There has been a wide variety of Web 2.0 media that have emerged into our society over the past decade. Some of these contain tools that have changed the way we operate in our daily life. The ways in which we are able to communicate and find entertainment has changed dramatically. One specific Web 2.0 medium that has changed the ways in which we navigate and seek entertainment is YouTube.
YouTube is a video sharing website that allows users to upload their own personal videos for millions of other people to see. Its main purpose is for users’ entertainment value. This new Internet medium was developed in February of 2005 by three college students named Chad Hurley, Steve Chen, and Jawed Karim. One of the most important inventors of this website is Jawed Karim. The website worldhistory.com , his own personal website Jawed.com , and scholarly articles retrieved from the EBSCOhost database have given me a great amount of information on this student in his $1.65 billion creation. Karim began his strive for this creation as a student at St. Paul’s Central High School. While he was attending this high school, he was constantly engaging himself with computers. He had developed his own emailing system for the school, which was his first ever project as a developing computer engineer. While in high school, Karim was eventually employed by PayPal, which paypal.com describes itself as “A safer easier way to pay online and get paid online. This service allows anyone to pay in any way they prefer, in forms of credit cards, bank accounts, and account balances without sharing any financial information.” This job was the initial spark to the creation of YouTube, where he had met and began developing ideas with his future co-owners, Chad Hurley and Steve Chen. While still employed with PayPal, Karim attended the University of St. Thomas. Worldhistory.com states that he had participated in an entrepreneurship discussion at this University, where he had coined the term “Ideas are cheap.” This term by Karim was meant to illustrate that cheap ideas can come and go, but you will eventually land on one that will give you success. Karim finally landed on a good “Cheap idea” where he had wanted to launch a dating website based on videos. These videos would contain various members who would tape themselves in hope for a date with another individual. Jawed.com provides information that this video dating idea was eventually launched but did not succeed. Jawed then decided to modify this website from a video dating service to a service that was open to anyone, not just dating participants. While it is opened to any person, he had allowed them to upload any videos containing almost anything besides nudity and pornography. These users were able to share these videos and search for videos by using various keywords and hyperlinks. These hyperlinks that were found within the website gave users the ability to find related videos to the initial video they were watching. The form of navigating this website through the use of keywords and hyperlinks is what allows users to use this new Web 2.0 medium effectively. This final creation known as YouTube was eventually sold to Google for a total of 1.65 billion, leaving the three creators very wealthy.
In order to elaborate more on navigating features found within this new Web 2.0 medium, I would like to use two very informational readings that we have blogged about in our class. Tim O’Reilly’s article, “What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation” gives a very good elaboration on searching with keywords. This article provides the differences between searching in a Web 2.0 medium rather than a Web 1.0 medium. He states that “Subject categories help narrow a users search terms and strategies, and the advanced searching capabilities increase the chances of a more relevant results list.(O’Relly 2005) This is exactly what Karim had created from his original video dating site. He allowed users to search with keywords of what they are looking for. If a user wanted to search for a specific title of a song or video, that one keyword would display a wide array of videos. If they were searching for a particular artist or a user host of the video, a large list of videos related to the keyword would also appear. This use of subject categories gives the Youtube user anything they desire to this day. It is the most effective way to navigate its large database. But there is also another very effective way in order to navigate its database. Like I have previously stated, if you search using various keywords, you will come across a wide array of results. When you click on one of these results, you will find various hyperlinks of related material. For example: If you search a particular artist and find a particular video you like, you will find various other related videos to that artist in hyperlink form. If you click that hyperlink to that video you will then find more related videos relating to that artist. It is a never ending cycle, and that is what hyper linking does. One very important reading that we have blogged about in class is Eszter Hargittai’s article, “The role of expertise in navigating links of influence.” This article contains information regarding navigation through the web with the use of hyperlinks. Hartittai basically summarizes the importance of using hyperlinks within this article. He states “Links remain an important way for users to move around online, whether within a known site or by venturing to new destinations. Links are very important precisely because they allocate user attention.”(Hargittai, 2008) This statement is very important because it relates greatly to YouTube. The various links within YouTube allow the user to allocate their attention to more areas of their interest. As I have previously stated, if you search using a keyword of something you are looking for, you are most likely interested in the results. The links that follow your initial search all relate to that area of interest and provide more and more options that can give you what you desire.
Everyone has different interests and YouTube is able to deliver various forms of entertainment to all of its users. Users are able to create their own unique user name that allows them to upload, share, and comment on various videos. Anything captured on a personal recording device can be uploaded to YouTube unless it violates its terms of service, such as pornography. These types of videos that are uploaded and shared come in all types. Based on my observations and my experience with this Internet medium, I have found that YouTube is very music friendly. Users are able to search almost any music video they want to see. These videos may fall into the form of a very old, rare video that you may not ever get to see on a medium such as television. I have been able to see many videos that I would have never seen if it wasn’t for the emergence of this great technology. I am not just referring to music videos seen on television networks such as MTV. Users are able to record live shows and concerts with their own recording device, and then upload the whole show on YouTube for millions of others to see. I have seen many users do this and it has become frequently common. Lately I have been able to find almost every show at every venue that my favorite bands have played. Before this medium had existed, it would have been almost impossible to see all these live shows on video. I would have to view these shows through individual tapes that people had recorded for themselves. But with the emergence of YouTube, I am able to view all these tapes because of its unique video sharing feature. Music videos and live music shows is just one form of entertainment found within YouTube. This website contains many other forms of entertainment that users are able to utilize.
Although YouTube users tend to rip music videos and record live performances at concerts that they have attended, they can still record themselves. I have observed that many YouTube users are recording themselves doing various acts. There are a large number of users who tend to record themselves playing a particular instrument, such as guitar. They show off songs they have written on their own and covers of their favorite bands. These people are trying to gain Internet fame, and some most certainly do. They are able to do this by gaining a large amount of viewers. Some of these users have hundreds of videos with thousands of comments on songs they play. They are known people amongst the YouTube community of people who are interested in music. This is something that could have never had been done without the emergence of this medium.
Throughout my observations, I have also found that YouTube can negatively affect a certain person. While I was surfing the Internet on my own time one day, I found a link to news article regarding a Baltimore Police Officer caught on YouTube. I watched the video and it consisted of a police officer abusing his power against a 14 year old skate boarder. In this video it is obvious the kid had done nothing wrong, but the officer was throwing a huge temper tantrum. The officer eventually ended up throwing the kid to the ground and confiscated his skateboard. What the officer did not know is that the kid’s friend was videotaping the whole thing. Later that week the owner of the video camera posted the corrupt police officers acts on YouTube for the public to see. This is when I found the news article that stated this officer had been suspended from his department. The sole reason for his suspension is YouTube. Ever since this has occurred, more and more police officers have been getting into trouble because they are being displayed to the public doing vigorous acts. Based on personal research from an Internet forum known as Officer.com, I have found that videotaping a police officer is legal but most try to avoid being captured on the job for reasons like this. This would not have occurred before the emergence of this new web 2.0 medium. This is a perfect example of how the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies have changed the way we operate in society.
Throughout my research on YouTube, I have found that some organizations have blocked YouTube from their social networks. Itnews.com states that 1600 schools in the Australian state of Victoria reportedly blocked YouTube from its students because of a vigorous act of bullying. Students were captured on video while bullying a mentally disabled female. This type of act that is caught on tape is very serious because it is viewed by millions of people all over the world. It provides a great amount of embarrassment for those who are involved, the school, the parents, the teachers, and the community. After reading about this news article, I took my own time to search for videos on YouTube related to bullying. I was able to find many videos of schoolyard fights and videos of bullies who are picking on other kids. This is definitely a negative aspect of YouTube that many schools are trying to get their students away from. These videos encourage other viewing students to commit copy-cat acts. Although YouTube is a very entertaining medium, I do understand why schools would want to block it. There has also been controversy revolving around racist cartoons being displayed on YouTube. There was one case where the Islamic religion was attacked in a video showing offensive cartoons to the religious faith. According to Link, Pakistan had completely banned YouTube from its country in this past February. I recently have found a blog of a user who agrees with this decision. The user of this blog states “I fully support the Government of Pakistan for banning YouTube. I think it should make sure that other Muslim countries also follow suit and ban the site as well. Such actions will force the sites which don’t show any respect for Muslims to get back to their senses and learn how to exercise their free speech.” This is a very good example, I believe, that shows how certain individuals feel about YouTube and its content.
YouTube is a very successful Web 2.0 Medium. It has changed the way we operate in our daily life but has also affected many others in ways that could have never occurred without its development. Its search ability tools such as, using keywords and hyperlinks are very essential for navigation within the site. YouTube is growing every day and will continue its path by adding more and more users. It is definitely one of the most unique Web 2.0 media to this day.
Hargittai, Eszter. (2008). The role of expertise in navigating links of influence. In Joseph Turow and Lokman Tsui (Eds.), The hyperlinked society: Questioning connections in the digital age (pp. 85-103). Ann Arbor , MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Haymarket Media Hosted by Macquarie Telecom. (2008) Retrieved November 28, 2008
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/46729,australian-schools-block-youtube.aspx
Scripps TV Station Group. (2008) Retrieved November 28, 2008
http://www.abc2news.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=66fc0900-6624-4ac2-8c1b-792b0472b952
Paypal. (1999-2008) Retrieved December 1, 2008
http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/about-outside
Jawed Karim. (2008) Retrieved November 22, 2008
http://www.jawed.com/resume/
Thistlerose Publications. (2008) Retrieved November 22, 2008
http://www.worldhistorysite.com/YouTube.html
O'Reilly, Tim (2005. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web.html.
Whitaker, Jason. (2002). The Internet: The Basics (Chapter 1). New York: Routledge.
Learmonth, Michael. (2008). Advertising Age 00018899, 10/6/2008, Vol 79, Issue 37.
Tryon, Chuck. (2008) Pop Politics: Online Parody Videos, Intertextuality, and Political Participation. Popular Communication. Vol. 6 Issue 4, p209-213, 5p
Lowry, Tom. (2008). The Anti-Youtube is Starting to Click. Business Week. 10/6/2008 Issue 4102, p52-52, 1p, 1 color
M Junaid Khan. (2008) Retrieved December 1, 2008
http://thelandofpure.blogspot.com/2008/02/youtube-banned-in-pakistan.html
Monday, December 1, 2008
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Youtube observations
For the past month I have been observing an Internet medium known as Youtube. I have found that many users use this website for their own personal interest. Many people have different interests and Youtube is able to deliver what audiences want to see. I have noticed that a lot of Youtube users use this medium in order to see various music videos. With the use of the google-like search engine, you are able to find almost any music video you want. Youtube users also are able to upload videos that they have recorded with their own personal recording device. This is the basis of how Youtube works, but I will save my explanation regarding this on my final essay. I have observed that users like to record themselves doing various things, such as recording their own band for audiences to see, doing standup comedy, skateboarding, and thousands of other things. Sometimes things can be caught on camera and displayed to a large audiance in a negative way, such as something embarrassing or illegal. I had found a story on a forum regarding illegal police procedures being caught on camera by local skater kids. The kids then later uploaded the personal video on youtube for a large public audience to see. This is something that I will go further into detail on my final essay.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Dodgeball and Social Organizing
Today I was assigned to read Chapter 9 from Clay Shirkey's book called Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. This reading contains informative explanations behind the reasoning for "Small world incidents." As described by Shirkey, a "Small world incident" takes place when you come into contact with an individual who you are connected to through another individual. Shirkey also helps describe this occurrence through the use of social networking sites.
Shirkey gives a very good example regarding this. He uses an airplane example, where you and your right seat passenger know someone in common. Shirky states that these chances are actually quite good because of a factor known as "Homophily." This factor draws two people out of a much smaller pool than a larger one for the increased likelihood of knowing the same person. They are drawn from a smaller pool because these two people are sharing the same arrival and departure cities and may both live in the same town or city. Shirkey then gives further explanation with the use of small world social networking services. Dodgeball, a friend of friend social networking site designed for mobile phone users, allows a user to send a mass text message to the people on their friends list. Since this is a friend of friend social networking site, the text is then relayed to your friends' friends. This is very similar to Shirkey's airplane example, but it is occurring through an Internet medium. The people that you and your friends are connected to are drawn from a smaller pool. They are drawn from this smaller pool because they are mobile phone users who are connected through a large friends list.
Dodgeball is very similar to Facebook in my opinion. Facebook has a feature known as "The people you may know tool." This tool displays people’s profiles that you may know due to the large number of your friends that know them. This allows you to become acquainted with your friend's friends. Shirky states that "In small world networks people don’t simply connect at random."(p.222, para.1) This is true because Facebook and Dodgeball have specific tools that allow you to connect. You all are connected through the factor of "Homophily." In Facebook you all are college students within the same age group and in Dodgeball you all have a friends list of mobile phone users.
Dodgeball seems like a very interesting feature, but I feel like it could be quite annoying. The constant receiving of messages from friends' friends could start out interesting but end in disappointment when you get tired of it. On a positive note, it also lets you become acquainted with your friends’ friends. It allows you meet new people and it helps explain the reasoning of coming across a “Small world incident.”
Shirkey, Clay. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations (chapter 9). New York: Penguin.
Shirkey gives a very good example regarding this. He uses an airplane example, where you and your right seat passenger know someone in common. Shirky states that these chances are actually quite good because of a factor known as "Homophily." This factor draws two people out of a much smaller pool than a larger one for the increased likelihood of knowing the same person. They are drawn from a smaller pool because these two people are sharing the same arrival and departure cities and may both live in the same town or city. Shirkey then gives further explanation with the use of small world social networking services. Dodgeball, a friend of friend social networking site designed for mobile phone users, allows a user to send a mass text message to the people on their friends list. Since this is a friend of friend social networking site, the text is then relayed to your friends' friends. This is very similar to Shirkey's airplane example, but it is occurring through an Internet medium. The people that you and your friends are connected to are drawn from a smaller pool. They are drawn from this smaller pool because they are mobile phone users who are connected through a large friends list.
Dodgeball is very similar to Facebook in my opinion. Facebook has a feature known as "The people you may know tool." This tool displays people’s profiles that you may know due to the large number of your friends that know them. This allows you to become acquainted with your friend's friends. Shirky states that "In small world networks people don’t simply connect at random."(p.222, para.1) This is true because Facebook and Dodgeball have specific tools that allow you to connect. You all are connected through the factor of "Homophily." In Facebook you all are college students within the same age group and in Dodgeball you all have a friends list of mobile phone users.
Dodgeball seems like a very interesting feature, but I feel like it could be quite annoying. The constant receiving of messages from friends' friends could start out interesting but end in disappointment when you get tired of it. On a positive note, it also lets you become acquainted with your friends’ friends. It allows you meet new people and it helps explain the reasoning of coming across a “Small world incident.”
Shirkey, Clay. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations (chapter 9). New York: Penguin.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Drug-Free Body Building Blog - Essay 4
During the past two weeks, I have been spending a good amount of time observing a weightlifting blog. I have chose to observe this type of blog because of my strong interest in this sport. In the past I have been a regular observer of different weightlifting forums, but experiencing it on a blog is something new for myself. This blog, "Drug-Free Body Building,"contains various methods of training, suggestions, facts, and tips in all areas of physical fitness. Although I am solely interested in the sport of weightlifting, this blog provides so much more than that. With that being said, it is safe to say that this blog's target audience is widely diverse.
Physical fitness is the main subject found within this blog. But there are so many areas that branch out of physical fitness that this blog covers. This is my main reason for stating that its targeted audience is widely diverse. As I stated earlier, I am very interested in weightlifting. So I am going to read and respond to blog posts involving various weightlifting exercises for each body part, tips on increasing weight, opinions on peoples experiences with supplements, and insight on new workout routines that I may not know about. Other people may view this blog because they want to lose weight. This blog contains information in that area where it provides insight on proper nutrition and effective weight-loss cardiovascular activities. Some viewers may also be interested in gaining weight. This blog also contains information regarding how to increase your body weight with proper nutrition, good supplements, and proper weight gaining exercises. One of the most recent posts on this site caught my attention greatly. It involved a targeted audience of people who may suffer from back pain while lifting. Although everyone involved in physical fitness does not experience this, it still happens to certain people. I've talked about this post in my "Blogging 3" entry. The blogger stated that he has been experiencing lower back pain during a particular exercise. He said he changed up his routine and added exercises that stretch the lower back in order to free it from pain. He also provided a weekly workout of exercises that can help those with back pain. This is just another example that provides evidence that this blog has a large target audience. The only downside to this blog is that the flow of conversation is very low. About two days ago I posted a follow up comment to a particular chest workout. I stated that I believed regular dumbbell presses are far more effective than regular barbell presses. I was hoping to get other comments in order to see if people agreed or disagreed with me. Throughout my experience in the gym, these particular exercises are highley debated, so getting some conversation on this topic would be very desirable. After about 3 days since my comment, I have found that no had replied. After I browsed through other posts to see if others have commented alike myself, I had come to the conclusion that this blog contains very little conversation flow.
The book Blogging America by Aaron Barlow provides a very good example that is comparable to supporting my above claim. In Chapter 5 of Blogging America, Barlow states that "You cannot give technology to people and expect results, they must want it."(p.122) This statement can be comparable to the diverse target audience of this weightlifting blog. The people that view this blog, alike most blogs, want the information they are reading. You have to be interested in physical fitness in order to benefit from this blog and that is what Barlow has stated blogs have done in America.
In Chapter 2 of Blogging America, Barlow speaks about the negative aspects of blogging. He states "Anyone can blog, and that there are no filters in order to stop anyone from saying whatever they want. Without editors, administrators, or regulators to monitor what is being posted, we have no one to vouch for the reliability or credibility of what we read."(p.36) I agree with this statement for many blogs because they lack credibility. But I believe this blog "Drug-Free Body Building" contains a lot of credible information. Based on my observations, this blog contains a blogger who posts various articles from physical fitness magazines or books. Each post is credited to a different author. This blog is mainly composed of a mass compilation of credible physical fitness articles. I am able to vouch for this blog in its credibility because all of the information provided is honestly amazing insight on their topics. I know this because I have spent many years reading magazines, books, and web site forums on information regarding this. This blog is just one huge information provider that is entirely free.
Barlow, Aaron. (2008). Blogging America: The New Public Sphere. Westport, CT.: Praeger Publishers.
Physical fitness is the main subject found within this blog. But there are so many areas that branch out of physical fitness that this blog covers. This is my main reason for stating that its targeted audience is widely diverse. As I stated earlier, I am very interested in weightlifting. So I am going to read and respond to blog posts involving various weightlifting exercises for each body part, tips on increasing weight, opinions on peoples experiences with supplements, and insight on new workout routines that I may not know about. Other people may view this blog because they want to lose weight. This blog contains information in that area where it provides insight on proper nutrition and effective weight-loss cardiovascular activities. Some viewers may also be interested in gaining weight. This blog also contains information regarding how to increase your body weight with proper nutrition, good supplements, and proper weight gaining exercises. One of the most recent posts on this site caught my attention greatly. It involved a targeted audience of people who may suffer from back pain while lifting. Although everyone involved in physical fitness does not experience this, it still happens to certain people. I've talked about this post in my "Blogging 3" entry. The blogger stated that he has been experiencing lower back pain during a particular exercise. He said he changed up his routine and added exercises that stretch the lower back in order to free it from pain. He also provided a weekly workout of exercises that can help those with back pain. This is just another example that provides evidence that this blog has a large target audience. The only downside to this blog is that the flow of conversation is very low. About two days ago I posted a follow up comment to a particular chest workout. I stated that I believed regular dumbbell presses are far more effective than regular barbell presses. I was hoping to get other comments in order to see if people agreed or disagreed with me. Throughout my experience in the gym, these particular exercises are highley debated, so getting some conversation on this topic would be very desirable. After about 3 days since my comment, I have found that no had replied. After I browsed through other posts to see if others have commented alike myself, I had come to the conclusion that this blog contains very little conversation flow.
The book Blogging America by Aaron Barlow provides a very good example that is comparable to supporting my above claim. In Chapter 5 of Blogging America, Barlow states that "You cannot give technology to people and expect results, they must want it."(p.122) This statement can be comparable to the diverse target audience of this weightlifting blog. The people that view this blog, alike most blogs, want the information they are reading. You have to be interested in physical fitness in order to benefit from this blog and that is what Barlow has stated blogs have done in America.
In Chapter 2 of Blogging America, Barlow speaks about the negative aspects of blogging. He states "Anyone can blog, and that there are no filters in order to stop anyone from saying whatever they want. Without editors, administrators, or regulators to monitor what is being posted, we have no one to vouch for the reliability or credibility of what we read."(p.36) I agree with this statement for many blogs because they lack credibility. But I believe this blog "Drug-Free Body Building" contains a lot of credible information. Based on my observations, this blog contains a blogger who posts various articles from physical fitness magazines or books. Each post is credited to a different author. This blog is mainly composed of a mass compilation of credible physical fitness articles. I am able to vouch for this blog in its credibility because all of the information provided is honestly amazing insight on their topics. I know this because I have spent many years reading magazines, books, and web site forums on information regarding this. This blog is just one huge information provider that is entirely free.
Barlow, Aaron. (2008). Blogging America: The New Public Sphere. Westport, CT.: Praeger Publishers.
Blogging 5
After my final day of observation, I have come to the conclusion that this blog is very credible. Although I do not have any evidence to prove this, I still have my experience in this sport. Every post I have viewed is so in depth in training and provides amazing insight on everything involving physical fitness. It covers all aspects of physical fitness, such as dieting, exercises, correct form, weight loss, weight gain, cardio, weightlifting, power lifting, etc. The list can go on forever. I will definitely use this blog in the future for my own personal pleasure rather than for a essay assignment.
Blogging 4
About two days ago I made a post on a a particular topic regarding a specific bench press routine. I stated my routine workout that I have used for the past couple years. I also provided information on my gains during this time period and what weight I can currently lift in comparison to my body weight. After about two days, I have yet to receive any response. As I browsed through other user's posts I have come to the conclusion that this site does not have a lot of user comments. It is more of an information site.
Shout into the Wind, and it shouts back
Today I was assigned the reading "Shout into the wind, and it shouts back" by Lori Kendall. Although our class has been studying blogs for the past two weeks, this reading's main focus shines light on another Web 2.0 application, known as LiveJournal. This reading consists of a study conducted by the author involving the identity and information management strategies of LiveJournal users. Kendall (2007) stated that she "Conducted face-to-face interviews with a theoretical sample of 26 LiveJournal users in several different United States cities."(p. 2)
The author begins this study by explaining how her interviewees distinguish between blogs and LiveJournal. She states that they believe "A blog requires more skill with html and is housed on a personally controlled website, while LiveJournal is a site hosting online diaries."(p.2) Some interviewees stated that LiveJournal is used as a diary, but very private things must be left out since it is displayed to the public. One interviewee, Robert, makes a very good statement regarding this. He states "Even if my post is marked private, it's on somebody elses server and if the government wanted to subpoena all of my records concerning me they could." Kendall also had discovered other findings in her study. She stated that some interviewees chose LiveJournal over Email as a better form of asynchronous communication with friends or even the public. If a user wanted to post something in their journal that they wanted the public, all of their friends, or even a few selected friends to hear, they can send their message through their journal. After their friends have viewed what they wrote, they can reply back and provide feedback. This is where the Kendall had developed the quote "Shout into the wind and it shouts back." Users shout out what they want others to hear or read, while in return they receive feedback.
This reading was very interesting to me in the area of feedback. This can be used in many beneficial ways in my opinion. If a user loves to hear feedback on their opinions that they post, then this website would be very entertaining for them. If you want to send a message to a massive audiance, such as informing your friends that you just had your first child, then this is a also a very beneficial website. I believe the feedback portion of this website is what Kendall is trying illustrate in the area of identity and information strategy.
Kendall, Lori. (2007). "Shout into the wind, and it shouts back." Identity and interactional tensions on LiveJournal. First Monday, 12. Retrieved on August 21, 2008 from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_9/kenda11/index.html
The author begins this study by explaining how her interviewees distinguish between blogs and LiveJournal. She states that they believe "A blog requires more skill with html and is housed on a personally controlled website, while LiveJournal is a site hosting online diaries."(p.2) Some interviewees stated that LiveJournal is used as a diary, but very private things must be left out since it is displayed to the public. One interviewee, Robert, makes a very good statement regarding this. He states "Even if my post is marked private, it's on somebody elses server and if the government wanted to subpoena all of my records concerning me they could." Kendall also had discovered other findings in her study. She stated that some interviewees chose LiveJournal over Email as a better form of asynchronous communication with friends or even the public. If a user wanted to post something in their journal that they wanted the public, all of their friends, or even a few selected friends to hear, they can send their message through their journal. After their friends have viewed what they wrote, they can reply back and provide feedback. This is where the Kendall had developed the quote "Shout into the wind and it shouts back." Users shout out what they want others to hear or read, while in return they receive feedback.
This reading was very interesting to me in the area of feedback. This can be used in many beneficial ways in my opinion. If a user loves to hear feedback on their opinions that they post, then this website would be very entertaining for them. If you want to send a message to a massive audiance, such as informing your friends that you just had your first child, then this is a also a very beneficial website. I believe the feedback portion of this website is what Kendall is trying illustrate in the area of identity and information strategy.
Kendall, Lori. (2007). "Shout into the wind, and it shouts back." Identity and interactional tensions on LiveJournal. First Monday, 12. Retrieved on August 21, 2008 from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_9/kenda11/index.html
Monday, November 10, 2008
Blogging 3
During today's viewing I decided to take a look at the content of the newest post. This post was done last Tuesday and a new one is due tomorrow. This entry is different than most of the others. It is targeted at those who suffer pack pain when doing a particular excercise. This is another good example of the different types of people this author is targeting. The excercise he talks about is known as squats. He gives a very good in-depth strategy of how to effectively perform this excercise. He then states other excercises that help strengthen and stretch out the back in order to avoid back pain. I just find it so interesting that the author can break down so many different aspects of this sport. I will be looking out for a new post tomorrow.
Blogging 2
Throughout my viewing of this weightlifting blog for the past week, I have come to the conclusion of many things. I have found that the author makes posts every two weeks based on fitness articles that he has compiled on his own time. He then credits the author by stating their name, location, and title of the article. This is very interesting to me because this proves that these diet and workout tips are very credible sources. It is not just one person's view on what they feel is correct. It is a compilation of credible articles that the author has organized in order to create his own blog.
Blogging 1
For the past week I have been observing a weightlifting and fitness blog called "Drug-Free Bodybuilding." I found this blog through a simple google search. This blog contains many interesting facts, tips, suggestions and training methods regarding weightlifting and fitness. As I looked at each individual post, I noticed that each post was very unique in it's own form. On one day the blogger will give tips on how to do a correct arm workout, then another day he will talk about working out your legs. He talks about correct methods on building each individual body part. He also has posts regarding proper nutrition for gaining weight and losing weight. His blog is targeted at all different kinds of people. They include heavy people, light people, weightlifters, powerlifters, and cardio fanatics. I am very interested in weightlifting and have been involved in this hobby for quite some time. This blog provides much more for myself than just a mandatory assignment.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Chapter 2 "Blogging in Society"
Today I was assigned to read the chapter "The Blogs in Society," which is extracted from Aaron Barlow's book Blogging America. In this chapter Barlow speaks about the negative depictions of blogging on the Internet. As we all know by now, almost anyone with Internet access can begin blogging whatever they want and whenever they want. This means that bloggers can be defined as authors of their own work and that they allow others to view the work that hey have made. Barlow states that bloggers tend to create lies, rumors, and make errors within their blogs. He states, "Without editors, administrators, or regulators to monitor what is being posted, we have no one to vouch for the reliability or credibility of the content we read and see."(p. 36) This is very important because readers have no idea if an author's specific story is credible or truthful. It may tend to make the viewers believe something that is not actually true. These bloggers may do this accidentally or intentionally. Another negative aspect of blogging that Barlow speaks about occurs within the area of threats. Bloggers who tend to voice opinions on certain topics may attract people who oppose their thoughts. These viewers comment on their blogs in hurtful threats that may negatively affect the blogger in various ways. Although the viewers who oppose the blog may not want to actually hurt the blogger, they are mainly getting their point across that they totally disagree with what the blogger has to say.
I believe that the negative depictions of blogging in which Barlow states is the most important part of this chapter. I totally agree that without an administrator, the information is not credible. If a user follows the rules, makes no mistakes, correctly cites, and doesn't make false stories for the sole purpose of entertainment, then blogging can be credible.
Barlow, Aaron. Blogging America. (2008). The Blogs in Society (Chapter 2).
I believe that the negative depictions of blogging in which Barlow states is the most important part of this chapter. I totally agree that without an administrator, the information is not credible. If a user follows the rules, makes no mistakes, correctly cites, and doesn't make false stories for the sole purpose of entertainment, then blogging can be credible.
Barlow, Aaron. Blogging America. (2008). The Blogs in Society (Chapter 2).
Monday, October 20, 2008
Searching and Determining Quality of Information
The emergence of Web 2.0 has given users many different ways in order to retrieve wanted information. Over the past couple of days I have used three different search engines in order to find background information on Youtube. The search engines I used were Google, Askjeeves, and EBSCO host. Since Youtube is a large database that contains millions of videos and files, i needed to use various keywords in order to eliminate having them displayed in my search results. Tim O'Reilley's reading "What is Web 2.0" gives a very good definitive answer regarding search engines and key words. He states "Subject categories help users narrow their search terms and strategies, and advanced searching capabilities increase the chances of a more relevant results list."(O'Reilly, 2005) This is exactly what I needed to do in order to find information of relevancy and validity.
The first search engine I used was Google. I immediately searched a broad keyword that gave me loads of information regarding the background of Youtube. The keyword I used was "Origin of Youtube." This keyword gave me exactly what I was looking for in Google's page ranking system. The first entry result was actually listed as "The Origin of Youtube" from worldhistorysite.com. This website provided me with the Youtube creator's name and his story of it's creation. In order to test the relevancy and validity of this source, I then searched the Youtube creators name, "Jawed Karim." The results I obtained were perfect and proved the previous article as a credible source. Searching the creators name not only proved the previous article as credible but also provided me with more background information on Youtube. The first two entries I found were from Wikipedia and Jawed Karim's own website, Jawed.com. Finding the creators own website I believe was very key in obtaining additional information on Youtube for my final paper. I would not have been able to find it without my first keyword search of "Origin of Youtube." Based on my search process I have found that keywords eventually led to more keywords because new information was retrieved as the process went on. After searching the creators name, I went back to my results of the keyword "Origin of Youtube" because of the vast amount of information retrieved. The second displayed entry was actually a video from netgaum.com that showed how the creator of this website came up with the idea. This is different in the area that it is more of a visual way to obtain information. Its composition basically proves the emergence of Web 2.0 technology. Another source of information that I found with the keyword "Origin of Youtube" comes from a website called Originof.com. I believe this is a great source of information because it includes a brief historical background on Youtube that I may be able to use in my introduction or conclusion for my final essay. This website also contains other Web 2.0 applications that I believe others students will use for their topics such as Facebook, Myspace, and Napster. I would not be surprised if this was a highly used website.
After I used the popular search engine Google, I then gave Askjeeves a try. I have never really used Askjeeves before so I decided to use it after hearing about it during class. I figured, based on its name that you search in a question type fashion. So my first search included the question "Why was Youtube created." One entry headline that quickly caught my attention was listed as "Who created Youtube and Why?" from funadvice.com. This website didn't include the information I thought it would have. It was a forum type website where a user created a thread listed as "Why was Youtube created and Why?" This was the first source that I found that I would definitely not use in my final essay because it is not credible information. It just includes random peoples own information. I also shouldn't have even bothered clicking on it's link based on the websites name, "FunAdvice.com." While on AskJeeves I decided to disregard my search through the use of question type keywords. I needed to find more information regarding its financial situation. I decided to just use the keyword "Youtube Inc." I found exactly what I was looking for and actually learned that Google bought Youtube. I aquired this information from the website infoworld.com. This website included an article regarding Google's deal to buy Youtube. This is a very good article that I will most definitely use in my final essay. Since I found this very useful source with the keyword "Youtube Inc," I decided to continue finding sources under it. I came across an entry that was from TheWashingtonPost.com. As soon as I saw this I knew it was going to contain a large amount of information. When I clicked the Askjeeves entry link, it brought me to a page that contained all of the Washington Post news articles written on Youtube. Some articles included information on business briefing, marketing, and data releases. Using the keyword Youtube Inc, provided more financial information rather than historical information regarding Youtube.
The last search engine I used was EBSCOhost. Since this is a library source, I decided to just search the word "Youtube" because of the possibility of a small amount of sources. EBSCOhost provided me with a large amount of information. There wasn't too much on its history but I came across an article by Michael Learmonth from the source "Advertising Age." It was about John McCain's use of Youtube for his political campaign. I thought that including politics in my essay would help the overall diversity of topic discussion. I also came across an Anti-Youtube article from the source "BusinessWeek." This article could be also used in my essay to state the negative effects Youtube is pushing on other companies such as Best Buy. The last article that I found very helpful under EBSCOhost was another political one. "Online Parody Videos, Intertextuality, and Political Participation" provides information on the effects youtube can have on political participation. Overall EBSCOhost in comparison to Google and askjeeves provide more scholarly and credible sources that I can incorporate in my final essay. I also found that using a broader keyword was more helpful in this search engine than the others.
Michael Zimmer states that the Internet is a remarkable resource for research and is a huge national library.(Zimmer, 2008) This statement has been proven to me after my use of two common search engines and our school library search engine. I found that each search engine with different keywords generate various amount of information of all areas, Financial, historical, and even political. I found that google is the most usefull, askjeeves is the most confusing and EBSCOhost is the most valid. In the end, Zimmerman's statement that the Internet is a huge national library stands true.
O'Reilly, Tim (2005. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web.html.
Whitaker, Jason. (2002). The Internet: The Basics (Chapter 1). New York: Routledge.
Learmonth, Michael. (2008). Advertising Age 00018899, 10/6/2008, Vol 79, Issue 37.
Tryon, Chuck. (2008) Pop Politics: Online Parody Videos, Intertextuality, and Political Participation. Popular Communication. Vol. 6 Issue 4, p209-213, 5p
Lowry, Tom. (2008). The Anti-Youtube is Starting to Click. Business Week. 10/6/2008 Issue 4102, p52-52, 1p, 1 color.
The first search engine I used was Google. I immediately searched a broad keyword that gave me loads of information regarding the background of Youtube. The keyword I used was "Origin of Youtube." This keyword gave me exactly what I was looking for in Google's page ranking system. The first entry result was actually listed as "The Origin of Youtube" from worldhistorysite.com. This website provided me with the Youtube creator's name and his story of it's creation. In order to test the relevancy and validity of this source, I then searched the Youtube creators name, "Jawed Karim." The results I obtained were perfect and proved the previous article as a credible source. Searching the creators name not only proved the previous article as credible but also provided me with more background information on Youtube. The first two entries I found were from Wikipedia and Jawed Karim's own website, Jawed.com. Finding the creators own website I believe was very key in obtaining additional information on Youtube for my final paper. I would not have been able to find it without my first keyword search of "Origin of Youtube." Based on my search process I have found that keywords eventually led to more keywords because new information was retrieved as the process went on. After searching the creators name, I went back to my results of the keyword "Origin of Youtube" because of the vast amount of information retrieved. The second displayed entry was actually a video from netgaum.com that showed how the creator of this website came up with the idea. This is different in the area that it is more of a visual way to obtain information. Its composition basically proves the emergence of Web 2.0 technology. Another source of information that I found with the keyword "Origin of Youtube" comes from a website called Originof.com. I believe this is a great source of information because it includes a brief historical background on Youtube that I may be able to use in my introduction or conclusion for my final essay. This website also contains other Web 2.0 applications that I believe others students will use for their topics such as Facebook, Myspace, and Napster. I would not be surprised if this was a highly used website.
After I used the popular search engine Google, I then gave Askjeeves a try. I have never really used Askjeeves before so I decided to use it after hearing about it during class. I figured, based on its name that you search in a question type fashion. So my first search included the question "Why was Youtube created." One entry headline that quickly caught my attention was listed as "Who created Youtube and Why?" from funadvice.com. This website didn't include the information I thought it would have. It was a forum type website where a user created a thread listed as "Why was Youtube created and Why?" This was the first source that I found that I would definitely not use in my final essay because it is not credible information. It just includes random peoples own information. I also shouldn't have even bothered clicking on it's link based on the websites name, "FunAdvice.com." While on AskJeeves I decided to disregard my search through the use of question type keywords. I needed to find more information regarding its financial situation. I decided to just use the keyword "Youtube Inc." I found exactly what I was looking for and actually learned that Google bought Youtube. I aquired this information from the website infoworld.com. This website included an article regarding Google's deal to buy Youtube. This is a very good article that I will most definitely use in my final essay. Since I found this very useful source with the keyword "Youtube Inc," I decided to continue finding sources under it. I came across an entry that was from TheWashingtonPost.com. As soon as I saw this I knew it was going to contain a large amount of information. When I clicked the Askjeeves entry link, it brought me to a page that contained all of the Washington Post news articles written on Youtube. Some articles included information on business briefing, marketing, and data releases. Using the keyword Youtube Inc, provided more financial information rather than historical information regarding Youtube.
The last search engine I used was EBSCOhost. Since this is a library source, I decided to just search the word "Youtube" because of the possibility of a small amount of sources. EBSCOhost provided me with a large amount of information. There wasn't too much on its history but I came across an article by Michael Learmonth from the source "Advertising Age." It was about John McCain's use of Youtube for his political campaign. I thought that including politics in my essay would help the overall diversity of topic discussion. I also came across an Anti-Youtube article from the source "BusinessWeek." This article could be also used in my essay to state the negative effects Youtube is pushing on other companies such as Best Buy. The last article that I found very helpful under EBSCOhost was another political one. "Online Parody Videos, Intertextuality, and Political Participation" provides information on the effects youtube can have on political participation. Overall EBSCOhost in comparison to Google and askjeeves provide more scholarly and credible sources that I can incorporate in my final essay. I also found that using a broader keyword was more helpful in this search engine than the others.
Michael Zimmer states that the Internet is a remarkable resource for research and is a huge national library.(Zimmer, 2008) This statement has been proven to me after my use of two common search engines and our school library search engine. I found that each search engine with different keywords generate various amount of information of all areas, Financial, historical, and even political. I found that google is the most usefull, askjeeves is the most confusing and EBSCOhost is the most valid. In the end, Zimmerman's statement that the Internet is a huge national library stands true.
O'Reilly, Tim (2005. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web.html.
Whitaker, Jason. (2002). The Internet: The Basics (Chapter 1). New York: Routledge.
Learmonth, Michael. (2008). Advertising Age 00018899, 10/6/2008, Vol 79, Issue 37.
Tryon, Chuck. (2008) Pop Politics: Online Parody Videos, Intertextuality, and Political Participation. Popular Communication. Vol. 6 Issue 4, p209-213, 5p
Lowry, Tom. (2008). The Anti-Youtube is Starting to Click. Business Week. 10/6/2008 Issue 4102, p52-52, 1p, 1 color.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Searching - Issues of Privacy
Today I was assigned the reading "The externalities of search 2.0: The emerging privacy threats when the drive for the perfect search engine meets web 2.0" by Michael Zimmer. This article's main focus falls upon the downside of Web 2.0's quest for the "Perfect search engine." This downside as stated by Zimmer, can be illustrated as Search 2.0's ability to "Accumulate personal information and build personal profiles of its users in order to satisfy their needs and wants for their future searches."
Zimmer states that "The perfect search engine" generates pin-point results to users based on the websites they have visited and keywords they have used in their past searches. These pin-point results are mainly due to what Zimmer states as, "The perfect reach" and "The perfect recall." "The perfect reach," as I have previously stated, generates results due to the user's history on the web. For example; If I were to shop on an online website for Nike sneakers, Web 2.0 will be able to accumulate this information about myself. It will know I have purchased, searched, and was even interested in Nike sneakers. This results in what Zimmer states as "The perfect recall." Web 2.0 is able to recall that I may prefer the brand Nike for my choice of sneakers. This collection of information about myself may come in handy on a future search for sneakers or the brand Nike.
Zimmer also talks about advertising towards a certain person's interests based on the information Web 2.0 is able to accumulate. I have viewed this first hand on the Web 2.0 application, Facebook. Facebook is composed of personal profiles which lists their interests. If I listed that one my interests was "Weightlifting," I would receive many ads on my Facebook about available gyms in my location, tips on strength gain, and exercise equipment for low prices. This is all due to the emergence of Web 2.0's ability to accumulate personal information and create profiles on its users. It knows what you have searched, your interests, and what you have purchased.
Although the "Perfect search engine" generates perfect search results that relate to the users needs and wants, it still accumulates a lot of the user's personal information. I have previously stated that this is the downside to the development of "The perfect search engine." I still agree with this statement because as the title even states, it is still a "Privacy threat." Zimmer makes a very good statement that "The fear that a users personal information may fall in the governments lap"(p. 6, para. 4.) may occur. Having the web know too much about us may be dangerous in areas of scam and fraud, which is actually occuring in our present day.
Zimmer, Michael. (2008). The externalities of search 2.0: The emerging privacy threats when the drive for the perfect search engine meets Web 2.0. First Monday, 13. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2136/1944.
Zimmer states that "The perfect search engine" generates pin-point results to users based on the websites they have visited and keywords they have used in their past searches. These pin-point results are mainly due to what Zimmer states as, "The perfect reach" and "The perfect recall." "The perfect reach," as I have previously stated, generates results due to the user's history on the web. For example; If I were to shop on an online website for Nike sneakers, Web 2.0 will be able to accumulate this information about myself. It will know I have purchased, searched, and was even interested in Nike sneakers. This results in what Zimmer states as "The perfect recall." Web 2.0 is able to recall that I may prefer the brand Nike for my choice of sneakers. This collection of information about myself may come in handy on a future search for sneakers or the brand Nike.
Zimmer also talks about advertising towards a certain person's interests based on the information Web 2.0 is able to accumulate. I have viewed this first hand on the Web 2.0 application, Facebook. Facebook is composed of personal profiles which lists their interests. If I listed that one my interests was "Weightlifting," I would receive many ads on my Facebook about available gyms in my location, tips on strength gain, and exercise equipment for low prices. This is all due to the emergence of Web 2.0's ability to accumulate personal information and create profiles on its users. It knows what you have searched, your interests, and what you have purchased.
Although the "Perfect search engine" generates perfect search results that relate to the users needs and wants, it still accumulates a lot of the user's personal information. I have previously stated that this is the downside to the development of "The perfect search engine." I still agree with this statement because as the title even states, it is still a "Privacy threat." Zimmer makes a very good statement that "The fear that a users personal information may fall in the governments lap"(p. 6, para. 4.) may occur. Having the web know too much about us may be dangerous in areas of scam and fraud, which is actually occuring in our present day.
Zimmer, Michael. (2008). The externalities of search 2.0: The emerging privacy threats when the drive for the perfect search engine meets Web 2.0. First Monday, 13. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2136/1944.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
What is Web 2.0
Today I was instructed to read "What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. This reading was retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html. This article illustrates the evolutional difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. Which is that we have moved from an era of using platform devices such as packaged software applications to the use of web applications.
O'Reilly gives various examples of differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 regarding this. But the most important and easy to understand is his use of Netscape and Google. He states that Netscape "Framed the web as a platform and was the flagship product of the web browser"(O'Reilly) This was Web 1.0, the basis of the web before it evolved from software to using web applications. These web applications, as stated by O'Reilly, "Include Google which was never sold or packaged, but delivered as a service."(O'Reilly) These delivered services emerged Web 2.0 into what it is today. Giving users access to millions of websites with the use of one web application. This is known as Chris Anderson's "Long Tail." The Long Tail refers to the "Collective power of small sites that make up the bulk of the web's content."(Anderson) This statement just proves how much more evolved Web 2.0 is than Web 1.0. The Internet is massive in size and is still growing. Web applications like Google are able to provide more for its user than the old platform because it is able to "Reach to the far distances of the Internet, not just the center."(O'Reilly)
This article mostly consisted of how web applications changed "The platform," which was the old use of software. O'Reilly used many examples such as Double click vs. Overture, Akamai vs. Bitorrent, and mp3.com vs. Napster, and Netscape vs. Google. I believe that Netscape vs. Google is the benchmark for this whole Web 2.0 emergence because of the vast amount of information Google can obtain from the Internet. O'Reilly provides very good examples in describing Google. Such as using Chris Anderson's "Long Tail." I thought the use of it was very key in this article and helped illustrate the importance of not just Google but web applications overall. These have changed the way we use the web now and it has evolved Web 1.0.
O'Reilly, Tim. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.
O'Reilly gives various examples of differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 regarding this. But the most important and easy to understand is his use of Netscape and Google. He states that Netscape "Framed the web as a platform and was the flagship product of the web browser"(O'Reilly) This was Web 1.0, the basis of the web before it evolved from software to using web applications. These web applications, as stated by O'Reilly, "Include Google which was never sold or packaged, but delivered as a service."(O'Reilly) These delivered services emerged Web 2.0 into what it is today. Giving users access to millions of websites with the use of one web application. This is known as Chris Anderson's "Long Tail." The Long Tail refers to the "Collective power of small sites that make up the bulk of the web's content."(Anderson) This statement just proves how much more evolved Web 2.0 is than Web 1.0. The Internet is massive in size and is still growing. Web applications like Google are able to provide more for its user than the old platform because it is able to "Reach to the far distances of the Internet, not just the center."(O'Reilly)
This article mostly consisted of how web applications changed "The platform," which was the old use of software. O'Reilly used many examples such as Double click vs. Overture, Akamai vs. Bitorrent, and mp3.com vs. Napster, and Netscape vs. Google. I believe that Netscape vs. Google is the benchmark for this whole Web 2.0 emergence because of the vast amount of information Google can obtain from the Internet. O'Reilly provides very good examples in describing Google. Such as using Chris Anderson's "Long Tail." I thought the use of it was very key in this article and helped illustrate the importance of not just Google but web applications overall. These have changed the way we use the web now and it has evolved Web 1.0.
O'Reilly, Tim. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Cops 2.0 IRC Chat (Essay 2)
Over the past couple of weeks, I have observed a specific Internet Relay Chat. An IRC is a social medium that allows users to chat amongst each other synchronously. Although there are many IRC's available on the Internet, I chose to observe one that I am very familiar with and have a strong interest in. This IRC is known as "Cops 2.0." This social medium works in congruence with the television show "Cops" on G4TV. At the bottom of this television show is a box that contains information regarding what is occurring in the episode. It asks a variety of questions that allows users in the IRC to answer. When the user answers the questions pertaining to the episode, the host then chooses these specific answers randomly to display in the information box at the bottom of the television show. From what I have observed, I have seen many users act as "Free riders" who answering questions in a spamming fashion. These "Free riders" are taking away the enjoyment and interests of those who want to use the IRC correctly, and for those who want to discuss the police activity occurring on the episode.
The reading "Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities" by Peter Kollock and Marc Smith gives a very good description of what a "Free rider" does in these social media. Kollock and Smith both state that "Free riders" contribute useless information to the social media in order to obtain a public good. A public good, as stated by Kollock and Smith, "Is a resource from which all may benefit."(p.110) In the Cops 2.0 channel, the free riders answer questions in a jokingly spamming fashion in order to get their answers up on the information box on the television show. In other words, they are trying to get their humorous answer displayed on television by overriding many other's answers. The free riding that occurs in this situation, is the consistent spamming of idiotic answers and the public good that they are trying to obtain is their displayed answer on television. The problem here is that the questions that are being asked are relating to the police activity that is occurring in the episode of Cops. I have seen this occur in all five of my observation days. For example in my first day of observation on Septemeber 16th, the question "How would you clear a room?" was asked. This was asked because during the episode the Police needed to vacate a room where a crime has occurred. So I expected people to answer that question with answers like "Call in the K-9 Unit" or "Call for backup to vacate the premises." Instead you saw answers like "I'd call Arnold," "Throw a gas bomb," and "With my mutt." All these answers were displayed on television because they were constantly spammed, so the host randomly selected them because of the vast amount answered in the chat. During my final day of observation on September 23rd, I decided to answer a question in regard to what was occurring in the episode in a non-spamming fashion. The question "How would you handle this situation?" was asked. I stated, "I would call my superior, tell him my situation, and follow his orders." As i posted this answer, it was quickly overrun by the idiot spammers and was not displayed on television. This is very similar to Professor Stromer-Galley's blog post, titled "Experimenting with IRC." She stated that during the experimentation, users were not discussing anything, but just random things were being posted. She stated that she tried asking questions in order to refocus the discussion, but she was mostly overridden by the free riders who were posting nonsense. This is very similar to my answer being overridden by the free riders for a spot on television.
Although the reading by Kollock and Smith did not provide examples of free riders existing in Internet Relay Chats, my observations are still comparabe to what had occurred in Usenet. Kollock and Smith both state that "No central Authority manages Usenet"(p.111) Kollock and Smith had mentioned that Usenet free riders would post long articles and meaningless off topic spam in order to obtain the public good. During my observations, specifically the first, I noticed a lot of users getting booted from the channel when they answered the questions with curse words. This is the only central authority I saw within the channel. It still allowed users to spam meaningless information just like Usenet. I also found in my observations that there were no regular users who try and regulate the conduct displayed in the chat. As stated by Kollock and Smith, this is something that Usenet has in order to try and eliminate the free riders. They mention "Each contribution is passed throughout the system of interconnected hosts."(p.111)
Although this problem may not exist in other IRC channels, or may be declining as time progresses, but from my observations I have found that the Cops 2.0 IRC channel contains a majority of these free riders. These free riders ruin the channel for the people who want to use it correctly, in their own selfishness. It is very hard participate in the IRC channel when people aren't answering questions in regard to what the episode is portraying. I believe that these free riders give the channel a bad name and may discontinue users who want to use it correctly.
Blibliography
Kollock, P. and Smith, M. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (p. 109-129). Philidelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
http://www.g4tv.com/cops.chat.html
http://com430z.blogspot.com/
Stromer-Galley, J. (2008). Experimenting with IRC
The reading "Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities" by Peter Kollock and Marc Smith gives a very good description of what a "Free rider" does in these social media. Kollock and Smith both state that "Free riders" contribute useless information to the social media in order to obtain a public good. A public good, as stated by Kollock and Smith, "Is a resource from which all may benefit."(p.110) In the Cops 2.0 channel, the free riders answer questions in a jokingly spamming fashion in order to get their answers up on the information box on the television show. In other words, they are trying to get their humorous answer displayed on television by overriding many other's answers. The free riding that occurs in this situation, is the consistent spamming of idiotic answers and the public good that they are trying to obtain is their displayed answer on television. The problem here is that the questions that are being asked are relating to the police activity that is occurring in the episode of Cops. I have seen this occur in all five of my observation days. For example in my first day of observation on Septemeber 16th, the question "How would you clear a room?" was asked. This was asked because during the episode the Police needed to vacate a room where a crime has occurred. So I expected people to answer that question with answers like "Call in the K-9 Unit" or "Call for backup to vacate the premises." Instead you saw answers like "I'd call Arnold," "Throw a gas bomb," and "With my mutt." All these answers were displayed on television because they were constantly spammed, so the host randomly selected them because of the vast amount answered in the chat. During my final day of observation on September 23rd, I decided to answer a question in regard to what was occurring in the episode in a non-spamming fashion. The question "How would you handle this situation?" was asked. I stated, "I would call my superior, tell him my situation, and follow his orders." As i posted this answer, it was quickly overrun by the idiot spammers and was not displayed on television. This is very similar to Professor Stromer-Galley's blog post, titled "Experimenting with IRC." She stated that during the experimentation, users were not discussing anything, but just random things were being posted. She stated that she tried asking questions in order to refocus the discussion, but she was mostly overridden by the free riders who were posting nonsense. This is very similar to my answer being overridden by the free riders for a spot on television.
Although the reading by Kollock and Smith did not provide examples of free riders existing in Internet Relay Chats, my observations are still comparabe to what had occurred in Usenet. Kollock and Smith both state that "No central Authority manages Usenet"(p.111) Kollock and Smith had mentioned that Usenet free riders would post long articles and meaningless off topic spam in order to obtain the public good. During my observations, specifically the first, I noticed a lot of users getting booted from the channel when they answered the questions with curse words. This is the only central authority I saw within the channel. It still allowed users to spam meaningless information just like Usenet. I also found in my observations that there were no regular users who try and regulate the conduct displayed in the chat. As stated by Kollock and Smith, this is something that Usenet has in order to try and eliminate the free riders. They mention "Each contribution is passed throughout the system of interconnected hosts."(p.111)
Although this problem may not exist in other IRC channels, or may be declining as time progresses, but from my observations I have found that the Cops 2.0 IRC channel contains a majority of these free riders. These free riders ruin the channel for the people who want to use it correctly, in their own selfishness. It is very hard participate in the IRC channel when people aren't answering questions in regard to what the episode is portraying. I believe that these free riders give the channel a bad name and may discontinue users who want to use it correctly.
Blibliography
Kollock, P. and Smith, M. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (p. 109-129). Philidelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
http://www.g4tv.com/cops.chat.html
http://com430z.blogspot.com/
Stromer-Galley, J. (2008). Experimenting with IRC
Observation Day 5
Last night was my final day of observing the Cops 2.0 IRC chat. This observation contained all the similar aspects that I have been talking about in my past blog entries. Once again a question was asked that related to what was occurring in the episode. The question was "How would you handle this situation?" Many users then began spamming idiotic answers like "Use my sword," and "Shoot everyone in the room, point blank in the head." These users are anwering this way for the sole purpose of trying to be funny. But once again, it had nothing to do with police activity or answering the questions correctly. This observation, once again contained nothing but spammers and free riders. This time I decided to answer correct answers that related to the activity displayed on the episode in a non spamming fashion. I answered the question of "How would you handle this situation?" with, "I would call my superior, tell him my situation and follow his advice." As I posted this, it was overrun by the idiot spammers and it never displayed on television.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Observation Day 4
Last night I viewed the 9:00 PM showing of Cops 2.0. The IRC chat was very similar to the 3 other days of obvservation. So this time I decided to compare the amount of female to male users. Although these were alot of neutral names that could go either way, I was still able to find some females in this chat. Some user names include: "Michelle112", "Roxxy14pl", "Instagirl", and "msladymaz." Although these are feminine names, it doesnt provide enough evidence of their gender. There were also some users with masculine names. Some include: "Steveklj", "KidPoker", and "BatmanDNight." This also does not provide enough evidence of their gender. Many users like myself also had neutral names like, "Kardian24." This user names consists of my last name and my favorite number. It could be any type of gender. I only focused on these things during this observation, and will go more into depth on it in my final essay.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Observation Day 3
During today's observation of the Cops 2.0 IRC Chat, I noticed there were a lot more users logged on. This increase of users meant that there was an increase of spam. All of the chat was absolute nonsense, but some related to the episode. During one of the segments on television show, there was a civilian being arrested for a domestic violence charge. He started crying when the Police Officer slapped him with cuffs. When this happened alot of the nonsense spam stopped and began relating to what was shown on television. The users were laughing at how he was crying and called him a cry baby. I was actually laughing out loud to the things they were saying. One user, Kingzzsj, said "This kid sucks, go cry to mommy." Other users responded with similar comments like "Yea what a baby, feed him a bottle." This actually was the first viewing where people talked about the actual show and Police work.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Day 2 Observation
Last night I observed the Cops 2.0 IRC chat for the second time. I once again did this while viewing the 12:00 Am showing. The IRC host asked the question "Why would you hide in the bushes?" This question was asked in relation to what was occurring on the episode. Many users responded to this question in a humorous manner. People responded with answers like "To hide from scooby" and "To hide from Hannibal Lector." Just like my first observation, none of these answers were Police related. I also analyzed alot of the usernames. I was able to find atleast three usernames that were in a feminine way. One was CrazzyGal14. This person was answering the host's questions with a multiple answers, in a spamming fashion. As I saw this going on in the chat, I just figured it was some young girl spamming the IRC chat. While inbetween commercials of the show, the users were all spamming different jokes. There was no real conversation or Police related conversation. This was all that occured during this half hour of chat.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Day 1 Observation
Today I sat through the 12:00 Am Cops 2.0 episode while observing their IRC chat. This television show and IRC chat both work together in congruence. At the bottom of the television is a box that contains information regarding what is ocurring on the show. They ask multiple questions that allow the IRC users to answer. Then the host picks the answers that will be displayed on the television. When the first question was asked, about 14 different users responded with various answers. Most answers were not serious. For example the show asked, "How would you clear a room?" Many IRC users responded with "I'd get Arnold," "Throw a gas bomb," and "With my mutt." There were also many users who constantly spammed useless information. I also saw a couple users get booted from the chat for saying curse words. I looked at everyones user name and many of them were in a masculine form. During commercial breaks, the users were constantly spamming jokes. Nobody was in real conversation. This is all that I had observed today.
New Media and Web Production
Today I was assigned the reading The Internet: The Basics by Jason Whitaker. This reading consists of various components of digital production on the Web known as "New media." Whitaker states many processes that these new media have taken in order to make our present day Internet.
The first component of digital production on the web is known as hypertext. Whitaker states the importance of hypertext by mentioning that "Without a standard protocol for transmitting documents, the Web would not exist." (p.58) He continues by explaining the importance of hyperlinks, stating its usefulness through its ability to connect to various amounts of information, videos, and images from web pages. Whitaker spoke about how the computer has changed early photography from an alchemical process of capturing images to a digitized procedure. This new process of capturing still images has decreased the earlier methods of photography. This then leads to the presence of moveable images and audio formats such as MPEG's and MP3's. This emergence of new media has led to the availability for music albums and DVD's on the Internet, allowing piracy to take place. Millions of MP3 files over the past 10 years have been available through many peer-to-peer networks such as Napster and Kazaa. Whitaker states that producers are worried that video could spread as easily as MP3 files have. I believe this is true or has already happened because I know of many people who download hundreds of movies and burn them to DVDs in an easy fashion. There are also various underground businesses that sell bootlegged movies that have not even left the theaters yet. These new media on the Internet have both affected businesses, artists and customers. They have hurt businesses in sales because of less CDs and DVDs being purchased, left the customer without proper profit, and they have encouraged customers to engage in illegal activity.
This reading, I believe was very different than the previous readings. I would have to disagree that this reading consisted of "The Basics." Whitaker went deep into explaining how certain processes work, such as capturing a digital image with the use of sampling and quantisation. He also gave an in depth explanation on how to create a web page. He gave examples and explanations of various tags in order to format pages, add color, create a lay out, and add images on the web. But what was most important in this reading was the presence of these new media not their in depth operations.
The first component of digital production on the web is known as hypertext. Whitaker states the importance of hypertext by mentioning that "Without a standard protocol for transmitting documents, the Web would not exist." (p.58) He continues by explaining the importance of hyperlinks, stating its usefulness through its ability to connect to various amounts of information, videos, and images from web pages. Whitaker spoke about how the computer has changed early photography from an alchemical process of capturing images to a digitized procedure. This new process of capturing still images has decreased the earlier methods of photography. This then leads to the presence of moveable images and audio formats such as MPEG's and MP3's. This emergence of new media has led to the availability for music albums and DVD's on the Internet, allowing piracy to take place. Millions of MP3 files over the past 10 years have been available through many peer-to-peer networks such as Napster and Kazaa. Whitaker states that producers are worried that video could spread as easily as MP3 files have. I believe this is true or has already happened because I know of many people who download hundreds of movies and burn them to DVDs in an easy fashion. There are also various underground businesses that sell bootlegged movies that have not even left the theaters yet. These new media on the Internet have both affected businesses, artists and customers. They have hurt businesses in sales because of less CDs and DVDs being purchased, left the customer without proper profit, and they have encouraged customers to engage in illegal activity.
This reading, I believe was very different than the previous readings. I would have to disagree that this reading consisted of "The Basics." Whitaker went deep into explaining how certain processes work, such as capturing a digital image with the use of sampling and quantisation. He also gave an in depth explanation on how to create a web page. He gave examples and explanations of various tags in order to format pages, add color, create a lay out, and add images on the web. But what was most important in this reading was the presence of these new media not their in depth operations.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
The problems and effective methods of control within a virtual community
Today I was assigned the reading "Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities" by Peter Kolluck and Marc Smith. This reading consisted mostly of the social dilemmas found in vitrual communities and the effective methods of controlling them. The main social dilemma stated in this reading is the challenge of providing a public good. Kolluck and Smith both define a public good as a resource from which all may benefit, regardless of whether they may have helped create the good. The problem here is that many people like to "Free-ride" on the enjoyment of a public good, but do not contribute to it's production whatsoever. This occurs mainly due to the fact that a central authority does not exist. Kolluck and Smith both describe the free-rider problem in a virtual community known as Usenet.
Kolluck and Smith both describe Usenet as one of the largest computer-mediated communication systems in existence. Usenet is a forum based virtual community that consists of many newsgroups. These newsgroups allow users to discuss important news topics amongst themselves by creating threads and discussing through interconnected posts. This virtual community lacks a central authority or post moderator. This is where the free-rider problem comes into play. Kolluck and Smith both state that if users each take turns posting their stances or opinions on a particular topic, then the communication flows smoothly. The smooth flow of communication here can be labeled as a public good. But this public good can be victim to a free-rider who may use the information without contributing. Kolluck and Smith describe another problem regarding free-riders. They state that some users tend to abuse Usenet's bandwith by posting long long articles, repetitive messages, and nonsense spam in order to receive valuable information by the other rule-abiding members. Another way users are able to free-ride is by asking questions, but not answering others', gathering information but not providing it, or only reading members posts without contributing their own posts. They tend to inherit very valuable information by not contributing any of their own to the community.
Kolluck and Smith both have stated that the free-rider problem occurs because there is no central authority. All the members of a self-governing virtual community must all work together and follow the rules of decorum. Within this reading, Kolluck and Smith provide information by Ostrom, who states various design principles of groups who were effectively able to organize and govern themselves. Kolluck and Smith both have broken down Ostroms principles into three main methods of control. They are group size and boundaries, rules and institutions, and monitoring and sanctioning.
Ostrom states that having clearly defined boundaries are very important because it encourages an ongoing flow of communication between members. This frequent communication tends to eliminate the free-riders because repeated interaction tends to recruit more participators. The more people who participate, the more in weeds out those who do not contribute. Monitoring and sanctioning is very important in sustaining a successful community. Kolluck and Smith both state that Ostrom had found evidence that many users are willing to follow rules relating to public goods as long as most others do. This is important because if most people follow the rules, it dramatically reduces the amount of free-riders who violate the norms. It ends up in a match between a large mass versus a small amount. A set of rules and institutions is also very important in sustaining successful communities. Ostrom had found evidence in the fact that if most members follow a set of rules, they are most likely to modify them due to the day to day activity in the virtual community. They know what is always going on and the problems that are occuring. So they are able to modify rules in order to eliminate every new emerging problem.
Within this reading, Kolluck and Smith both have described the main social dilemma of users free-riding off of public goods. Although a central authority figure does not exist in order to eliminate these problems, there are still ways to control effective information flowing virtual community.
Kolluck and Smith both describe Usenet as one of the largest computer-mediated communication systems in existence. Usenet is a forum based virtual community that consists of many newsgroups. These newsgroups allow users to discuss important news topics amongst themselves by creating threads and discussing through interconnected posts. This virtual community lacks a central authority or post moderator. This is where the free-rider problem comes into play. Kolluck and Smith both state that if users each take turns posting their stances or opinions on a particular topic, then the communication flows smoothly. The smooth flow of communication here can be labeled as a public good. But this public good can be victim to a free-rider who may use the information without contributing. Kolluck and Smith describe another problem regarding free-riders. They state that some users tend to abuse Usenet's bandwith by posting long long articles, repetitive messages, and nonsense spam in order to receive valuable information by the other rule-abiding members. Another way users are able to free-ride is by asking questions, but not answering others', gathering information but not providing it, or only reading members posts without contributing their own posts. They tend to inherit very valuable information by not contributing any of their own to the community.
Kolluck and Smith both have stated that the free-rider problem occurs because there is no central authority. All the members of a self-governing virtual community must all work together and follow the rules of decorum. Within this reading, Kolluck and Smith provide information by Ostrom, who states various design principles of groups who were effectively able to organize and govern themselves. Kolluck and Smith both have broken down Ostroms principles into three main methods of control. They are group size and boundaries, rules and institutions, and monitoring and sanctioning.
Ostrom states that having clearly defined boundaries are very important because it encourages an ongoing flow of communication between members. This frequent communication tends to eliminate the free-riders because repeated interaction tends to recruit more participators. The more people who participate, the more in weeds out those who do not contribute. Monitoring and sanctioning is very important in sustaining a successful community. Kolluck and Smith both state that Ostrom had found evidence that many users are willing to follow rules relating to public goods as long as most others do. This is important because if most people follow the rules, it dramatically reduces the amount of free-riders who violate the norms. It ends up in a match between a large mass versus a small amount. A set of rules and institutions is also very important in sustaining successful communities. Ostrom had found evidence in the fact that if most members follow a set of rules, they are most likely to modify them due to the day to day activity in the virtual community. They know what is always going on and the problems that are occuring. So they are able to modify rules in order to eliminate every new emerging problem.
Within this reading, Kolluck and Smith both have described the main social dilemma of users free-riding off of public goods. Although a central authority figure does not exist in order to eliminate these problems, there are still ways to control effective information flowing virtual community.
Monday, September 8, 2008
The Internet is entirely different from television
The Internet and television are similar in many areas. They both provide vast amounts of information and entertainment to large audiences by the Mass Media and are two of the most used information mediums to this day. But many people say that the Internet is different than television. I do believe this is true and can prove this statement by illustrating 5 defining characteristics of the Internet.
Although the Internet and television provide a lot of information to it's users, the information by each medium is still delivered differently. The Internet relies heavily on the use of a text-based form, while television uses a visual mode. Although it can be argued that the Internet is very visual because of arising websites such as www.youtube.com, where it is basically a type of television, it still contains one key characteristic that separates these mediums. This characteristic is known as hypertextuality. After reading through Adams and Clark's chapter "What is it" I was able to obtain a good grasp of this definition. The chapter states that "Hypertextuality is the ability to link any type of content to any other type of content." This cannot be done while watching television. For example, If I was watching a news story on the CBS News via television, I would have to watch it all the way through in order to obtain all the information that was being said by the newscaster. But if I used the Internet, I could go to www.cbs.com, find the same news story, and click various hypertextual links that will bring me to the information that I want. The use of hypertextuality enables you to choose the information you want to read and navigate, rather than waiting for it on television.
Another defining characteristic of the Internet that television lacks, is the use of interpersonal communication. After browsing through many sites, I finally came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/interpersonal_communication, which provides very insightful information regarding this. This site states that "Communication channels are the medium chosen to convey the message from sender to receiver." Meaning the sender reveals information to a receiver through a specific channel. This can be done asynchronously or synchronously, which is another defining characteristic of the Internet. It is stated in Adams and Clark's chapter "What is it" that synchronous can be defined as "Something occurring immediately," such as a comment following another comment instantly. Asynchronous can be defined as "Not occurring at the same time." A specific interpersonal communication channel such as video conferencing can be labeled as a synchronous technology. You are able to exchange messages simultaneously, while actually seeing it occur over the web. This cannot be done while using television. Television is just a sender to a receiver type of communication. The television can only talk to you, you cannot talk to it.
One defining characteristic of the Internet that most definitely separates the Internet from television, is the means of how data is actually transmitted. This is done by the use of packet switching. Adams and Clark's reading "How did we get here" gives a very good example of this by using email. It states that "Whenever we send information such as email, it is sent in thousands of smaller email packets that will travel in different directions to its one destination." This is done because it is expected that some packets will get lost, but if the majority make the destination, then the overall message will be accepted. If email messages were to be sent in one huge bundle, then the overall message may not be accepted because of a certain server outage. Data transmission from sender to receiver on television is essentially different. I was able to prove this through the use of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/television. This site states that "Television broadcasts moving images accompanied by sound." The broadcasting acts as the sender and the moving images act as the receiver. This data transmission is obviously different and is just another proven fact on how the Internet differs from television.
The last defining characteristic of the Internet that television does not contain is multimedia. The Internet is a multimediated source which allows you to virtually do anything. Adams and Clark's reading makes a very interesting statement regarding this. It states that "The Internet may resemble a book, a television, or something out of a science fiction movie." This statement is very important because it describes the dominance the Internet has over television. The Internet is so much more evolved than television in the form of blending together text, audio, and video. The Internet basically has a television within itself along with many other medias. There are various websites that allow you television, such as www.mlb.com and www.youtube.com.
Overall, the Internet is entirely different from television. Although they do contain similarities in areas of providing information, the Internet is just so much more evolved than television. It contains so many ways to navigate for selected information, communicate with other people through asynchronous and synchronous technologies, operate with other systems, and provide mulitmediated sources to it's users.
Although the Internet and television provide a lot of information to it's users, the information by each medium is still delivered differently. The Internet relies heavily on the use of a text-based form, while television uses a visual mode. Although it can be argued that the Internet is very visual because of arising websites such as www.youtube.com, where it is basically a type of television, it still contains one key characteristic that separates these mediums. This characteristic is known as hypertextuality. After reading through Adams and Clark's chapter "What is it" I was able to obtain a good grasp of this definition. The chapter states that "Hypertextuality is the ability to link any type of content to any other type of content." This cannot be done while watching television. For example, If I was watching a news story on the CBS News via television, I would have to watch it all the way through in order to obtain all the information that was being said by the newscaster. But if I used the Internet, I could go to www.cbs.com, find the same news story, and click various hypertextual links that will bring me to the information that I want. The use of hypertextuality enables you to choose the information you want to read and navigate, rather than waiting for it on television.
Another defining characteristic of the Internet that television lacks, is the use of interpersonal communication. After browsing through many sites, I finally came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/interpersonal_communication, which provides very insightful information regarding this. This site states that "Communication channels are the medium chosen to convey the message from sender to receiver." Meaning the sender reveals information to a receiver through a specific channel. This can be done asynchronously or synchronously, which is another defining characteristic of the Internet. It is stated in Adams and Clark's chapter "What is it" that synchronous can be defined as "Something occurring immediately," such as a comment following another comment instantly. Asynchronous can be defined as "Not occurring at the same time." A specific interpersonal communication channel such as video conferencing can be labeled as a synchronous technology. You are able to exchange messages simultaneously, while actually seeing it occur over the web. This cannot be done while using television. Television is just a sender to a receiver type of communication. The television can only talk to you, you cannot talk to it.
One defining characteristic of the Internet that most definitely separates the Internet from television, is the means of how data is actually transmitted. This is done by the use of packet switching. Adams and Clark's reading "How did we get here" gives a very good example of this by using email. It states that "Whenever we send information such as email, it is sent in thousands of smaller email packets that will travel in different directions to its one destination." This is done because it is expected that some packets will get lost, but if the majority make the destination, then the overall message will be accepted. If email messages were to be sent in one huge bundle, then the overall message may not be accepted because of a certain server outage. Data transmission from sender to receiver on television is essentially different. I was able to prove this through the use of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/television. This site states that "Television broadcasts moving images accompanied by sound." The broadcasting acts as the sender and the moving images act as the receiver. This data transmission is obviously different and is just another proven fact on how the Internet differs from television.
The last defining characteristic of the Internet that television does not contain is multimedia. The Internet is a multimediated source which allows you to virtually do anything. Adams and Clark's reading makes a very interesting statement regarding this. It states that "The Internet may resemble a book, a television, or something out of a science fiction movie." This statement is very important because it describes the dominance the Internet has over television. The Internet is so much more evolved than television in the form of blending together text, audio, and video. The Internet basically has a television within itself along with many other medias. There are various websites that allow you television, such as www.mlb.com and www.youtube.com.
Overall, the Internet is entirely different from television. Although they do contain similarities in areas of providing information, the Internet is just so much more evolved than television. It contains so many ways to navigate for selected information, communicate with other people through asynchronous and synchronous technologies, operate with other systems, and provide mulitmediated sources to it's users.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Characteristics of the Medium
This reading consists of many different components that revolve around the evolution of the Internet. Its main idea involves the issue of the Internet's medium type. The reading states that the Internet can be used as a personal communication medium. Internet users can use various asychronous technologies such as email, as well as sychronous technologies such as videoconferencing. These technologies allow users to us the Internet in an interactive approach, which can define it as a social medium. But this reading states that the internet is evolving. It can be used in various other ways such as for public information and business practice. Examples of these include many informative websites such as www.mlb.com and www.weather.com. These websites are displayed amongst the internet in order to provide information for the public. Users can use these websites in order to find valuable inofrmation on major league baseball scores or tomorrows weather. The Internet can also display business websites such as www.pacsun.com. These sites allow consumers to buy products over the web in a business to consumer practice. These various websites also illustrate that the internet is a multimedia. For example, www.mlb.com may contain various highlight videos of yesterdays game that may require a real player plugin. These websites also contain another important element known as hypertexuality. As defined by the reading, hypertextuality is "The ability to link any type of content to any other type of content." (Adams and Clark, 37) Hypertextuality can be used on www.mlb.com's homepage in order to link the user to other areas of the site such as to "Statistics" or "Standings." Finally, "What makes these websites accessible is through the use of packet switching and digitization." (Adams and Clark, 41) This is a very important statement that I can agree with because this is actually part of the basis of the Internet's evolution. Since the Internet contains many different elements that define its medium type, the reading states, "We would like to suggest that the Internet is a macromedium." (Adams and Clark, 29) It can be defined as this term because of the many functions the Internet possesses. The functions include both the communicative and informative processes and it's six key qualities that I have previously stated.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
First Reading Summary
This reading mainly consisted of the development of the internet. It also contained many definitions regarding how the internet works. Some of these definitions include packet switching which allows the internet to search the world wide web, which is mostly the basis of how the internet works. It also stated that hypertext allows you to link anything to anywhere on the web. I also read that this is one of the most easy programming languages to be developed, yet one of the most effective. The reading also stated that the intenet was deceloped for military use in order to compete and communicate with other countries such as Britain, which was the first country to engage in this. The development of the internet was also sparked by the Cold War, where Russia placed the first satellite into orbit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
