Generation Dumb

Summary
“Generation M” starts off by saying how children and adolescents have always had a major effect on new media and how people have always given attention to the role of media in children, ranging from the how the Brothers Grimm edited their fairy tales to social scientists actively studying children and media. It gives statistics on how much media has changed from the mid 20th century to the beginning of the 21st century and provides statistics on a wide range of new media objects present in American homes such as the number of televisions in each household, the number of computers, and the amount of video games children and adolescents possess. It concludes by stating that the average young person spends six and a half hours a day using media and that over a quarter of the time a person is using media they are using two or more forms of media simultaneously. The study found that in homes where parents control the amount of time their children are exposed to media the more they read and the less they watch television, play video games and use the computer. One conclusion was a fairly obvious one, which states that a child with some form of media in their room will also use other forms of media more.

The video states that multi-tasking is not effective and argues that this generation of students is far below the level of previous generations. It supports its claim by showing a student who says he has not read a book in years and that he simply uses a website such as SparkNotes, where he can learn the content an entire novel in five minutes. It also goes on to say that professors are no longer able to assign books that are longer than two hundred pages because they know that students are simply not going to read the book, rather they will find other ways to learn the material.


Inquiry

I was surprised by the conclusions of the study but, unfortunately, it was not a huge shock. It is evident that new media is being overused and can be seen by something as basic as someone telling their children dinner is ready by calling their cell phone instead of telling them in person and watching television while eating dinner, something that was previously strictly a time for family with no other distractions. The study was done six years ago, and the use of media has only increased dramatically since then. There has been no attempt to stop the overuse of media and media use shows no signs of declining. As for being the dumbest generation, with such a large quantity of resources available online providing anything from a simple summary to a character analysis to an in-depth discussion about the plot of a story, it is easy to see how students would gravitate towards the less time-consuming route and simply use a readily available source, such as SparkNotes. In previous years, technology was not as advanced and information was not as readily available, meaning students were forced to complete their assignments in order to pass the class. Now, with a multitude of distractions such as social networking sites and other forms of new media, most students prefer to spend less time on homework and more time using new media so the depth of the completion of assignments depends on how accurate the quick information found online was.


1. Do you believe that this generation of students really is “dumber” than previous generations?

2. Do you feel that the growth of new media is what is to blame for what is now known as the dumbest generation and what do you feel needs to change in order for this generation to get rid of that title?

3. Do you agree with the reading and how do you feel the use of media has changed since it was written?

Continue Reading

"Toward a New Epistemology of Wikipedia - Fallis

SUMMARY --
Don Fallis, from the School of Information Resources and Library Science at the University of Arizona, explores the many facets of Wikipedia and why it should studied by epistemologists in his paper entitled "Toward a New Epistemology of Wikipedia." He defines epistemology as "the study of what knowledge is and how people can acquire it," (2) and believes that Wikipedia should be studied by others in his field because of the way it draws users to its database of knowledge.  "Why are people turning to popular online informational sources instead of traditional, academic sources such as libraries, and how will this impact the future of informational science?" is a question that Fallis and many other epistemologists are faced with now that we have entered the digital age.  Some of the pros that Fallis outlines about Wikipedia include it acts as an online community for millions of users to come to one common place for information; information is now accessible in many languages other than English allowing for an international community to be created; due to open source the amount of articles written by anonymous users was created in a timely matter that would've taken years to create if done by hand.  The cons that Fallis sees includethe accuracy of information posted, as previously in the past only those who were academically accredited were able to write encyclopedia entries; the lack of control mechanisms that Wikipedia has in order to compensate for its open source authorship; the belief that those who utilize Wikipedia will acquire false beliefs instead of actual knowledge upon consulting Wikipedia.  However Fallis concludes that while Wikipedia may have its faults, it is still a fairly reliable source as its power, speed, and functionality surpass any other open source informational database.

INQUIRY--
This article identifies two other open source platforms that have been made in the midst of the Wikipedia craze, that hope to offer alternative options to Wikipedia. They include Citizendium.org which has greater control mechanisms than Wikipedia as posts must be approved and experts are encouraged to submit entries; and Veropedia.com which hosts reliable, stable entries from Wikipedia that have been approved by experts. I had never heard of either of these sites until reading this article, and part of me wonders if they will actually succeed in their mission.  Fallis argues that in order for Wikipedia to progress, it must evolve to incorporate more stringent posting parameters.  However it is up to the users and readers of Wikipedia to initiate this change, for no matter how hard academics argue to change Wikipedia due to ethics and academic standards, the online community rarely accepts academic integrity reasons as a reason to initiate change. We value our independence and this notion of open source allowing anyone to publish on a database that is accessed by millions of people fuels our love for online anonymity.  If more rules are created to guide the validity of online posts, how will this affect how we see Wikipedia?

QUESTIONS --
We have seen in the past how fast information can spread, especially when something goes viral.  Due to the open source nature of Wikipedia, do you believe that it could potentially be utilized as a source for propaganda and change?

Who is in charge of determining whether or not something is "accurate"? Do they potentially have the power to create censorship in regards to what information is published, and what is not?

Continue Reading

Why You Can't Cite Wikipedia In My Class - Waters

SUMMARY --
In an opinion piece, Middlebury College history professor Neil Waters argues why Wikipedia is not a valid source of information for any of his classes.  While he values Wikipedia as a starting point for any research endeavor, the fact that the encyclopedia is an open-source platform that is capable of being edited by anyone, anywhere regardles of academic qualifications is an issue that should be brought to the forefront of higher education.  Waters compares Wikipedia to the popular TV show "Family Feud," in that it doesn't matter what you think the right answer is to a question, but rather what you think the general public thinks the right answer is.  Thus while Wikipedia is checked for accuracy, it is only pages that receive greater hits that are policed more frequently than perhaps abstract topics of art or history.  Therefore, Waters argues that in order to keep Wikipedia entries valid, there must be a revolution from within the open source world that allows for greater accuracy of information. Until this happens, he will continue to ban the use of Wikipedia in his class as a valid academic source of information.

INQUIRY--
So many times in high school I was told "Wikipedia is not an academic source, do not even think of citing it in your paper," and so I never bothered to use Wikipedia as my go to source for infomation.  However upon coming to college, so many people are quick to use this online encyclopedia as their "book of knowledge,"  not even stopping to question whether or not the information being read is actually accurate or valid.  Have a homework question you can't answer? Wikipedia it, the answer is usually there.  We now live in a society where we hate waiting for answers to questions.  The notion of actually going to the library, finding a book, and looking up the answer to a question that we have is laughable - no one wants to take the time to do that. Instead we simply type our inquiry into google, and majority of the time the top site brought forth is from Wikipedia.  This sense of exigence, or urgency that comes with having immediate answers literally at our fingertips, comes at a price - accuracy of information or speed at which said information can be received?

An interactive graphic regarding the science and technology activity on wikipedia

QUESTIONS --

• Do you use Wikipedia? If so, what do you use it for?
• Do you think Wikpedia should be "policed" or monitored for information accuracy? Should their be academic qualifications for those who author or edit posts?
• Currently, Google pulls up Wikpedia as a top search result due to popularity and alogrithims. How does this affect an online user's inclination to use Wikipedia?
• With the advent of digital information, will the print encyclopedia and library become osbolete?

Continue Reading

A Thousand Plateaus-Gille Deleuze and Félis Fuatarri

SUMMARY-

In the introduction to A Thousand Plateaus, Gille Deleuze and Félis Fuatarri use pseudonyms in describing the way human knowledge is spread through literature. They describe a book as a machine and literature as an assemblage, but not ideology (407). They say there is no difference in how a book is made and what it talks about. Writing is measured by units, which define writing as “the measure of something else” (408). They compare books to trees and their root systems, and also to the reproduction of roots. The way in which the books/roots multiple is compared with binary logic and biunivocal relationships. Starting with the first book as a classical book or the root-book or taproot and all other books stemming from here. With the classical book as the foundation, all of literature comes from here and is somehow a reflection of the book prior. They state, “the world has become chaos, but the book remains the image of the world” (409). This relates to how the book is made (time) and how it is reflected in the work. They end the article with this kind of system being compared to a rhizome. They say that a rhizome can be good, but also bad; and also, that it is not composed of units but rather of dimensions (“directions in motions”) that relate to change such as a metamorphosis. They continure to describe a rhizome as not only an antigenealogy, but also an antimemory.

INQUIRY-

The way in which Duleuse and Fruatarri use the rhizome metaphor at the end of the introduction helps show the development process in which humans communicate knowledge through literature. They start out by comparing literature (in the form of books) to the root system on a tree (408). The main root (taproot) is the first literature—classical writing. From there, books were written in response to books previously published. A system was created, but is continually growing. This corresponds to the non-stop publication of books and how after they are published they become outdated since there is no communication between the text and the reader. Finally, they use the rhizome to address the Internet. It cannot be measured by units since units are constant, but rather has to undergo a metamorphosis because the Internet allows for the media to be changed—this is why it is an antimemory. The functions the Internet has such as hypertext or social interaction can also be compared to a rhizome. These forms of new media allow not only for change, but also have very few limitations. When analyzed with books (roots), there is no comparison in the amount of options that the Internet (rhizomes) gives.

1. Do you agree with the way they present books, in which “a book exists only through the outside and on the outside” and “a book has neither object nor subject, but that it is made of variously formed matters, and very different dates and speeds” (407).

2. Why do you think that they used the tree/root system and rhizome to compare literature? Can you think of a better/different example that would communicate the same ideas?

3. Through their arguments on the development of literature, what can you conclude about their thoughts on future forms of new media in relation to literature?

Continue Reading

Autistic Culture Online-Joyce Davidson

SUMMARY-

Autistic Culture Online by Joyce Davidson gives non-autistic people a better idea of how people on the Autistic Spectrum (AS) communicate and how the Internet has benefited its members. She uses autobiographies as examples to help the reader understand the life of an AS person. Davidson uses these examples to defend her idea that being autistic is a way of life that can be compared to any other minority group, rather than a disability (795). Like any other minority group, AS people often receive discrimination as a result of being commonly misunderstood (799). However, the AS has great diversity because it is composed of a wide spectrum of culture (800). AS people live with social norms and unwritten rules, as any other culture has. Davidson stresses how the Internet has changed the relationships amongst the people in the AS. One of the main characteristics of autistic people is a difficulty with communicating face-to-face. The Internet has given members of the AS not only a way to communicate naturally, but also a way in which they can meet new people, and function on “a level playing field with almost everyone else” (801). Because “autistic culture today is largely where deaf culture was a century ago,” it will take time before people on the AS are culturally accepted and new media is used on a larger scale in order to aid the AS.

INQUIRY-

I have never thought about the AS or what it would be like to live being autistic. I found this article to be very interesting and insightful on how our society views AS people. I agree with Davidson that the people in the AS do not have a disability, but are rather a part of a minority group. This article helped me better understand the AS community and the challenges that autistic people face; also, how they overcome these challenges. This article shows how new media is being used to help improve AS people’s lives. The Internet has given the world a fast way to communicate with others without direct contact. I believe that this new medium has not only benefited its users, but it has also created a new world for AS people in which the can communicate better; this has improve their lifestyle and have given them confidence to identify with being autistic.

1. Do you think that the communication acquired through the Internet for AS people would help them gain social skills/confidence to succeed or hinder their ability to communicate face-to-face as they rely to heavily on the Internet for communication?

2. Davidson states that “autistic culture today is largely where deaf culture was a century ago” (801) With this in mind, where do you think online autistic communities/new media will lead to in the future to improve the lives’ of AS people?

3. What was your response to this article? Did you have a bias against AS people and how did this article change (or not change) that? If you know someone that is autistic, what is it like communicating with him or her; and do you believe that the Internet is a better form of communication for an autistic person?

Continue Reading

"The Search Party: Google squares off with its Capitol Hill critics" - Ken Auletta

Summary: "The Search Party: Google squares off with its Capitol Hill critics" is an article by Ken Auletta, published in early 2008 in The New Yorker. In this article, Auletta discusses Google's new presence in the political arena to an audience curious about Google's growing influence. Although Google was a multi-billion dollar company for several years in the early 21st century, Google was never very politically active. It was not until Google's founders realized the potential harm that could be done to their company by not having political influence that they decided to establish a substantial Washington, D.C. office. Google's stated mission as a company is "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” (1). The main problem with making "information" your company's main "product," is that other companies own most, if not all of that information, creating conflict. With Google's extension of their company beyond Search, they have caused alarm within several different industries. Many of these companies have called for an anti-trust case to be brought against Google, but no case has been substantiated thus far. Closely tied with Google's Search is their advertising: AdWords and AdSense. These extremely successful advertising efforts have allowed Google to nearly surpass the combined advertising revenues of the major television boradcast networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, & Fox). When Google wanted to acquire DoubleClick, an online advertising giant, anti-trust flags were waved, but eventually put down after Google successfully acquired this company in mid 2008 (a few months after this article was published) [Source]. Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, claims "the more Google knows about a user the better the search results" (4). Critics of Google worry that there is danger in a company that depends on advertising to collect so much data on consumers through their searches. In other words, many people worry about privacy issues with Google, but Google has taken steps to lessen the worry. Searches are stored on Google servers for 18 months (lessened from 24 months previously). The article claims that Google will need to manage itself as a company, deciding whether it will continue to get "you to what you want as fast as you can and getting out of the way ... or will it become 'a source of content, a platform, a destination?'” (5). Recently, Google has expressed interest in the cell phone market, but has yet to lead in this industry. Schmidt, in response to critics, argues that what "kills a company is not competition but arrogance. We control our fate” (7). Inquiry: Google is a company that is trying to take over the world, and they seem to be succeeding. It is hard to name a new media industry or market that Google does not influence. It is interesting comparing Google's image to other companies such as Microsoft. Microsoft, a technology company, states that its mission " is to enable people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential" [Source]. This mission does not sound much different from Google's mission, but yet Google is nearly revered as a company while Microsoft is just trying not to be hated. I would argue that Google is looked at differently by consumers because their products are generally viewed as free. From my personal experience, many people cite the high cost of software as a reason for their dislike of Microsoft. When you have a company like Google that is giving equivalent resources that are perceived as free, "free" will always win (in a popularity contest at least). Consumers would prefer to "pay" for software by the searches they perform and ads they see instead of a direct monetary transaction. Google's value lies most in what it is able to discern about its users. As the recent Google Super Bowl commercial displayed, our searches tell a story: Many consumers worry that this knowledge could be used in negative ways, but others point to Google's motto of "Don't be Evil," and trust that Google will not misuse this information. This trust is vital for Google's success as a company. Without consumer trust, Google will have nothing. This information that they gather is very valuable when speaking about advertising. As an example, Facebook has been valued at nearly $11 billion dollars, not because of its great success at turning a profit, but because investors know that information Facebook users put on their profiles is an advertiser's dream come true. Facebook, as well as Google, are able to use information about users to create targeted ads, making them more valuable to potential advertisers. Questions:

• Google is thriving in this new media world without an end in sight. Do you foresee a point in the future when Google will reach a "breaking point" because of their involvement in such a wide variety of industries? Or, does this scattered involvement ensure their success as a financially stable company for the future?

• Many consumers worry about the information that Google collects. Do you believe this worry is validated?

• Google is currently an 11 year old company, but yet their earnings rival the GDP of small nations. What do you believe made Google such a successful company in such a short amount of time?

Continue Reading

The Hacker Manifesto

Summary The Hacker Manifesto is a piece written by Adam L. Beberg, who's information can be found by clicking on the small icon at the bottom of the manifesto. an example of our old topic of hypertext. This piece attempts to explain what a hacker really is by providing definitions of a hacker through hypertext (the word 'hacker'). Beberg enlightens the world, so to speak, on the mindset of a hacker, and how society has come to look down upon such people. Beberg seems to think that the world is quite misguieded about hackers, and attempts to straighten out people's view of them through his manifesto, and through hypertext links to his personal career in academia and professional life. Inquiry This work is by far one of my favorites of the year. It was fun to read, and very interesting. I, myself, have a view of hackers as the "scum" of the internet out there, out there to steal information and gain an edge illegally. Beberg seems to have set me a little straighter. Dictionary.com even defines a hacker as "a computer enthusiast" (dictionary.reference.com/browse/hacker). By viewing hackers in this way, I think we can better understand a social circle that exists, often right under our noses, in the world today. People like Richard Stallman could be considered hackers, as defined by Beberg and by dictionary.com. It seems that there is an entire world of hackers out there who consider themselves the elite of programming and computer knowledge. I find this fascinating, and would love to do more research on this topic. I think that the links Beberg has in his manifesto to his own personal information, including his resume, add to the credibility of this article, giving a so called face to the name type of effect. I think it's important more hackers attempt to convey to the world their true nature so that we may better understand their point of view, and what they seem to truly be about. I commend Beberg for his work, and again would love to see more like this. 1) What was your view of "hackers" before you read this manifesto? 2) Can hackers make a better name for themselves by creating more works such as Beberg has done? 3) Do hackers have a place in society, or will they forever be viewed as criminals by those that don't understand them?

Continue Reading