vince's two sons from his previous relationship – both of them are severely mentally handicapped and require continued medical care, and the parents' attention. Though Angela is fond of her step-sons and is the person responsible for fulfilling most of their needs, she expresses grief over her career as a painter that she has never had a chance to further pursue due to her commitment to Vince's children.
In her limited spare time, she continues to paint (although does not have a platform or an ability to share her work with a wider audience), but also tries to find a way to the fruition of her fantasy of a life she has never managed to experience. She decides to create a Facebook profile, where she poses as her daughter, Abigail, shares her paintings as the girl's, and, finally, befriends Nev, the director of the film. As their friendship continues, Angela's lies – but also the relationship - become more complex. The woman sends Nev her original paintings (while still pretending they were Abigail's), and claims that the girl has her own gallery in Michigan.
This part of Angela's continuing deception is well illustrated in the beginning of the provided explanation of how low self-esteem plays a role in online identity theft. By claiming to be Abigail, she can experience – however faint and artificial – the feeling of being a young and critically acclaimed artist. After years of being able to only fantasise about reliving her youth and achieving fame, when the dream materialises in online world, Angela becomes more indulged in her lies than she initially planned – which supports the claim that identity theft is not just the result of low self-esteem, but can also be caused by easy access to the content available online. Boyd (2008) explains Angela's mindset to even greater detail:
“Imagine that you are screaming to be heard in a loud environment when suddenly the music stops and everyone hears the end of your sentence. Most likely, they will turn to stare at you and you will turn beet red (unless exposure does not bother you).” The author also describes why it was easy for the older woman to create such elaborate lie: “Participants were not likely to post secrets, but they often posted information that was only relevant in certain contexts. The assumption was that if you were visiting someone’s page, you could access information in context. When snippets and actions were broadcast to the News Feed, they were taken out of context and made far more visible than seemed reasonable.” (p. 14)
Although not clearly stated in the film, it is suggested by Wesselman's further actions that pretending to be Abigail, however joyful it might have seemed at the beginning, would not fulfill all the expectations related to the Internet friendship the woman has developed over time.
Through Abigail, she desired to feel youthful again, which, at the beginning, she achieved. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the girl, oblivious to her mother's actions, was only eight years old, both in reality, and Angela's shenanigans. As it is revealed at the end of the production, the woman did, in fact, started to falsely believe that the world she had created truly existed, but it did not happen up until establishing a whole group of fake facebook identities. At the point of realising that the character of Abigail might not be sufficient for her needs, Angela was fully aware of what she was doing, and, most importantly, of her authentic identity, and hence, emotions.
What was previously the aim, has become an obstacle, as the woman started to – genuinely – develop romantic feelings towards Nev. Abigail's age, despite being the most important factor preventing any kind of an emotional bond other than friendship and admiration for talent, was not the only reason behind Wesselman's decision to indulge into even more complex deception.
The idea of admitting the lies to the man, and thus proving herself to be dishonest and untrustworthy was upsetting the woman, yet, surprisingly, not as much as revealing her actual, physical frame. Such thinking might paint Angela as shallow and deprived of principles in the viewer's eyes, but one should not forget the circumstances surrounding the already perplexing situation.
Knowing Nev to be in his mid-twenties at the time of encountering Abigail, Angela suspected that he would most probably not be interested in a relationship with a much older woman, focusing on this fact even more than on her already having a life partner. She also deduced that even if those two matters were somehow overcome, her physique might have played a deciding role in stopping any further romantic involvement. Such realisation greatly distressed Angela, which exemplifies the validity of Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard's theory.
Wesselman's insecurities, deepened by her use of the Internet, did not, however make her refrain from continuing the relationship with Nev. Being aware of the legitimate happiness posing as Abigail had initially provided her with, she decided to create another fabricated online identity, which would not only be an embodiment of past desires, but also the current ones.This stage of Angela's deception was when Aimee Gonzales, unbeknownst to her, became involved, and where the famous woman's experience with identity theft ought to be explained in greater detail.
Gonzales' was de facto not introduced in “Catfish” in person, yet her involvement was equally as important as Angela's. The viewer has a chance to familiarise themselves with the image of Gonzales through many pictures of her shown in the film, yet not only, at the beginning, does not see the model and photographer directly on the screen, but also does not learn her true identity. The reason for such bizarre participation was Angela's aforementioned decision to not abandon her fraudulent online activity because of the limitations of Abigail's persona.
The Internet was the Washington-based model's main platform to share her work, both as a photographer and a model. She used networks aimed especially at people interesting in photography, but also websites like then-popular MySpace, where she posted more personal and not professional work. Fully aware of praise and criticism resulting from sharing any kind of craft online, Gonzales had not expected her pictures to be misused in any way. When asked about “Catfish” and her reaction to Wesselman's actions, in an interview conducted in 2010 by Gina Piccalo, the model admitted: “She [Angela Wesselman] went to my MySpace page, my Model Mayhem page. She was even quoting things that I would say on my pictures and she would use that on her own pictures.”
How exactly Angela found Gonzales' work remains unknown, yet it is not difficult to understand why she chose the model's image to be the face of her newly invented character. Bearing in mind the older woman's already existing and newly developed self-esteem issues, as well as her unreciprocated romantic attachment to Nev, Aimee's persona appears to be what would alleviate the problems had Angela had the chance to possess the model's physical features. What was undoubtedly not possible to attain in an offline world, became certainly achievable online. Encouraged by the success of Abigail's bogus profile, especially after gaining enough experience in using a fake online persona thanks to it, Angela constructed a completely new character, a nineteen years old Megan Faccio.
This is the name the viewers know Aimee Gonzales by in Schulman's production. Soon after establishing Megan's profile, Angela tried to use it to befriend Nev again, this time as a woman in her late teens (to validate the sudden Facebook invitation, Megan was introduced as Abigail's older sister).
As the relationship between Nev and Megan quickly developed, Niemz, Griffiths, and Banyard are proven to be right yet again. Angela became even more invested in pursuing the lie as Megan (but did not stop to contact Nev as Abigail, hence her new remained to seem genuine to the man). The preference of the character of Megan can be explained by both alleviating Angela's problems with self-image and the enacted possibility of romantic interactions.
As mentioned earlier, Abigail's fake persona allowed Angela to, however briefly, fulfill her artistic ambitions, and Megan Faccio, accordingly, personified the physical qualities the woman desired in order to form a stronger bond with Nev. The existence of Abigail's older sister profile can be explained from the perspective of both the catfish and the catfished, the first clarifying the reason behind its creation, the other describing the outcome and consequences, in this case, experienced by a famous woman.
In Rob Frappier's interview with Nev Schulman, his brother, and a friend, who helped to shot and produce the film, the director talks about his attitude towards Megan, and his attachment to the sisters met online:
"The depth of the interaction and the extent of it was much more personal for me. (...) And it’s been a great lesson in sort of understanding why you allow yourself to, or convince yourself of something that you want — and the power of flattery and the fantasy and the escape element in all of us, in that we want something that doesn’t make sense or is unobtainable. (...) I guess I was at a point in my life where I felt like, okay, I’d like to get to the next level with a woman. I’d like to feel a really deep connection with someone, as I think everybody does, and I hadn’t found that in New York City. And so, when something came along that was so different and so unusual that I thought, “Maybe that’s why. Maybe I haven’t been looking in the right place.” Maybe there’s something so organic and genuine about this family that it will sort of take me out of this world that hasn’t worked, in regards specifically to the perfect girl, and I’ll find it somewhere else where I would least expect."
The quote, obviously, describes Nev's opinion and feelings, but can also be used as means of understanding Angela's emotions and logic. Being in a relationship where the needs of the children were the most important issue, Angela might have longed for the romantic connection she once experienced with Vince. Even though the circumstances were clearly different, as the woman thought she lost the attachment, and Nev had never been in love, they both deduced that a loving partner was what they desired at that time.
They considered, after becoming Facebook acquaintances, that they would try to find their significant one in a place different than usual – for Nev, a native New Yorker, it was Michigan; Angela looked online for what turned out to be a refreshing, but ultimately specious bond, which involved two more, unsuspecting, yet truly affected, people – Aimee Gonzales and Vince Pierce.
Accordingly, feelings seem to be the most important among Nev and Angela's shared experiences. “Organic and genuine”, they let both of them believe that they had found exactly what they needed. Although it might appear bizarre that a man would genuinely fall in love with a woman he has only ever seen in pictures (and, later, on the phone, heard what was supposed to be Megan speaking), it is, at the same time, not unimaginable; even though there was no physical contact, communication and appearance – both essential in forming a bond – were present.
The catfish' emotions, however, happen to be more difficult to understand. While Nev had no idea he was being misled, Angela, despite slowly losing sense of reality, still knew the basis of the relationship was artificial. As mentioned earlier, a connection without any physical contact was sufficient for answering the woman's needs.
Though based on elaborate lies, the affair between the catfished and the catfish would most certainly not be possible without the engagement of Gonzales. The interview with Gina Picallo comprises not only of the description of Wesselman's online activity, but also describes the model's feelings. “Gonzales says: “Your natural response is, ‘Oh, it’s OK.’ And it’s not. It’s not OK.” Wesselman-Pierce even used the name of Gonzales’ 8-year-old daughter to identify an imaginary dead pet snake. “I definitely felt violated and just completely drained,” says Gonzales, who also has a son, 6. “I don’t think I’ve ever felt so tired in my life.” The fragment allows a better insight into Aimee Gonzales' experience both as a person whose identity has been hijacked and as a famous woman sharing her work and image on social media.
What might draw the reader's attention first is the model's children being included in the scam as well. Although Wesselman was not aiming to hurt the children, identity theft is assuredly among the dangers the Internet possesses for minors.
Posting children's pictures and personal information online is prevalent among parents who use social media. Although majority of them does it simply to share the joys of parenting, the data, as any other information that enters the world wide web, might end up being viewed by a previously unintended party. Whether it is an online predator preying on children, or someone, like Wesselman, who does not intend to hurt the child per se, a minor's privacy can easily be jeopardized, which, if the child is mature enough to understand the situation, but not to confront it properly, can lead to serious health issues. Murburg (1994) states :
“The neurophysiological activation seen during acute stress is usually rapid and reversible. When the stressful event is of a sufficient duration, intensity, or frequency, however, these changes are not reversible. (...) In the adult, with a mature brain, the increases in catecholamine activity associated with the stress response may result in sensitization. In the developing brain, however, neurotransmitters and hormones play key roles in neuronal migration, differentiation, synaptic proliferation and overall brain development (Lauder 1988) and, therefore, the tremendous increases in neurotransmitter activity seen with severe or prolonged stress would be expected to have a significant impact on brain development.” (p. 4)
It is worth mentioning that the threats above were described as an experience of an ordinary parent and child, who, although are vulnerable to identity theft, usually do not get recognized and purposely searched for. A public person, however, attracts a bigger online following, which, most of the time, leads to the public being interested not only in their idol, but also in his or her environment. In extreme cases, such fascination heads to stalking, but it might take a less physically damaging (for the victim) and demanding (for the wrongdoer) form.
Aimee Gonzales, as a mother herself, besides her professional and amateur work, shared information and photos related to her family as well. Wesselman, in order to make the life she had crafted on Facebook more believable, decided to use the model's child's (and, as the film reveals later, other members' of the family too) persona. One might wonder: would the chances of Angela claiming the identity of the youngest members of the Gonzales family have been lower if the young woman was a private person? Since Wesselman never explained how exactly she found Aimee's photographs, in this particular case, it might seem impossible to give a direct answer to such question; however, there are certain premises that suggest the correlation between Gonzales' profession and her children being in jeopardy of identity theft. The easiness of finding a person modeling online, the number of available pictures (which Angela collected hundreds of), and, deeper than in the case of a private individual, interest in the famous' personal life, all contribute to Aimee Gonzales, as a famous woman, being in a greater risk of the theft of her and her relatives' image than someone who has not exposed themselves on the Internet to such extent.
The violation of the children's privacy is a serious and thought-provoking matter, and undeniably related to the model's work, yet it is not the woman's only concern linked to being catfished. In the interview, even before the mention of her son and daughter, Gonzales describes her first response – or what she thought would be her proper reaction – to the situation.
In one of her blog posts, Sara F. Hawkins, an attorney, reminds the reader:
“Nearly every photo taken gives the author (the one who takes the photo) a protectable right to prevent others from using or reproducing that image. Of course, there are exceptions, but generally, the photographer owns the copyright. This is actually very important to know should you ever hand your camera to someone else to take a photo.” (Hawkins, 2011)
The quote defines the legal aspect of picture sharing. Shortly after finding out about Wesselman's shenanigans, the model contemplated pursuing legal action against the catfish, yet later chose not to, as Piccalo's interview also discloses: “Initially, Gonzales considered reporting Wesselman-Pierce to some authority to see if she had any legal recourse. In the end, though, she decided to let it go. “She didn’t really financially gain anything from me,” Gonzales reasoned. “I’m not a person that really deals with confrontation very well. I just kind of avoid it. It didn’t make sense for me.””
Since there were no authorities involved, and the woman focuses on her emotional reaction to the theft, Gonzales' mental attitude needs to be construed in greater detail.
The first – and for many, the logical – response to someone stealing another person's photographs is that the uploader should be aware of the risks of publicising content online. From negative commentary to more malicious, or even illegal, actions, there is no method of fully protecting oneself from the dangers the Internet possesses, and since, a person, at least in the cases where no illicit activity was present, should not feel disturbed or upset by falling a victim to such wrongdoings. The conclusion seems to be especially relevant when the famous are involved, as, usually, they are fully aware of the reaching of the Internet and easy access to the shared data.
Gonzales', however, seems to disagree with aforementioned mindset. She admits to having felt “drained”, and refuses to simply ignore the situation she has found herself in. Although she does not openly provide a specific reason – besides, obviously, the unexpectedness and bizarreness of the situation – one might easily guess the model's conflicted emotions. Is Gonzales' chosen profession the main reason for her being exposed to such trauma? The quantity of and uncomplicated access to the pictures (also the professional ones) made her an easy target for perpetrators like Wesselman, who need a large amount of images to successfully pursue their lie.
In conclusion, the unexpected relationship between Aimee Gonzales and Angela Wessleman illustrates one of the dangers awaiting a famous woman who decides to use social media, especially when it is meant to be a tool for sharing the work that has made them a public figure in the first place. Personalities like Mrs Gonzales become more vulnerable to identity theft, not only because of its expanding definition, but also due to a complex combination of other users' struggle to manage their own emotions correctly and deeply rooted convictions of what physical and mental features are considered superior.
Thanks to Nev Schulman's film, one is able to understand two concepts that have already existed for a very long time – identity theft and problems with self-image – in a completely new way, as those problems both exist now, besides their traditional form, in their contemporary, online variant. Yet, first and foremost, the production is well suited to be an example that specifies and helps one introduce themselves to the issue this chapter is focused on.
Because of what was supposed (since, as mentioned before, the specific model's beauty and youth was what Angela thought Nev would be interested in) to be her assets, Aimee Gonzales fell prey to the unexpected behaviour of a member of her Internet audience, who, yet again, was initially meant to solely admire or criticise the content they had encountered. The continuous theft, unnoticed for a time long enough to let Wesselman develop a believable new online persona on another person's expense, caused the young woman a psychological unrest, a consequence that the thief failed to consider while progressing her malpractice. It is also important to remember that the trauma was not caused only by Gonzales's reaction to her image being used as a mean to deceive others, but comprised of discovering that her daughter was involved in the hoax as well.
The story presented in the film, provides a suitable example of a photographer struggling with identity theft, although, it is, undoubtedly, just one of numerous cases of online thievery and deception involving a well-known woman.
18 June 2018
Crisis of Masculinity? [essay]
Most modern societies (especially European and North American, but also those in Africa) have been established and continued by maintaining a patriarchal system of values and power. The structure, however, seems to have been undermined in recent times, most notably after the second half of the 20th century (the period known as the beginning of the sexual revolution and the birth of third wave feminism). The term “crisis of masculinity” was conceived to describe the process – the following paragraphs discuss the term, as well as the validity of the claim, as it has been depicted by Ronald F. Levant in his 1977 research. It is important to mention that in his analysis, the author focuses on racial, sexual, and other minorities.
One of the first reasons for the crisis (note that in all described cases, the negative output is believed to be the consequence of the minorities aiming at the majority’s ideals and goals), according to Levant, is men failing to fulfil the image of a bread-winner. Interestingly, the same males consciously reject the archetype of a provider or give up on it due to various excuses connected to or steaming from their current situation.
Another argument brought up in favour of the deepening crisis are divorce settlements. Despite the prevalence of no-fault divorces, most marriages end with the wife being granted almost all of the valuable material assets by the judge, as well as the custody of the mutual children. Such outcome might make a man believe to be a failure (which corresponds with the bread-winner model), but, besides the minority/majority clash, the rise of the aforementioned third wave feminism is usually also a deciding factor in favouring ex-wives rather than ex-husbands.
Finally, the media portrayal of men in the era of ubiquitous and easily attainable news providers strengthens what once was a (unfortunate, but still) joke, causing a legitimate concern about the subject, thanks to the media’s persuasive power. In case of men, it is the image of a “dead-beat dad”, defining an unemployed and unreliable father, whose children suffer the consequences of his laziness and lack of skills.
In conclusion, striving to and failing at becoming what the majority perceives as the perfect man, causes the minority men to lose the sense of their own masculinity. Together with the female-oriented culture, sometimes, as mentioned before, also backed by the legal system, the men in question believe that they ultimately lack the qualities to ever become a man, instead of just a male.
One of the first reasons for the crisis (note that in all described cases, the negative output is believed to be the consequence of the minorities aiming at the majority’s ideals and goals), according to Levant, is men failing to fulfil the image of a bread-winner. Interestingly, the same males consciously reject the archetype of a provider or give up on it due to various excuses connected to or steaming from their current situation.
Another argument brought up in favour of the deepening crisis are divorce settlements. Despite the prevalence of no-fault divorces, most marriages end with the wife being granted almost all of the valuable material assets by the judge, as well as the custody of the mutual children. Such outcome might make a man believe to be a failure (which corresponds with the bread-winner model), but, besides the minority/majority clash, the rise of the aforementioned third wave feminism is usually also a deciding factor in favouring ex-wives rather than ex-husbands.
Finally, the media portrayal of men in the era of ubiquitous and easily attainable news providers strengthens what once was a (unfortunate, but still) joke, causing a legitimate concern about the subject, thanks to the media’s persuasive power. In case of men, it is the image of a “dead-beat dad”, defining an unemployed and unreliable father, whose children suffer the consequences of his laziness and lack of skills.
In conclusion, striving to and failing at becoming what the majority perceives as the perfect man, causes the minority men to lose the sense of their own masculinity. Together with the female-oriented culture, sometimes, as mentioned before, also backed by the legal system, the men in question believe that they ultimately lack the qualities to ever become a man, instead of just a male.
9 May 2018
Restricting access to violent video games [argumentative essay]
Keep in mind that argumentative =/= for and against.
Nowadays, online video games are one of the most popular means of entertainment for teenagers, but also for children. However, despite their wide popularity, violent themes - which are prevalent in such games - should result in stricter restrictions on the access to them for the aforementioned demographics.
First, young people, especially those under the age of sixteen, are very prone to graphic and emotional stimuli that video games are rich in. If a person is exposed to a violent, yet engaging, content for a long period of time, they might get influenced by it to the point of mimicking the behaviour they have seen on their computer screen, thus carrying out violent acts in the real world.
What is more, the immunity to being affected by extreme or traumatising sights varies from person to person. A game that is simply a form of relaxation for one teenager, can have a long-lasting effect on the psyche of the other. The damage caused by the exposure to such graphic content might require years of therapy, or, in more severe cases, become irreparable.
Thirdly, a person's personality develops most rapidly during their adolescence. Indulging in an entertainment where other players are seen and interacted with only in the form of their nicknames, and the contact is focused mainly on the violent gameplay, puts the proper development of personality traits and the ability to form and maintain interpersonal relationships in jeopardy.
Finally, a game's storyline comprised of malevolence and wrongful deeds might trigger the worsening of an actual mental illness or personality disorder the young player may already have. Mental problems - even if properly treated - can be easily deepened by exposure to violence, especially if they themselves are the result of it.
Taking everything into account, the access to violent online games should be met with more severe and serious restrictions. A young person's healthy development, as well as taking care of their pre-existing problems, are prone to be disturbed by graphic and sinister gameplay; the consequences of such psychological turmoil can sometimes be irreversible.
18 April 2018
Report essay example (reading habits)
The discussed survey was conducted among college students, aged 20-23, from Some University in Somewhere. The interviewees were asked to fill a questionnaire, comprising of questions related to their current, as well as past reading habits. The report describes answers that show the most prominent or surprising tendencies.
As an answer to the first question, which dealt with favourite literary genres, almost 19% of the students picked romance as their preferred type of fiction. Novels, thrillers, and fantasy books were chosen by 16% of respondents each, followed by travel books (12%), comics (9%), historical books (6%), chic-lit (3%), as well as fan fiction (a story written usually by a fan of and based on a book or TV series, etc.), chosen by 3% of students. The answers suggest that developed plot, description of interpersonal relationships, and mystery (related to both criminal activity and scientific innovations) are the elements that draw students’ attention when choosing a position they would like to read.
The next question sheds perspective on the preferred form of read text. A vast majority (72%) claims that traditional, paper books are their favourite. The remaining chose between e-books and Internet blogs (14% each). The result clearly indicates that despite various technological advances regarding reading and writing, young adult students still largely prefer conventional forms of books.
The query related to the issue following - the part of the day that is most comfortable and preferable for reading - resulted in presented answers: 73% of the interviewees tends to read in the evening, 18% favour afternoon, and the remaining 9% prefers reading during nighttime. Similarly to the previous outcome, there seems to be a clear tendency towards choosing a specific answer.
The results regarding visiting libraries proved to be not disparate. Only one person confessed to visiting libraries, while the rest stated that they do not. One student specifically declared that they prefer buying to renting since they do not like being put under time pressure while reading. Such acknowledgement signifies that the students prefer obtaining their own paid for book, than renting a public, free copy.
The last issue, reading habits the students had during their childhood, produced a concerted answer - all respondents asserted that they used to read a lot when they were younger. The unity suggests that when the students were children, they had means, as well as were willing to choose reading as one of their preferred leisure activities.
The data reviewed above leads to following conclusions. Students from Bydgoszcz prefer longer, developed stories to books discussing specific subjects or shorter texts, and they are most likely to read them in a classic form rather than by using electronic devices, usually by the end of the day. Libraries do not seem to be popular among the respondents, indicating that they would rather purchase their chosen copy; they were also avid readers earlier in their life.
26 January 2018
Description of Moloch in "Howl"
"Moloch" is depicted as an embodiment of evil - yet the name does not refer to the devil or widely understood wrong deeds, but rather to the state of society, financial system, and politics.
To introduce his meaning of "Moloch", Ginsberg uses undoubtedly negative connotations, mostly related to emotions ("Solitude! Filth! Ugliness!"; "Nightmare of Moloch! Moloch the loveless!").
The author also provides examples, even if not directly, of Moloch. At the beginning, he mentions "boys sobbing in armies", which is a reference to the army, followed by "Moloch the vast stone of war! Moloch the stunned governments!" - a description of a (probably corrupt) government, constantly engaging the citizens in wars and military conflicts. "Moloch whose blood is running money!" describes the core need fuelling the society, money, and, therefore, banks. Similarly, Ginsberg brings up "Moloch whose love is endless oil and stone! Moloch whose soul is electricity and banks!" - referring to one of the most profitable industries, the oil industry, and reminding the reader of how trade and material goods can replace spiritual life, becoming one's "soul". Later, the author mentions "Moloch whose skyscrapers stand in the long streets like endless Jehovahs! Moloch whose factories dream and croak in the fog! Moloch whose smokestacks and antennae crown the cities!", meaning to depict an industrial area, stale and soulless, that has erased natural landscapes. Finally, through "Moloch in whom I sit lonely! Moloch in whom I dream Angels! Crazy in Moloch! Cocksucker in Moloch! Lacklove and manless in Moloch!" he presents the emotional state Moloch puts him in, leaving him isolated and longing for a different way of living, and slowly depriving him of his own nature, positivity, and even sanity.
To introduce his meaning of "Moloch", Ginsberg uses undoubtedly negative connotations, mostly related to emotions ("Solitude! Filth! Ugliness!"; "Nightmare of Moloch! Moloch the loveless!").
The author also provides examples, even if not directly, of Moloch. At the beginning, he mentions "boys sobbing in armies", which is a reference to the army, followed by "Moloch the vast stone of war! Moloch the stunned governments!" - a description of a (probably corrupt) government, constantly engaging the citizens in wars and military conflicts. "Moloch whose blood is running money!" describes the core need fuelling the society, money, and, therefore, banks. Similarly, Ginsberg brings up "Moloch whose love is endless oil and stone! Moloch whose soul is electricity and banks!" - referring to one of the most profitable industries, the oil industry, and reminding the reader of how trade and material goods can replace spiritual life, becoming one's "soul". Later, the author mentions "Moloch whose skyscrapers stand in the long streets like endless Jehovahs! Moloch whose factories dream and croak in the fog! Moloch whose smokestacks and antennae crown the cities!", meaning to depict an industrial area, stale and soulless, that has erased natural landscapes. Finally, through "Moloch in whom I sit lonely! Moloch in whom I dream Angels! Crazy in Moloch! Cocksucker in Moloch! Lacklove and manless in Moloch!" he presents the emotional state Moloch puts him in, leaving him isolated and longing for a different way of living, and slowly depriving him of his own nature, positivity, and even sanity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)