But what Reingold mentions about knowing who to trust is another really important factor. With the increased communicative abilities, you can communicate with anyone at any time. I frequent several forums in which everyone is anonymous, and under those circumstances, how do you know someone is telling the truth? To fix this, people have come up with elaborate ways of proving their points and very skilled at arguing/quickly getting evidence. But they also spend a good deal of time trying to trick people just for fun. I quickly gained my "internet legs" after spending several hours on wild goose chases.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Blog 13 smartmobs
What Reingold predicts is and has been rapidly coming true. I spend a good deal of time on the internet interacting with people that I barely or don't know, and about half of that I do from my phone. My first experience with a "smartmob" was in highschool when a group of friends and friends of friends played a massive game that spanned my hometown. We called the game commando, and it involved small groups, usually pairs, that try to get from point A to B. They have no rules except to not get caught. After they start going, people in cars search for them and try to catch them. Every person got the number of one person in each group and everyone communicated with text messages and calls. There were about 50 runners and I knew about 1/3 of them. By communicating when we saw searchers, we could move more efficiently.
Smart Mobs
As we do live in the ever growing world of technology I feel that in some aspects I was a little slow. When it came to computers I did not obtain my own computer until I was a senior in high school and I had to purchase it on my own. Although I did not have my own computer until my senior year I was very efficient in navigating through any computer as well as many different programs. My mom loved technology so she taught me lots of things with computers as well as my interested in the computer science class offered at my high school. During the class i remember being overwhelmed by the projects that our teacher would ask of us and I was in such awe that I now knew how to create some programs that run on computers everywhere. I purchased my IMac my senior year of college and when I graduated I purchased a MacBook. Several months after I left for college Apple released its newest MacBooks. I had to laugh to myself for being so excited when I got my laptop because knowing today and its ever rapid change within technology I should of known that my computer would have been outdated within a few months. Technology is improving and changing so fast that it is very difficult to keep up sometimes.
As for the cell phone phase I was a kid that always wanted a cell phone. I remember when I received my first cellphone I felt like i had to wait forever. Although I had tons of minutes on my phone my mother was very strict about when I could talk on it. Since I was either in practice or studying it left very little time for talking on the phone. I didn't start using my cellphone a lot until I became a junior in high school and moved away from my old town. My mom was more lenient since I was older and did not have a way to verbally talk to them expect for a phone. Until I entered college I did not have texting. Although I am a firm believer that phone calls are more personal and sometimes better I find texting is simple and fast. Texting allows me to send a quick message when I am in an area where it is not convenient to talk on the phone or reply to someone when I am not able to answer the phone letting them know that I am just busy and not ignoring them. Texting also eliminates having to hold conversations when one does not want to talk. With texts you can respond with one word answers or not respond at all. Texts are also faster at receiving quick information (like if I am on my way to order some food it is easier to read a text than memorize or take the time to write down an order). So although I was a little slow in the phone era I feel that I caught up pretty quickly. Many people are going to need to know how to adapt and learn technology pretty quickly to keep up with our vast knowledge.
Who owns the media?
I feel that this article is very much related to me and my generation on a more personal level because we've all grown up with a lot of the technology mentioned in the article, and will be introduced to a lot of the more abstract stuff in the near future. I can say, with both security and shame, that two of the most habit-changing experiences in my life were the addition of unlimited texting to my cellphone plan and my recent purchase of a BlackBerry. I was heavily resistant to the cellphone craze, putting off getting one of my own until Junior year, and continued my trend of telecom resistance by protesting against the texting craze until college. However, now that I've become integrated into the text based social network, I realize how much less effective communication is without it, and find it hard to live on a day to day basis without such a connection to the world.
Strangely, I almost feel more human while texting people than talking to them on the phone at times, and this phenomenon has implications that I find scary, and eerily similar to the idea of space no longer mattering that the article presents. While the topics aren't similar on a surface level, they both indicate the severe digitalization of society, and really the entire environment, to an extent that I would never have conceived of even in Middle School, when the mobile Net craze was beginning.
I've become less resistant to new mobile tech since college, and in fact consider myself an amateur enthusiast in the area, consistently checking cnet.com for the latest and greatest news concerning cloud computing, devices you wouldn't think to have internet, and even just the newest smartphones. In time, I hope to become a master of the new smart mob dynamic and be one of the amateurs that manages to find good and marketable uses for these technologies.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Smartmobs
When we take a look at these technological changes being made, i cant help but say i was a big part in the cultural shift. I texted from middle school on. I have Had a social networking site for as long as i remember. I started with Xanga, then myspace, ultimately leading up to Facebook. The other mediums of social communities i was involved in were websites like I use my iphone every day for the past two years. It is quite remarkable the amount of change that has occurred technologically.
Some of the middle school and high school intimiate relationships i had were based mostly on the conversations via phone and instant messaging. Relationships that probably wouldn't have lasted longer otherwise. As time went on, online submission and the online availability of grades became more common place in the school setting. When i was in high school, keyboarding was a class, but now i imagine that proficient typing is achieved at an earlier grade. In college more online homework helps cut down the grading teachers and TA's usually have to do.
The changes are abundant all around us, and we dont realize until we stop to think, how could all of this be done without computers, social networking and other things.
Some of the middle school and high school intimiate relationships i had were based mostly on the conversations via phone and instant messaging. Relationships that probably wouldn't have lasted longer otherwise. As time went on, online submission and the online availability of grades became more common place in the school setting. When i was in high school, keyboarding was a class, but now i imagine that proficient typing is achieved at an earlier grade. In college more online homework helps cut down the grading teachers and TA's usually have to do.
The changes are abundant all around us, and we dont realize until we stop to think, how could all of this be done without computers, social networking and other things.
Smartmobs response
Reingold’s article struck a particular chord with me, as I am what some might call a stick in the mud, despite being from what it generally considered a technological generation. In particular, I’ve only begun to use texting as a communication method this past year, and frankly speaking I still prefer a phone call. One impetus to the change was that my mother had begun sending texts to me and my siblings, and frankly speaking it seems weird for her to be more up on technological trends than I am. Even more than that though is the fact that for some reason most of the people I try to communicate with respond better to texts than phone calls, an oddity I’m still at a complete loss to explain. To tie it back into the article, I needed to change the way I do things so as not to be swept away by the current of new technologies. Sticking to my old ways was no longer able to cut the mustard of the future.
The second thing to take away is the discussion of technology being lauded for the sake of being new. I can’t for the life of me remember which device in particular it is, but roughly half a year ago there was an announcement for a new technology tool to allow people to read downloaded books in a surprisingly book-like manner, even having an easy page turn option and all. This leads to the question: what’s wrong with using a book? Essentially this device was a new way to do something that people have been able to do for some time now. It ties in to the critique of “The Machine is Us/ing Us” video that posited that these new technologies were simply seeking to emulate traditional speech. In this case, rather than accomplishing something new the device was trying to emulate the way we read books, which isn’t really that helpful since we still have books.
The second thing to take away is the discussion of technology being lauded for the sake of being new. I can’t for the life of me remember which device in particular it is, but roughly half a year ago there was an announcement for a new technology tool to allow people to read downloaded books in a surprisingly book-like manner, even having an easy page turn option and all. This leads to the question: what’s wrong with using a book? Essentially this device was a new way to do something that people have been able to do for some time now. It ties in to the critique of “The Machine is Us/ing Us” video that posited that these new technologies were simply seeking to emulate traditional speech. In this case, rather than accomplishing something new the device was trying to emulate the way we read books, which isn’t really that helpful since we still have books.
Wiki-versation
I chose to edit The Buzz, a page on Daviswiki concerning the event held by Campus Recreation, Campus Unions and Student Affairs for UC Davis Students.
I work for the Campus Recreation marketing department, and one of our goals was to get involved with the wiki community because many students use Daviswiki for information about campus programs.
I edited the page under the username CampusRec, which was the username our department decided to edit with.
Here's a link to the page edit info.
http://daviswiki.org/The_Buzz?action=info
The first edit I did was just to remove some of the implication on the event being tailored to freshmen and a somewhat ironic comment about the event being called "The Buzz" when it was alcohol free.
The edit received almost immediate negative feedback, both for removal of content and that I was editing under a user name. But the things I removed were either inaccurate (targeting freshmen) and opinion based (the alcohol content) so they should have been removed or at least changed. So I changed it back and left a comment on the other editors page.
During this time I also received a comment on my user page saying that I probably meant to edit the content page Campus Recreation, but that I had accidentally created a user page. I responded that I hadn't and this was the profile for Campus Recreation.
Both of these discussions caused considerable argument. My boss got involved with The Buzz page edits and the whole situation quickly escalated into a revert-war with a few personal attacks involved. There was very little to no productive discussion. Finally a few other editors got involved and a solution was reached with the final result removing the alcohol comment and referencing an old event that targeted freshmen that The Buzz replaced. I added one more edit under the CampusRec user name which was received with sarcasm: "THAT LAST EDIT WAS **OFFICIAL**!! (With a tin badge and all!)".
I finally created a personal user name MattSmidebush, which I then used to edit the page. This edit stuck and one of the major Daviswiki members left a comment on my page thanking me for creating an account. In the comment he mentioned the 'problem' of 'role accounts' (aka what I created for Campus Recreation), so I'm fairly sure no one was fooled with my account.
However, the content I added is still there (with minor changes) so I guess I did do something right.
Final conclusions:
The Talk pages are really helpful with keeping unproductive discussion out of edits, and reducing edit wars.
"Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs. Those with expert credentials are given no additional weight. Some experts contend that expert credentials are given less weight than contributions by amateurs. Wikipedia is also not subject to any peer review for scientific or medical or engineering articles. One advantage to having amateurs write in Wikipedia is that they have more free time on their hands so that they can make rapid changes in response to current events. The wider the general public interest in a topic, the more likely it is to attract contributions from non-specialists." -Wikipedia About page
This is very true. The edit made by my personal account was given more weight than the "official" edit.
While I think that this was a really interesting wiki-versation, it shows an interesting issue that people haven't really begun discussing yet: corporate interest in the wiki platform. Many people rely on wikis for local and encyclopedic information, and this is an excellent opportunity for companies to get a leg up on each other.
I work for the Campus Recreation marketing department, and one of our goals was to get involved with the wiki community because many students use Daviswiki for information about campus programs.
I edited the page under the username CampusRec, which was the username our department decided to edit with.
Here's a link to the page edit info.
http://daviswiki.org/The_Buzz?action=info
The first edit I did was just to remove some of the implication on the event being tailored to freshmen and a somewhat ironic comment about the event being called "The Buzz" when it was alcohol free.
The edit received almost immediate negative feedback, both for removal of content and that I was editing under a user name. But the things I removed were either inaccurate (targeting freshmen) and opinion based (the alcohol content) so they should have been removed or at least changed. So I changed it back and left a comment on the other editors page.
During this time I also received a comment on my user page saying that I probably meant to edit the content page Campus Recreation, but that I had accidentally created a user page. I responded that I hadn't and this was the profile for Campus Recreation.
Both of these discussions caused considerable argument. My boss got involved with The Buzz page edits and the whole situation quickly escalated into a revert-war with a few personal attacks involved. There was very little to no productive discussion. Finally a few other editors got involved and a solution was reached with the final result removing the alcohol comment and referencing an old event that targeted freshmen that The Buzz replaced. I added one more edit under the CampusRec user name which was received with sarcasm: "THAT LAST EDIT WAS **OFFICIAL**!! (With a tin badge and all!)".
I finally created a personal user name MattSmidebush, which I then used to edit the page. This edit stuck and one of the major Daviswiki members left a comment on my page thanking me for creating an account. In the comment he mentioned the 'problem' of 'role accounts' (aka what I created for Campus Recreation), so I'm fairly sure no one was fooled with my account.
However, the content I added is still there (with minor changes) so I guess I did do something right.
Final conclusions:
The Talk pages are really helpful with keeping unproductive discussion out of edits, and reducing edit wars.
"Wikipedia is written largely by amateurs. Those with expert credentials are given no additional weight. Some experts contend that expert credentials are given less weight than contributions by amateurs. Wikipedia is also not subject to any peer review for scientific or medical or engineering articles. One advantage to having amateurs write in Wikipedia is that they have more free time on their hands so that they can make rapid changes in response to current events. The wider the general public interest in a topic, the more likely it is to attract contributions from non-specialists." -Wikipedia About page
This is very true. The edit made by my personal account was given more weight than the "official" edit.
While I think that this was a really interesting wiki-versation, it shows an interesting issue that people haven't really begun discussing yet: corporate interest in the wiki platform. Many people rely on wikis for local and encyclopedic information, and this is an excellent opportunity for companies to get a leg up on each other.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Response to Who Owns the Media
In Who Owns the Media, the author discusses how when he first saw a cell phone a sense of awe came upon the author as they realized that this was our future. For me that experience involved an iPod. I first got one when the generation one version came out and my dad thought it would be a cool idea to get all the kids iPod's so we would not have to deal with scratched CD's anymore. I remember thinking that now, thanks to the iPod, I was a member of the technologically advanced society. I would take it to school and show all my friends how I did not need a CD, I could just play music with no trouble. I loved the idea that all my music could just sit in this bulky item and I would never have to carry a CD case around ever again.
My second experience involved when my family first got my brother a Nintendo 64. We got it for Christmas and I had never been more excited to play video games in my life. The idea of having our own device in which we could play mario kart on for hours thrilled me beyond belief. I remember thinking that we were cool kids now because we had the ability to play video games whenever we wanted and never had to go over to the neighbors ever again (of course we did though.) At the time I thought nothing better could come out, until the year my brother got an Xbox and I was fascinated all over again.
My second experience involved when my family first got my brother a Nintendo 64. We got it for Christmas and I had never been more excited to play video games in my life. The idea of having our own device in which we could play mario kart on for hours thrilled me beyond belief. I remember thinking that we were cool kids now because we had the ability to play video games whenever we wanted and never had to go over to the neighbors ever again (of course we did though.) At the time I thought nothing better could come out, until the year my brother got an Xbox and I was fascinated all over again.
BLOG 13 Who Owns the Media
I never thought about the future in relation to technological advances until reading this article. I remember when I got a Playstation for my birthday as a kid. I always had video games that used plastic cartridges until I got that. Now, the video game cartridge has become obsolete since discs are popular and dominant now. I remember as a little kid that the graphics in the video games used to seem so cool. One time I was playing a video game called Final Fantasy X on my Playstation2, and I will never forget how in awe I was during the cinematic parts of the game. The graphics look incredibility real. The playable part of the game did not use the same graphics, but the fact that video games have advanced so much is amazing. Now the Playstation that was once a big, console can now fit in one’s pocket since there is a portable version these days. I never thought as a kid that my PlayStation could fit in my pocket one day.
I also remember when I saw my best friend’s Iphone for the first time in high school three years ago. They weren’t that popular yet, and they were pretty expensive because they were new. I had never seen a phone with a touch screen. I’ve never really been into cell phones because I always break or lose them so I knew buying an Iphone was out of the question for me. But now it seems like everyone has a touch screen phone, and even companies like ATT and Verizon are producing them now. I hate using touch screen phones, but the idea of them is really cool. Now there is even the Ipad, another portable touch screen device that will probably become a new market.
I also remember when I saw my best friend’s Iphone for the first time in high school three years ago. They weren’t that popular yet, and they were pretty expensive because they were new. I had never seen a phone with a touch screen. I’ve never really been into cell phones because I always break or lose them so I knew buying an Iphone was out of the question for me. But now it seems like everyone has a touch screen phone, and even companies like ATT and Verizon are producing them now. I hate using touch screen phones, but the idea of them is really cool. Now there is even the Ipad, another portable touch screen device that will probably become a new market.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Burgess & Drax - Viral Videos
Drax makes his videos for Youtube using Second Life, another social networking program. They stand out due to the originality of Second Life reporting, and through serious reporting he legitimizes it. This, in turn, encourages other users to do the same. Not only can the other users actually participate in these virtual realms - and possibly then participate directly in Drax's reporting, they can then make videos through Second Life fairly easily - only requiring a decent computer with video capturing software can they imitate what Drax can do. Drax captures what Burgess describes as the bedroom feel of Youtube viral videos by using these low budget tools, a virtual realm instead of a professional camera and cameraman, and in the end contributes the 'bottom-up', word-of-mouth videos that Burgess describes.
Drax Xcred
Read the Burgess article in the Video Vortex Reader and also view the links provided to the work of Bernhard Drax (aka Draxtor Despres). How does the article's perspective on the nature of viral videos apply to the work of Drax?
Drax's work is one that primarily takes place in the second life world. He reports on activism and puts these interviews on youtube. The activism on second life he reports on spreads to other users on second life by showing them whats out there to experience on this social networking tool. By exposing other people to this experience on a virtual medium, he is informing them. People show other people, and by word of mouth information in spread. In addition, Drax himself is a mouth in the activism. Because he has a wider range of subscribers he is able to reach a bigger audience in the internet community. He works the virality of youtube videos as an tool to push his agenda.
Drax's work is one that primarily takes place in the second life world. He reports on activism and puts these interviews on youtube. The activism on second life he reports on spreads to other users on second life by showing them whats out there to experience on this social networking tool. By exposing other people to this experience on a virtual medium, he is informing them. People show other people, and by word of mouth information in spread. In addition, Drax himself is a mouth in the activism. Because he has a wider range of subscribers he is able to reach a bigger audience in the internet community. He works the virality of youtube videos as an tool to push his agenda.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Response to Viral Videos (Extra Credit)
In his article, Burgess talks about how Drax's work has been vital in creating the cultural practices that take place within social networking. He is known for his work with the avatar computer life program called Second Life. He used the program as a political tool in order to have his views and ideas expressed through this medium. Thanks to Drax's work the world of politics has taken off in Second Life and now many users use this outlet as a way of sharing their ideas and beliefs. Drax helped move Second Life from just a social networking site to a political tool that can be used by people all over the world. Thanks to his work there now exists a group of Republicans on Second Life who actually support Obama and gather more support for him just through Second Life. At first people doubted that Drax would be able to use such a minimal tool to take over and show people that you can campaign through any social networking site but once it became apparent that this was true, the idea took off in the minds of many. Burgess's ideas come out through Drax's work because he shows people that you can engage in a cultural conversation online through either video or games such as Second Life. He shows that by interacting with other users he can attract a wide variety of people who are interested in the same ideas and beliefs.
BLOG 12: Viral Videos (Extra Credit)
Burgess’ article relates to Drax’s work because Drax has essentially cultivated cultural practices within a social network; Drax has turned Second Life into a political tool to express political ideas. Other people have adapted his political practices in Second Life and have emulated him. There is now even a group of Republicans on the game who support Obama, and they even campaign for him through Second Life. Because Drax has participated in contributing his content to Second Life, he has been able to exercise Burgess’ idea of engaging in cultural conversation around online video; other users in the network have responded to his work. The response to his work on Second Life could not be predicted when he first started his work, but it has evolved into a cultural practice within Second Life; he has installed political consciousness within the social network. His work has acted as a hub for others to create similar work, such as the Republican Group for Obama that has emerged since then. A wide range of participants now engages in political activity within Second Life. Drax’s influence within Second Life as a political force has retained itself within the social network of Second Life. Although Second Life was first created with the intention of merely being a social network, Drax has helped it evolve into a political sphere as well; now thousands of users are doing the same, and this cycle of exchanging political ideas within Second Life continues.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Video Vortex
Lovink’s article was about how Youtube became a phenomenon. It is basically a database of information. Today Youtube offers many options any one person is able to “Broadcast yourself” or search almost any topic in the world. It attracts all ages and is creatively designed so that the viewers watch multiple videos without losing interest. A good amount of videos on Youtube are short so the viewers that watch a bunch of them sometimes don’t realize just how much time they were consumed for because they only think oh the video was only 3 minutes. The viewers did not multiple it by 25 videos or so.
Manovich’s discusses how the user base has switched from credited professional sources to content and information produced by non-credited or professional users. He argues that with the use of the web today we are able to make old media new again and add new life to it. In both articles we see a sense of optimism. Both authors are trying to show us the advantages of the web 2.0 as well as how our society has switched to non-credited sources of information and entertainment. The web is able to consume us more with the addition of Youtube and other new aged sites.
Yes Men FIx the World blog 11 week 10
The Yes Men film is very interesting because these men try and stir contrversy with large corporations as best as they can. They defnitely ask the general public and corporations to re-assess how the operation of corporations effect the world on the large scale. The Yes Men cover issues the media usually decides to leave out. They are strategically accurate with their satire of corporations and are seeking to expose the immoral practices of corporations fueled by greed and wealth. My favorite part and the scene on the back cover of the movie was the survival ball. I thought this part was incredibly funny yet pertinent to the overall theme of the movie. In a way the, Yes Men pit the general public against corporations. They strive for the general public to ask the question why do we allow such awful practices by corporations to go on? I really enjoyed the film.
Video Vortex
In her article, Lev Manovich proposes that youtube videos are a new and emerging art form that represent the diversity of the creative community that publishes them to the site.
Contrarily, Thomas Elsaesser is an opponent of the consideration of the youtube video as art, proposing that a lack of originality and thought concerning the structure of videos prevents the clips from reaching the level of "art."
Manovich and Elsaesser have different opinions on youtube videos as art primarily because of the different ways in which each person approaches the idea of art. Elsaesser's emphasis on avante-gardeism informs his opinions about youtube in that the typical youtube user doesn't have the patience or the desire to create something unique and evoking through their filmmaking. On the contrary, the typical user does have the power to build upon an already systematic approach to video making, such as the vlog or other popular genres of youtube videos in order to make something that's less focused on the aesthetic aspect of art, and more culturally and communally involved with the idea of it. This internet-culture based phenomenon aspect of the youtube video, and the successive additions that are made to this culture as new videos are posted everyday, are the main reasons Manovich considers the youtube medium a valid for of art.
The Yes Men
The "Yes Men" critique the media with a very active approach, with the intention of directly trying to alter the way the media shapes the real world. Their antics are interesting in that they draw attention to large corporations for a lot of the reasons that people aren't typically exposed to. the juxtaposition of the Yes Men's actions against those of the actual heads of corporations draws a lot of attention to the absence of corporate concern for the people which their companies affect. Their process may be considered something akin to culture jamming because of the way it forces corporations and the general public to reassess the practices of corporate culture when viewed under a new light. Though the Yes Men might create some false hopes in the process, the overall attention they generate in the process outweighs the disadvantages of their method.
Video Vortex
Elsaesser: His depiction of art does not really comply with what is founds on sites like YouTube today. Elsaesser believes that with an overload of videos that lack creative construction, the element of the "avant-garde" is lost and film making, in this sense, has lost its artistic touch.
Manovich: His idea of YouTube videos as art differs; he believes that YouTube users are actually creating a new form of art with a greater diversity and conversation with others.
The way both authors view art is different in part to the way both authors view realism, or life. Elsaesser believes that "art" on YouTube is not life like; it is not real, but virtual; it is not creative, but systematic. Manovich, on the other hand, sees YouTube's attributes as important aspects of social life. Connecting worldwide with video expressions is spreading art through a constantly changing, creative atmosphere. Elsaesser seems to fear that a site like YouTube is hurting the general amount of traditional creativity that accompanies film making, and Manovich seems less concerned about the ways in which the videos are created, and more excited about the idea of lots of people communication on a large scale through forms of creative interaction.
Manovich: His idea of YouTube videos as art differs; he believes that YouTube users are actually creating a new form of art with a greater diversity and conversation with others.
The way both authors view art is different in part to the way both authors view realism, or life. Elsaesser believes that "art" on YouTube is not life like; it is not real, but virtual; it is not creative, but systematic. Manovich, on the other hand, sees YouTube's attributes as important aspects of social life. Connecting worldwide with video expressions is spreading art through a constantly changing, creative atmosphere. Elsaesser seems to fear that a site like YouTube is hurting the general amount of traditional creativity that accompanies film making, and Manovich seems less concerned about the ways in which the videos are created, and more excited about the idea of lots of people communication on a large scale through forms of creative interaction.
Yes Men
The "Yes Men", a group of stealthy, guerrilla media activists use the same media sources as large corporations do to deliver information to the masses that, though fictional in its exact content, reveal a truth about these larger corporations. I say guerrilla media activists because their approach to reaching the public through mainstream, viral media is unconventional and innovative. Like Noam Chomsky's description of society's fixation on the media in such a way that actually eliminates any reason or choice in believing it, the Yes Men play off of subtleties within their critiques that are just different enough to draw attention. The point of their media activism is in part to draw attention to themselves, but interestingly enough, is produced in such a way that results in most attention being on the subject of their staged events. Important issues are brought to the surface, and the larger corporations (which had previously refused responsibility by either ignoring the matter or covering it up) are faced with questions from the public, which had not known to ask or assume such questions or information. The Yes Men succeed at shaking the public out of this state of lulled trust in whatever the media says, and with a touch of satirical irony, is able to unearth some important issues that require public input.
Wiki-versation : Final Report
For my Wiki-versation, I chose to have complete fun with the topic and chose to edit the page "Incidents at Disney parks". My first attempt was to edit the accounts of accidents at the park on the actual Wikipedia Disney page; however, interestingly enough, viewers seeking any accounts of these incidents were directed to a separate page. I contemplated attempting to still add to the Disney page, but thought that perhaps there would be less action and more opportunity to see my additions last on the sister page. My first attempt was to add a legitimate entry to the page. I researched online for an incident unaccounted for, and found one that fit under the Disneyland Space Mountain ride section. I carefully entered the correct date, person, tragedy, and finished with the appropriate citation. The citation wasn't exactly from a trusted source, but I had to figure that most of the incidents on this page were not from medical examiner's records. Apparently I was wrong. Within about 2 minutes, my entire post was removed with the explanation saying that though it was a "good faith" edit, it was "cited incorrectly". I was so surprised to see that 1.) this page was actually monitored frequently, and 2.) my careful research was apparently worthless. This made me think that if I could submit seemingly "factual" evidence of an incident, resulting in its deletion, I could just write anything and cite anything I wanted. I then switched from taking this site seriously to playing the waiting game. The next entry I posted was a completely fabricated account of 2 18-year-old men getting into an altercation over Princess Belle, fighting each other into the pond in front of Sleeping Beauty's castle, and accidentally drowning. It was a bit morbid, and I felt a little like I was playing with fire, but at this point, I just wanted to see who would respond and how. Sure enough, my edit was reverted. I posted it again, hoping to spur some personal response from the editor, but to no avail. I moved on to a slightly different approach: instead of adding an entirely new entry, I would edit just a few words in a long-standing, pre-existing entry. The original post listing 25 injuries on Disney's California Screamin' roller coaster went like this:
On July 29, 2005, 25 guests were injured when one train rear-ended another and 15 guests were transported to local hospitals for treatment of minor injuries.[4] An investigation determined that the cause was a faulty brake valve installed by Disney a few days earlier.
I decided to add to the end with this note:
Ride operators suggested a change in the ride's name from "California Screamin'" to "California Dreamin'" so as to avoid future confusion during passenger emergencies.[5]
This edit lasted a bit longer, 13 minutes, before being removed with the statement, "(Reverted 1 edit by Aneslick; Nice attempt at humor. (TW)) "
At least my humor was appreciated. What this actually proved to me was that people had a voice on this website. I no longer felt like my posts were automatically being deleted by a computer system programed to target spam. These were different people, coming together to protect a history they valued.
However, I wanted to go a step further and be totally obnoxious, perhaps to see if the personal responses from fellow editors would be less polite. I entered a statement of complete absurdity and pasted it about 20 times. Vandalism, in "wiki" speak. It read: "MICKEY MOUSE IS JESUS! HE DIED, BUT STILL LIVES! PRAISE BE TO DISNEY!", followed by a citation of the death of the original voice of Mickey Mouse's character. Sure enough, this was the response:
(Undid revision 363188843 by Aneslick (talk) Vandalism!!! Again!!!)
Vandalism, again. Plus 6 exclamation points. This editor had some pent up frustration, I believe. However, this response again proved to me that people had a voice on this site. It may be difficult to successfully post information that you like because the site is usually so well monitored, but at least those who are monitoring it are other users like myself. Each user who revised my entries was different, which to me exemplifies the democratic nature of this website. There was, at least to my knowledge, no sign of an overbearing source that dictated these users' revisions, or a computer that was able to edit under another user's name. In fact, in order to post anything, a "secret code" must be copied and entered to prove that you are, indeed, human. I suppose it depends on the frequency with which people check on a specific site, but the experience I had with this site proved that even if this knowledge is generated by humans, and even if it is correct, there is a sizable amount of editing that takes place before anything is accepted as truth. With thousands of editors worldwide, only a computer click away from each other, it comes as no surprise that information is monitored. Information, both true and false, may slip in under the radar from time to time, but the decision to believe it is ultimately left up to the viewer.
Here is the link to the history page for "Incidents at Disney Parks":
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Incidents_at_Disney_parks&curid=5765570&action=history
On July 29, 2005, 25 guests were injured when one train rear-ended another and 15 guests were transported to local hospitals for treatment of minor injuries.[4] An investigation determined that the cause was a faulty brake valve installed by Disney a few days earlier.
I decided to add to the end with this note:
Ride operators suggested a change in the ride's name from "California Screamin'" to "California Dreamin'" so as to avoid future confusion during passenger emergencies.[5]
This edit lasted a bit longer, 13 minutes, before being removed with the statement, "(Reverted 1 edit by Aneslick; Nice attempt at humor. (TW)) "
At least my humor was appreciated. What this actually proved to me was that people had a voice on this website. I no longer felt like my posts were automatically being deleted by a computer system programed to target spam. These were different people, coming together to protect a history they valued.
However, I wanted to go a step further and be totally obnoxious, perhaps to see if the personal responses from fellow editors would be less polite. I entered a statement of complete absurdity and pasted it about 20 times. Vandalism, in "wiki" speak. It read: "MICKEY MOUSE IS JESUS! HE DIED, BUT STILL LIVES! PRAISE BE TO DISNEY!", followed by a citation of the death of the original voice of Mickey Mouse's character. Sure enough, this was the response:
(Undid revision 363188843 by Aneslick (talk) Vandalism!!! Again!!!)
Vandalism, again. Plus 6 exclamation points. This editor had some pent up frustration, I believe. However, this response again proved to me that people had a voice on this site. It may be difficult to successfully post information that you like because the site is usually so well monitored, but at least those who are monitoring it are other users like myself. Each user who revised my entries was different, which to me exemplifies the democratic nature of this website. There was, at least to my knowledge, no sign of an overbearing source that dictated these users' revisions, or a computer that was able to edit under another user's name. In fact, in order to post anything, a "secret code" must be copied and entered to prove that you are, indeed, human. I suppose it depends on the frequency with which people check on a specific site, but the experience I had with this site proved that even if this knowledge is generated by humans, and even if it is correct, there is a sizable amount of editing that takes place before anything is accepted as truth. With thousands of editors worldwide, only a computer click away from each other, it comes as no surprise that information is monitored. Information, both true and false, may slip in under the radar from time to time, but the decision to believe it is ultimately left up to the viewer.
Here is the link to the history page for "Incidents at Disney Parks":
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Incidents_at_Disney_parks&curid=5765570&action=history
The Yes Men!
The Yes Men critique the media by getting attention. By posing as real, authoritative figures, they manage to get large audiences that most small-time renegade media outfits would not come close to matching. By posing as corporations on spoof websites, they are brought out and thought to be representatives for the corporations. For example, in the New Orleans incident, the Yes Men, through a false corporate spokesman, gives the community false hope about their land and homes - an altruistic step that the corporation SHOULD take, but ultimately doesn't. This attention draws a stark contrast to the reality of the situation, and the bizareness of such an outlandish statement draws much attention at the same time - and all that attention then gets focused on the corporation, who then looks bad. This is reminiscent of Chomsky's Propoganda Model, wherein Chomsky is shut out by the mass media (i.e. Dateline), and the only way the Yes Men can get these shocking, relatively unfiltered messages out is by fooling the mass media into thinking they're not outsiders of the mass media system.
Video Vortex
Elasser argues that Youtube disallows for an artistic avant-garde. The obsolence of art and the avant-garde. Deprofessionalism taht is like Wikipedia threatens art. Like Wikipedia, these ground up guys might create art. Tags merge art & technology. Overload of videos.
In “Constructive Instability”, Thomas Elasser argues that internet sites such as Youtube may destroy the artistic avant-garde by combining art and technology, making art a giant blur.
On the other hand, in Len Manovich's "The Practice of Every day Life," Len argues that Net 2.0 allows for the Internet user to make new media out of old, and therefore is valid art, despite breaking copyright and using existing copyrighted materials.
Elasser describes Youtube as an uncontrollable mutant of sorts, growing in directions that nobody can control. Len would agree in a sense, as it threatens the corporate "strategic" hold, forcing subcultures to buy into tightly controlled subcultures. At the same time, however, Len argues that the public has a control, forging new directions out of old media, and holding vast potential - and rivalling the most well-known commercial companies. Elasser disagrees, arguing that, in the face of such technology and an addicting, bottomless well of media, art and avant-garde need to redefine themselves if they want to survive.
Wiki-versation Final Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BP&dir=prev&offset=20100516191734&action=history
Username: ivmarton
I use wikipedia every day just to get some quick knowledge on some random curiosity i had seen somewhere else on the internet or on TV. I would have never thought i would contribute to a well known website such as this.
I initially choose the deepwater horizon oil spill, but that page was locked, so i looked to a major player in the oil spill: BP.
I am a more timid person, i dont like stepping on peoples toes. The first revision i had was relatively safe, citing that BP had a hearing in congress and that in this hearing blame was shifted. Through the week i saw that this revision change in grammar, wording, but the basic idea lived.
My next revision was in the same section. I cited a quote by the CEO of BP of him saying that compared to the big ocean, the spill is relatively tiny. (Which i thought was absurd.) So i included some of the potential impacts to the area including environmental, fisheries, and tourism. This revision was taken out little by little until all of it was gone 2 days later.
The next revision i made was citing the want of scientists to study the flow of the oil from the leak in order to find out the real rate of flow. To which BP replied that it would not be beneficial. I left this revision the way it was to see if it would last.
My Final revision elaborated on my opinion on why BP did not feel as though the real flow rate was important. This was deleted within 13 minutes because of personal opinion.
As this is an on-going situation that has not been resolved, there are a lot of facts being placed out in the open. Some get added. Most of my additions were cited so they survived. My personal opinion did not. It was very interesting viewing the edits on the page. One contributor had completely deleted the deep horizon spill heading and the contents to which many users responded on his talk page as to why he is doing it, and how he should get a username, as well as people who accuse him of being paid by the BP corporation to spin the article. I saw some unreliable sources been pointed out. However i never had anything posted on my talk page throughout the 6 days i was part of this expansive community.
Username: ivmarton
I use wikipedia every day just to get some quick knowledge on some random curiosity i had seen somewhere else on the internet or on TV. I would have never thought i would contribute to a well known website such as this.
I initially choose the deepwater horizon oil spill, but that page was locked, so i looked to a major player in the oil spill: BP.
I am a more timid person, i dont like stepping on peoples toes. The first revision i had was relatively safe, citing that BP had a hearing in congress and that in this hearing blame was shifted. Through the week i saw that this revision change in grammar, wording, but the basic idea lived.
My next revision was in the same section. I cited a quote by the CEO of BP of him saying that compared to the big ocean, the spill is relatively tiny. (Which i thought was absurd.) So i included some of the potential impacts to the area including environmental, fisheries, and tourism. This revision was taken out little by little until all of it was gone 2 days later.
The next revision i made was citing the want of scientists to study the flow of the oil from the leak in order to find out the real rate of flow. To which BP replied that it would not be beneficial. I left this revision the way it was to see if it would last.
My Final revision elaborated on my opinion on why BP did not feel as though the real flow rate was important. This was deleted within 13 minutes because of personal opinion.
As this is an on-going situation that has not been resolved, there are a lot of facts being placed out in the open. Some get added. Most of my additions were cited so they survived. My personal opinion did not. It was very interesting viewing the edits on the page. One contributor had completely deleted the deep horizon spill heading and the contents to which many users responded on his talk page as to why he is doing it, and how he should get a username, as well as people who accuse him of being paid by the BP corporation to spin the article. I saw some unreliable sources been pointed out. However i never had anything posted on my talk page throughout the 6 days i was part of this expansive community.
Blog 11 The Yes Men
The Yes Men critique the media by exposing the options available to the people, especially when it does not align with the special interest and the corporations. For example, they pranked the Dow chemical company in front of a BBC audience of 300 million people. Many more heard that and the stock in the company fell by a massive 3 percent. This fall of profit occurred despite the illusion of change of heart. What is supposed to be an act of compassion and kindness did not work in the favor of the company. Why does this happen? There are fewer government regulations to keep the companies in check. The Free Market free of regulation, has been claimed for a long time to be the most desirable workable ways to do economics. That is because the free market "should" correct itself. All of these government think tanks have the media available to them to spread this word and the government elected by the people all eat this up. They do not know any alternative. The Yes Men are trying to expose the false consciousness generated by the corporations and all their decisions and dealings.
Blog 10 Video Vortex
Thomas Elsaesser has a certain definition of art that does not define most of the material found on youtube. In contrast, Lev Manovich believes that through youtube, new forms of art are created.
Elaesser have a narrow minded view of art. In certain films, directors deliberately place the camera is a certain area. When we take a look at youtube media, often, there is no deliberate placement of the camera capturing the moment. Manovich believes that youtube has created a medium in which any user can place their work in the public eye. In doing so, the diversity of media has expanded. What is peculiar is that both seem to think art needs to be more "life". However, in different ways. Elasser wishes art becomes more life and not engineered and he insists that it needs to be in order for the internet to survive. Manovich sees life in the art through the interactions and communities created by the social media. People are talking more than ever before, and finding other ways to interact such as video and picture responses, and comments.
Elaesser have a narrow minded view of art. In certain films, directors deliberately place the camera is a certain area. When we take a look at youtube media, often, there is no deliberate placement of the camera capturing the moment. Manovich believes that youtube has created a medium in which any user can place their work in the public eye. In doing so, the diversity of media has expanded. What is peculiar is that both seem to think art needs to be more "life". However, in different ways. Elasser wishes art becomes more life and not engineered and he insists that it needs to be in order for the internet to survive. Manovich sees life in the art through the interactions and communities created by the social media. People are talking more than ever before, and finding other ways to interact such as video and picture responses, and comments.
"Yes Men"
The "Yes Men" critique media in a different way then most people. Rather than just talking about it or making ads they decided to go out into the world and attempt to fix it. They researched the problems to the fullest and devised plans to make the world more aware of the situations that were occurring around the world. In doing there critiquing they were more interested in making a scene to the companies themselves. Although the thought of how the people might react to false hope ran through their minds they felt that making the world see what the big companies could really do was more important. The "Yes Men" created fake websites pretending to be lead people in different corporations. Once their websites sparked hits and their information was read by the public multiple news stations, conferences, and meeting were arranged. Most media outlets thought that they were dealing with the real lead managers or executives of large companies when it was just the "Yes Men" trying to fix the world. These men gave hope, although it was false hope, to the world and the people that were affected by the large companies insensitive acts. Some of the media outlets tried to take down the "Yes Men" by asking questions like "Do you think it was fair to give people false hope?" This question was actually answered by almost every single member of the society that was affected by the large companies. Many citizens in India and New Orleans, the locations of negative results from large companies, were asked how they felt. Almost all of them responded that although it gave them false hope they appreciated it because it showed the world that the companies really could fix what they did to the citizens. It showed the world that the companies are just looking out for themselves and not the people that they might be hurting. I think that the most important factor about the "Yes Men' was that not just that they talked about what needed to be fixed they came up with plans to fix it. They wanted to care about the people. The "Yes Men" remind me of earlier in the quarter when we discussed how easily people can be fooled by media. This showed two levels of it. The citizens were easily fooled about many statements that the "Yes Men" made and second, they also just went along with the original statements from the large companies that nothing could be done or that their ideas were better. Many people were fooled by the paper that the "Yes Men" made. Some people just read it and thought ...wow, really?, where we see very few people mention that the date was six months in advance. It was interesting that some responses were this must be fake. All the readers had to do was to look at the date. However, this paper gave some people hope that the world really can be fixed, all it takes is people willing to make a stand. The media should not be able to sway us so easily. We need to think as a collective unit to make this world better and not just believe what the large companies are saying.
As I started this project I really had no idea what article i would like to edit. I finally decided to edit the article titled "Drumline." I decided that this would be a fun article to be a part of since I am very passionate about the subject. In the beginning I mad a few edit just to see if anyone would edit any of them or begin to add on. Intentionally I decided to misspell something to see if anyone would catch it. This is a user based edited website so I was curious to see if other users would even catch my intentional error. A few days passed and I started to get worried that no one would respond. I keep frequently checking the wiki page and after a while a few sparks were made. I noticed that the few users that edited were adding their take on what they felt was important about drumline. One user you could tell was particularly devoted to proper grammar and spelling. The user also felt that drumline should be two words, so the user edited ever word in the article. I felt that it was interesting to see how different users edited certain parts. If the users were anything like me they probably gravitated more to the section that meant the most to them or that they were a part of for the longest. All-in-all I felt like this was an interesting project because even though I knew that wikipedia was an edited encyclopedia, a user base edited encyclopedia to be exact, I did not fully understand how it worked. Editing a page is very simple and it made me realize how inaccurate some of the information could be on the website. There were not many major changes. As I said earlier one user gravitated to grammatical errors and some technical wording. Other users just added snippets of information about different sections, such as where the front ensemble might be placed or how a cymbal line may use different size cymbals to create different tones.
Yes Men Response
In the film "The Yes Men Fix the World," there are two men who play the lead throughout the whole film. These two men go by the name of Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bananno. Throughout their film they play pranks on media companies/organizations by pretending to be people that are obviously not. Two of those who the Yes Men pretended to be were corporate officials and government officials. They did this to take these media companies/organizations down as they produce media that benefit corporate executives. The reason why the Yes Men play these pranks is because they do not like how corporate executives use media to give false testimonies to those people who truly believe in these corporate executives. The Yes Men try to take them down as they do not appreciate how corporate executives profit from the lies they make up that will supposedly benefit "the people" , but in the long run do not.
The way Andy and Mike would play these brilliant pranks was by going after those who brought neglect unto India. Once they would see this, the Yes Men would in an instant intervene to take them down. Another way the Yes Men would critique media was by creating a fake website that would soon take down all Dow representatives.
Throughout each of our classes, we have discussed how influential media is and is continually rising in each of our lives. Media has become such a big influence that it has become invisible to us and even "normal" in everyday life. Because media has become so invisible to us media spectators, the Yes Men have had to impose by critiquing such media to reveal the reality.
The way Andy and Mike would play these brilliant pranks was by going after those who brought neglect unto India. Once they would see this, the Yes Men would in an instant intervene to take them down. Another way the Yes Men would critique media was by creating a fake website that would soon take down all Dow representatives.
Throughout each of our classes, we have discussed how influential media is and is continually rising in each of our lives. Media has become such a big influence that it has become invisible to us and even "normal" in everyday life. Because media has become so invisible to us media spectators, the Yes Men have had to impose by critiquing such media to reveal the reality.
Wiki-versation blog post: Final Entry
Over the course of the project, few changes were made with respect to the particular section of the Gorillaz music group article with which I was concerned. Their live performance section remained untouched for a long while until I pushed hard and made further alterations tonight, resulting in a small wiki-war between myself and another user. Throughout the experiment, I used different techniques when altering the article, ranging from including definite fact, approximated fact, opinion, and complete fabrication in order to generate a variety of different responses from users. My first comment slighted the group's performance at the Coachella Valley Music Festival, and was quickly removed thereafter, by angry fans I presume. Interestingly enough, the user who realtered my posts most frequently, pheeps21, provided new layers of insight about happenings in the crowd at the music festival performance on which I commented, but also got his facts wrong on occasion as well. The song "Superfast Jellyfish" has not yet been released as a single in the US or in the UK, and his comment concerning frontman Damon Albarn of '90s alternative band blur was both contextually inaccurate and grammatically incorrect. I'm also not sure I saw any people in jellyfish costumes at the festival, but decided against altering his text concerning that, as I might have missed them in the sea of people attending that night. This project has taught me a lot about the truth and the fallacy that is so easily attainable through wikipedia, and how it is as much about fan-service as it is about accurate information, at least in the case of music-based pages such as this one. It is very much a democratic vessel for information, and very much not a democratic vessel for opinion. Regardless of intended use, the wiki concept is a great right that requires great responsibility on the part of its participants.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
wiki-versation blog post 3
Finally had an experience that I'd actually deem a "wiki-versation." Argued through the website with someone for a good few minutes about particulars concerning audience actions and motives prior to the Gorillaz coachella appearance. Excited to keep monitoring for a few hours to see if there are any final developments.
Wiki-versation post 3
This is the link to get to my definition of "Religion" and "Religious"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religious&diff=362847519&oldid=362583196
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religious&diff=362847519&oldid=362583196
Wiki-versation post 2
In my attempt to re-define the word "Religious," I had to first re-define was Religion is. When it came time to post it, I came to find the next day that someone had taken off my definition. So what I did was re-post the same definition I had posted the day before because I wanted my definition to be seen by more than just that person who decided to delete my entry. Although my definition of the word was simple and short, it became a big deal to the person who deleted my entry and now that my definition of the word "Religious" is re-posted, it has yet to be taken off as it is still standing on Wikipedia.
Media Experiment 3-Wiki-versation
For this media Experiment I chose to do my entry on the recent debate over the Arizona Senate Bill. I started this assignment very late so I did not have much of a chance to get too much of a dialogue exchange with other users. However, I attached my discussion on profiling from the site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Support_Our_Law_Enforcement_and_Safe_Neighborhoods_Act#Profiling
Luckily, I did have two responses after my discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Support_Our_Law_Enforcement_and_Safe_Neighborhoods_Act#Profiling
While I was extremely hard pressed for time with this experiment it was extremely informative. Before I started this research I did not have a good idea of that the bill actually did and just thought it would give police officers more leeway to arest people based on suspicion of being illegal. I was wrong because I only had a general idea of what the bill truly did. I was shown by a wiki user called JeffConrad that the bill actually overrides the fact that a state cannot enforce civil provisions of federal law which immigration falls under. Immigration enforcement is an example of civil law. Thus, the bill intertwines federal and state law which is very interesting. Furthermore, the bill allows an officer to detain a person based on immigration status but does not require the detained person to respond back. I did not realize any of these these things before this assignment.
While I was unable to complete this assignment to its full extent I feel that I did understand the underlying goal behind it. When I began my discussion on wikipedia I had never even thought about commenting or giving my input on a wikipedia article. After I did this I realized I could contribute my opinions and ideas to a vast network of information. In wikipedia thousands of facts, ideologies, and opinions are tweeked and criticized everyday. I did not appreciate wikipedia before this because I did not think about the idea of user generated information. Now, I see why everyone is allowed to edit entries because it allows for a more holistic and all encompassing approach to learning and information. Everyone is involved and this is what I believe user generated knowledge and info stand for. People obviously abuse this privilege but wikipedia is special because it allows users to give their perspective and knowledge on a subject. Users can actively debate and criticize each other's opinions in a respective and civil manner.
At it's core wikipedia is a perfect example of democracy. It is an arena where users can exchange ideas and information and actively voice their views.It is much like a modern day electronic Agora where knowledge and ideas can be exchanged. The Agora was the market place or meeting place in ancient Greece where ideas and philosophies were exchanged. Now that a significant majority our interaction takes place on the internet I feel it is safe to compare wikipedia to a modern day Agora. Two key principles of deomcracy are equality and freedom. Wikipedia definitely exhibits these two principles because all user's opinions are equal and they have the freedom to say what they feel. At wikipedia, knowledge and information are definitely user generated because they control the flow of information which is published on the site and have the ability to edit what they want. The user has ultimate freedom in controlling how information is portrayed.
Wikipedia is an excellent example of a democratizing website where users are the ultimate source of knowledge and info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Support_Our_Law_Enforcement_and_Safe_Neighborhoods_Act#Profiling
Luckily, I did have two responses after my discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Support_Our_Law_Enforcement_and_Safe_Neighborhoods_Act#Profiling
While I was extremely hard pressed for time with this experiment it was extremely informative. Before I started this research I did not have a good idea of that the bill actually did and just thought it would give police officers more leeway to arest people based on suspicion of being illegal. I was wrong because I only had a general idea of what the bill truly did. I was shown by a wiki user called JeffConrad that the bill actually overrides the fact that a state cannot enforce civil provisions of federal law which immigration falls under. Immigration enforcement is an example of civil law. Thus, the bill intertwines federal and state law which is very interesting. Furthermore, the bill allows an officer to detain a person based on immigration status but does not require the detained person to respond back. I did not realize any of these these things before this assignment.
While I was unable to complete this assignment to its full extent I feel that I did understand the underlying goal behind it. When I began my discussion on wikipedia I had never even thought about commenting or giving my input on a wikipedia article. After I did this I realized I could contribute my opinions and ideas to a vast network of information. In wikipedia thousands of facts, ideologies, and opinions are tweeked and criticized everyday. I did not appreciate wikipedia before this because I did not think about the idea of user generated information. Now, I see why everyone is allowed to edit entries because it allows for a more holistic and all encompassing approach to learning and information. Everyone is involved and this is what I believe user generated knowledge and info stand for. People obviously abuse this privilege but wikipedia is special because it allows users to give their perspective and knowledge on a subject. Users can actively debate and criticize each other's opinions in a respective and civil manner.
At it's core wikipedia is a perfect example of democracy. It is an arena where users can exchange ideas and information and actively voice their views.It is much like a modern day electronic Agora where knowledge and ideas can be exchanged. The Agora was the market place or meeting place in ancient Greece where ideas and philosophies were exchanged. Now that a significant majority our interaction takes place on the internet I feel it is safe to compare wikipedia to a modern day Agora. Two key principles of deomcracy are equality and freedom. Wikipedia definitely exhibits these two principles because all user's opinions are equal and they have the freedom to say what they feel. At wikipedia, knowledge and information are definitely user generated because they control the flow of information which is published on the site and have the ability to edit what they want. The user has ultimate freedom in controlling how information is portrayed.
Wikipedia is an excellent example of a democratizing website where users are the ultimate source of knowledge and info.
Wiki-versation blog post 2
Made my second wikipedia post on the gorillaz page about some goings on in the crowd at Coachellafest. Waiting for a nibble...
Yes Men Response
The Yes Men primarily operate as a cultural jamming group, in that their preferred tactics is to twist standard media in order to expose what they perceive as problems or lies. Their main critique of media is that large companies and other groups involved in big business can often avoid heavy scrutiny and consequences for their actions. The pranks they play are often designed to show what they view as a logical extension of exiting policies held by these companies, such as normalizing practices that can kill people so long as it makes enough money. By taking the logical to a usually ridiculous endpoint the hope is that people will realize that the underlying principles that the Yes Men use to arrive at their projects are morally or otherwise wrong, and then perhaps go on to question the tactics and practices of the company in question more thoroughly.
To use a specific example, by introducing the idea of the Department of Housing and Urban Development dropping its current mode of operation in New Orleans in order to rebuild the housing that had existed before Katrina- and thus allow many of New Orleans’ citizens to return- they hopped that people would wonder why the department wasn’t doing this in actuality. If the people were happy about this hoax plan, then why isn’t it implemented? The easiest conclusion to reach then is the one the Yes Men hold, namely that the current model is better for the big businesses.
To use a specific example, by introducing the idea of the Department of Housing and Urban Development dropping its current mode of operation in New Orleans in order to rebuild the housing that had existed before Katrina- and thus allow many of New Orleans’ citizens to return- they hopped that people would wonder why the department wasn’t doing this in actuality. If the people were happy about this hoax plan, then why isn’t it implemented? The easiest conclusion to reach then is the one the Yes Men hold, namely that the current model is better for the big businesses.
Video Vortex
In her article, Len Manovich supports the use of YouTube, stating that is a creative outlet for people to explore and use different forms of media to create new forms of art.
In his article, Thomas Elsaesser does not support the use of YouTube, stating that it is a form of technology that actually takes away from the meaning of art itself.
Manovich encourages people to use YouTube because it is an opportunity for endless forms of art to be created by people. YouTube allows people to express themselves, and communicate with others as well around the world. Elsaesser, however, does not believe that YouTube produces true art because it is a form of technology to share media, not to create art itself. He does not believe YouTube is a form of true art. The two have different views on what exactly art is. Manovich encourages freedom of expression in any form when it comes to art; however, Elsaesser believes that there are restrictions as to what art is and what it is not. Although Elsaesser believes YouTube threatens the meaning of art, Manovich believes YouTube is redefining the meaning of art in a positive way.
In his article, Thomas Elsaesser does not support the use of YouTube, stating that it is a form of technology that actually takes away from the meaning of art itself.
Manovich encourages people to use YouTube because it is an opportunity for endless forms of art to be created by people. YouTube allows people to express themselves, and communicate with others as well around the world. Elsaesser, however, does not believe that YouTube produces true art because it is a form of technology to share media, not to create art itself. He does not believe YouTube is a form of true art. The two have different views on what exactly art is. Manovich encourages freedom of expression in any form when it comes to art; however, Elsaesser believes that there are restrictions as to what art is and what it is not. Although Elsaesser believes YouTube threatens the meaning of art, Manovich believes YouTube is redefining the meaning of art in a positive way.
Wiki-versation blog post 1
I attempted to alter the wiki entry on photography with little success; however, my first alteration of the Gorillaz page concerning their good, yet underwhelming performance at this year's Coachella music festival seem to hit soft spots, and was quickly removed. I'll be adding in more details about the front of the crowd at the festival and going into detail about personal testaments from people at the festival.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Blog 11: The Yes Men Save the World
The Yes Men made the critique that the media is used as a tool to benefit corporate executives. Typically, the media encourages people to "trust" corporate executives, who promise that they will "do what's best" for people. That is in fact not true. Corporations shape media to give a false image of themselves, when really they are using tactics to make profit above all; this is demonstrated through the "Acceptable risk calculator" that the Yes Men created. Truthfully, most corporations accept that a certain amount of people must suffer in order to make a profit. However, their image is spun in the media in a positive way to hide their true intentions. This can be linked to the concept of false consciousness. Most people never find out what corporations are really up to because their practices are hidden by the media. People usually believe corprations do good for the world besides making money. This image is produced through messages in the media such as a corporation presenting themselves as a "green company" to win more approval. That corporation may be a "green company", but they may also be causing more harm than good for the world.
The Yes Men's plan was to expose the Dow company to millions of people on the news channel BBC. One of them posed as a fake represenative of the Dow Company on BBC, and exposed the inhumane damage they caused in Bhopal, India twenty years ago that still persists even today. Once Dow's flaws had been exposed to the world, their stocks fell immmediately by almost three percent, which is a huge loss in the stock market. Prior to their exposure, their profits were flourishing. This example reveals how false consciousness is extremely present in the media when it comes to preserving the image of corpartions who are hungry for profit. False consciousness allows several huge corporations to continue to profit because the media helps them do so. The media acts as a cover up. The Yes Men showed that corporations typically value profit over human lives. Prior to the Yes Men's stunt on international television, people really had no idea. Because the Yes Men were able to take down Dow so easily in that short interview, this shows just how influential media can be. The response to their stunt was extremely quick, and was the top of news headlines for an hour afterwards. People were easily persuaded, even though the Yes Men were merely acting as fakes the whole time. Even the city of Bhopal heard of the news immmediately, and hundreds were given false hope in a matter of hours. Public opinion can be easily swayed through media, even if the source of information is not accurate. The Yes Men's stunt was short lived, but they were able to cause hours of global controversey from an interview that lasted only a few minutes.
The Yes Men's plan was to expose the Dow company to millions of people on the news channel BBC. One of them posed as a fake represenative of the Dow Company on BBC, and exposed the inhumane damage they caused in Bhopal, India twenty years ago that still persists even today. Once Dow's flaws had been exposed to the world, their stocks fell immmediately by almost three percent, which is a huge loss in the stock market. Prior to their exposure, their profits were flourishing. This example reveals how false consciousness is extremely present in the media when it comes to preserving the image of corpartions who are hungry for profit. False consciousness allows several huge corporations to continue to profit because the media helps them do so. The media acts as a cover up. The Yes Men showed that corporations typically value profit over human lives. Prior to the Yes Men's stunt on international television, people really had no idea. Because the Yes Men were able to take down Dow so easily in that short interview, this shows just how influential media can be. The response to their stunt was extremely quick, and was the top of news headlines for an hour afterwards. People were easily persuaded, even though the Yes Men were merely acting as fakes the whole time. Even the city of Bhopal heard of the news immmediately, and hundreds were given false hope in a matter of hours. Public opinion can be easily swayed through media, even if the source of information is not accurate. The Yes Men's stunt was short lived, but they were able to cause hours of global controversey from an interview that lasted only a few minutes.
Response to The Yes Men Fix the World
The Yes Men, are two guys named, Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno who spend their time critiquing media but playing pranks on major companies and media organizations. They pretend to be different government officials, corporate officials, and other controversial subjects. They make fake websites that help bring down media but messing with the stock prices. If a company like Union Carbide, tries to get away with poisoning victims in India yet settle in a negligent way, the Yes Men go after them. Luckily Dow bought out Union Carbide, so the Yes Men created a website for Dow, only to be invited to a conference on international finance. They wanted to go to this to show bankers that the logic of ripping off poor countries is not the way to go.
They break down media by going in and pranking them to a point where people start to believe that what they are doing is real. They get in disguise and then go impersonate Dow representatives. The make up fake market values to see if people respond and how they accept this news which is usually understood and accepted because media can be so influential.
In class we discuss how big an influence media has on our lives and this is what the Yes Men are critiquing. While they are taking down companies by impersonating them, soon to embarrass them, only to show how their work can ruin a stock because of how influential media has become. All they had to do is go to a conference and pretend to be Dow and yet all the people at the conference loved them for their 'refreshing honesty.'
They break down media by going in and pranking them to a point where people start to believe that what they are doing is real. They get in disguise and then go impersonate Dow representatives. The make up fake market values to see if people respond and how they accept this news which is usually understood and accepted because media can be so influential.
In class we discuss how big an influence media has on our lives and this is what the Yes Men are critiquing. While they are taking down companies by impersonating them, soon to embarrass them, only to show how their work can ruin a stock because of how influential media has become. All they had to do is go to a conference and pretend to be Dow and yet all the people at the conference loved them for their 'refreshing honesty.'
Response to Video Vortex
In the article Video Vortex is separated into four different sections, each of which discusses the website YouTube. One article which is entitled "The Practice of Everyday Media Life," by Len Manovich talks about how YouTube is the perfect way to broadcast yourself to the world. She calls the way in which people do so, art, because people have their own ways of defining art and this is one of them. Another article in the series, entitled "Constructive Instability," by Thomas Elsaesser says the opposite of Manovich. He walks about how this sort of media is actually taking attention away from the whole art world, a place where media art is not included or taken seriously.
The two authors have differing views on if broadcasting yourself through YouTube would be considered art or not. Elsaesser does not think that YouTube can be considered actual art because it takes away from the true art form and what people consider avant-garde which he does not consider YouTube a part of at all. This is because he sees YouTube as a organism that has surpassed any sort of control and is considered unstoppable because of how easily anyone can post and view videos. Manovich see's Youtube as an opportunity to create ones own art form. She sees this site as a new way of mediating information through different people and creating a world where one can consider it art and bring their own meaning to it.
The two authors have differing views on if broadcasting yourself through YouTube would be considered art or not. Elsaesser does not think that YouTube can be considered actual art because it takes away from the true art form and what people consider avant-garde which he does not consider YouTube a part of at all. This is because he sees YouTube as a organism that has surpassed any sort of control and is considered unstoppable because of how easily anyone can post and view videos. Manovich see's Youtube as an opportunity to create ones own art form. She sees this site as a new way of mediating information through different people and creating a world where one can consider it art and bring their own meaning to it.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Video Vortex
In the article Video Vortex, there were four articles in which You Tube was discussed. The two articles which stood out to me the most was "The Practice of Everyday (Media) Life" by Len Manovich and "Constructive Instability" by Thomas Elsaesser.
In Len Manovich's short article, her argument is more pro on you tube thus saying which every way we want to mediate ourselves through media is our own way art; meaning art is perceived in different ways depending on the person defining it.
On the other hand, Thomas Elsaesser is saying that using You Tube and other sorts of media is taking the attention away from the real form of art which "media art" is not included.
As much as Len Manovich is in agreement with Geert Lovink, taking You Tube more seriously as any one's own form of art, Len Manovich is in disagreement with Thomas Elsaesser in what exactly is a form of art. Manovish sees such sites like You Tube as a new form of mediating any information while Elsaesser sees these sites running further away from what real art really is such as avant-garde. Elsaesser feels as if interactive media has made people underestimate the difference between art and technology. As much as Elsaesser thinks this is the problem, Manovich sees this interactive media as a solution offering a better form of expressive art.
Video Vortex
In his short article “Constructive Instability” Thomas Elsaesser explores the interconnections between modern interactive media, such as YouTube, avant-garde art techniques, and complex biological systems; in particular he delves into the idea that interactive media has blurred the lines between art, technology, and life due to it’s unpredictability and potential for random growth. Len Manovich explores a related topic in “The Practice of Everyday (Media) Life”, looking into the customizability of sites like YouTube, and how the ways in which people choose to arrange various things together can constitute art itself.
While both article offer a related view of YouTube as an unpredictable system there is a clear divergence in how the authors believe the site became unpredictable. Elsaesser sees the site as an organism unto itself, which has grown past the expectations of its creators into something new and nearly unstoppable. Control of this being is no longer entirely in anybody’s hands, and it will take whatever direction it wishes to take. Manovich offers the contrary view that these sites are under the direct control of the public, which creates the morphological nature of the sites by mixing and matching all of the options and offerings creating by the professionals. Instead of being an uncontrollable juggernaut that threatens to swallow art if artist don’t keep up, Manovich sees YouTube and related sites are a fertile ground for new art methods to appear from the nearly limitless possibilities of mixing and matching.
While both article offer a related view of YouTube as an unpredictable system there is a clear divergence in how the authors believe the site became unpredictable. Elsaesser sees the site as an organism unto itself, which has grown past the expectations of its creators into something new and nearly unstoppable. Control of this being is no longer entirely in anybody’s hands, and it will take whatever direction it wishes to take. Manovich offers the contrary view that these sites are under the direct control of the public, which creates the morphological nature of the sites by mixing and matching all of the options and offerings creating by the professionals. Instead of being an uncontrollable juggernaut that threatens to swallow art if artist don’t keep up, Manovich sees YouTube and related sites are a fertile ground for new art methods to appear from the nearly limitless possibilities of mixing and matching.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Project- Modesto
Thought I'd try using my hometown as the base for the wikiversation project.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modesto
History: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modesto,_California&action=history
User HerrFaclon (yippee-ki-yay)
Not a lot of activity (hey, there was when I was looking it up about a week ago). We'll see what happens. My initial update was to add a bit of info to the previously blank crime section.
Updates!
Still not a lot going on- little bit of chatter about sister cities (is one of them actually a sister county!? stay tuned to find out!), something about bots, blah, blah, blah. Apparently the Modesto featured in Monsters vs. Aliens (the movie from a bit ago) isn't actually like the real Modesto at all. Scandalous. If I'd ever seen the movie I might have a better idea what was meant... not that it matters; none of this matters. I did a little layout work, as it seemed to me that the introduction was a bit bloated. I also cut some people from the list of "famous" resident's or ex-residents.
I have a miraculous plan B to enact if I feel I need to make up some extra BS for the presentation. I've sown a few seeds, but I'll start in earnest tomorrow. Maybe.
More Updates: So I basically started throwing out some highly speculative or subjective ideas into the wiki to see how long they would last for. Things like saying that the low air quality was dangerous to some individuals (is it? I don't know.) or deriding the local newspaper for its lack of real news. Also some negative comments about the shopping scene. Some of them were down in minutes while others lasted a few days. Some are still up, namely that roundabouts were added to ease traffic congestion with mixed results (what does that mean exactly? I don't know.) and that the plans for a new high school are on hold while the budget is "shaky". In actuality I didn't even know there were (are?) plans for a new high school. Hard to say if just a sudden influx of people who cared enough to edit or if the newer statements were just more inflammatory. After that it was just a bit more minor editing of the page, nothing worth noting beyond this much.
I might use this (the changes right before I started) in the presentation. Not sure yet, but I'll put it up here to be safe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modesto
History: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modesto,_California&action=history
User HerrFaclon (yippee-ki-yay)
Not a lot of activity (hey, there was when I was looking it up about a week ago). We'll see what happens. My initial update was to add a bit of info to the previously blank crime section.
Updates!
Still not a lot going on- little bit of chatter about sister cities (is one of them actually a sister county!? stay tuned to find out!), something about bots, blah, blah, blah. Apparently the Modesto featured in Monsters vs. Aliens (the movie from a bit ago) isn't actually like the real Modesto at all. Scandalous. If I'd ever seen the movie I might have a better idea what was meant... not that it matters; none of this matters. I did a little layout work, as it seemed to me that the introduction was a bit bloated. I also cut some people from the list of "famous" resident's or ex-residents.
I have a miraculous plan B to enact if I feel I need to make up some extra BS for the presentation. I've sown a few seeds, but I'll start in earnest tomorrow. Maybe.
More Updates: So I basically started throwing out some highly speculative or subjective ideas into the wiki to see how long they would last for. Things like saying that the low air quality was dangerous to some individuals (is it? I don't know.) or deriding the local newspaper for its lack of real news. Also some negative comments about the shopping scene. Some of them were down in minutes while others lasted a few days. Some are still up, namely that roundabouts were added to ease traffic congestion with mixed results (what does that mean exactly? I don't know.) and that the plans for a new high school are on hold while the budget is "shaky". In actuality I didn't even know there were (are?) plans for a new high school. Hard to say if just a sudden influx of people who cared enough to edit or if the newer statements were just more inflammatory. After that it was just a bit more minor editing of the page, nothing worth noting beyond this much.
I might use this (the changes right before I started) in the presentation. Not sure yet, but I'll put it up here to be safe.
Wiki-versation
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special:Contributions&contribs=user&target=Ivmarton&namespace=&tagfilter=&year=&month=-1
i decided to write about BP because the gulf oil spill page is still partially locked
my username on wikipedia is ivmarton
i decided to write about BP because the gulf oil spill page is still partially locked
my username on wikipedia is ivmarton
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Wiki-Versation Report
Wikipedia followed: Race (Classification of Human Beings) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28classification_of_human_beings%29
Revision History Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Race_%28classification_of_human_beings%29&action=history
I decided to edit the page "Race (The Classification of Human Beings) because I know a lot about this topic, and I know that it is definitely controversial. When I went to make my first edit, I was not really sure what to do because the article was so long and full of scientific, wordy information. Then it hit to do something controversial. I spaced the first paragraph down a little bit, and put “Race is a social construction. It does not really exist,” at the very beginning of the article. It got deleted within minutes. Then I posted it a second time minutes after. Again, it got deleted within minutes. A fellow user then messaged me warning me to discuss such controversial posts firsts on the talk page before posting them on the article itself. He said I was committing vandalism. We then got into a debate about vandalism; he never responded to my last comment to him, so I figured I won the argument. For my third edit, I tried a less controversial approach to see if my post could survive. I then posted “However, some people with hints of African ancestry had light enough skin and other features to pass as ‘white’. This did not happen for many people though,” in one of the sections. It is actually still there in the article as I type this blog. I commented on the talk page saying the article was too long, and that many sections could stand alone as their own articles; a fellow user agreed with me on the talk page, however, nobody else responded to my suggestion or made changes to the article. For my fourth change, I posted “The one drop rule has resulted in colorism today in the Black community.” but this edit was deleted by the end of the night. Yesterday I posted a fifth change stating, “Many African-Americans today still possess small traces of European ancestry because of this mixing of races.” in one of the sections; it is still there with my third change that has survived.
Overall I must say I had fun with this experience of interacting with others online on such a site. Wikipedia is democratizing in the fact that it is user-generated. A corporation does not post the information on Wikipedia; these are real, ordinary people taking the time to construct numerous articles accounting information. However, when I was making my changes, I was almost offended that one person across the country who did not even know me was trying to stifle what I had to say. It was controversial in their opinion, but to me it was not; I even explained to the user that the concept I posted is even taught in University of California schools. I felt the site lost a sense of democracy for myself when my posts kept getting deleted at first. Overall though, I feel proud that two of my five edits survived in the article. Now millions of people have the ability to see what I have written.
Revision History Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Race_%28classification_of_human_beings%29&action=history
I decided to edit the page "Race (The Classification of Human Beings) because I know a lot about this topic, and I know that it is definitely controversial. When I went to make my first edit, I was not really sure what to do because the article was so long and full of scientific, wordy information. Then it hit to do something controversial. I spaced the first paragraph down a little bit, and put “Race is a social construction. It does not really exist,” at the very beginning of the article. It got deleted within minutes. Then I posted it a second time minutes after. Again, it got deleted within minutes. A fellow user then messaged me warning me to discuss such controversial posts firsts on the talk page before posting them on the article itself. He said I was committing vandalism. We then got into a debate about vandalism; he never responded to my last comment to him, so I figured I won the argument. For my third edit, I tried a less controversial approach to see if my post could survive. I then posted “However, some people with hints of African ancestry had light enough skin and other features to pass as ‘white’. This did not happen for many people though,” in one of the sections. It is actually still there in the article as I type this blog. I commented on the talk page saying the article was too long, and that many sections could stand alone as their own articles; a fellow user agreed with me on the talk page, however, nobody else responded to my suggestion or made changes to the article. For my fourth change, I posted “The one drop rule has resulted in colorism today in the Black community.” but this edit was deleted by the end of the night. Yesterday I posted a fifth change stating, “Many African-Americans today still possess small traces of European ancestry because of this mixing of races.” in one of the sections; it is still there with my third change that has survived.
Overall I must say I had fun with this experience of interacting with others online on such a site. Wikipedia is democratizing in the fact that it is user-generated. A corporation does not post the information on Wikipedia; these are real, ordinary people taking the time to construct numerous articles accounting information. However, when I was making my changes, I was almost offended that one person across the country who did not even know me was trying to stifle what I had to say. It was controversial in their opinion, but to me it was not; I even explained to the user that the concept I posted is even taught in University of California schools. I felt the site lost a sense of democracy for myself when my posts kept getting deleted at first. Overall though, I feel proud that two of my five edits survived in the article. Now millions of people have the ability to see what I have written.
Wiki
For my wiki project i decided to edit the page for drumline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drumline - this is after my edit
Wiki-versation project
For my project I decided to edit the page for TOM Shoes. Recently I read an article implying that the shoes TOMS sends over to a third world country for their campaign (when you buy a pair of shoes from them for $40-60 a pair is sent to another country) is of lesser quality of the one we actually pay for. I posted on on the page only to be threatened by other users to be blocked from the page. This URL will take you to the history of the page where you can see my posts and how I responded to the threat of being blocked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TOMS_Shoes&action=history
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TOMS_Shoes&action=history
Friday, May 7, 2010
Wiki-Versation Updates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28classification_of_human_beings%29
I am following the Wikipedia page "Race (Classification of Human Beings)" for my WikiVersation experiment.
I am following the Wikipedia page "Race (Classification of Human Beings)" for my WikiVersation experiment.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Critical Concepts Dictionary
Jürgen Habermas:
A german sociologist and philosopher who developed the concept of the "public sphere" in his book, "The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere." Habermas proposed that as a middle class became more prevalent in society, the "representational" culture instated by Monarchies faded away, instead leaving room for the middle class public to formulate its own ideas and opinions on important political, economic, social, and religious issues. The space in which the public could meet in order to formulate opinions and critically discuss these issues is what became known as the "public sphere." According to Habermas, the public sphere has already decayed and no longer exists due to the control over public opinion exercised by mass media and the propaganda model. With such a small spectrum of available opinions to discuss, the sphere no longer serves any function.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Critical concept
One of the theorist which I thought has been the most influential towards me has been Jean Kilbourne. In her film Still Killing Us Softly she uses a variety of advertisements which portray many skinny women. Through these advertisements she speaks to us in claiming a change. She speaks about how these skinny women that has been conveyed as sexy throughout time has brought girl to lower self esteems. Unfortunately all these ads have come to make girls think this is the perfect body to having bringing them to do things they might regret later on.
Blog 9b week 6 Critical Concepts Dictionary
Jean Kilbourne was one of the theorists I found most interesting. In her documentary "Killing Us Softly" we are given an inside look at the methods advertisers use to entice their audience through exploitation of women. She displays explicit evidence that certain ads display women as objects rather than human beings. Many ads show women branded or dressed like a product, displayed as an animal, or dismembered by solely focusing on the breasts or butt. It is this objectivity, Kilbourne says, that is the first step to justfiying violence against another person. When we view a person as more of an object than a person we don't truly value them as a human being and can justify treating them as less than a person. While she does not beleive ads directly cause violence against women they truly give people an incorrect scope on reality and women. Kibourne finds the images that sell womens perfect body types as a skewed perfection that is designed to make you lust for a perfect body type. Advertising emphasis is almost alsways on body image, stressing youth, and perfection. Truthfully, a very small percentage of women have a model boy type and this exploitation only serves to give women an incorrect and unhealthy body image. This skewed body image is exactly what advertisers want you to think of as standard because it is their main ploy in enticing you to buy their products. With the images of a women's perfect body on many products this plants this subconscious idea in women's minds that they can obtain a better nody througha prodcut. Essentially, Kilbourne is communicating that ads send the message that you are incomplete, your body is insufficient, and a certain product can improve your beauty and your body. Killing us softly is a healthy reminder that no one is perfect and we should be vigilent about discerning the underlying meaning of ads true messages.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Critical Concepts Dictionary: Public Sphere
Jürgen Habermas introduced the idea of the public sphere: something that didn't exist until certain forces lined up - economic forces, technological forces, religious forces - to create a middle class, and therefore birth of public opinion. The public sphere is an area in social life where people can meet and have rational and critical debates about social/political issues. Ideally, this is a positive thing for the middle class, who then can keep authorities in check. This information today, Habermas argues,drowned out by infotainment and other mass entertainment media.
Response to Critical Concepts Dictionary
Jean Kilbourne, a woman theorist who made the Killing Them Softly series, examined ads in magazines and analyzed how they depicted women. In some ads she would talk about how the model used in the ad is usually very skinny with a perfect complexion. She discusses how this is the reality. She goes on to explain how ads such as this bring young girls self esteems down as they aspire to be just as thin and perfect as these airbrushed models. She also discusses how in ads with both men and women, the men come off as dominate and have the perfect look while the women are usually in some demeaning or belittling position. She talks about how through these ads young girls who are impressionable might be influenced to some how harm themselves to be just as perfect.
Dictionary entry Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky, renowned linguist and political activist was a main proponent of the propaganda model. This is the theory that the media skews information in order to advance their own business and revenues. The corporations have full control of what is heard by the audience and will often doctor articles in order to more effectively control the population
Review Concepts- John Dewey
John Dewey, known as the father of modern critical thinking, championed the idea of critical thinking as reflective thinking. His definition: "Active, persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of grounds which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends." Dewey viewed critical thinking as not only considering the item in question itself, but also where it came from and where it will go. His point about "active... consideration" is a key underlying point in many definitions of critical thinking, as most scholars consider active thought, as opposed to reflexive thought, a critical cornerstone to any form of critical thinking.
BLOG 9B: Critical Concepts Dictionary (PUBLIC SPHERE)
Jurgen Habermas discusses the idea of the public sphere. Modern life is essentially a theater. People use talking as a medium to engage in political participation. The public sphere is ultimately a realm of social life where public opinions can be formed and dispersed. The public sphere acts a mediator between one’s private sphere and the larger sphere of public authority. It is the site of the production and circulation of discourses that may be considered critical of the State. The public sphere is distinctive from the economy. Its role is not to sell. The public sphere is a place to exchange ideas. It is essential in order for participatory democracy to exist.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Critical Concepts
Jean Kilborne, the author of Killing Us Softly 3, is most known for tying together powerful images in the media to public problems; such as alcohol, eating disorders, and violence. Kilborne approached what is the reality that women face in today’s society. She shows us the stereotypes and ads that women have to face every day. In critiquing male ads she examines ones that may be similar to women’s ads (i.e. perfect male bodies), yet the captions along with the ads rarely scrutinize men the same way that they do to women. The ads give a false security to women, making them think that they will never be perfect unless they look like models.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Modernity, Spectatorship, Power
My most self-conscious moments tend to be when my suitemates and neighbors start talking about their family life or really fun-sounding traditions, etc, etc, and I begin to think about how different and less-positive my past familial experiences have been.
For ad: display an intimate but comfy space in which 7 to 10 people can talk freely about their lives and relate well to each other, in an manner one could even call excitatory. The space should consist of three sofas, a television on in the background, and a table, possibly with a disgruntled deck of cards that's clearly been used, but is not currently in use. Now is the time for reminiscing. People tend to shout over each other in proclamation of how awesome the things they do/did with family and friends are. The camera pans across the room as they discuss their fun, sometimes even jumping to certain individuals who become enthused enough to interject with their own tales. After a while, it's clear that one member of the couch community has remained silent for a good while, and so they community initiates the gaze as the camera pans to the leftmost seat on one of the couches. The individual struggles to come up with some sort of summer camp, some holiday tradition that hasn't collapsed due to family deaths or even just something moderately happy that can be related in some way. Perspiration forms on the forehead, the brow furrows, and the distress is clear from the individuals face that he is a black sheep, clearly thinking of unsatisfying memories. Some small mention is made, and the group awkwardly accepts this as tribute before continuing with their excited conversation...
Blog 9 week 5 Modernity,Spectatorship, Power
I feel most self conscious when I am doing an exercise or using a machine at the gym. I feel as if I am on display and as though people notice every little nuance of my movement. Sometimes I feel that people notice every little droplet of sweat that rolls off my body, even though they don't.
A product advertisement that would work well with this situation would be some sort of enhancement supplement. First, I would enter the gym as the subject of everyone's gaze. My gait would be very calculated and self conscious as I feel people's eyes running over my awkward movement. Next, the camera pans to me doing an exercise with which I have a lot of trouble and people are noticing my strife. Since people are noticing my frustration and poor performance I resort to a little help from an "absolutely essential" supplement. Self conscious and obviously frustrated with my lack of strength I open my gym bag. I then pull out a large bright green drink container that is an enhancement supplement. Then an announcer's voice chimes in saying,"Can't seem to find that extra edge in the gym? Want to increase your strength, vasodialation, and looks? Well get a Monster Muscle! It's not a work out withour Monster Muscle! Then the Camera pans to my ,now, muscular fingers ripping off the lid and taking a drawn out 3 second gulp followed by a sigh of refreshment. After this gulp my body has a glow and miraculously women begin to look at me and whisper about me. Now, very self confident I walk over to another machine, load up the heaviest weight, and pull out ten reps with ease. The camera pans out again to a shot of the Monster Muscle container resting atop my bag with me in the background confidently entertaining a group of attractive females. This pariopticon would allow people a view into my life simulataeously allowing them to level with my feelings of inadequacy until I use that special product. The words "It's not a workout without Monster Muscle" flash across the screen and the ad ends.
This ad, like most ads, thrives on tapping into people's self conscious worries. The ad implies that we are not inherently sufficient and cannot function at our optimum without certain products. Once we have the product we immediately become self confident, effective, and powerful. Essentially, what this ad and most ads like it are selling the idea of incompleteness, an inherent lack of perfection, or inadequacy. They are selling you the idea that your are not wholly complete and effective without their product. It is shameful how slimy, yet effective, this type of advertising is in the US today.
A product advertisement that would work well with this situation would be some sort of enhancement supplement. First, I would enter the gym as the subject of everyone's gaze. My gait would be very calculated and self conscious as I feel people's eyes running over my awkward movement. Next, the camera pans to me doing an exercise with which I have a lot of trouble and people are noticing my strife. Since people are noticing my frustration and poor performance I resort to a little help from an "absolutely essential" supplement. Self conscious and obviously frustrated with my lack of strength I open my gym bag. I then pull out a large bright green drink container that is an enhancement supplement. Then an announcer's voice chimes in saying,"Can't seem to find that extra edge in the gym? Want to increase your strength, vasodialation, and looks? Well get a Monster Muscle! It's not a work out withour Monster Muscle! Then the Camera pans to my ,now, muscular fingers ripping off the lid and taking a drawn out 3 second gulp followed by a sigh of refreshment. After this gulp my body has a glow and miraculously women begin to look at me and whisper about me. Now, very self confident I walk over to another machine, load up the heaviest weight, and pull out ten reps with ease. The camera pans out again to a shot of the Monster Muscle container resting atop my bag with me in the background confidently entertaining a group of attractive females. This pariopticon would allow people a view into my life simulataeously allowing them to level with my feelings of inadequacy until I use that special product. The words "It's not a workout without Monster Muscle" flash across the screen and the ad ends.
This ad, like most ads, thrives on tapping into people's self conscious worries. The ad implies that we are not inherently sufficient and cannot function at our optimum without certain products. Once we have the product we immediately become self confident, effective, and powerful. Essentially, what this ad and most ads like it are selling the idea of incompleteness, an inherent lack of perfection, or inadequacy. They are selling you the idea that your are not wholly complete and effective without their product. It is shameful how slimy, yet effective, this type of advertising is in the US today.
Response to "Facebook Suicide"
I, like most other people, have a facebook profile and check it regularly...too regular would certainly be the most honest answer. I've attempted facebook suicide multiple times in the past, and I've been dead to the online community for weeks at a time, for two months even on one occasion. My personal revelations about facebook center around the fact that the entire thing is a corporate scam, and I hate that the information I input into a site that should be about social networking is essentially sold out to advertisement agencies who then try to market their worlds to me based on my own interests.
I certainly wouldn't agree with the author of this article entirely; I think facebook can be used pretty responsibly. I may be spending a fair bit of time on facebook these days (still less than average I imagine), but it's always just there as a type of Internet background noise in my life. I don't find myself consciously "facebook stalking" any person(s) or, quite honestly, even caring very much about all of the garbage that people tend to post about themselves. In my opinion, the primary issue with facebook and its user base isn't necessarily the narcissism (for some percentage of users it might be), it's the desire to pile friends on left and right, and then try to find out what any of them are doing in the constant stream of posts - posts from people who you really don't know that well, nor will you ever. I think striking a balance in managing your community size is the key to a good facebook experience, and having 700+ friends as a normal human being isn't the way to go.
The Gaze
The moments in which I feel the most self concious is simply when I arrive late to class. When i know that I will be late. I tend to walk a lot faster using all my walking energy, thus creating sweat once I a take a seat. I feel self concious as I feel everyone's gaze on me since I am one of the last to come in. Especially when I walk in through the front door of the classroom I feel as if every single persons questioning gaze is on me since they did take the effort of coming in early as ,I, as well a determined student, finds on a daily basis how to come in late to class.
If this were to become a tv advertisement, there would have to be a classroom full of gazing eyes all towards that one single girl who walks ten minutes late into class panting and sweating as she did jus speed walk. The class would become suprisingly quiet as she walks in, signs in on the sign up sheet, and makes rude nises simply to get into her seat as she does need to go through people to get into that one single seat left.
Facebook Suicide
In my own personal point of view, I feel as if those who are facebook members make facebook as important or non important as they want it to be. It may induce self-obsession, yet some, at least I do, create and continue using facebook to reconnect, or simply connect on a daily basis with old and new friends. I feel as if this article has replaced any type of pros towards facebook to only introduce some of the cons when in reality we, facebook members, how we use facebook on a day to day basis whether it is for a few minutes or for long periods of time.
Some things which I would lose if i would commit "facebook suicide" is all my elementary friends whom I had lost contact with since sixth grade. Thanks to facebook I was able to re-find them and reconnect with them. I would lose connection with family whom I only get to see every few years since they live in Guatemala which is by far impossible to speak with all the time as I do on facebook. Although i may lose connects I do feel as if I'd gain some new sort of knowledge by separating myself from any type of social networking. I would maybe gain a sense of nature and a better exercise habit which doesn't include sitting on a chair or laying in bed while searching through facebook. All in all, there may be loses and new wins, but all one has to do is find a balance between the two.
Facebook Suicide
My first thought after reading this article was that the title actually has a double meaning. Facebook "suicide", as the author states, is when one exits this realm of social networking, cutting oneself off from the virtually constructed community that links so many people together. However, Facebook itself could also be considered a suicidal device inflicting our "real" lives. Personally, I can relate with the anxiety that the author mentions, brewing over the course of a day, wondering if I've made any new friends, received any notifications, or thought of a perfect status update. Even Facebook terminology has infiltrated our modern lexicon, with terms like "friending" denoting the acceptance of a new contact, or "posted", referring to this action of making something public and shared between all on a common page.
I have never seriously considered deleting my facebook to commit "facebook suicide", largely based on the fear of becoming disconnected with that social world, or losing all of my "friends" and pictures. Checking facebook has become as normal as checking emails, but I can visit my page without doing or changing anything. I hope that like previous social networking sites, facebook will become less and less a part of my daily life as I grow up; however, knowing that it isn't a site geared towards only college students anymore blurs those lines a bit.
I have never seriously considered deleting my facebook to commit "facebook suicide", largely based on the fear of becoming disconnected with that social world, or losing all of my "friends" and pictures. Checking facebook has become as normal as checking emails, but I can visit my page without doing or changing anything. I hope that like previous social networking sites, facebook will become less and less a part of my daily life as I grow up; however, knowing that it isn't a site geared towards only college students anymore blurs those lines a bit.
Week 5 - Blog 8 facebook suicide
I first find an interesting similarity to the Southpark Facebook episode that discussed how Stan tries to delete his Facebook account and isn't allowed to because of how connected it was. That being said, I do see the author's reasoning on how facebook is a form of narcissism. However, in most things we do, there can and often are narcissistic motivations. But those actions also are based off of other people (for example you dress a certain way or take that picture to make yourself look good for your friends) so I think its very difficult to separate the two motivators.
Personally, I would never delete my Facebook page, or any of my social networking pages, but not for the reasons the author says people keep them. I work in marketing, and thusly I need to be where the trend is, analyzing it every step of the way. What I stand to lose by deleting my accounts is a good connection with pop culture (and then my career choice). I also heartily believe in the value of Facebook for maintaining connections that would be difficult or impossible to do otherwise. Whether or not its a superficial connection, the connection can have value for you or for them, so why destroy the connections?
And while it may be somewhat narcissistic make an effort to present the best image of yourself you can online, what's wrong with that? It's your opportunity to market yourself to acquaintances, friends, employers, etc, so why waste the opportunity? I don't see it as something that you slave over and end up losing track of 'real life', I see it as something to enrich your life, both as a self-marketing tool and a community building tool.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Blog 9 Week 5: Modernity Spectatorship Power
I often feel self conscious when I bike to school and come to class sweaty. I feel like an object of "the gaze" when I walk into class as my shirt is slightly damp and I may or may not reek of sweat.
For an ad, show a chump arriving to class all sweaty and opening the door, with the camera panning in from a low angle to highlight how bad his situation is. Then cut to him sitting in his chair, with a bunch of students behind him showing disgusted looks on their faces, and classmates attempting to move their desks away from him. Then show me at home in the bathroom the next day putting on some anti-persperant product (the focus of the ad). Cut to me walking into the classroom and all the classmates hold their gaze on me as I walk by them, wriggling their noses in response to my good smell and a hot girl talks to me and I become the center of a conversation.
For an ad, show a chump arriving to class all sweaty and opening the door, with the camera panning in from a low angle to highlight how bad his situation is. Then cut to him sitting in his chair, with a bunch of students behind him showing disgusted looks on their faces, and classmates attempting to move their desks away from him. Then show me at home in the bathroom the next day putting on some anti-persperant product (the focus of the ad). Cut to me walking into the classroom and all the classmates hold their gaze on me as I walk by them, wriggling their noses in response to my good smell and a hot girl talks to me and I become the center of a conversation.
Gaze
I have been playing drums for nine years now. I am currently a member of the Marching Band-uh and every time I go to play I feel like eyes are always on me. Whether we are at a rally in the front row or on the field at half time I feel like eyes are staring at me and just me. I feel more self-conscious and in a way it encourages me to practice harder to know my music and my show so I cannot be single out in a bad way or embarrassed. If I had to put this moment on display I would use it to advertise a drumline. In high school I felt like every note I played and every step I took had to be perfect. I wanted to sell the group and the hard work that we put into our show. I wanted to show everyone that gazed at us that we were there to impress. I would shoot this commercial during the summer and on a football field. It would start with a few people running and a few people doing pushups with a caption across the screen saying “hard work.” Then the next scene would be the drum line practicing with the drum tech. This scene would take place on the field in the hot sun and the members sweaty with water bottles in close reach. We would observe the members playing difficult parts of the music with critiques. Across the screen this time the audience would see the words “determination.” The last and final scene would be the drumline together with their drums off and getting a pep talk from the drum tech. The last and final words you would see on the screen would be “family.” As the scene fades out all of the member voices in unison would state, “These are the three main qualities of our line, can you live up to the expectations?”
For me committing “facebook suicide” seems too becoming easier and easier each day. Although I feel that deleting my facebook would not be so hard in the back of my mind I know that I will miss my profile and the connection to my friends. Facebook has always been my safe haven for boredom. Facebook offers tons of games and endless pages to search. In high school Facebook was more than just a site to meet people or chat it was a simple way to send information. As a captain in drumline it was easy to post pictures, videos, and send messages to other members of the group with one simple site.
Although to me, facebook became a valuable tool to keep in touch with people. There are a few people in my lives that I would love to call each day but with time differences and busy schedules keeping in contact is not as simple as it sounds. With facebook sending messages and viewing pictures just takes a few minutes and a couple clicks. If I deleted my facebook page not only would I feel bored more often but also I would feel like I am losing connections to a lot of people.
During the summer before my freshmen year of college I became a facebook addict. I would check my profile almost every hour, update my status often and check out other people’s pages. Since I have been at college I have used my time in other ways. I still check facebook about every other day but the amount of time I spend on facebook is dramatically less. My guess would be that I spend on average maybe an hour a week on facebook. When I log in I check my messages and comments and then only chat with people if I am bored or need to ask someone a question. Occasionally I will spend time facebook chatting with people but generally it is to people that do not have instant messaging. Also knowing that they are online gives you a reference that the people are probably not super busy and have time to talk. I think I would gain maybe another free hour, but I believe I would be losing more. I would lose connections and friendships as well as a means of relieving my boredom.
Week 5 - Blog 9 The Gaze
I often feel self conscious at parties when I don't know very many people. Its very easy to sink to corners or just sit in a small group with people that you know at least a little bit. When looking around I sometimes see people that are laughing it up and having a great time glance over in our direction. When this occurs its really easy to feel the focus of the gaze.
To correlate this to an ad, I would either choose some type of alcohol (although you don't really want to promote drinking as the only way to have a good time) or possibly some kind of hair/cologne product. Lets stick with absolute. So the focus would be on me at the center of the party. I am wearing college-age stylish clothing and there is music playing: one of the new hip hop hits. I would be holding the bottle in the air (I would probably be standing on a chair or something) as people are in a circle around me. The camera would pan around me slowly, showing the circle and that I am at the center of it. All of these people would have admiring looks, showing that it is desirable to have this product. The camera and scene would then speed up as I pour drinks for those around me. As the last drop falls from the bottle, I jump into the crowd and am crowd-surfed away, showing how the product holds me above the party.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)