Social Media - What In the World is Web 2.0?

Web 2.0 "refers to a perceived second generation of web development and design, that facilitates communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web-based communities, hosted services, and applications; such as social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies." (Wikipedia, Web 2.0)

The term implies a "new and improved" version of the web and that case could be argued based on all the new functionality we think of when we refer to Web 2.0. CoolTown Studios describes it best on one of its social networking sites by saying, "... Web 1.0 was commerce. Web 2.0 is people." Aside from the immediate association conjured in my head to a Charleton Heston scene in Soylent Green (1973), I think CoolTown Studios has summed it up nicely in a nutshell. Web 2.0 may be more about people connecting to each other than it is about selling products to people. According to research cited by the Pew Internet and American Family Life Project, at least 75% of young adults between the age of 18 and 24 have a profile on a social networking site and 80% of GenX'ers buy products online. Even the older demographic of adults 65 and older use the internet regularly to communicate by email. But in this vast, ever-expanding list of technologies, where does the consumer start, and more importantly, what is the intended benefit? That question is as complex and varied as all the different platforms from which to choose and is based on individual consumer objectives (do I want to make friends, or just influence people?). For example, if a person wants to get alternative, real-time news feeds, they may be interested in Digg, Newsvines, or one of the other newszines where users upload and share news with other members of the network. Users, not media outlets, rate and rank the news stories they read to generate interest. This interaction between users who share a common objective is one of the driving principals behind social media: the evolution of the web to allow consumers to publish as well as consume media.

Albert Bandura's social learning theory of reciprocal determinism seems to best describe consumer behavior in this interactive environment (Bandura, 1986). There is an unquestionable reciprocal relationship between the consumer and social media, as consumer perspectives may be directly impacted by what they read, see and hear and the consumer may in turn share those perspectives with others. Morley Winograd and Michael Hais, co-authors of Millenial Makeover, discuss this effect in describing how the millenial generation, those born between 1982 and 2003, exchange information in social networks. Bandura investigates the impact of media on social learning theories of behavior in his more recent work, Media effects: Advances in theory and research (Bandura, 2001). Bandura believes that the mass media, particularly television, continues to play the most prominent role in influencing public opinion because it provides "the best access to the public through its strong drawing power. For this reason, television is increasingly used as the principle vehicle of justification" for opinions and beliefs. I wholeheartedly agree with Bandura's assessment that "research on the role of the mass media in the social construction of reality carries important social implications". This is easily demonstrated when you consider shows like "JackAss" and its imitative power to influence others to model and mimic the absurb and often dangerously risky stunts performed in the show.

Aside from the implications of group modeling behavior, what hierarchies exists within the groups when behaviors are being adapted? Clay Shirky describes this process in his discussion on group formation and group hierarchies. Shirky believes the essential elements of group behavior form a "ladder", in which group members communicate, share, and collaborate before engaging in collective action (Shirky, 2008). So, if our behaviors are influenced by the way we interact with each other, how might this influence the way we learn and acquire information?

William Richardson, author of Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts, comments on learning technologies and connective writing in Understanding Instructional Technologies. Richardson believes that "old taxonomies and the way we organized learning will not work in the digital world" (Richardson, "The Read/Write Web"). Richardson observed that as we moved from the read to read/write web and begin to publish what we write, we can reach a much broader audience. "We really are doing real work... putting out ideas out there" to connect to others. Writing is not simply text anymore.. it's multimedia (Richardson, "The Future of Education is in a Web-Based World"). Richardson notes that change is slow in the education system. However, Richardson does cite examples of schools that have embraced and "absorbed" new technologies, such as a virtual high school in Florida. This is an example of promising shifts in pedagogy that will make learning more collaborative. Nonetheless, Richardson comments that in spite of these signs of progress, "we are still in textbook mode, and that's not really the way the world works these days." The education system may be slow to adapt to changes in technology, but GenX'ers and millenials have already fully embraced the digital world.

Winograd and Hais believe millenials are the most ethnically diverse generation, with 4 in 10 of non-european origin, and 20% have at least one immigrant parent. According to Winograd and Hais, millenials are the generation with the least amount of gender differentiation in how they vote, their ideals, beliefs, and education. MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube seem to be helping millenials come together, form a consensus and organize groups (Winograd). The millenial generation is using social media such as blogs, wikis, and networks for news and information rather than television and more importantly, communicating online with each other to get information (Hais). The success of the Obama campaign was largely influenced by social networking strategies in media like MySpace and Facebook, which promoted self-organizing infused with positive messages of unification and hope. This appeared to be particularly appealing to millenials who connect through social media.

Winograd predicted correctly that the forces of technological change embraced by the millenial generation would bring about significant change, and ultimately in this case, political change that promises to improve optimism and diminish divisions within American society. Interesting to note is that Winograd and Hais believe generational ideals and belief systems will not change as millenials get older, a point they discussed in the following interview. Hais also notes that partisan allegiances normally form in early adulthood, but that should not be confused with "party loyalty" (in other words, millenials may not define themselves as democrat or republican while they may endorse and embrace specific ideals):



Clay Shirky, author of "Here Comes Everybody", and adjunct professor of graduate interactive telecommunications at New York University, made an astute observation in his presentation at a Web 2.0 expo conference. Shirky noted that, "media that targets you but does not include you may not be worth sitting still for." In other words, media needs to be inclusive and interactive if it intends to keep its captive audience.

References:

CoolTown Studios, "Web 2.0, and Why Your City Needs It To Attract The Creative Class"

"Soylent Green is PEOPLE", Soylent Green (1973) , IMdb database,

Pew Internet and American Family Life Project, "Generations On Line in 2009", January 2009

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communications. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillman (Eds.). Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., 121-153). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

William Richardson, "Understanding Instructive Technologies"

Clay Shirky, "Here Comes Everyone", 2008

Morley Winograd, Michael Hais "Millenial Makeover", 2008

"Plugged In" - Resistence is Futile

"The Borg have a singular goal, namely the consumption of technology, rather than wealth or political expansion as most species seek." (Star Trek Archives, CBS Paramount Television, CBS Studios 2006)

It's 6 a.m., and the alarm clock glares with digital indifference to the pulsating signal of the start of your day. Somewhere between sleep and awakeness you head toward the shower when you suddenly remember, "I'm on call this week.. better take the cell phone.... just in case I get a call". Now aside from the sheer ridiculousness of this notion.. that your cell phone is suddenly waterproof and you could actually answer it while sudsing in the showering, it illustrates an even more ridiculous point.. namely, just how much technology actually controls our lives. The irony of it is this same technology was supposed to free us from the mundane and the ordinary, adding effortless convenience to our everyday lives. But at what cost? Are we truly consumers of technology, or has technology begun to consume us?

As I ask myself this question, I begin to think of HAL 9000, the AI computer in 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). HAL, the all-seeing artificial intelligence created to help and guide the crew of Discovery, soon decided to take over the ship and terminate the humans onboard to continue the prime directive. It's interesting to note that the later of the Space Odyssey film series assimilate HAL and Bowman (his nemesis) into one being, coveying the message that man and machine, humans and the technology they create, are destined to become one (as HAL and Bowman merged to form Halman in the last film 3001: The Final Odyssey, 1997). HAL and Bowman became the first borg. But to some degree, we are all becoming like the borg, with our blue tooths and blackberrys and iPods, happly texting, tweeting, and mp3-ing to confirm our existence in a wired world. Escape from boredom is only a 3G away (downloads at blazing speeds for instant gratification).

Anthony Doerr reflects on our compulsion to stay connected to the grid in "Am I Still Here?", an article he wrote for Orion Magazine in 2007. Doerr uses vivid, delightful imagery to describe his struggle to find balance between the virtual world and his other real world responsibilities. That line is often blurred when we must connect to the wired world to meet obligations, which Doerr says leads to a rationalization process for sacrificing time away from family and significant others for online time (Doerr, 2007). Inspite of the fact that we seem to be losing more and more private time as we crowd in more and more technology in our lives, our dependence on our cell phones and pda devices seem to be growing rather than diminishing. Doerr develops an alter ego whom he calls "Z" in his article to explain the internal struggle he faces in his quest for balance. "Z", the pale and puny voice in his head that kept telling him to check his email, read a blog, or surf the net instead of engaging in other real-world activities is a very good illustration of the dilemma and the question.. are we replacing social interaction and meaningful relationships with the internet, cell phones, and online activities?

So what exactly is driving our thirst for technology and our compulsion to stay connected? In Neil Swidey's Boston Globe article, The End of Alone, Dalton Conley's observation that our obsession to stay connected may be driven by a fear that we will miss out on something may be quite true, and it may be as simple as that. Conley, a sociology professor at New York University and author of Elsewhere, U.S.A.: How We Got From the Company Man, Family Dinners, and the Affluent Society to the Home Office, BlackBerry Moms, and Economic Anxiety, believes that the act of staying connected and wired is actually creating this anxiety (Conley, 2009). Conley concludes that, "it's very hard for people to unplug and be alone -- and be with the one data stream of their mind." (Conley, 2009) Images of Stephen King's The Lawnmover Man (1992) come to mind as I reflect on Conley's observation. Job, the mildy-retarded man in the movie, is turned into a maniacal genius with CIA-sought-after powers when a brilliant scientist (Pierce Brosnan) "wires" him into a virtual reality simulator that remaps his brain. The end result was that he went from being a simple, mildly-retarded man whose main preoccupations and pleasure in life was attending mass and cutting grass to a mega-brained genius with telekenetic powers who could hear other people's thoughts and kill people with his brain. Job soon became addicted to the virtual reality experience and no longer wanted to (and for that matter no longer could) live in the real world. A striking comparison to ponder. Is Job a metaphor for what we are becoming in the wired world?



Swidey's article also included some intriguing references to research done by Milgram on the "seven degrees of separation" and Granovetter's The Strength of Weak Ties, explaining our connectedness to people we don't know that well. So, the familiar is being replaced by the unfamiliar through our online experiences, as we start to exchange information sometimes therapeutically with people in the wired world that we really don't know at all. In some cases, anonymity may be a good thing when something personal is being exchanged, but caution should always moderate self-disclosure with unknown individuals (being connected does not mean ignoring common sense).

I agree completely with Doerr's statement that our drive to stay connected is driven by our need for self-validation through the online experience. "Am I still here" translates to "does anyone remember me?".. "am I still connected?".. "am I important?" This is somewhat disturbing given that a person's self-worth could actually be tied into whether they receive an email or get a "tweet". How do we balance all this, and can we? Are we just destined to see a whole new host of technology-induced psychological disorders, or am I taking this too far? In my opinion, more and more people are seeking that validation in cyberspace because they have less-fulfilling social relationships in the real world and they feel a greater sense of disconnectiveness in their day to day lives (to some degree structural as our communities evolve, and we no longer know or want to know our neighbors, and we become megafocused on our own lives and less interested in the lives of others).

Ultimately, our need to stay connected could be creating distractions that let us tune out more important things in the real world. Clive Thompson's New York Time's article The Life Hackers evaluates research on how these distractions impact cognition. Distractability it seems has a lot to do with spatial and visual representation of data and events. The research of Czerwiski and Horvitz in the use of AI to moderate common workplace distractions that inhibit productivity mentioned in Thompson's article provided a sci-fi solution to technologically-cluttered minds. But will we awake one day to learn that all our technological advances have rendered us redundant and that technology is controlling rather than improving our day to day lives? A scary thought to ponder... as soon as I finish reading my emails and checking my text messages.

References:

"HAL 9000, 2001: A Space Odyssey" (Wikipedia)
"The Borg", Star Trek: The Next Generation (CBS Paramount Television, CBS Studios, 2006)
"The Lawn Mower Man" (IMDb, The Internet Movie Database, 1992)
"Am I Still Here?" (Doerr, Orion Magazine, 2009)
"The End of Alone" (Swidely, Boston Globe, 2008)
"Meet the Life Hackers" (Thompson, NY Times, 2005)

Consumer Psychology - Deception by Perception

This week's topic was an opportunity for timely analysis of the way media is manipulated, sieved, filtered, retouched, and presented to the general public on a digital platter for selective consumption. The timing couldn't have been better after seeing the media coverage last week concerning the controversial retouching of the photo of President Obama bare chested, wearing red swim shorts on the cover of a recent issue of Washingtonian magazine. Not sure if the retouching of the photo to change the color of the shorts from black to red was more controversial than a bare-chested president (the color selection itself sends so many messages which the magazine apparently wanted to convey). And I say selective because interpretation of the message varies based on individual perception, which of course is influenced by so many factors (culture, ethnicity, age, sex, and gender).

Ironically, Washingtonian magazine's retouched photoshoped cover photo may be more common place than the "untouched" photo of Sarah Palin which appeared on the cover of Newsweek in October which was both celebrated and denounced for showing the one-eyed, uber-close up of Palin (Newsweek 2008). Coverage of the media flap over the less-than-flattering picture included a segment on the Colbert Report, which introduced comic irony about reporting on the "untouched" photo as well as political satire on the upcoming election.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/188444/october-14-2008/tip-wag---palin-s-newsweek-cover

Other magazines, too, have used photoshoping unabashedly with an air of expectancy, as seen in the photos of fab glam black couples in the February 2009 issue of Ebony. This issue includes photos of a fully-clothed President Obama in a loving, black and white cameo pose with Michelle whose dress has been retouched to fire engine red (that color red is consistently being used here to relay the message "hot"). So, do we expect publicists, publishers, and photographers to add their "finishing touches" to the photos we see, or do we consciously believe the photos we see are real representations of the people in them? Diet.com phrased this question within the context of whether people believe the images they see in magazines and advertisements are actually real, and more importantly, are we trying to emulate the bodies and images we see? (YouTube video: The Photoshop Effect, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP31r70_QNM&feature=related) Specifically, could these images of airbrushed, retouched perfection actually be creating disordered eating (Sarah, The Photoshop Effect). Alexis Beck, a Nutritionist consulted in the video, believes that the cumulative effect of ads with photoshopped images has a direct effect like a time-bomb in the mind of the viewer leading to more and more serious psychological issues among young women obsessed with exercising, dieting, and maintaining a size "zero" (Beck, The Photoshop Effect).

Aside from the apparent psychological damage this is causing by distorting what is real while creating unattainable physical expectations for both men and women, is photoshoping just plain dishonest, and as a result, unethical, leading to Diet.com's question as to whether it should be banned. Tim Lynch, retoucher/photographer featured in the video views photoshoping as a service that all his clients demand noting that "they won't release any pictures that have not been retouched". So the consumer (and not just the celebrity consumer) is creating the demand for these images of perfection at the expense of our self-image and perceptions of what is real.

Daniel Cohen-Or and Tommer Leyvand of Tel Aviv University have found a way to further drive the pursuit of perfection by creating The Beauty Function, software that beautifies the face through a series of progressions similiar to what a plastic surgeon might use. The underlying questions begging to be asked here is why? Why are we so unhappy with ourselves the way we are? Alexis Beck may be onto something. Maybe this is truly a ticking time bomb. Where does it stop? Can it be stopped? What realistic goal can we hope to achieve?

Sarah of Diet.com suggests that perhaps we should include a disclaimer, a warning like you would find on a cigarette package to let the viewer know that the image is not a true representation of the way that person looks. Would it really make a difference? I doubt it, since the impact of the image, presented as "real", has already entered the viewers mind and the process of imitation and emulation may already have begun. It would probably be more practical in my opinon to address this issue through consumer training, and education made part of school curriculums using popular teen magazines to expose young minds to the deception. The Dove Project for Real Beauty is a really good example of consumer education that steps through the process to deconstruct photoshopped images. Another really good example of deconstructing photoshoped images to educate the consumer is the Girl Power magazine cover which also points out step-by-step just how many things were "wrong" and undesirabled in the untouched version of the model on the magazine cover (retouched to reveal fuller boobs, blonder hair, waspier waist, perfect teeth, creaseless lips... ya da ya da ya da... was there anything "right" with her?)

The Dove Project and Girl Power examples were quite an eye opener. These types of strategies, in my opinion, present viable solutions that help consumers decode the images they are seeing rather than perceive them as real. I worry, though, that ultimately, we may not want to see our true selves and may not at all be satisfied with decoded realities.

Perceptions notwithstanding, the public cannot know what it doesn't know if all media is being selectively broadcast and manipulated by media gatekeepers. Though some level of censorship in the media may be inevitable (painstakingly evident in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated), the idea that information is being selectively chosen to disseminate to the public by gatekeeper organizations is disturbing at best. I would insist, however, that some common-sense rating system must exist to help the consumer, though this in itself leads to less artistic freedom. That being said, one man's art is another man's trash. It's just all too subjective for us to ever hope to have a perfect and fair rating system.

The argument was put forward in the University Twente, Netherlands, article on media, culture, and society that gatekeeping is an unavoidable, necessary evil inherent to the process of reporting news to the public (http://www.cw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Media,%20Culture%20and%20Society/gatekeeping.doc/). McCombs and Shaw evolved Kurt Lewin's 1940 theory of gatekeeping to apply to journalism and the current, leading caution.. that gatekeeping is a precursor to agenda setting (McCombs and Shaw, et al, 1970) a process that influences how much importance is attached to a news item from the emphasis placed on it by the media (UT, Theory Clusters, "Media, Culture, and Society" October 2006).

White's 1964 process model cited in the article adds a visual rubric that seems to suggest a process similar to a conveyor belt rejecting defective products. The real process, however, is probably a lot more complex, a lot less clinical, and a lot more suggestive within gatekeeper organizations. News items that finally do past muster and make it to the general public must surely get filtered along the way, and the subjective nature of this process ensures only those stories which that particular organization sees fit to publish will actually be viewed. But what happens when all news organizations seem to be in lock step with each other.. when no matter what channel you chose, the news is pretty much all the same.. all the time? We can all be thankful that we have the internet now, opening a vast array of alternative news and information sources from which we can expand our views and perceptions (that, too, is a selective and suggestive process because we tend to seek out information based on what we already believe and may not be receptive to information that doesn't agree with our prevailing beliefs and perceptions).

Should we be concerned that gatekeeping could be abused to deliberately mislead the public? Should we rethink that equation and minimally set up sufficient safeguards, as would be the case for other consumer-related issues? I think the growth of alternative media presents the most promise for finding reasonable answers to these questions. The consumer will go where they can find honest media, even if the sources are non-traditional. That may be a wake-up call for the major networks and the gatekeepers who serve them.

Links:

"Shirtless Obama Makes Washingtonian Cover", Huffington Post
"Newsweek Under Fire for Sarah Palin Photo", AccessHollywood
"October 2008 Tip/Wag - Palin's Newsweek Cover", The Colbert Report
"Ebony Looks At Obamas' Real Love" USA Today, February 2009

Consumer Psychology - Are We "Wired" To Follow The Crowd?

Scene: An attractive white female newscaster on a prominent syndicated news channel head bobs and chants "blame it on the a-a-a- a-a alcohol" when the Jamie Foxx/T. Paine hit is cued in the background. The most astonishing thing about this is that she didn't consider how that may have been perceived by her peer group, the other three news casters sharing the dias with her. Which crowd was she following at that very moment when the impulse hit her to "get in the groove" to a top-charting R&B song about clubbing and casual sex? Was her conditioning and associated responses to the song so strong that they were able to override her ability to stay "in character" with her fellow news caster peers?

This might all have seemed relatively benign had it occurred within the context of a popular entertainment news-zine or on one of the popular music video channels. The fact that it didn't raises interesting questions about media and group mentality. David Robson addresses group think in his article, "How To Control A Herd of Humans". The title itself conjures up images of people as cattle or "sheep-ple" as some would say, being shepperded around mindlessly. Robson frames his discussion within the context of the rise of social nationalism in nazi Germany (an interesting aside here is that the word nazi is actually an anagram for the german word zian, an interesting segway into the role religiosity plays in forming group mentality). Robeson presents scholarly evidence of how group activity and ritual form group loyality (chanting, dancing, etc.) based on the research of Scott Wilmuth (Stanford U). and Jonathan Haidt (U of Va), but he does not discuss the role of charismatic preaching as a key element in cult formation. In other words, there are many angles influencing herd mentality, and all influence the behavior of the target group. Robson also did not discuss the draconian, authoritative tactics imployed by these groups to maintain group loyality. The worst example of this I can think of in recent times is the horrific Jonestown cult mass suicide, where group members were threatened or killed for trying to leave the group and those who did not escape were forced to drink cyanide-laced cool aide.

I do agree, however, that the impact of priming, the subject of Seger's research (Indiania U.), should be considered, particularly when we look at group behaviors in adolescents, children, and teens. Most significant is the way prolonged exposure to violent media may be priming anti-social behaviors in young audiences, and audiences in general for that matter. Minimally, the audience is being numbed and conditioned to habituate violence in media as normative with repeated exposure to violent material. But what does all that have to do with "herd mentality"? Specifically, all of these factors combined influence and control the behavior of the group.

Using our opening scene as a good example of the priming effect, we are left to still wonder which group our newscaster was in mentality when she chanted along with the song in the middle of a news cast? We can assume it was a pleasurable experience which was triggered by impulse and positive associations, hence why she "got in the groove", though totally out of character for that place in time.

"Cool Hunting" and Consumer Psychology

Generally, my take-away from The Persuaders and The Merchants of Cool is that advertisers view consumers as cultural commodities, with each consumer seeking membership in artificial cultures, illusions created by advertisers to sell their product. This concept of consumers as commodities is suggested initially when Naomi Klein, author of No Logo, compares consumers to "roaches.. you spray them and spray them and pretty soon it doesn't work anymore". The better, faster, stronger competition between brands, in other words, is only as effective as our belief in what the advertisers are trying to tell us, which may have more to do with brand loyalty than anything else. So, what is creating this brand loyalty, if there really is no best brand? Is it really all just an illusion?

Framed within the context of Trout's belief that the consumer mind is inherently limitated and unfocused, advertisers search for creature comforts and hidden needs that might give their product a competitive edge (i.e. cup holders in a SUV might appeal more to women than men). But with these kinds of disparate interests, how do any products get sold as obviously you can't cater to the whims of every niche group? Clotaire Rapaille develops this idea further by suggesting consumers are impulse shoppers who apply no real rationale for the products they buy, but rather buy to fill some hidden, unconscious need. From this point, advertising becomes more about creating culture rather than selling, and I think that is a very compelling point to consider. Are we experiencing such a cultural void that we must form these pseudo relationships based on the brand cults?

Rapaille sums it up well by describing his experience decoding the behavior of autistic children. By learning to communicate without words, the behavior of the autistic children became its own language. And so, too, I guess is the behavior of the consumer. But this by no means suggests the power of words should be underestimated. Frank Luntz believes we are more emotional than intellectual, and that getting the message across to a particular audience is all about choosing the right words (i.e. global climate change v. global warming). But it is this very kind of word-smithing double speak that caused the general public to distrust politicians as dishonest, self-serving, and disingenuous. This is not to say contextual speech doesn't work.. it does, but let the word-smith beware. There may be a huge backlash at the expense of public trust.

The teen demographic is not so easily caste because what's hip and trendy is constantly changing, creating a real dilemma for advertisers trying to reach this large consumer market. "Cool hunting" described in The Merchants of Cool then becomes the strategy used to engage teen-aged buying power based on input from peer focus groups on what's in and what's not. But shouldn't we be concerned about the ethics of advertising cool to such a young and impressionable audience? Should we care that advertising may be creating the need to possess every new gadget and products that don't really enrich us or connect us to each other, save through the brand itself? (ipods, iphones, I just can't keep up). Is it any wonder our young people have one of the highest rates of depression in the developed world? Could all this consumerism targeting such a youthful audience be sublimating real needs for traditional social interaction between families and groups?

Wrapping up, my consensus is that we are placing more value on the artificial needs that are largely created for us by advertising culture at the expense of meaningful social relationships, ethics, and values. I believe this leads to shallow mindsets which lack a sense of social responsibility, constantly seeking self-gratification. This makes it ever more important to educate the consumer to read public spaces and become more aware of the impact of advertising media. At best, this will definitely create a more level playing field of informed consumers. Critical social media has an important role to play in offsetting the effects of consumer psychology, which I'm sure we'll explore further in our studies.

Greetings, netizens :-) This is the place where my personal reflections and introspections will be revealed on media psychology, what it means, and how it can be used to change the world around us. Stay tuned as I transition and transform. Check back often for updates :-)

B. 'Aqila Mujahid