Artifact 3

I don’t know what to think about this audio. What does our future hold if the Internet as it interrupts our brains ability to process short term memory into long term memory? Will our brains adapt somehow? They will adapt, but will I be losing something that I value but don’t realize it. I like to be able to focus and have deep thoughts/ reflection about me and the people around me. I may be able to hold on to this but what about my children. The Internet will be a larger part of their life than it in my life.  I still remember a time when I did not use the Internet at all, but for my children’s whole life they will have access to the Internet. I don’t think I will be able to stop their use. The Internet and the technology that comes with it is the wave of the future. I would be hindering my children’s ability if I did not allow it in their life. If I don’t allow it in my life I will be hindering my ability to protect them from the dangers that come with the Internet. I guess it comes down to finding the healthy balance of being connected vs. disconnected. Will my children have trouble with processing short term memory into long term memory? How will teaching change? Are teachers finding it more difficult to get their student to reflect and really think critically about something?

I am not a person that is very techy. I know just enough about the Internet to use it and am smart enough to figure out what I don’t know. I never have the newest technology, it always takes me a year or so to adapt (mainly because I just don’t have the money to keep up or don’t value having the newest technology). I just started texting just over a year ago. I check my facebook page maybe once a month.  I strongly dislike checking my email and I have a job and teachers that require me to check my email every day : !   I’m a person that likes being disconnected. Being available 24/7 is not what I want. I like being around people but not computers as much. Now after saying all this, I am open to new technology and I don’t want to be left behind because like I said earlier it is the wave of the future. I am limiting myself if I reject the Internet and what it can do for me.

Nickolas Carr’s findings really disturb me a little. Maybe just like other past inventions that had negative attributes, but still prevailed so the Internet will overcome their negative attributes somehow.  The whole world does not have the Internet and they survive. What will happen if for some reason we get disconnected? Carr almost made it sound like being distracted and the Internet were addicting. I also wonder what the Internet is doing to our health. Obesity is on the rise is that because people are at the keyboard instead of outside playing games? Being connected to me is almost like being sedentary because when people are not on the Internet they are usually actively doing something else.  Maybe not physical exercise but more moving than non-moving.

Artifact 2

This audio really stuck me in a good way. I really want to read his book now. Today when I hear people talk about the Internet or technology I usually hear a group of people on one side or the other. One view is the Internet is bad (usually the older generations) and we need to get rid of it. The other side see the Internet as good (younger generations) and they can't live without it. I rarely hear the argument about finding a balance between the two, the idea of being "disconnected" distancing ourselves from society norms for our own benefit.  It is interesting to me to see that this problem is not a new problem, but all throughout history there has been the struggle between the demands that new technology has on our life and how do we adjust to that new technology.

When he mentioned the Internet Sabbath it made me think of a time when I made a pledge to not watch TV for a whole semester. I did it, but the first week was the hardest. I would find myself watching TV without even realizing it. My family had to remind me of my pledge.  After the first week I was good for the rest of the semester. I never realized how much TV had become an addicting habit in my life. I felt free to do other activities. The semester made me realize that I had a choice to choose not to watch. It was so freeing to say "no" like I was in bondage before. I think the same goes for any new technology. We forget we have a choice of how much technology we want in our life and in some ways how much we want technology to control our life.

I have a teacher that does mindful mediations at the beginning of class. The meditations try to quiet the mind to focus on just our breath without other thought interrupting. It is hard to do, but I think it speaks of what Sincak -“The restless energy of the hunted mind” and Shakespeare-“Clear the clutter of the distracted globe” were talking about. The mediations also challenge us students to focus our minds throughout the day on one task at a time. If I am going up the stairs focus on just going up the stairs not think about what I’m going to eat for lunch while going up the stairs. Our minds get clutter with so much today. Life is so simple as a child, because everything is taken care of, food, housing, and daily activities are governed by parent. I believe children have the ability to think of only one thing at a time, because they don’t have to think of everything else, but I also believe we as adult have the ability to do the same thing but we have to choose to do it, it does not come naturally like when we were children.

He also mentioned a study that concluded that 3D tools such as paper are easier on then mind than digital tools or something to that effect. I don’t like reading on a computer screen. Anything that I have to read that is more than a page I prefer to read on paper. I don’t know why. It is annoying to me to read from a screen. With a computer I can’t just cuddle up in a blanket and read I have to position the computer just right so I can see the screen.

Unit 5 and 6 summary

Unit 5 starts off by speaking about CMC social groups. Study of CMC social group is very dynamic and the groups function differently than face-to-face (ftf) because it is written communication. One of the differences is explained through Reduced Social Cues (RSC) model. This is a concept that says that CMC is more difficult to have a natural flowing conversation and more effort has to be given into what is typed than with ftf. Anonymity is another difference in CMC  and has many different degrees. One example given is that a person may use a false name in a chatroom while in an email use their real name and know the other persons as well. Some of the down sides to in CMC group dynamic are disinhibition, deindividualtion, polarization, and conformity. Disinhibition and deindividualtion, and polarization are very much determined on context.  Polarization and conformity tie into each other because sometimes it is easier to pick a side and pick the majority side than to sit in the middle by themselves.  The upsides to CMC group dynamics are cohesion, interactivity, and identity. All three come attach to each other to help people come together and stay together as a group. There is another model that helps us understand CMC better. It is Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE model) which contradicts RSC model because it present the idea that loss of physical and social cues are not as prominent in CMC as originally thought and that CMC could actually be more effective than ftf.

Unit 6 starts out talking about the myth of how CMC is “thrill-spill-and-kill” meaning that people have the right to act however they want , share whatever they want, be rude to whoever they want on the Internet. Flames/flaming is perceived online hostility. Some of the examples given are indecent messages, rudeness, and profane language. RSC model believes that this hostility comes because no physical cues are present to limit what is said. Interactional-normative framework contradicts RSC because its main focus is on the response that is fits within the context of the online conversation. Flame language can be perceived differently depending on the context. Interactional-normative framework has four major principles.

1.       Need for definitional clarity

2.       Direct consideration of social and relational context

3.       Investigation of functions rather than reliance on value judgments

4.       Prioritization of communication over technology

The normal way of life of any group and relationship history both take part in creating the context in CMC. There are five qualities of CMC that make it different than other forms of communication.  They are packet switching, sensory appeal, interactivity, synchronicity, and hypertextuality.  Embedded media is how dependent and integrated people have become on the Internet to do activities in their daily lives. Social capital is another term similar to embedded media because it speaks of how much of people’s social network is on the Internet.  There are two approaches to how to study how embedded people are in the Internet and what they use it for.

1.       Very quantitative with controls, specific variables and processes of CMC

2.       Very qualitative people observe and describe what people do every day with CMC

Both units present models that come together and said that CMC is very complex and unpredictable just like ftf communication.

Artifact #1

I think the Internet is a great source for news. The Internet is there 24/7 not just early in the morning or evening when people may not be home to see. TV news also has a boring vibe with me. Maybe the vibe came from when I was a child, but it just does not catch my attention not to mention its always talking about who was murdered in North City, a string of brake inns that are going on, or all the damage done by a storm that moved through. This kind of news depresses me and I wander what is going on in this world I live in? Then the clips are short, but sometimes too short and I find myself wanting to know more about a particular story and all of a sudden the clip is over. Where do I go to find out more? The Internet. The study does not say anything to this effect but, I think my view is similar to others my age. It’s a generational move from TV to Internet. While some of the older generations are also moving more toward the Internet for new, I believe a large majority will not because TV news is what they are used to and like.

Through the Internet I have more access to different kinds of news, not just the bias news of whatever station I am watching at the moment. If I want only to hear about humanitarian work going on in the world or if I want to hear about the genocide that is going on in Darfur I can look it up. Either way through TV or Internet it is hard to keep up with everything. When I am on the Internet I have a tendency to look up international news more and I lose what’s going on in St. Louis, when I watch the evening news I lose what’s going on outside of St. Louis.

All the Facebook and Twitter news feeds sound great, but are people really paying attention to the news feed or has it become, like the pop up advertisements that people ignore. I think it would be an interesting to see a research study done on what kind of news people look up and read. This study just made me think of questions.

Are people more interested in international, national, or local?
Since more and more people are moving to the Internet, more and more people have access to the Internet. What does the future hold for how news is mediated?
Does the Internet bring better news?
Does the Internet make it hard to find the news people want because they may have to sift through more stories to get to the one I want?
TV news can only cover so much, while the Internet is unlimited to what it can offer in terms of news. In the future will there be any need for TV news?

This study only makes me wonder what direction and how news will be mediated in the future. I have many unanswered questions, but they will be answered throughout my life.

Units 3 and 4

I think it is interesting that one of the reason the Internet was first created was for people to share their research with others in their field. Research is very objective and fact oriented. In research there is really no need to get the subjective side, because that does not have any application in the field. Now days the Internet is used for much more than for sharing research but also for human relationships which is very much subjective to what people feel. This is kind of a role reversal from what the Internets first purpose was. The Internet did its job very well, but now it has to adapt to how people use it today to fit the needs of its users. It has come a long way through emoticons, Skyp, and gmail video chat. All this to try and bring CMC as close as it can to being face to face.