Community= Commune+ Unity

For our last blog we were given a choice. I’m going to examine why internet community can never truly replace real life community. The internet has truly become a central part of how we stay in touch with the news and each other but, as we are in the midst of the holiday season, I stop to think could I see myself communing with my family around the Thanksgiving table in Second Life and would I be happy with that interaction. Not a chance.

I think a part of a relationship and the formation and strengthening of a relationship is the effort you put into it. It is also the perception of how much effort you put into a relationship. My parents and I drove 6 hours to the city this Thanksgiving and everyone was so happy to see us because we don’t often make the trek. While I was in town I met up with my best friends who recently graduated. We planned a dinner and most of us managed to make it there the night before Thanksgiving.

After taking the train an hour from Queens to Manhattan, it felt so worth the effort seeing them, and I could tell that they felt the same way coming from each of their respective parts of the city. Now these are friends that I’m constantly texting, IM’ing and facebooking, but nothing and I mean nothing could replace being in their company. I think that the internet will also facilitate the maintenance of relationships, but they can not replace face to face, unless a person would rather keep their relationship online, for whatever reason.

Hunter cites Networks in the Global Network by Wellman and Gulia, and they speculate that online communities don’t take away from offline communities. I think that yes the numbers decrease in offline communities, but that is not because people are completely forgoing associating with these groups because of the internet. I think it is because we are just living in a more complicated world and we can’t always make time to go out to club meetings, or other associations. However, that doesn’t mean we do not miss being a part of these communities.

Hunter hypothesizes that he thinks that is we lose the physical aspects of community that we could lose the benefits that come with community. I wholeheartedly agree. According to Li (2007), a true friendship requires real time shared experiences. I think that is why the best friends I have were the ones I made during when I pledged. I think that’s also why friendships I’ve had with people I haven’t spent time with often have deteriorated. Sometimes when you get to the point where you are deciding whether or not it’s worth trying to save a relationship you look at the times you spent together and whether or not you could live without more moments like that. I recently broke up with one of my best friends and I thought about the times we spent, and yes they were great, but I didn’t see her making an effort to spend time building our relationship, so I let it go.

According to and article on Wikipedia by Kornblum (2006), people have begun to depend more on their family for social support because of the lack of close confidants. I can definitely see that happening around me. I think this is because the internet has made people lazy in cultivating true friendships, and then they have no one to fall back on except family, who is obligated to be their support system.

In conclusion, we can all think of relationships we have that are maintained using the internet, but the one’s that are most satisfying and supportive are the ones where we spend time with that person or group and make an effort to be there for them and vice versa. I think this holiday season is the perfect time to make the effort to let the people we love know that we appreciate them by taking the time out of our day to catch up with each other and have coffee or dinner.

References

Hunter, B. The subtle benefits of face to face communication. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from The subtle benefits of face to face communication Web site: http://www.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/facetoface.html

Kornblum, J. (2006 June 22). USA Today. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from Study: 25% of Americans have no one to confide in Web site: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-06-22-friendship_x.htm

Li, L. (2007, October 7). Green Marketing 2.0. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from Search Marketing & Web 2.0 Strategies for Green & Social Activism Web site: http://lornali.com/index.php?tag=community

If only we cared

I think that the government can use technology in a variety of ways to make the government more transparent and accessible. The first way I would like to see the government use technology is to make us more aware of the legislation that they will be voting on in the House and Senate.
The reason why people like me don’t get more involved in how our country is run is the lack of awareness. Yes the information is out there, but for people like me, who only know what their AOL homepage tells them, finding it poses a problem. I would like to see change.gov have a feed that lists the legislation that is up for discussion and if they could classify who it directly involves that would be icing on the cake
. I know that sometimes I read things that come from the government and the vagueness of the wording makes it difficult for me to fully understand what’s going on. It would be super fun if they got Kat Williams to give us all the legislation in layman’s terms. I’m just throwing that idea out there.
Another way the government could use technology to make the inner workings more transparent is that they could join second life. It might be really interesting for the younger generation to be able to see how the government works using another web application. I think that the most important thing is the use platforms with a significant number of users. Obama utilized this strategy when he was campaigning and put up billboards in video games. That was pretty brilliant on his part.
Another thing they could do to make the government more interactive would be to post opinion polls on their websites to see how people feel about certain issues. It would be amazing if the common person had a say in who gets what type of funding in the bailout package. The only drawback to that is, not everyone is educated enough to make an informed decision. However, to combat this problem they could include links to information that showed the different sides of the story.
I think that with a greater amount of government transparency it gives us the help we need to start monitoring what our government is doing with our resources. If we are to actually make a difference we need to take the new information we get and utilize it. A comment on the original blog by petes_pov said its not that we don’t have access, we just don’t care about what’s going on. I think that might change a little bit since we have seen where apathy and unchecked government gets us. We need to get more involved by writing to our congress people and other government officials, because in the end they are in their positions because we elected them to represent our interests.
I would propose solutions to help older Americans to utilize the internet to keep track of the government, but I think that would require research. I wonder what would get people like my mother who can only email (and still has trouble doing that) to use their computer as a resource to keep track and stay informed about the government.

You want to charge me for what?

When looking at the issue of net neutrality, I think it comes down to a simple struggle between the rich wanting to get richer and the poor not being able to afford what is better. In one of the assigned reading from the Wall Street Journal there is a quote from an executive who stated that we as consumers were crazy for wanting to use their services, which they made an investment in, for free. Thing is, as the number of users increases they make their investments back millions of times over.

The current debate is, whether or not these broadband internet companies should be able to provide “tiered” internet service where for more money your internet packets can be prioritized over another’s internet packets; regardless of if they sent their information first. Some special interest foundations have been wary of this proposal and have been fighting it because they believe that it would be very likely that their rights would be infringed upon.

Broadband companies would also be able to block content from their competitors and, block out any website they felt was necessary to continue their success. There was a case in the readings where a certain provider blocked the usage of Craigslist from their users, and they did so because of the lack of legislation.

The other set of interests that could be infringed upon besides there large special interest groups would be television station who stream shows online such as ABC.com, and lastly their customers would be served less fairly. Some people really can’t afford to pay for cable, but through the wonders of the internet they can watch their favorite shows. I don’t think some bigwig who could afford to buy a small island should be able to take away the small piece of happiness I get from watching Dexter on Showtime…online. With slower speeds I couldn’t do that.

I couldn’t really see these large companies being allowed to discriminate against customers in good conscience. The best part of the internet, especially an internet without bounds is the freedom it allows to us as consumers. What would happen if the net was no longer neutral and when you went to buy a car you found you were not able to access the Kelly blue book online? That could possibly happen if car dealers made a deal with these internet companies where they took away our right to be informed so it would be easier to sell us vehicles at a higher price.

I think the beauty of the internet is that we all get the same thing. I remember a lot of my friends had roadrunner before I did because dial up was much cheaper. It took a while for my parents to finally bite the bullet and pay for broadband, but when we did finally get it, it was worth the money. If the net became preferential towards its customers because of what tier of service they could afford I could see the digital divide affecting the U.S. because yes we may have internet access, but what could we access on the internet?

The execs from these companies said that tiered service would allow to them to increase profits and then in turn they could improve the service they provide us by improving infrastructure. However, in the readings it was said that in Japan and Korea, both countries are net neutral, but they are using networks that are infinitely faster that ours and they pay significantly less. I think that you can achieve anything on a budget, so I think that’s what these companies need to do instead of asking for more money. Maybe they should wait for some of the cables they use in Japan to go on sale, they we can all have more for less.

Art Often Imitates Life

In Second Life the open economy encourages you to spend your offline money online. This is a concept that is completely foreign to me. I could never see myself taking my hard earned dollars and giving them away to someone online, so I could buy and item, that would exist only online. However, what doesn’t necessarily make sense to me makes sense to the millions of users of Second Life.
When I look at this specific economy with a critical lens the first problem that jumps out at me is, what are people doing to get the money they spend in the Second Life economy? I believe these games are for people who are really looking for an escape for the every day realities of their unfulfilled lives. As I saw in the readings that’s not always the case, some users are relatively affluent and relatively educated, especially in the case of the man who worked for Proctor and Gamble and held two patents.
However, for the user I envision in my head, the twenty-something high school graduate who lives at home or in a dingy apartment with little disposable income left over from his slightly over minimum wage job, how is he affording to pay the membership fees? Also, where is he getting the money to buy items in this virtual world? I would imagine that at times he may choose to buy something on Second Life rather than pay his bills in real life, because men have funny priorities.
As far as WoW, there aren’t many initial problems I see with the economy except for the exploitation of the people who are paid to advance players to certain levels. The sweatshops where we used to get textile products have turned into sweatshops where we finally get to be the level 59 Grandmaster Ogre we always wanted to be for the low price of $250 US.
WoW discourages the sale of services and property for real life money, but to stop such a profitable enterprise would be extremely tough to do. As we saw in the article about the sweatshops in China where these employees aren’t making very much money, it is still more than they would make elsewhere in exchange for not having to do hard labor. If that were an option available to me I might take the opportunity.
I can’t really see a problem with putting money into virtual worlds. I think that there have been many vices that people invested in offline, and we may not think it’s prudent, but it’s an option available to them. I remember watching an episode of MTV’s True Life series. They chronicled people who had alternate lives online. One girl was an aspiring singer, but she had extreme shyness. She utilized second life to put her music in the public realm and even had a sizable following in Second Life.
I don’t look at her and think she’s pathetic, I think that there are different ways to achieve what it is you want to do. I do however think that, if you put so much of your efforts into these virtual worlds, you lose the chance to improve your life offline. I always think what these people would be capable of if they took their time and efforts and just applied it to better themselves in the real world.

And the Winner is...

As the election draws ever closer the question raised is how the voting system will affect the results. Last election’s butterfly ballot fiasco was a source of controversy, and I’m sure some people wonder how things might have been different if the ballots had been clear. The problem that both the print version of USA Today, and the Halloween online issue of the New York Times both point out that extra steps need to be taken to reduce the error in this hotly contested and historic election.

Both articles mention that the voting system is flawed Richard Wolf from USA today doesn’t go into depth as to what specific factors are hindering the voting system, whereas Ian Urbina from the New York Times goes very in depth as to what is going on. This difference goes back to the audience that the Times is trying to reach versus who the audience for USA Today is. USA today is targeted towards the younger audience. According to an article from the Times by Richard Perez-Pena, in the early years the writers were young, and didn’t have “Washington pedigree”.

USA Today in its inception didn’t cover topics in a substantial way. They were dubbed the “McPaper” according to Perez-Pena because of their brief coverage style. It was commonplace that a picture would dominate the front page as opposed to the Times which is principally a textual newspaper. The real differences in the papers I believe are the way articles are written. The USA Today borrowed from television ideas and applied them to their newspaper said Allen Neuharth, creator of USA Today. They created a small town paper feel by referring to Americans as “we” or “us” according to Perez -Pena.

Neuharth explained that the light coverage of the issues has a legitimate reason. He said in Perez-Pena’s article that he doesn’t expect that most readers are reading on a daily basis. Therefore, he has a limited amount of time to get their attention and also to get his point across. This also relates back to the younger audience he is dealing with. There is so much competing for people’s attention, so not too many people in the younger generations really would sit down and read and entire New York Times length article. This is why USA Today is a must have during any boring lecture class.

According to a paper written by Lisa George, where she was examining how the availability of the New York Times affects the readership of local papers, George says that readers of the New York Times tend to be more educated. This is an important factor when looking at how information is presented. There difference between the Times and USA Today tends to be strikingly clear from first glance. The Times is very text heavy. I think I remember discussing this in a Mass Communication class I took a few semesters ago. The New York Times is a very well respected publication with a rich history. The writers are undoubtedly at the top of their careers or are quickly becoming well respected as their articles are published by the Times.

I think that the Times’ format at presentation of their information is also a reflection of where the writers have come from. I do not know for a fact, but I can make an educated guess that the writers frequently come from the most prestigious universities locally and abroad.

When looking at an article that also covers how the flawed voting system will be handled in the upcoming election one of the differences I immediately see is that they go very in depth as to what the problems are and then go on to speak about how they are being addressed by each party. I think this is because, the medium this article is published in allows for longer articles. Also, since the Times expects a more discerning reader they assume that their curiosity will lead them to have more questions that need to be answered by the article. This most likely wouldn’t be the case with USA Today who presents for the less educated.

Citations

George, L. (2005, May 17). The New York Times and the market for local newspapers. Department of Economics, Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://bpp.wharton.upenn.edu/waldfogj/pdfs/nyt_aer.pdf

Perez-Pena, R. (2007, Spetember 17). At 25, 'Mcpaper' is all grown up. New York Times, Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/17/business/media/17gannett.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Urbina, I. (October 30, 2008). In a tight race, victor may be ohio lawyers. New York Times, Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/us/politics/31ohio.html?ref=politics

Wolf, R. Legal volunteers ensure a fair election. (2008,October 31). USA TODAY, p. 2A.

Blogging is Power!

Through utilizing my favorite search engine Google I stumbled upon this interesting website for local conservatives. This particular website is called The Buffalo Bean. The blogger Matt Margolis doesn’t utilize a pseudonym. Matt is a writer by profession, and his recent publications is Caucus of Corruption (2007), which was co-authored by Mark Noonan. The Buffalo Bean was born June 13th, 2008. Technorati has ranked the website 368,349th.
This blog presents itself in my opinion with a serious tone. Maybe I think that because he is by profession a writer so everything that he writes sounds more on the formal side. He definitely injects his own brand of educated humor, the same type that my tour guide showcased on my college visit to Georgetown. This is an excerpt from his blog on August 12th, 2008:
“Scott Leffler interviewed Jon Powers on his radio show today. He’s posted a link to a podcast of the show.
I’ve listened to a good portion of it, and found Powers to be quite disappointing. He started off the show sticking to his usual script about why he’s running for Congress, and his responses to the questions about War Kids Relief were very defensive and quite frankly, I think Powers has to stop making it the centerpiece of his campaign and repeating over and over that he was on the cover of Newsweek.”
Obviously if he’s taking the time to post about politics he’s a critical person which I find to be positive in this circumstance because, it’s very easy to just listen to what you are told and to never investigate facts and form your own opinions.
Matt’s serious tone turns to dismissive when it comes to responding to comments from people who usually have an opposing (Democratic) viewpoint. One person attempted to respond to a post where he spoke about some good news for the Republican candidate Chris Lee and the opposed insinuated that Chris Lee wasn’t what was best for anyone but Chris Lee.
According to Dresner, under the right circumstances blogs have the potential to affect local politics. To affect change a blog needs to focus on a previously unexplored issue because they do have the power to “shape and constrain the larger political debate”.

If the blog’s power can extend to “the larger political debate” and I interpret that as affecting the national perceptions, than most certainly if scaled back it can affect the local assumptions and ideas.

To get the message out smaller blogs post to their sites for the most part, and then link up to what Dresner calls “focal point” blogs to increase their potential audience. Candidates have also been utilizing websites and blogging to influence their constituency. According to Gill, Howard Dean in the 2003 elections was among the first of the candidates to reach out to his audience using new media, and he was attracting 30,000 visitors a day at its peak.

Blogs are also effective in affecting the outcome of local elections because not only links, to other sites but because of the word of mouth factor. I have a friend who started a website based around the elections and informing voters. It has become pretty well known being featured in the Buffalo News and also other publications. I initially intended to reference his website, but it doesn’t include blogs, it more involves forums.

However, ideas that are introduced in the blog I think spread in a more important way offline and that is how differences are made. The most beneficial thing for a blog visitor to do is to bring what they read up in discussion out in public. This can be a way that opinions can be swayed and elections can really be influenced.

References

Drezner, D.W. (2004 August). The power and politics of blogs. Retrieved October 24, 2008, from The power and politics of blogs Web site: http://www.cs.duke.edu/courses/spring05/cps182s/readings/blogpowerpolitics.pdf

Gill, K. (2004). How can we measure the influence of the blogosphere?. Retrieved October 24, 2008, from Department of Communication, University of Washington, Seattle Web site: http://faculty.washington.edu/kegill

Mediation: Friend or Foe

AOL Instant messenger was a phenomenon when it was first introduced to the public. Since then it has become very common to be one of the primary ways people keep in contact. I believe that the Instant Messenger is a blessing and curse in disguise. According to Tom Tyler,

The ease of online communication may lead to weaker social ties, because people have

less reason to leave their homes and actually interact face to face with other people. The internet

allows people to more easily…form and sustain friendships and even romantic attachments from

their home…engage in political and social-issue based discussion with others from their home

(Tyler p. 196, 2002).

Utilizing Instant messenger does just that. As a member of the instant messenger community I’ve seen people talking to people in the same room as them, but through a computer when they could very easily just speak to them.

The most important part of building relationships is disclosure. Instant messenger as a technology allows people to share their lives with other people in a way that causes much less anxiety than face to face communication. Yifeng Hu et al. mentioned in her Introduction that many people are using instant messenger late at night and also in private, which is leading to more self disclosure. Before instant messenger, people used to get to know each other by talking on the phone or spending time in the other person’s presence. However, as instant messenger was introduced slowly people stopped spending time with each other. I remember that growing up I think instant messenger came out around the time I was 11 or 12. It came at a time when I was still outside playing all day especially during the summer, and not coming inside until my parents called me inside.

Looking back on it now I see that once Instant messenger came around my parents were calling my inside less and less because I was already spending more time inside. My family also did the singular computer for the entire family to use, and having a brother and sister who were just about my age made it hard to find time for me to talk to my friends. I began to go inside earlier because I knew my brother and sister would be outside playing so, I wouldn’t have them complaining about me spending too much time on the computer. I remember back then it was the popular thing for my friends to try to play matchmaker for their other friends, so I definitely talked to my fair share of guys I had never actually met.

Instant messenger didn’t make for the formation of a strong relationship. There are a few factors that are specific to instant messenger that affect the formation of a strong relationship. First, back when I first started using the internet very few people had pictures that they could send to you. I was always wondering what these guys would be lying about, because they would always try to portray themselves as the best thing smoking, which of course wasn’t true at all. Next, I felt like since I didn’t actually know these people we would have these random conversations where we would try to relate to each other, but we mostly ended up just making things up to sound more interesting than we really were.

Instant messenger I think fore certain people has redefined how relationships are formed offline as well. In my group of friends they know that if they want to speak to me they should text me. For some reason I’ve just become so accustomed to typing, that I took it from the computer to my cell phone. I now use cell phones that have QWERTY keyboards because I am so impatient that a normal cell phone just wouldn’t cut it. Even if it’s not a computer mediating my relationships it is some form of technology, and that is the new trend according to Theresa Kasallis.

Citations

Hu, Y. (November 2004). Examining the relationship between instant messaging and intimacy. JCMC, 10, Retrieved October 17, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/hu.html#fifth

Kasallis, T. (2006 July 6). Text messaging affects student relationships. Retrieved October 17, 2008, from BYU Newsnet Web site: http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/60307

Tyler T.R. (2002). Is the Internet Changing Social Life? It seems that More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1). 195-205