My Thoughts on My Blogging

           I want to do a review on my blog, my thoughts on blogging, my feelings about the process, and how the availability of my blog makes me fail, at this point of time.  After all the questions I want to address are taken care of, I hope to realize and put forth how I have grown up to this point in relation to blogging.
          When I began this blog life was great and I felt that I had no need to blog, also that it was beneath me.  I felt that it was pointless and that bearly any blogs actually were worth my time or any one else's time.  The first few blog posts were at best annoying and absurd.  As I continued blogging it became slightly more enjoyable, but I was still not comfortable with the process as I am more of a private person.  At the present time I feel that blogging is something that may be fun and enjoyable, and for the most part I feel comfortable putting my thoughts and ideas out there.  While this change did happen, I still feel that blogging is a pointless, busy body, selfish act/process, but I have found that it is a great way to express your ideas in a subtle yet unsubtle way. 
             I wrote my blogs in a way that I would feel comfortable with literally anyone reading them as I will not retract what I have written thus far and believe that I have been more then conscious of other's feelings about subjects I have covered.  I guess if I really wanted to be more sensitive in order to reach a broader audience I would not address certain issues that might turn a larger group of people.  Though it was not my intention from the onset of my blog to gain the widest possible audience possible, but to put my ideas out there and see what people think.
          There are many changes in my life as to what I do that I did not do before.  I now check a greater variety of news sources on various media on a daily basis from internet, newspaper, etc.  In addition, I have now read several blogs that I check once and a while that I would never had checked previously.  Finally, I do have a greater appreciation for those that are able to maintain a blog on a daily basis.  As this review of my blogging affair must come to an end, I will continue to grow as a person and this blog will continue to live on.

The Media System and Reform

   The media system has changed tremendously over the years.  This change has happened naturally due to companies and such just wanting to change to gain greater profits and other reasons, but there has been change that has come due to political activism, economic activism and freedom rights activism by people of various countries.  The media system seems to be moving toward a consolidated ownership as companies are buying up other companies and cutting down the possibility of entrepenuers entering the media arena.  I see that less and less people are active or unhappy with the status quo in that many do not choose to physically act on their thoughts or care to act.  I am of the mind that it needs change because the for profit model that most media companies/corporations are using is outrageously wrong.  News companies need to be less about profit and more about the truth.  These news corporations such as Fox News, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, etc that report the news rely heavily on news nets, geographically and historically significant locations, and eye catching news.  This is maybe the most economical way to get news and report it.  There needs to be a better method for getting news that reports both local and global news with some in between.
    In addition, the type of news being reported is not fully representative compared to what is actually happening.  The news for the most part reports eye stopping news that includes war, robbery, violence, disease, marriage scandal, celebrity juice and political problems.  The news net lets many positive stories of hope and such fall through the ropes.  Furthermore when issues are debated on television, the media companies try to present the issue with each point of view with equal amounts of time.  The problem is that even those views that are held by just a few are given equal time.  A great example is the climate change debates held on television where all sides are being presented as equal possibilities.  Most scientists accept and see climate change as happening, and that it is causing trouble for the planet.
  Now as far as the most important issues to watch out for as the media system changes are consolidation, how media is collecting news stories, what news focuses on as newsworthy, and focus on the news corporation/company on profit.  These issues need to change and there is hope that this will happen as time moves on as social and political pressure seems to be on the rise.  The only worry I have is that activism is such a loose term, and maybe people will just do the whole 'click-through activism' that Hesse talks about in her article "Facebook's Easy Virtue 'Click-Through Activism' Broad but Fleeting".  That is what I believe the future holds.

video games and violence: truth or myth

           The evolution of video games and a certain reality(virtual reality and semi-real environments) that has been created with that evolution has led to many changes in the lives of people all over the world, but more importantly, to me, the American people, since 1940s.  Serious popularity came in the 1970s leading to now the video game industry is the fastest growing industry. At the same time there has been 57 school shootings (August 1966 to February 2008), of which 34 of those shootings took place since 2000.  This is just one of many statistics of increased violence that people have employed for their argument that video games are the cause or are at least correlated to the "increased" violence that people feel is happening all over the US.  The media seem to report mostly on the bad that is happening in society and less on the positives.  The best corellation/cause example is Columbine High School massacre that occurred in 1999 where afterwards the critics or the commentators on the event pointed to high amounts of violence in movies, video games and regular television.  There have been countless studies trying to argue that their data supports the arguement that the more violence youth experience the more likely they will be violent.  A documentary film called 'Game Over: Gender, Race and Violence in Video Games' that tries to support the argument and here is a clip from the film.  The film's focus is on people particularly youth being sucked into a virtual reality and not being able to maintain separation between that and reality.  The film even draws on military statistics for supporting the argument by saying that the military uses the video game Doom to train soldiers to react and shoot with less thinking and less hesitation.  This is supported by the statistic the marine corp gave saying that "they have had experiment after experiment to show the value of these simulators, but the greatest experiments are things like World War II where only 15% to 20% of the riflemen fired, and Vietnam where 95% of the riflemen fired."
           My view is that this is nothing more then people trying to point the blame and have a scapegoat, instead of actually trying to fix the underlying problem that has been the true reason for the increase in violence.  The underlying problem is that education is slumped and family structure is crumbling as people have moved to an individualistic thought process and away from the community mentality.  As far as the blanket statements in the first paragraph argument about video games and violence there is a key point or area of discussion is that needs to be looked at.  That is the emotional investment and connection that people put into the video games.  There are countless young people who have played only violent video games and have turned out just fine without becoming very violent.  For example when I was younger I played tons of video games and look I ended doing biology research and have never done anything violent like studies suggest.  The important component that emotional investment brings is that it tells how people reason with reality and the virtual reality created in video games.  The idea that people need to be able to separate themselves from the virtual reality of the game and their characters so that they are able to maintain their mental state is key to life.  Furthermore the military's stats are extreme because those in the military are willingly pushing their own psychy into the game and training of shooting.  The military personel have the emotional investment in the training and the simulations so there is little else to suggest otherwise.  With all that said please tell me what you think about my argument and how that video games have affected your life.

Globalization and Social Movements

            The process of globalization is when ideas, cultures, politics and economies around the world increase in connectivity and interdependence.  Globalization has been occurring at least since the seventeenth century, but the process accelerated with the european industrial revolution as inovation allowed for faster travel and communication.  Over the past century the United States has spread what the country's citizens hold most valuable (materialism and individualism) to other countries.  This is visible through the fact that you can go to distant locations and here american music (rap and hip-hop) for example in clubs in Hong Kong and Dubai.  The world for the most part perceives citizens of the United States through the television, for example televised political events, television series(Leave it to Beaver, Pimp My Ride, Desperate Housewives, etc), and movies.  Many people in other countries see through this media that US citizens have many material things and are self centered with little worry or care about others' lives.  These people seem to see that having a television is a sign of stability and wealth.  Most of the media that reaches the masses outside of the United States portray this almost problem free society with little difficulty.  This view has been pushed onto other societies and cultures thus the people of those areas increasingly want what they see on television.
            On the reverse side of things when global media products that do not originate from the United States reach the citizens of the United States there is this huge transformation of the products.  My experience has been just this, the products have been made easy to understand and translated into English.  I feel as if I am at a loss on somethings and at an advantage at others.  What I mean is that through having most media products of non-US origin translated and formated for easy viewing I lose some of the little intricacies that come with hearing and seeing things in the original format.  An advantage to the formating is that I am able to view many varieties of products without spending the time and money learning the language of the original product.  Another advantage is that I am able to become aware of other cultures and societies that would otherwise be unavailable to me.  The global media products that I tend to use are international news websites (http://english.aljazeera.net/) and radio (http://www.bachataradio.com/bachataradioondemand.htm) to gain further perspective about current and past events, as well as learn about issues and events not covered my media in the United States.  Furthermore, I enjoy listening to a vast variety of music from around the world in the native languages and in traditional form to try to experience what other people experience through their language.  An example is . This leads to my next point of discussion on why I have mixed feelings on globalization.
            The final point of interest that I want to talk about is my mixed feelings on globalization.  I am passionate about learning about the world of which I live in and believe that everyone needs to try their best to keep up to date on what is happening around the world within their means.  The overall trend started out bad back when european were invading countries left and right.  Though over time countries have become more conscious, the countries that have been attacked have lost some of their history, their culture, social values and local religion.  There are many points to mention, but these are what I value most and see as paramount in the in discussion on globalization.

Tech User Quiz Result Analysis

  I took this quiz that was asking the question "What kind of tech user are you?" and the result was interesting.  The results you may see in my post from November 5, 2009.  My result essentially said that I use technology as if it is attached at my hip and create pieces of media that I share with others.  I believe that is inaccurate.  Technology is not something that I crave and use as if I need to in order to carry on my life.  In fact, that is rather extreme and I would put myself in a different category.  The different category options are digital collaborators, ambivalent networkers, media movers, roving nodes, mobile newbies, desktop veterans, drifting surfers, information encumbered, the tech indifferent and off the network.  I know that I use technology and the internet on a frequent basis, but mainly because I must in order to gain certain information that would not be available or as easily available.
   I believe when it came to searching for the group or label from this quiz that I mostly fit into and right away I feel as if I can eliminate "Stationary Media Majority" section of types of users list.  I feel confident that I am neither a mobile newbie nor a media mover as I stated above and I have had my cell phone for several years now.  With that said it comes down to digital collaborator, ambivalent networker or roving node as options to be called.  As regards to the possibility of being a roving node, I do not see that as being fully encompassing.  The label does not take into account my feelings about progress in technology and mass media in relation to my life.  In addition, I am definitely not a digital collaborator because this sense of confidence that is mentioned in the description is not placed in the place that I would place it.
     That leaves me with the group that I feel fits who I am, and that is ambivalent networker.  I believe that I use my mobile device to help me run my social life.  Though I am nervous about the level and pace of progress of technology and how that affects the connections people are making with other people.  That is the type of tech user that I am and how I arrived at my conclusion, even though the quiz came up with another choice.

Facebook and all that jazz

   Facebook is a social networking site that seems to be changing constantly.  That said, the way people, such as myself, change in the way they interact with this.  One evolutionary activity involving facebook is that people have been sending invites to groups and causes, and people are just accepting these invites on a whim.  This movement is ironically called "Click-Through Activism", which was termed by Monica Hesse in one of her articles from The Washington Post.  As for me, I join groups or causes for various reason, whether it be that I truly care about the thing or I want to help drum up some support for a friend's cause that they are passionate or just cause others have joined it.  I try my best to not just join any group, but even the ones I do care about and join on facebook I do not usually do anything further.  Personally, I see little happening that was directly caused by the the groups or causes on facebook and people, myself included, just being content with the fact that all they did was join the thing.
   While that activism was evolutionary in the person to site activity, facebook itself evolved in many aspects, most notably the addition of the news feed.  I must say that I never had a facebook before the addition, but I heard about it.  The people that had a facebook before the addition had mixed reactions when the addition came because some loved it, others really did not care and since some felt it was the worst thing to happen.  The interesting part is that those that hated it were mainly hating it because they felt violated in their privacy rights.  They may have been so back in the day, so to speak, but now a days(several years after the addition) there are very good privacy settings that can be used for the feed and your profile.  Though I must note that what many fail to understand is that anything put on the internet can ultimately be accessed as long as someone has the will to do it and the advances in technology that are happening around the world.
     I do not want to leave this blog on a soar note, so I have one more evolution.  That is the evolution of the effect facebook has on person to person interaction.  This has happened mainly due to the posting of a person's relationship status("single","in a relationship","engaged","married","it's complicated","in an open relationship","widowed", or just not post anything) because people now rush to post it and change it depending on their situation.  Furthermore, if someone is in a relationship and they list who they are in it with, but then break-up people rush to be the first to change it. This makes for relationships to be on edge for those that care about their facebook profile reputation.  Also they allow people to find out alot about a person without talking to them, which would normally not be known unless people talked to that person or a friend of that person.  This changes how people interact from the beginning.
  The evolutionary steps that I have mentioned are just a few.  With just these few changes in a social network that is not even ten years old having a huge effect, where do you see the next big change coming from and what effect will it have?

What type of Tech User would I be?

I am a Media Mover, I have a wide range of online and mobile habits, and I am bound to find or create an information nugget, such as a digital photo, and pass it on. These social exchanges are central to my use of information and communication technology. Cyberspace, as a path to personal productivity or an outlet for creativity, is less important to me.

Feminism

    I went to a panel discussion on contemporary feminism featuring three women who spoke about becoming and being a Feminist in their life.  I do not have a substantial backround in ideas of feminism nor do I have friends that are openly expressed that they are feminists.  This panel, through hearing their personal experiences, gave me great insight into the thinking of people who become feminists and what their ideas are.  Previous to this panel discussion, my view of feminists has been one of extremism and obscurity.  My perception of them was in a sense that they are FemiNazis.  The discussion changed that and I now have a greater respect for feminists.  Though I do have one problem with the panel.  That is that one of the panelists claimed to essentially be a feminist at a very young age, meaning before middle school.  That is utterly rediculous, but I guess everyone has a right to their own opinion.  Well I guess there is still much to be thought about.

Politics and Media

         Mass media in today's society has become almost like a branch of the government in a sense.  There are the presidential debates, press conferences, public announcements, etc, which are essentially pseudo events.  They happen in the sense that they physically take place, but are fake in that they try to portray a certain reality that is not realistic.  For example, the presidential debates that are televised are real to the point that people are actually at the televised location, but the debate is not true to what a debate really it about and lacks the time needed to do so.  This example in particular puts the focus on the candidate's ability to look good physically and verbally, but does not put much emphasis the intellectual content or the real issues that are important to helping the country.  This led to John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama getting elected.  These political events allow those in politics to have a direct link to the public and control to some degree the information what reaches the masses in the United States.
        The interaction of the politics and media has another side.  That is the side of regulation, which involves mass media and the FCC (Federal Communications Commission).  This involves the big media giants all the way down to those individuals who make their own media available to the public.  The FCC regulates specifically the radio, television, wire, satelite and cable, which with technology of today creates a very grey or hazy area in which the two "dance".  The issues of today that deal with politics and media in relation to regulation are the ownership consolidations that are happening and the other is the question of what is best action to take when dealing with the public interest.  This "dance" is fluid because it is constantly changing.
          Now the final point I am looking to cover is this idea of gatekeepers for politicians having to go on television shows that not just news, but comedy based.  For example, during the 2008 presidential campaigning of the candidates there were several appearances on Saturday Night Live.  These appearances included, Obama, Clinton, Palin, McCain, where they went with the flow of the normal satire of the program.  In the presidential election, there was no such media gate keeper that had such a dramatic affect.  This is clear because soon after Palin's appearance on SNL, her popularity plummeted and vice versa Obama's appearance gave him greater popularity.  What is interesting now that Obama has been elected, comedians seem mixed about him because they now have months of which he has been in office.  Though his actions have not been prolific as he proposed in his campaigning.  In the spirit of politics and media coming together, here is a video.

Pseudo-Events and the Current Status of the Newspaper Industry

          Today, there is a rampant growth in the media of pseudo-events.  These events are events that are in a sense "fake" because while they might have happened or will happen, but they are staged and scripted for the news.  Example of an event is the Presidential Debate that occurs around the time of the campaigns for the positions of the US President because that event is unrealistic when thinking of a real debate, which would take much more time and not the minutes that the candidates are given.  The person that is chosen to moderate the event is there mostly to provide "star power" and ask questions.  The presidential candidates are given miniscule amounts of time to respond to the question or truly debate with the other opponent.  The questions being asked are for the most part not the meat of what should be asked to figure out how good of a job one might do in the position.  Also there is a huge crowd usually, so the person before becoming president has to be able to speak quickly, succinctly and in an educated fashion.  Though that is not all, for the candidate has to be able to do the job in effect before doing the job.  The event is scripted in advanced for the most part and the candidates are very cautious and not candid in their responses.  The purpose of the event is to push a certain type of person and personality into the spotlight that people would vote for no matter how qualified.
            Then there is the hyped event of December 21, 2012 that many in news and entertainment media have claimed that the world will have apocalyptic events occur.  Though this is not definitively a pseudo event by definition, it needs mentioning because not all events are clear as to whether they are a pseudo event or not.  Since this is an event that is being predicted it is not real in the sense of happening, but media and entertainment are making it out like this event is definitely going to happen.  They have come out with stories and even a movie set to be in the theaters soon.  The date is supposed to be a time when there is a cosmic alignment and tectonic plates causing many earthquakes and tsunamis.  I do not know what you think about this possibility, but when I first heard about it, I thought that while it was very unlikely due to my life experiences that it is terrifying to think about the possibility of it even happening.  The purpose of this event is to cause hysteria and skepticism in society.
             While news media are causing society to be more fearful of the future, society is doing the same to news media when it comes to the newspaper industry.  In the United States, there has been a decrease in newspaper readership since news went on the internet.  A perfect example is the Boston Globe, which is run by the New York Times.  If that company can not stay in business, then what hope is there for small newspaper companies?  Well, I believe that people in American society no longer sit while eating breakfast and drinking coffee to read the newspaper.  Today, people are constantly on the move and rather read the news on the internet because that can be done while checking emails and social networking sites.  This change is big because while it opens the door to less reliable news outlets, people will be able to check out many diverse articles on the same issue and discern the truth.  Where as with the newspaper there is just one company's view.  Furthermore, fewer trees will be used to make paper, thus theoretically saving more trees.  Times are changing and companies have to adapt, that is what sparks innovation.  The future seems to hold much promise for innovation as things seem to be changing only faster and faster.

The music industry has consolidated over the years, but this increase does not have a direct affect on the diversity of music out there.  Interestingly, there has been changes in television channels that started out playing music 24/7.  An example would be MTV because back in the early 1980s the channel played music for the most part.  Now the channel plays very little music, and focuses on commercial value with many reality shows and advertisement.
            Recently I watched MTV for an hour.  There was nothing during that hour that was on that was not trying to sell something.  The show that was the focus was the reality show "Made" that showcases young people getting changed into something else that they wish to be.  During this particular episode there was this young girl who wanted to be made from geek to beautiful for prom.  The episode is an advertisement by promoting a certain lifestyle, look, consumerism, makeup and clothes.  This is all within the “content” aspect, never mind the regular commercial parts of the hour.  In effect there were the “official” ads, but the “content” was its own commercial.  The girl wanted superficial beauty through makeup, the prom dress and a boyfriend.  The person termed “Made Coach” was a model who has been in many magazines and was wearing tons of makeup.  There is a larger advertisement within the “content” that was selling a lifestyle and image that it suggests every girl should want and want to be.  The difference between the content and official ad was that one was advertising subliminally and the other was in your face.
            The other example of consolidation that I want to discussion is the Billboard charts.  The Top 100 used to be as recently as the 1990s filled with diversity and less commercial music.  Now the list is filled with music that is very similar and the artists for the most part (about 70% of the most recent list) belong to just a few big companies.  Jordin Sparks’s Battlefield and Kelly Clarkson’s Already Gone are very similar.  Though there is a great deal of underground and local based music groups/singers the companies have made it tough to make it “big”.  The Billboard Top 100 is a perfect example of how consolidation of power within the music industry has changed the way it works.

Hegemony

               Hegemony is how dominant ideology, the ideas or representations in a given social order, becomes naturalized.  Ideologies usually have to compete with other ideologies in today's society.  Not only is this competition between ideologies but with cultural controveries.  Media comes into play as it provides a medium for which the ideologies and cultures maybe portreyed and shared.  Media take the ideologies and cultures and put their own slant on the subject, sometimes blatantly and othertimes subliminally.  Some examples of this is satire or news updates.  When looking into the satire example, it is clear that the slant is blatantly expressed in favor of President Obama's health care reform featuring mildly well known actors and actresses.  The other example is an article about an interview between Queen Noor of Jordan and an English Al Jazeera reporter.  The media plays the role in the competition through making schedules, such as the newspaper is delivered on a schedule and television is put on a schedule(Gitlin's Prime Time Ideology: The Hegemonic Process In Television Entertainment), controlling in part our lives.  Though this role has been removed for the most part as television is now recordable and minute-by-minute news is available on the internet.
               The discussion on friday was interesting.  The discussion on role models, especially when it came to athletes, was something I had not thought about.  The idea that now little kids have fewer and fewer athletic heroes was something that hit me in that moment.  The reason was that I remember when I was younger, I remember seeing the big athletes and thinking "how cool it would be to be like them?"  Now with all that is happening in today's society, who do kids look to as heroes or persons to aspire to be?  Is it the music artists, who portray themselves as thugs, promiscuous celebrities or corrupt politicians?  Then there is this new generation that is growing up with the television as the way to be kept entertained, how will the children learn to imagine or dream to the extent that past generations have been able to?  These questions are all connected to mass media in today's society and the discussion that occurred this past friday, and hopefully help to keep the conversation going.
               The reading that has been done thus far for the class has been relatively interesting.  Mass media has not been a subject of major thought prior to this blog, but the readings have changed that.  One of my favorite quotes thus far is from Horkheimer and Adorno's The Culture Industry, "The reconciliation of general and particular, of rules and the specific demands of the subject, through which alone style takes on substance, is nullified by the absence of tension between the poles: 'the extremes which touch' have become murky identity in which the general can replace the particular and vice versa."  Though I struggled to understand Kellner and Durham's "Adventures in Media and Cultural Studies" because I felt that I was unable to make the connections.  Well till next time I am signing out.

Media Consumer

                   I am a big media consumer, from TV to print to internet.  I find that not only do I dapple in various types, but I try to encourage others to try areas out of their confort zone.  For example, one of my friends only watches television, so I pushed my friend to pick up a newspaper and go to the internet.  I believe that by viewing multiple sources in different types of media the ability to gain a greater amount of truth is invaluable.  The time spent checking my favorite locations(facebook, yahoo.com, english.aljazeera.net, bbc.co.uk, hulu.com, youtube.com, etc) takes a good chunk of time to make sure that nothing is missed.  The interesting part is while I am on the internet trying to gain a greater connection with the world, I loose the connection with what is happening in the immediate area around me.  This dicotomy or paradox is something constantly on my mind as a reminder that I need to stay grounded and not get lost.  As Lauryn Hill, singer/poet, once said, "check your motives and thoughts."
         Mass media is in my life on a daily basis for as I mentioned above.  In addition to the internet stuff, I use the tele for stress relief, fun/relaxation and to inform myself of what is.  When I was younger, like many others of my generation, I had an aim account, but compared to other media outlets that is the one that I feel I have lost touch with.  It is archaic and basic, where as there are other outlets, such as Skype or facebook that allow for a more interactive and personal interface for communication.  Also, many people of my generation have a blackberry or just use texting.  Aim is interesting in this respect because it seems to have risen in and fallen from popularity in less then ten years, representing how fast technology is turned around this day in age.
           While I do seem to use media for large amounts of my life, I do not know how much a value it or see it as important.  One thing is true that I am now able to remember people's names better and feel like I am connected with more people.  Though when it comes down to whether it is important to me, I ask myself whether I could live without it(TV, internet, newspapers)?  My answer is that while I am extremely and absurdly curious about what is going on in the world, I believe that I could live without it for the most part.  The reason why I say this is I have tested myself to see if I could live without TV, internet and newspapers.  I found that the first five or so days were pure torture and I wanted to just run to my computer and see what had happened since I last checked, but I eventually was ok with the idea of not having the media.  Now that is all good and all, but this day in age I believe that mass media helps keep people, for the most part, honest.
              When it comes to the question as to whether I view myself as an "expert" or familiar with some area of media, I see myself as someone who is knowledgable when it comes to mass media on the internet and TV, but less knowledgable in other areas.  I do not believe I am an expert, because I feel as if that word carries a connotation of perfection of sorts, but at the same time I am more then familiar when it comes to the internet and tele.  The reason I put myself there is because I use both things with extreme easy, where as I do not use much of any other form.  Tell me what you think of this post by commenting.  Well I am signing off till next time.

So I am fascinated by online news and how it works.  Places where I have found news that is not just pertenant to one area, but on a more global reach, these english.aljazeera.net, www.bbc.co.uk, and yahoo.com.  There are many, but these three combined help to give a broad perspective to the world.  An interesting story was posted on aljazeera's website recently covering the battle between two media outlets and here is a link.  Now if your wondering how to watch a show that you missed due to life's unexpected turn of events here is a link that will hopefully serve your needs.  That is all for now, but enjoy the links.

The blogging has begun check often for posts.