Theme 5

There is currently a battle between those behind Facebook and those behind Google, to try and own as much of our internet experience as possible and dominate all of our activity on the web. Facebook does this by tapping into our relationships and encouraging us to use our friends for resource information. One of the main ways they do this is using the "like" button. For the users, it allows them to see what their friends like and relate to their likes and dislikes. Facebook monitizes this because Facebook creates a registry of what all Facebook users like and sell the information to retail partners so that they can find better ways to advertise. Facebook also encourages us to use our friends for resources by creating the status updates. People post questions they want their friends to answer or information they want their friends to know. This creates an almost instant response for those on Facebook.

Google, on the other hand, uses other methods to keep us on their site. Google helps us find information and websites by basing the results on what we have previously viewed on Google. While you shop off of websites from Google, Google will show ad's with relevant products on it, so that you do not have to leave Google's page to search for things. They all monitize their information by grouping together all of the sites people have went on, anonymously, and selling it to other companies so that they can see what people are searching. They do this so that they could better their advertising.

Overall, I think that Google will emerge as dominant when discussing which would make better use of our personal data to "help us" find stuff. Google has every website on the internet available for you with the click of a button. You can find anything you want within a matter of seconds. By using the websites I previously visited as a guideline for the future websites that come up when I press search, helps make the search a little more personal.

However, I think differently when discussing which has the best strategies to hold our attention to the site. I think that Facebook has many more attractions and things to do that would keep us on the site longer than Google. Google is just a search engine and a way to navigate to other sites. Facebook has games, profiles, photos, videos, etc., much more than Google does.

And here's something interesting I found while looking up information...

Facebook makes up 7.07% of web visits, while Google makes up 7.03%. While that it not much of a difference, it still shows that Facebook is more popular than Google!

Are kids different because of digital media?

Theme 4

Herbert Marshall McLuhan is a well-known educator, philosopher, and scholar. One of his most important ideas is the fact that media creates new ways of thinking and new environments. McLuhan also said that media affects out way of thinking. Although this may seem at first like a good thing, it really is not. In fact, certain media has actually affected our thinking, attention span, and memory.

One of McLuhan’s major theories is known as technological determinism. This is the idea that technology determines social changes in our culture and in society. He once said, “We shape out tools, and they in turn, shape us.” Our society is definitely shaped by new technologies. They create new environments our society has never been exposed to before. For example, the introduction of computers and cell phones in the past have greatly affected and changed our culture, both positively and negatively. It changes how we work throughout the day and how we communicate with other people. However, although new technologies like computers and cell phones had their advantages, they have also created problems. One major issue is that it is changing the way we think. Statistics prove that people’s attention span’s and memory have lessened as well. This is because the new technology has allowed for any and all information to be at our fingertips, whenever we need them. The article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, explains these facts. He says that Google is doing the work of the mind. People no longer have to search for information anymore. This, in turn, has made people become less patient and less interested.

Another issue about new technology is how it affects children. Children are now learning in an extremely different way than years ago. This is because kids have become so preoccupied with technologies like phones, computers and video games, that learning is of no importance to them. In the article, “The Children of Cyberspace: Old Fogies By Their 20’s”, Bratt Stone says that children are technologically advancing at such a younger age because of new technologies.

One of the most interesting issues about new technologies is the idea of reading books. In a CBS News article titled “Huge Decline in Book Reading” the author Raksha Shetty says that only 47% of American adults read literature. The reason for this is the rise in television, movies and Internet. She also states that the most drastic decline from a decade ago was young people age 18-24. Only 43% of this group has read any literature, compared to 53% in the last decade. This decline is solely due to electronic media. People have new and more exciting things to pre occupy themselves with now, so why would they want to read a book; something that actually requires effort.

According to Marshall McLuhan, media gages the way we think and communicate. It drives social change. Although these electronic medias are beneficial to our society in many ways, they are also very concerning and detrimental to our learning and ways of thinking.

Theme 3

Almost all of the different technologies there are, are not the same as they were when they first came out. All forms of media change and adapt to the new technologies and innovations that are introduced in society. These different media’s are also transformed by their users. Some examples of “old” media’s that have adapted into new digital forms are television, film, books and radio.

When the first TV came out, not only was it just black and white, but it was very rare for a family to have one in their house. Now, many years later, the picture of TV is far better than black and white. Also, it is not uncommon for a family to have more than three TV’s in their house. TV has made drastic changes in its size and picture quality as the years have gone on, and it is still changing. Television sets have changed physical appearance for convenience of the consumer. Not only is the skinny flat screen easier to display in a room, it is also sleeker and more attractive. TV has also changed by becoming HD. High definition allows for better and more enjoyable viewing. TV has also become digital because of its on demand and online features. On demand is appealing to many people in our culture because we are always in a rush or busy, with no time to sit and watch a show at a certain time. Instead, you just record it for a later day. Or you could get it on the computer for free, whenever you want. Television has changed in a positive way as it became digital.

Another “old” media is film. Film has changed in a very similar way to television. Becoming digital, the picture quality has changed in both movie theatres and on DVD’s. Another major transformation is 3D. This feature is very popular because it is interactive. You feel as if you were in the film with the actors. Also, just like TV, as film became digital, the different ways you watch it have also changed. You can download them from your computer or watch them on your iPhone or iTouch. This allows for convenience, so you could be able to watch the movie anytime you want.

One of the most concerning “old” media’s is a book. As books become digital, they are becoming less and less popular. This is partly because more people have found more interesting things to occupy their time with then reading a book. Reading takes involvement and effort and that is not attractive to most people. Some ways that books have changed is by becoming “e-books” instead of “p-books.” Books have become available on new technologies like the Kindle and the Ipad. These two technologies have full books, like the exact hardcover or paperback book that would be in the library. People can now carry a whole library of books if that’s what they wanted to do.

Lastly, another technology that has changed is radio. Although radio has not made drastic changes, since it began, it still had made some. Listeners now have the opportunity to listen to the radio without listening to commercial, for a free, of course.

I think that no matter how they change, television and film will never die. Although I don’t disagree with the idea that TV and film will not be the same as in years to come, as it is now, I think that people will always be watching their movies and favorite TV shows. Watching a film or the TV is an escape for many people, from the chaos of everyday life and I don’t think that will change. However, I do not feel the same way about books. I think that eventually, in due time, no one will be writing books and nobody will be reading them. I feel that books will only be used in schools, for students to learn and get a better education, but they won’t be read for leisure.

Theme 2

Joshua Meyrowitz, a professor of communications, studied the effects of mass media on people. In his article, “The Separation of Social Space From Physical Place”, Meyrowitz explains that electronic media takes away from the physical location of things. However, it encourages the idea of para-social relationships. This is the idea that people form relationships with other people, usually celebrities, who do not even know they exist. A person who engages themselves in a parasocial relationship, become so involved in that persons life, they begin to think they are close friends, without even ever having a face to face conversation with them. One example of someone engaged in a parasocial relationship is Mary Dyck. Mary was a Kansas farm wife living in the 1930’s. She lived a very isolated life, in a quiet town and was always very lonely. She depended on the soap operas of the FM radio to entertain her daily. These soap operas became her form of escape from the real world. Mary became so attached to the soap operas that she started writing about the characters and what happened on the episodes in her diary, as if they were her real friends. Mary was able to create relationships with these characters, without ever physically being with them.

Another area about parasocial relationships that is more common and well known is Twitter. Twitter is an electronic medium where people update what they are doing at that current moment. These people can “follow” other Twitter users and look at what they are doing at that given moment. Twitter allows people to no longer need physical place setting for social communications. By updating what you are doing at any given moment, you are allowing for the chance of a parasocial relationship. This is because people can see all of what you are going, without you really even knowing who is looking. These people read little pieces of your life, or anyone else’s repeatedly. Eventually it will create your life story and people will become closer to you. It is like the thought of becoming intimate with millions of people. The communication medium Twitter also portrays the idea of ambient awareness. This is being physically near someone and picking up the mood they are in, through the little things they do. However, instead of being physically near the person, you are just viewing their page and are able to see how they are feeling. The thought of people who do not even know you, being able to know whatever you write about yourself, is quite scary. In fact, you can become so connected to people by the updates that you get to know them better than your own family. Because of Twitter and other electronic communication mediums, we have all lost privacy. They allow information to be readily available for anyone at any moment, so long as you write it.

The Simpsons

The Simpsons is a well-known television series that attracts viewers of all ages. It is about a neighborhood of yellow characters who do peculiar and unrealistic things at times, yet also act like regular human beings other times. I think one of the amazing things about this sitcom is that it is completely ridiculous, yet it has been so popular for about twenty years. I think, however, it is because of this that it has become, and still is, so popular. I think the fact that it attracts people of all different ages is another reason why The Simpsons is popular. This is because the animated sitcom includes violence, disgusting acts, sexual references, and just plain old comedy, that is able to attract a young kid, yet also able to attract an older man or woman. The people who watch The Simpsons are also attracted to it because they can sometimes relate to the people. A lot of sitcoms on television are about perfect parents with perfect children, who live in a perfectly clean home. Although these sitcoms are enjoyable, most people in America do not live in a house like that. However, the main family in The Simpsons is a lazy dad who argues with his wife all the time, a child who is a rebel and is always starting problems and another child who is a perfect student. Although this could be seen as an extreme example of families in America, it is more closely related then many other sitcoms. This draws viewers to this animated sitcom. I think another reason that The Simpsons has such a large audience is because it is animated. Although the young people who enjoy The Simpsons might not know very well what is going on, they still enjoy watching yellow characters run around the screen doing violent and vulgar things. I think that older people are also attracted to the animation aspect of the sitcom. This is because no matter how old you are, you always enjoy stupid animation comedy. So, rather than turning on Nickelodeon and watching cartoons, they are able to watch animation with something they can relate to.

In Jason Mittell's piece, "Cartoon Realism", he analyzes The Simpsons and tries to show why The Simpsons is controversial, yet still successful. He says he does this by looking into what the critics say about the sitcom. The genre of any work is defined by the critic. This is because the way a critic talks about any TV show, book, movie, etc. influences the way we think about that piece. This creates the genre for that piece. So, by Mittell analyzing the way critics think, it allows him to have a better understanding of The Simpsons. Critics say, according to Mittell, that The Simpsons is primarily a sitcom and it uses the animation to highlight certain things. I do not agree with this. I think the animation of The Simpsons is what makes the sitcom so entertaining. If it was not an animation, they couldn't do half the things the occurred on the show and therefore would not be where it is today. The animation does not just highlight certain aspects, it creates the whole TV series.

Texts Without Context

1. Digital and social media have had a great impact on our culture. One example that Michiko Kakutani, the author of the article, discusses is the impact of books entering the digital realm. He says how before digital books, book reading allowed the reader to enter a whole other world and escape reality. By books being read digitally, they become more like a magazine or newspaper; you read little parts of it whenever you get a chance. Another impact of social and digital media, according to Kakutani, is the more and more these media's become popular, the less attention span the public has. He says how people have become less interested in "an entire news article, watching an entire television show or listening to an entire speech." Instead people would rather just hear the conclusion or summary and get on with their day. People are no longer interested in the context of certain things that they were once interested in. In the article, Mr. Lanier says that internet has encouraged people to "...be a child forever, without the responsibilities of adulthood." This is because of the fact that internet has no qualities of a physical world, but instead has "playfulness and optimism."

2. According to Cass Sunstein, cyberbalkanization is personalizing your favorite websites, so that you only get the type of news that you are interested in. They do this so that they do not have to read things that do not interest them. It is said in the article that doing this grows consensus and common ground even smaller. I think that this is becoming a trend in our culture. In fact, I even do this myself. On my Google Mail home page, I have set it to have only information I am interested in. I think that people do this because everyone is having less and less patience for everything and come to want everything in a matter of seconds, because of the digital and social media.

3. I think that these trends are bad news for authors, composers, filmmakers and others who compose their own works. I agree with John Updike's idea in the article, when they point out that these trends would eventually lead to the "end of authorship." He also says that these writers and composers would not have the ability to earn a living from their works. Another major issue is that their own recognition from their own creations would be non-existant.

4. Appropriation art is defined in the article as the recycling or re-do's of older works. It also is the remaking of television shows into films, or video games into movies. The rise in appropriation art means a decrease in originality in media. Although I understand the point that the author has, I do not 100% think this is legitimate. This is because, if you know that an old television show or video game was successful and made a lot of money, then you would want to do something similar to that idea. I do not think it is done out of laziness, like they say in the article. I just think that it is done this way because people want to create things they know will succeed.

5. I do not agree with the idea that audience is archaic. I think that no matter what happens with media, it will always have an audience. I do not really understand how William Gibson could say that audience has become archaically passive.