COMM 2F00: Module #4—–Initial blog post

Based on the second one of guiding questions in module #4, we should know about what new media and cultural commons are. As Henry Jenkins said, “new media technologies have lowered production and distribution costs, expanded the range of available delivery channels and enabled consumers to archive, annotate, appropriate and recirculate media content in powerful new ways.” And according to reading guide, cultural commons means everyone can share and transform resources any time and ant where, this exists in the new media.

Nowadays, there are more and more new forms of media, most of them are advanced online media technologies. Everything can express on the Internet and people can share information with each other by using them. Because of convenience of the Internet, there is a problem to come up with which is how to keep balance between consume products or practices online and keep copyrights to producers. In the early periods, people did not notice the copyright or patent, and there were many different products which have same elements somehow. At the present, people can consume products and  information online, and there is also the very restrictive copyright law which people address their interests no matter what for inventor or economic agencies. For example, people do not cite or quote or consume others’ works directly without available permission. If you write some academic papers, you will use online materials when you need, you should make references and point out the original writers. When people share  videos with others, they can found there is the original link with them and know where videos come from. These are ways to keep balance between consuming products and keeping copyrights. Another example, we always are asked to hand our papers in by professors, this is a system which can check whether people violate others’ copyrights. Because there are a huge numbers of materials online to use, this system can filter out which materials are and where they come from online. Thus, students use others’ content very carefully because this system can check them out.

The other aspect, as Toby Miller said that there are many potential risks for investment in the new market because it is a free and open market style. There are any restrictions to invest, it leads to blind investments easily and destroy the whole market and economy. This is the same as online behaviors by consumers and producers. If there is no copyright law, I believe that the whole internet market is unbalanced. Therefore, that is why there are many limit accessible links when you want to enter into websites, and even though you can use and consume everything online, you still found that those original links with them.

In conclude, consumers and producers can respect others’ patents and use references when they face with the restrictive copyright law, and I think this law is a necessity in the virtual world.


Jenkins, H. (2004) The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence. International Journal of Cultural Studies March 2004 7: 33-43
Miller, T. (2004) A view from a fossil. International Journal Of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 55-65.

COMM 2P91 Participation Assignment #5: Socia Media Reflection

Now, this class has almost done because there is the only last class today. For me, I found that I have understood the relationship between social media and the society better and deeper than before. Because this course covers different aspects of variable  social media to connect with our lives in per week, I can notice some aspects which I haven’t focused on before.

I think that there are the most two surprised things of this course for me. The first one is  about the micro-blogging. I haven’t had the Twitter account before I took this course because I think that Twitter is the same as Facebook and Facebook is enough for me. While, I signed the new Twitter account for this course because I use it to help me write my one of assignment and discuss any thoughts to the professor. Moreover, I found Twitter gives me some interesting stuff when I finished the second assignment. There are much more information about variable topics and issues, and I can see other people talk and discuss about those, and I also know about what trends or popular topics when I log in Twitter. These stuff give me many new opinions about those issues and I can share with interesting stuff with my friends. The second one is about wikipedia. I also take COMM 2F00, it covers the same topic of wikipedia as this course. I found that these two classes offer the new thought for me about wikipedia. I do not totally believe wikipedia any more, but I still use it to get some basic information which I do not get any idea for anything. And I also found that wikipedia is also to be a discussion platform for everyone, people can edit and change information what they want. I just knew about this function of wikipedia after I have taken this course and COMM 2F00.

In addition, I am changing my thoughts about social media from the first class till the last class. There are different topics in per week and discuss more and deeper relevances about every topic. Before the first class, I haven’t ideas totally about social media because I think that this is a very normal thing which seems like the air we breathe in our lives. Now, I think that different social media for different fields reflect to different social phenomena. Through every presentation, I know about more and more social media which focus on specific topics and groups in our lives.

Lastly, I really feel good about this course and know more information about social media.

Op-Ed piece, Wikipedia: Violence doesn’t matter in media? Not really!

Do you think that violence doesn’t matter in media? No! Not really! Violence and media have a complex relationship at present, and violence in media leads to more and more crimes among people’s behaviors, especially for young students. Therefore, I typed the entry of “violence in media” on wikipedia, and there are many results to appear on the page and I chose the first one on the top of this page which is called media violence research. I found this wikipedia entry has an intensive debate, and most of them are counterpoint about the original content.

To be honest, I do not think those information are reliable in there because I do not clarify who they are and what backgrounds of knowledge are, even how much credible of information or sources which they offer. While, I have to say that there are many bias which against the structure and sources of the original content, especially for the section of criticisms of media violence research. They added more specific information and sources, such as someone thinks that it should add the part of television which is also influencing people’s aggressive behaviors; and somebody thinks that those sources in the section of criticisms of media violence research are vague and failed to conclusion of this part. Thus, I think that these are helpful for resolving problems and controversy by producing their information.

Even though there are many debates on the talk page, they still respect every response by each other. And they also reflect democracy in the tension of debates because everyone can edit and change information on wikipedia. As Cindy Royal and Deepina Kapila said that Wikipedia is not producing knowledge simply to people, it wants to mention more who use and how use it by anyone can edit or add their own points on it. And also as the article of Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestos came up with the new concept which it shifts from top-down model to peer production model. It addresses it is powerful when individuals get together no matter what are on social, cultural and economic. Moreover, I found that there is a classmate’s blog also talk about wikipedia is a quickly and convenience tool when people want to know something, and everyone can enter into there to make comments or bias what they want.

Specifically, there is somebody said that media doesn’t really influence on people aggressive behaviors because violence happened in the early period without media. I do not say this is totally wrong, but I have to say that I do not agree with the point. As we known, there are more and more criminal cases which are about young students shoot in the campus due to simulation of scenes from films and video games, people can not ignore this phenomenon because this has became the serious issue in the society. More and more people like to watch the content of violence because they think that it is too exciting to do in the reality. According to these data, five of the 10 best-selling video games of 2012 featured violent content, according to a year-end sales report by NPD Groups. They included such titles as “Call of Duty: Black Ops II,” “Halo 4,” “Assassin’s Creed III,” ” Borderlands 2″ and “Call of Duty: Modern Warefare 3.” And there is also one more example to show that people can be influenced by violent content in video games and any media. There is an image to show how video games effects to people’s aggressive behaviors.

Murder_Simulators_5524( This image is from

Lastly, I am really not sure about how authoritative the participants appear to be because there are no identities to reveal who they are and what backgrounds of the information which they published. I can not judge the authority of these information. As in the article of  “Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War of 1812″. (Richard Jensen) He took the war of 1812 to be a case study, and it gave some numbers to show anybody can write about “historical stuff.” It is about there is the article of 14,000 words of “War of 1812″ by 2,400 different people, and 3,300 comments about “War of 1812″ by 627 enthusiastic people. This reveals that not all of them are professional historians and they are just interested in this historical issue to discuss, anybody can share with their points, even was persuaded by them. Moreover, one of blogs by the classmates also pointed out the controversy of War of 1812 by different people who hold variable opinions. And another blog address that people are always influenced by reviews or comments, this way can persuade audiences or readers easier.

As the above said, there are a lot comments and bias appear on the wikipedia entry. People read all of them and they are influenced by them somehow. For example, I agree with the point of view which television also influences on aggressive people’s  behaviors and young people are easier influenced by those violent content in all types of media. Therefore, we should come up with some effective ways to solve this issue. I hope that filmmaking corporations and channels of televisions and other platform of media have a strong responsibilities for their content; and government should legislate laws and rules about how to control and reduce the violent content in all types of media; and government encourage to build the community which takes some actions to set standards and focuses on whether content are violent or not. Moreover, schools can strengthen knowledge which violence is resulted in bad consequences for students. These actions are effective to limit the violent content to the public, especially for adolescences. All in all, media content is not the only factor for violence, but we have to admit that violence in media which increase the rate of crime, especially among young people. Violence in media doesn’t matter to the public? Definitely no way!


Jensen, R. (2012). Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War

of 1812. Journal of Military History. 76, 1. pp 1165-1182

Royal, C. & Kapila, D. (2009). What’s on Wikipedia, and What’s Not . . . ?: Assessing

Completeness of Information. Social Science Computer Review. 27, 1. pp 138-148.

Van Dijk, J. & Nieborg, D. (2009). Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of

Web 2.0 business manifestosNew Media & Society. 11, 5. pp 855-874.

Blog Links:

Other Resources:

Dayton Daily News ( Feb.1, 2013) Study: Violent video games increase aggression.

Retrieve May 29, 2013, from


Tvtropes (n.d.) Murder Simulators. Retrieved May 29, 2013, from

COMM 2P91 Participation Assignment #4 – Consuming the Social

To be honest, I am not a really gamer because I do not like to play any games no matter what are on mobile or browser. So, I also do not know about more information about it. While, I also give some reflections about participation questions.

Firstly, I can not count the specific number of students in the class to review products or services about games. While, I remembered that there some guys were reviewing their products and services about their games in the lecture, especially for male classmates. I think that there are many people are looking for their game products and services when they playing games.

Secondly, as the relationship between consumers and corporations, I think that there is a mutual relationship between them. Consumers are playing games, then they can comment whether this game is good or not. And in the most time, they always give advices to corporations when they find some drawbacks in the playing process of games, they hope that corporations can improve problems which they have pointed out. At the same time, corporations review these comments and advance their games to satisfy consumers’ requests. Because there is an intensive competition among the market of games, corporations very care about what kinds of responses or feedbacks of consumers to improve their products better. Moreover, corporations offer some new products and services, consumers will buy them when they want to upgrade their levels of games. When they find that new products and services which do not satisfy with their needs, they will comment to corporations and corporation advance their games again. Thus, I think this relationship is mutual which consumers and corporations can influence by each other. Moreover, this also can be a new role of consumer in the consumption process because it decides that how much consumption when they comment in their games.

As different social media, it may lead to different user behaviors in the consumption. For example, consumers want to choose the mobile phone which has many functions and games are interesting when they play games by mobile phones. Iphone can be a typical example because it has some apps or games which be played only between the two Iphones. This is also increasing the amount of demand of Iphone because people want to play together with their friends. Another example, there are very very many people bought Ipad when it came out. Not only its new design, but also its games. Like, there is a game of cutting fruits which only plays in Ipad, and people like this game then go to buy Ipad to experience this game. Those reflect that games can influence user behaviors in the  consumption process by different social media.

In conclude, people play games which become the popular trend whether you are a really gamer or not. Popular games often effect our culture in the society because it can reflect some phenomena of the reality. Such as, games shift from some small intelligence games to 3D war games, it reveals that not only the advanced technologies, but also the changed thoughts by people. Therefore, games also challenge the whole cultural industry.

COMM 2F00: Module #3—–Summary blog post

After I looked all comments about my blog of wikipedia, I concluded that almost all comments support my thoughts of pros and cons of wikipedia. Their opinions agree with my thoughts in my blog. Especially, there are three commons and I point out to share.

First, I wrote that wikipedia has no hierarchy of backgrounds of knowledge by collecting all information from everyone. Wikipedia can be edited and changed by people who are interested in some specific issues and topics. Everyone can say something what they want when they use wikipedia. This also reflects democracy in the public because people have more rights and freedom to giving speeches in the public. There are no limits of speech due to backgrounds of knowledge. This is a good way to reveals democracy in the public.

Second, I mentioned that the way of wikipedia influenced cultural,social even economic in the society. As cultural, people can connect all others no matter who they are, they can have discussion with everyone who are different cultural backgrounds; As social aspect, we have more rights and freedom to do something what we want, such as comment anything what we want on wikipedia; Then, as economic aspect, after I have read the article about wikieconomics in this module, I found that the way of wikipedia leads to the new business management way for companies. Wikipedia focuses on collecting and sharing all information to the whole public, and this way is resulted in the new and advanced way to help to most of companies at present. This new way means that it shifts from top-down model to peer sharing model in companies. Companies address that individual power and contribution to the whole company, it believes that put all individuals’ knowledge together will form a huge power to the whole company. Now, there are many companies which have used this way, such as Google, Youtube and so on. Therefore, wikipedia has influences on social, cultural and economic aspects.

While, other classmates are also agree with my cons of wikipedia. For example, we all think that wikipedia really may be referential tool because it lacks of reliability honestly. Even though everyone can edited and changed information on wikipedia, it also exists many debates and critical comments. People are hard to judge which information useful and reliable. Sometimes, there also are totally wrong information on wikipedia, these are easy to distort and mislead facts to the public.Thus, I think that wikipedia even everyone should have responsibilities for expressing information to the public.

In conclusion, I am glad to have some opinions which can get some supportive comments with others. And I also feel happy because there is someone said that my thoughts are helpful for her to understand wikipedia’s implications somehow. Through these comments, I also get the deeper understanding of wikipedia because they pointed out specific points and expand my thoughts. As myself, I also agree with one of them said that there are potential problems of wikipedia which people have to notice, even though people still use it due to its’ convenience.

COMM 2P91: Personal Media Reflection #3—-Collaborative Communities – Wikipedia

When we talk about Wikipedia, I believe that almost all people have used of it. Wikipedia is a very quickly and convenience online tool for searching information. It covers almost all types of issues and topics, so people often search information by it when they do not have any idea about something. It seems like encyclopedia which has explanations and relevant information about almost everything. However, Wikipedia takes a new way for producing information which is about everyone can edit and change information on Wikipedia and people can talk about their views and thoughts what they want on Wikipedia. People can know about some basic information for everything and also know more things how the public discuss and talk about topics and issues. While, I have a question to ask—–is this way really to reveal democracy or others?

I use the typical example which is War of 1812 on Wikipedia. This issue exists many debates and critic thoughts by different people, even there is no consequence about who won in this battle. On wikipedia, it introduces many basic historical information about this battle at the first, then at the bottom there are many discussions about who won in the battle—-British and Canada or America? For these debates, Americans said that America is the really winner in this battle, but many others people said that British and Canada won in the battle. I do not want to talk about this complex historical problem, I focus on why there are many discussions appear on wikipedia. As before said, Wikipedia can be edited and changed by everyone. If someone is interested in some issues and topics, they can type anything what they want on wikipedia. I think that there is no authority on Wikipedia because there is no one can judge which information are totally right or wrong. People do not know who edit and change information, even they do not know others’ backgrounds of knowledge and anything, so it is hard to judge whether wikipedia is an authority website of information or not.

I have to say this way which collects all information from everyone is good for democracy. Because it does not care about who edit and change information on wikipedia and there is no hierarchy of backgrounds of knowledge. Not only special professional people can say something, everyone has right to talk about their own views of public issues and topics. This way really reveals that people have much freedom to their speeches. It shows much more democracy in the public. While, we have to notice that there are some potential problems of wikipedia. As above said that everyone can edit can change information on wikipedia, there are some wrong information on it to express to the public and someone plays tricks on the public which express wrong and funny information purposely. These have no responsibility to the public, even some serious critics can cause some social unrest somehow.

As myself, I use wikipedia very frequently and I used to believe that this is a trustful website to use. Then when I learn some more about wikipedia in my the other communication course, I know about it is not reliable information tool to use and I also understand professors always told us that we can not use wikipedia resources to be our evidence in our papers. Therefore, I think I do not have enough confidence to wikipedia and I just use it to be a basic information to know some popular issues because I have to say it is very quickly and convenience website to use.

In conclude, I used the example of War of 1812 to address whether wikipedia reflects democracy or not. We still use wikipedia and we like to comment on it when we want to or are interested in, but we have to think about whether we have responsibility to express our views to the public.

This is link of War of 1812 on wikipedia:

part of the image of war of 1812

COMM2F00: Module #3 Initial blog post

After I read all articles in this module, I think that people can get and know knowledge from the traditional way to the new way, and this is the main topic in module #3. Specifically, the traditional way which is people just receive knowledge from books, texts and documents by some people of specific authority shifts to the new way which is collecting all people as many as possible who have comments or views of knowledge, and people can see all information via the Internet, such as Wikipedia or encyclopedia. This change reflects our technology becomes much advanced and reveals cultural, social and economic globalization in our society. As Cindy Royal and Deepina Kapila said that Wikipedia is not producing knowledge simply to people, it wants to mention more who use and how use it by anyone can edit or add their own points on it.

When I look at the first question of guiding question of module #3, I feel surprised why the question was asked because I think I have any doubt to Wikipedia, and I always use Wikipedia if I have no idea about any concept or issue and I think it is a very very useful tool for me. While, I got the new idea about Wikipedia after I have read all articles because I have not never known anyone can edit and add their own thoughts or views on Wikipedia before, and I think Wikipedia is the most trustful educational website for people. I think I change my view about Wikipedia when I use it in the future, I will doubt that not everything is totally right of Wikipedia.

Specifically, I took the course of Canadian Study in my last spring term. At that time, I used Wikipedia frequently when I confused some historical battles and issues. And I found there were always critical thoughts at the bottom of it, and I did not doubt whether they are trustful or not because I believe. Especially, I think I should wonder that comments’ reality after I read “Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War of 1812”. (Richard Jensen) He took the war of 1812 to be a case study, and it gave some numbers to show anybody can write about “historical stuff.” It is about there is the article of 14,000 words of “War of 1812” by 2,400 different people, and 3,300 comments about “War of 1812” by 627 enthusiastic people. This reveals that not all of them are professional historians and they are just interested in this historical issue to discuss, anybody can share with their points, even was persuaded by them.

At the present, this new way of collecting and creating knowledge has two aspects to our society. As pros, there is no hierarchy of different people who have different educational backgrounds. It encourages people can explore deeper thoughts of important issues, it also offers the more spaces of democracy in the society because everyone can talk about their thoughts and share with others’ views. This way is not only effecting on the cultural and social things, but also influences on economy. As the article of Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestos said that companies change their management model from top-down business model to peer production model. It is more transparent and democratic structures of a company, and it gets more benefits from all employees, such as Youtube, Facebook, Google, Myspace and so on. This   concept which is using individual knowledge to make bigger benefits is from Wikipedia, it addresses it is powerful when individuals get together no matter what are on social, cultural and economic. Moreover, this concept becomes popular to most of companies in the business management.

While, I think there are some cons about it. Even though everyone can talk about stuff what they are interested in, it lacks of authority of knowledge somehow because different views are easy to distort and mislead some facts. And it may not be trustful or academic evidence for professional stuff, so people are lack of resources to support their views. Sometimes, not everyone can search very academic resources, Wikipedia is easy to get information and is also not very professional educational website. For example, I feel upset when professors said that we can not use Wikipedia to be a resource  because I have limited resources to get more information. But I understand why it can not be a “real” resource now and I really use it to be referential tool.

In conclude, Wikipedia and Wikieconomics have the main point which is addressing individuals’ power is big than we imagine, and this new concept is influencing on our social, cultural and economic aspects in the society.


(From: Google Image)


Jensen, R. (2012). Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War of 1812. Journal of Military History. 76, 1. pp 1165-1182

Royal, C. & Kapila, D. (2009). What’s on Wikipedia, and What’s Not . . . ?: Assessing Completeness of Information. Social Science Computer Review. 27, 1. pp 138-148.

Van Dijk, J. & Nieborg, D. (2009). Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestosNew Media & Society. 11, 5. pp 855-874.


COMM 2P91 Participation Assignment #3: Who are you on the Internet

To be honest, I have not never tried to google myself before. And I saw this work which  I should do in this participation, I googled myself. And I found some interesting things on it. On the Internet, there is no much information about me. As me, I feel glad because my personal information does not be disclosure on the Internet. While, I found there are some people whose names are the same as me, for example, one of them post her information on Linkedln. I saw her profile about her school, working experiences and job.  And when I typed my name in Chinese, I found many cloth companies whose brand names are the same as me. It is very interesting when I saw them on the Internet because I never  think that my name can be the brand of a company.

Back to myself, I do not post my personal information online, I post the fake name and wrong information online sometimes. I think there are potential risks to exist online, some people can stole your information to make crimes while you do not know what happen. For example, my Facebook and Twitter do not have many information on it if there is someone visit my online pages. I think about whether I have Facebook or not when I signed on the new account of Facebook. Because it needs my real name if I want to have the account of Facebook, I do not want to post my real name on it. Finally, I use my English name to sign up and I do not post more information about me on it. Thus, I think that is why there are more information about me when I googled myself, and  there are no information about my early life-casting.

Finally, I think social media tools are communicative tools when I connect to other people, even the whole world. I do not make the “special personal brand “to attract to others online. Maybe I will do that when I need make my resume to my employers.

COMM2P91: #2 Personal media reflection

To be honest, I used Twitter just for a month because I do not think that I need many social media tools and I think Facebook is enough for me.While, I have sign the new account of Twitter because my courses need it which connect some information with my professors. When I used at the first time, I thought that Twitter is the same as Facebook because I also find friends to follow and I can tweet some thoughts about my life to the public, but I still feel different than Facebook because Twitter is more open than Facebook, you can search topics or issues what you want and you can know more information than Facebook. So far, I do not have as many as friends to follow because most of my friends do not have Twitter handles. I have a few of followers and I am following with some people. I am just following my professors and my classmates, and some of strangers who have some interesting views to attract to me. For example, my professors always encourage us to discuss deeper and wider thoughts online to share with other people, they always tweets many videos or articles. Then, Twitter becomes the communicative tool between professors and students. And they also tweet some notices which are about course schedules or works in every once week or assignments’ specific information and so on. As others friends, most of them tweet some interesting video or news to share and with their thoughts, I can know more information about the whole world. I found that Twitter is different than other traditional social media tools because it is more quickly and conveniently to express information to people, and people can involve in the social online world to know everything what they like. Moreover, the intend is wider than traditional social media tools because you can search other strangers’ thoughts no matter who they are.

I always search my interesting topics or trends by hash-tags. I think this is a good tool to use because you can type any key words what you want, and it can gives you many results, like, other people also like the same topics or other issues which relate to your topics. I think it is better than traditional searching tool because Twitter offer the communicative space to you, you can re-tweet others’ tweets, then you can discuss more with them if you want. It seems to have conversation in the real world and people have more rights to say their thoughts in the world.

When I use Twitter and I always concern about fashion, entertainment and Brock news because these are relative for me. For example, I follow Brock TV because I want to know what happen in everyday of Brock University, and I can know more activities in the school and I can share with my friends. While, I do not often tweet some personal things and I always tweet and respond my interesting topics and issues which I am following. I just log in it via my computer if I have time because Twitter seems to be a “information stand” for me and I look up it what something happen in the daily life. Thus, I think I do not have rich tweet experiences on Twitter and I am also not positive to tweet something because I just re-tweet and respond others’ tweets.

Even though I am not active on Twitter, I have to say it has own pros for us. When I found   tweet has word count, it reflects people can write their tweets very quickly and it reveals that our ways of communication and writing are changing in this digital era. People always use simplified words and people should adapt to this way of expression. Especially for young people, they like to use special network words. It shows our society becomes more and more advanced and people use the new way to communication.

In the last, I think there is nothing is perfect. Everything has two aspects which are positive and negative. As pros, Twitter changes our communicative expression to our world, and it covers broader information for us. People have more choices to choose social media tools what they like. For cons, Twitter is much public in the society, privacy is a problem which we have to notice. People can not control the virtual world which there are their information on it. It is easy to have problem of  invasion of privacy, and it also easy to make crime which some people use the public online. All in all, people have own responsibilities to publish their information or thoughts what they disclosure and keep the peace in the virtual world.

Module #2: Summation of the blog post

As I saw the all comments, I found most views of the comments are the same as mine. These comments are all positive and support my original blog before. Generally, I summarize that there are three points which connect my views and these comments.

First of all, some students and I believe that people choose to disclosure their more personal information on Facebook. Why people publish more personal their information on Facebook? Many people think that Facebook is their own personal online spaces to share information with their families and friends. On Facebook, most of people just modify their families and friends to go into their personal profile. Because they know they share information or other interesting things with their friends and families, they do not mind publish their information on Facebook. While, people do mot publish more information on Twitter because Twitter is more public than Facebook, everyone can see your tweets and information even though you do not want to show everything to everybody, so people always tweet their stuff in daily life or views for other topics or news when they choose to use Twitter. Twitter seems to be a public conversation online which is in order to let everyone discuss what they want. Therefore, different social media tools have different function when people use.

Second, people balance their public and private lives when they use different social tools. The most main point in here which is about people choose that how much information they disclosure due to different social tools. Different social tools can reflect different levels of relationships among people. For instance, people think that Facebook has the main function which connect with our families and friends online. People are tend to disclosure more personal information on Facebook because they want to share their personal things with their close relationship. While, when people use Twitter, they do not publish their personal information on it. Twitter is more open than Facebook and there are less private space than Facebook, people think that they do not need disclosure their information on it. And one more example, when people do a resume to their employers, they will post as many as information on it in order to get the deep impression from their employers. So, different social media tools have different functions, and different functions lead to different levels of people’s interpersonal relationships, people can choose to disclosure their information what they want due to different social media tools.

The last one is potential risks online and people have to notice that they should balance their private and public lives online. I have mentioned in my own blog before that many stores ask customers to get their personal information to get online coupons or online news of their companies. There is one of the comments said that she got surprised this views and she agreed with my views at the same time. I still think people have their own responsibilities to protect their own privacy. When people disclosure their information to public organizations or companies, they should concern whether this decision leads to invasion their privacy or not. Thus, people have responsibilities to balance the private and public lives online in the digital era.

All in all, most of points are still same as the original blog before because these comments are positive to discuss it. I think people can control and protect their privacy in the public online space when they choose information what they want.