In this blog, we’ve discussed digital living from several angles. Most recently, we’ve addressed a specific topic — time — and then elaborated on it by a collaborative effort on autoethnography, self-analysis.
Now I would invite everyone, Fordham students and anyone else reading this, to go ‘from micro to macro’. In other words, now that we have observed/read about others’ observations of digital living, what does that mean to us as a society? Remember, communication and media studies are often said to be about real-life problem solving.
So the core question to you all is: What, in your opinion, is the biggest communication/media related challenge/problem in our digital era for all of us as a society?
Fordham students (and others): This time around, let’s take blogging further and truly interact with one another here, comment on each others’ posts, debate, complement them…
Here are some comments to a similar question by a group of communication studies MA students from around the world: They are addressing the challenges in the field of media in general, ranging fro the safety of journalists to network neutrality. And they talk about the web 2.0, too. You can use those as your inspiration, too (especially if you’re an early blogger and there’s not much to comment on here). And here’s an earlier blog entry, The Internet is a Scary Place, that addresses one challenge — just something to perhaps inspire your thinking.
Digital Living: FIN_IND_USA 
Oct 07, 2010 @ 00:46:59
The emergence of digital living in our world has no doubt brought many good things to society. Because of technology, the future of the field of communications is now limitless.
But, this blog asks us to talk about the greatest issue digital living has created. The first thing that popped up in my head is the dangers of the internet, primarily the spread of information. Today, anything you read on the internet should be with caution. But, think about how easy it is for someone to post a blog or create an entry on an online encyclopedia. Now the internet has not been around for too long of a time, and already we have this problem. Imagine what it will be like 50 years from now. Everything will be digital. Now imagine how much bad information there will be.
In the past, words in books were all factual because they were edited. The Average Joe cannot get a book published if it’s full of crap. What the Average Joe can do is put that on the internet. That’s what scares me the most. When my children and grandchildren are researching a paper or merely surfing the web, what information will be known to be true?
Oct 07, 2010 @ 04:24:28
Tim
Do you think if would ever be possible to certify that online info is correct? What would you think about a sorts of “online alamac” that’s continually updated and run by a company whose sole task is to accurately report info. Kind of like a go-to website for all information that’s regulated by professionals.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 19:58:49
After reading a few of the comments and blog posts from my fellow students I came to the conclusion that the greatest challenge/problem that derives from communication in our digital era, more specifically the internet, is the fact that everything spreads like a virus. Facebook and other fads, information, technological devices, and the need to stay connected at all times are all examples of how the digital communication can be seen in a negative light because it has similar qualities of a contagious ailment. The biggest problem is that our whole society has just been diagnosed with what I will call techluenza.
One of the general threats, all seen as a thing of beauty, is the freedom to post whatever one’s heart desires. This opens the door for false facts to be stated as true. Earlier, Tom phrased it as “bad information.” My interest was piqued with his use of “bad” as opposed to incorrect, false, exaggerated, or wrong. “Bad” insinuates that the effects of the information being incorrect are further reaching then simply just making a mistake. Bad information has the capacity to expand and, as we know the Internet is prone to facilitating, spread like a virus. Luckily online databases will be able to continue to keep facts in check for most people, as long as they have a subscription. This is just an adaptation of the encyclopedia for the digital era.
Another symptom of techluenza is the addiction to our technological devices and the addiction to being connected at all times. Nicole’s post about our desire to be connected 24/7 really puts it into perspective. It is one thing to be curious about those you miss, or even those you spend a lot of time with, but is it necessary to relentlessly check on their activity 5-6 times a day? Methinks no.
The viral effect of the internet is scariest when the devices, networking sites, information, and billions of people using them all work together. For instance, a few years ago someone posted an article that Lil Wayne had died. They wrote it as fact and posted it on the internet. With in minutes someone else had read the “bad information” and made a R.I.P Weezy status. Next thing you know my facebook newsfeed is blowing up with similar status, all the while Lil Wayne was very much alive. Now this is kind of humorous example but this could happen with any type of information and the ramifications could prove to be disastrous, similar to pulling the fire alarm in a crowded building.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 22:23:23
I agree with Tim in the fact that people take things on the internet as being completely true. It would be cool as Quetzalli says to determine what is “true” and “false”. When we have to do a project all teachers say no wikipedia. I find that a lot of info on this site helps me find info for papers but I get worried some of it might be skewed. I hope one day they put full books online by published authors that we can browse through!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 18:17:17
Tim I completely agree with you. In high school I primarily used the internet as my resource for writing papers and learned very little. Eventually in college I learned how invaluable books are and have written much better assignments and learn far more. I do have a fear of the blogosphere but there does seem to be a lot of quality content available. should there be some sort of way to weed out the bad information on the internet or should it stay an open forum? I think this question will eventually be answered.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 20:03:09
I absolutely agree with you Tim. As much as I hate to admit it, teachers are really on to something when they say not to use Wikipedia. A perfect example of this mentality comes from my Aunt; she is constantly sending us (myself and my relatives) emails of strange ‘facts’ and is constantly fascinated by all of the things she is learning from the internet. It makes for some pretty interesting conversation, then, when we have to tell her that some of the things that were sent to us are scientifically impossible. It becomes problematic for society because now we have two things to worry about when doing research on the ever-growing internet: Finding the right information, and trying to find ways to prove our information isn’t really just bulls**t.
Oct 07, 2010 @ 03:53:31
I agree with Tim, the spread of information now a day is generally online. That would not be a problem if all the information on the internet were true, but it is not. And like Tim pointed out, it eventually will get to the point where it will be hard to distinguish between right and wrong because all our information will be taken from the internet. Feeding off Tim’s response, I think one of the biggest communication challenges in our digital era is how dependent we have become to all this new technology that surrounds us. For example, I know some people who do not see their friends for months, but they’re constantly texting each other so they don’t need the face to face communication. Communicating with your friends via facebook, and messaging has become more common than sitting with your friends and having a conversation… A few years ago, sitting down and having a conversation with your friends would be your only option to communicate with them.
People in my generation were born with technology and therefore it has always been part of their everyday life. Personally, after doing the media diet, I realized how dependent I am of my phone. Without my phone, I have no way to talk to my friends and family. I feel as if most people are too dependent on their computers, the internet, their phones; it has gotten to a point where it exceeds what is normal. We should be okay with having our phones and computers taken away for a week… Nothing would change, we would still be living the same lives, so why does it seem like without these possessions we won’t be able to function properly?
In addition, we have seen more and more cases of cyber bullying. In the past, parents were concerned about their kids getting bullied in school, but now they have to worry about their kids potentially getting bullied in school and on the internet? That’s a bit much if you ask me. People are misusing and overusing the new technologies that surround us. It is fine to go online and do research for a paper or look up some information. But it is not okay to become an online bully or replace spending time with your friends with an online chat. I feel as if the cyber world has taken over our worlds, and we’re just sitting back and letting it happen because we’re so dependent on it.
Oct 07, 2010 @ 04:27:05
Paola
I laughed out loud (yes, I refuse to use lol…) when you mentioned dependency on phones. I’d have to wholeheartedly agree with you because I’ve been doing all of my posts for this site from my iPhone, even my main blog! Win…
Oct 08, 2010 @ 02:50:14
I agree with you on the phone part. I too felt lost without my phone!
Oct 10, 2010 @ 20:49:51
Paola,
I felt so lost without my phone, too! but I’m still questioning dependancy on it… does that mean we’re dependent on the physical phone, or the need to communicate? I know for me, I don’t have internet on my phone is it’s really about the need to communicate rather then actually needing my phone as a means to communicate
Oct 13, 2010 @ 04:06:32
I also felt lost without my phone, mainly because I purposely stopped using it. If I had been doing something interesting, I don’t think I would have noticed.
Oct 07, 2010 @ 04:20:18
Although new media has created a general sense of unity, we must be wary because at the same time it may lead to a sense of disunity in that it creates images of us (some unintended and unwanted) that stick around for better or for worse. Facebook in particular allows us to look at a person and judge them by their pictures, walls, and info. With a virtual timeline of the subject (extending back as far as they joined Facebook) we can easily judge a person by what is up on Facebook instead of taking the time to get to know a person. With Facebook, a phenomenon like that in the movie “breakfast club” would be highly unlikely in my mind.
Recently, I met a girl that I liked. When we became Facebook friends, I feared for what she would think based on my Facebook pictures. Would she think I’m weird or lame? Will she want to get to know me better or start to back away? Fortunately she opted for the former, but it had me nervous for a while. Likewise, employers have been searching for prospective employees on Facebook, an alarming fact when one considers that pictures from years ago may still be up. Statuses may be scrutinized and a joking insult in your info may be taken seriously. I want people and employers to get to know me and have an idea about what I’m about BEFORE they look through my profile, only THEN can they even try to understand what was going through my mind in pictures both harmless and somewhat shady (and only one of those exists to my knowledge…)
Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, posits that today’s youth will want to, and even NEED to, legally change their name in order to escape the mistakes of their past. We were all teenagers at some point, we have all made some less than exemplary decision, and we have more than likely reported such events on Facebook in one form or another. Although I am of the opinion that prudent judgement must be employed by all users of social media sites, most people haven’t quite reached that realization yet.
My greatest fear is that somebody will look at my Facebook and decide who I am before they actually get to know me. I should think that I have a right to show somebody who I really am in person as opposed to through my profile.
Quetzalli
Oct 07, 2010 @ 14:20:19
Hi T, P, Q: good dialogue, excellent points — you made me think several issues so I’m tempted to jump in here and comment, but will wait a bit and let the debate continue. But just wanted to express my delight about the beginning of this thread!
Oct 07, 2010 @ 18:53:05
I totally agree too Queztalli. There’s also the fact that we all may act differently with kids our age as opposed to our parents, aunts, uncles, younger siblings, even grandparents that are now all getting facebook accounts as well. There’s always the issue of portraying ourselves the way we want others to see us. I know that the summer before my freshman year at college i went through all my pictures and look at my wall constantly to try to see how other people would see me and judge me before they met me.
Oct 07, 2010 @ 18:54:27
sorry typo on your name! – that just further proves how rushed we always are and how little we pay attention to things because we’re doing ten things at once.
Oct 08, 2010 @ 03:02:41
I agree with you on the Facebook situation. People “creep” on each other in order to get to know them. Face-to-face communication seems to not be enough in determining a person’s character. I actually ended up using a lot of privacy settings to prevent people from just looking me up on Facebook. People can’t find me unless we have a mutual friend. My pictures, wall etc are all hidden from “non-friends.”
Oct 09, 2010 @ 20:02:36
Quetzalli, I totally agree with you. When I read a wall to wall conversation with a friend that goes back like 3 years, I realize how young I sounded back then. Are we supposed to be held accountable for things we said 3 years ago? We become different people every year. I’ve become way more cautious about what I write, because these posts will be here for posterity.
Oct 15, 2010 @ 18:23:56
Oh God, agreed again and again. When I look at posts between friends, I think oh god, imagine if people could see this, they would think we’re nuts. Then I remember that THEY CAN. Not to mention the numerous times, Ill scroll down a friends wall and see my friends talking about me (not negatively) and what we did where we were/are. It’s insane.
To follow what Tim and other’s were saying though, I think it’s funny teachers first comments when doing reports and getting credible sources are
-wikipedia is not a credible.reliable source-dont use it. Funny that a supposed online encyclopedia isn’t credible, when it’s sole purpose in comparison to alll the other sites out there, is to provide people with credible information about numerous things. You can learn so much, and yet possibly nothing at all, if you look in the wrong places. Ironic, no?
Oct 10, 2010 @ 20:51:57
You’re point about the girl who you became facebook friends with and worried about the content you had on there is extremely well put and so relevant to my life as well. Literally every single time someone asks to be my friend on facebook or accepts my request I check my page to see what kind of content I have up there (even though I obviously already know since it is my own page) and try to see it from their perspective so I can know what they will be thinking about it!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 21:12:53
Quetzalli,
Your points about Facebook really stood out to me. I totally agree that people are becoming more wary of what people think of them based on profile pictures and status updates. Sometimes I find myself about to post something but don’t based on the feeling that people might judge me based on what I write. It’s sad that people can judge someone so quickly based on their Facebook page.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:43:55
I couldn’t agree more!! Just imagine, the future President of the United States probably has a Facebook with all sorts of incriminating stuff! Though, perhaps as our generation grows up, we’ll be less shocked and offended about the comments and decisions people make. Though the relationship between technology and morals is an entirely different subject.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:37:56
Quetzalli,
Excellent points! I definitely sensor my facebook because I don’t want to be judged, but I also judge others quickly. I’m a criminal of judging harshly, then meeting someone in person and changing my opinion about them. Remember Ed Garrity speaking at orientation? He said that it takes 18 future encounters to change a first impression, and a first impression coming from facebook is not always accurate or fair. Definitely dangerous stuff.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:06:20
Now I continue thinking and I ask myself if there is any way to stop the vicious cycle. I can honestly say that I don’t know if it is possible anymore. The image that comes to mind is that of a scene in the Fight Club where Edward Norton’s plan of destroying the buildings of major credit card companies in order that everybody can have a second chance, a clean slate. This was to prove the point that we are all so wrapped up in debt that extremely drastic action needed to be taken. Can such a thing be possible for internet users? Can we hit the magic reset button?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:05:52
Quetzalli, I completely agree with you. I recall when my friends and I were applying to colleges, one of my friends changed his name on Facebook as a precaution of some of the,, well, questionable things that may or may not have been present on his profile and favorite quotes. It is very unfair for people to judge others based only on the “picture and a paragraph,” as said in Match.com commercials. The reason these profiles exist is for friends to connect to each other and make communicating between them much easier. While that has of course been an overwhelming success, it has also led to many not-so-good occurrences, such as cyber-bullying and people being judged based only on their interaction with close friends. I know a few people who joke with their friends a lot, and from the outside it may look like they aren’t nice people, always making fun of their friends, but this is more often than not a complete fallacy. People interact with close friends very differently than they do people they do not know, and judging a person based on these interactions is not very telling. They say the you can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep, but how can you tell a lot about the company they keep?
Oct 18, 2010 @ 21:30:20
Brian, I know exactly what you mean about the changing names on Facebook thing. It has become a tradition at my old high school where starting junior year, everyone changes their Facebook names to something funny so they can’t be looked up when they start applying to colleges. It even becomes a competition then for who has the cleverest fake name. However, I think that’s a main problem of technology: it’s almost impossible to keep things secret. Even with a fake name on Facebook, there are ways to find people. Also, as for privacy in general, it can easily be invaded. Just the other day, I heard a guy talking about how he bought an online people searcher so he can keep track of which girls phone numbers he has. This seemed like such an invasion of privacy to me, yet the casual way he said it shows how technology can so easily be taken advantage of.
Oct 07, 2010 @ 16:06:54
Quetzalli: I definitely agree. I sometimes hesitate in accepting a few friend requests because it could potentially change someone’s opinion about me. A person who hasn’t had a conversation with me f2f wouldn’t understand my humor on facebook. And so before I accept any friend requests, I scan my wall to make sure everything looks appropriate. lol
Oct 07, 2010 @ 23:44:19
In regards to what Tim was saying, i don’t think getting information off line is hazardous. if the website states that some information may not be accurate then its viewers will use the website with caution. i remember when i was in high school, my teacher would always say not to use Wikipedia and that we couldn’t use it as a source for our papers because Wikipedia information can be added bye anyone. but actually Wikipedia is an accurate source of general information about important things. Wikipedia has ppl check each post for its accuracy. little unimportant things, like Taylor Maze’s high school stats are left uncorrected though sometime. The other day in class we watch a clip of Did You Know? and it said bye the year 2048 we will have computers with capabilities greater then all of mankind. thats a really smart computer, so in the future information is going to be even more accurate.
Oct 08, 2010 @ 03:10:53
The biggest communication/media related problem in our digital era is we are all way too connected. There is no need to be connected to the world 24/7. People need to learn to turn off their electronics and stop and smell the flowers so-to-speak.
I agree with Paola, people today are so reliant on their cell phones and internet. As a society, we are over-connected. With the growing use of smart phones, more and more people have internet on their phones–receiving not only phone calls, emails (personal, work, school), Facebook notifications, “tweets” from Twitter, etc. This enormous amount of info is getting sent to one person nonstop! This just seems too overwhelming. Who cares what Joe Shmoe tweets about his encounter at the mall? or what McDonald’s Mary just walked into from Facebook’s map application? I believe most of the information we are getting bombarded with is unnecessary.
Touching on what Quetzalli wrote, Facebook has become a major stalking enabler. Today, after two people meet, usually one of them, if not both look up each other on Facebook–searching their profile, pictures, and/or wall to see what they are really like. As a society, the action on Facebook becomes relevant in real life. “so and so poked me,” “I saw your pictures from Brooklyn this weekend,” “i saw on facebook that you and your boyfriend broke up! what happened?” With Facebook, no matter how many privacy settings one puts up, there is ultimately no privacy. We have become a nosy, “all-knowing” society living off a system that never sleeps–the internet.
Oct 08, 2010 @ 16:35:44
I agree we are all way too connected to each other, there is no room for privacy. If you’re not receiving a text on you phone, you are checking your Facebook status that someone commented on 1 minute ago. Why are we so obsessed with how easily connected we are to one another?
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:32:01
Nicole your post helped me to write my own. I truly believe that we, as a society, are way too connected all the time. Yes, we are social beings who are meant to interact with one another and function together, but privacy is an excellent thing as well. However, because of things like the news feed on facebook or mass text messaging, there are no longer anymore secrets. It seems that if someone wants to find out about our lives, all they have to do is log into facebook or text someone close to us in order to find out. Pretty soon, within a matter of a few hours, everyone knows our business. Some things are better kept in secret, but because of technology, secrets and privacy no longer exist, they have almost become extinct. Furthermore, when we post things like statuses on facebook, many people take them as they want to take them. A somewhat sad status causes people to talk, and this is how rumors start. Constant communication has really hurt us.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 18:47:20
Nicole, I completely agree with you. And another thing is that if you aren’t connected (aka you don’t have a smartphone that has email or Facebook or Twitter), then contributing to face-to-face conversations about what so and so just posted online is extremely difficult. It’s sad that the people that aren’t “upgraded” enough to have smartphones are collectively being excluded from a lot of conversations.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:48:40
Ugh, I hate that feeling! Missing out on a little bit of information can actually end up being a lot in a social context.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 21:08:03
Nicole, I totally understand/agree with everything you wrote about. Really, mostly because I do go up to people I’ve recently stalked and say “oh i saw those pictures you put up!” It’s almost like we have to see someone’s facebook before meeting them in order to have a conversation with them.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:45:00
It’s funny, y’all, for a middle-aged media scholar, that you bring about fb etc in terms of topic for f2f conversations….
There’s been so much theorizing how television — especially popular fiction series — has helped people to socialize; how TV has provided topics for conversation and even if ‘only’ light entertainment, helped people to discuss important things (relationships, social issues such as race, crime, politics… think of everything from Oprah to the Sopranos and West Wing…). But now it’s about your FB pictures…
Oct 11, 2010 @ 23:38:44
I disagree, secrecy still exists. If you don’t want people to find out about what you did or how you feel, then don’t put it on Facebook. We can still live private lives, we just have to control what information we put out there. However I do agree privacy is a very important problem with communication on the internet.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:48:10
You are right. Thank you for stating that fact. But there’s something almost thrilling about sharing things and facts about yourself, isn’t there? Having researched reality TV this made me think of some strange similarities between them and our FB culture. It’s almost like people share quite a bit about their personal lives to somehow assure others about their ‘authenticity’. What do you think?
Oct 15, 2010 @ 18:14:46
Agreed Markian, however, this is not necessarily always true. My friend got a facebook simply because I told him to and hardly used it, so he thought it would be funny to simply fill his info with how much he loved me and how much i was so awesome (as well as making his pictures all photos of the two of us. He never really logged on again to get on my nerves. This was about four years ago. About a year ago, completely forgetting about the incident, even though I didn’t consider it one (cause it hadn’t crossed my mind) my boss called me to tell me my boyfriend should take down his obsessive facebook because it was the first thing that showed up when I was googled. I was mortified. Not only had I no control over taking it down, but I had no idea people could see it so easily, or that when someone did they wouldn’t realize the funny intention, as I did.
Another example is one of my jobs. I host karaoke and dj at bars, and there have been countless times, I have been posted up on youtube for singing songs or talking on the mic, when I obviously didn’t want that or think it would happen. This is a different example because I guess I should assume maybe it would surface being a public place and singing etc. However, when my relatives in Ireland, whom I hardly see call up my parents saying they can now ‘see me online’, it gets a bit creepy and scary knowing I had nothing to do with it.
Makes you think, and going along with what a few people were saying, as well as you, Professor, in regards to facebook; yes Markian, YOU can choose to keep your life private, but if you decide to go out with friends, or do any kinds of activities with people who do have facebook, and do post their information, you’ll find it very hard for say, pictures for example to surface.
I always think its funny and I always say to my friends, how it’s strange to see pictures of our parents and grandparents as teens or kids. It’s INSANE to think about how my kids will see pictures of me on someone’s facebook or some online source, even if I try to keep my life private. Why is it, we have to make more of an effort to keep our lives private, and no effort at all for people to know and see and even comment on, our whole lives to present.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:17:21
Nicole,
I totally agree with you, both with the being “too connected” to everyone at any given time, and that facebook enables
“stalking.” As much as these aspects of the digital world may seem like problems to us, it seems as if we are too involved to ever be able to solve them. I think that it will only get worse as time goes on and younger people grow up with even more intense technology.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:27:44
I completely agree. And I think it’s interesting to think about how this reliance and addiction to digital living affects our interpersonal relations. While it makes it easier to keep in touch with people from, for example, high school or summer camps and what not, it also makes it so that a lot of these relationships are based on two minute long facebook chats, or a couple of text messages a week, or even just writing on their facebook wall once. And so we consider these people to still be our friends, our close friends, without realizing that not only are we not keeping in touch and having fulfilling relationships with our friends from our past, our inability to recognize this is preventing us from forging relationships with people in our present who could most likely offer more fulfilling, healthier, more personal relationships.
Oct 08, 2010 @ 12:58:34
Julie, Nicole, Darryl: Thanks for broadening the debate 🙂 Good comments!
Oct 08, 2010 @ 16:33:27
Digital living has not only helped society acquire more knowledge, but at a much faster rate then what was known before. Now with the technological advances that we have, we can gain plentiful information in such a short amount of time. Although this sounds great there are many problems that come with this fast-paced learning. What information is important? Is it valid? The internet can lead people in so many different directions on so many different topics. How is one sure whether the information is valuable? This is only one problem that comes with this digital era we are now living in.
Growing up with technology, our generation is literally living digitally; Macbooks, ipods, iphones, videogames, etc. All these tools are resourceful, but there are downsides as well. Always being connected to the internet may not always be a good thing. Where is privacy? Everyone is always on their cell phone either texting or checking Facebook, or on their Macbook video chatting with their friends miles away. And when we are without these resourceful tools we immediately feel alone and disconnected from the world. Will this ever come to a point where face to face communication will end because of our obsession with “digital living”? Will digital living exceed living prior to these technological advances?… It has already started.
Oct 09, 2010 @ 17:31:27
Yeah Laura I agree, our dependence on technology is becoming especially scary…I mean geez the rise of the smartphones is a prime example. People can just watch movies, and check their emails and send IMs on the go…its crazy. Someone saw my phone and went “eww what is that old thing?!” I told them, its a phone its purpose IS to talk to someone not check my emails lol
People are just taking those simple things for granted now a days and now I hope it doesnt get to the point where we become like robots to eachother
Oct 10, 2010 @ 02:01:34
Your argument for sure resonates; it is repeated in many media diet posts of our last assignment… Can you think of a concrete example on what that might mean to us as a society?
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:28:46
Laura your post makes a lot of sense. I know many people feel that things like wikipedia provide false information, but it is true. I can easily go on websites such as these and post information that many people may believe to be true. Furthermore, I know I am guilty of googling things for papers and clicking on the first link that seems like it knows what it’s talking about. However, can all of this information really be trusted? This makes me think about what we discussed in my media industries class with Minna as well. Much of the media that we consume is produced by a few major companies. How can we be so sure that this news is not spun in their favor? We cannot take everything we see as totally valid, and because of technology, many things have begun to lose credibility and legitimacy.
Oct 09, 2010 @ 17:18:15
Yeah Laura I agree, our dependence on technology is becoming especially scary…I mean geez the rise of the smartphones is a prime example. People can just watch movies, and check their emails and send IMs on the go…its crazy. Someone saw my phone and went “eww what is that old thing?!” I told them, its a phone its purpose IS to talk to someone not check my emails lol
People are just taking those simple things for granted now a days and now I hope it doesnt get to the point where we become like robots to eachother
Oct 09, 2010 @ 17:31:04
One of the problems I believe is very worrisome for adolescents and young adults is online abuse. Weve read about problem the past few weeks with the number of suicides recently. Its always been there since the rise of the internet and social networking sites but now the problem has been put in the spotlight again. To go alone with that Quetzalli wrote earlier, people do judge others by their facebook pages and in some cases that may become someones representation of how another person is. By their likes and interest. But there are some jerks out there sadly who take that to another level by publicizing their abuse of others. Nasty rumors or very private information can be spread with a few Facebook Posts. Ive read about people revealing someones sexual orientation through statuses. Some people these days are just pure grade As****** . Excuse my language but its true
This isnt just limited to Social Networking sites such as facebook.
I am someone who plays Xbox Live. Its a video game system that allows me to play games with people all around the world. We can all gather in one online session and play a game of Halo, and chat with eachother through our headsets. Now we dont have to know those people personality and since people are in the comfort of their own homes, they say mean things they wouldnt say in person. So Ive actually first hand hear people cursed out and abused over some stupid miscommunication in the game. There are even Youtube videos on these happenings. Sometimes the person just doesnt deserve that treatment, and other times they do.
And not everyone is tough enough to take it. Some kids and teens may be genuinely hurt or insulted by another players comments, And it expands Online Bullying.
Dont get me wrong, its positive outweighs the negative, because there are as many good people out there as bad. But some people just find amusement in the misfortune of others and its a problem for kids growing up in this new digital age
Oct 10, 2010 @ 02:03:19
Interesting, the different platforms of online bullying, enabled by the virtual nature of communication… Have you ever encountered any such situation yourself? What could that mode of communication, if it continues to expand, mean to our society as a whole in the future?
Oct 10, 2010 @ 19:32:23
Yeah there have been a few times where I have been in an online room and hear people who have been relentless and vulgar for no concrete reason what so ever. Cursing someone out also for their performance in the game, and even age if they are young enough. I personally “Mute” these people as there is an option to shut certain people up.
This would affect society as a whole if it continues to expand because it would affect the kids of this generation as they grow. Making them more hostile, passive, passive agressive and even more socialble depending on what kinds of people they come across. Basically things will be very unpleasant for many people
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:42:49
I like the term “different platforms” of bullying. A perfect example is the recent case at Rutgers where a young gay man was secretly videotaped by his roommate, the video was posted on line, and the guy ended up killing himself. That bullying wouldn’t have been possible without all of the new technology like Twitter and Webcams.
Oct 10, 2010 @ 16:56:39
I agree Isacio. I also see the bullying on Xbox live. It is hard to prevent bullying like this on video games because there is no way to tell who is saying it. Everyone does it because they feel better about themselves. They feel free to say anything behind the TV screen.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:25:07
Isacio, I totally agree with your post. I too play online games at times and some of the people you meet are absolutely terrible. They think that just because they are behind a computer screen, they are able to say anything they want and no one will be hurt. However, the truth is, words hurt. I work at a video game store and I cannot begin to tell you how many little kids come in talking about how many people they killed in Call of Duty and Halo, and the language that these little kids use is unlike anything I ever used when I was that young. They hear it online, and what they hear sticks with them. They think that if they can act tough online, they can act tough in the real world, but the truth of the matter is that’s not the case at all, and unfortunately, many people are losing the ability to see this.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 10:43:08
Many thanks for the real life examples, I & T!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 13:52:25
Just read this: Parents, teachers and psychologists fear that teenager/adolescent + cyberbullying & communicative style has now begun to trickle down to kindergarden real life… http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/fashion/10Cultural.html?src=me&ref=style
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:59:25
That’s crazy!! My mother is a kindergarten teacher and I’ve never heard of stories like that. Then again, the school she teaches at isn’t particularly well off or have helicopter parents. Wow, I guess cyber-bullying and whatnot isn’t going away anytime soon. Just look at the situation at Rutgers. I hope all the recent advocating against cyber-bulling helps curtail it, but I don’t know…
Oct 11, 2010 @ 21:02:42
Isacio,
I completely agree with you here. There are some people who go so far beyond what is normal for face-to-face interaction, in terms of abuse and bad language. I think its completely a problem that people forget their manners!
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:13:26
Preach, Isacio, PREACH!
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:05:05
😉
Oct 09, 2010 @ 20:56:43
The media brings a lot of issues to the table, but it is also an issue unto itself. As a society I think we’re brainwashed. We use the internet for entertainment and we do it constantly; soundbytes, 3 minute video clips, tweets…..we really are becoming the future that Ray Bradbury foresaw. Our addiction to technology is real, as proven in our media fast. A lot of times if I’m in the middle of watching a show or reading something on the internet and someone comes over to talk to me, I get unreasonably irritated when I should actually be valuing human interaction over something I can do at any time of the day. A chance to talk with someone is different each time. I think we miss out on a lot because we spend our time doing things that don’t need to be done. And I wonder how much more productive everyone would be, including myself, if we didn’t distract ourselves with random crap on the internet.
I also think Quetzalli is on point. It’s so important to note that the image we create for ourselves online lasts for much longer than we realize. We don’t know how online profiles will impact us in the long run because we’re the lab rats. No other generation has had this unique issue, and we don’t know yet how much it can affect our lives.
Oct 10, 2010 @ 02:06:17
Yes E & Q: good point about the self-creation… It used to be about looks, education, hobbies, tastes in music, food, movies, friends, career — now all of that but also polished into a virtual format…
Oct 10, 2010 @ 16:51:58
I completely agree with Isacio that the biggest problem in the technology and media these days is the online bullying. I just read an article about the recent suicides of young children going through bullying in school and on the internet. It is bad enough at school when everyone is making fun of you, but when you go home and have 20 emails from kids making fun of you because of your weight, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc…, it becomes overwhelming. You have nowhere to hide.
Technology is getting way too personal and public in my opinion. You see it in the case of the suicide at Rutgers University. A Rutgers freshman secretly tapes (with a webcam) his roommate in their room with another man. He posts on his Twitter, “Anyone with iChat, I dare you to video chat me between the hours of 9:30 and 12. Yes, it’s happening again.” So, everyone who saw that ‘tweet’, video chats him and sees what is happening in the room. Three days later, the roommate posts the following on his Facebook… “jumping off the gw bridge sorry.”
This is an extreme but sadly a very common case with technology these days. Cyber bullying has become a huge problem because the bullies don’t need to reveal who they are. They can hide behind their computer screen and make lives miserable for others so that they can feel good about themselves. But it is something that is very hard to prevent.
Oct 10, 2010 @ 21:01:41
On this thread, everyone has commented a lot about how we are “too connected” and “too dependent” on media and communicating, which I agree with a lot. I think the biggest problem I have personally had is the drama it creates. Not answering a text or phone call can result in a worried parent or even a friend who thinks you’re mad at them. Not replying to someone on facebook means you don’t like them or are choosing to neglect the comment. A girl writing on a guy’s facebook wall who has a girlfriend often causes a fight between the boyfriend and girlfriend. Friends who talk about other people on their facebook, thinking they are being inconspicuous but really are not, cause drama as well. Not all of these things have happened to me personally, but I have seen instances of them through friends frequently. Therefore, our “depedance” on media seems to cause drama in our lives as well, though much more in our generation then the older generation.
In my Introduction to Media Industries class, we talked about social currency – where the media (things posted on facebook, movies, television shows, etc.) become topics of conversation – and if you are not up to date on things that everyone else is, you are often left out or even made fun of/looked down upon for not knowing about a movie or tv show, etc. On plenty of occasions I have brought up films, or a tv show I’ve seen recently and the people who join in are very engaged in the conversation, where the people who haven’t seen it sit there quietly. If someone brings up something that I haven’t seen yet, I feel very left out of the conversation.
It’s just interesting how media and speaking about media can make people feel extremely engaged or inversely extremely disengaged in other’s lives. Media has a very positive impact on relationships in the sense that it allows people who are far away and unable to see each other stay connected, but it also has its downsides as mentioned.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 00:57:13
A: great insights about social currency. Thank you for bringing up the concept!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:22:16
Hey Alyssa I very much agree with your belief that media and communication cause a lot of drama. Although it has never happened to me, I have seen couples break up over something as foolish as someone writing on a person’s facebook wall, even if it is completely harmless. We have become too connected and as a result, many people become worried that they are perhaps being talked about through text messaging or instant messaging, and many parents in their attempt to become affiliated with the new digital age feel that if they are not in constant contact with their children, then something must be wrong. I also agree that since there is so much technology and things in the media today, when we are not up to date on something, we feel left out and are maybe even frowned upon at times. That is definitely one of the biggest problems facing communication in our digital era today, great post!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 20:55:48
Alyssa,
I completely agree that the constant dependence on technology has been a key instigator of drama. I feel that people often getting more self conscious on social network sights and misunderstand a message that is sent to them. This causes fights and unnecessary drama that wouldn’t have happened if the message was heard in person. I also agree with your point that if we aren’t up to date with the newest shows and technological advances, we can be completely lost in a conversation. Our communication has started to rely on these media devices.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:59:02
Alyssa,
I couldn’t agree more! Staying connected with the world is one of society’s number one priorities today, and the second a network goes down or cell service is lost, a person goes into a state of mania and panics! (me being one of them). Digital society is the central nervous system for drama, gossip, and secrets – what a boring world we must have lived in 50 years ago, no?!
-KD
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:07:27
What a poignant metaphor!
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:18:07
In my opinion, the biggest communication/media related challenge/problem in our digital era for all of us as a society is the fact that due to technology, communication (as in face to face) has begun to lose its value and, in fact, it seems that people just do not know how to communicate with each other on a more personal level. Don’t get me wrong, technology is great, it makes life much easier, simpler, and faster, and it also saves lives on a medical level, but in a way, it has caused us to begin to almost “devolve” into something less than what human beings are meant to be. Human beings, at our most basic level, are designed to be social creatures who interact and socialize with one another. After all, why else would solitary confinement be used as a form of torture (many people argue that it is even the worst form of torture)? It breaks its victims down into something almost less than human due to the lack of communication and interaction with others. As a result, when its victims are released back into the world, they are unable to function on the level that today’s society does because of the fact that when the skills to communicate are lost, it becomes very hard to get them back. Although most of us are thankfully not stuck in solitary confinement (though many of us may feel as though we are if we do not have our daily doses of technology), because of all of the new technology that is constantly being produced and released, we are slowly losing our abilities to communicate on the most basic and personal level, face to face.
I completely agree with Nicole DeMeo when she says that there is no need for us to constantly be connected with each other 24/7, and I believe that this is a major contributor to the problem that I am addressing. Due to technologies such as text messaging, smart phones, emails, instant messaging, etc., we are all way too connected, and as a result, we communicate through these devices all the time. I had a friend who would say things through text messages that she would not say over the phone or in person, and many of us are guilty of this as well. Therefore, when it comes time to actually interact on a more personal and face to face level, we are left with nothing to say and therefore sit in silence. We spend so much time communicating on a technological level that we do not develop skills to communicate face to face and in person. It’s easy to say one thing by typing it through a text message, but many of us find it difficult to say the same thing in person, and therefore, we have begun to lose our abilities to interact with each other in the way we were meant to interact. After all, how many of us are not guilty of text messaging or emailing someone who is in the room next to you? I know I am. I have been friends with people who I have communicated with mostly through text messaging and instant messaging, and when we actually did meet in person, the conversations would be empty and dry since neither party had the ability to communicate with the other in person because everything had been said through technology. As a result, these friendships desolved since communication is the most basic foundation of any relationship, and without the ability to do just that, no relationship (be it professional, friendly, or intimate) will be able to survive.
Many of us in today’s society and today’s day and age have gotten way too comfortable with communicating through technology, and where has this gotten us? Not many people know how to traditionally communicate anymore and if technology has truly caused us to devolve, what is going to happen in the future? My theory is that human beings will become something less than what we were meant to be, beings that are not able to communicate personally and with one another because we lack the necessary skills that communication has taken away. Yes, communication has been made easier by technology. If need be, we can instantly get in touch with someone in the event of an emergency or just to say hello. However, technology was not designed to replace our vocal chords. We were given this technology to communicate with each other when face to face interaction just isn’t possible at that moment. Despite this fact, many of us have become too comfortable with technological communication and even too lazy or awkward to attempt to strike up conversations when in the presence of others. As a result, we feel like we are unable to communicate without our technologies, and this, I feel, is the biggest problem for communication in our digital era due to technology in today’s society.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 02:24:57
Good thinking, good argumentation. May I challenge you a bit further and ask you to envision what the erosion of certain kind of communicative skills and abilities to connect f2f might mean in a more macro level, say, for political participation, citizenship, democracy… Yes, I’m challenging you Thomas!
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:51:50
I feel that on a political level this lack of f2f communication and the fact that our communication skills are disappearing will affect the macro level in a very big way. We are the future leaders of this country, and as the future leaders, we need to be able to communicate with the people that we lead. However, how will we be able to do this if we struggle with communicating with one another on the micro level? We cannot text message important information to the country or instant message our ideas to members of the workplace during meetings, everything that we do in life on the macro level all relates to how we handle ourselves when communicating on the micro level. Therefore, when communication on the micro level becomes hard to do, communication on the macro level will seem almost impossible. We cannot keep relying on technology to do everything for us for the rest of our lives. If we do, we will face the consequences.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:21:58
I couldn’t agree with you more! I have heard from multiple friends how they are more comfortable saying certain things via text message or instant messaging than they would in person, especially when it comes to confronting someone about a problem. I admit that I feel the same way sometimes. I think that hiding behind our phones and computer screens can certainly affect our ability to communicate effectively in person.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 03:02:25
One of the biggest problems with digital media, as I alluded to in my last blog post, is the influence of postmodern technological efforts being streamlined into entertainment industries. Obviously, it has opened up a myriad of possibilities, but personally I think that a lack of professionalism and style exists through these means. For example, the movie industry is thriving off of 3D gimmicks from movies such as “Avatar,” a film that should really only be recognized for its visual endeavors and achievements. While some regard it as a huge milestone in cinematic history, I would argue that the film has no core substance to be considered a worthy film, as its plot is extremely derivative. In short, James Cameron relied on the technology, not the storytelling aspect, to draw in an audience. And people love it. I would be deeply interested in looking at a survey posing the follow question to Americans: “Would you rather sit through a 2 hour film with high-tech, 3D technologically advanced special effects or a 1 hour insightful, intricately woven and complicated drama with fully developed but deeply flawed characters?” The fact that Avatar is the most fiscally successful worldwide release and not, say, Citizen Kane, might give us insight into the possible results of that survey.
So what does this have to do with us? Well, to begin with, the French philosopher Jacques Derrida argued that writing was only a supplement of verbal speech: that one could not capture the emotion or essence of spoken word through pen and paper. I would agree and disagree– while certainly a novel cannot move us exactly in the way an actual human experience can, it still can affect us greatly in its own unique way. We can compare it to feelings based on interpersonal relationships, we can comment on real life and try to convey it through written word, but a story told is never as good as a story lived. There’s always that slight disconnect. Still, I absolutely love and completely appreciate the intricacies of literature, that’s why I’m an English major. However, what I can’t really appreciate is the DRASTIC transition of what literature was once considered into what it has become today. The beauty of literature is in its rhetoric: the way its told and how the story is crafted. With the introduction of digital communication, storytelling has drastically changed, not simply in regards to world-renowned novels but also in the simple day-to-day interactions we have with one another digitally. If I am going to tell a story to someone, the way I tell it and the extend in which I go into detail is going to greatly differ in person than electronically.
My main point is, we lose so much value when we would rather interact digitally than face to face. While some of the theories we have examined would suggest that this would provide us with better relationships, I would tend to disagree, for the same reason Derrida would. Digital interaction is a great tool, but we should remember that it functions best when we use it as a supplement. When we rely on it too much, as the trend seems to be leaning towards recently, we will lose all the elements that make humanity so intricate and emotionally rich, and I think THAT is the biggest problem that digital communication has presented to us.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 03:03:55
In short, this response is pretty much in full agreement with Tom Aglio’s, I hadn’t read his comment prior to my post.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 10:41:33
David: Yes. And not only Derrida but most of the theorists dealing with interpersonal communication (think of those we’ve discussed so far) would stress the importance of not only language but human interaction f2f. SIP was the only theory which claimed that the technology mediating communication didn’t make *that much* of a difference…
Oct 11, 2010 @ 18:40:10
The greatest concern i have with communication technologies that have developed in this digital age is there ability to isolate people from greater society. The internet has allowed a generation of people to get there interpersonal connection fix from an inanimate object, their computer. I’ve, as many of us have, encountered many people who are afraid to meet people in person, so instead of pushing themselves to address there problems they begin a new life on facebook, second life, or world of war craft. Although this isn’t the worst thing in the world it concerns me how quickly people have been able to adapt to an “unnatural” lifestyle. Will the further development of these technologies entice more of us to reject life and all the insecurity it brings? In my opinion the greatest moments in my life have happened when i step outside my comfort zone to get what i want. If its friendship people want then they should be going out to meet new people. I think that an addiction to communication technology is like an addiction to french fries. its easy, our bodies say its what we need, but in reality its really harmful for us when we become addicted and stop eating anything but french fries. I hope by the next generation we have recognized the addictive qualities of communication tech and can find ways to push people away from them. I doubt this will happen because just like there is a lot of money to be made from french fries, there is a lot of money to be made from insecure teenagers and adults.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:12:18
Eric
I think that our addiction to technology and hiding behind our computers can be explained by fear. People may be consumed by fear that they wont be accepted so they create an online persona that may hide their insecurities. Also, being rejected is a lot less painful for a cyber-relationship than it is in a relationship that is mostly face-to-face.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 04:23:10
I completely share your views. The isolation created by technology is in a word, strange. We have all the tools to talk to everyone we have ever met, but yet we have used this technology to close our worlds. Sure some argue that Facebook is a great way to communicate but I doubt that anyone can sustain a quality relationship over the social network. It’s a very perplexing paradox.
On another note, the isolation created by technology is very time consuming. Although we (my generation) are physically alone more, we have no time to be innovative. I feel that members of past generations made the best of their isolation by expressing themselves in poetry, art, etc. Members of my generation are filling up free time with insignificant events.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:13:14
C, E, Q:
Might be totally off mark here but your posts made me think what a strong motivator fear seems to be in these digital times… Fear of not being connected, of people misreading ‘you’… almost as if fear would be heightened by digital communication (instant, at least semi- if not fully anonymous). Personally, I agree with E: challenging boundaries, leaving comfort zones — way to experience life.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 22:01:10
In regards to Dave McSkimming’s post, I agree with his assertion that communication is losing its value. I particularly like the example he gives of how Avatar would not be a great movie without the groundbreaking special effects (in other words, it lacks a deep plot). But Avatar is hardly the only movie built on special effects and lacking a plot. The same could be said for just about every Quentin Tarantino movie ever made and everything Sylvester Stalone has been in since Rocky. This suggests that we as a society prefer style over substance. Who cares if the characters are cardboard and the plot is rehashed garbage? As long as there are big explosions, blood, and scantily clad women, you have a movie that is bound to do well.
Another media related problem I have noticed is that because of the anonymity the internet provides us, people tend to say anything they want (including very offensive and insensitive things that they would never say in face to face interaction) without fear of repercussion online. You see this very often in blogs (except this one), where people, emboldened by the fact that anything they say will not be traced back to them, tend to leave comments that are just flat out stupid. In fact, this is the main reason I avoid blogs, because I know seemingly every other comment will be vulgar and written in anger and outrage as a response to another post. What I wonder is what causes people to do this? Is it that certain people are too cowardly to tell someone off in person and thus feel the need to do it anonymously online? Or perhaps is it even frustration with their lives in general coming to a head? (in other words, venting)
Oct 13, 2010 @ 22:26:33
Richard, thanks for highlighting the issue of aggressive speech online. People are horribly mean — besides serious hate speech (re: ethnicity/race, sexual orientation, political affiliation etc.) plain meanness flourishes. You question is valid: What drives people to such rage? I’ve encountered something similar when writing columns for the biggest Nordic daily. People would write such vicious responses to me, anonymously, that often had little to do with the content of my piece. Made me think that it’s as if: You decide to write in public (newspaper/blog/FB/…) it’s understood as if you’d ask for criticism, and deserve unfiltered commentary…
Oct 11, 2010 @ 22:17:35
I agree with many students that the biggest communication problem in our digital era for all of us as a society is too much communication. People feel they must be in contact with others so often that it sometimes is a burden. For example I have a friend that is studying abroad. For the last week we have been trying to skype. Because of the time difference and our busy schedules it has not happened yet. She thinks im mad or dont want to talk to her. The truth is I have just been very busy! Because everything is at the tips of our fingers people tend to look further into a lack of response or communication from a phone call or text. If someone does not answer a text look into it too much. The truth is they could of stepped away from their phone or just simply forgot to answer. Another negative contribution to technology is that People feel ignored or bad about themselves because of it. People think they can say any mean thing they want on the computer and it can lead to serious impact on peoples feelings. The boy from Rutgers took his life because his business was put onto the wed for everyone to see. There are no boundaries with the internet which is a BIG problem.
Oct 11, 2010 @ 22:58:09
I think, like many other students, that the biggest problem facing our digital society is the lack of face to face communication. Today we can text people anytime we want and get a quick response from them and carry on an entire conversation. We can Facebook chat someone and have a conversation with them online, and post all kinds of funny videos to their walls. While both of these things are great, they also create a problem. When we see someone that we are so used to texting, but don’t really talk to that much in person, it can be extremely awkward. You feel like the two of you should be so close, but without the keyboard at your fingers you have no idea what to say them. And with some people, they will then text the person to discuss how awkward it was, and then go back to their daily routine.
We lose so much when we only talk to someone over media, like their tone, mannerisms, gestures, and everything that makes them unique. I know that I can use my sarcasm much better in person than in a text. Sometimes where I would say something in a joking fashion in a normal conversation, I will have to use many “haha”s in order to get the point across that I am joking. Using all these “haha”s makes me sound like an idiot, and it can be tough to communicate.
Another big problem in today’s age is the abundance of communication. It seems like we have to update people on every single thing that we are doing at every single moment. People are constantly telling people over Facebook what their plan for the entire day is. This abundance of communication is a big problem for couples. Girlfriends are constantly getting mad at boyfriends for not texting them first, since they believe that if they boy does not text her that they are not going to talk that day. Also, boyfriends can get jealous if their girlfriend takes too long to respond, and he jumps to all kinds of conclusions. A couple that I am friends with texts all throughout every class that they have, remain connected throughout the entire day, and always seem to be talking to each other.
These kinds of things can lead to people to really having any privacy. And while we may desire privacy, people will get mad at us for not responding to their repeated texts, and take it the wrong way. This probably be the world we will always live in, and we have to take some time to ourselves when we can.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 22:28:21
Again, good illustrations about the strangely emotional state and impact of our digital living…
Oct 11, 2010 @ 23:16:56
While many people feel that our biggest problems with communication stem from over-exposure, I believe society’s problems with technology concentrate in a more personal level. One problem most children and young adults deal with is a lack of reading books. I understand, so much happens in life that reading mostly takes a back seat to everything else. Other factors also influence this, these include: too many activities, and preparing for the next level of education, be it high school or college. Children and young adults do not need to read anymore for school, everything we’re assigned is on Sparknotes. Don’t get me wrong, Sparknotes is fantastic, but as a supplement to the original text, not as a substitute. There are movies made out of books that are easier to comprehend than 18th century writing. With all of these media alternatives, it’s no wonder people don’t read anymore.
Another problem that people have stated already, that I am in complete agreement with, is that people do not know how to communicate without technology. This has even happened to me (sadly) in some situations, where I talk to someone about what was on their Facebook, instead of what has happened in their life. People have started not even having phone conversations because they do not know what to say, or how to say it. Almost everything has become either a texting, or a wall-to-wall writing, with no real face time involved in the conversation. In addition to this, a problem with communicating through technology is that people become much more relaxed and feel that it is easier for them to abuse, curse, or otherwise say negative things. I have been on many websites where users simply write just to bash everything in the article. Then other people yell at them over typing, and everything turns into a big mess of internet conversations. But if this situation ever happened in reality, those initial hurtful words would probably never have been said. I attribute this to the fact that the internet provides an anonymous front and people think that no one will ever find out who they are or where they live. But when in real life, people see who you are, and know about you.
It has become a challenge for people to learn how to communicate face-to-face, it has become a challenge for people to read books without help, and it has become a challenge for people to function without technology. All of these are sad commentaries on what society as a whole has degenerated into; it’s scary to think of how the world will be in 20 years, when all of this media has become even more advanced than today.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:04:39
I think that you present really good insight into the problem technology causes for society. I mean, without reading books, where would we be? Also, your point about people almost “forgetting” how to communicate is very interesting. No one really just talks to each other anymore. Everyone is always on their phone either talking or texting. Rarely do I find myself talking to anyone when neither them or myself is texting or about to make a phone call. it is almost as if we advanced too far with our communications technology. It is better to read than to use sparknotes and to talk to your friends about their lives and not their facebooks. However, at this point is is simply second nature almost. I do not even know if its possible to revert back to the time when more people read books than read text messages. Hopefully though, people realize that there needs to be a balance between our technology and communicating on a much more basic level.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 22:29:15
Yes: What do you think your day will look like in 20 yrs? If you’d imagine it?
Oct 11, 2010 @ 23:50:44
I agree with many of the interesting positions raised by everyone, and a few stood out. Emily and Tom’s comments about the incorrect or “bad information” were thought provoking. I would go further to say that the biggest communication/media related problem in our digital era is the slanted way mass media depicts sociopolitical issues. Pre-conceived ideas, culture lenses and egocentric attitudes all affect the transmission of information, and on a mass media level, this is extremely dangerous. It is similar to Quetzalli’s comment about the immediate judgment that occurs when a Facebook is looked at, except at a global, macro level. The image of Islam depicted in the mass media has suffered greatly because of this. Not only post 9-11 but after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, the media paired images of Muslims praying with violent scenes and American flag burnings. This association creates a stereotype that all Muslims are extremists and terrorists. Mass media is the most powerful influencer of global opinion. This is not to say that our era first experienced this problem; it goes back to radios, television, magazines and newspapers. But as the ease at which we can transmit information quickens and the possible recipients grow, negative stereotypes and misinterpretations increase exponentially. Overall, we need to be mindful of this when reading, watching or listening to anything and not let ourselves be caught up in false associations.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:24:40
THANK YOU ALL! Within the past few hours that I spent offline the conversation has blossomed. Dependency, lack of f2f comm skills, privacy, aggressive communication/bullying, dis/misinformation. Excellent points and examples!
Again I challenge you all: how (If) can this translate to broader questions about how we relate to each other as citizens of a society, deal with common social/political problems, and so on… Thank you Jacqueline for already elaborating on that strand of debate!
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:10:50
Minna, your question about how we relate to each other as citizens of a society, deal with common social/political problems relates to the Non- violent communication lecture we had on Friday. Our interpersonal relationships must be strengthened by practicing NVC as they are the root of every macro level decision or outcome. Moreover one can say that as technology weakens these relationships for its lack of authenticity it directly affects our global relationships.
I also agree with Jacqueline that the media influences our opinions. They omit and manipulate information and could fool anyone. It is our duty to remain knowledgeable and do our own research.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 05:58:47
An interesting note about mass communication and politics:
When the constitution was drafted, one of the most pressing matters was the process of voting. As a democracy, a government is to be chosen by the people. At the time however, the concept of a direct democracy was impossible. Instead, the constitution calls for an electoral college in the selection of the president, a grouping of a select few to decide who will lead the country. With modern technology however, we have the ability to have a direct vote, something which would have been impossible 100 years ago. We could take this concept even further and have citizens vote on every bill that passes through congress, creating a true, pure democracy. Is this not the ideal government, formed by laws that every citizen who wished to could vote on? Would such a pure democracy succeed?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 09:13:57
A & E: Thank you for taking up the challenge! E — your point is valid, and highly debated. What would be some dangers of e-voting?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 16:33:53
Jackie- I absolutely agree that this is a huge problem! Media has a large impact on how we see others- especially those who are different than us. With so much information about places we are unfamiliar with both on the news and on the internet, it is hard for someone who has never been somewhere to formulate unbiased judgments about a culture’s people or traditions. I think this also relates perfectly to what we heard about non violent communications last Friday. It’s so important not to formulate judgments about one particular person based on his/her background or even what he/she decides to display on facebook. On the most basic level, we are all people who want to be accepted and it’s important to respect that by refuting stereotypes broadcasted in the media.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:08:55
I think that one of the biggest challenges that we, as a society, face in our digital era is our lack of responsibility and caution when it comes to technology use. We fail to think about the potential risks that our media actions pose. Recently, a 2010 female graduate of Duke University, Karen Owens, proceeded to create a fake senior thesis that discussed, in depth, 13 Duke male athletes with whom she had sexual relations. The PowerPoint included the athletes’ pictures, names, a detailed overview of each individual’s pros and cons, and finally, a rating on a scale of 1 to 10. She sent her project in an email to 3 of her friends in the hopes of getting some laughs. However, what was meant to be a joke between her and a few of her friends soon became the topic of conversation around campus as her PowerPoint circulated amongst her classmates. It didn’t take along for it to go completely viral on the Internet for the whole world to see. As a result, Owens has now deleted all of her social networking sites, and has pleaded with websites to conceal the identities of her subjects. As for the male athletes involved, they feel humiliated and embarrassed. No lawsuits have been filed at this time.
When I came across this story, I was not surprised that something like this had happened. When it comes to the Internet, there cannot be any expectations of privacy. If something is shared with a few friends, it’s shared with the whole world. So many young people think that they are immune and invincible when they post something on Facebook or send a text message. But, with a simple click of a button, all of that can change. It’s scary.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 00:31:50
I agree Betsy. People can be so immature when it comes to the internet. Cyber bullying has seemed to become a huge issue in the last few years. Once something is on the internet it is there forever.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:46:49
This is definitely true especially with the attention cast on bullying in the past weeks. It’s scary to think that anyone, anywhere with a negative message or rumor to spread can reach an unthinkable amount of people via Twitter, Facebook or countless other digital means.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 13:26:15
I agree with you also, Betsy. Immaturity can be the catalyst for someone losing their reputation or even dignity over the internet. Look at all these young girls who send intimate picture messages, honestly believing it is only going to enter the hands of the one person they mean to send it to. The next thing they know, everyone has a copy and many people in her life will never look at her the same. It seems to be common knowledge to not do such things for people our age, but the internet poses some serious risks for the younger population. It almost seems a shame that there is (and rightfully so) such a mass campaign against “sexting,” starting in junior high. Just something to think about.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 22:35:49
Betsy, Christina, Hannah, Amanda:
I’m startled by the story of the thesis. What would drive someone to go to such great length & trouble in creating such a thing in the first place? And all of a sudden — it’s viral. (Same issue with sexting.) This is like meanness magnified manyfold. I begin to formulate a thesis … that somehow digital communication heightens our emotions — we’re more bold, mean, needy when not f2f. Maybe the SIP theorist was right.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:05:03
I completely agree with Quetzalli and others, teenagers today cannot escape the world of communication. There are no such things as privacy or a secret. If someone tells you something private and you just tell one other person it is bound to spread through numerous sources to who knows how many people.
Also, like Alyssa stated, communication through technology causes unnecessary drama that would otherwise be avoided if it weren’t for this constant communication.
Facebook adds this virtual world to our lives that allows us to judge others that we may not even know. Even with privacy settings on facebook, there are ways to find a person, for example through friends of friends and other connections. Facebook takes the ‘six-degree of separation’ idea to a completely new level; people are connected to others they have never even met.
Facebook and other technological communications create this surreal world where people lose themselves. For example, even writing this blog post I find myself forgetting simple English grammar. I have been taught for 13 years now the correct placement of an apostrophe or comma, but thanks to the past couple of years of reoccurring casual conversations through email, facebook and aim, I have to remind myself to include a comma, a period, capitalization and more.
Another problem in the digital world of communication is the assumed dependence upon these items. For example, this past weekend I was away all weekend and did not check my email or my facebook and my friend from home called me to tell me about the boy she likes who she was tagged in photos with this past weekend, I had not seen the pictures and she was upset. Facebook ‘stalking’ is a normal part of our lives and almost assumed by all of our peers, we know more about people we hardly talk to than the people we interact with everyday, it’s just sad.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:28:53
Wow, all of these comments are pretty overwhelming! Not only are they articulate and opinionated, but now I’m starting to feel anxious about what the future holds, in terms of technology. I can’t imagine technology becoming an even bigger part of our lives, but I’m 100% sure it will. It’s crazy how quickly our world changes, and we don’t even notice it. It wasn’t even a century ago that radio was the next big thing. Wow.
Anyway, my post overall relates to Jacqueline Tozzi’s. I agree with many of her points about the mass media’s influence and how they slant things. However, I see the government’s involvement with media as a bigger threat in the future. Right now, in an almost twisted way, we’re fortunate to have such unlimited, free access to the Internet and all sorts of media. Even here in the Western Hemisphere that’s not always the case- just look at the situations in Cuba and Venezuela.
Unfortunately, here in the United States, “big brother” has been watching us, and no one seems to care that privacy is practically non-existent. Sure, we give some up on our own, but in no way should that be seen as accepting of legislation such as the Patriot Act. Not to get too political, but President Obama extended the Patriot Act at the beginning of the year, even though he once opposed it. Recently the administration has also been pushing to make it easier to “wiretap” the Internet and phones. All of these developments, and it only makes headlines for a day or two. (This article has more information: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html)
I think over the next few decades, we’re going to have to seriously answer questions concerning technology, privacy, government, and security. I know it’s a broader challenge, but it still impacts us.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:48:15
Excellent point about wiretapping. Plus I just read today that the new html3 language actually will pose some threats to privacy — mostly in terms of how (easily) companies can access all kinds of information about us online.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:00:17
The biggest problem with the information boom that has defined our lives for the last few years is the de-personalization of communication. Text message conversations are much different than a face to face conversation or even a phone conversation. Facebook has also dramatically changed the lack of personalization in communication. People can now connect so much easier than ever before, and while it is a positive for out society in many ways, it is also a significant problem.
The difference between what people are comfortable saying to each other using a computer or cell phone and what people say to each other face to face or on a cell phone is astounding. It is so much easier to simply enter a few letters and words to create a sentence that would be very difficult to read aloud. One example of my own behavior that I believe supports that claim is that when I was a younger kid and AIM first became popular, my twelve year old self decided that it would be much easier to “ask out” my crush using AIM rather then face her in person. This also had nice built in excuse of saying that you were kidding the whole time if your crush denied you. It was so easy to hide real emotions online that it would be an easy solution. The lack of emotion in text communication like internet communication or text messaging is also a problem with modern communication. Even with the occasional smiley or emoticon you can never really understand a persons emotions online like you would in person.
Facebook is another example of the lack of personalization in human communication. How many people would actually feel comfortable physically poking the people they poke on Facebook? Additionally the interaction on Facebook that goes on without the other person knowing is in some ways very creepy. One person could know almost everything about another person without any real interaction. Accepting people as “friends” without really knowing them is another alarming practice of Facebook when you think really think about it.
Just the fact that everyone is here commenting on each others essays is interesting because most people would not feel comfortable talking like they are here. I think that digital communication has made communication much easier, almost before people were ready for it.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:58:49
I agree with a lot of your points, Andrew, but I can think of one example of non-face-to-face communication that actually is very personalized: letter-writing. Writing a letter is time-consuming and intimate, and yes, you can reveal information you might not in an actual conversation. However, I don’t think that makes it any more personal. I guess when you’re hiding behind a screen and just typing (as opposed to putting pen to paper) that the anonymity factor comes into play.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:23:03
Technology is a product of our intellectual evolution as humans. Although it is something to be proud and excited about it is also a matter of serious concern. As a society our biggest communications/media related problem is the lack of skill we are acquiring because of our dependency on all this new technology. For example penmanship is getting worse, interpersonal face to face communication is suffering and people are depending on calculators for simple problem solving. Recently when on a road trip, I thought about how people use to use maps to guide them places but now we rely on GPS systems to get us from point A to B. I would love to experience the road the old fashion way by using a map but maps are no longer used as people don’t learn how to use them. I myself can’t accurately read road maps. Our generation’s short comings when compared to older generations are all due to our exposure to technology. Sure we know how to text and use the computer better than our elders but we are no longer relying on ourselves but on technology to do our deeds.
Christina, I totally agree with you. Our relationships and expectations are changing much like everyone else has been mentioning in their post. Just because we have these speedy devices we expect everyone to contact us within a certain time and if they don’t we get sad and take it personal. The thing is that people realize how fast they can get a hold of you and put off communicating with you. If we were relying on letters we would get more responses when we want them. Referring to the bullying, I heard of a school that was monitoring their student’s online accounts to avoid bullying. This is what people have to resort to and this would not be necessary if people used their anonymity in the internet not to harm others but to protect themselves.
Dave, I agree with you about the 3D movies. It seems like every movie that is coming out now is 3D. This special effects feature is more expensive and it loses its value as a 3D movie. I mean before when a 3D movie would rarely come out it was a great thing but now I am pretty tired of it. When I go to the movies with my friends and watch the previews we sigh at every 3D movie that’s going to be released. When Hollywood focuses so much on the graphics and presentation of the movie they seem to lose concentration on the single most important thing being the plot line. One disappointment for me is the final Harry Potter film that’s coming out. I’ve been watching those movies in 2D since I was about 10 years old and now I should be expecting a 3D Harry Potter film. When will it stop?? Are 3D films the new 2D films? As communication theorists ourselves I definitely agree that surveying the audience would be a great idea and the overwhelming results will put an end to this 3D movie madness.
Also Elaine, you mentioned Ray Bradbury. I read his book Fahrenheit 451 and also saw the play about 5 years ago and it seems like we are really becoming this media obsessed society he had predicted.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:41:03
After reading the original question posed in this blog entry (“What, in your opinion, is the biggest communication/media related challenge/problem in our digital era for all of us as a society?”) I automatically thought of the utter dependency on technology that myself and nearly all of the people I come in contact with have developed in today’s digital era, and from reading other entries it seems that others agree. For instance, Thomas Aglio commented that technology has begun to dehumanize society with our constant communication not face to face but through devices. This trend is also evident in Facebook; Quetzalli’s anecdote regarding the judgement people cast solely based on Facebook photos or the like is an extremely prominent trend today. I myself am guilty of judging someone based on what’s on their profile as opposed to what they’re actually like face-to-face. The fact that one can create an online persona that people take beyond face value is an unsettling aspect of digital communication; someone has the ability to paint themselves in any way they want online, and this skewed character is the one that most people can easily come in contact with.
Richard Cibrano mentioned that many people are emboldened by the anonymity afforded by the internet which hammers home the negative aspect of social networking and communication that is screen to screen as opposed to face to face. Unfortunately for all of us living in this digital era, dependency on technology for communication and the likelihood that people aren’t what they seem paints a grim future for interaction in the years to come.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:46:18
After reading the blog entries regarding “digital diets,” I came to the conclusion that we, as a generation, may not be able to live without technology. It’s almost scary. And it’s even scarier to think that technology will continue to become an even larger part of our lives in the future.
Throughout my experiences with technology, I have encountered TWO major problems with it: unreliable information and misinterpretation of dialogue. The internet has made posting information accessible to the general public. Take Wikipedia.org for example. If I really wanted to, I have the capability to write an article about myself saying that I am a famous actress. I also have the capability to edit an article written by another author. In other words, I could edit John Lennon’s article and write that he is still alive and well today, writing music! I admit that I have used unreliable sources such as Wikipedia and Sparknotes, but I am not the only person. Once something is posted online, we tend to think that it is a fact. We must realize that this is not ALWAYS the case. In regards to the misinterpretation of dialogue, we must be careful these days what we write in text messages, e-mails, and instant messages because a tone cannot be conveyed well via writing. Certain punctuation marks or capitalization can sometimes convey an unwanted tone. For example, ending sentences with a period implies “shortness” or “snippiness”. It sounds silly, but I admit that I have interpreted words in a negative way when in reality, the sender may just be grammar-conscientious.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:02:28
Misinterpretation is a big deal. I guess that’s developed from the depersonalization Andrew discussed. As for the “media diet” thing, I could totally see it that as a trend, a few years from now, bragging about how you can go without e-mail for x amount of time. I think we could survive without technology, as long as we aren’t surrounded by others who are engaging it. The people who had more of an escape, like a trip, were more successful without using media.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:44:14
The reason why people are misinterpreting text messages, emails and wall posts on facebook is because they are losing their sense in communication skills. People take things too literal, and now there is a code and this “special language” where we have to write “lol” to imply we are joking or a smiley face to imply that we are happy, or we want to keep speaking to you. Some times people use acronyms that people cannot make out, therefore people will misinterpret messages or take the message the wrong way.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 12:01:02
Katie, Sarah, Ashley. Thanks for highlighting not only the misinformation issue but the misINTERPRETATION question — something we’ve been dealing with throughout our discussions about intrapersonal communication. Do you think we’ll develop a new sense/sensibility in decoding texts, IM etc.? Do you think there might even be a new language (think of all the emoticons that have already been developed 😛 )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emoticons
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:57:07
My first instinct was to say that there is a lack of personal communication nowadays, and that communicating over the internet or through a phone can cause unnecessary drama. Then, after reading other blog entries, specifically Thomas’s and Alyssa’s, my thoughts developed. I saw a connection between the two ideas. There is tons of drama and judgement because of the lack of face to face communication. We don’t see the nonverbal cues, like posture, facial expression, etc, and often times we don’t hear tone of voice either. We can read the words on the screen of our phone, but we can’t read body language, and I think that causes most misunderstandings, aka drama.
Then, there is the fact that because we are using texts and instant messaging to communicate more than we communicate face to face, we are slowly losing our ability to read nonverbal cues. I did a little research and I found this article. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574348493483201758.html
Basically, people of our generation are losing the ability to read nonverbal cues because we spend an average of nine hours a week on social networking via technology. This is, in my opinion, the biggest problem that comes with our obsessive use of and dependance on technology.
Imagine a word without nonverbal cues. The art of sarcasm will be severely diminished. Huge problems could arise in close personal relationships, as they already do, and even create political issues. Unnecessary conflicts arise now and will arise in the future because of the use of technology rather than face to face contact.
I don’t think texting will ever be replaced with video chatting, but the fact that Skype and Oovoo are growing more popular is a good sign for our society. Visual signs of emotion/expression and tone of voice are more prevalent in video chats. Let’s hope that this popularity continues to grow.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:00:04
As I finished writing this, my friend came in and said “you have computer eyes.” He meant my eyes looked like they were in pain/really tired because I had been staring at the screen for so long. It made me think of another issue – computer screens aren’t necessarily fantastic for our eyes/vision. Just a funnt little note I thought I’d mention.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:35:41
I agree with you, thats funny because my friend just told me I look sleepy after I get out of the computer. Your right, computer screens are definitley not good for your eye sights, I just wonder about those computer addicts who stay on the computer for hours non stop. Dont they ever get tired or is it just laziness? lol
Oct 12, 2010 @ 09:11:04
Amy, I second to Sarah’s comment: Thanks for sharing that article. Great material for us!!
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:07:51
That was a great article! Honestly, I had never thought of that before, that we are less capable of reading non-verbal cues. It reminds me of this summer, when one of my co-workers and I would instant message on facebook while we were at the office. I would use my usual emoticons until he told me that it was unnecessary because he could see my reaction to the messages from across the room.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 02:58:49
I have spoken about this before in my prior posts but I believe that this question opens up a can of worms as far as the problems of communication for us as a society. The biggest challenge/problem in my opinion is a sense of detachment from other people. I understand that communication and the advancements in communications technologies are supposed to link us to more people in less time, and things of that nature, but at what cost is it to our society? Is speaking to someone on the phone really is good as talking to them in person? And texting…..can we really get the full effect of a real conversation simply by seeing words and not hearing or seeing another person? Communication comes at the price of detachment from others while still being connected to them.
In addition, it is not only detachment from those who we are communicating with, but also detachment from those who ARE around us. If I am texting or calling someone, I cannot connect and communicate with those directly surrounding me. I am detached from society in that way. A person using a cell phone or computer or whatever communication device they may be using cannot effectively communicate with those around them. Yes they may communicate, but with attention divided, it is not whole-hearted.
Ultimately, the problem of detachment cannot be fixed because it truly is a matter of opinion. Some people may not have a problem with the way people communicate with others or who they may communicate. However, just because it isn’t going to be fixed or can’t be fixed doesn’t mean it isn’t worth considering and understanding.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 15:12:36
Joe — and others, too: can I challenge you further? Isn’t this a question of attachment/detachment (we are attached if not addicted to be able to be connected, as noted by so many on this thread and before). What does this mean? If we are detached, can we still continue feel like citizens; can we feel connected as a community, nation? I’m trying to take a broader view here 🙂
Oct 12, 2010 @ 03:27:25
Hmmmm, what is the biggest communication/media related challenge in our digital era for all of us as a society? That is a question to think about. I mean now we like to communicate indirectly. Back in the day if we did not want to talk to a person face to face, we would use the telephone or cell phone to call and talk. Now, just so we wont have to actually keep up a conversation, we text, we email, and we facebook eachother. We are loosing our senses to communicate with people because technology has corrupted us that much. Not only has technology made us communicate with others indirectly, but now the art of handwriting is dying off. We are so used to texting and typing on our Mac computers and Blackberry phones, that we are forgetting how to handwrite. I mean, what if people start to forget how to handwrite? Think about it, texting and typing are not the only ways to reach out to people. What ever happen to writing a simply letter to your cousin who lives in California?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 04:58:40
I think it is so interesting how many people say that being “too connected” to each other all the time is a problem. It is even more interesting when they tie receiving e-mails and facebook notifications to their smartphones into the problem. However, it seems to me that people only ENABLE the “problem” by setting their smartphones to receive these notifications. If they thought it was such a problem, they would avoid the constant connection to begin with.
Although facebook is coined a “social network,” I think everyone would agree with Quetzalli when he says that it is a “stalking enabler.” But, aren’t you enabling your privacy to be “stalked” just by merely putting your information and pictures up on your page? Someone mentioned this before, but as much as you can control your privacy settings, your page is still going to be viewed and your activity is going to be noted on your friends’ facebooks. Can this really, then, be a problem you can legitimately complain about if you are the enabler of the problem?
I propose, then, that the biggest problem of the digital media world is the anxiety about time as we have discussed in class. Given the day in age, I, as a student, have no choice but to be digitally connected each day. Granted, it is my choice to go as far as to receive e-mails to my smartphone, but I do not classify that as a problem because I use my free will to choose to do so. However, I am the first to feel anxious when digital “time” does not seem to be going my way. Digitally speaking, the faster the response, the better for me. However, people get used to this mindset, including me, and quickly forget that quicker is not always better in all life situations. We need to learn to separate digital from life.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 15:10:34
Haha I agree with what you said about how even though we are all stating that we are so dependent on media and how much of a problem it is, most of us are probably on facebook as we write these blog posts.
It’s so hard to turn away from the digital world when we know that everyone else is relying on it so heavily. I know that the biggest issue with the media diet for myself was the fear that I had gotten a text and was missing something so incredibly important.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 05:12:49
I would say in my opinion the main issue is as much on the dependency on technology; I believe it to be more of the issue of depersonalized communication. Yes you can essentially talk to any given person across the globe at any time, but being able to do this over a live wire communication, there becomes less and less of a need to actually see eachother in person. The need to call people on the phone and have personalized conversations that expressed tones in voice and emotions has been utterly removed by text messaging being much quicker and more conveniant. I agree with everyone, remember when you actually went to read a physical book from the library, or send an actual letter to someone with ink paper and licking the envelope closed? i wish it was the 20’s again or something personally haha
Oct 13, 2010 @ 15:15:26
Ashley, Amanda, Rachel, Matthew: yes. Hyperconnected but depersonalized communication? What do you think about any possible broader + / – consequences of this, I mean to us a s nation, to communities, to our feelings of citizenry and social responsibility?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 05:16:22
Digital society has become the world’s newest theoretical drug addicts. The lengths people will go to (including myself) to find that one bar of service in the subway, or the extreme measures one will take to find SOMEONE with a blackberry charger (even if it is a stranger) may seem crazy to some, but quite normal to others. In my opinion, media’s biggest challenge at this point in time would be “how to keep the people obsessed with us satisfied?” – Like any other addict, people need more and more of a substance after time to keep the craving under control. For some, it may have started with a GameBoy Color or a Barbie Computer Game escalating to XBox Live, the first cellphone with text message capabilities and all lead up to the iPhone, MacBook Pro, Blackberry, iPad, and Kindle’s of the world. As a society, our yearning for more and more of this craze of digital media is gradually becoming our own personal “habit”. My aunts and even my own GRANDMOTHER have become obsessed with Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr! Quetzalli’s claim of Facebook being a “stalking enabler” is, in my opinion, SO TRUE. – How else would my Grandmother find old friends from her college days?! The constant need to stay in contact becomes quite normal and relevant to every day life for people of all ages. Personally, my closest relationship is with my Blackberry currently (so sad, I know). It’s sickening that I personify such a device to the point that I will say that I’ve gone through so much with my phone (almost like we’re dating!). At some point or another, society will need a period of withdrawal from the drug that is Digital Media, and when that day comes, I know I’ll either be somewhere far away from the assumed maniacs (lie) or worse, ONE OF THEM!
Oct 12, 2010 @ 05:50:11
In my opinion, the biggest threat to our society by the new digital media is, as some have mentioned before me, dependence. I see no problem with the new and exciting types of communications brought about by social networks and smart phones, but we must be cautious not to become too dependent on these tools Just one generation ago, most people had more technical skill than our generation. Skills such as being able to fix simple problems in a car, finding your destination without GPS, and even engaging the opposite sex face to face without the aid of texting or facebook are becoming less and less common. While these digital media tools give us access to more knowledge than ever before, we must take advantage of that knowledge and commit it to memory, not simply expect it to always be there when we need it.
Many people who posted earlier have made the claim that we are detaching ourselves from others by communicating in a a less personal way. I disagree with this position because yes, we now use modern forms of somewhat distant communication, but we also spend the majority of our time face to face with other people. I think that tools such as facebook and smart phones have enabled us to create a much larger group of friends and acquaintances than ever before, while also retaining personal, face to face relationships with those we are closest with.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 15:27:23
Ethan: thanks for bringing up an alternative view re: personal nature of digital communication. Remember: the SIP theory that we discussed actually claims that people may develop relationships quicker via digital media (computer-mediated comm) than f2f…
Oct 12, 2010 @ 08:46:31
I believe there are a couple of major challenges facing society as the communications and media landscape rapidly evolves. These challenges are 1) whether the new, more popular ways of communicating are readily available and accessible to everyone, and 2) whether we become addicted to such forms of communication.
First, in regards to whether today’s most accepted and used forms of communication are available to everyone, we must remind ourselves that not everyone in the world has a cell phone or a computer. This is true even when we limit our case study to the United States. Being able to use such technologies in today’s world has become almost a necessity as accomplishing all it takes to be successfull or well-off becomes more demanding. This is evident in how those who are poor or live in third-world countries usually are automatically disadvantaged and less educated and are likely to stay that way unless certain opportunities are presented. The evolution of technology is leading to a world dominated by text messaging, e-mails, video chatting, and so on and so forth. Unfortunately, these things cannot be performed by many people still to this day. Some type of effort must be made to make today’s media landscape for everyone, not just those who can afford it or live in the right place. Everyone must be kept in mind in order to enjoy and fully use media.
Furthermore, though we should take advantage of today’s technologies to the fullest and make them completely available to all people, we must keep these technologies in check. As mentioned in previous posts, communication is becoming less personal and people are becoming much more attached to their computers. Addiction to today’s technologies must be avoided in order to maintain some level of humanity in us all. Abandoning other forms of communication, especially interpersonal communication, in favor of our iPods and Blackberries is a frightening prospect. This is necessary for the sake of human health in body and mind.
In the end, I feel that efforts are still made to make today’s technologies available to everyone and that everybody feels that addiction to computers and cell phones should be avoided. Yet, I still feel that these problems occur without anyone noticing. We may all feel as if we’re not addicted and as if we’re all connected to the media in some way, but the fact is that if we truly believe that, we are blind to the world. Today people are so accustomed to using their phones and computers in their everyday activities that in due time we will know nothing else. There are plenty of people in third world countries who have to live a completely different life and out of the loop when it comes to the latest media and technology. It seems to me that even though everyone is “connected” so to speak, we are still very much disconnected and unaware of what is happening to us as a society.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 15:46:47
Thanks for bringing up the issue of access. Digital divide is still reality, and not only in ‘developing countries’. See, e.g., http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Home-Broadband-2010.aspx
Oct 12, 2010 @ 12:10:07
I whole-heartedly agree with the main points made by my classmates, specifically the main ideas of the issue of privacy and misrepresentation. One issue that I don’t believe anyone has touched on specifically yet is the use of mass communication as a tool of propaganda. Even since the days of WWII where the only widely-used technology in American homes was the radio, the government and other corporations used the device to communicate hidden (and often very thinly-veiled) pro-war messages to the masses. Going back even further, the printing press–one of the first technological machines used on a huge scale–enabled people to create the first mass-circulated propaganda, through pamphlets and newspaper articles,that they would have had to write by hand otherwise. Today, we have obviously moved on towards the extreme. We are bombarded by advertisements, delivered through our televisions and pop-ups on our computers. We have little control over what advertisements we see, as they continuously send us messages that register subconsciously, telling us how to behave and what is the “cool” or “right” thing to do or buy. Through the channel of mass-media and all of its forms, advertisers can disseminate a certain idea about a product rapidly and to a gigantic number of people. Children are starting to use the internet at a younger and younger age, where they can be subject to pornographic or violent pop-ups and advertisements on certain websites, and start to become influenced by what they see without even searching for it. As a few of my classmates brought up, incorrect information is a huge problem in the internet age, and the younger members of our society, who have been born into a world where the internet often reigns over real life, will need to learn to separate that which is true and useful on the internet, and that which is false and harmful. Children are extremely impressionable, and images viewed at a young age have the potential to affect how they live and behave throughout their entire lives. In short, the problem with the internet now is that there are very few barriers. Most content is available on a world-wide level, and can reach all audiences. While some countries censor what websites their citizens can access, in America, there is very little keeping us from whatever we want to access. In short, I believe that the greatest danger of mass-communication (especially through the internet) is that it knows no bounds. It has the ability to control its viewers, both consciously and unconsciously, as well as having the addicting power of a drug (as brought up in many other posts.) While the ability of the internet to reach an enormous audience can be counted as one of its merits, the lack of filters for those who should not be seeing certain information is also one of its dangerous attributes. If we become more educated as to how to use the internet safely and usefully, and recognize that we are being influenced by its advertisements, we will be able to use our technologies more positively.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 03:05:38
Lauren, I definitely agree! Propaganda and media bias is live and well (just look at Fox News, CNN, and CNBC) and people don’t always realize it or choose to ignore it. This also ties into Jackie’s post about the media’s influence over our decisions and whatnot.
Oct 14, 2010 @ 16:21:14
Lauren, Sarah:
An important point about ‘mass media’. I’m almost thinking that people are beginning to lose the idea of ‘objective news’. It’s as if they (we) have just begun to think all informative media content as opinionated and biased — but that it really doesn’t matter that much, we get comfort by hearing the versions about world events we feel comfortable with. I’m being a bit provocative here — what do you think?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 15:07:30
I agree with my classmates on every issue that has been brought up especially that the internet is the biggest problem in our digital era. The lack of face to face communication has changed the way we interact with each other drastically. As many other posters have mentioned before, the way a person communicates through instant messaging or texting can be incredibly different from how they act in person. I know from personal experiences and through friends that many fights that have been fought through the internet got a lot harsher than if it was addressed in person. When communicating online people tend to feel as if they have a shield protecting them and allowing them to say whatever pops into their minds. Communicating online, with the exception of things like Skype, is incredibly non personal. It takes out the factors of non verbal cues such as body language and even tone of voice and makes the conversation seem much more shallow.
Many times sites such as facebook and twitter make speaking to other people completely obsolete. If you are updating your status there seems to be really no reason to repeat that information verbally because 99% of your friends have probably already seen it on facebook. The other day my friend changed her relationship status on facebook and verbally told absolutely no one, yet the next day everyone knew. I find it sad that people are beginning to completely cut out verbal communication. Personally, my favorite part of telling a story is seeing my friends reaction. In my opinion “lol” has nothing on hearing real laughter.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 16:09:29
I’ll be honest, this is a difficult question. Clearly there are problems with how much information we share over the internet and who we are sharing it with. For example, just by having a Facebook account people can see who you are. Ad companies use this information to try and sell you things online based on your interests. If ad agencies know this then I think it’s possible for non-authorized people to find out about it as well. Even though a quick google search of my name will tell you even more. When I did google my name just now most of the information about me wasn’t something I put there or it was about my family. Even when you don’t use the internet someone can still talk about you or read about you and that is a problem.
Of, course having this information online is not a bad thing unless someone is willing to use it against you. As previously stated in many other comments, using the internet to spread rumors or for cyber bullying is clearly a wrong use of the technology. Bullying and rumors would probably have continued without the internet. Only now it is easier to do making it much worse. However a crime more associate with the internet is identity theft which is debatably a worse problem then rumors or bullying.
We will continue to face these are problems among others in the future. I think the overall problem stems from how much we use the internet. Most of the problems we face can be prevented as long as we can control how much time we spend using it and how much we share. I don’t mean we should eliminate the internet from our lives but we should gradually use less and less of it, while making it more secure and private. By doing so we lower the amount of information we put online and protect what we share. As a society we should also monitor how our children use the internet. I don’t mean we should censor everything, but make sure we know what they are looking at and how long they use it. I think lowering our dependence on digital media can eliminate the amount we are harmed by it.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 16:26:45
I would have to agree with most of the earlier blog entries that the largest problem with technology and media is how its overuse has diminished the value of f2f communication. A surprising amount of people (even adults and professionals- and myself included) can sound perfectly eloquent in an email but have trouble articulating thoughts and arguments in person. On a slightly larger scale, this issue could easily effect large businesses and companies that communicate via email either with all employees or between other corporations. It has become increasingly important for large name businesses to have a positive “media image.” This public image is largely fueled by how well companies present themselves through advertisements or how the CEOs sound in written mission statements or even news articles rather than how people sell their products by personally talking about them. For instance, most people looking to buy a specific product look at all the information available about it online rather than going to the stores to see for themselves. For example, when looking to buy a dress for a special occasion, I had the websites of about five of my favorite stores up on my laptop, and I based my decision on which to buy by comparing prices, reviews, and customer ratings. To me, it seems businesses more often use communications on an objective level to sell products with advertisements, customer reviews/ratings, and statistics rather than on an interpretive level to talk about the effectiveness of their products. Therefore, in business/sales, using technology has become a more useful skill than public speaking, making it much more impersonal.
Another issue I see with technology in communications is how constantly people are almost expected to be in contact with one another. With a plethora of ways available to be in contact with multiple people at one time (ie text messaging, emails, and facebook) information can be spread instantly, and responses are expected to be instantaneous as well. This propels our exponentially faster paced society. From friends trying to make last minute plans to grab lunch to a club president getting in touch with all the members to a company trying to design a new product that will be even better than the one a competitor released just months prior, instantaneous communication is key to accomplishing tasks efficiently. As a result, more people are expected to be constantly connected, and therefore always reachable. I see this as having the potential problem of creating a society so fast paced to the point where we will be almost controlled by our technology, and it will become more difficult to escape the hectic, demanding world and relieve stress.
Oct 14, 2010 @ 16:56:04
R, M:
Is it possible? Can we step back and limit ourselves from ‘digital living’? Is is just easier to change the relationship status? Are we just expected to be connected, for work, because of our social lives? What if we really stepped out of, say FB, not only for a day, but for weeks, if not forever?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 16:45:27
I believe that even though technology has greatly enhanced every day communication, there are many challenges that society is facing because of this. Technology has allowed us to easily access information about anything and anyone. Although it is great to find old friends, sometimes we run the danger of providing too much information to individuals who may look to hurt us. I think the greatest challenge then is providing safety precautions to the users of digital communication.
For example, there are always rumors about Facebook privacy statements changing, most of which turn out to be true. Although Facebook warns users the next time they log in that there were changes made, it is easy to miss when all you get is a pop up in your home page, especially if you mostly access it through your phone. Sometimes you just never know the next time your settings have been changed. I personally recall a time when Facebook privacy settings were changed and for a while all my photo albums were viewable by my friends and their friends. I was very angry at this because I am not comfortable with sharing my personal experiences with people I may not even know and it is quite scary that some people may have their information viewable by everyone on Facebook without even knowing it. I’ve heard of people getting kidnapped, robbed, and even murdered because their privacy settings were low and basically gave all the information the individuals needed to commit their crimes. More recently a student in Rutgers committed suicide because his privacy was violated and intimate videos of him ended up online.
There is a thin line between socializing and maintain one’s personal private life to ourselves. There’s only so much one wants to share and even then, only the users should be able to decide who they want to share their information with. I think social websites like Facebook as well as email servers, and chat servers need to focus on providing more safety precautions and better privacy settings for their clients. I think in more recent years, people have gained awareness of the dangers that exposing too much information online may bring and some are beginning to fear digital communication. This probably will not stop the society as a whole from communicating digitally because it is too necessary and fast. However, it will continue putting people in dangerous situations and even death if precautions by these websites aren’t taken.
Oct 14, 2010 @ 16:48:55
Zoe, Nancy: ‘ A thin line between socializing and maintaining a private life’. A good point. Could there be a turn around? Will privacy become a luxury good (e.g., in the future, you pay for extra privacy protection online…) Just thinking… What do you think?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 16:45:35
Using this class as an example, we can see a glaring problem with communication today…fear of criticism. When the ability to remain anonymous or hide behind a screen with no fear of someone publicly criticizing them. We have moved into a more de-personalized state of mind where its accepted to remain anonymous instead of standing up and proudly representing what it is you feel. There are two examples of this depersonalized culture. For starters text messaging. Texting removes the emotion from the message and allows the reader to interpret the message however they please (possibly in a way opposite to the intended one). Conversely, it also gives the sender the ability to change what they meant depending on the response they receive. Remaining relatively removed from the emotions and body language we are forced to put our own meaning to simple words.
Another example we can use is our class, this blog can be seen as an outlet were we cannot be wrong. In class the participation level is about average, however on this blog we see a lot of people who have a lot to say. Using the blog, no one is going criticize or laugh or argue against you face to face, and any responses can be ignored. I’m sure everyone has heard the expression hiding behind the screen. It is truly founded in todays society as technology allows us to do so. We have become a society of anonimity, where you can be a face in the crowd instead of an individual with his or her own ideals. We have become comfortable with following others to avoid confrontation and technology has facilitated that.
Oct 14, 2010 @ 16:44:57
Jon: An excellent comment. But the phenomenon that you treat, perhaps, slightly critically, may well work for our advantage. With all the material to cover and 35 of us in one 1010 class, a lively and participatory dialogue is often a bit difficult to achieve.
Yet, back to those Greeks 🙂 Questions and answers and more questions and more debates were the way to learn (and still are, in many Eastern traditional communities, e.g., in monasteries).
And especially within social sciences and humanities, the uncovering of issues and discovering of their linkages IS the ground work. As my favourite scholar Zygmunt Bauman (Poland-UK) says: Socsci should provide alternative insights and show that things, values, phenomena in our societies are not necessarily self-evident, that they can be changed if they ‘don’t work’. So it’s not about right and wrong. It’s about the diversity of insights.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:20:36
They’re is a lot you can tell about a person from there grammer. It can let u no how they talk in real life, and how they communicate w/ otherz. People do things lyk dis all the time, and people like this, well, their everywhere.
If you didn’t notice anything wrong with the above statement, then you are a casualty of teh internetz. I have found more and more that, due to the internet’s fondness and acceptance of shorthand, our society’s spelling and grammar has gone down the tubes. In the opening sentences, I purposefully used the wrong spelling of the word “there” three times. This is one of the overwhelming things about the internet that I have noticed that drives me mad. It is a very simple concept of words that I see done incorrectly on an almost daily basis. I find myself grammar-checking You Tube comments more often that paying attention to the video I’m trying to watch. So many times I have wanted to comment back correcting the person, but I don’t want to come off as smug and obnoxious. So I hold my tongue, or should I say I hole my fingers from typing back, and painfully ignore it. Some may call me a grammar Nazi, but I just think it’s a good thing to not completely ignore things that you were taught in every English class from first to twelfth grade. There, their, and they’re along with it’s and its, these mistakes often show up on pages such as “Five Grammatical Errors that Make You Look Dumb,” yet they show up more commonly on blogs and web posts than ever before.
I don’t see a big problem with shorthand; many people want to get their ideas across as quickly as possible, especially in IMing instances. While I personally always write even text messages in complete, punctuated sentences, I do not blink at an occasional “where r u?” and the like. However, on formal blogs and web posts where the timeliness of the posting is not an issue, I find these errors unforgivable. Let me know what you all think, am I alone on this one?
Source: “Five Grammatical Errors that Make You Look Dumb” (http://www.copyblogger.com/5-common-mistakes-that-make-you-look-dumb/)
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:32:41
It’s true that grammar has taken its turn for the worst thanks to the internet. So many people have found abbreviations for words and they use it during their everyday instant messaging or text messaging. This use of improper grammar spreads like wildfire. Even facebook has gone on the bandwagon by adding a language option, leet speak.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:55:12
Stephanie, Brian:
Actually, being a non-native speaker this lack of respect for proper grammar is somewhat a relief — as I make so many mistakes anyhow. Just kidding, almost. But I’m thinking of texting and all the abbreviations we’ve begun to use — LAWL.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:43:34
I agree that sometimes revealing too much information over the internet could potentially be very dangerous. There have been several cases where predators have faked an identity to get to know someone without revealing their actual identity. Foolishly, many people, young and old, have fallen victim to the naive ways of talking to strangers. We often hear parents warning their children to “never speak to strangers.” But with access to the internet, children forget this general rule and believe that since it is via internet, nothing harmful could ever come from talking to strangers. Others believe that since they have maintained a stable internet relationship with one another that they know the individual so well that he or she would never do anything to harm them. Internet safety has become a growing issue for not only children, but also adults. People should be aware that revealing personal information on the internet is not only dangerous but could be life threatening too.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 17:56:03
In my opinion, the scariest thing about digital media is the media’s cognizance of consumerism, and its willingness to therefore produce whatever they think will make money regardless of intelligence, creativity, relativity and a great number of other things.
For example, there is the reality show craze. It is, in a word, idiotic. There are some exceptions, but very few. But in this new, media controlled world, we have this new desire for something what I think of as “shiny.” I don’t really have a better word for it. It’s the idea of magazines, with their glossy models, and all these films filmed in the most pronounced, idealistic light, and shiny, bright, colorful iPhones. People are coerced by the media to strive for this “shininess.” As a result, we are losing creativity and gaining this excess lifestyle that can only lead to idiocy.
A few years ago, I watched a movie called Idiocracy. It was a comedy, but it had a good point. In it, America’s “most average soldier” played by Luke Wilson, and a prostitute, played by Maya Rudolph, are cryogenically frozen and unfrozen 500 years later. The society they find themselves in is so overridden by idiocy that humans have evolved into over populated junk food receptacles. This society in the movie came about due to consumerism, mass production, loss of credible information (which was referred to in an earlier post) and big business advertising and owning so much that a Gatorade-like company had been hired to use their product to water the country’s crops.
My point is, with this new digital era, we must be careful about how far we let consumerism take us. While it is part of our society, and I am just as guilty as the next person when it comes to giving into it occasionally, we must be aware of what is real and creative and intelligent, and what has been produced for the sole purpose of making money.
Oct 14, 2010 @ 16:11:42
Julia: You’re practically the only person who highlights the idea of consumerism. THANK YOU for bringing that up. It’s not only about getting a new laptop every other year, and a new phone every year, it’s about how consumerism is deeply embedded in much of the media content, from glossy lifestyle magazines to shoppers’ iPhone apps to ‘gadget porn’ (just learned the term from the New Yorker) blogs…
Oct 12, 2010 @ 18:18:42
I agree with pretty much all of the students and the main points that they all made. The danger involved in mass communication is the fact that face to face communication is becoming obsolete. Lauren commented on how young children are beginning to use technology. My sister is twelve years old and she has a cell phone and a facebook. She is always texting her friends and facebook chatting despite the attempts that my parents make to keep her away. When I was twelve I was not allowed to have a cell phone and facebook was not in existence yet. It makes me nervous for her and her generation in terms of being able to communicate with people without technology. She skypes with her friend that lives down the street, instead of calling her or walking down a few houses to see her. Human contact is vital, and yes it is useful to have all of these technologies (i love and use them all as well), but there has to be a limit. One of my friends was confused when her relationship ended because her and her boyfriend “never fought.” She failed to realize that they never really talked to each other because they texted each other more than they actually spoke or saw each other. Their problems arose from one of them taking too long to respond to a text, not from what was actually being said. There was a time in which people would wait weeks to get a letter from a significant other, and now waiting more than a few minutes for a response is uncomfortable for some people.
Furthermore, always being connected to people can be a problem. I know that even though I’ve found that I am addicted to technology, sometimes it is nice to have alone time and we rarely have that now. The quality of time you spend with other people is then diminished because you are so connected that if you forgot to say what you needed to say, or it was uncomfortable to say in person, you can text it to them as you each walk to your different dorms. When you’re with the person, you are rarely fully there because everyone has their phone out, checking their facebook or the score of a game or texting a friend, rather than giving their full attention to people. If we’re constantly doing a million things at once, how is it possible to do anything well? To do something correctly, it needs your full attention and we rarely give anything that in our world today.
To come back to the problem with children, they have less experience with simplicity and doing one thing at a time. My generation at least existed in a world before AOL. My sister’s generation will be even more prone to not paying attention and getting all they can out of human contact simply because it has always been a part of their lives.
Oct 12, 2010 @ 19:47:51
Julia,
I really agree and understand where you’re coming from when you discuss your little 12 year old sister being dependent upon technology. I have always wondered what the future will look like at the rate technology is currently enhancing, and your sisters Skyping with friends down the street and constant cellphone use proves that technology has become a major part of our lifestyle. I feel that technology has almost become a crutch for the day-to-day life of modern society, and a world without technology is certainly almost unimaginable at this point. Technology is so prevalent today that the teenage world does not actually know what its like to live without cellphones, ipods, laptops, Internet, etc. When I was younger having a cellphone in the eighth grade was a big deal, but now I feel that I could name a few six graders that own the same exact technology as myself. I could honestly say that with the way things are going, and the increase in use of technology of younger children, I am scared of what the future holds…it seems like one of those disaster movies about what “we” will become.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:37:13
Julie, Christina:
J’s sister is indeed an interesting example. I’m seriously wondering about what that is about. It’s just not ‘being accustomed’. If there’s a choice, there must be compelling (psychologically, emotionally…) reasons for why she would choose Skype over f2f. Is there some sort of comfort, safety, about digital communication?
Oct 12, 2010 @ 20:15:05
I commented on Tim’s point earlier, but I’ll say it again: I think that one of the biggest problems that society faces in this era of digital communication is the amount of disinformation that can now be spread through society. You hear it all the time; people sarcastically say something like ‘well I found it on the internet, so it must be true.’ Problem is, there are tons of people who really DO have that mentality. Something read on the internet can automatically become cannon. Recently, I had the unfortunate task of informing a friend of mine that Mr. Rodgers (of Mr. Rodger’s Neighborhood fame) was not, in fact, a former Navy Seal with special forces training and a heck of a kill count to match. While the idea is VERY entertaining (because deep down a part of you always thought he was a closet bada**), it’s not true. My friend, however, refused to believe that it was a fabrication; he read it on the internet and therefore it had to be true. Now, take my story and put it in a much more serious context. It is so much easier to create and spread disinformation about even the most serious of topics. Our society has a greater potential than ever to use this great digital advantage backwards; rather than use the perks of digital communication to better our society and make us smarter it is used to make us blind to the reality of the world around us.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:28:20
Right on. And these rumours go viral in quite serious situations — Barack Obama is not American (there are quite a few sites dedicated to that statement).
Oct 12, 2010 @ 21:43:05
Technology, while contributing in many positive ways to today’s modern world, also negatively influences our daily lives. Simply put, technology has become a crutch to the average persons day-to-day routine. While my classmates have rightly previously stated the negative aspects of technology, such as losing personal connections, forgetting the power of face-to-face communication, living through a phone instead of in the real world, cyber bullying, drama oriented Facebook driven lifestyles, the disclosure of incorrect information, and more, I feel that the most worrisome technological contribution to our world is, generally speaking, the fact that the human race can no longer survive without technology.
Above, Julia speaks of her 12 year old sister who not only has a Facebook and a cellphone but also uses Skype when talking with her friends who live right down the street. Julia questions her sisters actions in asking why can she not walk to her friends houses to talk to them, why is Skype a necessity? Well, the answer is because that is what society is currently accustomed to. The reason most people get cellphones is because everyone else has one and, well, its the only way to communicate amongst other people. One could even say having a cellphone is the “in” thing. In fact, I know one 17 year old boy who does not have a cellphone because he can not afford it, and everyone, when learning that he does not have a cellphone, makes fun of him. People act like HE’s strange and that he leads a weird lifestyle because to the modern person, living without a cellphone is not normal. So, while people act like HE is the weird one because he has no phone, it is actually the rest of US who are “weird” for thinking him strange in the first place. But thats the way things are now. Not being up to date in technology is not “cool,” exemplified when another classmate brought up the fact that people made fun of her for having a phone incapable of accessing the Internet.
Everyone constantly “updates” their lives with the newest and greatest technology in order to fit in, not only socially, but actually its a necessity to update to the latest software or one will find themselves lost when trying to successfully function compatibly with the surrounding technology. This problem of using technology as a crutch is both affecting the productivity and lifestyle of our world. The modern business worlds rely on technology to get anything done, but thats understandable because in order to compete with other businesses successfully a company must be as productive as possible with their technology at hand. The problem here is that if one were to take all technology away, businesses and companies would not be able to perform or produce anything at all, all because our world has become so technologically dependent. So, with that being said, lets pray there are no crashes in the technology world.
Oct 13, 2010 @ 16:35:53
Julie, Christina:
J’s sister is indeed an interesting example. I’m seriously wondering about what that is about. It’s just not ‘being accustomed’. If there’s a choice, there must be compelling (psychologically, emotionally…) reasons for why she would choose Skype over f2f. Is there some sort of comfort, safety, about digital communication?
Oct 15, 2010 @ 01:20:20
Within a few years technology has greatly expanded and overall improved society. The internet has become one of the biggest means of communication. However we are so wrapped up into this media hype and new digital age that we somehow forget about the negative aspects it has to offer. This mainly has to do with the OBSESSION over technology. As written in the other blogs, there is a constant need to be “connected” with everyone at all times. Maybe too much of a good thing can be bad
You can pretty much do anything on the internet to avoid actual face to face communication. From online shopping to even paying your electric bills… you never have to worry about seeing anyone. This proves how dependable we are on technology. For example, today my professor had cancelled class. She e-mailed us at 1:00 to give us our homework and tell us not to come. I didn’t get the e-mail because I was working and I don’t have internet connection on my phone. I showed up to class on time and only three people were there, we noticed something was wrong so one of the students texted a classmate. It turns out that we didn’t get the e-mail on time but everyone else did saving them the trouble.
Unfortunately the Internet can be very harmful to us and we may not even know it. Facebook is the best way to keep in touch with your family and friends. Conversely for some people it has taken over their lives. People these days always feel the need to update photos or their status instead of doing something productive. Someone can easily take a picture that you didn’t think twice about and use it against you. Hiding behind the internet has even given strangers the confidence to cyber bully other people online. It could be seen as harmless fun but this has caused fighting, depression, and suicide for some teens.
A few months ago I read a disturbing article : “A South Korean couple addicted to the Internet left their 3-month-old daughter to starve to death while they raised a virtual daughter online during 12-hour bouts at a cyber café.” I was really shocked to see how technology has negatively influenced people. After reading this I did a little research and found out that the number of people with internet addictions in Korea is growing.
http://www.aolnews.com/crime/article/police-baby-starved-as-couple-nurtured-virtual-child/19384636
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:27:20
Although the story you quote is quite extreme, it’s quite an apt metaphor for the discussion here — we’re more comfortable with and intrigued by virtual communication than f2f one….
Oct 15, 2010 @ 04:22:42
We have without a doubt entered an age where through the advances in technology nothing is private. It seems that every week there are new “hot” scandals involving the personal lives of famous athletes, celebrities, politicians, etc. What we used to think were confidential, e.g. cell phone conversations, texts, pictures sent, now seem to end up all over the internet, TMZ, and ESPN headlines. While certainly entertaining and a source of interest and buzz for the media industry is it really comforting to know that anything you do or say could end up in the hands of millions across the globe? I think that the lack of privacy and insecurity people are now feeling is really a problem for all of us as a society in this digital era. For instance while I along with countless others have been recently amused with the whole Brett Favre phone saga it really disturbs me how seemingly personal things can come into the public eye even from years in the past. There is no end in sight for this type of dirt sleuthing through every aspect of people’s personal and private lives as long as Tiger Woods-esque stories continue to pop up and captivate us. This should make us even more conscious of anything we do or say and is definitely what I see as a problem today and for future generations as the world continues to shrink through technology.
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:29:59
You’re right… I just read from somewhere (I think it was an article about the Gawker blog) that media have always tried to sell with sex, or crime, or (even better) sex crimes — and audiences buy it. But now with the multiplatform media output, things go very viral — and private lives have become very public…
Oct 15, 2010 @ 05:18:57
The biggest problem in the digital era is the great need people have to broadcast their entire personal life online. Social websites like Facebook and Twitter promote a culture of over self indulgence. There is no escaping the huge popularity of these sites. For example: it is three in the morning, a paper is due at 8:30 and a lethargic college student cannot bring himself to begin. Never mind the fact that he had plenty of time to finish this assignment beforehand, procrastination is the only way he knows. Just when the not-so-studious pupil is about to begin, he checks his Facebook for the eighteenth time posts yet another status update. The night draws on and it becomes apparent that the concept of sleep is just a dream. Energy drink in hand, he gives a toast to himself as one of the many other procrastinators in academia in a race against the clock. Now more than ever, the student of today cannot help but waste time overexposing themselves on the internet. With distractions galore on the internet and other media, this is a generation of dilly dalliers.
On the social networking site, users can chat with other users on Facebook IM, tag each other in posts and pictures, write on their friend’s wall, comment their own and each other’s statuses updates and “poke” their friends. Most users find it relatively easy to connect with friends on Facebook and even easier to get hooked. Since its inception, Facebook has garnered 400 million users who spend over 500 billion minutes a month on the site (Facebook Statistics). Logging in may start as an innocent check of notifications online but using Facebook can grow into a massive session of internet self indulgence. Before a user knows it, the valuable time he or she may have set aside to work is almost completely gone.
Facebook Statistics.” Welcome to Facebook. 2010. Web. 12 October 2010. .
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:31:41
Enjoyed your descriptive account of us compulsive digital netizens… 🙂 How about implications for the society at large?
Oct 15, 2010 @ 06:36:33
I agree with Tim’s blog post at the top of this comment section. The biggest problem/ challenge for us who live in the digital age is misinformation. Anything you search for online using search engines like google should be subjected to scrutiny. Since anyone can put things on the internet, how do we know whats the truth and what’s fabricated? That’s probably why in college most professors prefer sources to be books because they’ve been edited and revised by experts (and not like Tim said, “by the Average Joes”). At the same time, because of social networks like facebook or even blogs, a lot of our personal information becomes available online. I’ve heard that the first thing some job interviewers do is check your facebook to see if you’re a good candidate for the position they’re offering. Personally, I wouldn’t want my facebook to affect my career opportunities. Because the person examining my facebook doesn’t really know me, they’ll assume whatever from what they see. The keyword here is assume because people are more than just pictures and statuses. It’s not fair to judge someone based on these things you see on the surface. You might have even created a bad image for yourself before even letting others know you. Another thing about personal information is that you can be almost whoever you want to be online. The internet is a dangerous place. Because of the misinformation, you have to be wary of strangers online. Although it sounds cliche to say, “Don’t talk to strangers”, it’s very good advice. Over the last few years, there have been many reports on the news about how people pretend to be others. You never know if the face behind the online picture of a young girl is actually a 40 year old pervert. In addition, with the creation of sites like craiglist, there have been an increased danger alert online. There have also been reports of people meeting with strangers only to find their meetings fatal or dangerous. Maybe in the future, there will be some regulation on the information being spread online.
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:34:18
Yes, this is such a 2-edged sword. We need to protect our privacy and manage any misconceptions, at the same time we are expected to ‘brand’ ourselves and participate online… A prospective employer might even wonder if you didn’t have a FB profile… What does that say about our society at large?
Oct 15, 2010 @ 13:36:28
If you ask a teenager these days what they would bring if they were stranded on a desert island, more than likely their answer will be some sort of electronic device that has only been invented within the past century. They might say an iPod, a cell phone, a computer—despite lacking a charger and an outlet. We consider these electronic devices to be means of survival and connection to the rest of the world. We rely so heavily on them in modern day society, that we struggle to understand how we could exist without them. Of course, there are many positives to these electronics such as the ability to speedily acquire information or contact someone in the case of an emergency. However, technology may have robbed us of certain things as well. It is upsetting to see children playing video games and glued to their laptops at an age where I know I was playing games outside and running around enjoying life.
Technology is making our society more and more sedentary. Websites such as Facebook have even managed to digitalize our social lives. This is the main problem I see with modern technology and today’s digital media. We become so consumed with the electronics around us that we lose sight of the natural world we live in and the fun that can come with it. We immediately turn to our televisions or computers for entertainment rather than nature or other people. While in a way technology connects us to the world, it also manages to separate us from the world. We can access trillions of bits of information on anything or contact a person thousands of miles away; however, we fail to utilize out ability to step outdoors and learn how to enjoy the natural creations around us.
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:45:46
Cara: I have a gut feeling that ‘nature’ will become a true luxury commodity 🙂 Researching the topic of media diets, I came across articles and comments e.g., in the NYT where people were proudly sharing how they leave all the tech behind in purpose when going on vacation in some remote resorts…
Oct 15, 2010 @ 15:54:01
I’m definitely going to have to agree with Brandon and say that the biggest media/communication related problem in our society today has to do with the extreme amount of disclosure we give others about our personal lives through means of the web, cellular phones, and otherwise. I agree with his comment that sites like Facebook and Twitter promote “over self indulgence” however, for me, the major problem with these sites dwells in the creation of a false sense of identity we have all become obsessed with in the midst of all of this self promotion. As I’ve mentioned in a previous blog, sites like Facebook and Myspace specifically give members free reign to design a specific personality/look/persona that they’d like to project to the world… whether or not it says anything about who they truly are as a person is uncertain. It’s upsetting to me, as Julie and many others said that face to face communication is dwindling… and many of us are beginning to create false beliefs about each other based on things like online profiles. Employers, potential dates, classmates, teachers, and strangers alike are all judging YOU based on the content you submit via the internet and cell phone. Minor issues such as misjudgment of character… and even larger ones involving invasion of privacy, stalking, and identity theft, can all potentially result from this over spill of personal information. Everybody has their own character… you can find the drunk girl who strictly posts status updates th@AT R writeen lsyke thiszXs so people KNOW she had a good time last night, the boy who channels Mike ‘The Situation’ and takes ONLY topless photos on his iPhone in his bathroom mirror at home in order to show off his muscley figure, fake tan, and guido hair do, the people who “like” 100 things per day and post moody, depressing status’ just for a little attention… the list could go on, every character you could come up with is out there. But it’s important to think about how these reality stars we’ve created are actually portraying ourselves. It’s nice to get attention…. but have we all become attention (pardon my language) w***res? It seems like it. Are we heading towards a world in which online communication is the only way we are able to communicate comfortably with each other?
It’s very easy to hide behind a computer, this is also a huge issue in our culture. People who are not otherwise are willing to be BOLD on the internet. It could be somebody who is online bullying, someone who is trying to make sexual advances on another person, a stalker… anyone. Once a computer disguises ones true identity, people feel free to say whatever they truly want to. Reputations have been ruined, people have been hurt, or even killed because of this feeling of anonymity that the perpetrators feel when they do not have to disclose their true faces in the realm of the internet. I’m not sure whether this losing true identity or disclosing too much personal information is worse, but both seem to be huge problems in our digital world today.
Oct 15, 2010 @ 18:18:21
You’re into something here, D. This all might be interpreted as an expansion of media / public visibility-centredness that has existed quite a while, but now we can have our own 24/7 reality show broadcast online and in our mobile devices. One famous sociologist has said that today’s societies seem to believe that media (visibility) form some sort of mythical center, that we feel that being ‘exposed’ we are more real, life is more intense… What do you think?
Oct 15, 2010 @ 21:09:12
In my opinion, I’d have to say that one of the biggest communication/media related problem in our digital era is our dependency on technology. Technology has come to be the center of society. It is sad to see how the youth of our generation mostly communicates via text or facebook rather than face to face. Not only does this cause people to get in the habit of constantly using poor grammar, it has also made communication less personal. Although I myself am guilty for being so dependent on electronics, I’d much rather have a conversation in person above all else. Communicating via electronics may also lead to confusion and big misunderstanding between two people. Because you cannot fully interpret tone and expression, often times this may cause fights and such. Forms of social networks are also responsible for lack of privacy of people’s personal business. Everyone seems to know everyone’s business and words spreads quickly over the internet.
Oct 16, 2010 @ 18:47:28
Gina, valid points, shared by most of your colleagues… What kind of influence this all might have on us as a society?
Oct 19, 2010 @ 13:42:42
I was not able to make it through all of the comments that have been posted. However, the debates, which are coming from these comments, are fostering my previous ideas. (I am sorry for any repetition)
I would like to start on a personal level; the biggest challenge I have to overcome is time management. There are so many forms of media and technology today that I find myself always participating and/or multitasking in forms of technology. In class a few weeks ago one of my peers mentioned how much time multitasking takes out of her day. I decided to test her statement. For me it proves true. Usually when i am writing a paper ill be on the internet (FaceBook, YouTube, and gossip sites) have my phone beside me and have my iPod in. It is not shocking that is takes me hours to write a 3 page paper. Last week I shut off my internet and put my phone and iPod away. I was amazed how quickly I was finished, with less errors and more intellectual thought.
I have read a lot of comments regarding the ignorance that the digital age has brought. I specifically agree with D.W.’s reply. What is written on the internet and “factual” has to be taken with a grain of salt. Facts have to be referenced and cross-referenced. Maybe in the future we will have definitive websites that can be sited. But, for now researchers still must put out the effort.
Lastly, as a society, the digital era requires us to be more aware of EVERYTHING we do. A topic that really needs to be observed is that anything a person does in a public space con be posted to the internet without consequence. This can be highly detrimental to a person’s reputation, whether it is a picture, a transcript or audio. Along those lines defamation of character can happen with the click of a button. There was a story in the news a few months ago about a college student that comment suicide because his peers posted a picture and wrote a few sentences on a college gossip site regarding his sexual orientation. I have also, been the target of a topic on a gossip site. For those extreme and minor cases, without resources, nothing can be done.
Oct 23, 2010 @ 00:16:06