- Sep 2015
-
learn.sju.edu learn.sju.edu
-
Most of what gets created on any given day :is ·justthe ordinary stuff of life-gossip, little updates, tlDmrimg out loud-but now it's done in the same medium as professionally produced material.
This is true for people who have personal social networking accounts, rather than a brand or a business. The most popular thing now is the sharing of photos. But, it's done in the same manner and form of professionally produced material. What this means is that professionals and ordinary people are on the same level.
-
No one (except News Corp) can easily address the site's assembled millions; most conversation goes on in much smaller groups, albeit interconnected ones.
This is true because usually the information I'm sharing only goes to the people I have in my network, not the world (public). This is true for most people, too. The conversations are, usually, limited.
-
Seen this way, the idea of user-generated content is actually not just a personal theory of creative capabilities but a social theory of media relations.
We discussed this in class. User-generated content is a social theory because it is put forth by the people, not one company distributing information. People join together to generate content and put it out into the world, known as media relations. It's social in the aspect of content being commented on or replied to by the people.
-
-
inst-fs-iad-prod.inscloudgate.net inst-fs-iad-prod.inscloudgate.net
-
They often approached me, genuinely worried about their children’s future and unable to understand why anyone who cared about themselves and their privacy would be willing to be actively engaged online.
For the parent, it's all about establishing trust with their children. The internet is an amazing thing if it is used in the proper way. Not everyone doesn't care about their privacy while being an active internet user.
-
“Just because teenagers use internet sites to connect to other people doesn’t mean they don’t care about their privacy. We don’t tell everybody every single thing about our lives. ... So to go ahead and say that teenagers don’t like privacy is pretty ignorant and inconsiderate honestly, I believe, on the adults’ part.”
While this is the case for many teens, it does not speak on behalf of all of them. It is different for everyone. It is wrong to only listen to the opinion of one person on such a broad spectrum of users.
-
Teens often grow frustrated with adult assumptions that suggest that they are part of a generation that has eschewed privacy in order to participate in social media
When dealing with their kids' involvement on the internet, parents are mostly concerned with privacy. Social media, however, has become a very private forum, if that's what you want it to be. Extensive privacy settings and features make popular social networking sites virtually secure and private. Ultimately, it's the teens that have the decision of what they want to share and whom they want to share it to. Parents can even adjust privacy settings for their children if they are under a certain age.
-
t enables youth to create a cool space without physically transporting them-selves anywhere
Which, in a way, promotes laziness. Instead of actually going to the game, a teen can have the same experience watching the Snapchat stories posted by friends on his or her phone. They are constantly tapped in, regardless of where they are.
-
Although some teens still congregate at malls and football games, the introduction of social media does alter the landscape.
Because of constantly being tapped in to social media, communication between teens has been hindered. The practice of texting someone you're sitting next to has become common. I believe it has had a negative impact on the way we communicate, since a cell phone acts as a wall for someone to hide behind. People would rather communicate via text than in person.
-
Social media plays a crucial role in the lives of networked teens. Although the specific technologies change, they collectively provide teens with a space to hang out and connect with friends.
Social media involvement is the key to popularity for teenagers. What's disgusting is that the amount of likes you get on a picture is directly related to how "popular" you are. Teens are constantly connected to their friends online through numerous social networking sites. It has become part of the culture.
-
-
firstmonday.org firstmonday.org
-
At this point, the meme was no longer transmitting the original message clearly; copying fidelity had been subsumed by variability, particularly in the latter two examples from Black Flag and Maybelline.
With popularity the subjects got misconstrued and taken out of context. Companies took their advertisements too far and the original message was not being received anymore.
-
The popularity of Internet memes has spurred many corporations to co–opt popular cultural messages to sell products — see, for example, Spike TV’s use of the 2005 Internet meme “Leeroy Jenkins” in its 2006 series of commercials “Leeroy Live.
The goal of the corporations is to draw attention to the business and attract the culture into buying them. The people then believe that because they're buying that product, they're supporting the cause. Whether or not the company cares about the issue will never be known, but they put up a front to make us think they do. The proof is in the advertising.
-
These variant examples illustrate corporations’ interests in capitalizing on the kairotic moment surrounding gay marriage rights
What is being said here is that corporations feed off of what's trending on the internet. They change their logos and ad campaigns to reflect the current hot topic and gain notoriety. This ultimately gives their company or brand more attention (whether it be good or bad) and generate more business. It's all about the money.
-
-
henryjenkins.org henryjenkins.org
-
The term has ‘viral’ has been used to describe so many related but ultimately distinct practices — ranging from Word-of-Mouth marketing to video mash-ups and remixes posted to YouTube — that just what counts as viral is unclear.
I think that he means the term "viral" is very broad. The things that are viral are very obvious; it's what's extremely popular and circulating recently on the internet. Anything can be viral on the internet. I don't understand what he finds to be unclear.
-
Ultimately, however, viral media is a flawed way to think about distributing content through informal or adhoc networks of consumers.
I do not agree. I think that making this connection between the two topics make it easier to understand. To me, they are the same thing.
-
Use of the terms “viral” and “memes” by those in the marketing, advertising and media industries may be creating more confusion than clarity.
I believe the author is referencing the people that are not involved with media are the ones that are confused? I find it hard to believe, however, these terms make things confusing. Those who are in the marketing, advertising, and media industries should be very familiar with these terms.
-
-
-
The Internet will become a lot more like TV and a lot less like the global conversation we envisioned 20 years ago.
This means that the internet will be more like a TV in the sense of just watching what is on it, not having your views expressed or contributed. The conversation will come to an end. It virtually won't exist and there will be only be one distinct voice.
-
And they will define the future of our communications network, unless something dramatic changes.
The author is saying that the current global network will shrink drastically in the future is something isn't done. Our communications network will divided. But what could be done to change this?
-
The Internet is less open and more centralized.
I think what the author is stating here is that the internet has become less of a forum and more of a niche community. There are only a few major sites that have the most popularity (like Facebook and Pinterest) that others can't compare to. This makes the interent very centralized; dominated by a select few. It also causes it to be less open.
-
-
learn.sju.edu learn.sju.edu
-
And it demonstrates the ease and speed with which a group can be mobilized for the right kind of cause.
An example of this would be the world responding to a graphic or innapropriate post online. This has happened a lot recently and can truly ruin someone's life and reputation if you're being attacked by millions of people online!
-
The whole episode demonstrates how dramatically connected we've become to one another.
What the author means by this is how people are dependent upon technology to stay connected. We depend on one another for news, updates, and information about our personal lives. In a way it is almost addicting. Personally I don't like the idea of having my entire life exposed on the internet, but most people do. It also promotes curiosity and jealousy.
-
It demonstrates how a story can go from local to global in a heartbeat.
The author is talking about how technology is instantaneous. A tweet or a post can be seen by anyone from around the world. Technology has made the world a much smaller place, uniting people together.
-
-
-
And what that means is just constant, huge volumes of data going up. It's actually staggering. When you look at the numbers, every minute there are 72 more hours of video on YouTube. So that's, every second, more than an hour of video gets uploaded. And in photos, Instagram, 58 photos are uploaded to Instagram a second. More than three and a half thousand photos go up onto Facebook. So by the time I'm finished talking here, there'll be 864 more hours of video on Youtube than there were when I started, and two and a half million more photos on Facebook and Instagram than when I started.
In this part the speaker is talking about media constantly forming and changing. It is moving at such a rapid progression, not stopping anytime soon!
-
Thirty seconds later, the first message went onto Twitter, and this was someone saying "temblor," which means earthquake. So 60 seconds was how long it took for the physical earthquake to travel. Thirty seconds later news of that earthquake had traveled all around the world, instantly.
This is one of the positive things about technology: it has become fast and instantaneous. It connects people places and things from all around the world. It makes the world a much smaller place. News can be viewed by anyone, anywhere.
-
So it's a really interesting time to be a journalist, but the upheaval that I'm interested in is not on the output side. It's on the input side. It's concern with how we get information and how we gather the news. And that's changed, because we've had a huge shift in the balance of power from the news organizations to the audience. And the audience for such a long time was in a position where they didn't have any way of affecting news or making any change. They couldn't really connect. And that's changed irrevocably.
What the speaker's saying here is that today, the audience has more power to affect the news and make change. Members of the audience can filter and select which types of news they want, comment on the news (thus creating discussions about it), and stay up to date on their technological devices. Before, the audience was limited to only what was available to them, not what they could make available. There has been a drastic shift, and the audience is in control now.
-
-
-
Anyone distracted in class doesn’t just lose out on the content of the discussion, they create a sense of permission that opting out is OK, and, worse, a haze of second-hand distraction for their peers.
The author is saying that once one student becomes distracted, others become distracted too. The domino effect is put into play here.
-
There are some counter-moves in the industry right now — software that takes over your screen to hide distractions, software that prevents you from logging into certain sites or using the internet at all, phones with Do Not Disturb options — but at the moment these are rear-guard actions. The industry has committed itself to an arms race for my students’ attention, and if it’s me against Facebook and Apple, I lose.
What the author is saying here is that the success of these software programs could potentially be useful in creating a distraction-free classroom. But, still, the teacher would lose against some of the industries top professionals like Facebook and Apple. They would win against the teacher in a fight to keep the students' attention.
-
Jonathan Haidt’s metaphor of the elephant and the rider is useful here. In Haidt’s telling, the mind is like an elephant (the emotions) with a rider (the intellect) on top. The rider can see and plan ahead, but the elephant is far more powerful. Sometimes the rider and the elephant work together (the ideal in classroom settings), but if they conflict, the elephant usually wins.
Why does this occur?
-
Laptops, tablets and phones — the devices on which the struggle between focus and distraction is played out daily — are making the problem progressively worse.
What the author is saying here is that while technology is beneficial in a lot of ways, it is also harmful. It can be difficult to remain focused while using a laptop, tablet, or phone because of easy access to other things.
-
Humans are incapable of ignoring surprising new information in our visual field, an effect that is strongest when the visual cue is slightly above and beside the area we’re focusing on.
I think this is a perfect explanation as to why people are constantly on their phones; the desire to remain informed and share information has greatly increased because of how easy it is to do on a mobile device. It has to do with the constant stream of information that is so alluring and sometimes, irresistible.
-