Presentations

I really enjoyed the presentations. I was particularly interested about the campaign spending habbits. Obama clearly understood that the winner would clearly have a campaign of the next generation. The fact that he had his own blog manager showed that Obama clearly understood what had to be done. Further, his spending showed his clear knowledge of the media age and he used that to his advantage. McCain ran a good campaign, but it was about 4 years outdated. The last four year, like the next four will be, saw an explosion in the emphasis people have placed on the internet for their daily news and updates.

-Matt

class presentations

The past two classes of presentations have been really fun to watch. While Jeff, Mike, and Sam approached the presentation with a topic focused more on business, others looked at the side of monitoring and surveillance. Even though two groups did look at similar topics it was nice that we each chose different aspects and different people to interview about HWS surveillance. I really enjoyed watching Yanina, David and Jess's presentation - you put together the video in a creative, fun, yet educational way. Good job everyone... also for the people who made movies, can they put them on F8, it would be fun to watch them again!

-Anna-

Presentations

So far I've really enjoyed listening to the presentations and hearing the different things people have taken out of the class. Jeff, Sam, and I looked more at the business side of what the internet can be used for, while others mostly looked at the campaign and different surveillance concerns. I think these three ideas sum up what we have mainly focused on, or what we were most engaged and interested in.
One of my favorite presentations so far was Brandon and Gil's video that included Enemy of the State. I thought they did a great job in incorporating the overall message of that movie with the themes of our course. I liked how they interviewed other students to give us a more complete message of what everyone else feels.

-Mike

the internet then and now

the CTM got me thinking about when the first time i went on the internet was and what i used the internet for over the first few years my family had a computer, probably around '99 or 2000.

then- napster, aim, dial up, email, yahoo searches, looking at bikes with my friends and not much else

now- facebook, google, high speed, skype, ichat, twitter, a blog on every subject ever, youtube, ebay, etc etc etc...

its weird to see everything thats new and worse to think what 8 more years will look like.

tom

Social Networks Spread Happiness

Here is a pretty cool article from CNN.com that discusses the idea that if you are happy, a friend of a friend of a friend will be a little happier. I wonder how directly related this could be to things such as facebook and myspace. It mentioned facebook, but with no conclusive results.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/12/05/happiness.social.network/index.html

-Mike

Clue Train Comments

What I got from the remaining chapters of clue train is that the voice of the people is back and here to stay. It make sense because old habits are hard to break like command and control which has been the strategy since the beginning of the assembly line which turned workers into machines. The voice of the people is popular again because internet technology encourages open distributed speech. Instead of another hundred centuries of billion dollar propaganda how about the human voice get a chance to work. It's interesting, the main attractor to big business advertising is the propaganda, telling consumers how much they NEED this product. On the internet, the human voice is the primary attractor because it is honest and tried and true because it is information for consumers by consumers. This is the reason I personally like shopping around on the internet, because you can search for the product and then go to a yahoo question and answer site where anyone can converse and give you their opinion about buying the product.

-Abe

today's class discussion

Today's discussion was the first class in a while where the conversation stimulated a really interactive and engaging topics. The Wall Street Journal article was especially interesting to all of us, because it directly applied to us - as college students looking towards jobs and internships maybe that was why we all had such strong reactions? I particularly responded to Corey's claim that he would prefer a more black and white world rather then a grey one in which people were cut slack. I agree with both. My personality is so that I feel incredibly guilty when I don't get things done that I know I should- and get pretty annoyed when others don't feel the same way and they are allowed to get away with it. However,I have been instances where I have had extenuating circumstances where I need to be cut slack. It's hard to live in a world with so much black and white as well as grey - there needs to be some kind of balance and accountability and responsibility.

Another comment I responded to was both Matt and Yanina's point about making money. Yanina seemed to be more focused on why are we as a society picking having copious amounts of money rather than our happiness and I understand that but reflect on our current economic crisis- it seems necessary and natural that we want to maintain our quality of life, doesn't it?

-Anna-

Market Authenticity response

Businesses cannot succeed without rules because this would set the stage for all out opinionated warfare among employees. In this situation I believe communication is key because if the managers and employees are on the same page then there would be less room for the likelihood of a disgruntle employee. Employees who expect rules to be broken or to disappear are sadly mistaken because they are expecting the world to be handed to them on a silver platter. My suggestion is to have limited rules where the core things would stay intact like dress code and code of conduct but less stressful rules like lunch breaks and freedom to decorate a cubicle can be eligible for change.

-Abe

Clue Train Manifesto Chapters 1-3

I thought Chapter one was interesting because it made me think about my growing need for materialistic things. It makes me wonder, do I really need this or is it the convenience of the advertising, right place, right time. I agree that people like to talk about their crafts, it is what breaks the ice what one person may have in common with another. It perpetuates conversation because of peer to peer learning. Learning form each other makes us knowledgeable.
I agree and disagree with chapter 2. The web is a force that lures people in to it's enticing world. The ability to express ides online is interesting because we have a thrill in hearing ourselves speak, just to vent is the thrill and not so much being answered. My favorite quote from this chapter is" Our longing for the web is rooted in the deep resentment we feel towards being managed".
Chapter 3 was interesting because I agree with the statement that silence is fatal. Doing nothing is not progress. Emails, mass emails and other similar circulars are ingenious ways of not only widely spreading information but starting the conversation.

-Abe

Clue Train Manifesto comments..

I thought the clutrain manifesto is a very thoughout and intelligent reading. Some of these statements have made me think more of why things are the way they are. Why do companies build a seemingly insurmountable wall between ring leader and employee? If all parts of a company would share knowledge then things would be more about people. This reminds me of where my Aunt used to work, she was a consultant at this company who made huge promises but did not seem to follow through. They spend millions on advertising and made it seem like they were helping the community, but how is this effective when the community around your company is in near ruins and don't lift a finger to revitalize it. One of my favorite lines from the clue train manifesto is: #3 Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.

Companies want to appeal to the working man and appeal to the public. If this had any traces of truth then employees fromt he company would going out intot he commmunity and appearing on commercials instead of the CEO trying too sell propaganda garbage.
#13 What's happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical construct called "The Company" is the only thing standing between the two.
The company seems like an intimidating force. Isolationg is prominent among companies. The different departments like human resources, compliance and the "top brass" should communicate collectively. Sharing knowledge could be key to the success and appeal of the company. My suggestion would be that people need to stop being stuck in their ways so progress could be possible. A company divided will not get far.

-Abe

95 Theses

I thought was a pretty interesting reading because it was a different way of looking at how companies and markets interact. A lot of the theses were redundant, but I picked three that I thought summed up the main arguments of the author. Theses 12, 16, and 25 seem to cover the main themes of the rest of them.

#12 - "There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone."
I think this is an interesting point because with all the access consumers have to company information through the internet gives them a much better idea of what they are buying. Companies are no longer able to sugar coat their products and try to make them look better than they are.

#16 - "Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone."
This idea kind of goes along the same road as #12 in that companies can't sugar coat their products, but this is also saying that companies need to lose the formal way of going about things and try to relate more to the people because this is what is becoming the ultimate marketing success. Companies such as Apple are able to appeal to a much wider consumer base with their informal and user friendly products.

#25 - "Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers and talk to the people with whom they hope to create relationships."
I thought this thesis summed up pretty much the rest of the theses from 26 and on because they were all referring to the companies relating to their consumers more. They all kept referring to the human language and how companies weren't speaking it, which was going to be their downfall unless they can let the inevitable just happen.

-Mike

Gamer Theory

I was anticipating more than what was contained in this book. I understand many video games attempt to copy real life, which intrigue people to play it and become entertained and engaged. I just feel this book was long and drawn out to the point where discussing it further became confusing. Real life is real, virtual reality is virtual reality. I am glad we have moved onto the clue train manifesto which I think is much more interesting. The first six chapters of gamer theory in my opinion were enough for Wark to get his point across.

clue train manifesto

"There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone".
*This reminded me of our discussion earlier in the year about data mining. Companies know more information about your digital self then you do which is a rather creepy phenomena as we talked about at length during class. Google knows every search you have ever done and can trace it back to your individual computer. Facebook "knows" what your interests are , there are advertisements that are specific to what you like and yes it is kind of nice that I get inundated with ads for Gossip Girl and The Hills it's still slightly weird for me, networked markets really are the ones with the eyes and we are all blind to it until we are trapped in it.

"We are immune to advertising"
*This 'clue train manifesto' applies to the one above in that advertising in many regards define American culture-physically and on the internet (my example of the facebook advertisements) we just internalize what we see and don't question it.


-Anna-

Clue Train Manifesto

I rather enjoyed reading this. I thought it was extremely intelligent, thought out, and very much applicable to today's standard business. These are the thesis that I liked.

12 There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone.

I thought this was interesting because today when a new product comes to the market, it usually has a standard use and the customer has to wait for upgrades or accessories from the company. But, today when a new product hits the market there are tons of different little companies that sell their accessories or upgrades for the product well before the company releases them. Also, this body of under the radar companies combined with the market are very creative as they pool ideas from everyone at exceptional speeds.

17 Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch their ads on television are kidding themselves.

I thought of my mom, who does own a computer and uses the internet is more likely to see a add from tv and then find in online rather than find it while exploring online more randomly. People who find computers tricky and awkward are not going to be this new type of market.

31 Networked markets can change suppliers overnight. Networked knowledge workers can change employers over lunch. Your own "downsizing initiatives" taught us to ask the question: "Loyalty? What's that?"
The new markets of online shoppers and users don't have that sense of loyalty. The internet makes that easier but I agree that this idea that companies cut employees with ease has led to this feeling of the best product with the best service wins, if there is somethings or someone better with the drop of a hat the market will shift.


65 We're also the workers who make your companies go. We want to talk to customers directly in our own voices, not in platitudes written into a script.

I know that this exists, but I would have to give this platform to the market not the company. For example with motorcycles, the market quickly makes a platform to speak about everything about the bike. The market is able to discuss everything in great detail ask questions and receive responses from people who already own the product which will either encourage or discourage the market from purchasing. The company is in turn able to respond to complaints and questions about the market and better respond to the market. On another note, I know of outdoor companies including skiing companies that have hours where an employee is online and you can talk and ask questions about the products. What better suits you and so forth. Though this is not human VOICE, its just as good especially as the market continues in the internet. They are real people with real suggestions ans responses.

Corey

*Those comments do actually express some of the views of tesekkur ederim"

I know "IT" is not quite ready for publishing but when you do get it down i think everyone will be on your side. There is just no real "world of games." Everything is created and there is always a planned path, regardless of whether or not you're online gaming. And there is always a designated space for gaming, be it the console, computer, 3D goggles, whatever... Which is why I hate the term gamespace for reality. Games are not real, they are made up outlets that people use for entertainment, strictly entertainment. Games don't let you leave reality and they don't operate by themselves.
-Tom

Gamer Theory

I have to say I really do not enjoy Gamer Theory at all, though some of it may be my own fault. I didn't think that the chart we attempted to decipher was scholarly or clever, it just reinforced my negative feelings. Even if it makes some connection across gamer theory I still don't really care. Why? Because it's gamer theory, that’s why. I know I'm being overly critical but I really hate this book and needed to vent. I don't like the connection from gamer theory to reality, I believe it is quite forced. This is by far my least enjoyable subject thus far in the class and I can sense a "God, can't this stupid subject be over" from the rest of the class. In my next post, instead of bitching like a whiny school girl, I will offer critical analysis of the book so as to trash it in a way that’s not utterly infantile. Until then, screw this book, one of the least interesting books I’ve read so far.

-Matt

*(The comments of this post do not neccesarily reflect the thoughts or opinions of Tesekkur ederim)*

Gamer Theory

When we first started reading this book, I was pretty excited because gaming has always been an interest and hobby of mine. I've always enjoyed playing video games and interacting with other people through them. The first couple chapters of the book were confusing, but at the same time interesting because of the way it compares a topic to a specific game. I thought I would be able to get a grasp on the writing style, but I was wrong because I am just as confused as ever, and I have never heard of the games being discussed. One of the most frustrating aspects of this book are the ridiculously cryptic charts the author includes in the reading. In any other book there is a small caption or description, or at the very least labeled axes, to try to help the reader get a further understanding of what is being discussed. This couldn't be farther from the truth in this book. The attempts at the description of the chart that we discussed in the last class just made me doubt even further that the author even knew what he was trying to present. I really hope the book becomes easier to read and understand.

-Mike

The Game of Gamer Theory

I agree that this book is not the easiest of books. But, attempting to make today's discussion a little easier I believe I have a some what understanding that might help. I could also be proven wrong on Thursday. But the diagram, a starting place I believe we all agree is on the left and moving right either up and down or straight across that is still up for debate. But, if you try and picture that chart with a connection to the ever growing ball from the beginning of class it might get easier. I have never seen this game before class. But, the game starts a set position. (Your starting point) Then the choice is yours, going straight, left, right, forward, or backward. Either way you have four choices that are yours but also still well within the boundaries of the game. (Your first choice) So now you have chosen a direction and you have starting rolling. Again another four choices that are yours to make but still within the game. (Your third and final choice) This might be exaggerated in the sense of time, levels, checkpoints etc but still doesn't matter to have a general understanding (if I am right) Your decisions to turn left, right, forward, and backward were all smooth transitions, (if you say erase and replace or draw lines to connect to the next choice) the game still goes on and it is a seamless transition at least to the player. So no matter your direction it all fits within the game. I think it is important to understand the difference between the player or the ball and its seamless transition of directions and choices versus the idea of the programmer or something where you see all the different choices either on paper or in some program that you created endless possible choices but it results in the game as a continuous flow. Maybe this helps maybe I am completely wrong.
Corey

Gamer Theory

These past two classes have been rather frustrating for me. I've really enjoyed all of our topics up until this point- all the discussions about monitoring, all the ethical debates we had in class over social networking sites like juicycampus, what we thought was actually legitimate - yet for some reason I cannot get on board with this last section of Gamer Theory that we were talking about in todays class. I understood the discussion about how we have lost all our leisure time due to work, but Wark's model about gamespace seemed to be completely over my head, it seemed to be written in a different language to me. I don't quite see the relevance to our class, and this switch in discourse was a little off-putting. Maybe I'm just not making an effort to understand Gamer Theory because I am frustrated but perhaps a more hands on approach would help me better, I don't know about anyone else.

-Anna-