session 12 Jared

How can we relate a general sense of post-authenticity with new and sophisticated  tools for surveillance? How deepfakes coexist with automated facial recognition?


I don’t think we can relate at this point. I believe it’s too soon to truly see the damage that is being done by signing away all of our privacy to these apps that we use on a daily. The majority of us say yes to anything the apps ask for and whatever they are using our information for probably has not affected us just yet. I believe that there are probably already banks of information on each of us that can extremely negatively affect our lives in the future. For example, whenever an application asks for permission to use our camera roll or microphone that is an easy 90% of our daily lives taken from us.


As far as deepfakes are concerned I believe that in the future it will be a lot easier to steal somebody’s identity very easily, however because we are talking about privacy so much these days, I don’t think it will take very long to find better measures against it.


If authenticity is not the source of affect that it was, what it is?


These days I think that authenticity is just an emotion or a level of respect. It is no longer expected in society today, it is only appreciated as an act. What has replaced authenticity is yet to be truly found. Since the truth has become increasingly harder to find valued communication realms have been lost.



Last week

I found it interesting in the reading how tiktok videos presented to discuss the gender binary share several features that characterize the users’ perspectives on the role of the body image in gender presentation. First, for most of the videos, a simple clothing item and a hairstyle are enough to perform a gender visual appearance. This is a clear statement from the users that they perceive the visual attributes of gender as no more than a performance of the body that carries little weight. Their videos, therefore, point out that they view the visibility of gender as a pure construct of representing a body image.

session 11 Jared

What type of emotion do you associate distraction with? Why?

I associate frustration with distraction. Often times I am not distracted because I want to be but because I do not have a choice, I see the beauty in others being distracted in a sense of doing positive things with it. For myself there is never a moment where I am distracted on things that will progress my life forward. Frustration comes out of distraction because of a lack of interest in a task at hand. For example, it has taken me two weeks get to actually start writing this response because I have been distracted by things that are more entertaining to my zero-attention span brain.


What is the value of distraction/how do you think value is extracted from distraction?

The value of distraction in a more personal sense can lead an individual to discover something that they wouldn’t usually be interested in if their main focus wasn’t very attention grabbing. In a more economical sense, many people do not enjoy what they are doing on a day to day basis, so people’s distraction can result to a monetary value. The companies that can find out the source of your distraction can earn advertising dollars from your new found interests.

Week 12 answers

  • How can we relate a general sense of post-authenticity with new and sophisticated  tools for surveillance? How deepfakes coexist with automated facial recognition?

In terms of surveillance and post authenticity, I think looking at Tik Tok is interesting. Because while the surveillance happening there is not the same as one would have in a shopping mall, it is still happening in the pursuit to portray the “authentic self”. In the reading, Khattab talks about the pressure the users face to perform their body while knowing that it is being watched by other users and compared to other people. Tik Tok users are also constantly surveilling their own bodies and trying to change their performance in order to send a specific image of themselves without making it look like they are trying to do so, therefore remaining authentic. 

In terms of deep fakes, I feel like it makes the knowledge of facial recognition software being out there even more worrying because when combined, the situation is completely out of our control. If facial recognition software is storing your face and tracking you, then combined with the ability to use your face in a deepfake, is worrying in terms of impersonation. When a deepfake of a celebrity is posted saying weird things, people question it, but if it is a random person saying those things, people dont question it as much because they don’t assume people would go to the effort of doing it for someone who is not famous.

  • If authenticity is not the source of affect that it was, what it is?

I think that authenticity can still be a source of affect but in certain contexts. When people travel or go somewhere, they tend to try and have an “authentic” experience, by eating the local food and immersing themselves in the culture. Most of the time these people are not truly living like the locals of that place would, yet because of their lack of background knowledge on the subject, they don’t know that. To them, their “authentic” experience was a source of affect, because they don’t have anything to compare it to. If they had background knowledge of where they were, then they would know that their experiences were not authentic and actually just the typical tourist spots. 


Emilie – Week #12

Emilie COMS 308 week #12-

Here are my answers to this week’s questions.

  • How can we relate a general sense of post-authenticity with new and sophisticated  tools for surveillance? How deepfakes coexist with automated facial recognition?


I agree, like it was said in the video about deepfakes, that the danger of the surveillance tools is not that it exists as much as how people respond to them and use them. These tools definitely create a sense of post-authenticity because it is becoming extremely difficult to truly verify if something is real or not just by looking at it. Hence, sometimes, something that is post-authentic feels more authentic than something that actually is. For example, memes are not authentic because they are taken from a situation and applied to a different context. But I think that it is precisely because we know the background context that they feel right to use in the present situation and seem funnier than a simple answer. However, when people use automated facial recognition to make famous people say things that they would not say, especially when it applies to politics, this becomes a problem. Again, it is not necessarily that people do this that is the problem but more that some people will take them seriously instead of seeing them for what they are which is deepfakes. Hence, I think that one must be careful with these surveillance tools due to the damage that they can do when taken seriously, especially since surveillance tools make it even easier for deepfakes to come into existence and for faces to be copied by artificial intelligence.

  • If authenticity is not the source of affect that it was, what it is?


I think that authenticity still is somewhat the source of the affect but has been modified in its meaning. For me, something that is authentic now is something that I know for sure is not misleading in the sense of something that is fake but is trying to pass for something that is real. To be authentic still means to not be copying something else but has also a new meaning. For example, the Vocaloid characters are obviously not real since they are anime characters but I still believe that they can fit in the authentic definition in the fact that they are still the work of somebody behind the scenes and they are not hiding the fact that they are computer-generated. Hence, authenticity has a different meaning in today’s world and although it is not necessarily the source of affect as it used to be, it still plays a role in determining the value of something. In my opinion, videos that surface of deepfakes are not authentic but they also don’t affect because of their authenticity but more because of their inauthenticity when they are discovered to be fake. I also believe that celebrities resorting to saying that something that they said was a deepfake need to be taken on a case by case basis and be analyzed. By this I mean that Obama saying he didn’t insult Trump is far more believable than Trump saying he didn’t say something after he apologized for it, especially considering his record. Therefore, I believe that just like we are taught in school to verify our sources before using something as a source for an essay, it is becoming essential that we do the same for things that we see and share.