Posted on April 29, 2010 by David Lau
Mann Library- Library or Social Center?
When planning to study, I tend to determine how much work I have. Whether I have a huge paper due where I need absolute seclusion or just a quick homework assignment I may take my time on. Whatever the case, I’m more likely to go to Mann if I’m not beat down with a burden of tests and papers. Simply because, Mann is more of a social center then a library.
The café, Manndibles is always packed with people either studying or socializing. However, for those who are actually doing work there are new technology especially on the first level. Including large poster printers and the newest Apple computers. Mann is a place where not only traditional library activities can be done including research, but a place to socialize, watch television on flat screen televisions, rent/borrow computers, and so on. Mann exhibits traditional features of most libraries with private study rooms, but also entertainment and emphasizes a social society.
Mann has become a larger Starbucks or cafe which people may enjoy a coffee break and meet with people while being surrounded by new technology to do work. Books seem irrelevant at Mann, with number of computer labs and up to date software on Apple computers. The library is a computer lab, cafe, place to hang out, and place to stay in touch with friends, while away from your dorm rooms.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on April 22, 2010 by David Lau
I looked up “Facebook” on Wikipedia. The article consists of over 1000’s contributors and dates back to April of 2004. I chose this article because most of us are familiar to Facebook since it is arguably the most popular social networking site today. After reading the article, it did seem somewhat biased. The majority of the article consisted of the “great” applications and features Facebook enables users to do. It rarely mentions criticism towards the article. In the later part of the article they show a link of “Criticism’s of Facebook” however do not actually show it in the article. The entire article illustrates from the start of Facebook and how it has gradually developed and how it may be used with today’s new technology such as Smartphones.
After reading the article’s discussion part, it illustrated a few invalid points to the articles. It mentions specific sentences that are not true, according to the critic. However there are no major criticisms, from my perspective. This may be due to the large number of contributions and Facebook’s popularity. Overall, I think the article gives a good general idea of what Facebook is, although is somewhat biased. It however, cannot be used as an academic source to state exact features of the social networking site and also does not mention the other side of the argument, or criticisms or defects/problems of using Facebook.
In generalizing Wiki’s from the Facebook article, I think Wiki’s gives general ideas of information however cannot be used as a credible source. It gives an “idea” of what something is, and allows people to contribute however the sources are not sometimes credible, as it seems. However, if I wanted a general idea of what something was I would probably use Wikipedia. If it were a more serious matter, such as looking up a research project, I definitely would not use it as a source, due to its incredulous statements and invalid points at times in the articles (all based on the Facebook article).
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on April 15, 2010 by David Lau
Fenton offers many arguments in journalism today. Some themes he touches on include Space and speed (via Internet). But also, offers the criticism that everybody can be journalists in today’s online world. A concern is that people replace speed of information and how quickly its circulated with achievement in journalism as well as accuracy. In other words, information may not be legit or of academic levels.
As a young adult born with Internet, I do believe our generation has the ability to be more well-informed then people in our position a decade ago. The main reason is because of Fenton’s idea of speed and space. Internet has allowed access to vast amounts of information which is extremely easy to retrieve. Also, going back to the idea of produsage, we as consumers actively produce information/knowledge back in the Internet-realm. However, there are drawbacks. As described by Fenton of substituting academic achievement in journalism for space/speed, I agree that people may be less-informed in academic areas. For instance, most people my age I find rely on Internet for research. If we were to be asked to use only books, we would have much difficulty. Also, writing seems less academic or more creative or colloquial in today’s journalism. This may be due to increased online journalism rather than academic writing, people ten years ago were more accustomed to. In speaking with a Cornell English professor, she clearly has seen a change in writing. Newspapers are declining as Internet is prevailing. However, the degree to which people are informed today relies on personal interest and activity in seeking out reliable information. Internet merely allows this action to be faster and more convenient. However it does also offer illegitimate information that must be avoided.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on April 7, 2010 by David Lau
Facebook may arguably be the most popular social networking site today. As one of millions of Facebook users, I came across an application on one of my friends’ personal pages. Under the “Boxes” tab, the application on my friend’s wall was called, “Daily Babe.” It was a daily new picture of a model. However, it was not any clothing model, but rather lingerie models, Playboy “bunnies” and other provocative women that seemed to pose in sexual provocative ways wearing the smallest outfits possible. Although this did not seem surprising at first, I began to continue searching through my friends’ profiles and realized I had friends who were not even in high school as well as grandmothers and parents. The application seemed completely inappropriate to Facebook simply because of parents’ inability to block what their children see. Going through Facebook’s privacy settings, they showed how parents could help their children use Facebook. The problem is that the younger generation probably knows more about SNS than parents, especially grandparents. Also, Facebook blocks under 18 (minors) kids’ specific applications when they search “Everyone.” When searching everyone, minors only see their friends’ profiles according to the privacy settings on Facebook. However, If I were to have “Daily Babe” on my profile as an application, my 10 year old cousin would be able to see it.
Facebook allows you to customize what you see. However, privacy settings are done on your own. This leaves many problems if users are minors. There are some restrictions to minors as described by the previous example. However, it is extremely simple for kids to lie about their age so that they have complete access to the site’s application abilities. In the Help option for parents, the best recommendation Facebook offers is to “talk to your children and teach them about Internet safety.” I find that extremely difficult if they are looking up to their role models profiles and seeing virtually naked women in provocative positions as a 5 or 6-year-old boy. Facebook also says they review possible inappropriate content and offensive material. However Daily Babe is still up as an application. Their solution is for the profile-owner, the person with the Daily Babe app to block users. Facebook seems to make it the responsibility of the profile owner to block what is shown on their profile- which I completely disagree.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | 1 Comment »
Posted on April 1, 2010 by David Lau
As a New York State resident, I looked at Congressman Charles B. Rangel’s website, who serves for New York’s 15th District. In first opening the webpage, the site seemed user-friendly, almost similar to a blog. There are video links, as well as ways of blogging “with Charlie.” The site definitely tries to connect with the viewers. Many links leads to how the political system works and how certain issues are related to you. There is also news and issues on the frontpage which allows you to further delve into, which Congressman Rangel tackles. There are a number of links to contact the Congressman or discussing your own thoughts or issues. The site seems to support user-activity in politics.
The main page has a “browse by tags” as well as a “Latest News” which allows Rangel to discuss the issues he focuses on. On the sides, links really emphasize user-activity and being involved by offering simple, convenient methods of voting or how to share your opinions. There is a blog link, as well as step-by-step guidelines on how to get involved on Rangel’s specific issues. Rangel’s website uses current events and news he is involved in to offer information. The side links, allows further and simple ways to get involved. Also, it highlights his credibility, by illustrating his accomplishments and give the sense he is “serving the people.” In fact, some links include some of the popular social networking sites like Twitter to further emphasize discussion on his topics.
It seems the Congressman uses this website to offer specific topics he focuses primarily on in office. To facilitate opinion and a way of hearing the people he presents he takes a very informal approach to connect with the audiences. Using new media like social networking sites as well as links to newsfeeds and popular tags, allows users to easily share how they feel and see whether these issues are applicable to them.
http://rangel.house.gov/
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on March 18, 2010 by David Lau
Papacharissi (2002) offers her definitions of the new media age. However, some of these definitions are questionable, primarily Internet as a public sphere. She suggests the Internet, or as she calls, the Virtual Sphere 2.0, is an “extension of previous dimensions” of the original Virtual Sphere 1.0. These original dimensions include access to information, reciprocity, and commercialization. Papacharissi (2002) does not suggest Internet as a public sphere, merely because it does not directly cause Internet-users to become active in civic engagements. She emphasizes “democracy” of individuals in a public sphere; however new media blurs Papacharissi’s (2002) definitive view of democratic people in a public sphere. One type of new media online that questions her perception of a public sphere is blogging. Papacharissi (2002) offers her ideal of blogging however, according to her definition of a public sphere, denies the fact that blogging is an example how Internet is now facilitating a kind of public sphere. Blogging engages users to become affiliated with content and streaming information. She states that blogs “bear considerable democratizing potential as they provide media consumers with the opportunity to be become media producers” (Papacharissi, p.14). The idea that Internet-users are active, demonstrates the “democracy” and “civic engagement” Papacharissi (2002) defines as a public sphere.
In examining Axel Bruns’s idea of ‘produsage,’ in “Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond,” will further acknowledge Internet as facilitating a type of public sphere in the new media era. Bruns (2008) offers the idea, which he calls produsage, a feedback loop of producer to distributor to consumers who in return produces information themselves. Another way of viewing this idea is that for Internet consumers or users, the media isn’t being “done to them,” instead the consumers become more “actively involved in shaping their own media and network usage” (Bruns, p.15). One way of using the idea of produsage in an online context, are social networking sites. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and MySpace, have become increasingly popular with today’s younger generation. They allow users to actively communicate with other people and form or maintain relationships. Also, the applications of these friendly-networking sites allow events and groups to be made, in which people may meet to further engage in sharing opinions and common interests. Since, new media has allowed people to actively become engaged to civic activities, Papacharissi claim that Internet does not necessarily facilitate a public sphere is highly debatable.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on March 10, 2010 by David Lau
Although I had never heard of this division of the UN, I have much respect for their goals and targets regarding information society. However, as plausible their efforts are, after reading the Declaration of Principles, I can see a number of obstacles. First off, although I may not know exactly the authority the UN holds, in what ways and level of enforcement does this group have. One point in the Declaration of Principles is promoting network security, authenticity, privacy and consumer protection, etc. My question is how is that promoted internationally, with a variety of different types of governments? The idea of censorship as well as freedom of speech and press are some concerns regarding that question internationally. It seems as though the goal of this UN group is to promote safe, reliable, and truthful information via all sorts of media. Another obstacle that may be brought up is Turow’s idea of “produsage” and how media-users themselves are producing information online. It seems there is an immeasurable amount of information streamed through the Internet alone each day. To promote security, reliable information, and privacy seems nearly impossible for every nation.
The WSIS emphasizes the importance of sharing information and having it accessible to everyone. However, what types of information do they not want to be accessible, or blocked. In the Declaration of Principles part A paragraph 2, the WSIS lists its challenges- a number of difficult global affairs. However it seems to “combat aids/HIV” or “eradicate extreme poverty” some information must be deleted or blocked. Since not all information on the World Wide Web is real or credible, this information must be omitted to fulfill these goals. This seems utterly impossible, and may bring up the question, to what extent should outside officials of the UN be allowed to tackle the freedom’s of posting any type of information online, whether it is true or not. These are just a few Rights as a US citizen (freedom of press), and making it a global affair makes these goals seem even more impossible to reach.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | 1 Comment »
Posted on March 4, 2010 by David Lau
Turow’s writing in advertisement with new media deliberately focuses on consumers or audiences rather than a concern of new techologies. This may be due to the assumption that new technology is inevitable. A key idea that Turow seems to emphasize is that marketing/advertising strategies are using new technologies, to receive consumer attention. New technologies that enable advertisers to find behavior and specific information of consumers have become a new way of advertising. Turow’s deliberate effort in not saying changes in marketing research has come from new technologies, illustrates the growing technologies inevitability. And to gain people’s attention, the use of new strategies through these technologies are an absolute must. Turow implies the difficulties and challenges in reaching audiences and consumers’ behaviors over time. One example is the CNN.com who now allows you to customize your webpage so that your desired applications from CNN pop up when you go on the site. This new technology allows the audience to see what they want to see in a simple manner. Turow emphasizes the audiences to illustrate the difficultly in reaching these audiences, and that former-consumers desire products/services in the most convenient ways and also matches what they want specifically. Turow’s thoughts on advertising illustrate that consumers are not necessarily persuaded by new advertisements. He emphasizes the constantly changing behavior of the consumer and that the use of new technology is an absolute must to keep up with consumer needs. New marketing strategies include new technologies. Finding consumer behavior and personality traits effect how consumers decide or choose to look at, which are key in marketing. These new strategies and research Turow highlights the change in consumer behavior, due to new technology and culture change. As a result, marketing research must “tag along” and use new technologies to keep up with consumer behavior.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on February 26, 2010 by David Lau
Although I myself am not a daily Twitter user, many of my friends are. It is an interesting sort of new media in that the main purpose is commenting or posting anything you’d like in limited statements. Many of these statements that I have seen are ridiculous or funny things that have happened to someone or their whereabouts. Some of my friends who are now working and graduated, use Twitter as an advertising site. I think this new sort of media is a great way for people to market and advertise their products/companies. But also, to see what other people may be doing- in the least creepy way possible. Personally, I did not want people knowing what I’m doing 24/7, and if I had Twitter, much of it probably may not be true, which is probably the case for many Twitter-users.
Today, I think new media sites like Twitter, indicate people want to be able to communicate with other people as fast as possible. Not only that, but we also want to know what we’re doing, is similar to what they are doing. Whether we share common interests, or hobbies. I think we are replying more and more on Computer mediated communication and losing that face-to-face interactions with one another. We are being told by these sites on whats popular and what to think about ( agenda-setting theory). I feel Twitter is a way of finding what people are doing with as little effort as possible, and that its “whats everyones doing.”
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
Posted on February 18, 2010 by David Lau
Living in the Internet era has caused drastic changes in our culture and business. However, Lanier makes a firm argument in the Internet and online world falling apart. His criticism on people putting free knowledge into the online world is causing credible innovation to be undermined. Lanier describes this “mob” of online users as undignified people who are streaming “mush” into the Internet world.
Caterina Fake, who mocks fun at the “father of VR” (Lanier), believes otherwise. Her arguments supports the idea that people use Internet and upload various sorts of knowledge into the online world for numerous reasons other than for “their egos and making money.” If we bring Brun’s idea of ‘produsage,’ or Internet consumers giving back to the online world and are producers themselves, there are a number of people who have benefitted from the Internet. Music producers have found many new artists through the Internet. Their knowledge is not “global mush,” or noise, as Lanier would describe. Instead, if we look at Youtube, many of its users have greatly benefited from the site. Some have become famous and others have gained fan bases in music, charity work, and even presidential elections. President Obama used Youtube to stream his campaign, which may have helped lead to his election.
So as to whether, Lanier’s noise, or the knowledge generated from people lacking innovation in the online world is bad, our culture has indeed adopted the Internet and used it in innovated ways for many benefits. There are undoubtedly senseless types of knowledge that is uploaded to the Internet every minute. However, what Lanier needs to do as well as us, is to separate the real “noise” and “mush” from the talent, innovation of online entrepreneurs. I wouldn’t say Barack Obama’s campaign is “World Wide Mush.” Many new music artists have been found through sites like Youtube, Facebook, etc. Internet is a place where people may share their own innovation. It is a means of advertising and seeing what talent people offer in a growing and fast pace culture.
Filed under: Uncategorized | | No Comments »
