During my fifth week of learning, I gained new perspectives and understanding of PLNs. For me, Public Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) are not just about building networks, but more importantly, about sharing and reaping information. Every participant disseminates and receives information, and we all have our own responsibilities and rules. Making good use of PLNs can be very rewarding and is an indispensable step in modern diversified growth.
In the interview “Public Vision: Social Media and Evening News,” Sophie Lui, using her professional position as a news anchor/reporter, clearly explained why “public PLNs” (Public Placement Networks) have both value and costs. My understanding is that for her, social media is like a radar, constantly exploring and updating, allowing everyone to access fresh, first-hand news. However, she also mentioned some common negative impacts such as harassment and negative emotions. She addressed these issues and how to avoid them, using wit and rationality to prevent misleading others, and carefully considering boundaries before posting and publishing. Her thoughts inspired me greatly, making me realize that her theories seem applicable to our own personal PLN situations.
Public interaction with the public presents both benefits and risks, like a double-edged sword. The benefits include rapid dissemination and feedback, similar to how news used to be broadcast at fixed times, but with public networks, information can be shared 24/7, ensuring no participant falls behind in the information age. However, the drawbacks are equally real, such as the spread of rumors and slander. Unlike the physical world with its robust infrastructure like police and courts, the internet doesn’t offer such robust public infrastructure. Even with widespread real-name registration, these phenomena still exist, and these risks must be mitigated through improved judicial systems and online management. Another risk is misunderstanding. For example, software like TikTok can easily manipulate videos with incomplete beginnings and endings, adding voiceovers to distort the truth and mislead the public. Ambiguous information and videos can also lead to negative online impacts. These are all cases that have occurred. Therefore, in today’s diverse society, both offline and online, risks and opportunities coexist. Public networks are a double-edged sword; only by improving policies and management can we significantly enhance their benefits and minimize their risks.
Trust is the foundation of everything. In today’s world where public opinion networks (PLNs) are so widespread and developed, not only do media outlets need basic integrity and ethical standards, but every participant must also possess these fundamental qualities. As the primary disseminators of information, media outlets, appearing as a group, can quickly and immediately access information and news that is relevant to the general public. A fundamental quality is to disseminate information based on facts, understanding the causes and consequences, rather than embellishing facts with biased opinions and misleading the public. Besides the media, frontline professionals also face this challenge, such as police officers, lawyers, and doctors. A particularly interesting example is from late 2018 in Wuhan. A doctor used his social media account to warn the nation about a new virus that could infect the lungs, similar to the 2002 coronavirus, urging everyone to take precautions. Soon after, Chinese state media debunked this claim and criminally detained the doctor. Shortly after, this doctor contracted the virus and died on the front lines of the epidemic. It was later proven that the doctor was not lying; this was the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. This case is a classic example of media error—focusing only on impact and not on the facts.
I will manage and operate my social media accounts with utmost care, as they contain contacts of everyone I know and don’t know, including potential employers. All my actions, which I believe are impeccable, involve remaining silent. I will handle all events in my life and conflicts at work appropriately within designated areas to prevent negative impacts from spreading. Regarding news and other events, I will remain neutral, neither forwarding nor taking sides. In today’s information-saturated world, we as individuals lack the ability to distinguish between false information and opaque or asymmetrical information. To prevent further escalation of negative situations, I will remain silent until things are settled. If I were to take over public accounts, such as news company accounts, I would strictly adhere to company and work guidelines when disseminating information, such as: not saying what shouldn’t be said, and ensuring all information is 100% true and reliable. I will strive to minimize the negative impact of public opinion while disseminating information.
In summary, my view on PLN is conservative. Because there is insufficient regulation and punishment, and in order to avoid being misled into being a perpetrator, I currently mostly just accept and understand information, discuss it within my circle of friends to see what everyone thinks, and follow news organizations and local police agencies to stay ahead or not fall behind. I believe this is my management strategy for Personal Networks.
reference
Hegarty, B. S. (2020, February 6). The Chinese doctor who tried to warn others about coronavirus. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51364382
