Reading the article, “Your Television is Ringing” got me thinking about my distaste for Comcast over the years. I’ve always considered Comcast’s corporation to be a monopoly in the Seattle area because they are really the only prominent cable company service in the unless you chose to go with satellite. However, I was reluctant to make the switch for the very same reasons that the article stresses; the importance and benefits of convergence. If I were to chose a satellite provider not only would my bill be higher but I would also have to find a separate service for internet and phone services. Comcast’s bundled services, however, provide a single bill from a distinct provider and always have lower prices when you choose to sign up for more then one service.
When companies continue to buy out one another and eliminate the competition I always initially pegged this convergence as an unfair monopoly. The bigger and better company taking out the little guy. I never sought out exactly how convergence affects the consumers, and especially not positive benefits. However, after reading the article it appears that in many instances (but not all) convergence not only positively affects the business itself but provides positive benefits for consumers as well.
On the flip side, the rush to converge can create many problems especially when the consumers have no demand for such convergence. When convergence includes bundles and discount pricing it proves very successful. But when companies are convergence for untold future advances individuals arent as willing to jump on the band-wagon.
In what ways will convergence reshape technology?
Why is it that other countries (France, Italy) are less inclined to adapt to convergence?
Filed under: Reading | Tags: campaign contributions, maplight, online media, politics, Social Networking
I never considered how connectivity to social networking sites from other websites could effect the journalism profession. After reading the article I realize that many news organizations and media companies have yet to realize the importance of developing content on the web that allows for easy interaction from viewers rather than just one-way broadcasting.
It’s important that the comment capability is productive in the sense that readers are not simply presented with an open-ended comment box but instead provide their audience the opportunity for user participation by leveraging social media networks. What I found to be most crucial to utilizing sites like Facebook and Twitter was the fact that these sites generally have users with usernames reflecting their own first and last names which provides authenticity to each user and their statements.
I really enjoyed the second article because I was previously unaware of Maplight.org or even the capability of tracing political contributions. I guess I assumed that there needed to remain some sense of anonymity with contributions however, Im pleased that this information is available to the public; and now so more then ever. I immediately became curious to check out the layout of funds contributed to proposition 8 and found the tobacco companies, lumber yards, dairy industry and banks among the top.
Money is power and Maplight allows users the ability to study the relationship between politics and money without having to go to locations and dig through old archives. Wired stresses that, “These new tools are providing an unprecedented level of transparency, exposing patterns of influence that otherwise would have remained invisible to ordinary citizens.” The access level is just now a button click away and can be easily viewed and navigated by interested consumers expanding our knowledge base as we know it.
What effect do you think providing ordinary citizens the ability to easily document the flow of special-interest money and how it influences the legislature have in the future?
How can online news organizations utilize social networking site to their advantage?
photo credit: rosie hardy
The Newbie’s Guide to Flickr was a great article for anyone new to Flickr or to general online photo uploading. Although I was already pretty familiar with Flickr and uploading pictures to the web I liked how all the ins and outs were covered as well as special widgets and such to make uploading that much easier.
What I wasnt aware of before reading this article was the ability to tag notes in photos. I thought this was a really great feature because I notice a lot of members I follow use Flickr not only to update and share photos but also in the search of constructive criticism from other Flickr users. You can add a note to any part of the picture in case you want to highlight certain features or other users can leave notes commenting as well.
I also had breifly heard about “geotagging” but have never really known what that entailed. Geotagging is a special method of tagging photos with specific locations. This process makes it easier to track down, oh, say… the Space Needle, or a scenic view in Seattle. You can type in specific addresses and also view your photos geographical locations on a map provided by Mappr. Very cool if you’re a world traveling photographer!
Flickr prides itself as an area of community with the amazing ability to share photos across users. In some sense Flickr’s community is a social network that allows you to make friends (or “contacts”) and it also allows you to subscribe to users so that you will see their newly posted work on your main page. Although I dont upload photos myself, I use Flickr to view some photographers work that I really admire. Check out, Rosie Hardy who owes a lot of her success to Flickr and her ability to build a supporting fan base.
Who (if any) is your favorite Flickr contact to keep up with?
In what ways can businesses utilize Flickr?
We have mentioned in class the relaxed nature of Weblogs which is echoed throughout Rebecca Blood’s Weblog Handbook. Not only do Weblog authors feel less inclined to adopt a code of ethics but often times their uncensored writing styles can become one of their greatest downfalls. Although I scope the web with the knowledge that blogs are written by individuals with very biased opinions and minimal verification, I do seek out news and expect to find some form of validity within posts. Blood mentions that individuals should only publish facts that you believe to be true and if you are unsure, say so. The easy-going nature of blog writing makes this extremely easy for authors to state any speculation and would provide readers with expected standards. Providing links for further information on a subject also entitles readers to prove or disapprove your statements and can allow the blog author to later correct any aspect of misinformation.
The 10 Big Myths about copyright was all pretty new information to me. Although I understood the basics of copyright laws I myself had believed certain myths that I now know to be untrue. The fact that copyright is still violated even when no money is being gained or charged was news to me! I had always had the understanding that profit played a large role in determining whether an individual should be in violation of copyright. However, the article states that this mistake is mostly considered technical and shouldn’t result in legal action.
What are some of the advantages for Weblogs when ignoring ethics?
Should Weblogs uphold the same ethical standards as journalists or should they exists as their own entity with their own standards?
If one things for certain its that the blogging world is one large, online conversation. As better stated in the O’Reilly article, “If the Web is a a content warehouse, the blogging world is a conversation — and RSS may be the best way to follow the conversation.” When individuals subscribe to different blogs they are essentially allowing the information to come to them rather then going out and searching the web. Instead, the type of information received by the individual is completely controlled and hence, filtered. Not only can the web and news sources be more complete and varied than traditional media but they also allow readers to contribute. Anyone with a computer and internet connection could make the news in the sense that we don’t merely act as consumers but instead have the ability to both read and write the news. The Cluetrain Manifesto further stresses this idea by insisting that, “The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.”
Although there are skeptics that are worried about the content found and spread across the web, individuals who are aware of the fast growing digital communication world should have a filter all their own and to know to take certain sites such as Wikipedia with a grain of salt. If we are all clear that this information is being uploaded by random web users than we ought to remember that when we try and make a claim. Moreover, individuals can seek out highly credited sites for further assurance and legitimacy.
Just as web users create more conversation, the blogosphere has allowed both political leaders and celebrities to communicate with the public using the web space. I’ve heard quite a few claims from individuals who believe that Obama would have not won the presidency without the use of the internet. By using interactive Web 2.0 tools, Mr. Obama’s campaign changed the way politicians organize supporters, advertise to voters, defend against attacks and communicate with constituents.
- In what ways did the use of the internet, blogging specifically, impact the 2008 presidential election?
- How could internet radio (with music) become fair to both the consumers and entertainment industry in the future? (if even possible)
Reading the article “From Blog to Narrative” instantly brought me back to April 2007 during the Virginia Tech Massacre. During this point of time I was in my dorm room studying for midterms when I got word of what was going on at Virginia Tech. I spent both middle school and high school in Northern VA right outside of Washington DC and therefore know a great deal of people attending VT. I remember becoming completely consumed with the news and constantly refreshing my browser for more instant updates. Moreover, cell phone service was down on and around the VT campus and I therefore relied on my friends Facebook status’s saying “Im ok” or “Im safe”. Ive never looked back on this time and really thought about the technologies that allowed me to keep informed of the tragedy and my friends. After reading this article and hearing more about “reporting in its natural state” I cant imagine how I would have coped with the situation WITHOUT having the ability to gather instantaneous news from the web. In total the shooter killed 32 individuals. The report concluded that the toll could have been reduced if the university had made an immediate decision to cancel classes and a stronger, clearer initial alert of the presence of a gunman. Key words here are immediate and initial. There has been much debate on how the university could have better informed students of the situation to keep them inside and safe. What digital technologies would have allowed students to have a more immediate alert? Twitter? Text messaging?
To keep on topic, when reading about creating community online, I also thought about the “In remembrance” groups formed on Facebook and other blog sites that allowed students and faculty to comment and pray together as a community. I believe these groups played a major role in uniting individuals and feeling support from across the globe. I remember reading about different opinions on the shooter and individuals commenting back and forth which is described as constructive comments in the article.
However, it is also true that relying solely on Facebook status updates and commentary does not prove to be factual or necessarily the truth. We cant really rely on random individuals blogging for an unbiased, error free account. But I like to imagine that I dont seek out the absolute truth but more of a conversation, and, if i wanted the truth I would search websites known to be reliable.
- How do you think the future of instantaneous news could help individuals in situations like the VT shootings?
- What are the benefits of allowing individuals to comment on articles online? What are the drawbacks?
I found the first article, “Mediamorphosis” hard to follow because of the mass amount of expanding technology that was introduced. After reading the article its clear that human interaction is the key and goal to many digital communication systems and is the very reason I also seek out the web and different media outlets. The most interesting aspect of the article was the discussion of electricity and how pivotal this invention was to the still growing digital technology world. Electricity allowed a collapse of “the physical and psychological barriers of time and distance that had always limited human interactions.” With developments over time, the web allows individuals to “hyperlink” in which “users add new content, and new sites, by other users discovering the content and linking to it.” This very statement rang true for my own personal interests. Lately I have found myself subscribing to RSS feed for certain sites and taking a strong interest in Twitter and the sharing functionality. Twitter has proven to me the ultimate collapse of a time barrier through their trending topics and almost immediate exchange of information.
The Web 2.0 article really expanded on the idea that individuals reach out as means of interacting. What is also fascinating is the idea of a web democracy in the sense that people can choose what to look at and how to filter the information they are receiving. I discovered that Web 2.0 allows for good and news-breaking topics to surface to the top while allowing mass opinion and commentary for the public. It’s useful and quite interesting to look at the web as a social aspect with a form of “collaborative learning”. I find that I enjoy wikipedia and the free range for individuals to share information rather than visiting a site with straight forward, drowning facts.
The last piece of reading regarding the top tips of writing struck right at home for all the questions I had surrounding blogging and virtually writing your personal diary on an open forum. It makes sense that one should not take themselves too seriously and I liked the idea of remembering that most people dont have the time to read your blog and most likely will never come across it! It seems more productive to write for yourself and for your own passions.
- Hyperlinking stands as the foundation of the web. In what ways do you personally add to web content?
- After studying the transformation from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0, in what ways do you think the live web will shift/expand in the future?
