LEARNING!

Troughout the class, I have learned new ways to interpret new media. This class helped me understand the meanings behind new media such as blogs, social networking websites, computers, virtual communities, YouTube videos, etc. I learned that depending on what perspective/lens you take, there are different ways to interpret things. For example, McLuhan thought that the medium is the message and that technology created a new society and new social conditions. From the viewpoint of Williams, however, technology shouldn't be viewed as a cause-effect situation. Instead he argues that new needs/possibilities led to the development of certain technologies. Another example good example of the whole lens thing is the Kaycee Nicole Swenson article about skeptics and optimists in virtual communities. It's all a matter of perspective!!


My favorite thing about the class was probably the two major projects. It was a lot of work (O__o) BUT, I ended up learning a lot of interesting facts. I especially enjoyed the Facebook Project since it made me do a whole self reflection process. I am glad I can do a Facebook Cleanse now and be more cautious of what I post rather than find in out in the future that a company didn't hire me because of a stupid picture or updateI posted on my wall.


My least favorite thing was probably finding an interesting new media article to write about. It always took me awhile to find an article that I liked and I thought was relevant somehow to our class. It's not that I didn't like the assignment it just was really time consuming for me! It was hard to find an article that wasn't about Facebook or the Iphone!

What's Interesting??

I found the “Bus Uncle” article we read this week to be really interesting since it provided me with a new perspective on YouTube videos. I have always viewed viral videos on YouTube as mere entertainment pieces but after reading this article, it is obvious that there is much more to these videos. As Chu explained, YouTube videos are a specific form of public opinion known as collective behavior (pg 338). Viewers and consumers of the videos could re-create and rework the videos to become producers (aka “prosumers”) during moments when norms/conventions are unclear or challenged (339). Additionally, I thought the concept of collective behavior was interesting because it was easy for me to see how blogs and wikis could be classified as collective behavior but it never occurred to me to view YouTube videos that way. The Bus Uncle case, however, emphasizes how YouTube videos serve as a public space and how it could be seen as a cultural public sphere. 


Another reading which I thought was fascinating was the one about the Kaycee Nicole Swenson hoax. To re-iterate what I wrote in a previous post, I enjoyed the fact that this article explains that the events/actions in virtual communities should be seen as lying on a continuum rather than being viewed as either representing the good side of the internet or the evil side of the internet. When we get pass viewing things as being black or white, I think we can learn a lot about the gray stuff in the middle which is usually where the interesting stuff occurs. 

Virtual Death

This has to be my favorite article of the whole semester. I thought it was a really interesting, as well as informative read. From this article, I learned about the relationship between computers, communities, and communication. Using the Kaycee Nicole Swenson hoax, Jordan investigated how participants engaged in debates with one another over the topic of identity and what it meant in a virtual community, specifically after a crisis. Depending on a person’s perspective, he/she interpreted the situation differently: "Trust became the rhetorical vessel used to distinguish and evaluate the types of communal activity that emerged in response to Kaycee's death and Debbie's confession." (213). For example, as a skeptic, I would see the hoax as the perfect example of why trust cannot be formed on the internet. As an optimist, however, I would interpret the situation as one in which I learned a good lesson. Yes, I was fooled but in the end, I was still able to connect to other community members despite the evils done by the hoaxer.


Now I just want to go over some parts of the article which I found both fascinating and enlightening. First, some individuals see hoaxes such as the Kaycee Nicole Swenson one as representing the "dark side" of the net. These incidents are seen as "self contained" events, rather than as a moment in a virtual community's continuum (202). I thought this was a very good point. Often times when I think about the internet, I view it in binary terms instead of on a continuum. Second, Jordan brought up a good point about how on the internet, "the standard seems to be more about consistency than absolute certainty." (204). A person's online identity is only viable if it is convincing to another individual. Thus, on the net, a person's identity is more about acceptance then authenticity.

World Wide Web

This article is very technical in nature and it discusses the idea of the World Wide Web. It begins by explaining that the World Wide Web was created to be a sort of information and knowledge center, where individuals could share their ideas and projects. It then continues by describing how the World Wide Web works (i.e. HTTP). Additionally, the article states that HTML is the common basic language of interchange for hypertext on the World Wide Web. However, files do not need to be stored in HTML. To continue the article, the authors then compare and contrast WAIS, Gopher, and the World Wide Web, which are all popular network information projects. The article finally ends by stating the future of the World Wide Web and where it's going.

The design goal of the World Wide Web was to be a pool of knowledge. Clearly like the introduction to the article states, the World Wide Web has exceeded this goal since it has done much more than just provide information. I am sure no one could have imagined how personalized our computers would become and how much it would affect our social relationships with each other. So although I thought this article was completely bland and very boring to read now in 2011, it was still nice to read about how the World Wide Web began. It's interesting to know how we started and think about where we are now. This article really helped me realize how far we have come in the last 17 years. 

End of Books

From Robert Coover's article, I learned about hypertext which "describe(s) the writing done in the nonlinear of nonsequential space made possible by the computer" (1992, 706). With the creation of hypertext, Coover believed that books would be replaced since hypertext allowed for "true freedom from the tyranny of the line" (706). Additionally, the most revolutionary aspect of hypertext is that it's interactive so readers and writers are both co-learners and co-writers. Also because it is interactive, readers have the opportunity to organize the texts however he/she so chooses. 


The most interesting part of the article for me was the section where Coover discussed how hypertext supporters think that the greatest events in the history of literacy are the invention of writing, the invention of movable type, and the invention of hypertext. I thought this was a very bold proclamation and I can't say that I disagree with this idea. I especially enjoyed George P. Ladow's quote, "It [hypertext] promises or (threatens) to produce effects on our culture, particularly on our literature, education, criticism, and scholarship, just as radical as those produced by Gutenberg's movable type" (706). Indeed the world wide web, which is based off hypertext,  has led to radical changes in the world. 


To be honest, I didn't enjoy this article very much. I thought the idea of the article was cool but I didn't enjoy Coover's writing style. I am sure, however, that his article was pretty revolutionary at the time just like the Dynabook and Man-Computer Symbiosis one.  

Applying to Grad School? Clean up your Facebook!

Looking to go to grad school? Well you better clean up your Facebook before you apply! Not only are companies pre-screening their potential employees, but according to this article on MSNBC, top law schools, business schools, and colleges are pre-screening applicants via the web as well.

Kaplan Test Prep surveyed admissions officers at various prestigious schools and discovered that law schools pre-screened applicants the most. The data showed that 41% of law school admission officers said they have looked up an applicant on Google to find out more about them. Another 37% stated in the survey that they have used social networking sites such as Facebook to check up on an applicant looking to be a future lawyer . The most interesting finding from the survey, however, was the fact that 1/3 of law school admission officers who looked up an applicant online said they discovered “something that negatively impacted an applicant’s admissions chances.”

In my eyes, it’s better to be safe than sorry! Whether you are applying to business school, college, or law school, it would benefit you to not put damaging photographs and information about yourself online if you're planning on furthering your education. I am sure the number of colleges using Google and social networking sites will increase over the years so watch what you post online especially on Facebook!  I mean, with admissions being so competitive nowadays, I am sure it’s extremely hard to differentiate the applicants from each other. One quick way to help eliminate applicants is to Google them and see how they carry themselves in "real life". Personally, I don't think it's fair to include an individual's digital profile in the admissions process but whoever said life is fair? haha =/

another article about facebook ....

Blogging: Self Presentation and Privacy

McCullagh begins by stating that “privacy” involves a variety of different issues and because of this, there is no single definition of “privacy”. She then continues by providing DeCew’s cluster concept of privacy, which she believes provides a useful concept for her study on bloggers and their sense of privacy. DeCew’s cluster concept consists of three aspects of privacy: (1) information privacy; (2) accessibility privacy; and (3) expressive privacy. 


Additionally, McCullagh provides five main findings of her study, based on an online survey that was completed by 1,314 respondents. First, the survey showed that bloggers value self expression and social interaction. Many bloggers used blogging as a medium for self-reflection. Second, it was clear that bloggers value privacy. Because of this, there were many categories that bloggers found too personal to post about (i.e. sex/relationship, financial information, etc.). Third, bloggers are aware of privacy risks. Therefore, some bloggers tried to preserve their anonymity by restricting personally identifiable information about themselves. Fourth, blogs are perceived to be public spaces. Many bloggers expressed that privacy and anonymity was not possible on the internet, and the more accessible a blog was then the more it was considered to be public. Finally, the survey showed that bloggers employ different mechanisms to protect their privacy. One example is that some individuals password protect their blog so that only certain people have access to it. 


While reading this article, I of course thought a lot about Facebook. Many of the categories which bloggers stated were too personal to write about online, I have found many of my friends updating about! Twitter and Facebook I believe has made it very hard (if not impossible) for people to separate their private life from their other lives (work life, school life, etc). So while a lot of people in the study listed topics they wouldn't write about, I am sure many of them have contradicted themselves and done what they said they would not do. Because of this, I found McCullagh's implications at the beginning of the study to be quite important since "it is well documented that people's perceptions of their own behavior can differ from how they actually behave" (7).