In the article “Where ISN’T social media ubiquitous?”, Levi (2012) suggests that aside from limited internet access, another reason as to why social media is not widely used in certain jurisdictions is that the users’ native language is not supported by the more established social media networks. However, in the event the primary language of users is not supported, they are nevertheless able to access the networks via their second language provided that the second language is supported.
Even so, there are places where certain language may be intentionally omitted due to political sensitivities.
Social media has connected millions, has allowed voices to be heard and created many opportunities, be it a marketing platform of a product or assisting talented people to rise to fame. Social media has also proven itself as an instant way of receiving and dissipating first hand news.
Accessing social media requires a gadget such as a computer or a smart phone. Apart from the reasons proposed above, it may be that people from less developed countries like Congo and Liberia with a lower penetration of such gadgets do not have the necessary conduit to utilize social media.
Where a language is intentionally omitted by social media networks due to political reasons, this is hugely mitigated due to the fact that many jurisdictions practise second languages given that they were former colonies or in close vicinity to their more powerful neighbouring countries, such as the Basque Country alongside Spain and France. In Basque Country, users can still access social medias via the French or Spanish languages although the native language, Basque, is not widely used and supported by the more widely used social media. In the case of Taiwan, however, acknowledging and supporting Traditional Chinese, which is the official language used in Taiwan, on social media platforms can be sensitive as it can be interpreted as regarding Taiwan as a country, which might inevitably rile the Chinese government. Although Traditional Chinese is still supported on social media platforms such as facebook, twitter and youtube, such social platforms are officially banned in China to prevent Mainland Chinese from accessing them.
While less sweeping, certain governments may intentionally restrict the use of social media by its people in the country such that they can only access government controlled network.
In North Korea, the internet is generally not available in the country, and only a privileged few are allowed to access it. The citizens of North Korea are only allowed access to the country’s own intranet. This has no doubt deprived the users from accessing popular social medias, which have already reached millions of people at an unprecedented speed, despite the fact that infrastructure networks in the country can actually allow the citizens to do so.
Hello Paulette!
ReplyDeleteSome comments for you!
Content & Organization:
After reading your response, we felt that there is no concrete thesis statement. Or rather, you have agreed with all the main points suggested by the author in his original article. This results in insufficient evidences/opinions to elaborate on your view on the article. You might want to consider singling out a main point and have your thesis statement revolving around that one main point instead of commenting on all the points. This will make your response feel less of a “touch and go” and more detailed.
“Although Traditional Chinese is still supported on social media platforms such as facebook, twitter and youtube, such social platforms are officially banned in China to prevent Mainland Chinese from accessing them.” We felt that this argument should be placed under the same paragraph as the one mentioning “North Korea disallowing their citizens from using the Internet”. This is because the reason why the Chinese government refuses to allow use of social media websites is to not allow content from the outside world to “pollute” the minds of its citizen. This is similar to that in North Korea. We felt there would be a stronger correlation if you were to type them here instead.
Language:
You may want to use more reporting verbs in your response such as “the author claims, suggested, argued, reports, stated, illustrated” etc.
Citation:
With reference to your reference list, you did not use an in-text citation for the following reference:
Sedaghat, N.(March 17, 2014), North Korea exposed: Censorship in the world’s most secretive state, Canadian Journalist For Free Expression.Retrieved from: https://cjfe.org/resources/features/north-korea-exposed-censorship-world’s-most-secretive-state.
Also, the reference for “Levi (2012) “ in the first paragraph is not found in your reference list.
CHEERS! (:
Jovyn & Wei Chuan
Thank you, Paulette, for this summary and reader response. The summary seems especially effective to me, covering as it does Levi's two main points. As for the response, I tend to agree with your peers who didn't find a thesis. You seem to simply recapitulate Levi's view, albeit while expanding on that with good examples.
ReplyDeleteLike your peers, I also feel that you need to employ more reporting verbs, to show closer integration of outside source info. This will be useful throughout the essay.
I look forward to reading your next draft.