Posts Tagged: social interaction

Lanier makes a real effort to express his concern and opinion on the technology that is “forming” who we are and I would have to agree with Lanier in some aspects but I personally do not think free will is dead. I am an individual and as a graduate student in a program basically shaped for and by technology, I am still an individual in my own right and not by the technology and media mediums I utilize.

1. Lanier wants us to become individuals and not people that are to be shaped and framed by posts of others so my question is: Are there any possible processes, software systems or internet blogs that could help a user be an individual and not part of a whole or is becoming an individual impossible with the use of technology?

In response to this question, I think Lanier makes a valid effort. For example he talks about Open Culture and he says “impersonal communication has demeaned interpersonal interaction”  and I could not agree with him more on this point. I think interpersonal interaction has taken a hit to the wave of blog sites, dating sites, facebook, etc but that does not mean we are less of individuals. However, I think social interaction and contact is imperative and this is where I think we act as gadgets and sometimes we hide behind technology. It is almost the same routine everyday for me, I check facebook about the same times everyday as well as my email and other sites of mine so in a way that is somewhat robotic in my eyes. As far as software systems, I think that is the problem, software. Also, Lanier’s discussion on how facebook is similar to the No Child Left Behind Act was quite interesting. I see his point on the importance of helping or “getting” to everyone but I thought that was a little extreme.

2. Lanier talks about Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and he brings up many great points with the structure of the pyramid and I want to know how the hierarchy of need been altered based on the use of technology and the need for it? Have the everyday necessities been shifted based on our addictions and needs for the internet and the technology?

I believe Maslows hierarchy of needs was not the theory or concept he was trying to target and at this point in the book he started talking about his concept of digital Maoism and his beliefs on this hierarchy. Lanier states “digital Maoism doesn’t reject all hierarchy, instead it overwhelmingly rewards the one preferred hierarchy of digital metaness. Therefore, I believe the question is not has maslows hierarchy shifted based on technology but it is the concept of digital Maoism that adds relevance to a new hierarchy. He makes sure to express open culture is separate from digital Maoism which I think makes sense in a way because it does not relate to interaction but really in a way it does. Information systems play an imperative role in the accessibility of information but just because Wikipedia is constantly updated does not convey we are ALL acting like robots.

3.  Is this obsession with technology going to change the world of media journalism because there is such a need to have a “hand” in the media? Has journalism lost all credibility because everyone is considered a journalist?

I think we are in the unfortunate chaotic gray area of media journalism. The way to get information has changed, making it essentially a career for everyone. I think there has been some loss of credibility in journalism because of the way people get information. Yes, I GET YOUR POINT LANIER, Wikipedia is bad but that does not mean I am! I truly appreciate the comments of some of my classmates in regard to information gathering and I would have to say I am with most of the imedia students…….we are not gadgets, we just like to play with them!

After going back through the first 20 pages twice in this book, it is interesting the point Benkler, a law professor at Yale is trying to get across to his readers.

1. Enhanced Autonomy: Has the growth of mass media use led to the depletion of “close-knit” or “strong”affiliation relationships? Is it a negative concept to have “loose” affiliation relationships in the work place?

In response to this question, I believe there has been a depletion of those relationships in the work place because of enhanced autonomy. It seems it is all about the individual in todays society and whether that is good or bad can depend on the content and of course the individual. In my opinion, it is almost like Benkler is saying enhanced autonomy is a good thing because it leads to personal growth without the attachments of a relationship. For example, Benkler says ” enhanced autonomy enhances our capacity to do more in loose commonality with others, without being constrained to organize their relationship through a price system or in traditional hierarchical models of social and economic organization,” which I think is a point that could be argued. I don’t believe he is arguing this point, in a way I think he is trying to make a point as to what is currently happening. Although I believe face to face interpersonal communication is a great way to grow as a person because you are building social skills in a way that technology can’t but I do not think enhanced autonomy is a bad thing therefore, having loose affiliation relationships is not a negative concept. Much like Benkler stated, I think people in certain situations can do more for themselves independently.

2. In chapter 3, there is a discussion on relevance and accreditation in/of content produced on websites or in this case a search engine and my question is: should companies be allowed to filter peer review comments and posts that discuss the credibility of their product or is it considered media censorship?

Much like some of the discussion in the framing questions of some of my collegues, common based peer production, this new model of economical production is a growing phenomenon that in my eyes has been inevitable.  When it comes to editing peer review comments or filtering them, I think these companies should not be allowed to censor how their audience views their website. In talking about slashdot, I think how their designers accept the comments and posts their readers add to the website because they treat their bloggers as imperative sources of information. Many websites use censorship in a negative way and it hurts our economy because I think censorship is trickery. Although, there are times when censorship in the media could be essential for the well-being for the audience but that is a whole new can of worms that I could argue all day.

3. In chapter 10, the author says “the internet allows for a radically more diverse suite of communications models then any of the 20th century systems permitted,” and my questions is: could most of business/corporate operate solely on internet communication/ interaction therefore increasing the number of home offices or will society always need office space for a certain type of social interaction the internet cannot provide

I personally think it will be hard for businesses to operate solely on internet communication because that business face to face interaction is imperative in building professional relationships but I think this goes back to the traditional answer “it depends on the situation.” Corporate america would not be able to operate only on internet interaction but that is not saying the “home office” rate will not increase because there are many companies that are hiring people for their social networking abilities and newspapers even have online editors that never go into the office or if they do it is once a year.  I also believe we will see more jobs like those types of jobs in the future and this brings to what Benkler talks about in chapter 4. I think motivation is a big part in this topic because Benkler believes people are motivated because it gives them some social value which many jobs seemingly do not these days but ones that are based on social networking and even web design. These jobs are allowing a more socially acceptable employee which is really in a way what we all want; to be socially accepted. Internet communication is interpersonal communication but I do not think it should be the only means of interpersonal communication to operate on.

The Wealth of Networks

1. Enhanced Autonomy: Has the growth of mass media use led to the depletion of “close-knit” or “strong”affiliation relationships? Is it a negative concept to have “loose” affiliation relationships in the work place?

2. In chapter 3, there is a discussion on relevance and accreditation in/of content produced on websites or in this case a search engine and my question is: should companies be allowed to filter peer review comments and posts that discuss the credibility of their product or is it considered media censorship?

3. In chapter 10, the author says “the internet allows for a radically more diverse suite of communications models then any of the 20th century systems permitted,” and my questions is: could most of business/corporate operate solely on internet communication/ interaction therefore increasing the number of home offices or will society always need office space for a certain type of social interaction the internet cannot provide?