Rewrite of Henry Jenkins (Photoshop for Democracy)

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9729506-7.html

When discussing Henry Jenkins and convergence culture, I immediately thought of the YouTube/CNN debates. This I guess has more to do with convergences politics which is politics coming together with things of pop culture in order to appeal to more people, especially a younger audience. Ever since I could remember, presidential candidates have had televised debates. However, at least in my opinion, these debates have been uneventful and boring to watch. I’m not that into politics. I mean I understand it pretty well however I would rather go out and debate it then watch other people do so. So for me, they have never been something I took great interest in watching. Now, after hearing about the YouTube/CNN debates, I find myself watching more and more of them. I really like how people can send in videos to ask questions. It doesn’t matter how old you are and you don’t need to physically be there to ask questions. It provides America with a more interactive experience with the candidates so they can make a more well-informed decision. In an article entitled “YouTube, CNN aim to ‘revolutionize’ presidential debate process” by Caroline McCarthy, it mentions that not only will people be able to post questions online, but all the debates will then be posted online so the responses can be heard. Also, the article predicts the success of the debates. Says YouTube co-founder Chad Hurley, “We're confident we're providing a new outlet for them for distribution. We have thousands of media partners, and we're actively working to provide them new opportunities and develop new technologies that provide some choice: choice to control their content in the system, and choice to provide more promotional and revenue opportunities." Some say the debates were rigged to only show the most non-controversial questions. However, I’m not sure I believe this to be true. If they did select their questions to be non-controversial, it might be because they were trying not to start an uproar so close to the election. It’s really up for speculation but the YouTube/CNN debates are a perfect example of Jenkins’ grassroots media and convergence culture.

Henry Jenkins gave several examples of these two things in his article “Photoshop for Democracy” and ends by saying on page 208, “In each case, entrenched institution are taking their models from grassroots fan communities, reinventing themselves for an era of media convergence and collective intelligence”. I think that pretty much sums but what convergence culture is. It is taking old forms of media and new forms and colliding them. Grassroots media is content created by citizens as opposed to giant corporations. With the debates, YouTube is generally a place where anyone (no matter age or social status) can share their videos. Big name corporations such as CNN post their own shows online but that’s not grassroots. That is why the debates were so effective was because all you needed was a webcam/video camera and a computer in order to create content or watch the debates. And the coming together of the two was a genius idea on their part. Now that the YouTube/CNN debates are over, many would agree with how effective they were. They caused people (especially young people) in America to become more involved in the campaigns and election. I think YouTube and CNN should strongly consider doing this in the future because it gives a great opportunity to citizens out there to participate in grassroots media.

Rewrite of Howard Rheingold (Smart Mobs)

I found the concept of “smart mobs” very interesting. I especially understood that there can be disadvantages to being so technologically advanced. For example, the great lack of privacy. Rheingold shows this through his statement “When you piece together these different technological, economic, and social components, the result is an infrastructure that makes certain kinds of human actions possible that were never possible before”. He is talking about radio chips, and wireless internet and ways that people use technology, all of that makes up this puzzle of a “smart mob”. I really agree that we are doing things now that never in a million years we all thought technology would be capable of. Back to the privacy issue, surveillance is a technology that is increasingly developed to new levels. When we used to know very little about people, we can now know almost everything due to surveillance. It is almost scary how people can get information about you.

I remember watching the movie “V for Vendetta” and seeing how surveillance plays a huge role in that film. Surveillance is used as a means of catching so called “terrorists”. In the movie, the main character V is trying to overthrow the government (for political and personal reasons) and is being watched every second by video cameras and microphones places all throughout the city of London. Although, V was doing something that doesn’t seem right to us, this could be seen as an invasion of privacy by the government as well as a hindrance on V’s freedom of speech and expression. The government had the power to see almost anyone and the use of cameras and video footage really bring to life that V and others around London were being watched constantly. They used surveillance in a menacing way to stop the basic freedoms. It is supposed to inflict a fear in a panoptic sort of way. When I watched this movie, it made me question if I really had all the privacy I thought I had and that really bothered me. None of us know what goes on in government offices. Are our nation’s leaders really telling the truth? Are we being watched as we live our day-to-day lives? It can definitely cause of a little paranoia. I fully understand that in some cases surveillance can be a good thing. Video cameras in convenience stores and banks have saved lives. However, it is a real privacy issue. This is a definite disadvantage of “smart mobs”. While they are good for many things, they are not very respectful of privacy.

Rewrite of Douglass Rushkoff (Open Source Democracy)

The point that I am going to be talking about in this blog post deals more so with the backlash section of Douglas Rushkoff’s third chapter of his book (Open Source Democracy) called “Electronic community: From birth to backlash”. One of the main points that he makes is that the so-called “do-it-yourself” attitude of the internet community took a backseat in order to accommodate commerce. He says “when selling information online didn’t work, business people turned instead to selling real products online” (39). It sparked the new phenomenon of ecommerce. People wouldn’t have to leave their houses in order to shop for things. Businessmen realized that to make any money at all off the Internet (other than stocks) they needed to sell tangible products to consumers. A great example of this was and still is eBay. eBay was created in 1995 just around the time the dot.com bubble was being formed. eBay is an online auction and shopping website in which people and businesses buy goods and sell goods and services worldwide. Since being founded in San Jose, eBay has become the epitome of the online commerce world.

The dot.com bubble burst in the early 2000’s however eBay seemed to be one of the lone survivors. It is still a website with a lot of traffic and continues to be one of the largest websites for online shopping. Back to Rushkoff’s comment, I think it was almost unavoidable that the internet be turned into a station for commerce. Americans (and others around the world) love to buy and spend money. That is what keeps our economy going. Rushkoff isn’t saying that this is a negative thing and I agree that it is not. I simply think it was inevitable that we would have a shopping mall right at the click of a mouse. Will eBay and internet commerce continue to be strong? I believe so. Although the internet is used for a great deal more than online shopping in today’s world (communication has become the big thing since the early 2000’s), it still holds a solid place in the infrastructure of the internet community. Online commerce is still a huge part of many lives today. Some people do nothing but shop online. Rushkoff really did his research and I think he made it clear to us how much we really value online commerce.

Exrta Blog 3

I know that we have written many blogs on virtual worlds and that we have discussed it extensively in class, however, I still have some things that I want to vent about. Okay, I have two virtual worlds that I have issues with: Second Life and LambdaMOO. First, I’ll start with LambdaMOO. I don’t really understand how someone can enjoy spending all day long talking on the computer. Sure I have instant messenger but I do not spend all day talking on it. In fact, I haven’t gone on in a while. But back to LambdaMOO. I just don’t see how reading a bunch of text on a screen is enjoyable. I would much rather go out and meet people or talk on the phone. I like real life interaction so I guess virtual worlds aren’t for me. But how are they for anyone? I know the answer to this question but I don’t want to believe it. Because I still think it is a little ridiculous. Reading text descriptions of rooms and characters isn’t the same as seeing them and experiencing interactions in real life. This brings me to Second Life. I would say that Second Life is a little better than LambdaMOO. You can see graphics and have a character that you can actually see their features. But still, why would sitting for hours in front of a computer screen be entertaining? It is a strain for your eyes and these virtual worlds hardly correlate to real life. I don’t think that typing for hours on a keyboard can make you any more social in real life. I know that people use virtual worlds because they are too shy to socialize in real life. However, I feel like they are wasting their time. I know that I have brought up a lot of things that we have already talked about but I am just reiterating my point.

Extra Blog 2

This blog might be a little short but I want to tell a story of how I participated in a grass- roots campaign just two weeks ago. A girl who is a recent alumnus of my sorority has a younger brother who has Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML), a fast-growing cancer of the blood and bone marrow. They needed $500,000 by April 3^rd for a bone marrow transplant and weren’t sure how they were going to get it because the boy, Michael, hit his lifetime insurance amount. His parents sent out an email saying that there was a website that people could donate money to in order to help save his life. I received it and sent it on to 20 people. That was the goal. For each person to send it on to some people they know. That way, the information would be disseminated throughout as many people as possible. Also, they needed the money rapidly so email is the fastest way to do it. Fortunately, they received all the money they needed in order for Michael to get the transplant. I’m not entirely sure on how he is doing now but if I find out I will update this blog. I thought it was really interesting to be part of this. In class we were asked if any of us had participated in a grass-roots campaign and at the time I hadn’t. Now I guess my answer changes. I thought that Michael’s parents picked a very effective way of trying to get money to help their son. I would probably do the same if people I knew needed money for surgery or something like it. So here is a real life example of a grass-roots campaign!!

Extra Blog 1

Okay so this blog isn’t about media so much as it is about technology. Which aren’t the same things. My future career plan is to become a forensic psychologist. I have wanted to follow this career path for many years (not just because I watch CSI). Anyways, I am taking an anthropology class and we go into a little bit of forensic anthropology. This is really cool. We are learning how to tell the age and gender of deceased people by their skeletons! They have amazing ways of preserving skeletons now a day. I just think it’s really cool how far we have come with technology. According to an article I found called “Forensic Anthropology is used in…” written by Carl Walker, recent advances in technology have made forensic anthropology a very popular field of study. The use of new microscopic technology has made it incredibly easy to get the tiniest details at any crime scene. I was really impressed by the things I learned in my anthropology class and I strongly recommend that if anyone is interested in forensics (like I am) then take a forensic anthropology class!

danah boyd- MySpace

The danah boyd article called “Identity Production in a Networked Culture: Why Youth Heart MySpace” was definitely something I could relate to. After all, at one time, I did have a MySpace account. MySpace started as a social networking site for new bands and young people who needed a place to “hang out”. I was pretty young when I got a MySpace. I want to say I was a freshman in high school. I have long since deactivated my account and for one reason: my parents. Actually that’s not true, there was a multitude of reasons but none of them actually drew me away from the site until my parents stepped in. boyd’s article talks a lot about how MySpace (and other social networks like it) become this place where people define themselves and she mentions a lot of good things. However, she does mention how it is hard for parents to relinquish control of their children’s internet lives and that “this dynamic most often destroys the most important value in the child/parents relationship: trust” (6). I totally agree with that statement and a living example of it.

My parents were always pretty trustworthy of me until my Jr. year of high school when someone let them see my MySpace. Now being the oldest, I usually got it pretty hard and since my sister’s didn’t have MySpace accounts, there was no way for them to understand what MySpace was really about. They found some things they didn’t like and made me not go on my account anymore. But I did. And they found out. And finally they made me shut it down. They didn’t trust that I would make good choices over the internet about what I posted and who I became friends with. They didn’t like the type of person I was online or the type of person that I was becoming due to MySpace. Up until last summer, I wasn’t involved in any type of social network. I know it sounds weird but I felt like I was missing out on something. Soon a lot of my friends had Facebook’s and were sharing photos and I couldn’t do that. I eventually convinced my parents to let me get one in order to stay in touch with high school friends when I went to college. I am older now and understand the dangers of the Internet and am very careful what I say and post. Also, I really look at who I friend and who can see my profile. I really hope I never violate my parents trust again. I do believe that they need to let go because I am an adult and can make decisions by myself. I also understand their concern however. I don’t like MySpace because I say that it “ruined my life” for a short period of time (to be dramatic). However, I think it was actually myself and not the site that was the source of issue. At one time MySpace was a great thing but there are dangers to it. So be careful what you put on there.

Griefers

I think the concept of griefers is insane! I definitely agree with Prokofy Neva who believes that “no amount of humor or creativity can excuse what she sees as terrorism”. I feel like griefing is very similar to terrorism. What people are doing is pushing someone so far that they can’t take it anymore. Terrorism is the same way. Someone does something and continues to do it until someone else reacts to it. I find that very annoying. It’s like your little brother or sister poking you until you get upset and yell at them. In the article by Julian Dibbell called “Mutilated Furries, Flying Phalluses: Put the Blame on Griefers, the Sociopaths of the Virtual World”, he mentions many different ways that griefers push people to the edge. One example was when a group of Second Life Goons recreated the scene of the burning Twin Towers. That was an act of terrorism and I think that it still should be considered an act of terrorism in Second Life. Causing people to relive an experience that was horrible and scarring is a terrible thing to do. I think that these people are sick in the head. In the case, of Prokofy Neva, she lost hundreds of real US dollars because of the griefers. I agree that she has every right to be upset.

I am not very involved in online communities so I wasn’t entirely sure on what a griefing episode looked like until I read the articles that were included in our syllabus. The one that really stood out for me was “Alien Invasion” from the Something Awful website. It showed all these pictures of aliens coming to the Second Life world and abducting people to use for “experimentation”. It turns out that the experiments where just torture. That was disturbing for me to see. I didn’t like thinking about how there are real people behind those characters that are getting tortured, or raped (such as in the case of Dibbell’s article “A Rape in Cyberspace”). I feel like they are real terrorists because they get enjoyment from watching other people suffer. I realize that some are just trying to be funny or obnoxious like a little brother or sister, but there is also those who push it too far. Griefing is terrorism.

Here is the alien invasion article: http://www.somethingawful.com/d/second-life-safari/alien-invasion.php

A Rape In Cyberspace

When I first heard about the concept of virtual rape, I thought that was impossible and ridiculous. I still don’t really see why it is such a big deal (because it isn’t real), but I understand it a little better. This particular virtual rape that happened in Julian Dibbell’s article “A Rape in Cyberspace” occurred in the virtual world of LambdaMOO. Lambda Moo is completely text based. So that alone made me wonder how this could have happened. Why couldn’t the person just have logged off? You can’t control what other people say but you can certainly control if you listen to them or not. But apparently, people were outraged. Legba, the woman who was virtually raped, says this in response to how she felt after the crime was committed. “I also think that Mr. Bungle was being a being a vicious, vile fuckhead, and I…want his sorry ass scattered from #17 to the Cinder Pile. I’m not calling for policies, trials, or better jails. I’m not sure what I’m calling for. Virtual castration, if I could manage it. Mostly, [this type of thing] doesn’t happen here. Mostly, perhaps I though it wouldn’t happen to me. Mostly, I trust people to conduct themselves with some veneer of civility. Mostly, I want his ass” (380). As you can tell from this quote, there is a lot of bitterness and hostility here. I guess I understand that being raped makes you feel violated, but I don’t understand why legba couldn’t have just logged off.

I don’t even know what I can compare this too. I have never had an experience like that before because I’m not very involved in virtual worlds. However, I did find an article confirming that there are a lot more cases of virtual rape out there than I realized. The Wired article entitled “Virtual Rape is Traumatic, but is it a Crime?” talked about an investigation of a rape in Second Life. I don’t really understand how that is possible either. Yes, Second Life is not text base and has graphics but still, how can you force a virtual avatar to engage in sexual activities? I don’t understand why these people won’t just log off!! The article talked about how much of a mental trauma rape is whether online or offline. That part I agree with. I believe that rape is very emotionally destructive. But I also still believe that to avoid anything similar to virtual rape or sexual harassment, just log off!

Here is the article link: http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/05/sexdrive_0504

Tinysex and Gender Troubles

I thought Sherry Turkle’s article “Tinysex and Gender Trouble” was fairly interesting and very easy to read. She made a lot of valid points and helped open my eyes to the ups and downs of virtual worlds. I found to be most fascinated when she started talking about online imposters because I realize that I myself have come in contact with a few.

No matter where you go on the Internet, if you are interacting with people, you are bound to meet a few who pretend to be something that they are not. That was the case in this article with the story about Joan who turned out to really be Alex. Turkle describes the people’s reactions when they found out that their woman friend was really a man. She says, “The discovery of Alex’s deception led to shock and outrage. In some versions of the story, the anger erupts because of the initial deception-that a man had posed as a woman, that a man had won confidences as a woman” (229). I can imagine this outrage! No one likes to be deceived especially by someone they thought was their friend. From my own online experience, I have found to be deceived quite a few times in chat rooms and on instant messenger. I remember on one occasion how I was on instant messenger and though I normally don’t talk to people I don’t know, someone IMed me saying they knew me from a friend so I decided to stick around and talk. The conversation was going fine until they started talking to me about my ex-boyfriend who I was not on good terms with. I really don’t like talking about my ex, especially to people who I don’t really know too well. It turns out that I wasn’t just talking to a friend of my ex, but that I was talking to my ex. He had gone under a screen name that I didn’t know and pretended to be someone else in order to see if I would say anything bad about him. I thought that was a really low blow and it was really strange and creepy. I definitely feel for all those affected by Alex’s deceit. It is strange to share personal information with people who turn out to be someone else. I am definitely a lot more open with girls then I am with guys and to find out that I had shared a lot of my personal life with a strange guy instead of a girl would leave me feeling violated. I am glad that Sherry Turkle addressed the issue of online imposters in her article because it is a very prevalent issue today.

MUDs

Howard Rheingold’s article “Multi-User Dungeons and Alternate Identities” gives the pros and cons of the world of MUDs. Prior to reading this article, I had heard of a couple MUDs but really had no understanding to what they were about. An increasingly active example of a MUD is Second Life which I first heard mentioned on my favorite television show, The Office. Another example that I had heard of is World of Warcraft (WOW) which is more like a video game where monsters need to be killed, etc. I had a couple of guy friends that were pretty into WOW but I myself never played it. No I was never into virtual communities such as the ones I mentioned above. But I thought, why don’t I give it a try just to see what it’s like? I picked LambdaMOO, the text-based virtual community Rheingold mentioned in the article. After having a little trouble getting started, I found myself in the Coat Closet. My experience was pretty fun. I didn’t talk to too many people and I found myself a little overwhelmed with all the commands. But it was still a nice break from reality.

However, as I was on LambdaMOO, I didn’t realize how much time I was spending there. I had been on for half an hour when it seemed like I had been on for five minutes. I remembered reading in the article about how addictive MUDs can be and I completely agree. Some people even go on for 70 hours a week! That’s unimaginable to me. Rheingold says “When you are putting in seventy or eighty hours a week on your fantasy character, you don’t have much time left for a healthy social life” (156). I completely agree with him. MUDs are definitely addictive and I think that is a huge point he is making in the article. It is destructive to your social life to be spending so much time on MUDs but I believe it is also destructive to other areas of your life such as school and work. Rheingold says the largest category of MUDers is college age students meaning that a lot of them are probably slacking on their school work to play these games. I completely understand how addictive it can be but I also think that it’s a little ridiculous to spend so much time on something that is not even real. Personally, I prefer real life a whole lot more than a virtual one!

The Virtual Community

Howard Rheingold’s “Introduction: The Virtual Community” proved to be a very easy read for me. Basically, he was just saying how awesome virtual communities are and how you can become a part of something real through the virtual communities. He says “People in virtual communities use words on screens to exchange pleasantries and argue, engage in intellectual discourse, conduct commerce, exchange knowledge, share emotional support, make plans, brainstorm, gossip, feud, fall in love, find friends and lose them, play games, flirt, create a little high art and a lot of idle talk” (96). That is a lot to do in a virtual community! He gave the example of WELL (Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link) and how involved he is with that. Well I’m not involved in anything of that extent (that you have to pay for I mean!) but I do have a Facebook account. All the things that Rheingold mentioned you can do in the WELL, you can do on Facebook. Facebook allows you to talk and share pictures with friends all over the world. It is a great tool to help stay in touch when at college, or at least that is what I have found.

Within the WELL, there are many different groups or conferences which you can be a part of based on your interests. I find that very similar to Facebook’s groups. My nine close friends and I have a Facebook group that is just for us and we post pictures in it and write little comments about what is going on in our college life. It is a great way to be able to talk to them without having to play “phone tag” since we all have such busy schedules.

As much as I enjoy talking to my friends on Facebook, I don’t think that it is the most effective way to meet new people. I prefer to get to know someone in person first before I friend them on Facebook, not the other way around. With Rheingold’s WELL example, he said that he went to parties where he didn’t recognize anyone because he had met them all online. That is where my guard comes up. Personally, I don’t think I would go to a party unless I didn’t know someone who was going to be there and had already met them in person. I think he’s brave to do that because there are a lot of deceitful people out there who could be trying to mislead about their real selves.

I do think that Facebook and other virtual communities like it have great qualities however they should be used responsibly and safely because no one really knows all that is out there. And I think Rheingold would agree with me.

The Noble Amateur

When I first watched the video that was posted on the wiki about Andrew Keen, I thought that he needed to loosen up a little bit. However, after reading an excerpt from his book “The Cult of the Amateur”, I realized that he made some very valid points. For example, one thing he said was “On today’s Internet, however, amateurism, rather than expertise, is celebrated, even revered” (37). I find this to be 100% true. Just think of all the websites that allow regular people to share with the world whatever they want! Keen uses the example of Wikipedia. He says it has 200 thousand editors at least who are all unpaid citizens that make this website happen. Anyone with access to a computer can edit Wikipedia and a lot of people do. Keen strongly dislikes Wikipedia because he believes that these amateurs who edit entries are disrespecting the knowledge of all the experts out there. But who is to say that only the experts should tell us what is true and what is not?

Well if Keen does not like Wikipedia then he sure wouldn’t like Urban Dictionary. Urban Dictionary is a website that allows you to give definitions similar to Wikipedia. However, Urban Dictionary has a lot more slang and is definitely crasser. Other users can then rate posts with either a thumbs up or thumbs down. Just an example of an entry; when I looked up Indiana University, I found “A school where students spend more time drinking than going to class” but I also found “It has top ten programs in business, journalism and psychology”. It is unusual to have such different viewpoints under the same entry but that is what happens when amateurs are allowed to edit their own content. If an expert was writing about Indiana University, say on the school’s official website, his/her language would be a great deal more eloquent than what was found on Urban Dictionary. However, people still believe Urban Dictionary just as much as they believe other websites. If a prospective student looked on Urban Dictionary at Indiana University and read what was on there, they might not want to attend here. And they don’t even know all the great stuff about IU! I agree with Keen that amateurism is definitely celebrated and is what they say is believed a lot more today than a few years ago.

Transmedia Storytelling 101

I found the “Transmedia Storytelling 101” by Henry Jenkins to be fascinating. As I was reading it, I was reminded of various stories that are told over different sources of media. Sure there are series like Batman and Spiderman. And then there is the success of the more recent transmedia story, Cloverfield. However, I am not familiar with any of those in particular. I guess one that I am most familiar with would be The Simpsons.

The Simpsons started out as a cartoon television series but it has expanded into so much more. There are now comic books, video games, and even a full length movie on the Simpsons. It is not one continual story but it is many stories that lead to developing the characters and eventually you see all of them in the movie. I would have to agree most with Jenkins’ statement that said “Transmedia storytelling practices many expand the potential market for a property by creating different points of entry for different audience segments”. This means that there is something for everyone or a way for anyone to get hooked on the show. In the example of the Simpsons, there are comic books for those who like to read, video games for those who like to play them, and a movie for those who enjoy going to a theater. On a personal level, I got hooked onto the Simpsons by the television show, their main source of fan attraction. By watching the episodes on television made me want to go see the movie and find out what the story was about. There were a lot of things in the movie that related to the TV series such as similar characters and their funny traits or sayings that were popular from the series. By having so many different ways to see the stories or play games to learn the characters is really beneficial and is a great marketing tool. To get people interested on a variety of levels is good for the business of the Simpsons. So while it is not an action show like Superman or Batman, it definitely is advertised and directed toward many different groups of people through many different types of media.

Get A Life!

Okay to start of my blog this week, I would like to say that this is probably the most interesting stuff we have talked about yet. And I think that is mostly because a lot of us can relate to it. We are all fans of something, be it a sports team, television show, or recording artist. As I was reading this story, I was thinking about how I also tend to stereotype Star Trek nerds and other fanatics in unfair ways. I came across one section that really made me think and that I totally agreed with. Here is what it said. “Taste becomes one of the important means by which social distinctions and class identities are forged. Those who “naturally” possess appropriate tastes “deserve” a privileged position within the institutional hierarchy and reap the greatest benefits from the educational system, while the tastes of others are seen as “uncouth” and underdeveloped”(Jenkins 61). I agree that society looks well upon people with “good” taste and poorly upon people with “bad” taste. But how do we distinguish between the two. Does something have good taste if it is funny? If the acting is good? Bad taste if we enjoy the corny plot line that leaves more to be desired? I agree with this statement in the fact that taste really does divide us socially. I started to wonder what class I am in.

Like I mentioned before, everyone is a fan of something. Some are to the point where they are almost obsessed. Whether it be Grey’s Anatomy, Star Trek, or Harry Potter television shows prove to be a major source of crazed fandom. My personal weakness is The Office. I think the show is hilarious but it definitely has some sexual content. Some have told me that I have bad taste for watching a show that is not so “family friendly”. So because it’s not PG and has some vulgar language and suggestive comments, does that mean I have bad taste? I don’t think so. I think that the show is perfectly fine however I don’t want my 10 year old cousin watching it. It shows that society really casts stereotypes to what is good/bad or appropriate/inappropriate. I don’t think that Jenkins is blaming society here. I think that he is just stating a fact. And I don’t think he is out to judge us on our “taste”. However, I do think that society does. And that is why it was very unfair of me to laugh at the “Trekkies” because I am the same way only with a more “accepted” show. Maybe it is because the characters are dressed in regular clothes or set in modern day. Either way, you don’t hear people making fun of The Office fans (Except for the occasional person who gets sick of me quoting lines!) If people think Star Trek is bad taste then they should think a million other shows out there have bad taste. This article really opened my eyes to the fact that there are crazy fans out there everywhere and that I’m even one! Maybe in the future, I will give Trekkies more of a chance and won’t be so quick to judge on their taste.

Sorry...this is the real Flickr post (forgot the URL on the other one)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23693505@N03/sets/72157603903998965/

I really enjoyed the Flickr assignment that we did this week! I thought it was a cool way to get to know other people in the class as well as have some fun and tell a story. The preparation my team did wasn’t hard. We just thought of a topic that we wanted to tell a story on and then thought of each shot we wanted to take. We laid it out frame by frame and then decided what the specific props would be that we were going to use. Additionally, one member of my group opened an account on Flickr so we could easily share our slideshow with the world.

Once we loaded our photos onto the computer, Flickr was very easy to use. There were clearly labeled tabs of the things that we needed and the instructions we’re difficult to follow. In no time we had a picture set and had arranged our pictures into the right order for our slideshow.

I think Flickr is a very effective tool in creating user generated content and sharing it with others. Flickr allows people to take their own pictures and put them on this website where they can get critiques or praise and other people can help them become better photographers. I know that when I read the article “Flickr Changes Lives, Launching Photo Careers” it made me want to become a photographer. I have always appreciated photo but I never was able to take a photo class in high school because my parents didn’t want to buy the expensive camera that was required. With Flickr, I can just take my digital camera and take photos that don’t require fancy lenses and get people’s opinions on them. I usually just take pictures for memories or to show other people but perhaps using Flickr will cause me to be more creative and artistic with my photos.

I most definitely think that Flickr can be used for photojournalism. There are a lot of people in the world with very strong opinions and this is a very safe, subtle way to make a statement. Some people make protests through marches and rallies. Others do it through photos. Personally, I think that looking at an image is such a powerful thing and it might help sway me towards one position or the other. I just really like how Flickr gives people a voice and let them express themselves creatively. I think at times, society tries to oppress our creative self if it isn’t in line with what the government wants or with what higher authorities want. Flickr allows normal, regular people to be their own stars and the stars of the online photo community and finally gives them a voice.

Flickr

I really enjoyed the Flickr assignment that we did this week! I thought it was a cool way to get to know other people in the class as well as have some fun and tell a story. The preparation my team did wasn’t hard. We just thought of a topic that we wanted to tell a story on and then thought of each shot we wanted to take. We laid it out frame by frame and then decided what the specific props would be that we were going to use. Additionally, one member of my group opened an account on Flickr so we could easily share our slideshow with the world.

Once we loaded our photos onto the computer, Flickr was very easy to use. There were clearly labeled tabs of the things that we needed and the instructions we’re difficult to follow. In no time we had a picture set and had arranged our pictures into the right order for our slideshow.

I think Flickr is a very effective tool in creating user generated content and sharing it with others. Flickr allows people to take their own pictures and put them on this website where they can get critiques or praise and other people can help them become better photographers. I know that when I read the article “Flickr Changes Lives, Launching Photo Careers” it made me want to become a photographer. I have always appreciated photo but I never was able to take a photo class in high school because my parents didn’t want to buy the expensive camera that was required. With Flickr, I can just take my digital camera and take photos that don’t require fancy lenses and get people’s opinions on them. I usually just take pictures for memories or to show other people but perhaps using Flickr will cause me to be more creative and artistic with my photos.

I most definitely think that Flickr can be used for photojournalism. There are a lot of people in the world with very strong opinions and this is a very safe, subtle way to make a statement. Some people make protests through marches and rallies. Others do it through photos. Personally, I think that looking at an image is such a powerful thing and it might help sway me towards one position or the other. I just really like how Flickr gives people a voice and let them express themselves creatively. I think at times, society tries to oppress our creative self if it isn’t in line with what the government wants or with what higher authorities want. Flickr allows normal, regular people to be their own stars and the stars of the online photo community and finally gives them a voice.

Photoshop for Democracy

Maybe I am completely clueless when it comes to these readings but one thing I did understand was the concept of convergence culture. Henry Jenkins gives several examples and ends by saying on page 208, “In each case, entrenched institution are taking their models from grassroots fan communities, reinventing themselves for an era of media convergence and collective intelligence”. I think that pretty much sums but what convergence culture is. It is taking old forms of media and new forms and colliding them. Grassroots, I believe, would be the old media (or the things that people are used to.) An example of convergence culture is companies who try to engage a stronger emotion in their commercials as opposed to just stating the facts like they used to.

We also discussed convergence politics in class. This means politics coming together with things of pop culture to appeal to more people, especially a younger audience. An example of this would be the YouTube/CNN debates. Ever since I could remember, presidential candidates have had televised debates. However, at least in my opinion, these debates have been uneventful and boring to watch. I’m not that into politics. I mean I understand it pretty well however I would rather go out and debate it then watch other people do so. So for me, they have never been something I took great interest in watching. Now, after hearing about the YouTube/CNN debates, I find myself watching more and more of them. I really like how people can send in videos to ask questions. It doesn’t matter how old you are and you don’t need to physically be there to ask questions. It provides America with a more interactive experience with the candidates so they can make a more well-informed decision. Some say the debates were rigged to only show the most non-controversial questions. However, I’m not sure I believe this to be true. If they did select their questions to be non-controversial, it might be because they were trying not to start a uproar so close to the election. I don’t know the full details but I found an article that gives some good information about the debates if you want more information. I know we already talked about them in class but here’s more!

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9729506-7.html

Smart Mobs

I found the concept of “smart mobs” very interesting. I especially understood that there can be disadvantages to being so technologically advanced. For example, the great lack of privacy. Rheingold shows this through his statement “When you piece together these different technological, economic, and social components, the result is an infrastructure that makes certain kinds of human actions possible that were never possible before”. He is talking about radio chips, and wireless internet and ways that people use technology, all of that makes up this puzzle of a “smart mob”. I really agree that we are doing things now that never in a million years we all thought technology would be capable of. Back to the privacy issue, surveillance is a technology that is increasingly developed to new levels. When we used to know very little about people, we can now know almost everything due to surveillance. It is almost scary how people can get information about you.

I remember watching the movie “V for Vendetta” and seeing how surveillance plays a huge role in that film. The government has the power to see almost anyone and the use of cameras and video footage really brings to life that these people are being watched constantly. When I watched it, it made me really question if I was really had all the privacy I thought I had. I fully understand that in some cases surveillance can be a good thing. Video cameras in convenience stores and banks have saved lives. However, it is a real privacy issue. And with the Patriot Act in effect since after September 11^th, it is as if we have no privacy at all. This is a definite disadvantage of “smart mobs”. While they are good for many things, they are not very respectful of privacy.

Open Source Democracy

The reading this week again proved to be a little bit wordy. However, I found one point as I was reading that caught my attention and made me think. On page 29 of “Open Source Democracy Chapter 3” Rushkoff says “Channel surfing and similar behavior became equated with a very real but variously diagnosed childhood illness called Attention Deficit Disorder. Children who refused to pay attention were (much too quickly) drugged with addictive amphetamines before the real reasons for their adaptation to the onslaught of commercial messages were even considered”. I’m not entirely sure how Rushkoff meant this statement but for me I was a little offended by his approach to Attention Deficit Disorder. I have a couple close family members who suffer from severe ADD and I don’t think it should be taken so lightly. It is a disorder that needs to be treated with medication. The medication that my family member’s take is life saving to them! It really helps them to stay focused. The way Rushkoff put it by saying that they were “drugged” before the “real reasons for their adaptation” just kind of struck me the wrong way. There are hundreds of organizations dedicated to providing help and hope to those with ADD and I really wish Rushkoff would have considered looking into this before he made such a brash statement. He might not even have meant it that way but he should think before he writes something. He is kind of like my roommate in that sense. She is very politically opinionated which is great, more power to ya! However, I tend not to always agree with everything she says and she can be extremely rude with her comments at times. If she doesn’t know what I believe or how a feel about an issue, then she shouldn’t be so voiced about it in front of me or at least be a little less blunt with her comments. Some of them have left me feeling very hurt and angry and I don’t think I should have to live in a situation like that. Anyways, the point of this blog is that sometimes the things authors write can be offensive and that you have to go into reading everything possibly with a very open mind.

Reach Out and Elect Someone

I felt as though this Postman reading was a little bit more difficult to understand. When he started talking about President Reagan I was like “What the heck is he talking about?!” However, as I got further into the reading I began to understand a little bit better the comparisons he was making. For instance, Postman says on page 22, “In America, the fundamental metaphor for political discourse is the television commercial”. I took that to mean he was saying that the television commercial is a reflection of our society and especially our government.

I couldn’t find the exact spot in the article but I remember discussing a quote from Ronald Reagan when he said that politics is like show business. I tend to agree. It was kind of ironic that in my next class after this one, we had a similar discussion. We actually got into a little bit of a heated debate about how politicians say things like “God bless” and “by the grace of God” and how some people thought that was unnecessary and that they should leave their religious views out of the spotlight. However, ignoring the fact that I am a pretty religious person, I feel that most politicians mention God because they are trying to appeal to the highest number of people. The majority of the United States is Christian and so politicians say thing to work in the favor with the most people they can. Whether they believe in God or not, they will still make reference to Him if they think it will help their campaign.

Back to television commercials, when I think of those, I think of the Super Bowl commercials. Supposedly, they are some of the best commercials on television. Advertisers pay thousands of dollars to have their slogan or jingle shot across the country. I feel like theses commercials really do reflect our society. They will be for beer or for a movie or a bank. However, they are all somewhat flashy and I think that in life, a lot of people feel the need to always but on a show (example politicians!). That’s what I got out of this Postman article and I have to agree with him this time.

Side note: We also talked about how commercials reflect on society in my Spanish class so I thought it was kind of funny that we talked about this in 3 of my classes. :)

Postman articles

I really enjoyed reading Neal Postman’s articles and agreed with most of what he said. However, on page 9 of “The Peek-a-Boo World”, Postman says (in reference to the telegraph and photograph turning news into decontextualized fact) “This coincidence suggests that the new technologies had turned age-old problem of information on its head” Where people once sought information to manage the real contexts of their lives, now they had to invent contexts in which otherwise useless information might be put to some apparent use”. I disagree with this statement. I don’t think people need to make up ways to use new technology. Technology is ever-changing, ever-growing. Society is built to handle those changes in such a way that we embrace new technologies instead of freaking out and not knowing what to do with them.

I recently read an article dealing with voice recognition software. Postman could argue that this technology is unnecessary and a waste of millions of dollars. However, I believe that is has made great strides in improving the safety of many things. For starters, banks, casinos, and other things that hold a lot of valuables have voice recognition software installed within there vaults. It is a way to ensure that only the people who are supposed to be in there get in there. More recently, voice recognition software has been installed in some vehicles. This software allows you to pick your favorite music, call your best friends, and get directions without having to lift a finger from the steering wheel. This is an incredible accomplishment considering how many deaths by car crash there are every single month. While it seems like this is just another fancy thing to add to your vehicle, I think that it will drastically decrease the number of accidents from talking on the cell phone or changing the car radio.

It is this reason why I disagree with Postman’s comment. It is true that there are a lot of things that seem to only serve the purpose to entertain or look “cool”. But I believe that many of the technologies present in our society today have the ability to do even more, even potentially helping to save a life.

Here is the link if anyone is interested: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4893/is_200411/ai_n17954555

:)

HI blog. It's Amy. Have a great day!