(Mis)Communication

The cell phone social experiment was a great way to end the semester. From the team experiments I learned that people are much more involved in their own affairs than I previously believed. While John and I were unable to successfully turn heads by pretending to be out of town, Kevin and Victoria were able to draw slight attention, but not enough to force people to take any action. From the interviews, I learned that the coffee shop is a haven for all generations. We interviewed one man who claimed that he did not use any sort of new technology even though the general coffee shop seems to be heading towards a technological center. He also said that the “commotion” we caused was much less severe than some of the people he has to deal with on occasion.

For my personal experiment, I had to call juniors and attempt to engage in small talk. The catch was that I had to use the same opening line for everyone. I decided to go with the very generic “Nice weather we’re having” comment. This proved to be very unsuccessful. This cliche sort of gave away my intention of maintaining a conversation with no real point to it. Nearly every time, the person would ask if I had a “real” reason for calling and claim that they had to go for some reason or another.

I believe that text is much more suitable for small talk conversations. Phone calls have become a hassle and are primarily used to guarantee the transfer of a message.

Miscommunication

In today’s assembly the acting ensemble presented multiple sketches that were based on the theme of miscommunication over the internet. Although many of the sketches were meant to be comical, such as the FML and AutoCorrect posts, a few of the sketches were very dark and showed some of the more severe consequences miscommunication can have.

The sketch involving a myspace incident that involved the suicide of a teenage girl. I think that this story truly amazed the American public because it showed just how powerful the internet is becoming over especially growing generations. The Internet provides a haven for those that do not want to show their complete selves which can be both a good and a bad thing. Something that Internet users should never be unaware of is that people on the internet can always turn out to be something different in real life.

The other theme of the assembly was the idea of incorrect spelling and autocorrect forcing people to send messages that meant something completely different from what they intended. I find it odd that texts can not be deleted by the sender. Posts online can be deleted by the poster and by the receiver, but texting acts much more like a real life conversation where once something is said it cannot be taken back.

 

Oskar and Faber

Faber Text 1: Of the Division of Labour

1. The way I would define “division of labor” is the separation of different tasks in some sort of business in order to produce some product more efficiently or of higher quality. A division of labour can range from a setting such as a assembly line in a factory such as the one described in the reading with the pin factory, or it can be described by a modern day company, with different divisions such as a marketing division, a manufacturing division, and a accounting division.

Oskar Text 2: Estranged Labor

2. The dictionary definition Oskar uses in this text is “to become conscious or aware of.” He states that as a worker becomes aware of labor, this results in a loss of realization of the worker himself. In another words, as a worker begins to work, he begins to lose himself.

3. After reading the text, I thought that alienation was the loss of oneself through labor and that estrangement was the separation of a person from what is truly his natural self. These both occur during labor. Alienation occurs when a worker creates a product, as part of himself goes into the product, and therefore he is less of himself. Estrangement occurs because a person is not in his natural state when working for someone else, and therefore he becomes a working person instead of his natural person.

Oskar Text 3: Private Property

4. Oskar says in this text that social activity are in essence the same as individual life for a man and that these two things make up a man. Social activity. Both individuality and community are necessary for mankind and therefore are both good for man.

Oskar Text 4: Human Requirements and Division of Labour

5. Oskar claims that in order for businessmen to succeed, they must desecrate all the hopes and desires of a working man and reduce their standard of life to the bare minimum, until they are only able to live and work. This causes the working man to be unable to enjoy life and express any of himself outside of the workplace, causing a larger “alienated” self, which is how the estranged being is created. This process is the best method for businessmen and political econmoists to make the most out of there workers and make the most money.

Oskar Text 5: Gotha Program

6. Oskar clearly states that the “new” society “fixes” the problems of alienation and estrangement because each worker receives the amount of wealth he put in as labor; therefore, no amount of the person is lost in the work, and he may stay himself throughout the working day. The only problem Oskar has with the “new” society, is that although the system is fair, people themselves are not equal, causing a person with less obligations to have more money, or a person with more capability to have more money, causing a flaw in the system. Nonetheless, for Oskar, the “new” society is a step in the right direction.

What is Activism?

When Mrs. Davis came into class last Friday, the class had interesting discussion about what activism is today, and what is means to be an activist in an online community. The article we read prior to attending the class discussed the weaknesses of online activism as opposed to “old-fashioned” activism.

I personally believe that online social networks such as twitter or facebook do not hinder social activism but in fact help it. Activists who mean to gather online can make great use out of online social sites in order to create events or host group pages, but using this a recruiting tool is much less effective.

Our class came to a conclusion that social networks simply spread awareness, nothing else, but what else can be expected from an online networking site. The people that would otherwise have remained ignorant of the problem are now informed about the problem and, if they choose to, are able to research the cause even further. Facebook should never be meant to change people’s opinions, in fact, the internet should never be used to entirely change people’s mindset’s.

The fact of the matter is, the modern Internet is filled with people concerned with simply getting in their own opinions. The internet empowers the individual to a point where common courtesy can be avoided. I believe that people will always be rude online, simply because they can, which will make true online activism very difficult.

Cellphones

Have cellphones become a necessity in American culture, or can they still be seen as a luxury?

The cellphone holds each person accountable for being reachable every second of every day. Being truly disconnected from the world becomes a process requiring many steps that a person must take at the cost of missing some important information. The world today communicates and fast and with our cellphones, the world is able to stay updated just as fast.

“Staying in the loop” becomes harder and harder for those without a smart phone, which is one of many digital divides, a topic the class discussed with Mr. Hatridge earlier this year as well as with Mr. Donnell last week. I believe that the smart phone is a luxury for the common American, but it is quickly becoming a necessity for society, not because of growing needs, but because of increasing standards. Obviously the cell phone is not crucial for survival, but it is necessary to function as a contributing member to society. Each person relatively privileged has a resolvability to his/her fellow community member to be available by cell nowadays. This came to be as more and more people got cellphones that it became a norm to own a cellphone instead of not having one.

The general concept of one person holding no control over his or her responsibility seems a bit scary. Does society really dictate what individuals must or must not do? Yes, but is it a requirement for the individual to exist in that society? We see the digital divide gradually separating society apart, and if we do not stop this, we may find out the answer to that question the hard way.

Wall-E’s Contributions

Mr. Goodman discussed estrangement with our class a couple weeks ago. We opened the class with the discussion of a few texts written by Marx and Adam Smith, unknown to us at the time and closed the class by watching a few scenes from Wall-E. They both effectively showed the effects of estrangement at the two extremes, working all the time, and never working at all.

The more applicable scenario, in my opinion, is the “working too little” scenario portrayed by Wall-E. Is our society becoming more dependent on technology, and if so will this lead to a point where we technology is a necessity? I have no doubt that society is becoming more dependent on technology. Technology allows more efficient and advanced activities to take place, and the natural inclination for humans to progress draws us to the benefits of technology.

Having said this, I believe that we will continue to advance until technology is a very integral part of our lives, but I do not think we will every become completely dependent on technology as a society. I do believe that individuals will become completely entangled within technology, but as a whole, we have enough free thinkers to keep all of humanity from falling into the same pitfall all of the humans in Wall-E fell into.

To Print or Not To Print

Last Tuesday, Mr. Feldmeth came into class to discuss the topic of ethics in the media. The presentation was specifically on the topic printing images in the press. As a class we were introduced to the basic rules of ethics, such as the rule-based, care-based, and end-based processes of thinking, and we applied those rules in discussing some of the more controversial images of the 20th century.

The most striking image to me, which we did not discus, was the image of a northern Vietnamese spy being executed by a southern Vietnamese police officer in the street, so I will attempt to analyze the ethical dilemma behind this image.

First of all, the image is very disturbing and graphic and will no doubt offend many people, especially if it were to be shown on the nightly news, as it was when it did get broadcast. From the perpspective of the man being executed, it violates all rules of privacy, as one can clearly see his face in the picture. Even though I take this into consideration, the broadcasters at the time probably not use this kind of care-based logic simply because he was an enemy to America, nonetheless, I will consider care-based logic on the premise that all humans have this fundamental right.

The primary reason to broadcast the image is the media’s duty to inform the public of the truth. This image tells the story in Vietnam and effectively changed America at the time. Would the perception of the war have been different if the image had not been shown? Maybe, probably in fact, which just goes to show the power of the media and the true dilemma of ethics.

My Privacy

This week Mr. White came into class to discuss privacy on the Internet. The consensus that our class reached by the end of the discussion is that the increasing interconnectivity that technology brings the world comes at the cost of personal privacy.

Today, truly nothing social can be kept secret. Pictures, facebook statuses and tweets tell the whole online community what happened last, whether it was between a small group of friends or a large get together. Mr. White brought up the issue of pictures being posted online and whether the person in the picture or the owner of the camera has control of the picture. Theoretically I believe that people in the picture should have control of who gets to see it, but realistically, pictures get spread around without consent.

Many cases of this have occurred in modern culture, such as the marijuana scandal involving Michael Phelps. Clearly, he should not have been smoking illegal substances, but I believe that it is his right to not have that picture published. Obviously this is not what happened and will never be the case from here on out, so should the world get more accustomed to sharing lives with one another on a regular basis?

I think that this adaptation is already occurring in society and that whether people like it or not, interconnectivity will become a part of our lives.

The Media’s Duty

According to Harris, in his book A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication, “Certain news stories may be effectively censored through blocking the access of the media to the scene of the story,” (201).

Many examples of blocking access have occurred in the past few decades, such as the issue of apartheid in South Africa or Palestinian unrest (given by Harris). The media is unable to inform its viewers about certain events due to blocking access as well as all other types of censorship, which raises the question, is it the media’s duty to inform the public? Or should major events be hidden from the public in certain cases?

While ignorance may be bliss, knowledge is power. I personally believe that people have the right to know what goes on in the world we live in, if the event will happen to effect the public, and governments, companies, or organizations should not be allowed to hide information in order to preserve their images, and therefore it is the media’s duty to find out what the public needs to know and report it to us.

The next line that needs to be drawn is the distinction between the media informing and the media influencing. Today, the media attempts to influence every chance it gets, but I think that it is worth the information we would receive from interacting with the media. A mutual agreement between the media and its viewers must exist in order to maximize the profits and effects of the media, and hopefully this balance does not become too disrupted.

 

Society Leads, Media Follows

According to Harris’ book, “82% (of people) thought reporters were insensitive to people’s pain when covering disasters and accidents.”

Some of the quotes in this reading, including this one, amaze me. The media seems to gradually become more and more likely to broadcast stories about corrupt people and plots and people are upset about this. Insensitivity should not be a principle concern when reporting about certain disasters or catastrophes, as the news has become a medium of pure information, no opinions.

The real question become whether or not news has become a scarier portrayal or reality or if in fact reality has become scarier. In my opinion, I think the news does a good job of portraying what it needs to because in reality the world has changed into a more dangerous place over time. Certainly, the standards of society today are not at all the same as what they were 10, 20, 30 years ago. For example, hitchhiking has become a thing of the past, an act based on the mutual respect for each others vulnerabilities. Airport security has become tighter in all parts of the world to the constant threat of terrorism, a very prevalent theme on the news today.  The fact of the matter is that the standard of morality has degraded over time and the news must reflect that in order to do what it is supposed to, give an accurate portrayal of the world today and what major events have happened.