Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Catfish

Due Tues. a blog posting giving your analysis of "catfish" how does it fit in to our larger discussions of democratized media and web 2.0?

In class we've discussed how web 2.0 is a socialized form of web 1.0. The static consistency of web 1.0 is a very clear depiction of news and information one is supposed to see by professional reporters. Web 2.0 is more user generated information which we have discussed has much controversy over its legitimacy and credibility. Catfish is a perfect example of web 2.0 generated information that lacks credibility and borderline is illegal due to identity privacy.

In Catfish a woman portrays at least 15 other people on Facebook, a social media site, and pretends that they are real and posting comments that are supposed to come from their mouths. This woman is lying and posing as other people, even stealing pictures of people she knows and pretending that they are someone else. She uses people's identity and hides behind them to escape her life and problems.

In regards to democratized media, this amateur poser is creating a hole in the faith of what is social media and user generated content. She is exactly the kind of people Keen talks about when he says that quality is going down in the web because of situations where things like this can occur.

Catfish was a creepy portrayal of a serious problem that is going on in the world today. Even social dating sites like Eharmony are having problems with background checks and sexual offenders posing to be other people. Now too many incidents have been reported that people are either lying or exaggerating themselves on the internet to lead people to meet them in person. This sort of media i believe is the scariest kind. Keen talks in his work that we can't trust everything written on the internet, but so often we forget that and i myself am even guilty of this. This is a perfect reminder that web 2.0 is not professional for the majority. We have to be careful when deciding what to not believe and what to fact check by credible sources.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Keen Reading Questions

1. How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? use examples from the web in the form of links. Include this idea of "disintermediation".


Keen defines Democratized media by saying it is lofty idealized, undermines truth, and belittles expertise, experience, and talent. Keen thinks that democratized media is an empty promise and I think he means that it?s almost ironic that the phrase democratized media even exists. ?For the real consequence of the Web 2.0 revolution is less culture, less reliable news, and a chaos of useless information? Keen 16. Keen believes there is little truth to the world of democratized media.

For example, Keen uses the deaths of Ken Lay and Anna Nicole Smith?s Wikipedia pages and how their deaths were described incorrectly within minutes. Lay?s said his death was a suicide then a heart attack. Smith?s said hers was for unknown reasons, drugs, heart problems, and so on. This is how misinformation is spread.




2. Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. What are these differences in opinion? Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why? You may include the ideas of such utopian technophiles as Larry Lessig, Chris anderson, and Jimmy Wales (who are these guys!?)


Keen believes as I stated in the previous answer that the media is a way to spread lies in a super fast way. Rushkoff believes that social media hinders our abilities to grow on a large global or national scale but can bring towns and smaller communities closer because of information that is spread. Within these small towns people can get windows into other people lives that they may or may not know in reality.  I understand both of their views, and I actually really agree with both of them. I believe that social media is a way to spread information very fast but I do believe that there is a lot of misinformation being spread as well. Also in my own experience, people that I am Facebook friends with in my town, I feel that I know better or what?s going on in their lives. I see what colleges people are going to, if they get new pets, I can see pictures they post of new shoes they get, or whatever it may be, but I do see a town getting a better look into each other?s windows, essentially making us all neighbors.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Question Response

Whither the Individual?
As we join groups and social networks from affinity sites to Facebook, are we extending and expanding identities, or increasingly conforming to the cookie-cutter profiles demanded of these interfaces? Is the loss of "personal space" and "reflection" so many users complain of merely the necessary surrender of "ego" as we learn to participate as members of a more evolved "collective organism" of "hyper-people?"
(you may want to re-watch "bubbie" and "warcraft" sections of digital nation)

I really haven?t given much thought to this topic until I started realizing that it was happening to my profiles and online groups. I never really gave into the thought of having a cookie cutter profile and how even thought I post so much of my every day life online that I am actually molding myself into a very narrow person that people see.

Because now we live in a world where the majority of the time, besides our closest friends, we talk to each other via devices such as social media sites like Facebook, Google Mail, MySpace, or cell phones, I figured that people knew who I was already before I added them to be able to view my online profiles. However, after learning about the idea that we are only putting out what we want people to see, I have in fact noticed myself thinking differently of people because of what they put out on their Facebook pages.

For example, I had an old roommate and she was a nice girl and then we both transferred schools. Now that I don?t see her anymore, the only thing I see her post about is how much she loves her ?hubby.? Now when I see a status of hers coming up, I can already guess what it?s going to be about. I wouldn?t say that I?m addicting more than anyone else to these sites, that is why I found it so interesting. I go on every day to my Facebook, but if I notice things like that so easily, then maybe we are only putting out a small glimpse of ourselves when really we have put out so much personal information.

I think we are definitely hindering our ?reality personalities? and narrowing down out room to grow by having such personal online profiles. The video Digital Nation we watched in class, I have seen before but I definitely paid more attention this time and I find that I?m really disgusted with how people abuse the internet and tend to neglect their own reality. I also think that it is a true illness and it may sound absurd, but I would put money on it that in 50 years there are many more counseling centers and diagnosis for disorders related to communication addiction.

Since we can?t go back in time and change the way the internet has opened our availability to information, we can only learn how to use it now in a way that is better for our society. In the scheme of things, this world we live in of a surplus of technology has not been around long and if people in other countries have died from overexposure to gaming devices and social media sites because they?re neglecting their health and mental being in real life then I would definitely say there is a problem.

Schools would be where I started to change how we use the internet. Children learn quickly and if they recognize the effects of what overexposure to the internet can do then they will learn to appreciate it more. Cyber-bullying, racism, sexism, etc? all can be controlled by being ?safe? on the internet and I think before we really hinder our personalities, we should learn how to control internet use.

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Reading Questions

  1. Today many TV shows and advertisements try to look amateurish or "homegrown" to emulate what is often seen on the Web. Do you think professional production values will continue to drop, or do you think amateur user-generated content will get better over time? WHY??


    I think amateur user-generated content will get better over time because if i have learned anything about media and advertisements is that it is always changing. Even though methods and ads change over time, their goals and motivation remain the same. I think this question is difficult to answer because only time will tell but i think that you can see in general media that there is progress growing but in professional production, nothing is done without it being on purpose.

  2. What social media sites do you find yourself using the most, and why? In your opinion why is Facebook so much more successful than MySpace, and do you think Facebook is "here to stay" for the long term.

    I use many social media site especially since I got to college but i definitely find myself using Facebook often. I also use Twitter and Linked In on occasion. Because i am a journalism concentration, i have to use blogspot, wordpress, and other blogging sites that i don't think i would typically use on my own. I have, however, learned more about google and how i can use it other than just as a search engine. I actually created a site in Google sites where i started to produce an online magazine that i previously had in print from my capping site. I think Facebook is here to stay because of the wide range of audience it has targeted. Myspace became a trashy site and it is now embarrassing to use. Facebook has class to it in which it prohibits people to add annoying songs they can't stop playing or bright colorful animated pages. It is a site that can actually be called a tool and not just a flashy bragging page about everyone's relationships. I think Facebook is exactly what a social connection site should be and Myspace failed at it because they didn't target the right audience.
    before answering question #3 please read the Transparency in Social Media Blog Article

  3. Why is transparency such an important concept in the Social Media world? Is it MORE or LESS important in the offline world? Why?

    Transparency is very important because it uses tools that someone is already using and then advertising to them further. It really is like killing two birds with one stone. I think, although it can be annoying, that it is smart and something i think that will stay and be an important part of the online and offline world. The two worlds are connected and that is not debatable. What we do online often effects our offline lives. If i'm on gmail talking about teeth whitening with my girlfriends and what brand to use and then i see Crest Whitestrips advertisements coming up on my side bar, it may effect my offline decisions. I think it is VERY important to be aware of transparency.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

McLuhan Project


McLuhan's ideas about how media changes society is very clear. For example, the social media site, Twitter has broken down a pre-existing barrier between "normal" people and celebrities. Previously, the status of being a celebrity was an untouchable figure that was off limits to the average person. Now with real time updates of celebrities lives, it takes away some of the mystery and glitter to being a normal person. Whether it's Kim Kardashian tweeting about a fight between her sisters or Justin Bieber saying that he just hung out with his friends and played basketball, we as average citizens get to see a side of these celebrity figures that we never have been able to before. We can see these people now and relate to things we all do. The privacy wall is being broken down and Twitter and other social media sites have allowed us access to peer into the bedroom window of millions of people we don't even know.  

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

3 Mediums



In the past few years Facebook has risen to one of the leading competetors in social media interation sites. With millions of users, this growing site reaches people all over the world as a tool to communicate, advertise, and inform its users.




Twitter is a social media site in which its users update what is going on in there lives. Whether it's an update about how long they're waiting for a bus, what they ate for dinner, or posting information about politics, environmental issues, or the latest celebrity gossip, Twitter has reached millions of people including many public and governmental figures.





Smartphones have taken over as the new "it" phone. These phones can practically do anything. Thousands of applications that can be stored onto these phones can do anything from updating you on breaking news to tracking you on a GPS. These phones have opened a connection for their users to have constant contact with the world.