Monday Night's Contributions from Tyler!
Tyler's given us some things to think about as we return from a well deserved Spring Break. He's cited pages and places for everyone to concentrate on as we mull over his questions....
Feenberg & Barney: Pages 143-160; 183-238; 263-282.
1) Shade’s essay, “Gender and the Commodification…” looks at feminism in cyberspace by examining two internet communities. Both started out as places for intelligent female discourse but after various mergers and buyouts, both became commercialized and their message became diluted in the search for wider audiences and higher profits. Shade talks about the blurring lines between content and advertising. Can quality content remain uninfluenced by advertisers on these websites? Do you see a difference between advertisements on the internet and advertisements in other mediums (magazines, television, etc…)? If so, what are those differences and should we seek to prohibit them?
2) Kahn and Kellner’s essay, “Virtually Democratic…” examines how the spread of the internet and related technologies has had an effect on globalization and politics. The essay looks at the ways all sides have taken advantage of these new mediums and worked to get their respective messages out. We see new subcultures pop up everyday and they’re given a voice that they didn’t have before. Do you think we will continue to see more participatory democratic processes or will the further spread of capitalist ideals into the internet stunt the growth of free speech? What are some other movements you see coming in our future? (as in formats like blogs and wikis)
3) Agre’s article, “The Practical Republic…” looks at some different political philosophies and brings up the four-dimensional lattice structure. “From this perspective, the crucial type of capital that a society needs is not social networks but social skill.” (212) Agre later goes on to say, “But technology is not central; what is central are the choices we make….” (214) Do you agree with his assessment? Can technology be used for anything more than organization? What?
4) Etzioni’s essay, “On Virtual, Democratic Communities” looks at communities in both the real world and in the virtual world and what it means to be a true community. Etzioni examines studies detailing how people’s internet use affects their real world lives concluding that internet use usually enhances community. Etzioni goes further in brainstorming how the internet can be used in our democratic process (232-237). Do you see Etizoni’s idea of “multilayered democracy” (235-236) conducted on the internet as something feasible? If not, why not and what steps could be taken to create a more plausible scenario? Is such a scenario even possible?
5) Schuler’s article, “Toward Civic Intelligence….” discuses various concerns having to do with certain technological advancements and whether or not humanity will lose control of them. A strong civic intelligence would be a way to keep ourselves in control. Schuler examines the possibilities. With the rise of the internet and other technologies, do you think we’re reaching a point where an idea similar to Wells’s World Encyclopedia is finally possible? Can we strengthen civic intelligence in the ways Schuler describes? Or do you see us becoming too dependant on technology and losing control because humanity was unable to overcome their differences to participate in a “World Brain?”
Feenberg & Barney: Pages 143-160; 183-238; 263-282.
1) Shade’s essay, “Gender and the Commodification…” looks at feminism in cyberspace by examining two internet communities. Both started out as places for intelligent female discourse but after various mergers and buyouts, both became commercialized and their message became diluted in the search for wider audiences and higher profits. Shade talks about the blurring lines between content and advertising. Can quality content remain uninfluenced by advertisers on these websites? Do you see a difference between advertisements on the internet and advertisements in other mediums (magazines, television, etc…)? If so, what are those differences and should we seek to prohibit them?
2) Kahn and Kellner’s essay, “Virtually Democratic…” examines how the spread of the internet and related technologies has had an effect on globalization and politics. The essay looks at the ways all sides have taken advantage of these new mediums and worked to get their respective messages out. We see new subcultures pop up everyday and they’re given a voice that they didn’t have before. Do you think we will continue to see more participatory democratic processes or will the further spread of capitalist ideals into the internet stunt the growth of free speech? What are some other movements you see coming in our future? (as in formats like blogs and wikis)
3) Agre’s article, “The Practical Republic…” looks at some different political philosophies and brings up the four-dimensional lattice structure. “From this perspective, the crucial type of capital that a society needs is not social networks but social skill.” (212) Agre later goes on to say, “But technology is not central; what is central are the choices we make….” (214) Do you agree with his assessment? Can technology be used for anything more than organization? What?
4) Etzioni’s essay, “On Virtual, Democratic Communities” looks at communities in both the real world and in the virtual world and what it means to be a true community. Etzioni examines studies detailing how people’s internet use affects their real world lives concluding that internet use usually enhances community. Etzioni goes further in brainstorming how the internet can be used in our democratic process (232-237). Do you see Etizoni’s idea of “multilayered democracy” (235-236) conducted on the internet as something feasible? If not, why not and what steps could be taken to create a more plausible scenario? Is such a scenario even possible?
5) Schuler’s article, “Toward Civic Intelligence….” discuses various concerns having to do with certain technological advancements and whether or not humanity will lose control of them. A strong civic intelligence would be a way to keep ourselves in control. Schuler examines the possibilities. With the rise of the internet and other technologies, do you think we’re reaching a point where an idea similar to Wells’s World Encyclopedia is finally possible? Can we strengthen civic intelligence in the ways Schuler describes? Or do you see us becoming too dependant on technology and losing control because humanity was unable to overcome their differences to participate in a “World Brain?”
posted by Diane Penrod at 3/18/2006
4 Comments:
1. I seen similarities and differences between new and traditional media advertizing. On the one hand, traditional media is much more passive observation while new media required (constant) active filtering of ads. New media offers a lot more slots to advertize but not many are observed by the same person (much more narrow target?).
While much of online advertizing is annoying, I don't think prohibition would be the answer (unless said advertizing is abrasive or harmful). I think regulation is key.
4. Etzioni’s concept of using internet for an online multilayered democracy is feasible but not until internet is as common as water faucets and people use politics exclusively on the internet. As for now, I think we have some time until we grow into it.
5. As we discussed in class, I think we're seeing a world brain coming about as we speak in such innovations as wikis and other modes of collective intelligence arise. Global communication and access to knowledge has opened highways never seen before. We're not far away from such connective wisdom.
In response to Tyler's questions ...
1. I think the internet can remain uninfluenced by advertisers. I'm not sure about everyone else, but I never read online advertisements and don't factor them into the content that I am reading online. Perhaps this is dangerous of me because I'm not aware of the various underlying messages influenced by the advertiser. For some reason, online advertisements have less affect on me than traditional means of advertisements like TV and print. I tend to pay attention to tV commericals and magazine ads.
I'm not sure we should prohibit anything online, with the exception of child ponography. I'd hate to see the Internet become another issue of public policy, ruled by people who have a vested interest in the outcome.
2. This question segways nicely from my previous post. After reading this course material, technolgy related news articles and my book, the Digital Divide, I truly feel that the Internet is the next big target. I think TV and radio are already scrutinzed by the FCC and because of this, people are expressing themselves through untraditional forms of media like the Internet and satellite radio. Because of these alternative forums, the politicos are losing the battle and are being made a mockery.
I think the next big targets for these capitalist ideas are MySpace and Blogs. MySpace is all over the news and people are trying to figure out ways to police this forum. Plus, I am reading article after article of people losing their job because of blogs, etc. Wikis may be next in line and the reason why I believe they are a bit behind is because Wikis are still somewhat unknown.
4.I think we've alreay begun to see the Internet used as part of our democratic process. Between online campaigns and "smart mob" online coalitions, the Internet will soon begin to play a large role in how we deal with politics and democracy.
5. As of right now, I don't think the U.S. or any other nation is ready for a World Brain. People are far too competitive and unwilling to share information. Plus, I think there are far too many social factors that will influence our progression towards a World Brain. People are still seperated by race, class, gender, etc. and there is far too much ignorance in the world to support a group mentality.
In response to Allison's questions ...
1. I agree with Plato that the medium does in fact determine the quality of the communication. I find that I am more informal when using email. Through this course, I have also discovered that my thoughts and concept are less developed with posting my response on the blog. I'm not sure if this is because the Internet has traditionally been viewed as "entertainment" and so I have a subconcious block when using it as an educational tool. Regardless of my struggles with the Internet, I think the Internet can offer an immediacy that traditional writing cannot. Plus, I feel the Internet makes people more comfortable with the idea of writing in general because everyone can write an email or a blog, whereas not everyone feels they can write a formal letter or a response to a reading.
2). In my industry, as a grant writer, I struggle between the hard and the soft goals. Obviously, my hard goal is to secure grant funds for my organization. My soft goals are to create a well crafted proposal that will help spread the message of my organization. I also try to create a scene or scenario that helps bring the request to life. This is not the goal of every grants person. More often than not, people just want to get the message out and not care about the anecdotes or details. I'd like to see the soft goal of voice preserved when using the Internet. If voice gets lost, so does the writing.
4. Cosmopedia is like today’s wikipedia. But I urge caution of its overuse. Like the World Brain post, I'm not sure we are ready for this kind of concept. I question some of Wikipedia's content and I truly believe that this system has some severe flaws. I've used Wikipedia and typed in some random and off color terms to see what I get and I was surprised by some of the definitions. Just like the John Segenthaller (sp?) discussion, how can we confirm that what's posted on Wikipedia is actually correct and what if people start using for their own personal motivations.
In response to Stephanie's questions ...
1). As writers, we will need to increase our comfort level with writing in an interactive society. In Core I, I had to write a paper that used various things such as repersentations of sound, photos, etc. I found this to be a bit challenging because I was relying on more than just the written word to convey my message.
We are in a society of ADD children and a decreasing ability to focus and concentrate on one thing. Especially those of us surronded and/or raised on technology, it is difficult to keep someone's attention without including interactive elements.
Post a Comment
<< Home