Blog 5

The topic I would like to explore for my research paper is about how the use of the Internet changes the way people think in terms of how they find, read and process information.

The Internet is a good example of convergence between many mediums. Through the Internet people are able to access other mediums, engage in a participitative culture, access content, take part in collective intelligence and more. It is believed that by using the Internet consumers have changed their habits and thinking processes in how they access and gain information.

The article “Misunderstanding Media: A blurry Vision of Students Today” speaks to the way college students understand and interpret content and research they are doing on the Internet. Many students do not discern what source their information is coming from. For example, if information is quoted in an article, students do not make the differentiation between the article they are reading and the work being quoted. Journalism students were also found to use the Internet almost exclusively as apposed to going out and interviewing people for their stories. Students were also found to use the Internet over text books and other written sources. (Mielo 2008)

The article “How do we read online” looks at how people read and interpret content online versus in print. It was found that people who read news online versus news in print look at graphics almost as equally according to the Standford Poynter Project. The article goes on to talk about what news people are interested in accessing through the Internet. Most people were interested in reading specialized, issue specific news as apposed to local news. Consumers were attracted to article headlines and tended to read 75% of an article online regardless of length. Readers also were able to adapt to scrolling reading plains with longer articles. (Johnson 2001)

The way that people consume media through the Internet says a lot about how the information is taken in, processed and applied. It is believe that the different ways that content is displayed and accessed, affects the way people interpret and use the content. Local news can now been accessed online and continually updated. Yet, this local news may look different as the younger generation of journalism professionals consume Internet media and use it’s content, re-packaged instead of pounding the pavement for original content, when on a deadline. What is produced is a news story that could have looked drastically different without the use of the Internet. The cycle continues as the article is then put online for people to read on their local news website. This can change what people think as they read converging content. The Internet brings together content over space and time making the print world smaller as it becomes more accessible.

Blog 4

1. Provide a quick over view or summary of the readings

2. Clearly Identify what you feel are 3 key ideas in the readings

3. Support your summary and/or key points with three specific references to the readings

The article “Is Google Making Us Stupid” makes the argument that consumers are changing the way they consume media because of the Internet’s influence. “But that boon comes at a price. As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation” (Carr 2008.) Carr makes the point that the way that we consume the Internet has caused convergence of other mediums. Other mediums have adapted to stay relevant and competitive with the Internet. In some cases this means that they have to reorganize how they provide information. “As people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations. Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets,” (Carr 2008.) This point is furthered through the pod cast “Making the Case – Why Podcasting Matter to Your Organization” the author says that pod casts are the perfect medium to blanket your current and potential constituents with information (made possible through the Internet.) By using pod casts in conjunction with traditional marketing forms, such as press releases, radio, TV and print consumers will have more opportunities to access the information. Through pod casts the information becomes very flexible, portable, easy to archive, all possible with low overhead and production costs. Just as in the article by Carr, Cangialosi explains that the medium influences the way that people consume and how information is delivered.
The article “Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics” just like pod casts are made possible through the Internet. Blogs are highly accessible and furthered by other forms of mediums. The combination of the Internet and the convergence of other mediums result in collective intelligence through bloging. A difference between the other mediums in the other articles is that blogging is a more elite form of convergence. Many people can access blogs, but not all individuals are welcome to participate in highly visible way. “While A-list bloggers repeatedly deny receiving any special treatment, the reality is that both the media and political establishment pay disproportionate attention to their views, often treating them as representative of the entire progressive blogosphere,” (Chaudhry 2006.)

4. Identify the most difficult or challenging concept for you from this week’s readings. Saying “I don’t know” or “nothing was difficult” is not an adequate response.

I am new to pod casting. I found it a little difficult for the purpose of this assignment to really delve into the information. I took notes while listening and liked the fact that I could rewind and play again. Just like the Google article talked about, it was hard for me to really contemplate and reflect because of the medium because of its form. I understand that the purpose of the pod cast is that it is portable and flexible and can add a different quality to the information by class. It illustrates what we are taking about in class and we are able to experience it first hand.

5. Provide 2 or 3 discussion questions for us to talk about in class
1) In what ways have you noticed other mediums changing to be more “Internet”
like?
2) How can blogging become less elite? Is there a way that the medium can become more inclusive or will it only become more open when elite bloggers become more inclusive?
3) Have you noticed the influences of other mediums affecting the way we think? Isn’t it true that TV had the same affect on us?


6. Discuss how this week’s readings might relate to your upcoming presentation, paper or to the “real world.” Here too, saying "I don't know" or "it does not apply" is not an adequate response.

I found the idea of the Internet changing and influencing the way we think so interesting. I also thought the way that other mediums have changed their formats or adapted new behaviors to compete or be more “Internet like” fascinating. I had not really paid attention to this point previously, but I see it now. I think this might be a great paper topic for me.

Blog 2

The article “Media Lullabies: The Reinvention of the World Wide Web,” takes a look at how convergence theory affects different ways to access media. The article makes the case that the Internet should be looked at in different terms from the conventional TV and radio models. “By continuing to use the models of past media as our measuring sticks we continue to develop the new media of the Web within the standards and ideas of these past media,” (Hilf 1998.) This proves to be hard for many consumers because they are accustomed using traditional mediums and want to treat the Internet in the same way that they would treat TV. “I often hear people who get disappointed by the Web's inaptitude to reach the threshold, speed, and professionalism of film, radio, and television. At a recent Web community event in San Francisco, a member of the audience asked one of the panelists about the bandwidth problems currently existing on the Internet," When will it be like TV?” (Hilf 1998.) The way that we think about the Internet will not evolve if we continue to think that we can access the Internet like TV. The Internet provides more access to print and allows for access to information through viewing and listening. “This will be a true realization of the non-linear origins of the hyperlink: one piece of data may link to ten others below and ten to the side and ten above but all relative in some way (chronologically, thematically, financially, etc.) to the other data - think of a map of a distributed network where nodes connect web-like to other nodes within the network,” (Hilf 1998). These nodes are similar to a TV network; however the Internet is a more multi-fasted way to access information. The Internet is set up in a network of information through affiliation where pages are portals which provide access to much more information. The Internet has evolved from parent model but is different from traditional mediums because it is unique in its accessibility.

I understood the concepts from this article, but what I don’t feel that I know enough about, is what the model of the Internet looks like. I am having a hard time picturing what the author is talking about; how the Internet model looks versus a model like TV.

I have not previously been introduced to models about the Internet so I am learning new concepts. The article “Media Lullabies: The Reinvention of the World Wide Web,” touches on a lot of different mediums and I am now exploring these models further and causing me to think about how we use mediums.

I can relate to the article because I found out some interesting information about what the different codes for the Internet mean and how they came about. I do website updates and learn how to make our website function at work. Despite being able to work on our web page I don’t have any formal training or understanding about the reason behind how things are organized or the reasoning behind certain codes online.

Questions to discuss in class:

1) Would you have any additional ideas to ad to the article? Such as the affect of Google to the internet and how it functions?
2) Can a web browser/organizer of information have a significant affect to how people set up website and create access to things?
3) Is it really possible for the Internet to be more like TV and is this even a good question to ask, because isn’t the Internet organized and accessed drastically different from TV?



Chapter one of “Convergence Culture” looks at how people use different mediums to delve further into one media. For example, the TV show “Survivor” became very popular and people had to know in-side details about the show prior to finding out through watching each episode. “Online forums offer an opportunity for participants to share their knowledge and opinions. In this chapter I hope to bring to the readers inside the spoiling community to learn more about how it works and how it impacts the reception of a popular television series,” (Jenkins 2006.) Before the internet the idea of spoiling did not exist in the same way or at all. If it did, it was through print media. The idea of spoiling online is effective because the Internet provides access to a many people in a variety of locations that could not be access as quickly and easily prior to the Internet. “Collective intelligence refers to this ability of virtual communities to leverage the combined expertise of their members. What we cannot know or do on our own, we may now be able to do collectively,” (Jenkins 2006.) This may never have taken place without the internet. It would have been much harder to get people to work collectively, communicating through print and TV. This access to people and collective knowledge is so new that people are not always prepared for its side effects, which is unique to the medium. “The question was whether, within a knowledge community, one has the right to not know – or more precisely, whether each community member should be able to set the terms of how much they want to know and when they want to know it,”(Jenkins 2006.) The article points out that, when using a new access to the media, it is important to be prepared for the consequences. Using the example in the book consumers find out more then they may have wanted to know about the show “Survivor” by accessing the Internet. If consumer don’t want to have everything “spoiled,” it might be better to use a medium with more regulation and slower access speed. This may be best achieve by accessing media and participating in the collective intelligence that is more of a one way communication process such as TV and radio (for the most part).

1) Would TV and print mediums have a different affect on “spoiling”? How? Would their affect still include collective intelligence (working together for the information)?
2) Do you think that the internet has influenced different mediums to increase reports on “spoiling” information – such as “Entertainment Tonight” etc.
3) Is “spoiling” as effective or as wide spread on shows like “Entertainment Tonight” as it is on the Internet? Technically, you can choose to look up this information online or find the information in print, with more control then flipping the channel and hearing and seeing the spoiling information on TV.

I have never really engaged in “spoiling” searches for TV shows etc. The “spoiling” information itself and the detail that the author paid the “Survivor” show did not really interest me. What I found interesting was the idea of collective intelligence – people putting together clues over space and time was interesting. I still have not narrowed in on a paper topic – but I did get a new idea from this reading. What are the implications of collective intelligence for solving cold cases or crimes that no one is working on? Could collective intelligence lead someone helping to see something in a different way and solve crimes in their community or someone else’s? This could just be a crazy idea – but who knows, someone might be able to work with someone else across the country and put forward new thinking and ideas.

I found it difficult to get through the narration about the “Survivor” show details. It was hard to pick out some of the important information from the narration about the show and I am not really sure what all of the details that had to do with collective intelligence. It could have been just me, but I feel like I might have missed some key concepts in the narration because I was trying so hard to piece together a logical path about the “Survivor” story itself. I think that the more time on about digital convergence would have been helpful. Other examples, those in the margin, did help illustrate a little more about collective intelligence.

Blog 1

The article “The Cultural Paradox of the Global Village” looks at how individuals use television and the internet. The two media are similar in their graphics, video and text capabilities, but differ in their applications and structure. The TV is confined in a frame work, a structure that exists outside of the self. “Television's centripetal force made the world more comprehensible and palpable, as outside reality streamed into our homes” (Frederman 2003). Individuals watch TV to connect with the outside world. The internet, Frederman argues, can become like an extension of the self. The internet has less defined space and can easily blur boundaries of watching or interacting with a media and interactions that take place in real life. “In contrast, the implosive effects of the internet generate a centrifugal socio-physical force, moving us away from the axis of rotation that centers on our body as we launch into cyberspace. The effect is disorienting and disruptive in a manner that is unique in civilization. Like the supernova of an exploding star, society is imploded and we, as individuals are flung out into a new, discarnate experience” (Frederman 2003).

Frederman makes the connections between TV brining the outside world into an individual’s environment, while in contrast the internet brings the individual into the internet or outside space. In contract is not possible to have a two way interaction through TV alone. Through the internet, however, people can communicate as they would in the outside world, weather they are playing video games, IMing each other or connecting through Facebook. The internet is now so ingrained in our culture that even if you choose not to use it, it still affects you and the culture you live in. “We have eyelids, but we have no "earlids." We cannot shut out acoustic space, or the space of relationships and connections that are all around us. This suggests that we cannot shut out the effects of the Internet on our culture and society, even if we choose not to use the Internet directly.”

In fact the internet is becoming an integral part to society and how we function, because we use the internet for work, recreation or to get things done. “Our identity has, for many years, existed quite independent of our physical incarnation in government, financial and other institutional databases. We are not real to the bank or other authorities unless we can produce something that links our physical self to our "real identity" in their database. We have many versions of this digital identity - or digiSelf, as I like to call it - spread among many databases, each with its unique characteristics, and inferred behaviors. Each one is more real to the institution - and ironically, to the people in that institution - than our physical self, what we consider to be our real self.” The idea of the “digiSelf” is very interesting and an entire article could explore this topic alone. Just the idea of what the future will look like as we all move away from the physical self and more towards the “digiSelf.” The questions explored in the end of the article are very interesting. How do you reconcile the “digiSelf” and the world as it currently is? What will the future look like; will there always be a physical and “digiSelf” or will the physical world cease to exist in most ways? Do you as a physical being have less affect on the world then you as a cyber being?

The introduction to “Convergence Culture” touched on two major themes: the convergence of media and how we access media. Discussion around question; what drives accelerated media technology? Is it driven by demand from consumers or by corporate entities? What are the implications for these rapid developments? Do we as consumers demand the merging of media entities like movies and video games? Or is the convergence another way for corporations to blanket the consumers with products that will appeal to a broader audience. This is just like the discussion about which came first – the chicken or the egg, yet in reality a little of both occur. “Convergence, as we can see, is both a top-down corporate-driven process and a bottom-up consumer driven process,” (Jenkins 2006). Both corporations and consumers drive convergences of media as well as furthering technology to make media more malleable.

Consumers not only utilize new media but they come to expect their voices to be heard in the development of new technology to access media. “The promises of this new media environment raise expectations of a freer flow of ideas and content. Inspired by these ideals, consumers are fighting for the right to participate more fully in their culture” (Jenkins 2006). It seems ironic that consumers are able to push for advanced technology with features they want because of the media conglomerate structure. With such large monopolies on media and technology it is interesting that such big corporations can adjust to consumers needs. “Convergence requires media companies to rethink old assumptions about what it means to consume media, assumptions that shape both programming and marketing decisions” (Jenkins 2006). I understand the money makes the world go round and that consumers are the ones with a certain level of power because they are doing the buying, however I don’t usually think of big companies being so nimble and able to quickly adjust to consumer needs.

A corporation makes new and exciting technology and then suddenly consumers cannot live without it. What is hard to figure out for corporations is: what is the next cutting edge and will the technology catch on? “As they undergo this transition, the media companies are not behaving in a monolithic fashion; often, different divisions of the same company are pursuing radically different strategies, reflecting their uncertainty about how to proceed. On the one hand, convergence represents an expanded opportunity for media conglomerates, since content that succeeds in one sector can spread across other platforms” (Jenkins 2006). A complete miss though might mean an even bigger loss for a company because competition and expectations from consumers are so high.

A final thought, relating “The Cultural Paradox of the Global Village” and the introduction of “Convergence Culture” is what Jenkins points out in this one sentence, “Each time they move a viewer from television to the internet, say, there is a risks that the consumer may not return (Jenkins 2006). I wonder, is this really a risk – because I think it will happen. Isn’t this reality? I would think that as we are trying to simplify everything and have all media flow through a single “black box” that a company would try to get there first. Coming out with the technology and creating a significant need in the consumer seems like a safe bet to me, but why has it not already happened. We have the capabilities to do this now – so why isn’t the single black box more popular? Is it that companies make more money by selling multiple lines of TVs, computers, dvd players etc.?

In addition to this question I wonder – is it realistic to think that there should be some censorship for youth with all kinds of media being so available on their cell phones etc.? Is there really a way to regulate what they can access and should laws be passed or should these restrictions be left completely up to parents? The example that was referenced in the book about teenagers being able to capture soft-core porn on their cell phones – in reality there is no way to stop them from capturing these images on their phones but can this activity be considered illegal if it is found? Should it be considered illegal in the case of minors?

Both readings have helped me to start thinking about what I can do for a final project because they have exposed to new concepts that have me asking questions. The concepts that we have explored through these readings are interesting – I just need to figure out what topic I am interested in so that I can apply, if appropriate. I think the more specific I get the easier it will be for me explore a topic in-depth.

What I would like to understand better is page 14. in “Convergence Culture,” “Delivery systems are simply technology , media are also cultural systems.” Can’t technology also be cultural – the examples used, also in the introduction were examples about 8-Track etc. Aren’t these also cultural?