As I read the Gilpin article, I was reminded of the way the Chinese have a very relationship oriented approach to doing business.  It is not uncommon to have multiple dinners together before discussing actual business.  This has been a source of mild frustration for Western professionals who like to “get down to business.”  With the context collapse that seems inherent in new media, a relational approach to professional interactions takes on more of a Chinese flavor than the previously distinct personal and professional compartments of Western culture.

While public relations has always been front and center in creating and maintaining the identity of a client, and by necessity, their relationship to the public, the public relations of PR as a profession has received relatively little attention.  Previously, PR involved countless phone calls, faxes and other measures that required significant investments of time of resources and manpower.  Traditional venues for public relations rely on the resources of the client, yet current technology allows PR professionals to “practice was they preach” without significant investments of time or money.  As stated by the article, “Activity on Twitter can be seen as a means of increasing one’s professional visibility, as well as driving traffic to one’s presence in other online venues” (p246).  While it may be true that, “that this visibility is not necessarily a reliable indicator of overall expertise” (p247), there is something compelling about the sales pitch that says, “What I have done for myself, I can do for you.”

The Mendelson and Papacharissi article empirically captured a significant moment in personal development: the breaking away from one’s family as an individual and the attempt to connect with the larger social body.  I was also intrigued by the brief discussion of meta-photography and the way the camera becomes and en extension of the body.  While there are moments from my early adult life that I wish I had been able to capture with the ease of a camera phone, there are far more moments for which I am glad there is no evidence.

The “always-on lifestyle” makes perfect sense to me.  As Boyd states, it’s not that I always want to be connected, but I always want access to the network.  Before the proliferation of the internet, I began amassing books on a wide variety of topics so that I could easily have information at my fingertips.  Similarly, I kept phone numbers, business cards and phone books from many cities so that I could contact who ever I wanted with ease.  I may never use a number or need someone’s card, but it was nice to know I had it if I needed it.  I wonder how many others in the always-on cohort have or had similar stockpiles of material prior to present technology?  I blog only occasionally; I don’t Tweet, nor is my digital consumption as great as many, but I want it there whenever I have urge.