Barack and His Blackberry

I recently realized that I never posted my blog for Chapter 12 so I figured I would put it up here......

The section about Obama and his blackberry was very interesting to me. While the world is progressing and taking part in new, new media, it feels almost unfair to prevent the president from having access to these new advances. They keep people connected and up to date with what is going on in the world, but the controversy does make me think.
On the other hand, I think it is important for the president to be securely protected at all costs. His information and messages should be protected at all cost. Social media constructs this certain open forum to everyone and even when something seems private, people on the internet can usually access it at some degree. This makes me think that Obama should not take part in these forums and understand why he perhaps should not have his blackberry. For maximum security, to himself, and our country, his messages should not be shared. Overall, I think it is smart that he have his blackberry but be protected with the nation in mind.

New New Media and Politics

As New New Media has evolved, it has effected nearly every aspect of our lives. Politics is no exception. As Media has evolved, so has political campaigning. From the first radio broadcasted speeches in the early 1900s, to the first televised presidential debates in the 60s, politics has once again taken another leap forward into new new media, in particularly the internet. The internet has become such an incredibly huge medium, it was inevitable that those on the campaign trail would use it to boost their campaigns, however nobody would have guessed the scale of usage that some candidates would put forth. Many people say this is a very big reason why Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential election. Many people said he successfully harnessed the internet to his advantage.

The large scale use of internet for presidential elections was pioneered by Howard Dean in the 2004 election. However Dean failed to win even the Democratic Primary, he was the mastermind behind president Obama's political campaign on the internet, which seemed to be a very crucial facet of his election. President Obama's inauguration was the first inauguration to be widely streamed online, I remember watching it in my Chemistry teachers room as a sophomore.

Immediately following his inauguration, President Obama and his staff changed the presidential website as well, whitehouse.gov. Under previous administrations it had just been used for publishing documents and such. Now there is a blog, photos, streaming videos, podcasts and a sign up for email alerts as well. The Obama administration has pioneered and revolutionized the use of the internet for campaigning and propaganda publishing, reaching a vastly larger audience, overshadowing the use of old new media.

Politics Today

New new media has changed the way campaigns are run today. Candidates now have the ability to target specific segments through a number of different media instead of just using mass communication. They can target a large segment of the population with Facebook, Twitter, they can blog about their campaign experience and upload YouTube videos to keep their voters entertained and informed. Instead of spending a large sum of money on a spot on a major TV news outlet, they can create a speech from the comfort of their home, or on the road even, and upload it to YouTube. They can tape interviews with voters at different locations to answer questions in a less formal environment and give a down to earth appeal.

But, new new media can also be very damaging to a campaign. If some unknown truth about the candidate is revealed, it will spread like wildfire throughout the Internet. This would call for serious damage control both through the use of social media as well as conventional mass media. So, I see new new media as being extremely helpful for the public in terms of election. Not only do we have the potential to feel significantly more connected to our candidates, but there is also an ease with which the majority of society can learn about past scandals if they happen to come up during the election period (or after).

However, we must always be careful not to believe anything too quickly and always check stories against other sources. Although the truth has the ability to spread rapidly across the Internet, so do lies.

Obama and Digital Media for his 2008 Campaign

Revolutionizing Politics

It is interesting to see how much of an impact new new media is having on government, politics and law, one of the most reluctant groups to accept to new technologies as Dr. Levinson says. The Obama administration used tons of new new media, never used before, throughout the campaign, including a campaign video made specifically to air on YouTube. An actual presidential debate was streamed via CNN and YouTube, bringing new media more attention in the presidential race. The administration continues to use all kinds of media everyday. It is fascinating how these new methods, like blogs on the the whitehouse.gov website, facebook pages, etc. allow the people to have more of a say and an opinion ever before. I remember writing letters to the president in grade school that the teacher would pack up all together and mail to the white house. I don't remember if we ever got responses, but I'm sure if we did it was similar to the one Dr. Levinson's wife got back. Lookingback it doesn't seem like this method was very effective. Not only is it easier to write an email or a blog post or a facebook comment, but it is also easier for white house administrators to read them and take what they say into consideration. I think new new media has revolutionized politics for the better. It will be interesting to see what types of new new media will be used in the next election and to see if it has any interesting effects.

Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying has grown to simply be a part of our society. In a way, I think that cyberbullying may even have replaced actual bullying. I think that some people are more likely to bully someone through various sources of new media. Face to face confrontation is uncomfortable for most people, but with the invention of the internet this is not necessary anymore, but the same results can be attained, sometimes even worse results. I think that websites like myspace and facebook are the biggest sources of cyberbullying because of the amount of information that one puts out about themselves on these types of sites. They become targets for certain information that they post. My sister who is a 7th grader has told me countless stories about kids who have been bullied on facebook, which then translates into real life fighting or isolation. I think it is a shame that these types of issues come from websites that have the potential to be so positive. However, everything in life has its downsides and I suppose cyberbullying is one downside of new new media.

Downsides of New New Media

Every rose has its thorn. This is true for everything including new new media. New new media opens up a whole new Pandora's box of crime that now takes place in cyberspace. Crimes like cyber-stalking, cyber-bullying, and even robbery and murder have been solicited through new new media. Most of us are familiar with the joke "oh, time to Facebook stalk you!" This is making a pun on the fact that you're going to go through someone's Facebook page and give a thorough read through. Though harmless in this scenario, cyber-stalking is when someone repeatedly follows the movements of someone online through the internet. This is very scary for many people because it makes them uncomfortable and fear for their own safety. Cyber-bullying is another big issue as well. We're all familiar with gossip queens and such, but when it takes to the internet, it turns into a whole new beast. A young Irish immigrant to Massachusetts committed suicide because of what some of the people in her school were writing online about her. She was constantly harassed over her short time dating a football player at her high school and she could never settle in or feel welcome. The bullying got so bad, she took her own life. One of the most famous new new media crimes however, was the craigslist killer Philip Markoff. He was a medical school student who met people by soliciting ads on craigslist.com and then proceeded to rob them. One final time he met a young lady on craigslist and robbed her and killed her. Markoff committed suicide after being indicted on murder and armed robbery charges. Even though the internet and new new media have incredible upsides, their downsides can be very ugly. The world is a dangerous place, and cyberspace is no exception.

Everything Has Its Downfall

Along with everything in life, there are negative things that come along with each positive. Our advancement in technology, specifically in new new media, can be linked to several negative aspects but I think this is only what you make of it. Yes, we have all heard cyberstalking and the Craigs List Killer, but this only happens when someone posts personal information to people they are not friends with. You have to be aware of what you put on the internet for this reason and these new sites such as FourSquare make this very easy for someone to follow another person. While frequent status updates on Twitter can keep others updated on your life, it can also let them know where you are physically at all times. This is only possible by the decisions that you make as an individual. These new new media sources are helpful in many ways, but these sites should not be abused. They should be used in the right way and hopefully bring enjoyment to you, making communication to others easier from day to day.

Podcasting

I feel that podcasting is a great form of new new media in which one can express themselves. It allows people to proclaim their ideas and individuality to others whether it be on their iPod or in the car. Obviously, the free-ness of it all is amazing. While I do not produce my own podcasts, I feel that this form of new new media is not too invasive into one’s private life. Other forms seem a bit creepy to me, allowing people to know where you are at all times, which gets too invasive for me personally. The whole idea of actually creating something shows that you have a talent and I think podcasting is great way to show your uniqueness and get yourself known to others for a good reason. The example Levinson uses is very interesting, when he creates a podcast rather quickly in the beginning of the chapter. He discusses a popular problem known as cyber bullying and I think it is a great way to get your opinions on a topic out there for others to hear and be able to react to.

Wikipedia. How the Tables Have Turned

After making an edit in the Hula Hoop section, it became clear to me how drastically the roles of publishers of information and consumers of information have changed. New, New Media allows the consumer of information to become the publisher as well. And it is easy! You do not need to know how to decipher web-coding in order to edit an entry on Wikipedia, you only need to be able to follow simple instructions and be able to type. The fact that any one can edit information on Wikipedia has been a source of controversy for the site since it's creation. How can we deem information as reliable if we do not know the qualifications of the person providing the information? I believe that you should often be wary and double check your facts, but I believe Wikipedia is a useful source because while anyone can provide information, there are constantly people reading and editing information, removing things that are untrue and adding things that are important. This site could potentially grow to be one of the most useful site's on the Internet because rather than gathering information from many different sources and people, you can get the information from those different sources all on one page, boiled down to the best most agreed upon information available around the world. One thing I did wonder about is what happens if there is a adamant disagreement about a piece of information. If two people go back and forth deleting each others information and re-posting their own, is there some sort of mediating body within Wikipedia that can settle these sorts of disputes or is the content of the site completely controlled by its users?

Free Yourself or Lose Yourself?

Second Life seems to me to be more of a game than a social media outlet. As I was reading, I kind of thought of it as a more advanced version of the Sims. I understand that it does have some educational or social purposes, but it seems like it is used largely as a gaming center.

I had never heard of Second Life before reading about it in New New Media. I went on the website to try to figure out if it is any different from how it is portrayed in the book and I came upon a "What is Second Life?" video. You can watch it here. I think it is interesting what the text at the bottom of the screen says as it scrolls through the video. "A place to connect, to shop, to work, to love, to explore, to be different, be yourself, free yourself, free your mind, change your mind, change your look, love your look, love your life".

I don't think that this promotes healthy online behavior. I think that people can probably get carried away in this "Second Life" and forget about reality. Instead of people doing all of those things in real life, they just get their fix by doing it in a fake world, spending fake money and interacting with fake people. Even though there is a real person behind each fake one, that just means the problem is two-fold.

Editing of Wikipedia Articles

In Paul Levinson's book New New Media, he brings up the excellent point of editing Wikipedia articles. I believe that when he wrote this book, Wikipedia did not force users to create an account in order to edit the articles. Now, however, an account on Wikipedia is necessary in order to make edits. Before, administrators tracked users via their IP address, a set of numbers that are assigned to every computer in different locations, as a way of identifying with each computer user. Levinson says that once an account has been created, Wikipedia uses that to track users. But, neither of these methods are a good way to keep track of vandals. Anyone could create a different account name and easily have access. Or, especially those living on a college campus, can just go to another location (or building) and log in from there because their IP address is a different number (yet, this could prevent the person living in that location not to be able to edit if the editor gets banned.) As of right now, I don't know what could be a less foolproof method. Maybe tracking both the account and the IP address since that could give a lot of information (especially if they consistently have the same IP address.)


On another note, I did not know that editors/readers are allowed to view every single edit that was made to a Wikipedia article. I think that's a very useful tool because it allows readers and other editors to see what other people are looking for in terms of adding content (or even deleting it.) Great! Now, I have another way to procrastinate from doing my homework.

Digg What?

Prior to reading this chapter in New New Media, I had only briefly heard people mention the website Digg. I had no idea what it was or how it worked, because quite frankly, I didn't need to. After reading the chapter and investigating a little bit, I found Digg to be quite interesting, to the point that I actually got my own Digg account. It proved to be a useful way to browse headlines and see what's new and find some interesting articles to read.

Digg is a user generated content site where people post headlines and links, and other people can either 'Digg' it and vote it up or 'Bury' it and vote it down depending on whether they like it or not. Their is no 'friending' like you can on Facebook, however like Twitter you can become a 'Fan' of someone and follow them. Also like Twitter if the person who you are following decides to become a fan of you too and follow you back, you can send messages, called 'Shouts' to each other, another Twitter like concept. You can also provide a small profile with your name, picture, location, and description of yourself as Digg is still nonetheless a social site. You can also add links to your other social sites or websites that you my have too. Digg can also be connected with you Facebook, Twitter and Google accounts as well.

Digg proved to be much more of a help than I thought it would be at first glance. It offers a constant news stream that is more than just a monotony of song lyric statuses on Facebook, or Charlie Sheen's latest Tweet, if offers more relevant and useful information to the world around us.

Is Burial in Digg's Future?

Prior to reading New New Media, I did not know about Digg either. I do not know anybody that uses Digg, but I do think that the concept is pretty cool. I think that, contrary to a regular newspaper, it gives the people the power to decide what stories are most important to them. I think that this website is a sort of shortcut. It is one general place to go to learn about different topics, news, issues among many different categories with ease. I definitely think that our society values ease and speed these days so I think Digg is a great place for this. However, now that news websites are starting to incorporate videos and links to other pages, I wonder how different Digg actually is from a normal newspaper website.

I don't know if I just missed the Digg era, but it is interesting to think about why Digg didn't catch on and become as popular as other sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Is it saying something about our society? Do we care more about being social, looking at people's profiles and finding out what our "friends" are doing, more than we care about real events and news that is occurring? I would like to think that this is not true, but judging from the popularity of Facebook and Twitter over Digg, I think that it actually may be a possibility.

I found this article about some changes being made at Digg: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-20045598-2.html

How Non-Voters Can Keep Up With the Rankings

Digg is a site that I am not familiar with. However, after reading the chapter in Dr. Levinson's book New New Media, I have an idea of what it is like thanks to websites such as Stumbleupon and Mashable.

I found the Ron Paul section to be pretty interesting due to the stories about Ron Paul that were "Dugg" by readers, despite the fact that he did not even win the primaries. Dr. Levinson points out the usage of Digg by people (who claim to be) 13 years or old. There is a 5 year gap of teenagers who can use the site, but are not able to vote. Dr. Levinson says there are several factors why this occurs, but most importantly it could be due to the young audience that Ron Paul targets rather than Barack Obama who targets those people between the age of 18 and 30. So rather than this occurrence of "gaming" on the website, it seems that the age difference plays a role in online politics as well.

Towards the end of the chapter, Dr. Levinson talks about the "Alexa ranking," which made me curious to see how much it has changed. As it turns out, Google is the number 1 website (which probably held that spot when this chapter was written) and Facebook has moved from number 5 to number 2. MySpace, which was ranked number 7, is now ranked number 63. And these new rankings have occurred about 2 years later than when the book was written.

Not only were "Top Sites" posted, but so were "Hot Topics." The one that I think is worth mentioning is FireFox 4, currently ranked at number 3. FireFox is one of the leading web browsers today. After experiencing some competition from Google Chrome (and let's face it, it doesn't receive any competition from Internet Explorer), FireFox is being updated with some pretty cool improvements. The official update can be download starting tomorrow. To see some of the features in this update, check out the following link from Mashable, a site similar to Digg. I can't wait for this update!
http://mashable.com/2011/03/10/firefox-4-guide/

Facebook

Facebook is something that has become a worldwide phenomenon very quickly. Even since New New Media was published facebook has grown immensely and there has even been a hollywood film produced about it. Almost everyone in our generation has a facebook, and it has recently started to expand out to older and younger generations. There are also fan pages on facebook for almost any company, celebrity, public figure, etc. It is amazing to me, not only how useful it is for the common folk who use it simply to keep tabs on friends, family, etc. but also how often facebook is employed for other reasons. One of the pages that I am a fan of is for the Morning Mash Up, which is an XM radio station. On their page they post questions and topics that they are discussing on-air at that very moment and ask for replies and responses. Hundreds of people respond within minutes and the hosts themselves sort through the answers and read some live on the show. This has changed the radio game completely. One used to have to call in to the station and often not get through or not get put on the air. Nowadays, everyone has the opportunity to respond and get their posts read.

Another aspect of facebook that I was actually discussing over the weekend with my family was the advertisement aspect. A friend of mine who is very computer and internet savvy told us that facebook actually tracks our internet usage and other sites that we visit, other than just facebook. If you are logged into facebook, but on another website, facebook can track you. They use this to personalize advertisements so that they are the most relevant to you. I have to say that in the past, I have noticed that the facebook ads shown on my page are somewhat relevant, which leads me to believe that facebook is doing a good job stalking my internet usage. However, I can't say that I have ever clicked on an ad or followed through with whatever it was telling me to do.

YouTube

I guess if ever we needed any example of how quickly the internet business moves, YouTube would be a perfect case study. The company has gone from this maverick upstart website where people can watch grainy 5-part reruns of shows they've missed (or miss) to pretty much a household name.

The fact that the company was sold to Google Inc. for almost $2 billion is mind-numbing. The way it has impacted society as we know it today is probably even more astonishing.

Whether it's used as a political weapon, a platform to launch a career, or simply as a place to store memories, YouTube has, in less than a decade, ingrained itself as an integral part of society.

Many artists, both musical and visual, have used YouTube to get their name out there. It is a place where, it can be argued, that fame has been democratized. A viral video can get you a front page splash on a news website more than winning a Nobel Prize these days. Justin Bieber has gone from this preteen jamming on guitar to possibly winning a Grammy award. Whether YouTube has served as a tool to trigger a cultural renaissance or if it is an insult to creativity is a whole other debate.

YouTube has also served as an important political tool. Both parties have used the website to broadcast whatever they need to with limited cost. It was an important part of the last Presidential and midterm elections, as people were able to watch interviews, speeches, and even smear campaigns on their own time. It has made information readily available in a matter of clicks.

Still, majority of the material on YouTube is a potpourri of user-generated-content ranging from laughing babies to how-to videos to short films. It is a place to, pretty much, escape reality by living vicariously through other people's realities. We can be at a Lady Gaga concert one minute, to watching the first ever Superbowl the next, and finally swimming with some sharks the next.

YouTube has proven to be a very important part of our lives. Whether we've wasted hours watching people eating hot peppers or getting information about the war in the Middle East, it is tough to deny that we haven't integrated the website into our day-to-day living.

It is not without controversy, though. As usual, copyright issues are at the forefront. Luckily for the entertainment industry, they were a lot quicker in responding to this than when they were pushed (and eventually crippled) by Napster. The use of online advertising and required prerolls before watching videos have become important parts of any entertainment company's business model.

YouTube has pushed the boundaries of what we can watch and when we can watch it. They have even integrated 3D technology. The company has been able to create a powerful tool that is readily available to all of us, and it is exciting to speculate on what more is to come.

Blogging the Board Game

Bloggers are often referred to as "Citizen Journalists". The idea of any person being able to publish anything online however, has come with a price. That price is that you cannot make a profit from your posts. So then how does a person go about blogging for a profit? People have found a few ways to make a buck off their blog. However with that being said, does that make it right, to make money off a profitless blog?
Let's start off with the ways in which bloggers have made a profit from their blogs. Using certain tools such as Google Adsense, Amazon Associates, PayPerPost, PayPal donation, and accepting a place on your blog, being paid directly by an advertising company. Here's the deal with Google Adsense, it's an easy way to make a cheap buck. You start off by getting a code, to which you place text, images or videos of your choosing onto your blog. The average amount that people make for this is around $10. Next is Amazon Associates which lets its user post ads/images of Amazon books and products on your blog. However, the only way you can make money from this advertising is if someone clicks and then buys something from Amazon from your blog. Amazon provides many other items besides books and is a good idea for advertising online, however making the money might be a struggle, most likely because it depends on the viewers of your blog. PayPerPost takes very different approach to monetizing blogging. PayPerPost pays people to post on given subjects, and depending on your post, you could make from $5 to $500. The great part about this way of making money is that the money is directly associated with what you made, unlike advertising. Next is PayPal donation widget, which is pretty much just a digital tip jar. You can either connect PayPal to a specific post or the entire blog. depending on various factors you can earn a good deal of money from the donations, around $100. Lastly, is the oldest form of making money through advertising. You can just have an advertiser pay you to put up their ads on your blog. These ways of monetizing your blog however, come with a immoral issue.
So then, how could it be immoral to make profit from a blog. Well, because anyone can blog about almost anything, there are no real standards that people have to follow after blogging a post. This means that a blog could be making money through either its advertising or PayPerPost could be paying a blogger for posting a lie. In this sense being paid for blogging posts is immoral, however advertising ads on the side of your page do not strike the same issue and making money from that in my mind is a fair trade.

Social Media

In society today, social networking and social media have become a crucial part of our environment day to day. Whether a person likes it or not, even small references to phenomena such as Facebook and Twitter come up frequently throughout the day. These references may be by the computer, radio, or simply seen visually by the individual. Hard to avoid, social media seems to be embedded in the lives of everyone. Whether someone chooses to use these advances in technology frequently or not as much, they are at the disposal of basically all individuals.

Facebook is a form of social networking that everyone is familiar with. Whether you are checking your notifications for a mere 5 minutes or spending endless hours on profile pages instead of studying for exams, it is a site visited by all. People of all ages enjoy this site which helps people stay in touch and communicate information quickly and easily.

While social networking can be very nice to keep in touch with relatives or old friends, some people seem to abuse the site in my opinion. Certain people may update their statuses numerous times within a single hour and upload things that are of little importance. It is also interesting to see things that people choose to display on their own pages. While people may be shy in person, this cyber network makes people think they can share more with others because they are not necessarily talking to them. Because it is through the computer, they may portray certain things that they would never say in person or choose to tell you face to face. I find this very interesting, that people seem to be more open through social networking even though many people are able to access this information. While this seems like a negative aspect of social networking, overall I think this area of communications is brilliant and hope to see it grow into more as years go on.

Evolution of Social Media

For our generation, social media is something that is an inevitable fact of life. In this day and age, things like facebook, twitter, foursquare and the like are everyday tools that are almost impossible to escape from. Personally, I am a fan of, I would say, most forms of social media. I enjoy getting facebook notifications sent directly to my cell phone and being able to check in to locations on foursquare at any moment. This, in addition to my major in communications, is partially why I chose to take this class on social media. However, I think that this sort of affinity that I have for social media is not necessarily required in order to have interest in this class. I think that most everyone, if given the chance and had enough space in their schedule, would enjoy a class on social media because of the fact that it is so present in our lives.

I can definitely understand the opposite point of view as well. I get that many people do not want to be bombarded with information from different sources at all times through every medium. I think that in the end, when used correctly and for good purposes, social media can only produce good outcomes.

Something that is not so present in our lives is the idea presented by Dr. Levinson of "new new" media. When I first bought his book for my Intro to Communications class last year I was skeptical of the title and I actually talked to someone who thought the cover of the book had a typo. After learning about what this concept actually is it definitely makes sense. I think that the first chapter of the book "Why 'New New' Media?" is one of the most interesting. The explanation that Dr. Levinson gives for his ordering of the chapters is interesting and I think that his reasons made sense at the time that the book was published, but I would be interested to know if he would order them differently today, just a year and a half later.