When thinking of a new media that doesn't exist yet, I had trouble coming up with anything since basically, there is a lot of media forms out there. Eventually, I thought up with a media that allows individuals to stream video games to mobile devices. For example, you are at home playing a video game like call of duty, then you have to go to school, some may want to have the availability to stream their home console video games to their mobile devices.
This new media would enhance integration of the ever growing video game industry. Most home console video games are far too big and hardware demanding to be able to work on mobile devices. Through a purported, ever present existence of a wireless network, theoretically these extremely demanding games could be streamed from the home device to the mobile device. This technology would not produce strain on the hardware of the mobile device, it would simply work through having a home base device that is running the game and streaming it through a wireless network.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Our Class Wiki - So Far
My role in the class wiki is a contributor to the "New Media & Economics" section. As of yet, i have not posted information to wiki directly, but i have researched some current events that need to be noted. Events such as how the economy's development ins constantly updated, discussed and argued through new media sites such as yahoo and through networking sites like Twitter. Also, more importantly how the crisis that started in 2007 was projected and globalized through the internet. Undoubtedly, the fact that this crisis was spread vastly through new media had a deeper psychological effect on how people viewed the current economy's state and that affected their expectations on how the economy will do because the negative news was a lot more accessible and viewed more on a daily basis.
P2P File Sharing
File sharing is when an individual distributes digital information through many means such as the internet, servers, storage and many more. What makes P2P or "Peer to Peer" file sharing different is that digitally stored information is acquired directly from a peer by another peer and not from the internet or a server. Individuals connected to a network"upload" files from their computers and other individuals connected to the network as well "download" the files onto their computer. This network effect links many people who may be uploading and downloading the same information, which makes that information almost impossible for it to disappear from the network.
An example of P2P file sharing is illustrated in Jamie King's "Content producers should take advantage of P2P, not fear it" In the article she describes how the film titled "Steal This Film" was digitally distributed through various means, but mainly through BitTorrent sites like The Pirate Bay, which are a form of P2P.The article is making the point that P2P is extremely effective at getting information distributed. King states that the movie was downloaded over 2 million times and viewed by 3 million people in the span of 18 months. Those are impressive numbers. Ultimately P2P has negative connotations attached to it like "illegal" and "piracy," but beyond that misconception, there are those like King who recognized that P2P is a very efficient and effective way to spread information around and that is a tool that cannot be neglected.
An example of P2P file sharing is illustrated in Jamie King's "Content producers should take advantage of P2P, not fear it" In the article she describes how the film titled "Steal This Film" was digitally distributed through various means, but mainly through BitTorrent sites like The Pirate Bay, which are a form of P2P.The article is making the point that P2P is extremely effective at getting information distributed. King states that the movie was downloaded over 2 million times and viewed by 3 million people in the span of 18 months. Those are impressive numbers. Ultimately P2P has negative connotations attached to it like "illegal" and "piracy," but beyond that misconception, there are those like King who recognized that P2P is a very efficient and effective way to spread information around and that is a tool that cannot be neglected.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Privacy & Confidentiality
Along with the benefits of new media, there are also negatives such as the issue of privacy and confidentiality. Since new media is vastly integrated in the internet, it is extremely difficult to control something after its uploaded to the web. For example, if one uploads a picture to Facebook and later on decides that its not an appropriate one, they may delete it of their profile, but that picture is already stored in Facebook's database and there's nothing that person can do about it to truly remove it from the internet. With the right tools, another person could be able to retrieve this picture and use it for purposes the uploaded never intended to.
When somebody creates a profile in a social networking site, they fill in a lot of personal information that may seem harmless while they are doing it. The fact is that by displaying one's real name, age, e-mail, phone number, and location,one has given extremely powerful information to the right user, like spammers and and hackers, looking out to steal one's identity to benefit themselves.
The truth is that new media platforms like social networking sites bring about great issues pertaining to privacy and confidentiality, once such info is uploaded to the internet, its there for good. Others with ill intentions come along and use that information for others detriment. So before uploading anything on Facebook, Myspace or Twitter, think of it from a perspective of somebody looking to inflict harm on you and if they can use such information. If you have a reasonable doubts, DO NOT upload it, avoid the time and trouble of having to deal with it later.
When somebody creates a profile in a social networking site, they fill in a lot of personal information that may seem harmless while they are doing it. The fact is that by displaying one's real name, age, e-mail, phone number, and location,one has given extremely powerful information to the right user, like spammers and and hackers, looking out to steal one's identity to benefit themselves.
The truth is that new media platforms like social networking sites bring about great issues pertaining to privacy and confidentiality, once such info is uploaded to the internet, its there for good. Others with ill intentions come along and use that information for others detriment. So before uploading anything on Facebook, Myspace or Twitter, think of it from a perspective of somebody looking to inflict harm on you and if they can use such information. If you have a reasonable doubts, DO NOT upload it, avoid the time and trouble of having to deal with it later.
Advice to Baruch College
If i were to be contracted by Baruch College to use new media in order to improve the collegiate experience, i would advice Baruch to adopt a social networking community. A sort of community that enhances the student's level of education and overall college experience. Such a community would integrate many of the already existing services that Baruch provides. Like, integrating Blackboard, Degree Works, e-sims and many others into a condensed page that is more easily accessible without having to log in individually every time one wants to use one of the services. On top of that i would advice that Baruch establish a social network community that enables students to communicate with others who may aspire the same degree, are taking the same courses at the present time or may have taken the course previously. This community would have features that would allow students to converge and discuss similar ideals since they are already linked in the social network by their scholastic aspirations and experiences.
The students could help each other or give advice to each other pertaining to the courses they may be taking. For example, a student that is going to take a chemistry course the following semester could inquire another student he/she is linked to because that student already took chemistry. This community would give Baruch a more traditional experience of student engagement while in college because as of now, Baruch is seen as a fast paced school with barely any focus out of the everyday schedule of coming into school, taking classes and leaving. Through a social network community, students could engage on-the-go on matters other then scholastic ones, like fraternities and sororities, and sports at Baruch. The big picture is that through new media as the one illustrated above, Baruch could enhance the collegiate experience for its students by providing a deeper level of engagement and integration in a fast paced environment.
The students could help each other or give advice to each other pertaining to the courses they may be taking. For example, a student that is going to take a chemistry course the following semester could inquire another student he/she is linked to because that student already took chemistry. This community would give Baruch a more traditional experience of student engagement while in college because as of now, Baruch is seen as a fast paced school with barely any focus out of the everyday schedule of coming into school, taking classes and leaving. Through a social network community, students could engage on-the-go on matters other then scholastic ones, like fraternities and sororities, and sports at Baruch. The big picture is that through new media as the one illustrated above, Baruch could enhance the collegiate experience for its students by providing a deeper level of engagement and integration in a fast paced environment.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Creativity
New media fosters creativity because they are a open platform when they are released. Since new media is mostly software without any real hardware, people can be creative and enhance the platform. By comparison, old media, such as a newspaper is already a predetermined product. It was established that it is in paper form and with a certain format chosen by the producer.
However, new media is based on the Internet, and like Claire Cain Miller's "Twitter Serves Up Ideas From It's Users" states, a lot of new companies based of the Internet are sitting it out and allowing for their users to innovate their bare-bone companies. Like twitter, it was released with little features, basically only with the feature to micro blog up to 140 characters. Users started to develop other features like using "@" to refer to somebody because they believed the site needed it. Once the owners of twitter saw that most users wanted the feature, they made it an integral part of the site.
Ultimately, new media fosters creativity because of it's nature, it is released in software, ergo it can be updated, meaning that it is not completely defined in it's inception. New media is always developing, always a work in progress, awaiting the next creative individual who makes it better.
However, new media is based on the Internet, and like Claire Cain Miller's "Twitter Serves Up Ideas From It's Users" states, a lot of new companies based of the Internet are sitting it out and allowing for their users to innovate their bare-bone companies. Like twitter, it was released with little features, basically only with the feature to micro blog up to 140 characters. Users started to develop other features like using "@" to refer to somebody because they believed the site needed it. Once the owners of twitter saw that most users wanted the feature, they made it an integral part of the site.
Ultimately, new media fosters creativity because of it's nature, it is released in software, ergo it can be updated, meaning that it is not completely defined in it's inception. New media is always developing, always a work in progress, awaiting the next creative individual who makes it better.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Modeling Reality with Virtual Worlds
Virtual worlds are a hopeful attempt to simulate real life. These virtual worlds can be used in many ways. One use is to simulate something that can't be done in real life by certain individuals, like paraplegics. These people are bound home for most of their lives because of their physical incapabilities, so some of them become anti social. Through virtual worlds these people can communicate and converge with others who may or may not be in the same situation, regardless the point is that they communicate.
Another obvious way virtual worlds can be used is simply for entertainment, World of Warcraft is a n MMORPG, which is basically a virtual world in a video game form. The point of the game is that it never ends, you start off as weak and lonely, you can advance your stats by beating others and collecting items, you can build relationships with others.
Virtual worlds have many positive ways in which they can be used. One pro of virtual worlds is that they genuinely do help some people do things that others can in real life, but they are incapable of, like paraplegics. They can go out at night and have fun with others through this virtual reality. Another pro of virtual worlds is how they take social networking to the next level. Like Dave Itzkoff's "I've been to that club, just not in real life" states, the future of social networking is not in 2D planes like Facebook or Twitter, it's in 3D virtual worlds, where one can navigate in and converge with others. Yet another pro of virtual worlds is illustrated in Mark Tutton's "Going to the virtual office in Second Life," Mark states how virtual worlds can reduce overhead for multinational companies. Employees don't have to book flights to meet in person to develop ideas, through virtual worlds, employees from around the globe can meet up and discuss ideas through a fresh new platform. Employees can brainstorm while walking around in the park or have a beer at the bar, it is definitely a new approach to business interaction, which is a lot more engaging that video conferences, which definitely inspires creativity.
The big con of virtual worlds is that some may become too involved in them and detach themselves from the real world. The idea of being all you can be is a lot easier to implement in a virtual world than in the real world, because there are a lot less obstacles. Thus some may prefer to constantly "live" in the virtual world rather than in the real world, which may lead so serious psychological problems.
In virtual worlds there are no physical boundaries, anybody can be or do anything, there is a certain incentive to be creative with that. The lack of regulations and governmental laws give a new approach to how people view things, which in my opinion, fosters creativity.
In the future, through technological advancements, virtual worlds will look a lot better. With a lot less lag and more realistic graphics, people will become even more engaged. Virtual worlds are definitely one of the future medias that will take social networking to the next level.
Another obvious way virtual worlds can be used is simply for entertainment, World of Warcraft is a n MMORPG, which is basically a virtual world in a video game form. The point of the game is that it never ends, you start off as weak and lonely, you can advance your stats by beating others and collecting items, you can build relationships with others.
Virtual worlds have many positive ways in which they can be used. One pro of virtual worlds is that they genuinely do help some people do things that others can in real life, but they are incapable of, like paraplegics. They can go out at night and have fun with others through this virtual reality. Another pro of virtual worlds is how they take social networking to the next level. Like Dave Itzkoff's "I've been to that club, just not in real life" states, the future of social networking is not in 2D planes like Facebook or Twitter, it's in 3D virtual worlds, where one can navigate in and converge with others. Yet another pro of virtual worlds is illustrated in Mark Tutton's "Going to the virtual office in Second Life," Mark states how virtual worlds can reduce overhead for multinational companies. Employees don't have to book flights to meet in person to develop ideas, through virtual worlds, employees from around the globe can meet up and discuss ideas through a fresh new platform. Employees can brainstorm while walking around in the park or have a beer at the bar, it is definitely a new approach to business interaction, which is a lot more engaging that video conferences, which definitely inspires creativity.
The big con of virtual worlds is that some may become too involved in them and detach themselves from the real world. The idea of being all you can be is a lot easier to implement in a virtual world than in the real world, because there are a lot less obstacles. Thus some may prefer to constantly "live" in the virtual world rather than in the real world, which may lead so serious psychological problems.
In virtual worlds there are no physical boundaries, anybody can be or do anything, there is a certain incentive to be creative with that. The lack of regulations and governmental laws give a new approach to how people view things, which in my opinion, fosters creativity.
In the future, through technological advancements, virtual worlds will look a lot better. With a lot less lag and more realistic graphics, people will become even more engaged. Virtual worlds are definitely one of the future medias that will take social networking to the next level.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Blog about Twitter
I just recently signed up on Twitter and i'm going blog about how it compares to having a discussion on Blackboard and in class.
To compare having a discussion on Twitter to having one on Blackboard its like comparing sitting on a pointy rock or on a water bed, respectively. Blackboard is simply decades behind the usability and engaging factor Twitter has. Blackboard feels so clunky and slow, in comparison, when there's a really good topic in discussion and there are multiple people on the same topic, you cant type fast enough to reply to everybody on Twitter. Blackboard is just not up to the task, Twitter is a dedicated site to micro blogging and its the best at it.
Having a conversation in class is almost like having a conversation on Twitter. Its like passing notes in class so the teacher wont see or punish you. In fact, i bet tons of students tweet in class rather than have a verbal conversation. Since talking in class will get you canned by the teacher, Twitting is an alternative, they are very similar in the practical sense. If verbally having a discussion in class, then Twitting is just not the same, there is no way anybody can type as fast as they can motor mouth. The face to face and verbal interaction makes the conversation much more engaging, no social networking site will ever surpass that, but Twitting is the next best thing.
To compare having a discussion on Twitter to having one on Blackboard its like comparing sitting on a pointy rock or on a water bed, respectively. Blackboard is simply decades behind the usability and engaging factor Twitter has. Blackboard feels so clunky and slow, in comparison, when there's a really good topic in discussion and there are multiple people on the same topic, you cant type fast enough to reply to everybody on Twitter. Blackboard is just not up to the task, Twitter is a dedicated site to micro blogging and its the best at it.
Having a conversation in class is almost like having a conversation on Twitter. Its like passing notes in class so the teacher wont see or punish you. In fact, i bet tons of students tweet in class rather than have a verbal conversation. Since talking in class will get you canned by the teacher, Twitting is an alternative, they are very similar in the practical sense. If verbally having a discussion in class, then Twitting is just not the same, there is no way anybody can type as fast as they can motor mouth. The face to face and verbal interaction makes the conversation much more engaging, no social networking site will ever surpass that, but Twitting is the next best thing.
Social Networking Sites
There are many social networking sites all over the web. If you dont want to bother with signing on to a bunch of them to see which one is best then dont worry because i took my sweet time to do so and will be blogging about it.
My first encounter with a social networking site was back in high school when i subscribed to Sconex. I was pretty impressed being able to talk to my friends from high school and comment on their pages. To me, there was no other social networking site that was better, but that all changed when everybody moved on to Myspace. I'll tell you what, browsing through Sconex felt like i was back in the stone age after i subscribed to Myspace. The structure now seemed terrible in comparison, the entire page was filled with groups you had joined, they should have been in another tab, not in the main page. It's a bit ironic since when i didnt know anything besides Sconex, i though it was the second coming of Jesus.
So i abandoned Sconex, it was too primitive for my sophisticated taste, now i had my own space. Myspace really made me see the grand scheme of social networking sites, through Sconex i would only be able to contact high school students, but through Myspace, the world was the limit. I felt a little overwhelmed by this, but nevertheless i enjoyed it. It was like a more polished Sconex, one would share personal info in predetermined spots in your page. The fact that one could customize their and page made Myspace a much more engaging experience. I remember it like it was a competition, who out of all my friends would have the best looking page, it was time consuming to say the least. Also a feature that i really liked about Myspace was the music features. I remember spending hours upon hours discovering new artists or songs and then making that song my profile track. Everybody would try and have the "coolest" artists and pages, seemed a little juvenile now that i look back.
Then i went away for college at Binghamton University and made new friends and they asked me"you have Facebook?" I was like "wha...?" Well and then it all started, signed up on Facebook and boy i remember having the same feeling i had when i upgraded from Sconex, NOW Myspace felt dated and immature. Facebook had and has a certain "umph" to it that other sites just dont. I guess its the user interface that really got me hooked. Everything was so intuitive and efficient. I continued back and forth between Facebook and Myspace (had most friends there) until i indefinitely abandoned Myspace. I remember how annoying it was receiving so much spam mail in Myspace, to this day, at least in my experience, spam mail is non existing in Facebook. The best feature about Facebook was and is the status updates. It just feels right constantly updating and replying to comments you get afterward. Its extremely addicting, gives a perceptual reality of being with the person, obviously not physically, but the fact that you are conversing about whats on yours or any other's mind really enhances the experience.
I recently signed up to Twitter, never really saw the point in doing so, since i already had Facebook and micro-blog through status updates, but now i see how its different. In fact, Twitter is a lot more engaging in the aspect of micro blogging then Facebook is. Through features that allow for you to tweet or reply to one or however many people you want at the same time, Twitter separates itself from Facebook. Finally, the limitation of only being able to tweet 140 characters is an incentive to keep a conversation going, because there is no way you will say all you have to say about a controversial topic in a couple of sentences, well at least i know i wont!
My first encounter with a social networking site was back in high school when i subscribed to Sconex. I was pretty impressed being able to talk to my friends from high school and comment on their pages. To me, there was no other social networking site that was better, but that all changed when everybody moved on to Myspace. I'll tell you what, browsing through Sconex felt like i was back in the stone age after i subscribed to Myspace. The structure now seemed terrible in comparison, the entire page was filled with groups you had joined, they should have been in another tab, not in the main page. It's a bit ironic since when i didnt know anything besides Sconex, i though it was the second coming of Jesus.
So i abandoned Sconex, it was too primitive for my sophisticated taste, now i had my own space. Myspace really made me see the grand scheme of social networking sites, through Sconex i would only be able to contact high school students, but through Myspace, the world was the limit. I felt a little overwhelmed by this, but nevertheless i enjoyed it. It was like a more polished Sconex, one would share personal info in predetermined spots in your page. The fact that one could customize their and page made Myspace a much more engaging experience. I remember it like it was a competition, who out of all my friends would have the best looking page, it was time consuming to say the least. Also a feature that i really liked about Myspace was the music features. I remember spending hours upon hours discovering new artists or songs and then making that song my profile track. Everybody would try and have the "coolest" artists and pages, seemed a little juvenile now that i look back.
Then i went away for college at Binghamton University and made new friends and they asked me"you have Facebook?" I was like "wha...?" Well and then it all started, signed up on Facebook and boy i remember having the same feeling i had when i upgraded from Sconex, NOW Myspace felt dated and immature. Facebook had and has a certain "umph" to it that other sites just dont. I guess its the user interface that really got me hooked. Everything was so intuitive and efficient. I continued back and forth between Facebook and Myspace (had most friends there) until i indefinitely abandoned Myspace. I remember how annoying it was receiving so much spam mail in Myspace, to this day, at least in my experience, spam mail is non existing in Facebook. The best feature about Facebook was and is the status updates. It just feels right constantly updating and replying to comments you get afterward. Its extremely addicting, gives a perceptual reality of being with the person, obviously not physically, but the fact that you are conversing about whats on yours or any other's mind really enhances the experience.
I recently signed up to Twitter, never really saw the point in doing so, since i already had Facebook and micro-blog through status updates, but now i see how its different. In fact, Twitter is a lot more engaging in the aspect of micro blogging then Facebook is. Through features that allow for you to tweet or reply to one or however many people you want at the same time, Twitter separates itself from Facebook. Finally, the limitation of only being able to tweet 140 characters is an incentive to keep a conversation going, because there is no way you will say all you have to say about a controversial topic in a couple of sentences, well at least i know i wont!
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Social Networking
How can social networks be exploited? That's a question that many have probably asked themselves. Seeing how this year Facebook has produced 6 billionaires, while still remaining a private entity is very appealing. Social networking sites like Facebook present a major source of revenue for its creators, the ad business is bigger and more profitable then ever.
Like Fred Vogelstein's "Great Wall of Facebook: The Social Network's Plan to Dominate the Internet — and Keep Google Out" state, Google wanted in on Facebook's ad business, but Microsoft got it instead. Google represents the internet's biggest company and Facebook represents Google's biggest competitor. The answer to the question aforementioned is obvious, ads. These social networks like Facebook and Myspace are exploited with ads. Facebook has about half a billion members, the idea of having an ad in so much traffic is irresistible for companies and that means a lot of cash for Facebook execs.
Technologies like Facebook present obvious previously mentioned benefits for its owners, but they also present benefits for its users. Like Virginian Hefferna's "The Medium: Being There" states, social networks like Facebook present a sort of virtual reality of "being there" with your friends while not actually physically being there. Through Facebook's status updates, people make random or concise updates about what they are doing and about the state of their life. These current and personal updates gives the sensation of "being there" with the updater and it encourages others to comment on the status. While its obvious that you may not be physically there with the person, the sensation of feeling like you are through personal and current updates is certainly a benefit to those who by whatever reason cannot physically be somebody they may want to. It is definitely a new approach to "networking."
Is there a "dark side" to these social networks? That all depends on how the user interprets the actual use of the site. If a user becomes engulfed by the surreality of the website like what i previously explained of "being there," but not really being there. Then yes, this is a negative effect of the social network. These sites are not meant to make you a hermit and never physically congregate with friends, they are meant to provide access to your friends current and personal events when it may be impossible to do so, that is the positive effect of the social networks.
In my opinion, as more people inevitable become connected to the internet, these sites will only develop further to accommodate the users needs and wants, people like interacting with others. Social networks provide an efficient--on the go--method of doing this. With the ad business ever expanding, the more people subscribe to these networks, the more the business will expand and therefore entice the creators and regulators of these sites to attract more members. There is a blindingly future ahead of these social network sites, especially Facebook.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Blog Vs. Wiki
The main difference between a wiki and a blog is their purpose. A wiki is a central source of information for a particular subject, which its contents are controlled by contributors. This content "should" be objective, thus only facts should be contributed. A blog is a post where a user like myself at this particular time decides to share their opinions or beliefs about a particular subject such as this one. The key words that distinguish a wiki and a blog are fact and opinion, a wiki should provide facts and a blog is the contributors opinion.
The problem with wikis is in their nature itself. Since a wiki is content provided by contributors, the information may be inaccurate, whether it was the intent or a mistake made by the contributor to provide such content. Therefore like John D. Sutter's "Wikipedia: No Longer the Wild Wild West" article discusses, the assigning of editors to verify if the information added to Wikipedia is accurate or not was an inevitable step in the websites evolution. Some argue that the website is derailing from it's roots of user contributed content without regulation, but if editors were not assigned to the content, the website would have completely derailed from it's true roots: to provide "accurate" user contributed information. Since there is so much controversy on the legitimacy of wikis and content used as a source for scholarly research will result in an epic F-, wikis should be used for subjective debates on previously contributed objective content. Perhaps, wikis should abandon to strive so much for legitimacy since ultimately it's user based content and should be a completely open platform for the users themselves.
Blogs on the other hand are much simpler. Like Melissa Gerry's "Celebrity Blogs: The Impact of New Media" states, blogs are not regulated or edited by anybody. The author of the blog can say whatever they want without being punished. The fact that blogs are based on mostly formulated opinions makes it easier for collaboration to happen based around the blogs. For example, when I finish writing this blog, I may get comments on people's opinion about my blog. The comments may be negative or positive, it doesn't matter, the fact that this blog enticed others to take their time to respond proves how blogs are a tool of collaboration. Comments create a chain effect because I may respond depending on how strongly I feel about my opinion. Ultimately, blogs create collaboration through the sharing of information in a subjective way, which entices others to respond to share their opinions. We all gain new perspectives from a certain piece of information.
The importance of convergence is illustrated in both wikis and blogs. The fact that people are willing to take their time to contribute information to a wiki or to post comments on a blog illustrates that people are not only converging, but wanting and caring to do so through the use of these new media platforms. Blogs and wikis are bringing people from all over the world to the same place, almost like if I and all of the people writing a blog about this topic were sitting in a table together, discussing and contributing. There is no doubt that "new media" converges people from all over, but the fact that it does it so efficiently and seamlessly is unprecedented in human history.
The problem with wikis is in their nature itself. Since a wiki is content provided by contributors, the information may be inaccurate, whether it was the intent or a mistake made by the contributor to provide such content. Therefore like John D. Sutter's "Wikipedia: No Longer the Wild Wild West" article discusses, the assigning of editors to verify if the information added to Wikipedia is accurate or not was an inevitable step in the websites evolution. Some argue that the website is derailing from it's roots of user contributed content without regulation, but if editors were not assigned to the content, the website would have completely derailed from it's true roots: to provide "accurate" user contributed information. Since there is so much controversy on the legitimacy of wikis and content used as a source for scholarly research will result in an epic F-, wikis should be used for subjective debates on previously contributed objective content. Perhaps, wikis should abandon to strive so much for legitimacy since ultimately it's user based content and should be a completely open platform for the users themselves.
Blogs on the other hand are much simpler. Like Melissa Gerry's "Celebrity Blogs: The Impact of New Media" states, blogs are not regulated or edited by anybody. The author of the blog can say whatever they want without being punished. The fact that blogs are based on mostly formulated opinions makes it easier for collaboration to happen based around the blogs. For example, when I finish writing this blog, I may get comments on people's opinion about my blog. The comments may be negative or positive, it doesn't matter, the fact that this blog enticed others to take their time to respond proves how blogs are a tool of collaboration. Comments create a chain effect because I may respond depending on how strongly I feel about my opinion. Ultimately, blogs create collaboration through the sharing of information in a subjective way, which entices others to respond to share their opinions. We all gain new perspectives from a certain piece of information.
The importance of convergence is illustrated in both wikis and blogs. The fact that people are willing to take their time to contribute information to a wiki or to post comments on a blog illustrates that people are not only converging, but wanting and caring to do so through the use of these new media platforms. Blogs and wikis are bringing people from all over the world to the same place, almost like if I and all of the people writing a blog about this topic were sitting in a table together, discussing and contributing. There is no doubt that "new media" converges people from all over, but the fact that it does it so efficiently and seamlessly is unprecedented in human history.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Semester Research Project
The research project I'm endeavoring in for this semester is titled: "How Does Technology Blur the Lines Between Social Networking and the 'Real Thing'." I will focus on technology such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the platforms on which people used them everyday. Platforms such as tablets and smart phones ; devices on the go that allow networking on the fly or better yet "on the cloud!"
What's Next?!
As tons of new tablets hit the market, true fans await the release of the iPad 2G! It would seem that the iPad 2g is slated for the same release date as the original, so people can expect it to hit the market around April or May. As always apple has a close lid on everything, so any rumors you've seen or heard are just that, rumors, until Apple says otherwise dont get your hopes too high! On the latest CES, people claim to have spotted a reporter with the next iPad, from the buzz around the next and some hope-to pictures it would seem that the next iPad comes with a front and back facing camera (obvious much?) and seems to be slimmer and with a bigger speaker in the back. That's all the rumor that seems to be spreading around so far, Apple has done a better job at keeping this baby without leaking than they did with the iPhone 4! So as we patiently await, what are your expectations, new interface? What do you expect from iPad 2G? Let the blogging begin!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)