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). 

Navigating Technomedia

In this article, Han discusses the concept of “technomedia.” Before the internet age, technology and media were considered distinct from each other. With the advancement and evolution of the internet, however, the two entities did not replace each other but rather they connected to each other to form a fluid relationship. An example of technomedia that the article presented was the mobile phone. While in the 1990s, the cellular phone was used just for phone communication,  today with the invention of Iphones, Blackberrys, etc., we use our phones to sent texts, browse the net, watch videos on Youtube etc. 


Additionally, Han continues the chapter by providing a brief history of technology and media. He explains that there are four eras: Mechanical, Electric, Broadcast, and Virtual. To end the chapter, Han explains how information systems and communications systems are no longer distinct from each other as it was in the past. Thus, he again emphasizes the idea of technomedia and writes: “It challenges thought and pushes it toward the future.” After reading this quote, I was reminded of the Occupy Movement that is going on right now. The Occupy Movement has greatly used the internet and specifically social networking to communicate with other protesters about where they are meeting up and what's occurring at the camping sights, as well as to communicate to supporters and the world about their views/beliefs. The internet therefore is not only allowing for communication between different people but it is also helping people challenge thought and hopefully move towards a more equal tomorrow. 

Personal Dynamic Media

From this article, I learned about the Dynabook, a personal dynamic medium created by the Learning Research Group at Xerox PARC. The Dynabook was intended to input and output information much like a human’s sensory system and the goal of the research group was to examine how each individual could manipulate the Dynabook according to their own needs/wishes. The article, therefore, offers a variety of examples of simulations that different users created.

While the ideas of this article are nothing special nowadays, they were quite revolutionary in the 1970s. I often forget to realize how far technology has come in the past few decades. Because of this, I thought this article was a very interesting read since it allowed me to see how the personal computer started off.   Additionally, I enjoyed reading the various simulations created by a variety of uses. I was especially amazed at how children were able to program the machine. Finally, the most useful part of the article for me was the conclusion which contained a lot of important implications. Goldberg and Kay discussed several different ways that the Dynabook could be used by different professionals and I am sure that today, many of them have used their personal computers/laptops for these specific purposes and much more.

Facebook < Sex

Cosmo magazine did a study to see if women would rather give up sex or Facebook for a week. According to this article, 2,000 women were surveyed and a surprising 20% said they would rather give up sex rather than miss out on Facebooking for a week! Another surprising finding was from a survey conducted by TeleNav. 514 participants were included in the study and nearly 1/3 of them said that they would sacrifice sex for a week over giving up their phones. Finally, MSNBC added a live poll to the article and out of 4,829 voters who participated in the poll, 13% said they would give up sex for a week over Facebook. 


I am actually not surprised by these findings. Technology definitely plays a more prominent role in our lives today, especially our social lives, so of course it would have some affect on our carnal relations!! I remember when Myspace was very popular and I must admit I was completely addicted to it. I actually had a bet with my boyfriend to see who could refrain from logging on to our accounts the longest. I won but we both only last a little over a week haha 


In conclusion, this article was very entertaining and it goes to show how strong the relationship is between computers and humans when some humans choose their computer over a significant other! I wonder if the number of people who choose their Facebook over sex will increase in number in the next few years.


CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE!

Second Life

From the 2nd Life article, I learned about virtual worlds and what occurs in them. I have never engaged in any type of virtual environment so this article was a bit of a shock to me. Despite the shock, however, I did enjoy reading about how games and research can connect to one another. I have always viewed games as only being a form of entertainment but after reading this article, it became clear to me that games have a lot more to offer than just being a good pastime. From this article, I specifically learned about how a culture’s ideas about gender are performed, produced, and portrayed in the virtual world. The article also taught me about how technical skills and economics influenced a person's construction and performance of gender in the virtual world. 


What I find the most useful in the article is the fact that the researchers acknowledged their “own situated perspective.”  An individual’s situation/position affects his/her interpretation of an event, story, etc so I enjoyed the fact that the researchers pointed this out.  Furthermore, I found the idea of a collaborative project to be quite useful. The researchers were obviously engaging in a world they are not use to so in a way they were foreigners. But because they both could talk to each other about their encounters, I think it relieved a lot of stress they must have felt while conducting their research. Based on the ethnographic books I have read, it can be quite difficult for researchers to embark into a "new" world so I definitely believe that collaborative projects have a lot of benefits. 

Just Me Only Better

I have never engaged in virtual environments so I was fascinated to learn that there were few non-human avatars in Multi-User Virtual Environments like Second Life. I also found the idea of the users having three bodies very interesting: the imagined body, the physical body, and the digital body. Although the three bodies are connected with each other, there’s also a disconnect between them because the avatars have dimensions that are unattainable in real life. Because of this, I am very curious about the well-being of the people who participate in MUVEs (e.g. their level of self esteem).

Additionally, the most useful part of Fragoso and Rosario’s article is the section about Erwin Goffman and his ideas. Goffman emphasized the idea of “performance.” He believed that an individual portrayed certain impressions when he/she interacted with other people (i.e. the front stage). This is very similar to the avatars on MUVEs since users choose characteristics that they believe are easily identifiable to other users. Thus, they choose stereotypical indicators.

Moreover, I was not all that surprised when the study found that a majority of users chose avatars that contained a Caucasian standard of beauty. I also was not shocked to find out that often times the avatars had over-exaggerated characteristics (e.g large breast and tiny waists), which would be impossible to biological possess in the offline world. After all, look at the toys girls were grown up with --> Barbie. From the very beginning, Barbie had unrealistic dimensions. I’m sure most of you know that if Barbie was a real life woman, she wouldn’t be able to walk! Now let’s move onto G.I. Joe. Over the past decades, G.I. Joe has undergone a major transformation --> G.I. Joe

Finally, I think it would be interesting for the researchers to study the Mii characters people create on the Wii. I wonder if the results would be similar to the ones in this study.

Women > Men

An internet telecommunication company, Rebtel, surveyed 2,361 about their communications habits and much like the “Antecedents and Consequences of OSN Behavior: The Case of Facebook” article, the company discovered that more women use social media to keep in touch than men. The survey found that only 54% of men use social media to engage with friends, while 68% of women use social media websites to connect with friends. When it came to staying connected with family, the statistics were even lower! 60% of women use websites like Twitter and Facebook to maintain their relationships with their family, as opposed to 42% of men!

The statistic which I found the most shocking and fascinating, however, was the break down of the methods of communication that the participants used to communicate with friends. What was at the top of the list? Phone? Nope, it was email! Email emerged as the most popular way of communicating with friends. About 83% of the respondents used email followed by 74% of people using the phone and 61% of people using social networks.  (Click HERE for a pretty graph).

I am very surprised that email beat out the phone because to me, emails are a bit impersonal. The only reason I've sent an email to a friend is because they live abroad and calling is too expensive. After reading the article, I am very curious about the study sample. Were the participants in the study undergraduate students like the Antecedents and Consequences article??  The population that Rebtel chose to include (or even exclude) in their study could greatly affect the results of the study.

Nonetheless, the article was still very interesting to me.

Wanna Read The Article?

Technology and the Society

From the Williams article, I learned about how technology should not be viewed as a cause and effect situation where culture and society is seen as a by product of technology. Williams is thus arguing against McLuhan’s idea. Instead, Williams believes that there is a complex interaction between needs and inventions where the latter was intended to fulfill society’s new needs. In other words, technology did not create a new society or new social conditions as McLuhan believed but rather, the changes in society, such as the transformation of industrial development, led to new needs and possibilities which ultimately led to the creation of new technological advancement. In a way, McLuhan’s and Williams’ argument is like the chicken and the egg dilemma.


Personally, the most useful idea that I took from the article lies in the very first paragraph of Williams’ article. He writes, “we have got so used to statements of this general kind, in our most ordinary discussions, that we can fail to realize their specific meaning.” After reading this, it made me think about all the metaphors, phrases, etc I use daily without even thinking about it. I’ve gotten so use to saying things like “ooh I love that dress” or “ooh I love it” that I’ve forgotten the implications behind the word, “love.” I hear the word such much in ordinary life that I fail to think twice before using it.

To tie this back to the class, I started to think about how I often go on to check my Facebook without even thinking about what I am doing. Therefore, it's not only our words but also our actions that we fail to analyze. It's just interesting to think about how when something becomes routine or "ordinary" we fail to look for the specific meanings behind it. Yes, I go on Facebook to check my friends' updates and to post comments etc but is that all I'm doing? Based on all the Facebook articles we've read, of course not! I'm not just uploading new pictures and posting check-ins, I am portraying my identity. I don't know if anyone else finds this interesting but it for sure tripped me out a bit! The article really made me think critically for a minute which is good since I'm often so busy that I fail to connect all the dots in my life.

Community Media

The first main idea I got from the article was about community media and how it belongs within the sphere of civil society since it is created by groups of people that have something to say or groups of people that share an interest. Additionally, community media involves self expression since it allows for both the individual and the community to represent themselves and their ideas. While these ideas may not be accepted by the people in power, community media still has a significant role in society in that it empowers people and has implications for democracy since it allows for the public to participate and put their ideas into the mix of concerns.


This brings me to the second main idea of the article which is about democracy. I think this quote summarizes it up the best: “Community media also shows us that not everyone thinks the same way we do. It brings to the surface opinions and activities that we may not agree with. We might not want to know the people who think differently from us, but if we are able to see their thoughts and opinions on a more regular - and personal -  basis, we might be less surprised by the world. And the democratic process would at least appear to be working, even when it didn’t go our way.” In other words, community media allows all of us to engage in discussions with one another even if we all have different opinions. It is a democratic process since it allows for all voices to be expressed and heard, even if only one voice dominates in the end. I agree with the author of the article when they wrote that the issue of communication is probably the reason why voters feel so disconnected to the government. It’s not necessarily that they believe that their ideas should be adopted but they want to at least put their two cents in.  Thus, a lot of times at town meetings, some people come to voice their opinions even though they know they will probably lose.


Finally, the article states that community media sometimes leads to "immensely useful, far reaching, and innovative things." An example of this that comes to mind is the situation in Egypt. Anyways, I want to end my blog with a quote from Margaret Mead which I think ties in perfectly with this reading: ""Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has." 

Through Uses and Gratification Theory

From the article by Urista et al., I learned about the uses and gratification perspective, which states that “people will choose media according to their expectations and their drive to attain a gratifying experience” (Urista et al 2008, pg 220).  In other words, this perspective focuses on people as consumers of media and it examines what people do with media such as where they go and what they look at. Thus, this perspective gives people an active role since its goal is to determine how people use media to fulfill their wants and needs.

Using a uses and gratifications framework, researchers conducted several focus groups in order to gauge more information about how SNS like Myspace and Facebook fulfill the needs and wants of college students. Five major themes of why the participants use SNS to fulfill their wants/needs emerged at the end of the study: (1) efficient communication, (2) convenient communication, (3) curiosity about others, (4) popularity, and (5) relationship formation and reinforcement.  Thus, SNS was found to satisfy specific personal and interpersonal gratifications that the participants sought. Additionally, SNS serve as a powerful medium for participants because they are efficient, convenient, and allow participants the opportunity to seek approval and support of other people in their network.

I thought this article was very interesting since it gave me another perspective on how to analyze media. While McLuhan’s article focused more on how the medium of media influences people, this article focuses on how people use media and what they do to/with it. Reflecting on all the readings then, I see media and consumers engaged in a feedback loop where they both influence one another.

Medium Is the Message

In McLuhan’s article, he states that the medium is the message and that any medium virtually serves as an extension of ourselves (McLuhan 203). He argues that any analysis of media that focuses primarily on just the content of the message is both incorrect and incomplete because it causes us to neglect analyzing the medium itself. Additionally, McLuhan uses the example of the electric light to further explain his argument that the medium is the message. He states that it is the medium itself that “shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action” (203). In other words, McLuhan is arguing that the medium influences our minds, thoughts, and bodies even though we don’t realize it. Therefore, McLuhan states that humans must also pay attention to the medium of the message if we are to truly understand how media or technology is influencing us both consciously and unconsciously.

  Furthermore, I’m gonna go back to the concept of extensions. Some parts of McLuhan’s article were too philosophical for me but with the help of Google, I was able to grasp McLuhan’s idea of extension. McLuhan believed that every creation was an extension of ourselves. In a way then, the electric light is an extension of our eyes since it helps us to see when it is dark. While extensions/technology has contributed positively to our lives, McLuhan believes that we often forget to think about and realize the negative results of extensions (e.g. McLuhan states in his 1st paragraph about how automation led to the lost of jobs). In conclusion when analyzing media, we must not only examine the message itself and the medium, but we must also explore the cons of such mediums as well.

     Using an example from my personal life, I will talk a little about Fbook. Almost 99% of the time when I read my friend's updates, I simply take it for what it is. If my friend posts about how hung over she/he is, I would conclude that he/she had a very fun time last night. But by analyzing only the literal meaning of the message though, I am in essence not realizing how Fbook itself and the computer is influencing not only my life, but her life as well (and everyone else who sees his/her message). In the end, I am failing to realize that the computer is serving as an extension of myself, specifically my mind and psyche, since  I am putting my own thoughts and feelings on there for my friends to see.

Hypercasual: When the Web Gets a Little Too Friendly

I thought this article was a perfect fit for our class especially since we have been reading about projecting one’s identify and self online, specifically through social networking websites.

The article I chose is from Business Week and it describes the recent trend of companies trying to be cutesy, casual, and “ordinary.” Bobbie Johnson, the author, discusses how companies have lowered their standards when it comes to social media and have used an overly friendly voice which he refers to as hyper-casual. In other words, companies have noticed how online users are using blogger lexicon and have taken a more casual stance online, and the companies are thus trying to catch on to the trend and capitalize off of it. In the end, however, instead of sounding friendly, Johnson believes that the companies come off as flippant. One specific example he uses is how his friend in London noticed that her bank had a poll on the front page of its website, asking customers who their favorite A-Team character is. Although the bank was in essence trying to be more relatable to its customers and more friendly, the bank ended up coming off as unprofessional.

We have obviously learned and are still learning about how we project our personal and social identities online. In a way then, we are projecting our personalities online as well. Companies also use the media to project their identities. Do companies also use to media to project their personalities then? Is projecting an identity the same as projecting a personality? I do not know if I am asking the right questions but it's sure interesting to think about. After thinking about everything, I think the bank was unsuccessful in its attempts to sound friendly because of the voice it used. I think the bank had the right idea but they took the wrong approach. I guess individuals aren't the only ones that should worry about how they project themselves online! In a way, companies are just like people in that they forget that usually it's not what you say but how you say it and when the computer acts as a medium, I think it's easy to forget how important the delivery is!


What would you think if you logged onto view your online bank statement and you were asked who your favorite A-Team character is? Would it bother you or would you not even notice that the bank had hopped on the hyper casual train?

Here's the link in case anyone is interested in reading the article -->   Hypercasual ... w00t! 

Online Social Networking Behavior: Facebook

In Acar’s study, he explores the question of whether or not Online Social Network Services (OSNS) are different from real life social networks. He examines Facebook, an Online Social Network (OSN), in order to gain further knowledge about online social networking behavior. Specifically, he applies social network theory into Facebook.com usage and he addresses issues like self-esteem, body image, anxiety, extroversion, and gender (Acar 64).


Acar had a total of 6 hypotheses in his research, four of which were rejected and two of which were accepted after running several quantitative analyses. I will only mention the findings I thought were the most interesting. First, I learned that the size of an average online social network is larger than the size of a real life social network in a contemporary western society. While the former contains 217 members, the average number of members in a real life social network was only about 124.9. Additionally, I found out that online social networking size (OSN size) did not have a significant effect on a person’s anxiety level. The number of OSN memberships was also found to not have a significant effect on an individual’s anxiety level. Acar, however, did find a significant relationship between OSN size and extroversion. Specifically, people with higher levels of extroversion spent more time social networking and had more contacts in their online networks than introverts. Furthermore, from Acar’s study I learned that that females had more members in their online social networks and spent more time on the net for social networking than men. I actually found this finding to be the most interesting because I would have hypothesized that men spend more time than women online for social networking. For some reason I picture more men on the computer searching to make friends online (specifically female friends) than the other way around but I guess I'm wrong!

After reading the article, I think it would be interesting to investigate why online social networks are larger than real life ones. Acar mentions several reasons in his conclusion at the end of the article but these are of course only proposed factors that he thinks has influenced the size of online social networks.

Hacked NBC Twitter

I searched around the different Media websites and when I clicked on the CNN - Tech site, immediately this article caught my eye, “Hacked NBC Twitter Feed Falsely Reports NYC Attack.”

Apparently some hackers got into NBC News’ Twitter account and posted three tweets saying that a plane was high jacked and that Ground Zero was attacked again.

I was so disgusted when I read this article especially since I just recently watched a special on NBC about the children of the men and women who were lost on 9/11. I really hope these hackers are criminally prosecuted. Don’t get me wrong! I’m all for freedom of speech but the actions of these hackers is as irresponsible as shouting fire in a crowded theatre!

Hmm ... I guess I often forget that the internet has a bad side to it. Does anyone in the class watch the show “Criminal Minds?” After reading this article from CNN, it reminded me of a quote that one of the characters said during the show: “The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn’t understand … The largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had.”

Man-Computer Symbiosis

So, I read the first two pages of the article and thought to myself, "What the heck is this guy on?” Then I went back and noticed that it was written in 1960! Haha I should have known it wasn’t a recent publication though since the title is "Man-Computer Symbiosis" and not "Human-Computer Symbiosis!" :p

Anyway, what I learned from the article was the concept of how Licklider believed that humans and computers could engage in a symbiotic relationship with each other. I actually have never thought of it that way before so it was an interesting concept for me, and I would definitely classify my own relationship with my computer as a symbiotic relationship. I think a majority of people today would do the same since so many of us rely on our computers for our day-to-day activities. (Oh btw, even though I would classify my relationship with my computer as symbiotic, I don’t think I would use that term. For some reason, using that technical term scares me since it reminds me of the movie, “I, Robot!” LOL)

Finally, what is the most interesting to me about the article is how ahead of his time Licklider was since this article was written decades ago. Licklider envisioned a relationship where computers would be able to greatly contribute to such things as the formulative parts of technical problems (Licklider 1960, 3).  Today, computers have done just that and so much more. Hmm, I wonder how Licklider would react if he saw the relationship humans have with their computers today! I suspect he would a little bit shocked but would probably point at his colleagues who laughed at him and thought he was crazy and say, “I told you so!” hahaha

Quality of Online Social Relationships

2). Respond to the article,  Quality of Online Social Relationships.  Please highlight 2 or 3 main ideas from the article and discuss them. While discussing the main ideas, try to relate one or two of these ideas back to personal experience.  


In Cummings et al. article, “The Quality of Online Social Relationships,” researchers examined the quality of offline, as well as online social interaction & relationships. In the 1st study presented by the researchers, bankers were asked to evaluate the value of certain communication sessions. The findings from this study showed that bankers believed that communication by email was less useful for creating/maintaining working relationships than face-to-face contact and phone conversations. 


Based on personal experience, I did not find the findings from this study to be all that surprising. While using emails for work related matters are convenient, when it comes to service economies (e.g. banks, hair salons, etc), I believe personal interactions are extremely crucial and it’s often impossible to create and maintain personal, intimate interactions via email. I mean, if I had $70,000 in the bank and I had important questions regarding the money, I definitely wouldn’t email some random person at the bank! Plus, chances are that I would receive a faster answer by going to the bank and speaking with a representative myself versus sending an email (and waiting hours or even days for a response) or calling the bank (and being put on hold and transferred a billion times)! 


Another main idea from the article is that the “frequency of communication predicted psychological closeness for offline relationships, but not for online ones” (Cummings et al. 2000, pg 12). I didn’t find this to be shocking either since I usually only email people I do not really want to see in person or talk to on the phone hahaha :p 

Introductory Post

Hello everyone =)

I'm from the Los Angeles area. I graduated from UCLA with a B.A. in Anthropology and I'm currently an Applied Anthro grad student at SJSU. I do not have much communication experience as I've only taken 1 communication course during my undergraduate years. However, I am very excited to be enrolled in this course since I'm hoping it will help strengthen my master's project. Furthermore, something interesting about me is that this past summer I interned at Homeboy Industries and I will be conducting my master's project there this fall. If you haven't heard of the organization, check them out!