Talk:James Benjey

Peer Review by Angelica Tome

Seriousness of purpose

James compared publicly available and private data to understand relationship bw physical and digital self. I think this is a strong component to incorporate at the beginning of the essay so that the reader knows what to expect when reading. There is potential for a better data analysis, but it requires elaboration of findings and what James’s data indepentity looks at when he searches his name on different search engines and/or social media platforms. The conclusion is repetitive and does not sum up the conclusion of analysis on James’s data identity.

Quality of Writing
There is a great outline of what is in this essay (the three categories) in the beginning. As I continue to read the draft, it seems incomplete due to the overwhelming amount of bullet points. It does not seem to fully analyze his findings, but rather talks about the data public and private that generally is found when looking something up. The central argument of this draft is not focused on James’s online data identity. To improve, I suggest elaborating more personal background as to what your online presence looks like and how that reflects on the data that you receive when you are looking up your name on different search engines or different platforms. Adding either of those will definitely strengthen your findings instead of just focusing on the logistical things about online data. By connecting what you have in this draft and your personal findings, it will flow better and be more complete in terms of the online data identity analysis.