My Googlability

To my relief, I found that I'm not very googlable when I searched my name in Google. The only result that actually related to myself was the twitter account I've made for this class. "MinJung" is a common name in Korea, and I noticed that there were a lot of other MinJungs in the search results. If anyone wants to get information about someone named "MinJung," googling is definitely not a good idea.

There could be some advantages of appearing in Google search engines, but I feel that there are too many risks involved. It could seriously threaten people's privacy if too much information is exposed to the public through the Internet. Personally, even though there was only one search result that related to myself, I felf highly uncomfortable about it. In addition, there are some limitations associated with googling. It would be difficult to get accurate information of a person with a common name by using google search engines.

Googleability

After googling my name, I discover that according to Google I am the only Sheila Waslawski in this world. Fortunately or unfortunately, I have no Google doppelganger. However, this means that almost all of the Google results pertained to activities I specifically partook in. The results included newspaper articles pertaining to sports and academics throughout high school, math challenges, and athletic statistics and awards. Due to my privacy settings on Facebook, the only social network that appeared was Twitter. After searching under Google images, the only photographs that pertained to me were those of math equations that I solved in high school (lame) and a soccer ball that linked to a website in which my name was included. Overall I was moderately googleable.

In my opinion being googleable has both constructive and negative effects. Being googleable allows companies to have a quick overview of the awards and honors one may have received; but this also means that the same possible job prospects may view information that one may not have believed to be public. Social-networks are where this primarily comes into play. Companies are known to view Facebook pages of employee prospects and not only judge their information, but their friends’ information as well. Not only is one accountable for his or her information on the Internet, but also the friends he or she is depicted to be associated with. One now has to treat any piece of information he or she places on the Internet as being under the public eye.

Google Search: Sharif Anous

When I searched my name in Google, I came across various results. The ones that were actually related to me had to do with athletics and organizations that I had been involved in during either High school or here at the University of Michigan. The other results that were found were of sites that had some parts of my name in the URL or description of the site. When I did a Google image search I came across no images of me, but many of the famous actor Omar Sharif. I am satisfied with the amount of information that I can find about myself on Google, but I would prefer to be able to find at least one image of myself through the Google i9mage search.

The advantages of appearing in Google search are that you can find quick information about yourself. It allows organizations to get a somewhat quick overview of who you are. This would be based on the organizations you are involved in, the honors you received, or even how involved you are on the Internet. Despite this there are several limitations to appearing in a Google search. The main one is that you do not control what information is out there on Google. Therefore there might be compromising information about you that is open to the public. This can cause serious problems for your future development and especially if you want to have a respectable career.

My googabality

I found to be that I was much more "googable" than I would like to be. When I googled myself I not only found links for my Twitter account, and Facebook account, but also a link for a Facebook group that had my name in it. Additionally, I found links pertaining to my high school activties. Such being, high school golf and the magazine of which I was an editor for. It is also interesting to share a name with an actor. Ben Kurland, the actor, had a wikipedia page along with other links pertaining to him. Most frightening to see was a link for "Ben Kurland nude pics." I didn't actually click the link so I can't confirm that it was neither me nor him, although I sure as hell hope it wasn't me.

Obviously, advantages are that one can more easily find information about the person they are searching. However, this could also be a disadvantage and could be a potential new way of "creeping" or being a "creeper." We've all seen how weird the internet can be, so it is quite scary to see oneself appear on a screen that is visible to the entire world.

Googability

Googling my name is an activity not unfamiliar to me. I have, over the years, searched out every like-named person in the world. I can tell you the professional career stats of French singer Eric Raynal, the location of the dentistry practice of C. Eric Raynal (DDS), or the numerous writings of Eric Raynal submitted to the annual Crooked Tree Arts Council writing contest (that one is me). The limited number of Eric's in the world (three only!) give me a better sense of identity, as well as belonging. I feel a special connection with the other two in the world, even though the dentist only half counts. I mean, cmon. He doesn't even use his first name.

I feel a bit overwhelmed when Google can tell the searcher my friends on Facebook, or where I'm located, but then again, the Internet was designed to bring people together. It's a gift and a curse. The trend in the increasing amount of information available online can be compared to two extremely interesting historical cases: the story of Prometheus, providing fire to the humans as a blessing, but bringing a curse upon himself and all mankind, and also with the myth surrounding the Hand of Mysteries. Many interesting debates are raised regarding the power of online searches, from practical applications to esoteric societies.

Do not search me

When I google "Halley Rycenga," I find an assortment of information about myself. From social networking sites to newspaper articles, bits and pieces of information about myself (Halley) come together, linked by my name in text. One can learn about other people I am associated with, personal contact information, past jobs, my scholastic history, and more. However, being "googlable" or easily found with many sources/hits is not something I would like to be. For some, the idea of being present and connected to the web may give a sense of famousity but for myself it seems like a recipe for danger.

While there are some advantages to being googlable, there are many risks to being accessible through google that seem to outweigh the benefits. Perhaps I wanted to get a job and before I received an interview, the company decided to "google" me to find a little more about me. While at the present I have nothing rueful or incriminating in my past, the interviewer could associate me with people who have just by looking at social networking sites. Any bit of information on the internet could easily be misconstrued to look "bad" and give a bad impression of someone. Another risk to being googlable is making your personal contact information more accessible to the public. I do not want just anyone to know where I live, my full name, my birthdate, etc. If these small pieces of information got into the wrong hands, it could be much easier to locate me and do me harm or to steal my identity. I prefer to keep my business private to myself and others who I trust.

Googlability

When I googled myself, I found that I am not very “googlable”. The only information about myself that came up were this Blogger page and another page on Facebook. Many other results were related to people who have same or similar names. The reasons for not being very googlable could be because I have a Korean name with relatively uncommon spelling and many of the sites I use or have accounts for are Korean-based websites that are not easily googlable. I actually felt comfortable to be able to find only so much about myself on google. I have no problem with pages such as Blogger, Twitter and Facebook, related to myself, appearing on google search engine because any of the posts there were the ones I actually wanted to share with other people, so I knew that they could easily go public. However, I would not want to be any more googlable because it can possibly threat my privacy.

Of course, there are advantages of being googlable if someone wants to promote his or herself or draw people’s attention to anything they want to share with the public. Being googlable will definitely attract others. However, we are all well aware of the fact that once online, it will stay online forever. It would be a serious threat to private life if any information that one does not want to share with others anymore can be searched online. Even worse, it is not fair for employers or college administrators to be able to access prospective employees or students information without any permission. Therefore, appearing on google search engine risks one’s privacy and future.

Google: The Ultimate Gateway for Creepers

As self-centered as it may seem, I have Googled myself many times. I usually use quotes around my name because it produces the most accurate hits. After Googling myself in class today, I noticed some differences compared to what I have found in the past. Searching "Emily Nairn" produces results such as my Twitter and Blogger sites. I can also be found in my great-grandmother's obituary from ten or so years ago, along with a list of perfect MEAP scores in a fifth grade newsletter. I find it very strange that such dated publications are still showing up as search results. Although the Web search didn't yield much information about me, I would still like to be less Googleable because of the Images results. The very first image is an extremely old, deleted Facebook profile picture of mine. This angered me because I made a conscious effort to make my Facebook content unavailable to public searches.

I have trouble justifying the advantages of being Googleable if one is just an average joe. No one cares about my MEAP scores or my Twitter, so why bother allowing public access to that information? On the other hand, I have enjoyed the Googleability of various professionals, namely doctors. I carefully chose my PCP partially based on her credentials listed on medical evaluation websites. Being Googleable also poses potential risks. Given that I am currently in the process of searching for a job, I am uncomfortable knowing that employers can access information about me. It can also produce personal risks. Since I am a creep, I found and then proceeded to add an Emily Nairn from Australia whose Facebook showed up on Google. This wasn't a problem for her, but the fact that I was able to find her so easily could produce all sorts of issues, depending on the intentions of the Googler.

Googlability

Everyone Googles themselves at some point to see what's out there on the web with your name attached to it. When I Googled my name I found many hits with Michael Balke in it. For example there's a German composer named Michael Balke who has his own website and youtube videos of him conducting world famous symphonies. When it came to material that regarded myself the only thing that popped up was my twitter account. It was a relief to me because I really don't want to have my name out there on the web as a college student. I like my privacy and the fact that when people search my name all they will see is a twitter page made me rest easy.

There are many risks and advantages to being Googlable. It all just depends on how private you want your life to be. Some people like having there name out there because it can draw attention to them, especially if it's for something good. It can help employers understand who you are if there is good information out there on you. But on the other hand if there is a lot of negative things out there then it can be a real draw back. It can destroy your privacy and even the chance of getting a job if the wrong people see it. Your internet life is something that should be taken seriously. Nothing is ever truly "deleted." The risk of having something in a google search will always be there.

I am Googleable

My personal view pertaining to Google posting information about me online is vastly different than the the perceived general consensus: I personally have no problem with it. I believe that every internet user should be careful enough not to enter any information into a public space that they wish not be seen by other people. Facebook is a prime example of this; what you post on facebook can be seen by a unbelievable amount of people. I have edited my facebook privacy settings so that the only way a stranger can see any of my information (minus my name, location, and picture), is by first be-friending me. As for my name appearing in a google search, the only time this occurs is through my "linked-in" account and for a tennis tournament I won. Google showing these things does not concern me. If Google where to show any other private information (other than my name itself), this would concern me but because Google allows you to control this feature I have nothing to worry about.... at least for now.

The advantages of having your name and certain "safe" information shown to the world is simply exposure. People who are searching for you can easily find you. Whether these people are good or bad plays into whether displaying your name in the first place was a risk or not. I don't think too many "bad" people are looking for me and am therefore not very concerned. Having your contact information on Google could help employers see your professional side and could even lead to them contacting you.

Assumptions on social networking

In the article, Do problems associated with social networking outweigh the benefits?, both Norah Wei Tang and Elizabeth Anne Wood discuss what they believe to be the effects of social networking on their users. Tang agrees with the idea that social networking is affecting people, especially college students, adversely. She goes on to discuss how it can harm your career using the Michael Phelps scandal as an example. Wood disagrees with the statement, and believes that social networking sites create a perfect outlet for the pursuit of knowledge that wasn’t accessible before the creation of the Internet and these sites.

Despite these two polar opinions on the subject, the two responses do share a common assumption. This assumption is that social networking users, especially college students, spend enormous amounts of their time using social networking sites whether it be twitter, MySpace or Facebook. Although the same assumption is made, Tang says that the time spent on the sites is wasted as it only serves as a distraction. On the other hand Wood emphasizes that the social networking sites can be used in order to follow important people or interesting ideas, and that social networking sites allow for these many things to become easily accessible.

Social Networking Websites

Norah Wei Tang and Elizabeth Anne Wood have different views on the topic of the use of social networking sites in a environment. Although they both agree with the fact that the all these communication websites help people to much convenient, they slightly have different opinions specifically on communication. Norah Tang asserts that communication through social networking websites are unhealthy, meaning it gives bad outcomes to students. For example, college students may not focus and get distracted by these systems. Not only that, it hurts academic performance. Yet, Elizabeth Wood states that communication system is very beneficial to students in college. She says that it helps people to interact with one another and bond together.

In spite of these differences, two authors also have a common analysis over communication. One thing that both agree on about social networking system is playing crucial role in the society. Norah Tang says that students always can use them as long as they have the internet. Additionally, Elizabeth wood says that systems are very popular among people and they can learn so much about them not only through internet but other student users that use same program as well. Overall, they both emphasize that how social networking websites are. Students are further stimulated by this system. Social networking sites and students are developing quickly together and will work hand-in-hand with one another along the way.

Assumptions. . .

A few commonalities that are quite apparent by both of the authors of their respective articles are the assumptions they both make. First, both Ms Wood and Ms Wei Tang both assume that college a large number of students use social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Both of the author also have an underlying belief in the importance of education and both of their articles are written, in part, with that importance in mind.

The third and most important assumption that the authors make is that they agree about the enormous amount of time students spend on these social networking sites. This ties in with the very reason they are writing their articles, to either justify or condemn this expenditure of time. While Ms Wood believes that sites such as Facebook can enhance the free exchange of ideas, Ms. Wei Tang articulates her belief that they are a waste of time.

Tang vs. Wood

Although Nora Wei Tang is opposed to the over usage of social networking in our society, while Elizabeth Ann Wood is an advocate, both authors agree that social networking serves as a means of communication between individuals. In her argument, Tang mentions "immediate interaction" offered by the sites, as well as the concepts of instant gratification and being constantly plugged in. Without viewing Tang's negative views that go along with such aspects of social networking, one might think that she viewed it as beneficial.

Wood clearly has a positive tone throughout her piece. She mentions how social networking facilitates intellectual engagement (much like how our class utilizes this blog!) and allows interactive discussion of ideas. These important components of communication are useful as long as a person knows how to effectively operate the social networking sites. I particularly enjoyed the emphasis on this aspect of social networking because Wood was able to counter argue Tang's criticisms by simply stating that it can be wonderful when used correctly.

Social Networking: Good or Bad?

Wei Tang and Wood share two contrasting opinions about social networking. Although Wei Tang believes that social networking is a distraction and Wood believes that it promotes learning, they both agree that social networking sites allow people to connect with others that they normally wouldn't connect with. Wei Tang sees this as a distraction, but I disagree. Social networking sites have the ability to connect us with larger, more diverse groups of people. This helps us to grow socially into more well-rounded people and exposes us to more diverse intellectual opinions.

Another similarity in the two opposing arguments is the fact that they only discuss college students as the users of social networking sites. For Wood, this is understandable since she discusses the benefits social networking has in higher learning. However, Wei Tang's argument would be stronger if she discussed the cons that these sites posed for other groups of people, because users of sites like Facebook are increasingly diversifying. Kids are starting to get Facebooks at younger and younger ages, and increasing amounts of parents and teachers are getting accounts to stay connected with their kids and students. In my opinion, the ability that social networking sites have to keep people connected (like relatives, for example) far outweighs the negatives of the sites.

In the article "Do problems associated with social networking outweigh the benefits?", authors Norah Wei Tang and Elizabeth Anne Wood assume very opposing stances. Tang believes that the use of social networking sites by college students dampens productivity and is nothing more than a huge distraction and time-waster, while Wood thinks that social networking sites allow a new, effective medium for communication and the growth of ideas. There are clearly many contrasts between the two responses, such as example used, arguments produced, and even the organization, but beneath it all there are some similarities in the assumptions made by the authors.

Both authors' arguments are dictated by the assumption that college kids use social networking sites extremely frequently. Right off the bat, Tang says that "...popular social networking sites...are part of everyday life." Most of Tang's argument is centralized around this thought, as she believes the constant exposure and use of social networking eats up valuable time and established weak relationships. Wood on the other hand uses the assumption in order to explain intellectual discussion and engagement that happens over the internet. All of her examples of blogs and websites require that users are participating in large amounts. At the end of her response, Wood even says that "...we learn from our students about the technologies shaping their lives..."

Social Networking Bonds

While Norah Wei Tang, an opponent of social networking, and Elizabeth Anne Wood, a proponent for social networking, disagree on the benefits of social networking, they both make a common assertion that social networking does in fact connect people. While Tang berates social networking and sees it as a waste of time, she still asserts that people are in contact with one another. She mentions the installation of twitter and facebook apps on phones as a means of "instant gratification," yet individuals are still in contact with one another.

Wood supports social networking, and cites some benefits as people research via social networks for their work or studies. People are able to connect and ask questions to increase their knowledge. Social networking allows individuals to collaborate in order to successfully accomplish whatever task they might have at hand. Social networking puts people together for the benefits of the users.

Comparison Between Dissimilar Ideas

Though the two authors clearly have different opinions on the topic of Social Networking websites, they still share a commonality. Both authors agree that the use of these websites facilitates communication. While Wei Tang may see the type of communication that occurs as unhealthy, Elizabeth Wood sees the communication as a positive addition to social interaction. Yet, they both agree that the websites generate interaction between humans. Wei Tang shows us this when she admits that these websites offer, "...the possibility of immediate interaction...". Elizabeth Wood demonstrates her similar opinion when she states that, "Social networking lets many more people-who otherwise might never meet-learn from one another." Thus, they both agree on the factual information regarding the purpose of social networking websites, though they differ in interpretation.

Another area of common ground between the two authors is that social networking websites are taking more and more time out of the daily lives of college students. Whether their use be purely for leisure or purely for educational purposes, both authors agree that they consume a large amount of time.

Similarities Between Wei Tang and Wood

Although Norah Wei Tang and Elizabeth Anne Wood make opposite arguments about social networking sites, they do share some common perspectives. Perhaps the most visible commonality between the two was the argument that social networking sites connect people to other individuals with whom they wouldn't normally be connected. The two authors use this idea to support their arguments quite differently, perhaps because they focus on different groups people can be connected with.

Wei Tang makes the argument that the connections individuals are making via social networking sites are not valuable, but rather distracting. In her perspective, social networking sites connect people with "strangers the social networker wouldn't normally care about." Wood, on the other hand, discusses the importance of communication in education and how social networking allows people to connect with experts. She references as an example her meeting with Kate Bornstein, "an intellectual role model of (hers)" as a result of their connection on Twitter. Though the people with whom individuals connect on social networking sites differ greatly, there is no doubt these sites allow boundaries to be stretched and social interaction to reach new heights.

The Pro and Cons of Social Networking

Norah Wei Tang and Elizabeth Anne Wood both wrote articles regarding the use of social networking sites in a college environment. Norah believes social networking is harming those students who use it in college. She claims that the sites lead to poor time management and can hurt a students performance in academics and also cause them to not have a real social life off the computer. Elizabeth argues that social networking sites offer students a place to come together and share information. It allows for easy calibration on school work and people can play an intellectual role in each others lives.

While their opinions differ greatly, both Norah and Elizabeth agree that time management is an issue that needs to be dealt with. Students who spend too much time on these sites can be seriously affected in their work and life. While Norah makes it seem more extreme, both authors claim there needs to be a point where too much is too much. Elizabeth call this "effective use" and claims it must be learned. They also agree that the sites do offer instant access to information, which can help students.