The Continued Thoughts of a Wandering Man

Over the weekend I was at a party; during a lull in conversation I pulled out my iPhone. My friend flashed me a weird look before he pointed out that he was the only one in our circle of four who hadn’t reached for their phone. Looking around the room, I found it amusing how many people actually had their phones in hand. Even people out on the dance floor had their phones out.

Reaching for my phone has become like second nature lately. It has actually become a running joke about how often I have my phone out, but until yesterday I didn’t realize how bad it had gotten. Walking around Ithaca in order to do this post, I found myself listening to music while browsing my Twitter feed.

Technology hasn’t simple woven itself into the fabric of our lives, I’d reason that it has become the fabric. Most everything we do centers around technology of varying forms. Stop into CTB and you’ll notice that almost everyone pays with a credit card, look around your classroom or workplace where chances are more than half of your peers are typing away on their laptops, and then there’s the issue of cell phones.

Essentially, we live in a cocoon of new media, which I suppose is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it’s great how plugged in we are. However, we may be so plugged in that we’re tripping over wires trying connect with our fellow man. I’d like to say that I’m going to be more conscientious about my phone usage but that would be a lie. For better or worse, we’ve made this bed and I quite like lying in it.

Rated: from 9 votes

For my post I decided to check out The CW’s Wikipedia page. While I realize that our discussion of the network was fairly limited, and most of it came from me, it’s a topic I know a great deal about. Thus, checking the validity of the article seemed like a reasonable task.

First created in 2006, shortly before the network launched, the article has been edited numerous times by a plethora of individuals. In the last 3 months alone, more than 15 people have edited the page in some respect. The information in the article was solid and well sourced, though some of it was repetitive. This is probably the result of a user editing content without fully reading the text. The discussion page showed a true desire among users to make the entry top notch. But, nothing about it was too surprising.

Overall, looking at this page reinforced what I have already come to expect from Wiki sites. The users who are editing these sites usually do so because they care. In many ways, this makes them easier to digest than a typical encyclopedia article and just as valuable. Obviously, there are cases where this doesn’t hold true; rumor and bias can seep into entries from time to time, but chances are someone will edit them out.

Rated: from 9 votes

How well informed is our generation compared to the undergraduates who came a decade before us? Though I’ve yet to read any of my peers’ opinions on the subject, I feel like I can predict how they’ll tend to answer. The natural response is to say “the internet has opened up a whole new world, so we’re more educated” or “the internet has made the filtration of news simpler, so we’re less educated.” Yet, I’d reason that neither of these responses is the correct response.

Today’s generation is no more or less informed than the last. Just like they had to choose what news to digest, so too do we. For example, everyday I read upwards of 15 entertainment news websites and then I call my brother to discuss the day’s biggest headlines. I may pick up the paper and read the front page, or I might read the homepage of Yahoo, but for the most part I don’t really seek out world news beyond that. This is a conscious decision that I’m making, just like I’m sure they made similar decisions. Some of you may read the entire sports section, or business section, or lifestyle section of a newspaper or website; but, you’ll never look at anything beyond that. 10 years ago people did the same thing.

It all comes back to a matter of personal choice. Yes, the internet has made more information available at the click of a button. And, yes, it makes the filtration of news even easier. But, people have always gone out of their way to filter news that they found uninteresting  and just because all of that info is there doesn’t mean we have the time to digest it.

Rated: from 9 votes

The world of social networking can be a dangerous one. There’s an assumption among America’s youth that they’re safe as long as they’re in the comfort of their own homes, but this isn’t always the case. A few weeks back, I insisted my 14 year old sister delete her Formspring when she began getting harassed on the site. For those of you unfamiliar with the Formspring, it is a new social media tool that allows visitors to ask questions of others…anonymously. That anonymity has attracted a following of teenagers who want to ask questions but remain shielded in a way that sites like Facebook and Myspace don’t offer. However, that same anonymity is also the source of Formspring’s profound problem. When people began harassing my sister she didn’t know who was responsible, and though she assumed it was one of her friends playing a gag, I wasn’t entirely convinced.

In the current internet climate one can never be too careful. Just last month, a 17 year old girl who lived a few towns over from me killed herself because she couldn’t take the harassment she faced on a daily basis. That same harassment followed her onto Formspring and investigators tend to think it may have pushed her over the edge. Internet related deaths are nothing new and they aren’t limited to social networking sites. In 2003, 13 year old Ryan Halligan committed suicide after talking with another boy in a chat room, who encouraged him to end his life. Obviously, in both cases the internet wasn’t the sole cause of their deaths but it did play a part.

Even Facebook, a site that’s been criticized for being too conservative in it definition of pornography, falls victim to the disgusting nature of human beings. Back in February pictures of 12 year old Australian boy Elliot Fletcher found their way onto the site shortly after he was slain. These pictures weren’t in memoriam, but rather photos showing acts of child sexual abuse, bestiality and torture. Facebook removed them soon after but the breach shows that even they are not infallible.

Yet, despite all of the negatives that these websites present, there are enough positives to outweigh them. I, myself, have a twitter, a Facebook, a MySpace, a LinkedIn, and my writing can be found across the internet if you search my name. Social Networking is an invaluable tool when used correctly and one that I simply can refrain from engaging in. And, judging by the recent statistics revealing that social networks have dethroned porn as the internet’s most  common activity, I’m not alone. The key is too remain vigilant rather than accept the internet as a playground for depravity, so that the next generation can benefit even more from it.

Rated: from 8 votes

It’s easy to look at produsage from a financial standpoint because facts and figures are harder to dispute, but the sociological effects of produsage are equally important. “When you have everyone collaborate on everything, you generate a dull, average outcome in all things. You don’t get innovation,” says Jaron Lanier about the recent development. But, Yale University’s Yochai Benkler has postulated that participation in commons-based peer production systems may lead to a more virtuous society. Unlike Lanier, Benkler believes that participation in websites like Wikipedia teach discipline, since they require editors to adopt a style that fits with the rest of text and the site as a whole. Moreover, Benkler thinks we’re breeding a society of selfless individuals since creative commons tend to benefit a community rather than the individual.

Rated: from 6 votes

The goals laid out by The Information Society Summit in their Declaration of Principles are quite ambitious, and in many ways admirable, but equally unrealistic. Section 19 of the Declaration reads “We are resolute in our quest to ensure that everyone can benefit from the opportunities that ICTs can offer. We agree that to meet these challenges, all stakeholders should work together to: improve access to information and communication infrastructure and technologies as well as to information and knowledge; build capacity; increase confidence and security in the use of ICTs; create an enabling environment at all levels; develop and widen ICT applications; foster and respect cultural diversity; recognize the role of the media; address the ethical dimensions of the Information Society; and encourage international and regional cooperation.” But, as wonderful as that idea may seem to some, there are too many capitalist nations involved in this summit to take it seriously. Given the current economic climate, why would the United States want other countries to benefit? Groups like these are usually a huge failure; because, every country has their own best interest in mind. This is why I’m firmly opposed to the United Nations too. With 175 different opinions, they’re doomed from the outset.

However, I do think that some of the goals listed here are achievable.  I know computers are being delivered to third world nations, so disenfranchised individuals can have an opportunity to better themselves. So, in that respect they have already achieved their goal to “empower the poor, particularly those living in remote, rural and marginalized urban areas, to access information and to use ICTs as a tool to support their efforts to lift themselves out of poverty.” Continuing to achieve goals like this are what the Summit would be best suited for, and it’s what they should focus on.

Rated: from 7 votes

When people talk about the way new technologies have penetrated the market, it becomes second nature to say that the internet changed everything. This is predominantly because relying on the internet as a scapegoat/savior is easier than truly evaluating the situation at hand. Turow, however, knows better than this. In his piece “Audience Construction and Culture Production: Marketing Surveillance in the Digital Age,” Turow focuses on the construction of the consumer rather than the construction of the internet because that’s how marketing has worked for decades.

Marketing to a specific audience is hardly a new idea, the internet simply allows marketers to know that audience better. This really isn’t all that different from mailing lists, insomuch as you’re receiving advertising based on your previous experiences. Back in the 1960′s advertising was all about reaching people through the television, as you can see in this clip from Mad Men. But, in an age of DVRing and working women this isn’t practical anymore. Turow acknowledges that the world is simply more fast paced and, to keep up with that pace, advertising executives have constructed more precise character bios to impress their ads upon. It’s inevitable that the we’re marketed to will evolve over time but it will likely become even more precise, and is that such a bad thing?

Rated: from 12 votes

Unlike many of my classmates, I love Twitter and all of its quirks. I use it to network and I like gaining followers. Follow me @IamWesley

Rated: from 3 votes

The more I hear people talk about Twitter, the more I realize that they don’t really understand what its purpose is. I was excited to hear Professor Humphreys’ lecture about the social networking device but, somewhere around the 20 minute mark, I realized that even she didn’t really understand what Twitter’s purpose was. Twitter isn’t about keeping a diary like women did in the 1800′s, it’s not meant to link us the way that Facebook does, and wasn’t created for people to talk about what they had for breakfast… per say. I bring up breakfast because it’s the default example that folks who fail to comprehend the wonders of Twitter throw around.

So, what is the purpose of Twitter? Yes, Twitter is a public discourse and that’s an integral aspect of the website but to me Twitter is more about networking than anything else. Unlike Facebook where my friends are composed of people that I know fairly well, I know very few of my 200 some odd followers on Twitter. This is partially why I prefer Twitter, because it offers me the chance to extend my brand. Through Twitter I’ve been offered the chance to speak with lots of new people. Just this past week, I got the chance to speak with Life Unexpected creator Liz Tigelaar while I was watching her show on The CW. I found out that she attended Ithaca College and has strong ties to the area, to me discourse like this defines Twitter.

There are people on Twitter who treat it like a Facebook status update and I suppose that’s fine, but they won’t grow their follower count. If 14 year old girls want to talk about Justin Beiber with other like minded individuals, good for them. If people want to show their enthusiasm over American Idol contestant Andrew Garcia, good for him. Twitter offers the opportunity to do that. Right now “Health Care Summit” which, like Beiber, I would never talk about is trending. I understand why other people might want to talk about it over Twitter, they want to reinforce their own beliefs and honestly that doesn’t bother me. Issues like this also illustrate why the character limit is so important, because it prevents people from going off on rants. If you want to rant about this or that, get a blog! Twitter isn’t really about that… unless you’re director Kevin Smith.

In summation, I might be a Twitter addict but god dammit I love Twitter! So, if you feel inclined to follow me that’s cool, with every new follower gained I feel a personal sense of validation.

Andrew Garcia – Straight Up

Rated: from 7 votes

When you’re looking at a two sided argument like the one at hand, it seems like a cop out to say that both sides are correct. And yet, that’s exactly what I find myself doing. User generated content is a double edged sword and those who see only one side of that sword are destined to be impaled by the other.

Jaron Lanier said something that struck me in his piece in reference to a so-called old media, television. Lanier wrote “But I was also part of a circle of friends who tried to imagine how computers would fit into the peoples’ lives, including how people might make a living in the future. Our dream came true, in part. It turns out that millions of people are ready to contribute instead of sitting passively on the couch watching television.” This quote is ignorant in that it undervalues the medium of television and also fails to account for the ways in which new media has embraced discussions about television. User generated content has helped me reach out to other television critics and executives. It has helped me network. And, it may help me get a job when I leave Cornell University. So, while he seems to think people creating the content in question are denigrating themselves, I actually stand to benefit tremendously from social networking.

But sometimes the democratic nature of the internet can be problematic. Case in point, a few weeks ago fans of the NBC series Chuck were up in arms about a recent development in the show. These fans felt a misplaced sense of entitlement because they helped save the show last spring when it was in danger, by buying Subway sandwiches. One ridiculous fan even suggested boycotting the show until the collective mass got what they wanted. Before fans could take to the internet and create content to express their disappointment in television they has less of an impact. But now, because so many people are connected through the internet, the show’s executive producers, Josh Schwartz and Chris Fedak, actually felt the need to speak out about the topic. Said Schwartz “We don’t feel we have to defend what we did. We wouldn’t take it back, we wouldn’t change anything.”

I found this particularly upfront and honest, it’s a tactic that we should all embrace with the creation of user generated content as well. You can spout off online all you want but that doesn’t mean anyone has to listen, or value your thoughts. Everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt these days but I’m OK with that. We’ve gone too far to go back now, so it’s best we except the current state of things and move forward accordingly.

Rated: from 9 votes