class discussion on 10\30

I enjoyed yesterdays class as well. I liked the format of our teaching day as well. Everyone's contributions were helpful and beneficial for the entire class (especially Abe's presentation on the Amazon book downloader).... it's technology which could potentially revolutionize learning and reading. 

In regards to some of the web-sites we were discussing (Juicycampus.com) I am kind of disgusted that we're in college and we have a web-site devoted to cruel gossip, as well as surprised that our school would allow this to go on. Our blogs are completely unrelated to websites like juicycampus.com and others like it. Our blogs are an intellectual outlet where we can express academic interests and concerns, not personal attacks on people, just for the sake of doing it. Does this seem like middle school to anyone else besides me?I'm sure it's a source of entertainment for some-but such a public display seems wrong. 

-Anna-

Twitter Related

After all this talk about Twitter in class I thought this might be interesting for people who use it. 

http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2008/10/31/31readwriteweb-selling_ads_on_your_twitter_ba.html

-Mike

Teaching Day

I thought teaching day was great yesterday. I like how the groups were bigger so everyone could hear more of the presentations. Its amazing how many different random things people can come up with to teach to the class. I hope we will be able to have another one by the end of the semester because I thought it was a great setup.

-Mike

Teaching day

I thought today's teaching day was pretty great. It is interesting to see what students select to teach given unlimited choices. I think it allows an insider view in terms of what they think is neat or interesting or important enough to share. I would like a student to give a quick presentation (2-3 min) at the beginning of everyclass about something they think is interesting.

today's class

I definitely enjoyed class today because the diversity of the presentations kept people engaged and allowed people to learn more. I think our first teaching day was decent, but I was pleased with this one. At first I did not like the looseness of this class because I felt that we were playing everything by ear which had me skeptical. I think the main thing you gain from this class is the ability to learn from others through the presentations and when we have intense class discussions.

Today's Class

I'm glad Professor Dean lectured on last night's reading material. I mostly understood her chapter, but the few questions I had were answered. I just wanted to quickly inquire about Thursday's teaching assignment. The same rules that applied for the first teaching day apply to this one, correct?

3 fantasies & class today

Today's class was both frustrating and beneficial for me. There are some aspects of a lecture format that I like, but people (especially) me learn from a hands on experience. However, your article Professor Dean was, like you said quite technical so your explanation was really helpful, but slightly over my head still. 

One of your points Professor Dean was regarding abundance and participation. Your thoughts on participation, particularly what you called, " the registration effect", when individuals feel like they are contributing and helping, makes one feel political sustains and maintains inequality. This correlates to some of the issues were discussing surrounding monitoring and data mining. Earlier in the year I had adopted the point that data mining and monitoring were boundary crossing and incredibly invasive. However, we perpetuate this phenomena. Every time we enter information into our computers (when we are online) we are helping the shift in balance and power. When you said this, were you specifically talking about online blogging ->things like twitter or political networks online , which  Shirky name as "alist"?

-Anna-

Professor Dean in Boler

I think that democracy on the internet does little for those who don't use the internet as much as college kids or those who happen to be on computers all day.  The average person is still approaching competency with email, how are they expected to blog, twitter, yata yata.  Beyond johnmccain.com are places that they are completely unaware of, yet to some they are the foundation for the "campaign 2.0."  As kids used to the internet we search all the time when we want to know something, but in the case of the election and especially candidates stances there is just to many "he saids" to sort through.

To go along with this, participation does not even come close to effectivity.  You can blog all you want but the fact is come voting day you count as one single vote.  Regardless of whether or not people read your blog they won't vote for you, they'll vote for what they think.  Technology doesn't make us effective, it makes us expressive and that alone doesn't win elections.

-Tom

Communicative Capitalism

Three things I disagree with are: alternative politics, the stance of circulating content, and the extent of disconnect from media to the individual. The argument of alternative politics. I understand the view point of disconnect and sense of illegitimacy in the big picture but I believe places like MoveOn.org are constructive and for the benefit of the greater good. In a time when everyone uses the internet it is easier to take a platform like MoveOn once it has started to become popular to involve the mass people in physical connection like the phone calls and candle vigil. Those huge movements were only created because of the already involved people who use MoveOn. The website became their platform that carried them to the next step. Proffesor Dean's stance on circulating content I would agree for the most part. But I would have to go back to the example of the woman's blog who lives in Alaska. Because she personally knew Sarah Palin and wrote an extensive piece on her when the national spotlight was not more that hours old. It was one of the first sources for the American public. Her blog was emailed all aroudn the country, and I don't think you can get more political than a presidential race. It was a source that blew up and became nationally known very quckly. Lastly the stance of disconnect from media to the individual. I fully recognize her arguement but disagree with the extent. Yes in relation to the Iraq war their was a huge disconnect, but I feel for this presidential race the disconnect has retreated. People are now fully engaged in the presidential race and very much from the Interenet. A friend of mine is going to Penn this weekend to work of Obama and got her ride from a stranger in the area through the Obama website. That connection brought physical results. Also people are able to find information and learn about their candidates like never before. Though not all individuals are connected, I would argue that if they are not connected in finding their information online they would not be the type to call congress or go to a rally.
Corey

Chapter Response

After reading Professor Dean's chapter on Communicative Capatilism I would like to touch on the topics of whether democracy has failed and the topic of enhanced communication access facilitating democracy. I dont think democracy has failed, I think it has morphed into something other then its traditional self. As Professor Dean states, "there is a significant disconnect between politics circulating as content and official politics" (Dean, 102). I don't see disconnection I perceive this as change. Market and spectacle are influencing politics because of the popularity of advertising and technological progress. Yes, I think more forms of public expression just add to the clutter, but it strengthens public opinion. People who have bitten their tongues or have been lazy or seen it as inconvenient to attend town hall meetings are now able to anonomously express their feelings in forums, chat rooms and tools like twitter. I think this constant circulation of content makes it easier for inclusion to take place.
I don't agree when Professor Dean stated "the more opinions or comments that are out there, the less of an impact any one given one might take" (Dean 107). The reason I don't agree is because of the large impact the internet has had on the presidential election. If polls, positions on subjects and other matters were important than millions of dollars would not be spent on advertising and "selling" each respective candidate. Times have changed because this election has revolutionized the way we get a candidate into the white house. The ads, the merchandise and the forums are all proactive because they allow people to actively participate through voicing their views and having their say even if every single person is not being heard. The circulation of this idealistic inclusion is what is so intriguing and what fuels the fire behind this technological surge.
I believe that technological fetish does not give the illusion that citizens are engaged, but realistically allows everyone to be heard and everyone to be in the know by staying informed with more convenient access to the subject matter due to technology. I also don't agree with the statement that technology is doing everything for us, referring to political responsibility. I believe technology is providing us with more options and opportunities to be engaged. Lastly, it is true that having technology of this caliber can give anyone the chance to put in their two cents, but I think the pros outweigh the cons and communication is stretched beyond usual boundaries when circulation is achieved because people who will never talk face to face can discuss nearly any subject on what I believe to be a level playing field.

-Abe

Reading Response

One of the main points Professor Dean writes about that I disagree with is the idea that all the increased internet use and connectivity will facilitate democracy. Even though there is probably a decent number of people who use the internet to access their political information, I feel like this wouldn't be the most reliable source. One of the big things that comes to mind on this topic is the whole Sarah Palin situation with Tina Fey. These are by far some of the most popular videos on YouTube, which is definitely impacting the integrity of the election in a negative way. The way she is being made fun of makes everything about her seem like a joke. On top of this, the things SNL says are meshing into what she actually said. I didn't know she didn't say "I can see Russia from my house," until someone told me. So in this sense, I believe that the internet is not going to help facilitate democracy. 

-Mike

future projects and responses to the reading

Clay Shirky's article, Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality, made me think about weblogging in an entirely different light. Shirky discusses the politics of the internet, saying, "Not everyone gets to be heard. Some core group seems more connected than the rest of us . . . (1)He also makes the claim that, "Diversity plus freedom of choice creates inequality, and the greater the diversity, the more extreme the inequality,"(1). I've never thought about blogging, and whose blog is the most popular as a social hierarchy.

 My interpretation of the article is  probably not how the article was meant to be read, but to suggest another argument, compare the politics of weblogging to American society-they are remarkably similar right?The more diverse a culture we are, the more conflict and struggle we endure. The increase of people who are now entering online space creates a higher degree of inequality.  Why do we perpetuate the social hierarchy within our physical culture as well as online - through weblogging. Does this comparison make sense to others?

In the regard to final projects - I really haven't thought about it too much in specifics. I really liked the process of making a movie. The entire experience was such a beneficial learning experience for me, and helped me master the material in an entirely different way. Some points which were addressed in "Ispy" concerning governmental monitoring really intrigued me. For instance, google checking your email, and datamining were all subjects of interest to me. In addition, I really responded to the claim that the internet was not a place for action, maybe proving through film how the internet is a form of activism would be an interesting topic for a final project. 

-Anna-

A-list blogs

I think the argument put forth by Shirky that there is a sort of ‘A-list’ blogging community holds much validity. He argues that in any social system, such as the blogging world, disproportion of popularity occurs normally. He says that this isn’t intended by anyone, it just sort of happens as traffic occurs on busy roads. This makes perfect sense to me. The rise of the blogging world is a direct result of an increased blog-reading community, as such; readers obviously prefer one thing over the other. He argues that in the early days there just weren’t enough people reading blogs to create such disproportionate amount of blogging traffic. Now mainstream media promotes their blogs and other link their blogs all over to make it more likely to be viewed. However, he argues that in a system where most bloggers get below average traffic, the hit-size can't be the only measure for success. It depends on the purpose of your blog. 3 hits a week is a lot to someone only talking to their friends. For blogs without a friend-based intended viewership the amount of hits directly relates to how many people view the blog, which for most is the whole purpose. Also, the more hits you get the more legitimate you seem, which Shirky himself argues, which seems to support that popularity is a direct measure of success. But since blogs but their links everywhere in an attempt to increase the likelihood of their blog being viewed each hit doesn't neccesarily mean the person was looking for the blog.

class today

I really enjoyed the video's as well. I've been reading some of the other comments about the video's from the other blogs, and am in full concurrence.  I was impressed with everyone's knowledge about how to put together a 3-4 minute video in such an informative and interactive way. Even within my own group, I was extremely impressed. At our group meeting we all exchanged the information we had gathered and some of the things my group members created was astonishing (for instance the candidates as cartoons). We all really learned from each other, which was a fun challenge and interesting process. 

I said this in class that this video project really forced us to learn the actual points of Rebooting America. When we did our powerpoint presentations, I feel like the point of it was to see who could put the best presentation together during the class period, not on mastering the material. The video project was a new outlet for all of us. For me, especially  I like visual things, sometimes even more than words, so this experience  was a different and better one. 

Having to represent the points from Rebooting America in a creative, funny, and interactive way was really interesting in that having a focus and not deviating from that focus was essential and made us really think about what articles and what research would be prominent in our video. The one thing I wish we had known we could have made a longer video. So many times during our group meeting did people suggest different things that would have applied to our theme of the internet as the new form of media, but we had to cut things out. I wish we had asked you Professor Dean if we could have expanded our video. But I was pleased with the way it came out nonetheless. 

An interesting point that was brought up by Yanina towards the end of class that I kept thinking on was the argument that the internet was only a form of communication and not action. A part of me disagrees with this-for instance think of all the teenagers who find ingredients for bombs, or drugs, or how to find weapons. The internet to me is dangerous because it displays knowledge, yet anyone can access it and do what they want with it  . . . aka take action. 

-Anna-

10:30 meeting

Hey guys...me and Jeff finished the video last night and everything so we don't have to meet at 10:30. Hopefully you read this before then

Clips Useful for Project

Alfred E. Smith Dinner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGknnyaMGUE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR6SlTtY98U&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY-cUUF3a1E&feature=related

Sarah Palin-Katie Couric parody

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFL58Jduryg


Joe Biden vs. Sarah Palin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsGtuBqShM

notes from video discussion

hey guys-these are some of the ideas that we talked about in class and to maybe think about for our meeting tomorrow night.

1)Economy 

2)Change in polls 

3)Terrorism\racism 

4)Sarah Palin 

5)McCain & Obama charity dinner

*Internet 2.0 - Internet is the new outlet of all our information 

Sarah Palin & Tina Fey parody on S&L - 6 million viewers on Youtube *use this to show the influence of media 

*Obama advertising for Xbox

Create a poll balance that goes up and down to represent the changing in polls 

so ya, those are the notes from today, see everyone tomorrow @ 6 in the library lobby

-Anna-

Song ideas-Born In the USA 

http://www.jibjab.com/originals/time_for_some_campaignin

My Research: Tina Fey as Sarah Palin

I did my research over fall break on the coverage of Tina Fey's impersonation as Sarah Palin.  This has seemed to be a major impact on Saturday Night Live and to the presidential election.  People are calling it the revival of SNL; in the first three weeks of the show the number of viewers is up 49% from last year and has received the highest ratings in 7 years.  

Tina Fey has impersonated Governor Sarah Palin on 4 occasions.  Once with "Hilary Clinton," once in a mock debate with "VP candidate Joe Biden," once in a mock interview with "Katie Couric,"  and two nights ago in a mock interview (Eventually the real Sarah Palin joined her on stage).  These appearance have been such a huge hit due to Fey's excellent performances.  The two look exactly alike and Fey has nailed her Alaskan accent.  The skits have been filled with humor as the parodies include jokes on sexism, lack of knowledge and professionalism, and perceived naiveness.  Some of her answers and comments have included her calling global warming, "God just hugging us closer," asking Katie Couric to use a life line (phone a friend), calling herself and John McCain "mavericks," and "I thought I found Osama Bin Laden driving my taxi in NYC." 

The reactions have been mixed, while some angry and some humored, the skits have definitely turned heads.  After the first few weeks Sarah Palin responded by calling them funny and humorous.  She was not offended at all, she even announced her upcoming appearance on SNL for October 25th.  Well this Saturday she was there and was right in the mix.  She was made fun of to her face, she was able to make fun of Tina Fey, and I respect her for making the appearance.  However, it seems that there are plenty of people can not take Palin seriously anymore.  People can not remove Sarah Palin from her Tina Fey connection, and every time she speaks they hear Fey's impersonation and laugh.  I wonder how much Tina Fey has helped or damaged Palin's campaign. 

-Jeff

fall break update

I followed Obama and the terrorism and race threat

source-New York Times- Frank Rich

"biggest fear about Obama running or possibly even winning was that a crazy person might take a shot at him-comparing Obama to Lincon and Martin Luther King 

-Obama not worried, he has the best protection in the world, so there is no worry.

-Doing nothing is NOT an option 

-"all's fair in politics"

-Obama launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist 

-Is there still enough racism in America to prevent a black man from being elected? 

Republican's playing the race card?YES

-Anna-

Group Project

During our short fall break, I decided to follow the General Election polls on CNN.com. I followed and wrote down the daily changes to these polls last Saturday through this past Tuesday.
The following were the National polls from October 11 to October 14th.

CNN National Polls:

Saturday- Barack Obama 49%
John McCain 41%

Sunday- Barack Obama 49%
John McCain 41%

Monday- Barack Obama 50%
John McCain 42%

Tuesday- Barack Obama 50%
John McCain 43%

What I followed for the week

This past week I have followed the electoral map that is shown on CNN.com. Last Thursday I recorded the states that were definite and probable for each candidate, as well as the states that were still tossups. I then followed it to see if any states changed who they supported. Here are the notes I took on Microsoft Word. Hopefully you can understand them. The highlighted states are the ones that changed their position throughout the week. Everything that happened favors Obama, and if the vote were to be held today, he would win with 277 electoral votes. The big state switch over the past week was Virginia switching from being a tossup to being a probable for Obama. Also, New Jersey went from being probable to being definite for Obama. For McCain, North Dakota went from being definite to being probable. 

2008 Electoral Map – Week of 10/9-10/16

 

Thursday: 10/9

·      Obama:

o      Definite: Oregon, California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Maryland, D.C., Delaware, Conn., Rhode Island, Mass., Vermont, Hawaii

o      Probably: Washington, New Mexico, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Maine

·      Tossup: NV, CO, MO, OH, VA, NC, FL

·      McCain:

o      Definite: ID, UT, AZ, AK, WY, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, MS, AL, TN, KY, SC

o      Probable: MT, AR, LA, IN, GA, WV

Thursday: 10/16

·      Obama:

o      Definite: Oregon, California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Maryland, D.C., Delaware, Conn., Rhode Island, Mass., Vermont, Hawaii, New Jersey

o      Probable: WA, NM, MN, IA, WI, PA, VA, NH, ME

·      Tossup: NV, CO, MO, OH, NC, FL

·      McCain:

o      Definite: ID, UT, AZ, AK, WY, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, MS, AL, TN, KY, SC

o      Probable: MT, ND AR, LA, GA, IN, WV

class

sorry i won't be in class, I hope my notes help us decide what we want to do and when we want to do our video. I have a camera and can put it online. I can meet anytime the group decides before class next Tues, sorry to not make it
Corey

2 week project

I followed the economy and the presidential race. I was in the woods this weekend but I feel more than caught up on the issue. The economy has come to the forefront of the race as it is more than 50% of Americans most important issue facing the next president. The economy nationally and in the world view has almost tanked. We have put in tons of tax payer's money only to hear that they want more money for the banks. The presidential race has leaned towards Obama. More Americans feel that Obama has a better and bigger understanding about the economy compared to McCain. As that is the biggest issue for Americans, Obama has taken an edge that will be hard to loose. People feel more and more confident backing Obama. Going into the home stretch and the economy more than likely staying where it is, Obama seems like he will hold the lead and most likely win the election.
I hope this helps with our project, and we can put it all together.
Corey

Rebooting America Notes

Sidewalks for Democracy Online

• Main question: why have we decided to delete democracy from the most visited interface citizens have with “their” govt.
• One way communications – we rarely hear from each other
• Govt. needs the capacity to engage everyday ppl
• Author’s plan:
• Make the internet a democracy network by nature
• Content must be linked by geography, not issue
• Connecting locally based on common public interests
• Need ppl to connect locally based on common interests/issues, not just globally
• Restore and deepen access to representative democracy and governance through new laws and online public hearings
• Build trust in govt. through public interactions tied to decision making
• Restoring the bonds of community
• Put a big C on community and a little d on democracy
• Neighbors connected

Privacy in the Internet Age: Time to Go?

• Author is not sure he would try to save privacy, just transparency
• Authorities can keep up with a few individuals, but nowhere near the whole
• Easy indexing is biggest threat (credit, purchase, and financial records)
• This threat is not legally defined
• Coming up with laws to protect this would be difficult
• David Brin argues that privacy is a lost cause and that we should strive for transparency
• Author’s first move for privacy is for everyone to start caring more about it
• Without our care for privacy, we are surrendering it

Can Social Network Sites Enable Political Action?

• The passion and interest to share political info does not match the capabilities of social network sites (SNSes)
• SNSes highlight how status obsessed and narcissistic we are
• Most people log in to hang out with people they are already friends with
• SNSes are a substitute for being physically present
• Internet is a great mass communicator
• You may want your content to be viewed by millions, but the millions may not be interested in your content
• Echo chambers where we just reiterate what a friend said
• We need to activate the unmotivated groups

In Skypeoogletubeapedia We Trust

• Lower barriers and disincentives to political participation for public
• People should not have to be involved for years on end in order to make a difference
• One person in power for years is not the best govt.
• Sometimes we do great things and other times we don’t
• Govt. should mimic non-profit and advocacy worlds
• Change barriers to entry and participation in civic life
• Govt. should est. a right to privacy
• Some people stay out of internet groups so they can keep themselves off lists
• We should be able to view what they have on us.

Four Chapters due Thursday

Who Needs Elected Officials
Restructuring democracy to work more for the people is an interesting idea. Instead of electing selfish midde-adged men to think for the people, how about holding a forum based system where a topic is posed and people can give their views, then rules are made by using the outcome of the survey. This is the new web 2.0 way of thinking some people are moving towards. Instead of a group of people speaking for a whole nation how about giving the nation the microphone. Well, some people may see this as loose government, if people make a bad decision we can always have a revote.

New Gadgets Do Not New Humanity Make
The tale of two centuries. The 20th century called for framers to create a constitution that men that men would live by. Natural progress made way for individualism and for the people to have more power. It is this spirit of indiviualism and freedom for technology to thrive in a world where we have become mopre dependant on it.

Deliberative Democracy in Theory and Practice
Compeititve elections do not enhance the collective intelligence of the people. Elected officials are becoming elected by choosing sides and voicing the opinions of a small group concensus in stead of the ideas of the larger population for the greater good. Online tools are helping all voices be heard. As with this years election, everything from pop up ads to online surveys are pulling more people into the political arena and giving people the opportunity to let there voices be heard.

Government by the People
A government by the people would call for a situation where more people could actively participate in the decision making process. Bad choices by the government in place has led to consequences that severely hurt families of all statuses, companies and the nation as a whole. A government by the people could be ran loosely and could create a sense of self empowerment and actual inclusion in today's society.

4 chapters due thursday 10/9

Killer App
People are publicly (on the internet) expressing their opinions like never before. Public opinion polls/ blogs and emails/ eBay and Amazon feedback and rating professionals online (rate a lawyer) are all applications of public participation. The “Killer App” is a forum (not yet created) which will allow individuals to become more engaged with their government. The author claims that this application could become as widespread as Facebook or MySpace. The Killer App could arrive in many ways for a variety of different reasons. Citizens will need to trust that their opinions will be counted and reported fairly. They will need to know that their collective opinions have the possibility of being heard by the higher powers and that that will result in a direct change. Elected officials will need to know that the fee back is not only accurate, but accounts for total opinion and the opinions of those directly affected by the topic at hand. The author says that somewhere soon this Killer App will emerge, it is only a matter of time.

Citizen 2.0
Redesigning U.S. democracy for the internet age has endless possibilities. But what people mean by “democracy” varies. Some apply it simply to the election process itself. Others apply it to the way our three branches of government conduct themselves. The most significant changes will be the ones that change the way ordinary Americans perceive and interact with government officials and institutions. The internet expands the types of roles an individual can play in politics and government. Historically, citizens have been observers in the civic sphere, periodically becoming involved and letting their opinions known by voting and petitioning. Individuals have traditionally relied on government officials for a wealth of information that is now at their fingertips. A “Right To Know” thought process is taking over, and the internet is the catalyst. A fear of this is the distancing from person to person. People who once meet face to face now sit at their computers. The authors disagree. They feel this connects people even more because there are plenty of ways (going door to door for voting, town hall meetings and rallies) that people still interact.

The Last Top Down Campaign
Politics have drastically changed since 2004. Top-down big money methods or organizing and winning campaigns is now extinct. Bottom up strategies are now the way to win campaigns (as Hilary Clinton learned). Clinton should have not received money from lobbyists and special interest groups, nor should she have accepted more than $250 from each individual contribution.

Tangled Signals of Democracy
Author asks if voting helps us signal what we want from our representatives in a meaningful way. Were using a voting system developed in the 18th century.
5 Proposals for new systems:
1. Put NOTA (none of the above) on a ballot. If NOTA gets more votes then any of the candidates then a special election will be held with new candidates nominated. (In Egypt and other places, voters mark an X on their ballot as a sign that they came out to vote yet decided to mark an X as a sign of state corruption or their dissatisfaction with any of the candidates)
2. Give voters the ability to vote ‘No’ to a candidate. ( The No takes away a yes vote in the election) Let people take away a vote from someone. The person with the most net positive votes wins.
3. Release early voting results. Campaigns would put efforts in areas that haven’t voted as much which would increase turnout.
4. Embrace instant-runoff voting, or ranked balloting. Most elections have 2 clear candidates since most voters don’t want to risk ‘wasting’ their vote. This system allows you to rank your choices for candidates in order. If your candidate didn’t win a majority on the first, multi candidate ballot, your vote would be instantly transferred to your second choice etc…
5. Let voters add a comment explaining their vote. Then aggregate those comments to build a richer picture of people’s voting decisions.


-Matt

blogs for facebook

quick note-did people know that you can import your blogs on your facebook?

-Anna-

Two Week Project

These are what we want to follow over the fall break

Reality a Scarce Resource

I think this a really accurate statement. What is reality when its second hand? Just a recent thought with the economic crisis. What about the majority of Americans who don't understand the fundamentals of the economy. They don't understand the rules and how the details work. How are they supposed to understand what the economic bail out is going to do and how it is going to help them. What is the only way the average American understood the bail out from the TV? Is that a complete reality that accurately reflects the goals of the bail out. What if the TV was bias or just not completely accurate. I think this is an example of how the reality really is scarce. The average person does not get the straight forward explanation of the bail out, and they don't even have a very solid understanding of the economy to begin with. Reality is scarce, you have to really dig at in, and more than likely it is still being filtered, but at least with an understanding of the situation you can attempt to filter out the nonsense and attempt to grasp the reality at hand.
Corey

Assignment 7

I think tactical media is a clever way of not only getting a hot point across but also good for giving underlying meanings and concrete opinions. Throughout the two terms of George W. Bush I have never seen so much negative media being pushed towards one political figure. One humongous negative media firestorm have followed him through his term. This includes parody to a dedicated television show called Lil' Bush that makes fun of George W. Bush's policies in a satirical way. One interesting thing is that the show portrays his father George H.W. Bush as the president and present Bush and his cabinet as children. In Boler's book Digital Media and Democracy, he states that tactics are an "art of the weak". This may be so but I admire it in one way because they target a subject and then cleverly develops their argument into a parody using look alikes and characteristics associated with that person. Another instance is the Saturday Night Live skit between Hilary Clinton and Sarah Palin. We know Clinton to be a hard nosed, "ball busting" kind of person so the creators flipped this into portraying her as a masculine female. Palin is depicted as an un knowledgeable, outside of the box kind of person so the creators targeted her dumbfoundedness. Overall I believe tactical media is self expression that needs to be seen in heard in order for people to continually express themselves.

The VP Debate and Twittter

I followed the VP debate and texted making comments for Twitter. I had two conclusions from the assignment. I thought it was pretty interesting from the aspect of analyzing this on Tuesday. But, I thought it was a little annoying for personal use. I am very interested to see how many people actually did this and how much they commented. Was it very insightful comments or just to get them done? Will we learn much from each other or pretty much across the board agreements. I am betting there has to be at least a couple of disagrements and hopefully a couple interesting things I missed. I think as a medium Twitter is cool for assingments like this, where we can go back as a class and analyze everything. But, the texting gets annoying. I thought I was pretty good at texting, but to make a handful of comments took time away from trying to watch the debate. I like most people I imagine, have to focus while texting, I am listening to something spefic I sometimes type what I am listening to. It got a little annoying to be frank. I would not like to do something like that at all for personal fun or family or whatever the point is. I feel like twitter is just another medium for getting groups together and sharing, myspace and facebook or blogs. I think there comes a point where we just say no to new mediums. I already have trouble keeping up with the ones we have.
Corey

the remixing phenomenon

Whacking Bush:Tactical media as a play, was an especially interesting and relevant chapter for me following the current presidential race\debates. The opening pages of Meikle's chapter was amusing, with a rather serious undertone. For instance, George W. Bush's State of the Union address was cut with audio samples from other speeches, then remixed to, " create an arresting new hybrid," (p.376). This concept of remixing is an entirely new phenomenon in, not only marketing, but also finding new and more creative ways of creating political satire for in our case, the campaign. Meikle also makes the interesting and disturbing point that more people were 'remixing' Bush than were voting for him,"(376). This is a scary thought for politics.

The concept of reality is also a crucial point Meikle makes, "In the digital era, this competition remains fierce, but the raw material is no longer in such short supply. Defining reality carving up and exploiting that resource is one of the central phenomena of the media," (p.368). This may be an under exaggeration, Meikle states that media exploits reality, I would take it a step further and say that media not only exploits reality, but  manipulates and distorts it in  new and even more creative ways.

 

My question is what really is tactical media? Meilke describes it as a: "slippery term, a tool for creating, 'temporary consensus zones' based on unexpected alliances . . . alliance of hackers, artists, critics, journalists and activists . . . flexibility and mobility," (369). This concept can be thought of in modern terms especially with our political system. Anyone can and will do anything to get their point across in a political context. Does this mean this phenomenon of remixing is a beneficial or counter productive artistic expression?

-Anna-

Click to Help!

Scrll down and you'll see...

http://www.new.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=22252091259

Blog Potential is Growing

There is absolutely warranted optimism about blogs and the political sphere. Boler makes many points in the chapter about how some blogs caught the media attention and some did not. He makes it very clear that the difference between the ones that received national attention and the ones that fell through the cracks did not necessarily come down to content. He was clear to give examples of blogs that contained important information. So what is the difference between ones that make it and don't? Boler concludes the chapter with the idea of marketing and selling the story to the public. It has to be catchy and interesting as well as containing important information. This seems to be the deciding factor and I quite agree. But, I argue that Blogs are still just as important as there were in 2004 political election and argueably even more influential. The point still stands though that the Blogs have to be able to sell the story. For me this comes at a pinicle with the following blog.
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/
This particular blog exploded with the media only days if not hours following the announcement of Sarah Palin as the vice president with John McCain. This particular blog recieved national attention because nothing was really known of Sarah Palin and the media was looking for a story. And a story they found. This is a blog of a person from her hometown in Alaska where Sarah was mayor. The blog posted after the anouncement went through and talked about her time as mayor and did not portray her lightly. The woman actually riped her apart, but had the informationa and evidence to back her up. All of these brought her blog to the national forfront as a first look into Sarah Palin. This blog was emailed through the country and reached millions. This is a particular example of how a blog can still play a role, while also agreeing with Boler that not all blogs make it to the limelight.
Corey