New Book, New Sets of Questions!
Thanks, Gary, for a really good class exchange last week and some provocative questions.
This week, a new book and new sets of questions to examine as we begin exploring the social connections to writing in online environments.
Our fearless group discussion leader should now be ready to take us forward into this new realm. Fearless Leader, let your questions go (ok, I've been watching a bit too much "Iron Chef" this weekend...sorry for the dramatics!)
This week, a new book and new sets of questions to examine as we begin exploring the social connections to writing in online environments.
Our fearless group discussion leader should now be ready to take us forward into this new realm. Fearless Leader, let your questions go (ok, I've been watching a bit too much "Iron Chef" this weekend...sorry for the dramatics!)
posted by Diane Penrod at 2/26/2006
3 Comments:
Sorry that these are so late…between the Rowan Network being on the fritz and the gargantuan amount of work this weekend, I didn’t get a chance to post til now…
(Even though I tackled Bakardjieva first, we'll warm up with Howard and Jones):
1. In Chapter 1, Howard addresses how the traditional media (TV, radio, etc) differs greatly in function from the new media (namely the internet). One particular difference is that the traditional media monopolized on one function (TV viewing) while new media promotes multi-tasking and "sticky" (pg24) applications. Do you think this computes to the new media will ultimately ousting traditional media? And what do you see as the positives and negatives of the new media "stickiness"?
2. In Larsen's chapter of taking faith online, she states that the studies show that the internet supplements instead of replacing traditional religious practices (51). Why do you think that is?
3. (optional question) Why would you do a telephone survey on internet use?
4. On page 73, do you think Barlow's "Declaration" could ever realistically be achieved or do you think Nakamura's conclusion of "various categories of online citizens" has a more realistic outlook?
And now we go to Bakardjieva*
*I will address her as B.
(note: I got lost in this book more times then a
blindfolded man with vertigo in the Congo):
1. On page 33, B. cites Bakhtin's observation that speakers ultimately define the words they use and that such subjectivity creates the changes in language. In a world where we strive for globalization, does this concept affect that goal? How?
2. Looking to page 107-110, B. illustrates the Embodiment relation (I don’t care how it works, I want it to work), the Hermeneutic relation (I need to know how it works to stay with the times), and the Alterity relation (I really want to know how it works). She also defines that these views “can coexist within the same personal experience of a user with regard to different technologies, or at different stages of the user’s dealings with the same technology.” Where do you think you stand? Where do you think most Rowan students stand? Where should college students stand?
Bill,
Excellent discussion last night. You raised some great questions to explore. I think we had a really productive conversation, and Jen's point about "well, just because we can do these things...should we" really resonates with the whole focus on everyday life practices and institutions.
I'm looking forward to reading others' views. Especially if Linda gives us the "411" on the MySpace concerns.
Diane
1) I think new media will eventually replace the old. In January, the industry held a large tech show. I caught some of it on television. At one point Bill Gates gave a presentation about a little gadget that did everything. It was wireless and when you walked into a room, other appliances picked up your ID. He went through a scenario where a person gets up in the morning and picks up this hand held computer. As they walk into their kitchen, their flat screen TV picks up their signal and opens to their favorite news channels. It also shows the weather and the traffic patterns tailored for a specific route. It went on with the person driving to work and continuing to use this “sticky” technology throughout the day. This is still a ways off and I see traditional media continuing to dominate for at least another five to ten years. It’s just a matter of wireless access spreading and becoming available to everyone.
I see mostly positives. With everything being wireless and easily accessible, there are concerns about security. There are always those who abuse technology, but as time goes on, I see these things becoming integrated into our lives more and problems becoming less serious. Can we become too dependent on these technologies? Again, there will be those who abuse and become lazy. But as time goes on, I think those sorts of issues balance themselves out.
2) I don’t know very much about religion or how people practice. It seems to me that for most people, religion is a community thing. Church is about celebrating your religion with others who share your faith. I would think that doing such a thing over the internet through chats or e-mails wouldn’t provide the same satisfaction. The internet probably acts as a great supplement in that you can learn more about your faith through it. You can learn about other religions, many of which you might not be able to find info on at your local library. You can talk to others you wouldn’t normally have access to. In that way, it can open up your religious views a bit more.
4) The online world is the same as the real world. It’s just a reflection for the most part. As long as there’s divides between the rich and poor and feelings of bigotry in the real world, those same concepts will extent themselves into the digital world. Aside from that, there will always be differences between people. Everyone has different cultural tastes based on geography, ethnicity and age. As long as people keep their individual identities, you’ll see various categories of on-line citizens.
1) It makes it much more difficult. Language is in constant flux. It’s always changing and can vary wildly between individuals. Even if we come to a point where everyone has internet access, I can’t imagine the globalization of language being an attainable goal. While in many ways it would be nice if everyone spoke the same language in the same way, I would miss the uniqueness that each language can bring to culture.
2) I’m definitely Hermeneutic. I don’t really care how things work, but I feel I should learn in order to keep up with the pace of the world. I think most Rowan students would feel the same way. Ideally, I think everyone should be on the alterity side of things. When we become so dependent on something, we should want to know all the ins and outs. We shouldn’t be so dependent on others. I feel sorry for people who can’t even operate the basic functions of a computer. However, that’s hypocritical as there are plenty of technologies where I have no idea what I’m doing and don’t care to learn. It depends on what your interests are. I think people will fall in all different categories depending on their ideas of what’s important and what’s interesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home