Social Media Think-Tank‎ > ‎Topics‎ > ‎

Considering Context

Realistically, there is no one truth and perspective creates reality. Given this, why do we so often think we are able to group all of anything into some kind of unit or whole???

Consider this, with the majority of our clients and cases currently, fit primarily within the following conditions of context: 

Context: New Zealand

 

The NZ Government have officially started to really enforce & encourage people to utilise these supported by govt, digital content strategies & community initiatives all drive towards increasing our lives.

 

A Democracy, Prime Minister and the Governor General who are overarching & in simplistic terms, governed by the Queen.

 

We have a number of overarching pieces of legislature which we are all governed by:

Bill of Rights Act, Human Rights Act, Treaty of Waitangi


New Zealand in Context: Law

 

Government: consists of Parliament & Executive - decide law & policy

 

Judiciary Act, Privacy Act,

State Sector Act

 

Judiciary - interpret & enforce law- judge, police, customs etc

 

Social Norms: not in itself part of law but it are fundamentally integrated and entwined. Social Identity Theory comes into play strongly here, and we imagine more so even in the future (http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/10-piercing-insights-into-human-nature.php) 

 

Online behaviours are in general covered by the same laws that relate to behaviour offline - so things like publication of information, entering into contracts or harassment are held to the same standards as if equivalent actions had been taken offline, even though many processes are far easier online, and can be done between many people at the same time. So for instance pressing "accept" on the terms and conditions of a website is legally equivalent to signing a contract with the company owning the website, even though none of the formalities are present that would normally alert someone to the serious nature of entering a contract.

 

A large proportion of the information people generate online automatically becomes the property of the hosting company, under the terms and conditions they accepted when they signed up to the site. So every user has agreed to terms which amount to a contractual agreement to hand over copyright of all of this content to Facebook automatically upon uploading it, with no remuneration required from Facebook other than the provision of the social networking service they offer.

 

 

    Case History

     

    Wellington free ambulance case (employment dispute)

    dispute between two employees over Facebook outside of work hours was held to have been admissible when considering if it had been appropriate to dismiss one of the parties involved (Wellington Ambulance case, 2010).

     

    Police v Cameron Slater 2010  (aka Whaleoil)

    Whaleoil blog case (revealing details on blog that had been suppressed by court order)

     

  1. All material posted online that may be viewed by the public, can be considered to have been published. It is also on record which remains online for a time period which is not controlled by the person who posted it, and may be permanent.
  2.  

 

 



Understanding that other people's expectations about us directly and immediately affect our behaviour

posted Feb 6, 2011, 10:49 AM by Jess Maher   [ updated Feb 6, 2011, 11:40 AM ]

Understanding that other people's expectations about us directly and immediately affect our behaviour is a vital component in understanding how we can come to be quite different people across various social situations.

Understanding that other people's expectations about us directly and immediately affect our behaviour is a vital component in understanding how we can come to be quite different people across various social situations.

http://www.spring.org.uk/2009/12/how-other-peoples-expectations-control-us.php


False Consensus Effect

To put it a little crassly: people tend to assume that those who don't agree with them have something wrong with them! It might seem like a joke, but it is a real bias that people demonstrate.

http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/why-we-all-stink-as-intuitive.php

Attempts to organize, summarize, or explain one's own behavior in a particular domain result in the formation of cognitive structures about the self or self-schemata. Self-schemata are cognitive generalizations about the self, derived from past experience, that organize and guide the processing of the self-related information contained in an individual's social experience.
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/35/2/63/


is to do with cognitive dissonance. This is the finding that we try to avoid inconsistencies in our thinking which cause us mental anguish. It feels dissonant—the two ideas butting up against each other—not to comply after objections have been effectively dealt with; after all, if there's no reason not to do it, why not do it?
http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/10/dont-take-no-for-an-answer.php

  1. Liking: It's much easier to influence someone who likes you. Successful influencers try to flatter and uncover similarities in order to build attraction.
  2. Social proof. People like to follow one another, so influencers imply the herd is moving the same way.
  3. Consistency. Most people prefer to keep their word. If people make a commitment, particularly if it's out loud or in writing, they are much more likely to keep it. Influencers should try to gain verbal or written commitments.
  4. Scarcity. Even when companies have warehouses full of a product, they still advertise using time-limited offers that emphasise scarcity. People want what they can't have, or at least what might be running short.
  5. Authority. People are strongly influenced by experts. Successful influencers flaunt their knowledge to establish their expertise.
  6. Reciprocity. Give something to get something. When people feel indebted to you they are more likely to agree to what you want. This feeling could arise from something as simple as a compliment.

Unconscious motivators

Everybody wants to be accurate, to affiliate with others and to maintain their concept of themselves, however little awareness we might have of these goals. Effective persuasion and influence attempts can target one or more of these goals.

With these goals in mind it is possible to tailor persuasion attempts to the particular characteristics of an audience, rather than relying on transparent generic techniques. Whether it's at work, dealing with your boss, or at home negotiating with a neighbour, we can all benefit from thinking about other people's unconscious motivators. Then we can work out how to align our message with their goals.

http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/07/3-universal-goals-to-influence-people.php

The devil is in the press release

Submitted by Vikram on Fri, 15/10/2010 - 1:35pm
15 Oct 2010

The devil may not be in the details but a press release. In this case, Minister Simon Power ordering a review of “new media” by the Law Commission, it is even more so given that he used the same words in response to Parliamentary questions.

The review is a good step. Asking the Law Commission to lead it is also good. They have both the credibility and skills do a thorough job and develop balanced perspectives. And first talking about the issues and defining real problems before looking at possible solutions is good.

But there are many issues with the way the Minister has chosen to describe the review. They reveal assumptions and perspectives that are worrying and, in some cases, plain wrong.

Take the example of “It’s a bit of a Wild West out there in cyberspace at the moment...” If the intention was a bit of dramatic flourish then it’s no big deal. However, if that’s what the Minister really believes and is a starting assumption of the review, then we’ve got reasons to be very, very worried.


NZ Cases & Presecent

posted Feb 6, 2011, 8:39 AM by Jess Maher

Wellington free ambulance case (employment dispute) dispute between two employees over Facebook outside of work hours was held to have been admissible when considering if it had been appropriate to dismiss one of the parties involved (Wellington Ambulance case, 2010). 


Whaleoil blog case (revealing details on blog that had been suppressed by court order)

 All material posted online that may be viewed by the public, can be considered to have been published. It is also on record which remains online for a time period which is not controlled by the person who posted it, and may be permanent.

 

Police v Cameron Slater 2010  (aka Whaleoil)  CRN 004028329  9833]]



1-2 of 2