Digitalisaatio, kapitalismi ja Lukács

 Pedagogisen suhteen määrä ja mitta

 Kevätlukukauden kuluessa vedin opintojaksoa, jonka lopputehtävänä opiskelijat tarkastelivat kapitalismikriitikko György Lukácsin ajatusten valossa sitä, miten ja missä Lukácsin teoretisoima asioiden ja ihmissuhteiden ”tavaroituminen”/esineistyminen tulee esille tämän päivän markkinayhteiskunnassamme. Opiskelijat tekivätkin monia tarkkoja havaintoja.

Itse olen pohtinut samaa kysymystä paljon pedagogisen suhteen kehyksessä: kun opetustilanteissa kohtaan opiskelijan ja hänen ajatustensa kiteytymät, järjestelmän erään määrityksen mukaan tilanne on käännettävissä ”opiskelijan työmääräksi tunteina”. Tämä määritys on sitten järjestelmän mukaisesti laskettavissa tietyksi tarkaksi osaksi opintopistettä. Opintopisteillä on tarkka määritys osana tutkintoja – ja tutkinnoilla on talossamme (kuten monissa muissakin oppilaitoksissa) tarkka ja konkreettinen hinta. Tässä jos missä realisoituu kapitalismikriitikoiden sata vuotta sitten pohtima ja havaitsema kehityskulku. Näin pedagogisesta suhteesta tulee pakkatavaraa, jolla on standardi mitta ja standardi hinta.

Entäpä digitalisaatio ja suhteiden bulkkitavaroituminen?

 Laitoksellamme on viime aikoina keskusteltu paljon digitalisaation tunkeutumisesta osaksi erilaisten hoivatöiden ja -käytäntöjen arkea ja järjestymistä. Moninaisten digitaalisten laitteiden, alustojen ja järjestelmien hyödyntäminen esimerkiksi koteihin vietävässä hoivatyössä on pakollista: järjestelmiin tallennetaan esimerkiksi kunkin asiakkaan tai potilaan kanssa vietetty aika, hoivapalvelun sisältö ja luonne sekä ”tapahtumaan” osallistuneet henkilöt. Varsinaisille perinteisille kohtaamisille aikaa jää yhä vähemmän, kun hoivaajan panos ja puhti tilanteissa valuvat näppäimistöjen kanssa seurustelemiseen.

Kriittiset hoivatutkijat (esim. Eubanks 2018) ovat korostaneet hoivapalveluihin ja -suhteisiin liittyvää digitalisaatioriskiä ja sitä, miten erilaisten laitteiden ja järjestelmien imperatiivit syövät ajan ja sisällön siltä, mitä hoiva parhaimmillaan ja eettisiltä perustoiltaan voisi olla. Kun hoivakohtaamisten painopiste siirtyy erilaisten älyruutujen kanssa toimimiseksi, myös niissä on tunnistettavissa tavaroitumisen logiikka: suhteet muuttuvat minuuteiksi, ”toimenpiteiksi” ja niille lasketuiksi hinnoiksi – pyrkimyksenä tietenkin on myös tuottaa mahdollisimman paljon mahdollisimman pienin kustannuksin.

Hoivatutkimuksen kriittisessä otteessa ei ole näkynyt kapitalismikritiikkiä Lukácsin ja tavaroitumisen käsitteellistyksissä, mutta sen kautta pääsemme tässä blogitekstissä digitalisaation, suhteiden ja kohtaamisten kysymykseen – ja yliopisto-opiskelijoihin, joihin viittailin tämän tekstin alussa. Pandemian varjossa yleistynyt ja valtavirtaistunut etäopiskelu digitaalisten alustojen varassa on osoittautunut varsin tehokkaaksi pedagogisten suhteiden tavaroitumisen puitteeksi. Digitalisaatio on esimerkiksi tuonut tunteina, pisteinä ja tutkintoina laskettavan ”työmäärän” aivan eri aaltopituuksille kuin ennen. Opiskelijoiden itsensä kertoman mukaan digitaalisuus opiskelussa mahdollistaa nyt vaikkapa seitsemän kurssin samanaikaisen suorittamisen. Bulkkitavaraa tuleekin samassa ajassa paljon, kun voi olla yhtä aikaa läsnä erilaisissa opetustilanteissa esimerkiksi Moodlessa, Teamsissa ja Zoomissa. Näin opiskeluun käytetty aika tuottaa jopa kolminkertaisen määrän pisteitä entiseen verrattuna – ja tämä tietenkin merkitsee myös tutkintojen (ja niistä saatavan rahaksi muutetun tuloksen) lisääntymistä. Ei kai tällaista tehokkuutta kukaan halua lähteä vastustamaan tai kritisoimaan. Eihän?

Päivi Armila

Lähteet

Eubanks, Virginia (2018) Automating Inequality. USA: St. Martin’s Press.

Töttö, Pertti (1981) Lukács ja hermeneutiikka. Tampereen yliopiston yhteiskuntatieteiden työpapereita.

 

 

Tutkija hidas, digitalisaatio nopea?

Tässä blogissa monin eri tavoin esitelty DEQUAL-tutkimushanke suunniteltiin tilanteessa, jossa digitaalisia palveluja perusteltiin muun muassa niiden kyvyllä kampittaa kilometrien tyly konkretia. Digitalisaatio nähtiin mahdollisuuksina tarjota monenlaisia osallistumisen tilaisuuksia erityisesti ”keskellä ei-mitään” asuville nuorille. Tämän mahdollistamispuheen kontekstina olivat esimerkiksi monien nuorille tärkeiden asioiden (koulujen, harrastuspaikkojen ja -yhteisöjen, nuorisotapahtumien, kulutusmahdollisuuksien jne.) keskittäminen erilaisiin alueellisiin keskuksiin. Myös DEQUAL-hankkeen tarvetta perusteltiin muun muassa mielenkiinnolla siihen, miten erilaiset alueelliset mahdollisuusrakenteet oletettavasti ohjaisivat nuoria eri tavoin digitaalisen maailman toimijoiksi. Ajattelimme, että erityisesti harvaanasutuilla seuduilla asuvien nuorten elämässä digitaaliset valmiudet, laitteet ja infra olisivat erityisen tärkeitä asioita nimenomaan pois vietyjen osallistumismahdollisuuksien digitaalisena ”paikkailuna”.

Kuinkas sitten kävikään?

 Viimeksi kuluneiden vuosien aikana on kuitenkin käynyt niin, että monet palvelut on viety lähes kokonaan verkkoympäristöön, eikä niiden ”offline-versioita” ole tarjolla kunnolla enää kenellekään. Esimerkiksi monet kelan, työvoimatoimiston tai erilaisten ohjaamojen palvelut saattavat olla tarjolla vain verkossa myös sellaisille, jotka asuvat toimistojen tai erilaisten toimipisteiden vieressä. Enää ideana ei olekaan aina tarjota sähköisiä palveluja jonkinlaisina face-to-face-palvelujen lisänä vaan lähes ainoina mahdollisina toiminta- ja asioiden hoitamisympäristöinä.

Näyttääkin siltä, että myös tutkimuksessamme katsetta on syytä kääntää jo muualle kuin asuinpaikkaan ja välimatkoihin sekä niiden merkitykseen digitaalisen osallisuuden merkityksellistäjinä. Nyt, kun digitaalinen osallistuminen on osallistumisen an sich imperatiivi, kysymys digitalisaation kilometrejä taklaavasta luonteesta (tai sen mahdollisuuksista siihen) on vanhentunut jo ennen kuin kunnolla ehdimme edes esittää sitä.

Yhä enemmän olemme alkaneet katsella nuorten digitaalista toimijuutta ja siihen kiinnittyviä eroja sosiokulttuurisina ja sosioekonomisina kysymyksinä. Sosiaalisen maantieteen (social geography) ulottuvuutta on syytä pitää edelleen mukana tarkastelussa mutta ei niinkään kilometrien ja välimatkojen kysymyksenä vaan pikemminkin nuorten kotiseutujen sosiaalisten homo- ja heterogeenistymisten kautta. Asuinalueilla on tapana luokkaistua ja rakentaa omat sosiokulttuuriset maisemansa. Myös paikallisilla nuorisokulttuureilla on paljon toimijuutta suuntaavaa, joskus satunnaiseltakin tuntuvaa mutta rakenteellista voimaa.

Vaikka nuorten ”ruutuajasta” kannetaan paljon yleistä moraalista huolta, digitaalisten imperatiivien voima vaikuttaa olevan vääjäämätön. ”Ruutuajan” määrässä ei välttämättä enää ole kyse yksilöllisistä valinnoista – ainakaan sitä ei enää voi valita pois elämästään, asui sitten missä tahansa. Itse kunkin on rakennettava omaa digitaalista toimijuuttaan erilaisten välttämättömyyksien edessä ja erilaisin valmiuksin, resurssein ja mielenkiinnoin. Tässä suhteessa kiinnostavaa aineistoa DEQUAL-hankkeelle tarjosi muun muassa koronapandemian aikainen pakollinen ruutuaikavaihe: etäkoulu. Tämän teeman tarkastelu odottaa kuitenkin vielä julkaisemistaan muualla, joten siitä ei tässä sen enempää.

Päivi Armila

Balkan Forms of Digital Divide: What’s up, Serbia?

This text is inspired by a manuscript under a review dealing with digitalization of education in Serbia. Observing and researching the topic started in 2020 by acknowledging obstacles and recognized indicators for it. From the first beginning and “from the national statistics, as well as from European comparisons, we know that Serbia still suffers from visible educational inequality and exclusion especially when we look at marginalized minorities. The educational level and educational structure of Roma population are influenced by its social status, deep poverty, and cultural specificities which represent the darkest aspects in the reality of this ethnic group. For marginalized minorities, emphasis on the meaning of education can even become a hindrance to socio-economic development, and lack of it as a means of intergenerational exclusion.” (Armila, Stanković & Juutilainen 2022; also Milanković et al. 2015.) At the end of 2020, this obstacle was not mentioned loudly but had a loud echo – so loud that it brought various donations to Serbia for overbridging it. Digitalization of education was introduced as a main solution in reaching marginalized minorities.

Responding to the educational challenges facing Roma families, due to the COVID-19 epidemic for example, the Roma Education Foundation (REF), with the support of the Swiss Development Agency and the European Union Delegation, created the Emergency Fund to support Roma children in Serbia, due to the transition to online teaching. More than 600 Roma children of primary school age will be provided with internet and a tablet computer through which they will be able to follow distance learning (if they only have electricity in their homes, if they only have homes at all…). They will also be supported in enrolling in school, regular attendance, and learning, as well as organizing additional classes. Activities within the Emergency Fund were implemented by the end of 2020.

Digitalization: A socio-economic and socio-cultural promise of “modern”?

“Currently, when we discuss modernization, we also discuss digitalization as an imperative that cannot be overlooked. As a discursive project, digitalization is put forward with promises and imaginaries of, for example, access, equality, and inclusion, as seen in our research data. Today, all these imaginaries seem to be especially suitable in Serbia whose minorities have suffered from educational marginalization throughout a long history. In these imaginaries, socio-cultural modernization connects with a socio-economic promise.” (Armila, Stanković & Juutilainen 2022.)

In our initial data collection for the year 2020, we were notified about first digital education conference in Serbia, with EDTECH Centre as its host. Today, a third conference is preparation. The International Conference Digital Education 2022 will be held online on April 15th and 16th, 2022 with a declaration: “We continue the tradition of gathering with the desire to exchange knowledge and experiences, to learn examples of good practice, to discover the best ways to connect education and modern technologies.” http://edtech.center/en/conference-digital-education/

What about salvation from the educational divide?

The Prime Minister of Serbia, Ana Brnabić stated: “By the end of 2022, digitalization of all schools will be real. All schools and classrooms will be connected to the Internet, and all schools will have digital classrooms and textbooks.” This is believed to open space for local governments, such as the initiative launched by Belgrade Deputy Mayor Goran Vesic, to buy tablets for students and thus contribute to a different method of educating elementary school students.

Digitalization of education is not a project of only education: “To be taken as a serious actor in the European political scene, Serbia needs to prove its seriousness in campaigning against socio-economic and socio-cultural inequalities – via an educational reform, for example.“ (Armila, Stanković & Juutilainen 2022.) As a response to some EU demands, the government would ensure that all schools in the entire territory of Serbia have the same conditions, regardless of how far away they are and how small they are. “And then we will see with the local self-governments how to ensure the constant renewal of equipment. That is a big investment“, Brnabić said. She thanked the deputies for supporting the ratification of the loan from the EIB for related schools, worth 65 million euros. “We will invest in that all children have equal conditions, and that is somewhat better than those in most EU countries.”

Minister of European Integration Jadranka Joksimović stated that the introduction of broadband internet in rural areas (were Roma people, for example, mainly live) was selected as one of the key projects for the candidacy for the Economic Investment Plan for the Western Balkans. These are large funds, but they were asked to be key projects that will go, not only in the development of infrastructure, but also in an inclusive growth, in a time of changing education and in which “we must prepare children for the future, to be competitive on the European and world labor market”. Joksimović specified that 76 million euros is the total value of the project, and that the largest part is financed from the EU grant, and a smaller part from the EBRD loan. She also reminded that in January she signed the first 1.7 million euros with the Minister of Telecommunications for the preparation of project-technical documentation.

*******************************************

In our analysis, we still raise an important question: Can these technically orientated programs fade away the educational gap between different demographic groups in societies with different oppressed minorities? Like all societies, as a matter of fact.

  • Raise your hand if you think installing internet in schools is enough to call education digital and equalizing!
  • Nobody. Ok, thanks.

Biljana Stanković

*******************************************

Literature

 Armila, Päivi, Biljana & Juutilainen, Lauri (2022) Balkan forms of Digital Divide. A manuscript under a review process in EERJ.

Milanković Jovanov, Jelena, Ivkov-Dzigurski, Andjelija, Dukicin, Smiljana, Ivanovic Bibic, Ljubica, Lukic, Tin & Kalkan, Kristina (2015) Attitudes of School Teachers about Roma Inclusion in Education. A Case Study of Vojvodina, Serbia, September 2015. Geographica Pannonica 19 (3), 122-129.

 

 

Digitaalista toteemitoimintaa: Etäkonferenssit osana uutta ”tietotyönormaalia”

Globaalin pandemian myötä digitaaliset työtavat ovat tulleet pakollisiksi tutuiksi ainakin kaikille tietotyön tekijöille – niillekin, jotka viime vuosiin saakka ovat opettaneet, kohdanneet, kokoustaneet, valmentaneet ja vaikuttaneet mieluummin kasvokkaisen vuorovaikutuksen keinoin. Arkiset toimintatapamme esimerkiksi korkea-asteen oppilaitoksissa ovat muuttuneet todennäköisesti varsin pysyvällä tavalla: pelkästään kohtaamisiin perustuvien työmenetelmien käyttäminen tuskin on enää mahdollista, käy pandemian kanssa sitten miten tahansa.

Työskentely tieteen parissa ei ole vain arkista puurtamista opetuksen, tutkimuksen ja hallinnon tehtävissä, vaan yksi sen suola ja sokeri ovat säännöllisin väliajoin järjestettävät konferenssit ja tiedepäivät. Yhtäältä ne katkaisevat työn normaalin arjen, toisaalta rikastuttavat sitä. Konferensseissa paitsi tavataan muita ja ”verkostoidutaan”, myös opitaan ja päästään jyvälle siitä, mistä omalla alalla kulloinkin keskustellaan ja mitä asioista nyt tiedetään, mitä itse kukin tutkii ja miksi. Konferenssien voi (Durkheimin ajatusten hengessä) tulkita merkitsevän myös yhteisöllisesti tärkeää oman tiedeheimototeemin ympärille kokoontumista: kollektiivista identiteettityötä, jolla on symbolista arvoa juuri siinä. Konferenssit ovat rituaaleja, jotka etenevät suurin piirtein kaikkien tuntemien riittien varassa: key note -esitelmät, paneelikeskustelut, työryhmät, illanvietot. Sama sapluuna konferenssista toiseen – ja tämähän on yhteisöllisten rituaalien olennaisin piirre. Samanlaisina toistumisen ohessa konferenssit ovat myös vahvasti kertaluonteisia tapahtumia: sisällöt ja aiheet koodin sisällä vaihtuvat jokaisella kokoontumiskerralla.

 

Digi(henkilö)riippuvuus

Siinä, että konferenssit etenevät aina samalla kaavalla, on puolensa ja puolensa. Jatkuva saman kaavan ennakoitavissa oleva toisto tuo tapahtumiin yhtäältä puuduttavan, toisaalta rauhoittavan sävyn: jo mennessään tietää mitä saa, eikä tilanteisiin liity mitään erityisiä riskinottamisen elementtejä. Ilmoittaudutaan, saadaan kassillinen tavaraa, avainnauhassa roikkuva nimilappu ja konferenssin ohjelma. Itseohjaudutaan auditorioon, kuunnellaan key notet, etsitään työryhmätilat ja organisoidutaan työryhmiksi. Jo etukäteen on tiedetty (sen kummemmin asiaa tarkistamatta), kuinka pitkiä ”power-pointien-aukipuhumisia” saamme tehdä ja kuulla. Ja sitten illansuussa kysellään toisilta: ”Oliko hyvä työryhmä?”

Pandemiasta johdettujen kokoontumisrajoitusten myötä erilaiset virtuaalikonferenssit korvasivat konkreettiset toteemitapaamiset ja tulivat tutuiksi hyvin nopeasti. Vuosikymmenten kuluessa rutiineiksi hiottu kaava vietiin uuteen ympäristöön ja uudeksi konferenssinormaaliksi varsin päättäväisin liikkein; eihän näistä tärkeinä pidetyistä tapahtumista haluttu luopuakaan. Sekä kansalliset että kansainväliset toteemikokoontumiset on jo parin vuoden ajan järjestetty digitaalisen vuorovaikutuksen maailmoissa. On vältytty matkustamiselta ja majoittumisen vaivoilta, kun toteemin ääreen on päästy omasta tuvasta käsin. Muuten kaava on pitkälti ollut se sama vanha.

Virtuaalikonferenssien onnistuminen riippuu vahvasti niitä puitteistavan teknologian (ja digitaalisen infran) toimivuudesta ja tasosta sekä kaikkien osallistujien teknologisesta osaamisesta. Kokemus ESAn (European Sociological Association) massiivisesta digikonferenssista kesällä 2021 (virtuaalisesti Barcelonasta) opetti kuitenkin kiinnostavalla tavalla myös sen, miten jonkun avainhenkilön ”katoaminen” kesken kaiken voi täysin torpedoida työryhmäkokoontumisen. Olimme aloittelemassa virtuaalista nuorisotutkimuksen työryhmää jonkinlaisessa työryhmän digitaalisessa ”eteisessä”. Työryhmän vetäjä, jolla oli virtuaalisen työtilamme virtuaalinen ”avain”, ei kuitenkaan saapunut paikalle eikä istunto päässyt käynnistymään sille laaditussa aikataulussa.

Jokunen vuosi sitten – silloin kun vielä toteemin ympärille kokoonnuttiin oikeasti – Brightonissa järjestetyssä konferenssissa tapahtui sama asia: työryhmän vetäjä ei ilmestynyt paikalle. Koska riitti oli tuttu, me puhumaan varautuneet osasimme välittömästi käynnistää rituaalin: etsimme yhteisen tilan, sovimme esitystemme järjestyksen ja aikataulun ja suoritimme riitin sen kaavan mukaisesti. Avainhenkilön puuttumiseen liittyvä hämmennys kesti kenties puolitoista minuuttia. Barcelonan konferenssissa ongelma oli sama, mutta jäi ratkaisematta siksi, että vain sillä, joka puuttui, oli pääsy yhteiseen työtilaan.

**************************************

Akateemisen työn uutta normaalia rakennetaan viemällä vanhoja tekemisen tapoja uusiin ympäristöihin. Näyttää siltä, että osa asioista vaihtaa paikkaa suhteellisen vaivatta, mutta osa muutoksista vaatii pohdintaa. Arki toistoineen ehkä osataan jo aika hyvin (ja ongelmia voidaan korjata arjen edetessä), mutta työhön ja tieteentekemiseen liittyvät toteemiyhteisöjen ylläpitoriitit ovat toistuvuudestaan huolimatta kertaluonteisia ja ohimeneviä, ja niiden virtuaalisia puitteita jouduttaneen vielä rustailemaan paljonkin.

Päivi Armila

Etnografisia havaintoja verkossa ja verkosta

Digitaalinen etnografia tarjoaa keinon ymmärtää verkkomedian merkityksiä, verkkoyhteisöjen sosiaalisia ja kulttuurisia käytänteitä yhteiskunnassa ja ihmisten arjessa. Se luo metodologisen kehyksen tutkijoille, jotka tekevät etnografista tutkimusta verkossa digitaalisin välinein ja digitaalisista käytänteistä. Sosiologi Alecea Standlee (2017) määrittelee digitaalisen etnografian multi-modaaliseksi laadulliseksi tutkimusmenetelmäksi, joka pyrkii ymmärtämään digitaalisesti välittynyttä vuorovaikutusta, yhteisöjä, identiteettejä ja normeja tarkastelemalla fyysisten ja virtuaalisten tilojen rajapintoja, vuorovaikutusta näiden välillä, materiaalisuutta, tekstejä ja kehoja, jotka toimivat näissä tiloissa.

Verkkoympäristössä toteutettavalla etnografisella tutkimuksella on takanaan jo melko pitkä historia, josta kertovat esimerkiksi sen monet eri nimitykset: netnografia, virtuaalinen etnografia, digitaalinen etnografiaa mediaetnografia ja sosiaalisen median etnografia. Oman tieteenalani antropologian piirissä puhutaan myös media-antropologiasta, digitaalisesta antropologiasta ja sosiaalisen median antropologiasta. Vaikka suuntaukset ovat lähellä toisiaan, ne määrittelevät suhteensa teknologioihin, tutkimuskohteisiin, tutkijapositioon ja tutkimuskäytäntöihin hieman eri tavoin (Isomäki ym. 2013). Nämä toisistaan poikkeavat määrittelyt peilaavat teknologian kehityskulkuja, mutta ainakin itselleni moninaiset nimitykset ovat olleet myös hämmentäviä.

Dequal-hankkeessa tutkimme digitaalisuuden merkitystä nuorten arjessa. Ajatuksenamme oli havainnoida nuorten verkkoelämää heidän itsensä esittelemänä, mutta koronapandemian vuoksi jouduimme siirtämään tapaamiset, haastattelut ja havainnointimme verkkoon. Verkko on tunnetusti pohjaton, eikä sitä voi pysäyttää tiettyyn hetkeen. Päästäksemme alkuun pyysimmekin haastatteluihin osallistuneita nuoria nimeämään tahoja, joita he seuraavat verkossa ja kertomaan meille näistä tahoista. Tavoitteenamme oli näin päästä lähemmäs sitä maailmaa, jossa tutkimukseemme osallistuvat nuoret elävät tänä päivänä.

Etnografinen havainnointi on aktiivinen prosessi, jossa tutkija on vuorovaikutuksessa tutkimansa kentän kanssa, tulkitsee saamaansa tietoa sekä kyseenalaistaa tähän prosessiin ja tutkittavaan ilmiöön liittyviä itsestäänselvyyksiä ja oletuksia. Googlen omistama videopalvelu Youtube oli verkkokyselyssämme nuorten keskuudessa suosituin palvelu, ja lähes kaikki nuorten seuraamat vaikuttajat löytyivät myös Youtubesta (osa tuottaa sisältöä moniin eri kanaviin ja nuoret seuraavat heitä monikanavaisesti). Haastattelemillamme nuorilla oli kuitenkin erilaiset kiinnostuksen kohteet. Moni Youtube-vaikuttaja tuottaa sisältöä sivuilleen viikoittain, joten havainnoitavaa riittää. Itselleni verkossa toteutettava havainnointi oli yllättävän raskasta. Vaikka suhtaudun siihen tutkimusmatkana itselleni vieraaseen kulttuuriin, videoiden katsominen on välillä varsin puuduttavaa. Pyrin pitämään etnografiset havainnointijaksot maltillisina, mutta hartiani jumittivat, silmät väsyivät ja päässä suhisi. Pystyin hyvin samastumaan huoliin teknologian liiallisen käytön fyysisistä vaikutuksista, joita ovat esimerkiksi yöunien häiriintyminen, päänsärky ja stressi.

Verkossa tutkimustaan tekevä etnografi joutuu puntaroimaan tutkimuksensa eettisiä puolia tilannekohtaisesti, koska saatavilla ei ole tarkkoja ohjeistuksia. Tärkeää on esimerkiksi miettiä, miten tutkimukseen osallistuvilta saadaan tietoon pohjautuva suostumus ja kuinka tutkija tekee oman roolinsa heille näkyväksi. Verkkopalvelujen käyttöohjeisiin on myös syytä tutustua (eettisistä näkökulmista lisää esimerkiksi Kosonen ym. 2018; Ahteensuu 2019). Videopalvelu Youtube muodostaa yhden nuorten arkisen verkkotoiminnan kontekstin ja näyttäytyy meille tutkijoille periaatteessa kaikille avoimena, kauppakeskuksen kaltaisena tilana, jossa nuoret hengailevat. Youtube on nuorille sosiaalinen ja kulttuurinen ympäristö, jonka merkitystä tutkimukseen osallistuvien nuorten elämässä pyrimme muun muassa selvittämään.  (Ks. myös Standlee 2017; Sumiala & Tikka 2013.)

Vaikka hieman purnasinkin kokemastani verkkoetnografian raskaudesta, digitaaliseen etnografiaan perehtyminen on ollut myös mukava ja mielenkiintoinen prosessi. Nuorten kanssa haastatteluissa pohditut digitaalisen arjen eri puolet yhdistettyinä verkossa tehtävään havainnointiin johdattelevat tutkijan uusien teemojen äärelle ja palkitsevat uteliaalla mielellä kenttäänsä tarkastelevan tutkijan.

Kristiina Korjonen-Kuusipuro

Lähteet:

Ahteensuu, M. (2019) Käytätkö somedataa tutkimuksessasi? Saatavilla: https://vastuullinentiede.fi/fi/tutkimustyo/kaytatko-somedataa-tutkimuksessasi.

Isomäki, H. & Lappi, T-R. & Silvennoinen, J. Verkon etnografinen tutkimus. Teoksessa Laaksonen, S-M. & Matikainen, J. & Tikka, M. (toim.) Otteita verkosta. Verkon ja sosiaalisen median tutkimusmenetelmät. Tampere: Vastapaino, 150–169.

Kosonen, M. & Laaksonen, S-M. & Terkamo-Moisio, A. & Rydenfelt, H. (2018) Sosiaalinen media ja tutkijan etiikka. Saatavilla: https://etiikka.fi/tutkimusetiikka/sosiaalinen-media-ja-tutkijan-etiikka/.

*Standlee, A. (2017) Digital Ethnography and Youth Culture: Methodological Techniques and Ethical Dilemmas. Teoksessa Castro, I.E., Swauger, M., Harger, B. (toim.) Researching Children and Youth: Methodological Issues, Strategies, and Innovations. Sociological Studies of Children and Youth 22, 325–348.

Sumiala, J. & Tikka, M. (2013) Verkko mediaetnografin tutkimuskohteena. Tapauksena uutisen etnografia Youtubessa. Teoksessa Laaksonen, S-M. & Matikainen, J. & Tikka, M. (toim.) Otteita verkosta. Verkon ja sosiaalisen median tutkimusmenetelmät. Tampere: Vastapaino,170–192.

 

Possibilities, but at what cost? – Reflections on the data from our first survey

We have completed the survey part of the DEQUAL project that charted the attitudes and perceptions of adolescents towards digitalization and both its perceived benefits and negative effects. We aimed the survey at respondents who were born in the year of 2005. This means that the group of interest is currently on the 9th grade of comprehensive school, i.e., they are about to finish the education which until this year (2021) constituted the compulsory education in Finland. Starting from 2021, it has been ruled compulsory to continue studies after finishing comprehensive school (Ministry of Education and Culture 2021). In total, we received answers from 240 respondents. Most of the respondents (n=151) lived with their both parents and the most common family size, including the respondent, was four people (n=91).

It seems that digitalization and its possibilities are well utilized among 9th-graders according to the data and the analysis conducted on it. Despite this, there are several disadvantages that are perceived by the respondents as effects of activities within the digital realms. These negative effects stem both from the digital devices and their possible prolonged use as well as the contents to which these devices allow access to. It has been noted that problems related to digital devices and services can be approached from at least two different viewpoints, namely those associated with the actual devices and the physical negative effects they impose on their users and on the other hand the contents to which these devices allow access (Kurki 2015). A common negative effect the respondents associated with the frequent use of digital devices and services was losing time to do other things, which some also recognized as resulting in lack of sleep.

A negative effect related to the actual digital services themselves was getting a sense of inadequacy, for example in relation to appearance. This could happen when comparing oneself to others who are seen online in different services. This notion could be approached from the Foucauldian theory of normalizing power (see Foucault 1998, 102–103; 2010, 68–69), which in this case can be seen to operate through online contents: young users come to understand certain things presented online as norms – something that is desirable and to which users compare themselves (see Alhanen 2007, 143–148). Therefore, it would be useful to observe those who are perceived as setting the norms and ask: what kind of norms they posit and whose interests they advance by doing so? Focusing scrutiny to these questions could also allow us to see how biopolitics (to which normalizing power is linked) has increasingly shifted from the state to economy and actors operating in the market sphere (Helén 2016, 176–177).

Analyzing the data that we have collected shows that the lack of equipment allowing access to digital services is not a common factor that is perceived by the respondents as hindering their participation in digital society. Most respondents have smart phones at their disposal, as only a couple of them either have no phone at all or have a phone that is not considered a smart phone. Having a computer or a tablet is not as common as having a smartphone, but despite this difference in proportions, computers are used by at least half of the respondents. Answers to the question of what digital services or devices the respondents would like to have were focused on services that provide entertainment, such as streaming services for music or movies. Common answers to the question of what digital devices respondents would like to use but are not able to do so were computers and smart watches, each of which were mentioned about 10 times. In some answers where computers were mentioned, the respondent wrote of a need for a computer that would be powerful enough for playing games. What this could indicate is that the lack of devices is not a significant obstacle encountered by young students. In addition, the ability to use digital devices and services does not seem to be a big obstacle among respondents. This notion can in part be seen in academic research on digitalization and digital inclusion, where the focus around the concept of “digital divide” has shifted from examining the access to digital services and devices to reviewing more complex relations of digital realms and social lives of people, although it is still important to consider these previously mentioned aspects of digital divide as well, because they constitute the basis for digital participation (see Hänninen et al. 2021, 19).

Digital services were regarded as having many possibilities. Keeping contact to friends and family was a common use for digital services, and many a respondent stated making new friends online as a benefit of these services. This reflects the possibilities for even larger social networks that digital services provide, but at the same time the negative effects of digitalization should also be kept in mind for not let the digitalization take the leading role as a discourse that is self-evident and is not based on the description of the actual nature of the object (digitalization) – rather, the discourse represents its object as a certain kind of entity (Alhanen 2007, 64–66). The representation of the object within a discourse can then be used as an argument for social action and reforms. It is therefore important to be sensitive to notice the discourses surrounding digitalization, because digital services also provide platforms for malevolent conduct, of which examples were given by respondents who recognized having faced online harassment or having seen content they perceived as harmful.

A discourse which presents digitalized society as an ideal towards which we should aim at transforming our lives should not be taken as a self-evident truth as it can conceal the difficulties associated with digitalization (see Hänninen et al. 2021, 30–31). Acknowledging these difficulties as a part of digital imaginaries could ease the disadvantages brought fort along digital transformations and furthermore could prove useful in an attempt to better claim the utilities that digital services can potentially have. Our collected data shows that digitalization has a lot of potential for enriching people’s lives, but along with advancing digitalization should also come a critical attitude that enables us to see the pitfalls that may lay ahead in a world turning digital.

References

  • Alhanen, Kai (2007). Käytännöt ja ajattelu Michel Foucault’n filosofiassa. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
  • Foucault, Michel (1998). Seksuaalisuuden historia. Translated by Kaisa Sivenius. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
  • Foucault, Michel (2010). Turvallisuus, alue, väestö. Hallinnallisuuden historia. Collège de Francen luennot 1977–1978. Translated by Antti Paakkari. Helsinki: Tutkijaliitto.
  • Helén, Ilpo (2016). Elämän politiikat. Yhteiskuntatutkimus Foucault’n jälkeen. Helsinki: Tutkijaliitto.
  • Hänninen, Riitta, Karhinen, Joonas, Korpela, Viivi, Pajula, Laura, Pihlajamaa, Olli, Merisalo, Maria, Kuusisto, Olli, Taipale, Sakari, Kääriäinen, Jukka & Wilska, Terhi-Anna (2021). Digiosallisuuden käsite ja keskeiset osa-alueet. Digiosallisuus Suomessa -hankkeen väliraportti. Helsinki: Valtioneuvoston kanslia.
  • Kurki, Janne (2015). Nykymedia, lapsi ja perhe. In: Kristiina Brunila, Jussi Onnismaa & Heikki Pasanen (eds.) Koko elämä töihin. Koulutus tietokykykapitalismissa. Tampere: Vastapaino, 231–244.
  • Ministry of Education and Culture (2021) Oppivelvollisuuden laajentamista koskeva laki vahvistettiin, hakeutumisvelvoite voimaan jo 1.1.2021. https://minedu.fi/-/oppivelvollisuuden-laajentamista-koskeva-laki-vahvistettiin-hakeutumisvelvoite-voimaan-jo-1.1.2021 Last accessed 05/18/2021.

Lauri Juutilainen

May I introduce: Seela in the Digiland PART III: Growing up as a digital native: Comfort in diversities

The biggest thought in interviews with Seela – a digital native – was about diversities and how they help us to grow up as open-minded, inclusive persons. At Seela’s age, growing up in a multinational and multi-confessional Province of Vojvodina was my biggest profit. Still, this “multiness” was not enough to understand the value of acceptance. Those who raised me had their values rooted in tradition and patriarchy. Today, Seela’s globally orienting generation can be far beyond with acceptance, tolerance, and solidarity. Is it possible that the digital era has given her generation space to grow as individuals – unchaining them from traditional and analogical living?

How many applications you are using for daily life?

Bank is always the most important thing if you want to know your situation. Then for communicating with people, SnapChat and WhatsApp for family members. If you want to be in a contact with them. Anything that is on a smartphone is modern in my opinion. And then my alarm is there. If I need to remember something or just wake up, it is on my phone. And weather …and camera of course. It is always around. And yes, my blood glucose. I can measure it with my phone. I have type I diabetes. Now I can use my phone, need to get flex [flexible] with it. Everybody is like: “What is that? I want to have it.” It has more options there than at the regular blood glucose measure. Usually you do it with needles yourself. With the phone, you don’t have to do anything. You just wipe it. This is how I can measure my insulin things a little easier. I can see all the graphs when they go down or up. I can see the specific time of a day when it is usually low or high. I can change manually the insulin system in my palm. Because it is individual thing and I can change it by looking at my phone. It gives me the graphs.

 In your phone you are using apps to communicate with your friends. Which apps are you using to communicate? Do you phone more often or write?

 If the person is close to you, you can call or text with WhatsApp or with a similar app, but no one is using those with multiple people. The SnapChat is the most common one then. I personally don’t like the app but because I want to get in contact with people, I must have it. Instagram is an option, but it is more for the people you don’t know at all. Maybe you see someone very cool, a person that you want to know, and you send a private message and say: “Wow, you seem like a very nice person. I would like to know you.” Maybe you see a SnapChat from there and start talking. I’ve heard so many people done it. You can call SC, you can send the message and the picture with it. You can do basically anything. It is funny because it has filters. You can search any filter that you want. It might be a picture of a dog or a dog face or whatever you want. That’s the big part of the app. It is a fun way of contacting people.

What social media are you mostly using to present yourself? To show some stuff or your regular dog walks? You are doing diving and having a mermaid character. What about your fellows, are they supportive? Are you visible with this identity or? How do you call it?

 I think for representing style is Instagram. To present your casual life and what are you just doing is SnapChat, too. There are stories that you film about your life. All your friends and others who follow you there – they will all see it. But you can also send things privately. There are live forms there where you can have a group chat. This is more for the casual things but Instagram you use if you want to show how do you dress and how you want to be seen.

My hobby [mermaid diving, sharing diving videos] is not a usual thing. It is interesting because earlier people sometimes talked to me: “This is really weird, this is childish, this is nah”. Kids can say such things if you are not like everybody else. This was a reaction of some, but my friends have been supportive. It was very cool, and I didn’t really care if people said something bad about me. Then I got to know more people around. They didn’t say those things anymore. And really cool people got the interest about it. Maybe got impressed even. Maybe I sound a bit selfish, but I am more respected now. I am not hiding anything. And I am still nice to everyone and everybody is nice to me. Maybe too much sometimes but I think it is rewarded. There are no age limits or gender limits in my hobby. I went to Belgium to a convention of mermaids. And if you can imagine all those people, no one looks the same as someone else. Here when you look around maybe people are just a people but there everyone are themselves and it is really cool. I think I will do that again.

You became visible in Instagram. I’ve noticed that many people are following your character. Can you tell a bit about being world-widely connected? Was it a relief when you realized there are so many same kinds of people?

I was happy to meet more people around the world, how they like to do the things they do. And because I am the first teacher of this mermaid diving here in this city. Even adults asked me: “Can you teach us also, we want to learn to those things, it seems cool?” It was the best job I have ever done. My Instagram account is called Mermaid Selenia, this is my artist name. This is how I represent myself. Almost everyone who has this hobby, or a job, has the name for the character. You don’t want to mix it with the real world. People might start to call you with your mermaid name added in it. People did it to me. I was like, please don’t do that because this is not everything about me, that I do.

I love my videos because I have a professional underwater photographer doing this with me. It was maybe the best experience of my life so far. I think it was something different for him also because he is doing professional underwater shooting. Next summer I think I’m going to do more of these things again. It is fun to look back in time and see how you have progressed.

When you search for some community online with a need of belonging, for example, to your mermaid community, do you find it?

You can belong to every community existing out there by just commenting their activities or telling your story. And when you start sharing more information, maybe a picture of yourself, it can connect you to people who are not actually socializing so much. And people can see you, but you don’t have to respond. It is sometimes unnecessary to comment something. It can just make someone feel a bad emotion. I used to respond to mean comments before, but I realized maybe this is not the best thing to do. They might think I gain some emotion. When you get used to it you don’t think about it anymore. You just see it as a useless thing. I don’t really read all the comments.

Social media can start the fires and put them down. Does it disturb your generation? Is there any politics or rules you have for online space?

I think if it does influence on some other people I might pop in and comment like “this is not what you have to say here”. It can be insulting. Even sometimes in a real life I have to say to someone “this is not ok to say”. There is not much you can do, you can just be quiet and do nothing, it is easier than to say something hateful. It is not going to make anything any better. It is the same with the comments. If you say something phobic towards someone, I still will say something about it. Too many times I need to say this to other people. Maybe they realized it, maybe not, maybe one day they will get it. If I can affect someone’s opinion positively, I want to try and do.

Now I am curious to ask about – beyond – education. Gaining knowledge digitally and surfing for the information, how much is allowed now for you? Have you ever ended up into somewhere where is the stuff you don’t want to see?

I think it is possible. I haven’t personally ended up there. I’ve heard people getting viruses by going to untrusted websites and seeing nasty pictures if they search health things for example. There is always the risk, at least for the virus. We can choose from any site that is possible for our studies. And there is always more and more. This is why we can get tired really badly. When you have so much to surf, of course, you have more information. We are expected to know more, maybe they expect us to be professionals in the subject, not only trying to get us through the course. It is frustrating sometimes. And we get worst grades than we should. But I think it is nice to have more information. If you are really interested in something you can get things very easily from the internet.

Can you imagine one day without your phone? From awakening through the day?

Wait, I would probably go back in time, to do something that I have never done. I would probably knock my friend’s doors and ask: “Can you come out?” Then I go to the next one, cycling like ten kilometres. Ok, this is probably if I want to be in contact, I will do that. Of course, I must have my blood glucose measure and a clock for the alarm. Or my mom, she can wake me up because I still live with her. I don’t know, I would be pretty confused because my calendar is in my phone. I would have to check everything from the paper. And for the clock, I would always need to go to the kitchen and see what the time is, it is not in my pocket. So, it would change my daily routine pretty much. I only can imagine like ten hours without a phone when I am hiking or diving but not a day without the phone. And basic things like cooking. I usually have all my recipes in my phone. But if I don’t have them, I need to improvise. Also paying bills, couldn’t do that without a phone. Anything would be harder to do. Even that I actually lived an era without a phone. It was fun and nice, having no problems. Phone is somehow connected with it; it also will inform me about the problem.

Biljana Stankovic

May I introduce: Seela in the Digiland PART II: Digital native – behind or beyond the digitalized education?

“To understand their world, we must be willing to immerse ourselves in that world. We must embrace the new digital reality. If we can’t relate, if we don’t get it, we won’t be able to make schools relevant to the current and future needs of the digital generation.”

Ian Jukes (The founder and Executive Director of the InfoSavvy Group, an international educational consulting firm: https://infosavvy21.com/)

When the concept of education is changed it means everything else is changed. The convoy of changes goes from our challenged personal capacities trough already manifested social changes challenged by progressive technologies and economical possibilities. It is important to ask: When the concept of education is changing? Who is ready for the change first: those who need to be educated, those who provide education, or those who finance education – or maybe those who benefit economically by producing the digital infra?

Seela is a representative of a digital generation. In this second part of her narrative, she discusses the educational system that has been available for her:

For me, digital education started only in the fifth grade. It wasn’t common to use it at school before. Of course, we had those computers at school even when I was in the first grade. It was only like on brakes. We could maybe play a game there or do something. Then we started to do the presentations and books started to be on the digital form. Now it is like almost every other subject that I have digital. At least you have an option to use the actual book or pdf form. At the fifth grade we really started to learn how it works.

How the teacher presented to you this new way of learning? Did you have some previous knowledge, or did you start to learn there in the school?

Because my dad is very good in using computers, he taught me earlier so. It was like I know more about the computer then my teachers. This is common even nowadays. They don’t know what they are doing. They just thought what they must teach us, but we knew a bit more, maybe because of how much we use digital devices in our free time.

What do you think, is it because of your generation? You are progressive, and the school system needed to adopt on you and your knowledge. Or the school system did it anyways?

I can’t say it really but maybe the school system did it to be more united with the students that they are in this day, you know. Not in the past. They wanted to be more modern and give us more options. Maybe better learning, I don’t know. Sometimes I think digital books are worse than actual books. Sometimes carrying the book and open it is more motivating than always have a phone and a computer with you that you can do everything you need. It doesn’t motivate you as much. But I see why is better, for example with writing. You can easily correct mistakes or whatever you want. It is faster. They can probably teach us more because they don’t have to waste a time to write everything down first. They have already prepared dias or presentations. And they can just share it with us. We can learn it from there, we don’t have to write it down. Probably for saving time also. […] If we have a homework is it to do some project and it needs to be done in deadline, for specific date. We usually do those with computers and if we need to write something down is in the class. You don’t have to write anything at home.

Did you feel there is a switch in your education, or was it fluid for you? Have you been introduced to libraries at the beginning of your education?

I never really was a library person. I never went there if I wasn’t forced to. Now I never go there basically. No one requires me to go there. But if I want to do something at home, I usually do with my computer. I can just have everything on one page and not go true a lot of paper waste. We must pay for every book and the notebook and a pencil that we have. In high school they don’t provide us those. Nowadays they upgraded or did something with the system and next year people that come to high school, they get everything for free. We are still in older system. I was a little mad at first but then they offer online books. Now I am not too mad about it because I have an option for using online books. I have a smooth switch because still I can have a physical book. It is not only one option. If you are going to do some project with your close friend, you might go to a café or in someone’s place like yourself or the friends and do the project. But we never gather for doing the homework. I like to have my free time as my free time and school time as a school time. So, I try to balance it like that.

Do you feel that each student, your friends (not from your school only) have equal opportunity?

Yes, usually when someone is struggling, they do get the help. this is really god. They don’t let anyone just suffering in their learnings. It will be unfair if you have difficulties with reading or writing. You will get the help with that. But not every school has it equal, you know. Now we can’t get into school we want to. We must do the test to get in there at the first place. Of course, that depends on you. What opportunities you will get. I think maybe in a comprehensive school they have their bigger inequalities; you know. That could be fixed easily but somehow, they don’t do it.

And: do you think that owning an iPhone or any smartphone or a computer is possible for most of the students?

It must be. But we must purchase our own computers and it can get really expensive. The school doesn’t give us anything. I don’t know for the next year students might get their own computers for free. Now it is impossible to live without a smartphone but smartphone is not as needed as the computer. But if you don’t have a computer you don’t get to go to the school basically.

Biljana Stankovic

May I introduce: Seela in the Digiland – PART I: Growing up as a digital native

When we discuss digital natives, there is a need to consider what – for example – 30 years of an age difference have to say about new technologies and digital environment. To bridge this gap and understand the world we are studying, a three-part narrative of a young person who acts in digital environments like “a fish in the water” is presented in this blog. Young people can have strong self-awareness and openness towards new ways of express, and many of them also show this publicly.

As a researcher in the DEQUAL project at University of Eastern Finland I was privileged to interview a smart, creative, and progressive young person – Seela – who is also my friend, even though the age difference between us is 30 years. At her age I had no possibilities to befriend with older generations. Accordingly, there were no social platforms gathering people by a same interest. For older generations it was not cool to hang out with teenagers – and vice versa. Nowadays are different and there are many advantages in that. This is especially focal when youth research is under the scrutiny.

In her orientation towards the world around her, Seela is an open, welcoming, and inclusive young soul. During the interview, we talked about her childhood, schooling, hobbies, socializing, and free time considering new technologies in the digital environment. This text is a first part of the narrative of Seela and considers growing up into a digitalized reality.

I was born in the 1970s, when electronic digital wristwatches costed as today’s amount of 12 000$. In the 1980s, they could already be found in cereal boxes as cheap giveaways. My mother was a computer programmer for the National Bank, and at the age of four I saw the first IBM computer at her office. The whole room filled with odd machines in size of a refrigerator. Then, during the late 1990’s, at the half of my studies, I got my first e-mail address and a possibility to go through few available web pages.

Seela, on her part, was about five years old when she was introduced to video games on computer and already collecting toys with digital functions. In the fifth grade of elementary school she was introduced to online learning methods – and today, together with her peers, she already mastered a life in other “dimension”: the virtual world of digital era. Underneath Seela’s own words are cited in describing what it means to grow up in a totally different era than that of my childhood.

Seela’s narrative: Part I – Growing up

 I asked Seela to tell about her background, her interests and free time.

My name is Seela. I am seventeen and I go to Joensuun Yhteiskoulun lukio and study there on this art line. I live in Joensuu. Currently I live with my mom. I moved from my dad’s place. I like to free dive on my free time, also play the ukulele and do different kinds of things. I also go to the gym almost every day. Photo and videography are also a thing of mine and different artistic things. I think I gain it from my parents because they both are artists. My mom is a dancer. My dad is a musician. So, I think it goes with the genes that I like artistic things.

Let’s start with your first remembering of toys and devices being around you. What you liked to play with. When was your first contact with something considering display or digital sound?

 Yes, I think it was about 2007 when I started to play with toys with something digital on it. I always liked these “Pet shop” things. They have also little buildings and accessories that has a light on it or a sound. I still have those around somewhere. I love miniature things …still. These are the first things and at those times I also got my first cell phone. It was little seashell shape thing with little buttons and numbers in it. And as I remember, the only game on it was the worm game.  And I was playing it.  And two years later, as I remember, I got the first Nintendo wii.

I think I was six or five. My dad was very interested in video games like always. We started to play video games with my brother who is four years older than me. And it was always the fun doing it together, not alone. And we start to have more and more of these games. We had literally the biggest pile you can imagine. That was always around and since then I enjoy video games very much. I play with my friends now or alone. It is more with the computer, but we also have the newest Nintendo. It is really cool, portable and you can also set it with a TV.

And is there a community with friends like gathering of gamers?

Yea, they can be like – a local friends that I meet every day basically in my real life. And there are some universal people from around the world that I talk to while playing video games. It is really a fun like learning the new language at the same time. Also gaining a new friend. It is multitasking. Now when I play on my computer is maybe a Counter strike main one. And there are always new people that you play with. When I play with my Nintendo switch there is the multiplayer option. And I got to play with this pretty famous Youtuber once. I was following him maybe a few years. It was really fun experience with that because you don’t always end up playing with the best ones. He doesn’t accept all the requests. But he was watching my game hours, how much I play the game. He was super smash pro. And said OK to me. And I needed to beat him. We don’t know each other personally but it was really hyping me up to play more.

So, do you use game names? You can tell one. Use the old ones if you don’t want to discover your gamer identity.

Yes, I actually don’t have just one game name in every game. I have different names. And I have this one SNII – snii – it is really funny. Some people call me by that name because it is funny, and they remember me by that name. I almost laugh every time someone calls me by that name. And it goes with many people when you call them their game names, it is like a second personality. Some games go with something like an emotional or nostalgic connection. Like with the soundtracks of the game. I listen soundtracks of the game even when I am not playing it. Every day I have the LEGEND OF ZELDA. I am listening this soundtrack every time I am doing the exam if they allow us to listen the music. It really calms me down. It has always been around. That game is the one that started my gaming career. Not career maybe but the habit of playing.

Biljana Stankovic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNIGCNO5ss4