Collecting and Saving Information: Diigo vs. Pinterest LIS568

Something I never truly spent time thinking about is the idea of gathering and storing information accessed on the internet, specifically the benefits of doing such collecting.  As we all know, the internet is such a vast tool.  The amount of information that society is sifting through on a daily basis is unfathomable.  Now, something to think about is whether or not you want to try to make your time (and your student’s time) efficient while “surfing,” or you are fine continuing your mindless browsing.  I personally have found it very beneficial to start organizing quality information, that information that is helpful to my profession.  Don't get me wrong, I still have mindless “surfing” moments.  Although, they tend to be less and less these days.  My point is that I have had countless times that I needed some idea for a project, resources for my students, resources for myself, etc. in which I turn to the internet for assistance.  There has been many times that I have had to go back through my search history to try and find a certain website that I discovered a few days ago.  The wonderful thing about such a vast resource as the internet is that it provides us with exceptional tools that can help with such organizing.  The power that these tools can provide not only yourself but your students as well is immense.  I present to you Diigo vs. Pinterest.

Let me first start by saying Pinterest is mainly image centered, whereas Diigo focuses around the actual website as a whole.  There are certain aspects when you begin to use information organizing tools, such as Diigo and Pinterest, that you start to appreciate more than the others.  Tagging, being one of those aspects, allows a user to attach keywords to saved material.  Thus, the ability to find certain information in the future becomes much quicker and easier.  Diigo and Pinterest both incorporate tagging into their application.  However, Diigo allows its users to attach tags to saved material, whereas Pinterest only allows its users to search for new material using tags.  Although, I suppose creating boards in Pinterest and putting certain information on relevant boards can be considered tagging.  With Diigo the home screen of your account allows you to view your saved material.  It gives you the option to search through your material by typing keywords or choosing tags that you have created.  Pinterest opens you up to a home page that has all different resources depending on the interests you choose to be informed about, not your saved material!  With Diigo you can access suggested material through a “discover” option.  Where Diigo allows its users to copy and paste content into descriptions of saved websites, Pinterest only allows you to add a description to the boards you create.

Living in a socially connected world, having the ability to essentially “socialize” on applications is important for users.  Both Diigo and Pinterest allow you to follow other users and be followed by other users on the same application.  Pinterest allows its users to send messages, easily search for people by name and by content, and comment on both saved (pinned) and unsaved material.  Diigo allows its users to simply comment on individuals’ posts that are in the same group as them.  You have to first create a group to search, invite, and slightly interact with others while using Diigo.  Both Pinterest and Diigo do an excellent job with being able save content found on others’ boards (Pinterest) or libraries (Diigo).  However, Diigo only allows such functions with others’ content when following those users, whereas Pinterest allows such functions with whoever.  With that said, creating a class group on Diigo allowing students to add resources throughout the year can act as a valuable resource for students to use during the year and possibly their future years as well.

Pinterest certainly excels in the social aspect of the application, however Diigo seems to trump its counterpart in the more professional aspects, you know those functions that make your job easier.  Diigo allows its users to highlight, comment on highlighted text, and overall annotate any content saved to the application.  Sadly, Pinterest does not allow for any such functions.  The closest function Pinterest has in its annotating abilities is providing its users with the privilege to comment under an image.  Both applications allow for a browser extension.  The extensions for both applications certainly provide a better overall experience for its user, as they simply make the purpose of both applications easier to accomplish.  However, I feel for professional aspects Diigo’s extension blows Pinterest’s out of the water!  Using Diigo’s extension on my toolbar allows me to save websites to my Diigo library, annotate the article as is, annotate any PDF I drag into my browser, annotate the screenshot of the website I'm on, and more.  Pinterest’s browser extension, on the other hand, only allows me to bring up all the images found on the website I am currently visiting.

Although both applications are used for similar purposes, they are actually quite different.  Overall, they both store and organize information found on the internet, but depending on what type of individual you are will determine which application you will enjoy more.  If you are an individual who gets easily distracted by images, you will find Pinterest more of a distraction than useful.  However, if you need more visuals to help with your organization Diigo certainly will not do the trick with its wordy ways.  For me, it comes down to functionality for my personality type.  Pinterest simply distracts me, it is difficult for me to visualize its organizing ways, and overall too socially driven.  Diigo provides me with what some might consider an archaic organizing method, but that archaic organizing method is extremely efficient with its new age tags!  Not only that, but the functionality of the browser extension is super useful for my profession as an educator.  I can easily highlight areas of text and make comments directly on web sources, as well as annotate any pdf or screen shot.  For the assistance Diigo provides me in the classroom, I would be silly not to use this on a daily basis.  Furthermore, I feel that Diigo provides my students with a resource that exemplifies the power of connectivity through a less distracting and overall more beneficial way.  From organizing to functionalities, Diigo trumps Pinterest.

Are Your Search Results The Same As Mine?

One of the best aspects about being a scholar and educator that focuses a lot of their research in the technology field is that there is always something new to become informed about.  In other words, there is never a dull moment!  Have you ever thought about what results you receive from doing a Google search and how such results compare to a friend’s results of the same exact search?  Well, go and try it some time as you might be surprised.  The terms “filter bubble” and “echo chamber” might not mean too much, if anything, to you.  In fact, such terms meant nothing to me three days ago as well!  Before I discuss the two, possibly, foreign terms, let us all understand that the internet that we view on a daily basis is composed of many algorithms that guide such vast and diverse information as to what ends up in front of our eyes, on our computer screen, and ultimately what we view with each passing click.

When one rationally attempts to understand the meaning of both terms filter bubble and echo chamber surrounding our internet usage, I believe we can come to an understanding that the internet’s information is being filtered into some sort of bubble that also involves a chamber of echoing searches, clicks, friend’s searches…etc.  Specifically, a filter bubble is the use of algorithms to filter certain information into a personal bubble, where an echo chamber also uses algorithms to echo or communicate what clicks, searches, friends selection, friends’ searches…etc. to the filter bubble in which you exist in.  Essentially, both filter bubbles and echo chambers are working together to provide you with exactly what you “want” to see.  As Pariser (2015) states in regard to such algorithms, “After all, they mediate more and more of what we do. They guide an increasing proportion of our choices-where to eat, where to sleep, who to sleep with, and what to read. From Google to Yelp to Facebook, they help shape what we know.”  If this is your first time hearing of such aspects of our internet, yes, I too had some strong feelings regarding such actions.  However, it might not be all that bad as we might have some say in such operations.

Critics such as Eli Pariser have made such internet operations known and, as they should, some of the “culprits” for creating and using such operations have responded.  According to Moon (2015), “Facebook wants you to know that you’ve only got yourself to blame for the lack of diversity in views on your News Feed… ‘Filter bubble’ is what you call the situation wherein a website’s algorithm shows only posts based on what you clicked (or Liked) and commented on.”  Basically, Facebook is responding to such allegations by blaming the algorithms’ functions on the users themselves.  Saying that the algorithms only respond to what the users input into them, in terms of their choices of media to view.  Where Facebook is technically right, the fact that such algorithms alter what we see at all is a cumbersome thought in itself.  Although, without such algorithms how would the vast and diverse amount of information on our internet be sifted?  I suppose by most recent creation? Or, how about alphabetically?  I suppose we can’t be too upset with such organizations such as Facebook, as they kind of are just doing their job in a way they think might make the user satisfied.

Now that we have discussed a major part of what truly shapes the internet and how we view it, how has it possibly affected us as a society and what does this mean for our future usage?  Well, when we take a step back and think about what the results of such filter bubbles and echo chambers have caused, I believe it is very rational to understand that we have been exposed to basically only our view point.  Information that has an opposite viewpoint has been filtered out, ultimately to better our viewing experience.  Does this mean we have unknowingly been sifted into a society that is filled with individuals which have difficulty understanding opposing thoughts and views on different aspects of life in general?  Could this have lead us to much of the hatred that has recently been present within our society?  The answers to these questions are currently just not fathomable, as there has not been extensive research to back up such claims.  Thus, rather than looking into the past we must look into the future.

Eli Pariser (2011), in a TED presentation titled Beware online “filter bubbles,” talking to software engineers in general states, “…People who have helped build the web as it is, and I’m grateful for that. But we really need you to make sure that these algorithms have encoded in them a sense of the public life, a sense of civid responsibility.”  In other words, it is essential that we are not only coming across and viewing information that is solely chosen to satisfy our current views based on what we personally click on or what are friends on social media click on.  We must have diversity in what we view, ultimately allowing us to become more understanding or at least educated on society’s opposing views.  Although Facebook has released information on updates that they are working on and have released to help combat the filter bubble, as Pariser (2015) suggests, Facebook is still in control as to what information is released to the public as studies have to get Facebook’s permission in order to be released.  However, hopefully software engineers see the value in not “trapping” their users in filter bubbles and echo chambers, ultimately offering our society more “hard” news, the news that is of true importance and unbiased to our ideas, rather than “soft” news, the news that surrounds only our interests.  As current users, being informed and informing others on such internet operations can only help our view on society as a whole, as it might potentially help limit society unknowingly falling into a self centered world.  After all, as Pariser (2015) states, “The more we’re able to interrogate how these algorithms work and what effects they have, the more we’re able to shape our own information destinies.”