Cyberculture Report: DailyBooth, or as some call it "Face Twitter"

Social networking sites are popping up everywhere these days. You can’t go two metaphorical feet when surfing the Web without running into one. There are sites out there that cater to everyone’s particular desires as a user, but a lot of them fall into the two categories of text-based or picture-based. It may seem silly to have a site completely based on pictures, but photoblogging sites are growing in number just as rapidly as anything else. One of the newest and fastest-gaining in popularity photoblogging sites is DailyBooth.

DailyBooth is described on its website as “one big conversation about your life, through pictures.” It is a photoblogging site that allows its users to upload a photo, every day or multiple times a day, with a caption. Signing up is completely free. The goal is to allow people to document and share their lives with others. The DailyBooth slogan is “your life in pictures.” It has often been compared to Twitter and other social networking sites that allow users to follow and be followed in real time. My friend refers to DailyBooth as “face Twitter.” This is because the majority of users post images of themselves photo booth-style sitting at their computers (hence the name of the site) (Siegler). Users of both DailyBooth and Twitter are able to post links on the other’s page, so Twitter actually increases traffic on the DailyBooth site (Martinez). DailyBooth separates itself from Twitter by accentuating its unique feature: the fact that people exclusively share pictures instead of text. This tends to foster a greater sense of community and connection in a more immediately accessible way than other text blogging sites. DailyBooth is also becoming increasingly popular. It has a growth rate of about 35% a month (Siegler). Site creator Jon Wheatley has been quoted as saying that “people find pictures a much more engaging medium than just text” (Martinez).

Whenever a user first accesses the DailyBooth site, they are immediately confronted with the option to sign up. They have their description (“one big conversation about your life through pictures”) as the first thing you see and they promise “you’ll make some new friends real fast.” You can take a picture with your webcam and sign up right then. You can also see the “live feed” at the bottom of the screen. Once you get an account, you are directed to your home page. Once there, you will see several tags at the top labeled “everything” (which is your home page), “booths” (the pictures you’ve taken), “comments,” “likes,” and “follows.” There are also buttons to take or upload a picture onto your page.

The textual literacy on DailyBooth requires users to know how to write and read in shorthand text lingo. Not everyone uses it, but the majority of people do some type of textual abbreviation in their “posts.” Since the main focus of the site is on the photos, it is expected that people write very little to accompany their pictures. Some people choose to write longer posts, but they never go more than a few short paragraphs. The generally accepted amount of text is about a line to two lines, but a short paragraph is not going to result in accusations of spamming the screen. Because it is a photoblogging site, it is also important to be picture/image literate. This means that the user must know how to take and upload digital photos to the site or take a photo from a webcam. They also need to know how to “read” photos and respond to them. Because all you usually get when looking at the Live Feed is a picture someone posts of themselves or something they find interesting, users have to know how to analyze what that photo says about the person. They also have to know how to respond in a way that will facilitate further interaction with the other user if they want to try to build a relationship.  You can't just say something insulting about their picture and expect them to respond to you positively. 

To participate in the site, all users need to do is snap a pic and wait for someone to comment. Because of the live feed, any user might be likely to comment on your picture rather than people you know. There is not a “friend” feature on DailyBooth, but you can “like” or “follow” other users’ Booths. You can also comment on their photos they post by following the live feed or checking in on Booths you are following. DailyBooth is also synchronous: users are constantly uploading pics to the world. As a result, when you are viewing the “live feed,” there is actually a “pause” button so you can catch up with the ones you missed if they were posting too quickly. The instant a user takes or uploads a picture, it’s on the site. However, there is no way to access all the past archives of the live feed. The fleeting nature of the live feed mirrors the users’ desire to have a quick, in-the-moment experience. There is a search bar at the top of the site that will bring up Booths that contain the keywords, but there is no comprehensive database of past Booth’s except on the individual profiles.

DailyBooth users are also (for the most part) reflections of their real world selves. However, users of DailyBooth are much more likely to edit or alter their appearance because it is a site based a lot on looks. You are much more likely to see someone posing in an “attractive” way than making a silly face. Girls especially always make sure their hair looks nice, they have on a cute outfit, and their makeup is done well. DailyBooth affords users with the chance to tweak and perfect their appearance before they put a representation of themselves out into the world, unlike in real life. Quite a few of the Booths posted daily are superficial and tend to be posted by high schoolers. The deeper ones that are artistic, comedic, etc. are posted by older users. The site allows for the continuation of real world friendships onto the site, but the set-up is really more designed to get strangers to interact. Viewing the live feed, you see almost multiple new people per second, and any one of those have the potential to become a new friend.

DailyBooth users tend to only meet up in life if they already knew each other before the site. It takes such a long time to become friends (enough to actually meet what is basically a stranger you met on the Internet) through the little interactions DailyBooth provides that most people never follow up on it. It’s easy to “like” or comment on someone’s Booth, but talking to them and getting to know them is not easily facilitated on the site. The kind of friendship DailyBooth fosters is not the kind of friendship where people meet up in real life, but it does still result in real friendship.

The goal seems to be to have the biggest number of people following you. The people who have the most followers are not outwardly different from other Daily Booth users. The social hierarchy seems to be based on “coolness,” or everyone on the site’s agreed-upon definition of coolness. This usually means the users present themselves as outgoing in some way (whether it manifests itself in their Booths or their text blurbs). The users with the most followers take normal pictures of themselves (although they may have more skill with a camera, i.e they aren’t just using their computer’s webcam). The users with the most followers basically have the power to define what/who is considered “cool” on the site because people look to them for social cues. The people who are constantly campaigning to get followers never have very many at all.  I put in an example here of one user's "steps to popularity" on DailyBooth.

There are so many people using DailyBooth that it is a daunting task to try and categorize them. People from many different countries access the site, so there are many different cultures manifesting themselves on the site in addition to the uniqueness of each individual.  However, you always have your celebrities (movies/TV or Internet), your high schoolers, and your “average Joe.” DailyBooth is home to many unique people, but these are the three groups I’m going to focus on.

Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher are both on DailyBooth. They are fairly active on the site (and they definitely follow the “rules” of the site, meaning they post Booths of themselves doing average daily activities, not on the red carpet or anything) and obviously have a ton of followers. On her page, Demi Moore describes herself as female from the United States as well as “Wife Mother Woman I am always learning exploring and discovering the silly the absurd the profound. I try to love and give more than I receive. I am dedicated to the fight against modern slavery and human trafficking especially the sexual exploitation of children.” She has taken about 200 Booths, the last one posted last night. Ashton Kutcher is less active, checking in with the site every month or so. He describes himself as a 33-year-old from somewhere in the universe and states that, “I feel I'm on to something here.”

Another type of user that frequents DailyBooth is the high schooler. Chantal Fraser is a good example. She describes herself as a 16-year-old female from Canada and has no “about” section on her profile. She uploads pictures daily and tends to upload pictures that involve her either “looking pretty” or “looking cool” by herself or being goofy with other people. From what I can tell from the site, she is a bright and bubbly girl. Another example of a high schooler is William, a 17-year-old from somewhere in the universe. He always takes these sad pictures that make him look like a little boy with very depressing accompanying text. William is a textbook “angsty teenager,” and everything about his DailyBooth supports that.

Finally, there is the user on this site that is neither a celebrity of any kind or a self-absorbed high schooler. This Boother just uploads pictures on to the site that describe their lives and tend not to be in their teens. “mememeee” is a good example of this type of user. He is a 20-year-old male from Germany, does not have many followers, and has been using the site for a relatively short amount of time. He posts his pictures, a couple of people comment, and he moves on. He doesn’t post a Booth every day, more like every two or three weeks.

On this site, a lot of people steal other people’s pictures. The implications of this on identity are really intriguing: because that’s essentially how identity is manifested on the site (there is an option to add where you’re from and an “info about you” section on your profile, but most people don’t fill it out), stealing someone’s picture is like stealing their identity. This is definitely looked down upon on the site, and people get pretty angry when they find out someone has stolen a picture of theirs. Stealing other people’s pictures on DailyBooth is a great way to instantly lose credibility.

The purpose of the DailyBooth site is pretty clearly stated in all of the site’s literature. The idea is for the user to upload pictures of themselves that describe their life in some way, that way you know everything a user posts is really relevant to them and any comment you make is really going to be taken to heart. DailyBooth’s goal is to get its users talking and participating in the site all at once, so everyone is connected. It does this pretty effectively thanks to the Live Feed. Spending 10 minutes on it can have you interacting with people you’ve never even seen before just because you liked their Booth.

DailyBooth is tailored to our current time. Blogs are a thing of the past when you can type out your feelings in 140 characters or less. DailyBooth follows this trend with an idea that is exactly the in-the-moment type of experience that most users desire today. Lots of blogging sites are starting to charge instead of being offered for free, which also suggests a shift in user preference. DailyBooth already has funding from a number of wealthy investors with others looking into it all the time. It clearly has an effective model (for the time being, anyway).

Another way in which DailyBooth trumps blogging sites is that a lot of people today (especially younger ones) just don’t want to sit down and slog through writing an entire journal entry. These people are used to writing a status for Facebook or Tweeting. Blogging is now way more effort than a large number of young people are willing to expend. They want something they can do right now and be done with it. The constant updating and large number of users afford this in addition to the creative user experience. There is always something new happening on the live feed.

You can go anywhere to find a social networking site that will fit to your needs, so it says a lot that DailyBooth is still growing so quickly. People have really caught on to this idea of tracking themselves day by day through pictures. There are even movie stars using the site. It really seems like DailyBooth is going to usher in a new era in social networking sites. Things are going to move further away from the blogging format and into the more fleeting and in-the-moment style of sites like DailyBooth or Twitter because that’s the amount of time people want to spend on them.

DailyBooth. Web. Feb. 2011. http://dailybooth.com.
Martinez, Jennifer. "Why Is Photo Startup DailyBooth So Hot?: Tech News and Analysis ."
GigaOM – Technology News, Analysis and Trends. 18 Sept. 2009. Web. 9 Feb. 2011.
Siegler, M. G. "140 Characters? That's A Lot Of Writing. Just Post A Picture On DailyBooth."
TechCrunch. 18 Aug. 2009. Web. 12 Feb. 2011.

Making an Imperial Walker?

Article

I found a really great article this week about “How to make an Imperial AT-AT Walker from Star Wars.”  Due to a grassroots movement among fans, attempts may actually be made to construct a real Imperial Walker.  The Imperial Walker is “an elephantine four-legged walker used to attack a snowy Rebel Alliance base in ‘The Empire Strikes Back’ were officially known as AT-AT walkers, for ‘All Terrain Armored Transport’” (Hsu ¶ 3).  People are actually considering all the factors involved in recreating a functioning AT-AT, discussing problems such as structural strength, stress on leg joint (which makes running impossible), and the ease with which they can be knocked down (in contrast to the Big Dog, the Boston Dynamics robot we heard about in class).  Despite engineering issues and intellectual property concerns brought up by Lucasfilms, enthusiasm for the project has not waned.

I think the implications of this project are the most interesting part of the article.  Basically what’s going on here is that people are recreating a fictional construct in the real world.  They are even doing this despite all the difficulties the project is raising, as well as the likely ineffectiveness of an AT-AT.  Supporters have to first convince Lucasfilms to allow them to use their intellectual property, and then overcome the engineering difficulties building such a machine presents, and finally deal with what they’re going to do with the Walker.  Once they figure out what they’re going to do with it, they then have to deal with both its potential ineffectiveness as well as how functionally incapable it is.  I don’t really know what this says about the people that are lobbying so hard to build these AT-AT’s, but it doesn’t look good.  The ability to recreate what we see in movies because our technology has finally caught up to our imaginations may not be such a good thing.

Blogger vs. Celebrity

Article

I found a really interesting article this week on Tech News Daily about how bloggers are surpassing celebrities as sources consumers trust to recommend products.  A new survey conducted by the Nielsen Company found that “20% of women who use social media are motivated to consider products promoted by or with a blogger they know, while only 13% are motivated by celebrity endorsements” (Mulvey ¶ 2).  When these decisions to take blogger advice pay off, the consumers are more likely to return to blogs and other social media for further recommendations.  According to the article, the top three types of products that the “general population” looks for recommendations on blogs are consumer electronics (35%), computer hardware/software (33%), and movies (33%) (Mulvey ¶ 5). 

The end of the article discusses some intriguing implications regarding consumer engagement.  In order to take advantage of this new desire for people to seek out other consumer’s recommendations, marketers must invest more in a “two-way conversation” between producers and consumers (Mulvey ¶ 8).   The article concludes that “marketers must seize these opportunities now or risk falling behind their competitors in the race for online consumer engagement” (¶ 8). 

A change in producer/consumer relationship is definitely occurring as a result of social media.  Marketers are trying to engage with the consumer in terms of what they actually want instead of trying to sell them a product by arguing that they want or need it.   Will this actually result in better products that people actually want to buy, or will the marketers find a way to turn this form of consumer engagement against us?  They have certainly done it before.  After marketers in the 1970’s found that they could divide consumers into groups while still catering to their “individual” needs, we began to slide down the slippery slope that led us to our current consumer culture.  Who’s to say that they won’t find a loophole that will allow them to regain control of the producer/consumer relationship?

"Cause Global"

Cause Global: Social Media for Social Change begins by stating that everyone used to think that the Internet would bring on “a more open and democratic society” (Stepanek ¶ 1).  As the Web has evolved over the years, however, that idea seems to ring less and less true.  Data aggregators, like Google and even Facebook, actually decide what information we see online.  They use filters based on the personal choices we make online, like what ads or links we click on.  Because these data aggregators are filtering what we see without our conscious knowledge, they often don’t show content they don’t think we would enjoy, which can be really limiting in terms of information you receive. 

I thought it was an important observation that “we are not using the social media tools we have to solve problems so much as we are using them to socialize with like-minded people about these problems” (Stepanek ¶ 7).  The article discusses how social activists should be focusing on getting people involved offline instead of just using the “social media” to build a list of email subscribers (¶ 7).  When people are just on an email list, they are likely to skim the text and move on.  They may get upset and want to do something about it, but email alone is not enough to motivate people into action.  This article argues that putting more effort into getting people active offline is a much more effective form of promoting civil engagement.

The article continues further down to say that “we must stop assuming that civic engagement will occur online on its own” (¶ 10).  Because we control our social networks based on our preferences (which usually involve people that share our viewpoints), the only voices that get heard from the various groups are the ones that are the most extreme representatives of each group.  This can make it difficult for people within the group to take action as a result of any statements made as well as prevent new members from joining the cause because they don’t agree with the strength of the statement. 

I think a new level of effectiveness will be reached if we can learn to combine social networking and civil engagement.  At this point in time, what we’re doing is not working.  It is so easy for people to be passive with the social media they participate in because it does not encourage them to step into the offline world and put their ideas into action.  I have to wonder how sites are going to rearrange to better motivate people in to action.  I also wonder if moving civil engagement into the offline world to reconnect people if that can eventually lead to a further movement in all kinds of social media to reconnect everyone.

Augmented Reality

Benkoil describes Augmented Reality as “layering digital information onto the physical world” (Young qtd. by Benkoil, ¶ 2).  The most common applications of AR (augmented reality) today are on “smart” handheld devices like iPhones and Androids.  However, there are a ton of other applications for AR out there today: journalists can use them for restaurant reviews or even to see where bailout dollars have been spent in the neighborhood.  You can also look at real estate or historical data about a building and magazines are even using AR that functions in conjunction with computers. 

I thought one of the most interesting potential applications of AR was the idea of “TV station[s] using AR to let viewers poke around in a scene or get more information about something they’re watching right in the frame” (Benkoil ¶ 9).  This may not be one of the more practical use applications, but it would usher in a new era of entertainment.  Combining television with augmented reality would place the viewer in the show, which blurs the line between reality and imagination.  If you can interact physically with a world that is supposed to be untouchable and make-believe, can you really call something imaginary?

I thought one of the most practical applications of AR technology the article mentions is the U.S. Postal Service’s app.  The post office has the customer hold up whatever they want to mail in front of a computer’s camera.  The camera then shows them the size of the box required to ship it.  Being able to tell what size of box quickly will reduce the amount of time each customer will take in the post office, causing less frustration certainly but also the potential for greater customer volume.  Using this AR app could also potentially increase purchases, because people will wait to box their items until they arrive at the post office. 

There are already a lot of AR applications out there today, with many more potential applications on the way.  However, for all the beneficial applications of AR, there are the creepy invasions of privacy implications.  While Benkoil thinks it may be awhile before the technology progresses that far, I’m not so sure.  He states that “a lot of the apps are still glitchy, require downloads and don’t quite work all the time” (¶ 14).  But he still doesn’t disagree that there are apps out there that can be used for invasion of privacy.  Just because the applications don’t work very well certainly means they don’t exist.  So we have a lot to look forward to in the future of AR, but how much do we need to watch out for?

Daily Booth, or as some call it "Face Twitter"

DailyBooth is described on its website as “one big conversation about your life, through pictures.”  It is a photoblogging site that allows its users to upload a photo (every day or multiple times a day) with a caption.  Signing up is completely free.  The goal is to allow people to document and share their lives with others.  The DailyBooth slogan is “your life in pictures.”  It has often been compared to Twitter and other social networking sites that allow users to follow and be followed in real time.  My friend refers to DailyBooth as “face Twitter.”  This is because the majority of users post images of themselves photo booth-style sitting at their computers (hence the name of the site).  Users of both sites are able to post links on Twitter from their DailyBooth page, so Twitter actually increases traffic on the DailyBooth site.  DailyBooth separates itself from Twitter by accentuating its unique feature: the fact that people share pictures instead of text. This tends to foster a greater sense of community and connection in a more immediately accessible way than other text blogging sites.  DailyBooth is also becoming increasingly popular.  It has a growth rate of about 35% a month.  Site creator Jon Wheatley has been quoted as saying that “people find pictures a much more engaging medium than just text.”  

Whenever a user first accesses the DailyBooth site, they are immediately confronted with the option to sign up on the site.  They have their description (“one big conversation about your life through pictures”) as the first thing you see and they promise “you’ll make some new friends real fast.”  You can take a picture with your webcam and sign up right then.  You can also see the “live feed” at the bottom of the screen.  Once you get an account, you are directed to your home page.  Once there, you will see several tags at the top labeled “everything” (which is your home page), “booths” (the pictures you’ve taken), “comments,”  “likes,” and “follows.”  There are also buttons to take or upload a picture onto your page. 

There is a similar textual literacy to Twitter required on the site, i.e. you need to know how to write and read in shorthand text lingo.  Not everyone uses it, but the majority of people do some type of textual abbreviation in their “posts.”   Since the main focus of the site is on the photos, it is expected that people write very little to accompany their pictures.  Some people choose to write longer posts, but they never go more than a few short paragraphs.  The generally accepted amount of text is about a line to two lines, but a short paragraph is not going to result in accusations of spamming the screen.  Because it is a photoblogging site, it is also important to be picture/image literate.  This means that the user must know how to take and upload digital photos to the site or take a photo from a webcam while on the site.  They also need to know how to “read” photos and respond to them.

To participate in the site, all users need to do is snap a pic and wait for someone to comment.  Because of the live feed, any user might be likely to comment on your picture rather than people you know.  There is not a “friend” feature on DailyBooth, but you can “like” or “follow” other users’ Booths.  You can also comment on their photos they post by following the live feed or checking in on Booths you are following.  DailyBooth is also synchronous: users are constantly uploading pics to the world.  As a result, when you are viewing the “live feed,” there is actually a “pause” button so you can catch up with the ones you missed if they were posting too quickly.  The instant a user takes or uploads a picture, it’s on the site.  However, there is no way to access all the past archives of the live feed.  There is a search bar at the top of the site that will bring up booths that contain the keywords, but there is no comprehensive database of past booth’s except on the individual profiles. 

DailyBooth users are also (for the most part) reflections of their real world selves.  However, users of DailyBooth are much more likely to edit or alter their appearance because it is a site based a lot on looks.  Quite a few of the Booths posted daily are superficial and tend to be posted by high schoolers.  The site allows for the continuation of real world friendships onto the site, but the set-up is really more designed to get strangers to interact.  Viewing the live feed, you see almost multiple new people per second, and any one of those have the potential to become a new friend. 

The goal seems to be to have the biggest number of people following you.  The people who have the most followers are not outwardly different from other Daily Booth users.  The social hierarchy seems to be based on “coolness,” or everyone on the site’s agreed-upon definition of coolness.  The users with the most followers take normal pictures of themselves (maybe a little more artsy).  The people who are constantly campaigning to get followers never have very many at all.

Many people participated in the “Day of Silence” a few days ago – national youth movement protesting the silence faced by gay, lesbian, bi, and transgender people and their allies; deliberate silence echoes the silence they face.  A lot of people were doing this, which was interesting on a photoblogging site (the pictures featured the users making some mime of not talking, usually holding their hands in front of their mouths).  I noticed that half if not more of the people participating were just “supporters,” meaning they just were friends with or were in support of gay/lesbian/bi/transgender rights.

On this site, a lot of people steal other people’s pictures.  The implications of this on identity are really intriguing: because that’s essentially how identity is manifested on the site (there is an option to add where you’re from and an “info about you” section on your profile, but most people don’t fill it out), stealing someone’s picture is like stealing their identity. 

The purpose of the DailyBooth site is pretty clearly stated in all of the site’s literature.  The idea is for the user to upload pictures of themselves that describe their life in some way.  That way you know everything a user posts is really relevant to them, so that any comment you make is really going to be taken to heart.  DailyBooth’s goal is to get its users talking and participating in the site all at once, so everyone is connected. 

DailyBooth is tailored to our current time.  Blogs are a thing of the past when you can type out your feelings in 140 characters or less.  DailyBooth follows this trend with an idea that exactly the in-the-moment type of experience that most users desire today.  Lots of blogging sites are starting to charge instead of being offered for free, which also suggests a shift in user preference.  DailyBooth already has funding from a number of wealthy investors with others looking into it all the time.  It clearly has an effective model (for the time being, anyway).

Another way in which DailyBooth trumps blogging sites is that a lot of people today (especially younger ones) just don’t want to sit down and slog through writing an entire journal entry.  These people are used to writing a status for Facebook or Tweeting.  Blogging is now way more effort than a large number of young people are willing to expend.  They want something they can do RIGHT NOW and be done with it.  The constant updating and large number of users afford this in addition to the creative user experience.  There is always something new happening on the live feed.

S/R 1 Revision

Convergence Culture is a book by Henry Jenkins that discusses his ideas on the collision of modern culture with technology.  In his introduction, he states that the book “is about the relationship between three concepts – media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence” (2).  Jenkins then goes on to define convergence as “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences” (2).  He describes the example he uses for media convergence, the film The Matrix, as “entertainment for the era of media convergence, integrating multiple texts to create a narrative so large that it cannot be contained within a single medium” (95).  He begins his book by establishing that there is a major shift occurring in the relationship between producers and consumers and follows that by discussing the implications of this shift in reality television.  Using the example of the “spoilers” of the show Survivor, Jenkins demonstrates his point that collective intelligence is causing some definite tension between producers and consumers.  He states that “collective intelligence refers to this ability of virtual communities to leverage the combined expertise of their members” (27).   Participatory culture refers to the recent ability of the consumer to interact with and help create in some cases a media text that used to have a one-way path from producer to consumer.  Jenkins uses the examples of Star Wars and the Harry Potter franchise to demonstrate his concept of participatory culture.  Jenkins states that “in both cases, these grassroots artists are finding themselves in conflict with commercial media producers who want to exert greater control over their intellectual property” (21).  He also uses the implications he draws from these examples of popular culture to analyze politics.  Jenkins states that “in each case [referring to Star Wars and Harry Potter], entrenched institutions are taking their models from grassroots fan communities, reinventing themselves for an era of media convergence and collective intelligence.  So why not apply those same lessons to presidential politics?” (208).   

The issue of literacy is something Jenkins brings up a lot in this novel.  It is of particular concern in chapter five in both conflicts surrounding the Harry Potter franchise.  In the first case (with the fan writers online), we can see that the issue of literacy is no longer just about being able to read and write.  It now requires that an individual create and express themselves through other media.  Jenkins also argues that participating in fan fiction improves the other two components of literacy.  This occurs mainly through the writing, because there are many ways that authors get feedback on the sites: through other writers on the site or through systems set up to help critique newer writers and get them on the right track.  The second issue is mostly concerned with students’ ability to read.  Teachers think the Harry Potter books should be allowed in school because they know kids will read them, and anything that gets kids to read is good.  It is also easier for kids to go deeper into the analysis of something if they are interested in it.  I think both pro-Potter sides need to converge: by applying the methods used by online fan fiction communities, teachers can not only improve children’s literacy but allow them to have fun while they do it.  If schools were to model some aspects of learning how to write after fan fiction forums, kids will have some control over what they create, they will have an easier time evaluating their peers’ work, and they will gain a sense of independence in their writing that will make them better writers.  Teachers could create safe online groups for their students to interact in a forum-type setting, but instead of fan fiction they could work on school assignments.  Another tactic might be to assign students to participate in a fan fiction community for homework so they learn the skills that way.  Using this technology early on in the classroom will also help students to learn how to work with digital information.