The semantic Web, created by World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee, is an extention of the Internet which allows people to contect and share beyond the normal restrictions of the World Wide Web.
According to the 'Ed Technology Glossary of Terms' the Semantic Web "provides a common framework that allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise and community boundries." (http://www.uen.org/core/edtech/glossary.shtml [Accessed 26/03/09]) For the Semantic Web to work many applications such as URLs are integrated into the World Wide Web system.
The idea of the Semantic Web states that the computer understands and has a deeper knowlegde of what the user is searching for when online. An example of this would be when typing into a search engine. The Semantic Web allows the computer to know what you have requested and to give you options of websites which relate to your word or sentence.
Friday, 27 March 2009
Tailored Education
The beauty of education today, in my opinion, is the variety we are given. When considering our previous places of education, some of us went to grammar schools, some went to private, some went to boarding schools, some of them were mixed-sex schools and some weren't. But the best thing about them was that, although we studied similar subjects which were on the curriculum, we were all given a different teaching style, and our education was built around different theories and structures.
Because of this, we have all come to university with sound knowledge of different areas, allowing us to expand on what we already know and share what we studied with others. All of this broadening our intelligence and understanding.
If education was tailored to fit certain cultural and personal preferences then this broad spread of knowledge would be narrowed. As stated in a previous blog I believe education needs to stretch a person and how can this be achieved if we are all being taught at the same cultural level. It is common knowledge that some people find education easier than others, and with only a tailored education, how are some going to be able to stretch themselves?
Similarly, with Prensky's theory on education, suggesting that new media should be more advanced in schools, if everyones education was based on technology then would that mean losing the ability to learn important everyday skills taught it necessary subjects such as English and Mathematics.
Personally I think that education allows children to grow into adults with their own personalities. Education shapes and builds a person, hence why schools which are higher up in education standards generally mould more intelligent, personable students. Because of this tailored education would be restricting the growth of different personalities and a group of people who are share the same ideas and knowledge.
Because of this, we have all come to university with sound knowledge of different areas, allowing us to expand on what we already know and share what we studied with others. All of this broadening our intelligence and understanding.
If education was tailored to fit certain cultural and personal preferences then this broad spread of knowledge would be narrowed. As stated in a previous blog I believe education needs to stretch a person and how can this be achieved if we are all being taught at the same cultural level. It is common knowledge that some people find education easier than others, and with only a tailored education, how are some going to be able to stretch themselves?
Similarly, with Prensky's theory on education, suggesting that new media should be more advanced in schools, if everyones education was based on technology then would that mean losing the ability to learn important everyday skills taught it necessary subjects such as English and Mathematics.
Personally I think that education allows children to grow into adults with their own personalities. Education shapes and builds a person, hence why schools which are higher up in education standards generally mould more intelligent, personable students. Because of this tailored education would be restricting the growth of different personalities and a group of people who are share the same ideas and knowledge.
Digital Divide Issues around the World
Similar to the previous post on socioeconomic issues in societies, Prensky’s notion of the digital divide does not work across different countries around the world. Across the globe are thousands of countries which have different economic stability. As a westernised nation we live in a country which can afford luxuries such as technology and increasing developments in the digital world. For poorer, third world countries technology is a dream, for many it may be something they have never heard of. Prensky’s theory addresses the westernised cultures but does this mean that those born into poorer countries in this generation are still digital natives?
When studying Distance Learning we saw that countries such as
Another issue of global digital divide looks at areas which many have the economic climate to have technology but are not advanced enough for such digital change. For example, many areas of
Digital Divide in Socioeconomic Issues
Prensky’s theory on the digital divide does not address the issues which surround socioeconomic groups in certain societies. For example, although we live in one of the richest parts of the world where technology is developing and up-grade culture thrives, we still belong to different societies, communities of practice which fit us into different socioeconomic groups.
Prensky’s idea of the digital native speaking the digital language only works if the said digital native has had the opportunities to use technology from an early age and has grown up with the ability to use new media. However, if born into a community/society which can not afford technology or has less means to gaining technology, then how is the child meant to better his technological mind? You are not born with the ability to speak the digital language, you are just able to respond to and comprehend technology at a faster rate due to always having had it.
Similarly, a digital native born into the digital world may not be as technologically advanced as others in his generation due to the fact that economically his family are less able to afford certain digital gadgets. Does this therefore, considering Prensky’s theory, mean that he is not a digital native, despite having some technology experience but not as much as his peers?
Wenger and Prensky's Theories
Prensky’s ideas of the ‘digital divide’ lend to his notion on education. He believes that education is in need of a reform due to the young generation becoming increasingly good with technology. Education, in his mind, is lacking in teaching this new generation or the ‘digital natives’ what they need to learn in order to improve on their digital minds.
Wenger’s ideas of Communities of Practice (CofP) see groups of people forming and belonging to certain groups. When considering Prensky’s theory in relation to Wenger’s ideas we can see that CofP are formed between the digital natives and the digital immigrants.
There are many CofP which go against Prensky’s theory of the digital divide however. For example, sport groups, social and family groups etc can all contain members who belong to the two separate digital groups. My family is a CofP where we have “relationships which bind us together” and we share a “mutual engagement”, however, we are made up of two digital immigrants and two digital natives.
However, when the theory of CofP is placed into the education theory, Prensky shows the divide between those who are digitally aware and those who are not, the students and the teachers. In education a CofP is born, in the school, in classes and in particular friendship groups. CofP are also born between teachers and between students, forcing the two groups to have their own CofP due to the digital divide.
Thursday, 19 March 2009
Experiences of a technophile in 2020
I believe the future brings about a greater use of technology in a much wider setting. For example, I believe that by 2020 there will be access to any form of wireless Internet anywhere in the world. I think that there will also be the ability to have wireless charging where by leads and plugs will no longer be needed. For a university student these future advances will make a huge difference.
I also feel that as up-grade culture develops so too will the decrease in digital size. Everyday new phones and gaming stations are made smaller and faster allowing society to become more mobile with their technology.
A student in 2020 will hold all his university work on a small pen, as he writes in his lecture his pen will digitally store everything he scribes and will then wirelessly stream to his laptop at home, allowing his lecture and seminar notes to be stored safely and written up on his computer. As well as this, the wireless Internet and the wireless charging allows the student to access his files and work anywhere inside or outside of campus. He does not need to worry about taking leads with him to charge his laptop. As the technology gets faster and smaller he also will have a hand-help laptop which is easy to carry around.
I also feel that as up-grade culture develops so too will the decrease in digital size. Everyday new phones and gaming stations are made smaller and faster allowing society to become more mobile with their technology.
A student in 2020 will hold all his university work on a small pen, as he writes in his lecture his pen will digitally store everything he scribes and will then wirelessly stream to his laptop at home, allowing his lecture and seminar notes to be stored safely and written up on his computer. As well as this, the wireless Internet and the wireless charging allows the student to access his files and work anywhere inside or outside of campus. He does not need to worry about taking leads with him to charge his laptop. As the technology gets faster and smaller he also will have a hand-help laptop which is easy to carry around.
A Neo-Luddite University Student
A neo-luddite is a person who greatly dislikes technology. A dislike of technology would usually stem from not being able to use it and find it very hard to work.
Being a student at University has taught me so much about different forms of new media and technology, Universities today are mostly run by the use of online learning and technology produced lectures and seminars. To be a neo-luddite in today's society at University would be a great challenge.
Before attending a lecture the slides must be printed off so the student has something to work from. Finding the lecture notes on the Internet or the universities home page (blackboard) would confuse a technology frightened person. As well as this, many seminars are increasingly being taught online, such as this module. A neo-luddite would fall back in their work if they relied purely on technology to gain them a degree.
As well as online learning through university there is a lot of online interaction spent if you are a student at university. Socially the Internet is very important, not just for organising meetings but for keeping up with fellow students and friends. As scary as it seems, those who interact online more than others tend to keep a larger group of friends, due to the ease of keeping in contact and the communities formed in certain groups. For example, Facebook helps students at the university of Lincoln to form communities of practice, a term coined by Wenger, by allowing students to group together.
Without technology I believe University would not be run as smoothly and would perhaps not appeal to many people. What do you think?
Being a student at University has taught me so much about different forms of new media and technology, Universities today are mostly run by the use of online learning and technology produced lectures and seminars. To be a neo-luddite in today's society at University would be a great challenge.
Before attending a lecture the slides must be printed off so the student has something to work from. Finding the lecture notes on the Internet or the universities home page (blackboard) would confuse a technology frightened person. As well as this, many seminars are increasingly being taught online, such as this module. A neo-luddite would fall back in their work if they relied purely on technology to gain them a degree.
As well as online learning through university there is a lot of online interaction spent if you are a student at university. Socially the Internet is very important, not just for organising meetings but for keeping up with fellow students and friends. As scary as it seems, those who interact online more than others tend to keep a larger group of friends, due to the ease of keeping in contact and the communities formed in certain groups. For example, Facebook helps students at the university of Lincoln to form communities of practice, a term coined by Wenger, by allowing students to group together.
Without technology I believe University would not be run as smoothly and would perhaps not appeal to many people. What do you think?
A person who threatens the notion of natives/immigrants in digital culture
Prensky's theory of digital immigration is a simple one. He assumes that all those born into the digital world are natives and are easily adjustable to technology creations. He believes those born before technology are immigrants and therefore struggle with any forms of new media. This view is very generalised and does not consider any anomalies. I think that Prensky's idea follows the nature/nurture debate. In Prensky's mind nature over-rules and anyone born in a certain time must be a certain way. However, as seen in previous blogs this is not so.
When discussing Prensky's theory it must be considered that to be born into the digital world you must be surrounded by technology. So what if a native is born into a society which does not have such luxuries as technology? Surely then they would have nothing to build their experiences on.
Some of the most successful, richest people in technology are technically digital immigrants for example Bill Gates, the creator of the biggest computer software company in the world, Prensky's theory suggests that Bill Gates should have little skills in technology.
The two examples previously mentioned in the blogs are clear instances of digital natives and immigrants who are out of place in their digital groups.
When discussing Prensky's theory it must be considered that to be born into the digital world you must be surrounded by technology. So what if a native is born into a society which does not have such luxuries as technology? Surely then they would have nothing to build their experiences on.
Some of the most successful, richest people in technology are technically digital immigrants for example Bill Gates, the creator of the biggest computer software company in the world, Prensky's theory suggests that Bill Gates should have little skills in technology.
The two examples previously mentioned in the blogs are clear instances of digital natives and immigrants who are out of place in their digital groups.
Youngest Digital Immigrant
The youngest digital immigrant I know is probably my brother who is nearly two years younger than me and is 18 years old. Although he was obviously born into the digital world we as a family did not get a computer until my brother was about seven years old. He also did not get too into gaming unlike other boys his age. This may seem young however, it meant that he wasn't surrounded by technology or using it on a daily basis.
At school we were both lucky enough to gain a strong education in Information Technology, however, this was not a subject my brother picked up well. Although he is able to use the basics on any computer, he finds it hard and it does take him longer to grasps new digital concepts, in a similar way to my parents who, before 10 years ago, were technology illiterate and definitely digital immigrants.
According to Prensky's theory, my brother should be a native because he was born into the digital world however, as he struggles with technology in a similar way to someone who was not born into the digital world, then surely he is more of an immigrant.
Does Prensky's theory take into account the fact that maybe one can be a digital immigrant born into a world of digital natives?
At school we were both lucky enough to gain a strong education in Information Technology, however, this was not a subject my brother picked up well. Although he is able to use the basics on any computer, he finds it hard and it does take him longer to grasps new digital concepts, in a similar way to my parents who, before 10 years ago, were technology illiterate and definitely digital immigrants.
According to Prensky's theory, my brother should be a native because he was born into the digital world however, as he struggles with technology in a similar way to someone who was not born into the digital world, then surely he is more of an immigrant.
Does Prensky's theory take into account the fact that maybe one can be a digital immigrant born into a world of digital natives?
The Oldest Digital Native
The oldest digital native I know is probably my cousin who is 30 years old. This may seem too old but I know although he was not born into an already digital world, technology developed quickly around him.
Although schools at a young level may not have had Internet access but by the time he needed to learn about computers and technology, they were available to him.
He now works for a design building company which uses the highest computer technology around. He managed to comprehend the complexity of the digital technology used in his job by already having an understanding of new media and being able to speak the digital language.
I think it is hard to state whether people are too old to be a 'digital native' because some people have more opportunities of technology in their words. Another reason why my cousin is so advanced with technology is because his father always had a lot of technology due to his own job. Prensky's idea of growing up around technology is correct in meaning that 'digital natives' do learn a lot quicker when using similar forms of technology.
Although schools at a young level may not have had Internet access but by the time he needed to learn about computers and technology, they were available to him.
He now works for a design building company which uses the highest computer technology around. He managed to comprehend the complexity of the digital technology used in his job by already having an understanding of new media and being able to speak the digital language.
I think it is hard to state whether people are too old to be a 'digital native' because some people have more opportunities of technology in their words. Another reason why my cousin is so advanced with technology is because his father always had a lot of technology due to his own job. Prensky's idea of growing up around technology is correct in meaning that 'digital natives' do learn a lot quicker when using similar forms of technology.
Stretching Education
Stretch means to broaden or extend, to push something to it's limits and beyond. Most of the time stretching something to it's greatest achievement is seen as a positive thing where one would be getting the most out of something and trying to get more.
Applying this notion of stretching to education means that, in learning, a person should be stretched to their potential, or the person should be working hard to stretch past their previous achievements.
I agree with how education should be stretching students in order for them to reach their full potential and maybe allow them to achieve more than they thought they were capable of. I think that education needs to be a challenge in order to give students something to aim for. When you improve on something it spurs you on to try harder, a bit like being rewarded. This is obviously a positive thing and allows students to have something to aim for.
However, it could be said that students with little motivation for education could be put off by being stretched and won't rise to the positive challenge. Many people who struggle in school environments get easily disheartened when they see peers around them improving. However, personally I feel that each individual has their own personal potential which they should aim to achieve by stretching themselves. For example, in life there will always be those who are not as bright on a particular subject as others, or those who are more intelligent than others.
In this case I feel each student should hold their own idea of how far they can 'stretch' in education.
Prensky's theory of the digital divide brings about his idea's on education. Prensky feels that because the younger generation or 'digital natives' are so advanced in the digital world, they are not being stretched enough at school. Prensky believes the education system should reform to able students to have a larger technology based education. However, does this mean his ideas are suggesting that the entire education system is weak? Maybe, technologically, students are more advanced than teachers but because so much of their free time is spent using new media technology, perhaps they are learning and teaching themselves and therefore stretching their knowledge of technology outside of education on their own.
Applying this notion of stretching to education means that, in learning, a person should be stretched to their potential, or the person should be working hard to stretch past their previous achievements.
I agree with how education should be stretching students in order for them to reach their full potential and maybe allow them to achieve more than they thought they were capable of. I think that education needs to be a challenge in order to give students something to aim for. When you improve on something it spurs you on to try harder, a bit like being rewarded. This is obviously a positive thing and allows students to have something to aim for.
However, it could be said that students with little motivation for education could be put off by being stretched and won't rise to the positive challenge. Many people who struggle in school environments get easily disheartened when they see peers around them improving. However, personally I feel that each individual has their own personal potential which they should aim to achieve by stretching themselves. For example, in life there will always be those who are not as bright on a particular subject as others, or those who are more intelligent than others.
In this case I feel each student should hold their own idea of how far they can 'stretch' in education.
Prensky's theory of the digital divide brings about his idea's on education. Prensky feels that because the younger generation or 'digital natives' are so advanced in the digital world, they are not being stretched enough at school. Prensky believes the education system should reform to able students to have a larger technology based education. However, does this mean his ideas are suggesting that the entire education system is weak? Maybe, technologically, students are more advanced than teachers but because so much of their free time is spent using new media technology, perhaps they are learning and teaching themselves and therefore stretching their knowledge of technology outside of education on their own.
Monday, 16 March 2009
Abstract for Journal 5
This article is part of a five journal series by the author Tapscott, who is also the author of my first journal which I analysed. He has partaken in a lot of research on 'digital natives' and the 'net generation'.
The text discusses the need to change the education system in order for young people to "make more sense" of learning and applying the new digital world to their education.
The author suggests teachers should interact closely with students instead of lecturing to a whole community of students, on a "one-size-fits-all" basis.
The text discusses the need to change the education system in order for young people to "make more sense" of learning and applying the new digital world to their education.
The author suggests teachers should interact closely with students instead of lecturing to a whole community of students, on a "one-size-fits-all" basis.
Abstract for Journal 4
This article considers the way the 'digital natives' use and spend hours becoming online author on such sites and Myspace, Facebook and even in personal Blogs. It addresses a problem which seems to be rising of how little the younger digital native generation care for paper-based, 'real life' writing in school.
The texts discusses how the motivation changes for children as writers offline and online and the challenges teachers have to face when creating the right education system for this new generation and how hard the teachers find it being "digital immigrants".
The texts discusses how the motivation changes for children as writers offline and online and the challenges teachers have to face when creating the right education system for this new generation and how hard the teachers find it being "digital immigrants".
Abstract for Journal 3
This academic article considers the debate of the 'digital natives' and the new generation and questions the need for a change in the way the 'digital natives' learn by reforming education systems.
The text considers this change and looks into the idea of it being a most recent 'moral panic'.
The article suggests a lack of research is to blame for this 'moral panic' and questions ideas on 'digital natives'.
The text considers this change and looks into the idea of it being a most recent 'moral panic'.
The article suggests a lack of research is to blame for this 'moral panic' and questions ideas on 'digital natives'.
Abstract for Journal 2
This abstract addresses the research found from a three year-study into the ways young people use new media. Results show the difference between youths digital world inside and outside of education.
The article discusses the generation gap and what the results might mean for education in the future.
The article discusses the generation gap and what the results might mean for education in the future.
Abstract for Journal 1
This text follows the idea of a new generation of young people and shows the authors views on the so named, "Net generation". The new wave of technology is addressed along with the reform of certain formats of society, such as the presidential election campaigns being online recently in America.
The author discusses his opinions on the change that net generation will bring to the way society is run.
The author discusses his opinions on the change that net generation will bring to the way society is run.
Article References
Tapscott, D (2008) "The Net Generation Takes the Lead" Business Week Online http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=101&sid=260165eb-ec42-42ac-aaf0-40f151afeeed%40sessionmgr107&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=36082034 [Accessed on 13/03/09]
Trotter, A (2008) "Much of New-Media Learning Said to Occur Informally" Education Week, Vol 28 (14) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/message?vid=2&hid=101&sid=86b673d0-80ab-40e7-8d33-332bccb96e65%40sessionmgr102 [Accessed on 13/03/09]
Bennett et al (2008) "The Digital Natives Debate: A critical review of the evidence" British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 39 (5) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=4&sid=9901ff68-ac6c-4790-86b2-fbc8d58376a7%40sessionmgr8 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Adlington and Hansford (2009) "Digital Spaces and young people's online authoring: Challenges for teachers" Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, Vol 32 (1) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=7&sid=9a75c748-f7f3-478a-a904-003ac02809d3%40SRCSM2&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=36428102 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Tapscott, D (2008) "How to teach and manage 'Generation Net'" Business Week Online http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/message?vid=2&hid=7&sid=cea995ca-0984-4e33-ae2f-240b1782ba74%40sessionmgr9 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Trotter, A (2008) "Much of New-Media Learning Said to Occur Informally" Education Week, Vol 28 (14) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/message?vid=2&hid=101&sid=86b673d0-80ab-40e7-8d33-332bccb96e65%40sessionmgr102 [Accessed on 13/03/09]
Bennett et al (2008) "The Digital Natives Debate: A critical review of the evidence" British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 39 (5) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=4&sid=9901ff68-ac6c-4790-86b2-fbc8d58376a7%40sessionmgr8 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Adlington and Hansford (2009) "Digital Spaces and young people's online authoring: Challenges for teachers" Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, Vol 32 (1) http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=7&sid=9a75c748-f7f3-478a-a904-003ac02809d3%40SRCSM2&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=36428102 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Tapscott, D (2008) "How to teach and manage 'Generation Net'" Business Week Online http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/message?vid=2&hid=7&sid=cea995ca-0984-4e33-ae2f-240b1782ba74%40sessionmgr9 [Accessed on 14/03/09]
Website URLs
Website 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_native
Website 2: http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Website 3: http://www.malts.ed.ac.uk/staff/sian/natives_final.pdf
Website 4: http://www.wisc.edu/depd/html/TSarticles/Digital%20Natives.htm
Website 5: http://www.dimsum.co.uk/features/confessions-of-a-digital-immigrant.html
Website 2: http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Website 3: http://www.malts.ed.ac.uk/staff/sian/natives_final.pdf
Website 4: http://www.wisc.edu/depd/html/TSarticles/Digital%20Natives.htm
Website 5: http://www.dimsum.co.uk/features/confessions-of-a-digital-immigrant.html
What is Digital Immigration?
Digital Immigration stems from the idea of the generation gap. The generation gap separates those named "Digital Immigrants" and those called "Digital Natives", terms coined by Marc Prensky in 2001. These two names co-inside to create two groups of people in today's society; the natives, people who understand technology and learn to use digital media very quickly and easily, and the immigrants, those who find it hard to grasp digital concepts.
The two groups follow the generation gap because it is said that the "digital immigrants" are exactly that, immigrants, because they were not born into the digital world and have had to adapt themselves to new ways of working and socialising in new media.
The divide can be seen between parents and children or students and teachers, either way it is the younger generation who have grown up speaking the "digital language" through mobiles, gaming and the Internet.
The idea of these two separate groups is that the immigrants have had to work hard in their surroundings to deal with new digital forms of technology meaning the time taken to understand and learn about digital media is a lot longer than the time needed for the "digital natives".
There are many arguments based around education and the reform of how children learn as currently a lot of digital natives are far too advanced in technology for the schooling systems.
The two groups follow the generation gap because it is said that the "digital immigrants" are exactly that, immigrants, because they were not born into the digital world and have had to adapt themselves to new ways of working and socialising in new media.
The divide can be seen between parents and children or students and teachers, either way it is the younger generation who have grown up speaking the "digital language" through mobiles, gaming and the Internet.
The idea of these two separate groups is that the immigrants have had to work hard in their surroundings to deal with new digital forms of technology meaning the time taken to understand and learn about digital media is a lot longer than the time needed for the "digital natives".
There are many arguments based around education and the reform of how children learn as currently a lot of digital natives are far too advanced in technology for the schooling systems.
Saturday, 14 March 2009
Journal Criticism 5
This article looks closely at the 'net generation' and how the education system "makes no sense for young people". The author states that while a traditional 'one-size-fits-all' lecture way of teaching used to work for students in a "mass-production economy" it does not work now as young people have grown up with the demands of the digital age".
The author demands that schools should customize education to fit each child's individual way of learning.
While this would be ideal, it seems completely unrealistic, how can schools possibly be able to fund that sort of programme?
Going back to the authors idea that young people can't make sense of current schooling, I disagree. When studying for a particular topic, course or occupation a 'one-size-fits-all' lecture is appropriate. To gain a greater grade or experience the student must go out of his or her way to make sure that happens, not rely on the teacher to tell them everything, down to how a digital piece of technology, for a specific job, would work.
The ideas behind this article are fair but personally I feel they are impractical.
The author demands that schools should customize education to fit each child's individual way of learning.
While this would be ideal, it seems completely unrealistic, how can schools possibly be able to fund that sort of programme?
Going back to the authors idea that young people can't make sense of current schooling, I disagree. When studying for a particular topic, course or occupation a 'one-size-fits-all' lecture is appropriate. To gain a greater grade or experience the student must go out of his or her way to make sure that happens, not rely on the teacher to tell them everything, down to how a digital piece of technology, for a specific job, would work.
The ideas behind this article are fair but personally I feel they are impractical.
Journal Criticism 4
This text examines the use of Internet by young people and considers why certain programmes are used. It also addresses the challenges which teachers hold when considering educational reform.
The author suggests that those schools which chose hard copies of texts and books for learning rather than online or electronic are failing on building students talents and are therefore seen as not strong schools. Personally I think this is ridiculous. Although I agree it is important to learn how to use such technology correctly I think it is equally important to gain real, genuine written and spoken skills.
It has already been mentioned in the text that young people are equal in their digital skills to adults, so by taking away all traditional areas of learning how can students possibly learn and improve on what they already know.
This blogging module we are studying is good in learning about online texts and cultures of Internet society. But if schooling was done purely online, how would you learn written skills, for example everyday skills such as letter writing.
I believe incorporating digital, new media into schools at a later stage would be very beneficial, but only once traditional, offline learning is fixed.
The author suggests that those schools which chose hard copies of texts and books for learning rather than online or electronic are failing on building students talents and are therefore seen as not strong schools. Personally I think this is ridiculous. Although I agree it is important to learn how to use such technology correctly I think it is equally important to gain real, genuine written and spoken skills.
It has already been mentioned in the text that young people are equal in their digital skills to adults, so by taking away all traditional areas of learning how can students possibly learn and improve on what they already know.
This blogging module we are studying is good in learning about online texts and cultures of Internet society. But if schooling was done purely online, how would you learn written skills, for example everyday skills such as letter writing.
I believe incorporating digital, new media into schools at a later stage would be very beneficial, but only once traditional, offline learning is fixed.
Journal Criticism 3
This article looks at the new generation coined 'digital natives' and considers the importance of a cultural change in education and the way education should be taught. The article discusses the debate between the need to change the educators and the system or whether it is all just a 'moral panic'.
It is true that education must develop along-side the changes in society and culturally. However, this text claims that the lack of research into what 'digital natives' actually need has driven people to a 'moral panic'. Perhaps there is not enough research, but this does not mean that a change in education should be over-looked. Education does need to reform itself in many ways to gain full advantage of the wonders of modern technology. If new media continues to grow but new generations can not learn how to use it, then surely we are ruining the opportunities given to us by this wonderful technology?
I also feel that this article over-generalises in some instances, for example, "young people live their lives completely immersed by technology". It is true that becoming reliable on mobiles and the Internet is easy for young people, however, to assume that all young people are immersed by it is unfair. There are thousand of young people who do not have such luxuries as phones or laptop and so have little or no contact with technology.
It is true that education must develop along-side the changes in society and culturally. However, this text claims that the lack of research into what 'digital natives' actually need has driven people to a 'moral panic'. Perhaps there is not enough research, but this does not mean that a change in education should be over-looked. Education does need to reform itself in many ways to gain full advantage of the wonders of modern technology. If new media continues to grow but new generations can not learn how to use it, then surely we are ruining the opportunities given to us by this wonderful technology?
I also feel that this article over-generalises in some instances, for example, "young people live their lives completely immersed by technology". It is true that becoming reliable on mobiles and the Internet is easy for young people, however, to assume that all young people are immersed by it is unfair. There are thousand of young people who do not have such luxuries as phones or laptop and so have little or no contact with technology.
Journal Criticism 2
This article considers the results of the 3 year-study on how children gain more of their new media skills online than from education.
The article focus's on what the researchers have said of the study. One researcher states that the teachers and parents have found it challenging to make education more digital. She goes on to say that the parents and teachers are threatened by online spaces and the generation gap, where as the young people see online space as positive potential.
I feel that this statement is too broad, it can be said that the generation of 'digital immigrants' do find it harder to work online but, educationally, there is not a lot which has changed over time.
Some aspects of equipment in schools have been modified but most of what young people learn online, as stated previously in the article, is outside of school, forming the question of why should teachers be threatened?
The article goes on to consider how parents and teachers need to be involved in children's online world as the dangers of being online are not recognised. I do agree partially with this, that children need to acknowledge and understand the dangers of the Internet, however, through a strong education students should be taught and will acknowledge safety online. By getting parents and teachers too involved, the children will lose the passion of online hobbies, interests and socialising.
The article focus's on what the researchers have said of the study. One researcher states that the teachers and parents have found it challenging to make education more digital. She goes on to say that the parents and teachers are threatened by online spaces and the generation gap, where as the young people see online space as positive potential.
I feel that this statement is too broad, it can be said that the generation of 'digital immigrants' do find it harder to work online but, educationally, there is not a lot which has changed over time.
Some aspects of equipment in schools have been modified but most of what young people learn online, as stated previously in the article, is outside of school, forming the question of why should teachers be threatened?
The article goes on to consider how parents and teachers need to be involved in children's online world as the dangers of being online are not recognised. I do agree partially with this, that children need to acknowledge and understand the dangers of the Internet, however, through a strong education students should be taught and will acknowledge safety online. By getting parents and teachers too involved, the children will lose the passion of online hobbies, interests and socialising.
Friday, 13 March 2009
Journal Criticism 1
The journal explains digital technology has affected children and how society is changing to make way for the web and it's new generation.
The author calls the young generations "Net Generations" and states that old ways of society are being "shattered by the new web".
It is easy to agree with this notion of an increase in technology and it is true that many people "between the ages of 11 and 31" or the "net generation", grow up knowing and understanding digital. However, the author states that the "old" "great powers" such as TV, no longer control the distribution of knowledge. How can this be true when TV is still such a huge part of everyday life. For example, when a national disaster strikes, most people all over the world would turn to the TV to find out more.
The author continues by stating that formats in society are changing from the influence of the 'net generation', for example, Barack Obama's online presidential campaign, however the author does not address how few people in the age range can actually vote. Is the author therefore missing the point that, just because the older generations were not born into the digital world, it does not mean that they are completely unable to adapt and learn how to use it.
The author of this article makes strong points, however, he separates the 'net generation' from the older generations suggesting a rift and divide between society as it was before and now, with the ever expanding digital world.
The author calls the young generations "Net Generations" and states that old ways of society are being "shattered by the new web".
It is easy to agree with this notion of an increase in technology and it is true that many people "between the ages of 11 and 31" or the "net generation", grow up knowing and understanding digital. However, the author states that the "old" "great powers" such as TV, no longer control the distribution of knowledge. How can this be true when TV is still such a huge part of everyday life. For example, when a national disaster strikes, most people all over the world would turn to the TV to find out more.
The author continues by stating that formats in society are changing from the influence of the 'net generation', for example, Barack Obama's online presidential campaign, however the author does not address how few people in the age range can actually vote. Is the author therefore missing the point that, just because the older generations were not born into the digital world, it does not mean that they are completely unable to adapt and learn how to use it.
The author of this article makes strong points, however, he separates the 'net generation' from the older generations suggesting a rift and divide between society as it was before and now, with the ever expanding digital world.
Website Criticism 5
This final website is quite different from the previous academic websites.
This website is like a blog. The article I found was written in March 2008 and so is quite an up-to-date account of the authors personal findings in digital immigration.
The layout page is structured with sub-headings for each section which addresses different forms of technology and the authors opinions on each of these forms.
The article is written in first person due to the formation of a blog, thus making it quite easy to read. This is helped by the colloquial language and use of conversational grammar techniques, creating friendly discussion.
The article is based on the authors feelings towards technology and himself, being a digital immigrant, thus showing a very different structure to the previous websites.
Under the authors article are comments made by other produsers, each user shares their own views and experiences of the digital immigration.
This website is useful in finding peoples conflicting opinions on the idea, however for information and theory based content this article is rather weak.
This website is like a blog. The article I found was written in March 2008 and so is quite an up-to-date account of the authors personal findings in digital immigration.
The layout page is structured with sub-headings for each section which addresses different forms of technology and the authors opinions on each of these forms.
The article is written in first person due to the formation of a blog, thus making it quite easy to read. This is helped by the colloquial language and use of conversational grammar techniques, creating friendly discussion.
The article is based on the authors feelings towards technology and himself, being a digital immigrant, thus showing a very different structure to the previous websites.
Under the authors article are comments made by other produsers, each user shares their own views and experiences of the digital immigration.
This website is useful in finding peoples conflicting opinions on the idea, however for information and theory based content this article is rather weak.
Website Criticism 4
This website addresses the idea of digital immigration and looks into the difference in ages and the generation gap.
The language used is easy to understand and conveys the ideas simplistically. It also uses examples of how younger people can adjust to new surroundings easier then adults - showing how the theory can be understood and applied.
The article is written in first person forming a connection between the user and the author and making the text appear more interesting.
It addresses a counter argument to the theory and contains reference to other texts showing a development of ideas and theories.
The article was written in 2003 so is not as up-to-date as other articles meaning some of the references may be a lot older and therefore may not be so beneficial.
The language used is easy to understand and conveys the ideas simplistically. It also uses examples of how younger people can adjust to new surroundings easier then adults - showing how the theory can be understood and applied.
The article is written in first person forming a connection between the user and the author and making the text appear more interesting.
It addresses a counter argument to the theory and contains reference to other texts showing a development of ideas and theories.
The article was written in 2003 so is not as up-to-date as other articles meaning some of the references may be a lot older and therefore may not be so beneficial.
Website Criticism 3
This website shows a university paper on the subject of Digital Immigration. Just like the previous website it is set out on PDF format.
The layout of this article is easy to understand with sub-headings sectioning off different arguments however the lexis is hard to understand due to it's intellectual content.
Because the website shows a university paper there are many quotes and references to other texts and theories based around digital immigration, showing a greater content an large amount of information.
This paper goes into great detail and also focus's on argumentative points of discussion. The author takes the original theory and analyses it in great detail, looking at differences between 'natives' and 'immigrants'.
The paper is a strong article to look at for quality of information and theory, it was written in 2007 so is quite a recent article.
The layout of this article is easy to understand with sub-headings sectioning off different arguments however the lexis is hard to understand due to it's intellectual content.
Because the website shows a university paper there are many quotes and references to other texts and theories based around digital immigration, showing a greater content an large amount of information.
This paper goes into great detail and also focus's on argumentative points of discussion. The author takes the original theory and analyses it in great detail, looking at differences between 'natives' and 'immigrants'.
The paper is a strong article to look at for quality of information and theory, it was written in 2007 so is quite a recent article.
Website Criticism 2
This website holds a lot of detail on the subject of Digital Immigration. The author of the article is a known writer in the field therefore making the article legitimate and more reliable.
With such strong, trustworthy content the article does practice what it preaches wel, meaning the ideas and notions of the digital immigration can be put into context and relates well to real life situations. The reason we can address the theory with what we have learn't is because this article explains 'digital immigration' theory in great detail and is easy to understand and apply.
The article is accessed through a PDF file making it slightly harder to retrieve, however allowing the user to crop, save, zoom and use the article more to their advantage.
The article was written in October 2001 making this quite an old text (especially for theory on technology as such theories change frequently with the growing digital world.) However, due to the authors place in the discussion of Digital Immigration, the text is reliable and useful in the understanding of this theory.
With such strong, trustworthy content the article does practice what it preaches wel, meaning the ideas and notions of the digital immigration can be put into context and relates well to real life situations. The reason we can address the theory with what we have learn't is because this article explains 'digital immigration' theory in great detail and is easy to understand and apply.
The article is accessed through a PDF file making it slightly harder to retrieve, however allowing the user to crop, save, zoom and use the article more to their advantage.
The article was written in October 2001 making this quite an old text (especially for theory on technology as such theories change frequently with the growing digital world.) However, due to the authors place in the discussion of Digital Immigration, the text is reliable and useful in the understanding of this theory.
Website Criticism 1
This website addresses the notion of 'digital native' and defines it's meaning.
The article is not long, there are only a few number of paragraphs written on the subject, however, there are many hyperlinks available throughout the text to allow the user access to more information.
One criticism which must be addresses with this website is the article only looks at 'digital natives' and barely touches on the digital immigrant notion, the opposing notion.
This particular website has similarities to a search engine and so I typed in 'digital immigration' to try and gain a wider range of info. However, I was directed back to the page on 'digital native' proving that this particular website is limiting in information on the subject.
Another criticism of the website is it's dependable source of information as it's open structure lends itself to unreliable content. This must obviously be considered when information from the website is used.
However, one positive aspect of the article is that it was updated and modified in February 2009 making this an incredibly up-to-date article.
The article is not long, there are only a few number of paragraphs written on the subject, however, there are many hyperlinks available throughout the text to allow the user access to more information.
One criticism which must be addresses with this website is the article only looks at 'digital natives' and barely touches on the digital immigrant notion, the opposing notion.
This particular website has similarities to a search engine and so I typed in 'digital immigration' to try and gain a wider range of info. However, I was directed back to the page on 'digital native' proving that this particular website is limiting in information on the subject.
Another criticism of the website is it's dependable source of information as it's open structure lends itself to unreliable content. This must obviously be considered when information from the website is used.
However, one positive aspect of the article is that it was updated and modified in February 2009 making this an incredibly up-to-date article.
Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Distance Learning - Chosen Website
During the lecture Distance Learning (DL) or e-learning was discussed. The concept of e-Learning was applied to University students from well-developed countries who, instead of attending University, study their degree online or via other new media forms.
I decided to find a style of e-learning which is aimed at a different age group and I found a website called “The Children’s University of Manchester” (http://www.childrensuniversity.manchester.ac.uk/). The website is designed for Key Stage 2, children aged 7-11, and provides curriculum-relevant resources which co-inside the Key Stage 2 structure with current research being completed at the University of Manchester.
The website gives an indication of the sections of e-learning which are available for children, science, maths and literature and many more.
The whole idea of the website and the e-learning opportunities is to show children what the future can bring, and to get them excited about the prospect of university. Each academic section is linked to what is happening at Manchester university allowing an insight into the courses and showing children why the subjects they are studying now will be beneficial in the future.
The website is set up to look bright, fun and exciting and to attract children to browse the hyperlinks. One particular hyperlink called “Your Future” gives children an idea of university life and allows them to view videos and interviews of current university students. Users of the website are also encouraged to ask questions online about university and will gain a response from a current student.
The website is a great idea and encourages children to work for greater things. I did not even consider university until I was taking my GCSEs and aged 16. I think the website is making a positive step towards teaching and building children’s education.
I decided to find a style of e-learning which is aimed at a different age group and I found a website called “The Children’s University of Manchester” (http://www.childrensuniversity.manchester.ac.uk/). The website is designed for Key Stage 2, children aged 7-11, and provides curriculum-relevant resources which co-inside the Key Stage 2 structure with current research being completed at the University of Manchester.
The website gives an indication of the sections of e-learning which are available for children, science, maths and literature and many more.
The whole idea of the website and the e-learning opportunities is to show children what the future can bring, and to get them excited about the prospect of university. Each academic section is linked to what is happening at Manchester university allowing an insight into the courses and showing children why the subjects they are studying now will be beneficial in the future.
The website is set up to look bright, fun and exciting and to attract children to browse the hyperlinks. One particular hyperlink called “Your Future” gives children an idea of university life and allows them to view videos and interviews of current university students. Users of the website are also encouraged to ask questions online about university and will gain a response from a current student.
The website is a great idea and encourages children to work for greater things. I did not even consider university until I was taking my GCSEs and aged 16. I think the website is making a positive step towards teaching and building children’s education.
Distance Learning in China
In China, during the 1960/1970's there was an increasing demand for higher education in order to bring China's standard of education for students up to the level of higher education found all over the world.
The Beijing Television University and other city-based Television Universities was opened to act in accordance with the desired increase in higher education and become very popular.
TVU's (Television Universities) became a place where students all over China, could partake in Distance Learning (DL) and were able to study from home. Between 1960 and 1966 more than 8,000 students graduated from the Beijing University and the University offered single short courses to students as well.
Still increasingly popular, especially as new media evolves and gets better therefore increasing e-learning ability, the radio and television universities in China have seen 1,291,833 students in the past eight years. 590,941 students have graduated.
China's TVU's have become recognised worldwide. Although the studying of the courses at the TVU's can be done at home, for many subjects practical work must also be shown, eg. laboratory work and suitable areas are found for the work to take place.
Although the TVU's work very well in China there are still issues which surround DL. There are discussions that the amount of studying for DL students is far too much. I find DL very tough to keep on top of and to be motivated to do when there is no physical, FtF support from fellow students and tutors. I therefore cannot imagine how hard it must be for a full-time DL course.
There is also the challenge of over-seeing practical work and being able to assess it.
Even so, China's TVU's have created a much needed increase in higher education and many more qualified professionals.
The Beijing Television University and other city-based Television Universities was opened to act in accordance with the desired increase in higher education and become very popular.
TVU's (Television Universities) became a place where students all over China, could partake in Distance Learning (DL) and were able to study from home. Between 1960 and 1966 more than 8,000 students graduated from the Beijing University and the University offered single short courses to students as well.
Still increasingly popular, especially as new media evolves and gets better therefore increasing e-learning ability, the radio and television universities in China have seen 1,291,833 students in the past eight years. 590,941 students have graduated.
China's TVU's have become recognised worldwide. Although the studying of the courses at the TVU's can be done at home, for many subjects practical work must also be shown, eg. laboratory work and suitable areas are found for the work to take place.
Although the TVU's work very well in China there are still issues which surround DL. There are discussions that the amount of studying for DL students is far too much. I find DL very tough to keep on top of and to be motivated to do when there is no physical, FtF support from fellow students and tutors. I therefore cannot imagine how hard it must be for a full-time DL course.
There is also the challenge of over-seeing practical work and being able to assess it.
Even so, China's TVU's have created a much needed increase in higher education and many more qualified professionals.
Monday, 2 March 2009
Communities of Practice
"Members of a community are informally bound by what they do together" (Wenger) and 'Communities of Practice' (CofP) must involve a "shared interest" (Wenger).
It is easy to think of sport or activity groups when considering CofP's but Wengers model and theory applies strongly to the CofP in the small village where I work.
Wenger states that there are three dimensions involved in CofP, the "joint enterprise" the "mutual engagement" and the "shared repertoire". Many small country villages, such as this one, do still hold a strong sense of community. The "joint enterprise" is recognised by the known etiquette's and social belongings of the members of the village. Wenger states that the joint enterprise is "understood and continually renegotiated by it's members", reinforcing how the villages CofP fits into his model; as times have changed so too have the functions of the village, for example, while still holding traditional fairs and races, the village also creates new community events to involve everyone.
The way the village community functions and the "relationships that bind members together" also support Wengers model. The villagers meet together at the pub restaurant where I work, there are friendships made from living in the same place and the sharing of the community. Their mutual belonging which they share binds them together.
The third dimension which Wenger notes is the "shared repertoire of communal resources". The villagers go by their daily routines which co-inside with each other. There seems to be a knowing between those who have lived in the village a while and formed relationships.
However, does my example of the villagers create a hole in Wengers theory? When considering villagers who have only recently moved to their new homes, are they instantly included in the CofP? Theory suggests not as they are not aware of the "shared repertoire" which but develop over time.
It is easy to think of sport or activity groups when considering CofP's but Wengers model and theory applies strongly to the CofP in the small village where I work.
Wenger states that there are three dimensions involved in CofP, the "joint enterprise" the "mutual engagement" and the "shared repertoire". Many small country villages, such as this one, do still hold a strong sense of community. The "joint enterprise" is recognised by the known etiquette's and social belongings of the members of the village. Wenger states that the joint enterprise is "understood and continually renegotiated by it's members", reinforcing how the villages CofP fits into his model; as times have changed so too have the functions of the village, for example, while still holding traditional fairs and races, the village also creates new community events to involve everyone.
The way the village community functions and the "relationships that bind members together" also support Wengers model. The villagers meet together at the pub restaurant where I work, there are friendships made from living in the same place and the sharing of the community. Their mutual belonging which they share binds them together.
The third dimension which Wenger notes is the "shared repertoire of communal resources". The villagers go by their daily routines which co-inside with each other. There seems to be a knowing between those who have lived in the village a while and formed relationships.
However, does my example of the villagers create a hole in Wengers theory? When considering villagers who have only recently moved to their new homes, are they instantly included in the CofP? Theory suggests not as they are not aware of the "shared repertoire" which but develop over time.
Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Website Analysis - Continued
Produsage, the term coined by theorist Bruns, takes place in www.dailymail.com. Under each story there is a 'comments' section which allows produsers to voice their opinions on the articles or to comment on others views.
Along with this is a section called 'Blogs' where a variety of writers for the Daily Mail write their own blogs on their chosen subject and users are invited to comment.
The produsage is important in involving the site in becoming a place of community. Theorist Rheingold came up with the idea of a virtual community and saw online conversations as reinforcing community projects. Taking Rheingold's theory into account, the produsers on dailymail.com are forming a community via their shared interest in the site, and in particular in news stories.
However, unlike some forums, the website is monitored and holds a strict privacy policy. There is a restriction on what is written on the site by users in the form of comments, and anything untoward is removed. It could be argued therefore that this particular site does not allow the freedom and openness to create a strong community, something that many produsers try to gain.
However, the site is primarily an informative website which offers the chance for produsage.
Although users are free to comment they are not able to change articles or news stories unlike some open-news or Wiki websites, making the Daily Mail website appear more legitimate. Meikle suggests that we, as Internet users, learn to trust certain websites, ones which we know can not be changed, freeing bias or untrue content. Perhaps this level of trust we can have for this website brings us back to it, in order to gain desired information which we KNOW is reliable.
I use dailymail.com regularly to make sure I am aware of news issues and am kept up-to-date with the worlds events. The reason I choose this website over other news websites is because I fall into it's target audience. I come from a middle-class family who reads the Daily Mail in 'real life'. I also trust it's legitimacy and like the structure, layout and hyperlinking opportunities, allowing myself to get to stories which are of particular interest to me. I also like to read the opinions of other readers and decide if I agree, although I have yet to post my own opinion, making me a user of the site, but not a produser.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
Along with this is a section called 'Blogs' where a variety of writers for the Daily Mail write their own blogs on their chosen subject and users are invited to comment.
The produsage is important in involving the site in becoming a place of community. Theorist Rheingold came up with the idea of a virtual community and saw online conversations as reinforcing community projects. Taking Rheingold's theory into account, the produsers on dailymail.com are forming a community via their shared interest in the site, and in particular in news stories.
However, unlike some forums, the website is monitored and holds a strict privacy policy. There is a restriction on what is written on the site by users in the form of comments, and anything untoward is removed. It could be argued therefore that this particular site does not allow the freedom and openness to create a strong community, something that many produsers try to gain.
However, the site is primarily an informative website which offers the chance for produsage.
Although users are free to comment they are not able to change articles or news stories unlike some open-news or Wiki websites, making the Daily Mail website appear more legitimate. Meikle suggests that we, as Internet users, learn to trust certain websites, ones which we know can not be changed, freeing bias or untrue content. Perhaps this level of trust we can have for this website brings us back to it, in order to gain desired information which we KNOW is reliable.
I use dailymail.com regularly to make sure I am aware of news issues and am kept up-to-date with the worlds events. The reason I choose this website over other news websites is because I fall into it's target audience. I come from a middle-class family who reads the Daily Mail in 'real life'. I also trust it's legitimacy and like the structure, layout and hyperlinking opportunities, allowing myself to get to stories which are of particular interest to me. I also like to read the opinions of other readers and decide if I agree, although I have yet to post my own opinion, making me a user of the site, but not a produser.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
Website Analysis
www.dailymail.com is the online version of the newspaper The Daily Mail and changes everyday to reflect the news and it's headlines.
Logging onto the home page, the user can see the days headlines and a list of other stories seen as important to viewers. There are also many hyperlinks sending the user to different parts of the website, similar to the different sections in the real life newspaper. eg. 'Coffee Break' and 'Sport'.
This structure makes it easy to browse or, as Meikle would suggest, "research" the site.
Many critics hold an issue with hyperlinks, suggesting that they are non-linear and that they change the way we read, acting as a distraction from the online text. However, for a website such as this one, such hyperlinks create a quick and easy way to direct the user from one news story to another.
The culture of the site is reflected by the nature and status of the newspaper. The website shows the stories which the Daily Mail believe their readers will find most interesting, and then displays sub-headings for the 'less important' stories and events.
The Daily Mail have a specific audience, the newspaper, although a tabloid, is seen as more 'news-worthy' than most other tabloid papers however it is too gossipy to be a broadsheet and so finds itself appealing to the middle-class, providing important stories, sporting events and colloquial gossip columns. The website mirrors this appearance.
The websites language is representative of the 'real-life' newspaper with bold, conversational and eye-catching headlines and sub-paragraphs giving a summary of the news story.
Across the top of the website are hyperlinks to various pages, displaying different topics of news. These too are quite casual and quirky, eg. the "Femail" section. The style of lexis used reflects the readership and audience.
Logging onto the home page, the user can see the days headlines and a list of other stories seen as important to viewers. There are also many hyperlinks sending the user to different parts of the website, similar to the different sections in the real life newspaper. eg. 'Coffee Break' and 'Sport'.
This structure makes it easy to browse or, as Meikle would suggest, "research" the site.
Many critics hold an issue with hyperlinks, suggesting that they are non-linear and that they change the way we read, acting as a distraction from the online text. However, for a website such as this one, such hyperlinks create a quick and easy way to direct the user from one news story to another.
The culture of the site is reflected by the nature and status of the newspaper. The website shows the stories which the Daily Mail believe their readers will find most interesting, and then displays sub-headings for the 'less important' stories and events.
The Daily Mail have a specific audience, the newspaper, although a tabloid, is seen as more 'news-worthy' than most other tabloid papers however it is too gossipy to be a broadsheet and so finds itself appealing to the middle-class, providing important stories, sporting events and colloquial gossip columns. The website mirrors this appearance.
The websites language is representative of the 'real-life' newspaper with bold, conversational and eye-catching headlines and sub-paragraphs giving a summary of the news story.
Across the top of the website are hyperlinks to various pages, displaying different topics of news. These too are quite casual and quirky, eg. the "Femail" section. The style of lexis used reflects the readership and audience.
Friday, 20 February 2009
Bruns - Moderation Functions on Collaborative sites
The word collaboration means working together or combined, therefore a collaborative site online indicates a number of produsers working together to create and improve on the content.
So when a moderation falls into place, restricting what can or can't be written, or improved on, how can this still be a democratic, "free for all" site?
Bruns discusses how there must be a "balance between openness and structure" in a website which adheres to the collaborative content. Bruns explains that for such a website to be popular, attract new produsers, it must not be too controlled as people will feel left out and won't want to participate. However, it must also establish some kind of structure otherwise there is no organisation and people can be overlooked or lost online.
writing, To make sure these sites are able to function some moderations are made. For example, as seen in Meikle'sIndymedia.com has made its main page secure, not allowing produsers to comment on its content.
idea of holding a form of structure and I believe that this does not mean that the site loses it's ability to be an open news site. The site is following Brunscontrol in order to achieve the balance, attracting new produsers, without loosing the sense of 'freedom of speech'.
In society we need restrictions and organisation for things to work well. I believe, that with these restrictions in place, such websites are still open to produsers. Without moderation's in life, wouldn't society be chaos?
So when a moderation falls into place, restricting what can or can't be written, or improved on, how can this still be a democratic, "free for all" site?
Bruns discusses how there must be a "balance between openness and structure" in a website which adheres to the collaborative content. Bruns explains that for such a website to be popular, attract new produsers, it must not be too controlled as people will feel left out and won't want to participate. However, it must also establish some kind of structure otherwise there is no organisation and people can be overlooked or lost online.
writing, To make sure these sites are able to function some moderations are made. For example, as seen in Meikle'sIndymedia.com has made its main page secure, not allowing produsers to comment on its content.
idea of holding a form of structure and I believe that this does not mean that the site loses it's ability to be an open news site. The site is following Brunscontrol in order to achieve the balance, attracting new produsers, without loosing the sense of 'freedom of speech'.
In society we need restrictions and organisation for things to work well. I believe, that with these restrictions in place, such websites are still open to produsers. Without moderation's in life, wouldn't society be chaos?
Bruns - Produsers and Produsage
The term 'produser' indicates a person who uses the Internet and produces work on what they find. Just because a person is online and using the Internet, this does not make them a produser until they have produced something online. For example, in forums, those 'lurking' are not produsers, those discussing, using others views and comments and producing their own ideas, become produsers.
Produsage work must form in groups, as Bruns states, "to be a produser it is necessary also to be a user of other participants' content" (page 3) therefore produsers are alive in open news websites and Wiki sites. It is not possible to be a produser without others and therefore involves a combined creation of work.
For produsers to be involved in produsage the work must be continuous, where by produsers build on existing online content, "in pursuit of further improvement". (page 2)
It can be said that we are produsers involved in produsage as we all work on producing content for each other to discuss via our blogs. The blogs are then improved on by other produsers when we comment on already written content.
Produsage work must form in groups, as Bruns states, "to be a produser it is necessary also to be a user of other participants' content" (page 3) therefore produsers are alive in open news websites and Wiki sites. It is not possible to be a produser without others and therefore involves a combined creation of work.
For produsers to be involved in produsage the work must be continuous, where by produsers build on existing online content, "in pursuit of further improvement". (page 2)
It can be said that we are produsers involved in produsage as we all work on producing content for each other to discuss via our blogs. The blogs are then improved on by other produsers when we comment on already written content.
Meikle - Is open news quality news?
The Internet for myself is a wonderful thing, but my biggest criticism with it is the lack of trust I can find in it.
For open news or open publishing websites it is impossible to know where your information is coming from.
As considered in Meikle's writing, even if what we find on the Internet is true, how can we accept it if it is biased? Many open news stories may have been posted or adapted by someone whose beliefs are strong and very one-sided.
Meikle looks at Indymedia.com and acknowledges that although advertised as an "open publishing" website, Indymedia have had to secure their home page so as to gain more readers, proving that most users will only accept secure and legitimate news websites.
Does this example therefore answer the question of open news and its quality? To an extent, yes, how can it possibly be reliable when written by, well, who knows!?
In the lecture the collaborative content of Wikis was addressed. Wikitravel, Wikibooks, Wikipedia and many more are websites owned by no-one, allowing any user to contribute. While an excellent form of free Internet and a perfect way to express oneself, it is also an unreliable source of information.
We as students are encouraged to use sites such as Wikipedia but we are not to use them in essays or if quoting as it is impossible to tell where the information has derived from.
Acknowledging this, surely the open news websites are equally unreliable and therefore the quality of them is poor.
It in unsurprising that we as a society turn to genuine, legitimate sites to get our news. Is this unfair to open news sites, should we be giving them a chance? Or can we just not trust them?
For open news or open publishing websites it is impossible to know where your information is coming from.
As considered in Meikle's writing, even if what we find on the Internet is true, how can we accept it if it is biased? Many open news stories may have been posted or adapted by someone whose beliefs are strong and very one-sided.
Meikle looks at Indymedia.com and acknowledges that although advertised as an "open publishing" website, Indymedia have had to secure their home page so as to gain more readers, proving that most users will only accept secure and legitimate news websites.
Does this example therefore answer the question of open news and its quality? To an extent, yes, how can it possibly be reliable when written by, well, who knows!?
In the lecture the collaborative content of Wikis was addressed. Wikitravel, Wikibooks, Wikipedia and many more are websites owned by no-one, allowing any user to contribute. While an excellent form of free Internet and a perfect way to express oneself, it is also an unreliable source of information.
We as students are encouraged to use sites such as Wikipedia but we are not to use them in essays or if quoting as it is impossible to tell where the information has derived from.
Acknowledging this, surely the open news websites are equally unreliable and therefore the quality of them is poor.
It in unsurprising that we as a society turn to genuine, legitimate sites to get our news. Is this unfair to open news sites, should we be giving them a chance? Or can we just not trust them?
Meikle - What constitues 'news' on the web?
When considering the question of "what constitutes 'news' on the web" we must take into account people's perceptions of news and what news is worthy of making headlines. As what is important to one person is different to someone living over the other side of the world.
So what is 'news' on the web? Robert Burnett and P. David Marshall argue that "news has become a subset of a wider search for information by web users"(paragraph 7) suggesting that news on the web has just become a search for information, a hyperlinking activity.
Online news allows Internet users to find exactly what they want and ignore the news stories which they are not interested in, creating a diversity in what people think is news.
The web allows a greater variety of stories and many different interpretations, eg. a westernised view of the state of the economy will differ from the views of the eastern countires.
Meikle suggests we as online news readers become 'researchers' and we begin to 'research' what we want to find on the Internet in terms of news. This idea links with that of Burnett and Marshall, we 'research' for information when online.
Meikle suggests that we then "hierarchise" sources which seems to us more legitimate, for example websites such as CNN News or BBC which we have learnt to trust.
It is addressed that weblogs and newsgroups are considered worthy for news stories but what makes us want to pay attention to certain sites? Perhaps it is that sites such as BBC or CNN News are large, recognised sites and are visited and trusted by thousands - does this therefore make their news more believable? Surely yes, because it is written by professional journalists.
But is Burnett and Marshall are correct, then perhaps 'news' is just a search for information, and what we find depends on what we see as 'news'.
Personally, I find it hard to trust 'news' found via some websites I am unsure of. I retrieve news from websites I know are legitimate and which have news-worthy stories. But then what I see as new-worthy maybe different from others.
So what is 'news' on the web? Robert Burnett and P. David Marshall argue that "news has become a subset of a wider search for information by web users"(paragraph 7) suggesting that news on the web has just become a search for information, a hyperlinking activity.
Online news allows Internet users to find exactly what they want and ignore the news stories which they are not interested in, creating a diversity in what people think is news.
The web allows a greater variety of stories and many different interpretations, eg. a westernised view of the state of the economy will differ from the views of the eastern countires.
Meikle suggests we as online news readers become 'researchers' and we begin to 'research' what we want to find on the Internet in terms of news. This idea links with that of Burnett and Marshall, we 'research' for information when online.
Meikle suggests that we then "hierarchise" sources which seems to us more legitimate, for example websites such as CNN News or BBC which we have learnt to trust.
It is addressed that weblogs and newsgroups are considered worthy for news stories but what makes us want to pay attention to certain sites? Perhaps it is that sites such as BBC or CNN News are large, recognised sites and are visited and trusted by thousands - does this therefore make their news more believable? Surely yes, because it is written by professional journalists.
But is Burnett and Marshall are correct, then perhaps 'news' is just a search for information, and what we find depends on what we see as 'news'.
Personally, I find it hard to trust 'news' found via some websites I am unsure of. I retrieve news from websites I know are legitimate and which have news-worthy stories. But then what I see as new-worthy maybe different from others.
Sunday, 15 February 2009
Social-Networking Sites- What they do for us.
When society connects to the Internet there tends to be very little thought process to it. Either you log on to check emails, find out the latest news or maybe to just browse websites, but generally we all tend to connect without thinking about what we are doing.
Personally, when I wake up or come back to my flat, the first thing I do is switch on my laptop and connect to the Internet, it almost becomes addictive and we feel like we are missing out if we have had a day or two without being connected.
Facebook has been running for 5 years now and has 175 million users and 15 million users update their statuses at least once a day (http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics, accessed 15/02/09). This proves how important social networking sites have become to many people and enforces the point that so many people do not think twice about going on Facebook to chat, share photos etc. Until this module I too thought nothing of uploading photos, changing my status and writing on friends 'walls' however I now think about how people may perceive me if they come across my page. Do I look like a friendly person? Or do I show a side of me which perhaps I shouldn't?
Because Facebook is so popular it becomes very easy to trust it. You are able to make your page accessible to all or to make it private, encouraging people to give out more information than perhaps necessary. Does this make Facebook dangerous?
When considering Facebook as a "community" it is easy to see how people feel they 'belong', even if you do not have many friends on the site you are still able to connect to groups etc. Facebook has become a virtual communication world, there is so much available, why would we need to step outside of this social networking site when all our friends are here in one place?
Personally, when I wake up or come back to my flat, the first thing I do is switch on my laptop and connect to the Internet, it almost becomes addictive and we feel like we are missing out if we have had a day or two without being connected.
Facebook has been running for 5 years now and has 175 million users and 15 million users update their statuses at least once a day (http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics, accessed 15/02/09). This proves how important social networking sites have become to many people and enforces the point that so many people do not think twice about going on Facebook to chat, share photos etc. Until this module I too thought nothing of uploading photos, changing my status and writing on friends 'walls' however I now think about how people may perceive me if they come across my page. Do I look like a friendly person? Or do I show a side of me which perhaps I shouldn't?
Because Facebook is so popular it becomes very easy to trust it. You are able to make your page accessible to all or to make it private, encouraging people to give out more information than perhaps necessary. Does this make Facebook dangerous?
When considering Facebook as a "community" it is easy to see how people feel they 'belong', even if you do not have many friends on the site you are still able to connect to groups etc. Facebook has become a virtual communication world, there is so much available, why would we need to step outside of this social networking site when all our friends are here in one place?
Blanchard and Online Communities
I am finding it hard to see online discussions, forums and CMC groups a communities. I understand communities as existing in real life, where people who share similar interests and live in the same areas group together. I believe communities become real and strong when something happens to bring everyone together, when people help and are there for each other, regardless of differences, a community is formed.
The Cambridge Dictionary uses one definition of community as "people who are considered as a unit because of their common interests" (www.dictionary.cambridge.org) This suggests that perhaps, even online, communities can be formed.
Blanchard considers whether all CMC groups, including blogs, can be named as communities and suggests that to belong in a community, FtF or virtually, there must be a sense of community (SOC). She addresses whether this SOC can be found in blogs.
Although I am still unsure of the concept of online communities, I appreciate that having a sense of belonging online (whether in a forum, social networking site or blog) is important.
With regards to our own blogs, I do feel like I belong to something and can contribute to the group in my own way.
I am able to associate the four characteristics which Blanchard speaks of (researched by Mcmillan and Chavis 1986) which are involved in having a SOC;
My blog allows me to feel like a member,
I am able to speak my mind on certain views, influencing others and being influenced,
I am able to support others comments and views,
and there is a shared connection between myself and the bloggers I work with.
However, do I hold this SOC with these blogs because I already know the people I share my blog with in real life and have FtF connections with them?
Does this "community" and sense of "belonging" that we have created online only work because we already belong together in the "community" of our course and our friendships?
The Cambridge Dictionary uses one definition of community as "people who are considered as a unit because of their common interests" (www.dictionary.cambridge.org) This suggests that perhaps, even online, communities can be formed.
Blanchard considers whether all CMC groups, including blogs, can be named as communities and suggests that to belong in a community, FtF or virtually, there must be a sense of community (SOC). She addresses whether this SOC can be found in blogs.
Although I am still unsure of the concept of online communities, I appreciate that having a sense of belonging online (whether in a forum, social networking site or blog) is important.
With regards to our own blogs, I do feel like I belong to something and can contribute to the group in my own way.
I am able to associate the four characteristics which Blanchard speaks of (researched by Mcmillan and Chavis 1986) which are involved in having a SOC;
My blog allows me to feel like a member,
I am able to speak my mind on certain views, influencing others and being influenced,
I am able to support others comments and views,
and there is a shared connection between myself and the bloggers I work with.
However, do I hold this SOC with these blogs because I already know the people I share my blog with in real life and have FtF connections with them?
Does this "community" and sense of "belonging" that we have created online only work because we already belong together in the "community" of our course and our friendships?
Dangerous Materials on the Internet
When considering the Internet as 'dangerous' it is no surprise that so many people find criticism. With the Internet becoming such a great part of our lives we must learn to trust in our use in it.
It is somewhat easier for my generation to accept the Internet and it's faults, we have grown up with this form of technology, however for our parents and older generations, trusting the Internet must be near impossible.
As stated by Lister et al the Internet is "anything but a safe space for many users" when considering the "fear of viral contamination" or "obscene conversations in chat rooms" (2003:181) There are so many stories of people whose identity, details and even money has been taken online, or people who have met with someone they only know over the Internet and have ended up being abused or worse.
According to www.hongkiat.com 266 new porn sites appear everyday on the Internet (accessed 15/02/09) and, scarily, in America "over half (51%) of parents do not have, or do not know if they have software on their computers to monitor where their teenagers go online and with whom they interact" (www.securitysoft.com accessed 15/02/09)
Such facts give an example of how dangerous the Internet can be, especially when not used correctly or by someone who is not aware of the dangers.
When hyperlinking and jumping from one website to another it is scary how easily someone can come across an inappropriate website. However, what is classed as inappropriate?
Today's society is much more open to certain subjects which only a few years ago would have been taboo. What adults see as inappropriate or offensive may not affect children.
Even so, I believe that the Internet is a dangerous place to be if the user is careless. If you don't download files from unprotected sites and if you monitor the sites you and your family visit, why should the freedom and excitement of the Internet be restricted?
It is somewhat easier for my generation to accept the Internet and it's faults, we have grown up with this form of technology, however for our parents and older generations, trusting the Internet must be near impossible.
As stated by Lister et al the Internet is "anything but a safe space for many users" when considering the "fear of viral contamination" or "obscene conversations in chat rooms" (2003:181) There are so many stories of people whose identity, details and even money has been taken online, or people who have met with someone they only know over the Internet and have ended up being abused or worse.
According to www.hongkiat.com 266 new porn sites appear everyday on the Internet (accessed 15/02/09) and, scarily, in America "over half (51%) of parents do not have, or do not know if they have software on their computers to monitor where their teenagers go online and with whom they interact" (www.securitysoft.com accessed 15/02/09)
Such facts give an example of how dangerous the Internet can be, especially when not used correctly or by someone who is not aware of the dangers.
When hyperlinking and jumping from one website to another it is scary how easily someone can come across an inappropriate website. However, what is classed as inappropriate?
Today's society is much more open to certain subjects which only a few years ago would have been taboo. What adults see as inappropriate or offensive may not affect children.
Even so, I believe that the Internet is a dangerous place to be if the user is careless. If you don't download files from unprotected sites and if you monitor the sites you and your family visit, why should the freedom and excitement of the Internet be restricted?
Wednesday, 11 February 2009
Online Communities - Lecture 4
When I think of the word 'community' I imagine a small village - one which partakes in fairs and activities together. This village has people of all varieties but they all get involved together in their community. My idealised view of a community is probably very unrealistic, of course there are such villages but there will always be some people who do not get involved in these communities amongst which they live, perhaps because they do not feel as though they fit in.
The Internet offers many people a sense of 'belonging' via forums such as "The Well" and the chance to belong to what Rheingold described as a "virtual community".
As discovered in the lecture, Stuart Brand, the founding member of "The Well" set up in 1985, stated that "information wants to be free" enforcing a positive notion of allowing oneself to be involved in online communities.
As an opposing argument, many do not see how such forums can constitute as a "community" when those you are forming "relationships" with are unknown and may at any point not return to the forum, therefore showing a lack of commitment to the group.
Lister et al discusses how our "understandings of community have been determined by spatial relationships and a sense of belonging to a place" (2003:172) and considers how now we think about "belonging with one another in particular 'spaces' in the non-place of cyberspace." Such ideas conjure up questions, can a community survive online? Do we not need to be in 'meatspace' in order to form connections, relationships and communities?
I believe it is possible for those who do not 'fit in' in real life to find safety and belonging online, however, as stated in the lecture, "real communities include 'others'", and I believe, in real life, these communities are formed when different people accept, and are there for, each other. Can such situations occur in the virtual world?
The Internet offers many people a sense of 'belonging' via forums such as "The Well" and the chance to belong to what Rheingold described as a "virtual community".
As discovered in the lecture, Stuart Brand, the founding member of "The Well" set up in 1985, stated that "information wants to be free" enforcing a positive notion of allowing oneself to be involved in online communities.
As an opposing argument, many do not see how such forums can constitute as a "community" when those you are forming "relationships" with are unknown and may at any point not return to the forum, therefore showing a lack of commitment to the group.
Lister et al discusses how our "understandings of community have been determined by spatial relationships and a sense of belonging to a place" (2003:172) and considers how now we think about "belonging with one another in particular 'spaces' in the non-place of cyberspace." Such ideas conjure up questions, can a community survive online? Do we not need to be in 'meatspace' in order to form connections, relationships and communities?
I believe it is possible for those who do not 'fit in' in real life to find safety and belonging online, however, as stated in the lecture, "real communities include 'others'", and I believe, in real life, these communities are formed when different people accept, and are there for, each other. Can such situations occur in the virtual world?
Monday, 9 February 2009
Forums
I decided to look at two completely different Internet forums. The first I looked at was www.webhostingtalk.com which claimed to be one of "the largest, most influential" forums on the Internet. On this website there were many different sections which lead to certain discussions, including advertising forums, many of which you had to be a member for. I managed to get onto a forum called "Web Hosting Lounge" which contained posts by many different people on completely different topics.
I found that many of the posts were questions, asking how to use certain equipment or what was the best phone to buy etc, there are also a few people starting discussions on how many posts each member has. The conversation style on all of these posts are very colloquial and people use smiley faces, or nicknames such as "dude" to interact with each other. I imagine this is done to create a relaxed feel, perhaps like in a real life friendship conversation. This is also reflected in one discussion on Valentines day where complete strangers have been discussing, very casually, what they plan to do for the weekend.
The second forum was www.minimins.com, a website of forums dedicated to discussions of weight loss. I found this forum very interesting as it was full of discussions of support, and help between members. Some posts were quite formal but many were chatty and conversational.
Perhaps when forums are created for certain discussion points, members begin to feel part of a society or group, and in this case, people who feel uncomfortable in their real-lives, due to their weight, are able to talk about how they feel with others - I believe forums such as this one are helping many people realise that they are not alone, what a positive thing.
Generally speaking, both forums I looked at expressed a similar style of conversation. No-one was rude or offensive and every took the approach of a laid-back online conversation, albeit the second of the two was slightly more formal.
However, I believe that the reason for this is that both websites are monitored closely with "rules". When looking at YouTube.com I found that underneath videos people have left their comments, many of which include swearing and occasionally result in a few members arguing with each other and "slagging" each other off in unpleasant ways. Seeing this made me question; do open forums like these encourage arguments? People become free on the internet and perhaps gain too much power, hiding behind a nickname and sometimes a "made-up" persona, so should we as a society be encouraging this behaviour? But then why should those people who are using the forums in the correct manner, and to benefit their lives, be punished for the mistakes that others are making?
I found that many of the posts were questions, asking how to use certain equipment or what was the best phone to buy etc, there are also a few people starting discussions on how many posts each member has. The conversation style on all of these posts are very colloquial and people use smiley faces, or nicknames such as "dude" to interact with each other. I imagine this is done to create a relaxed feel, perhaps like in a real life friendship conversation. This is also reflected in one discussion on Valentines day where complete strangers have been discussing, very casually, what they plan to do for the weekend.
The second forum was www.minimins.com, a website of forums dedicated to discussions of weight loss. I found this forum very interesting as it was full of discussions of support, and help between members. Some posts were quite formal but many were chatty and conversational.
Perhaps when forums are created for certain discussion points, members begin to feel part of a society or group, and in this case, people who feel uncomfortable in their real-lives, due to their weight, are able to talk about how they feel with others - I believe forums such as this one are helping many people realise that they are not alone, what a positive thing.
Generally speaking, both forums I looked at expressed a similar style of conversation. No-one was rude or offensive and every took the approach of a laid-back online conversation, albeit the second of the two was slightly more formal.
However, I believe that the reason for this is that both websites are monitored closely with "rules". When looking at YouTube.com I found that underneath videos people have left their comments, many of which include swearing and occasionally result in a few members arguing with each other and "slagging" each other off in unpleasant ways. Seeing this made me question; do open forums like these encourage arguments? People become free on the internet and perhaps gain too much power, hiding behind a nickname and sometimes a "made-up" persona, so should we as a society be encouraging this behaviour? But then why should those people who are using the forums in the correct manner, and to benefit their lives, be punished for the mistakes that others are making?
Friday, 6 February 2009
Online Identity
The Internet has become, for many, a window of opportunity, a chance to deliver your views and gain a response. We live in a country of free speech but we still must be careful not to offend anyone, so the Internet acts as a haven for discussion on ANYTHING you want.
Of course it is still possible to offend people by posting strong views however, by hiding who you are and only showing what your beliefs are you are able to speak freely.
Most forums encourage users to speak freely and fairly, however, there are some cult websites which can be extreme.
I believe that everyone has the right to argue their views, but the Internet does allow people to sometimes go over the top. For those people who use the Internet sensibly it can be an opening and a chance to be themselves, as perhaps they are unable to be themselves and say what they feel in their real lives.
Many forums allow people to express their views with people who have similar views, allowing them to feel part of a group of like-minded people. Is there anything wrong with that? Perhaps not, however this brings us back to previous points, how do you know who you are discussing your views with? Can anyone on the Internet be trusted, if so, who?
Of course it is still possible to offend people by posting strong views however, by hiding who you are and only showing what your beliefs are you are able to speak freely.
Most forums encourage users to speak freely and fairly, however, there are some cult websites which can be extreme.
I believe that everyone has the right to argue their views, but the Internet does allow people to sometimes go over the top. For those people who use the Internet sensibly it can be an opening and a chance to be themselves, as perhaps they are unable to be themselves and say what they feel in their real lives.
Many forums allow people to express their views with people who have similar views, allowing them to feel part of a group of like-minded people. Is there anything wrong with that? Perhaps not, however this brings us back to previous points, how do you know who you are discussing your views with? Can anyone on the Internet be trusted, if so, who?
Online Persona
In society there are certain social 'rules' which everyone abides by. These rules are not necessarily stated, they are purely what society recognises as the correct way to act or the 'norm'. Online we also have these acknowledged 'rules', for example, we understand how to present ourselves in emails, and we are aware of how colloquial or formal we can be.
Because of this accepted form of online writing how are we able to present ourselves as individual from others over the net? People build an identity through their persona and how they show themselves to others online, whether through a nickname on a forum, a photo on a personal page etc.
The Internet is, to many, a wonderful thing, but it is still restricting. Online chat rooms and forums allow connections between people via typed words, there is no speech and no body language/facial expressions. It is therefore unsurprising that many people form an 'identity' online to make themselves differ from the masses. However, there are extremes to this online identity creating.
Lister et al suggests that "the Internet facilitates the development of different experiences of identity and different experiences of group belonging". It is correct that the Internet allows identities to be formed at such ease, unlike in real life, there is no one "left out" online as everyone seems to be accepted. For example, if you are homosexual you are able to meet in certain forums and meet other people like yourself etc.
For many, forming an online identity allows you to make your mark on the net, to be more than just typed words, however there are many people who use the Internet to form a whole new form of identity for themselves, one which differs completely from their real life person.
Critics may call this, forming of an online identity, a way for people to hide behind what is real and the problems in the persons real life.
I think that forming an identity online which is completely different to your own self could be dangerous and may get out of hand, how can you be aware that the person you are pretending to be is not just a stereotyped form. People online can not be seen or heard, and if you do not tell anyone, no one knows who you are, this sometimes gives people the confidence to say exactly what they think, something which could potentially be harmful to the person reading. This is unlikely to happen in real life because we hold these conventional 'rules' and social norms, we are bought up knowing that we cant just be rude to someone in real life.
Because of this accepted form of online writing how are we able to present ourselves as individual from others over the net? People build an identity through their persona and how they show themselves to others online, whether through a nickname on a forum, a photo on a personal page etc.
The Internet is, to many, a wonderful thing, but it is still restricting. Online chat rooms and forums allow connections between people via typed words, there is no speech and no body language/facial expressions. It is therefore unsurprising that many people form an 'identity' online to make themselves differ from the masses. However, there are extremes to this online identity creating.
Lister et al suggests that "the Internet facilitates the development of different experiences of identity and different experiences of group belonging". It is correct that the Internet allows identities to be formed at such ease, unlike in real life, there is no one "left out" online as everyone seems to be accepted. For example, if you are homosexual you are able to meet in certain forums and meet other people like yourself etc.
For many, forming an online identity allows you to make your mark on the net, to be more than just typed words, however there are many people who use the Internet to form a whole new form of identity for themselves, one which differs completely from their real life person.
Critics may call this, forming of an online identity, a way for people to hide behind what is real and the problems in the persons real life.
I think that forming an identity online which is completely different to your own self could be dangerous and may get out of hand, how can you be aware that the person you are pretending to be is not just a stereotyped form. People online can not be seen or heard, and if you do not tell anyone, no one knows who you are, this sometimes gives people the confidence to say exactly what they think, something which could potentially be harmful to the person reading. This is unlikely to happen in real life because we hold these conventional 'rules' and social norms, we are bought up knowing that we cant just be rude to someone in real life.
Wednesday, 4 February 2009
Selves and Others Online - Lecture 3
I found this lecture on individuals persona's online very interesting however, I also found it hard to remove society's stigmatised view of the "strange lonely" people who we often associate chat rooms and forums with.
It is unfair in today's world to stereotype and group people however it is almost impossible not to. We are all so aware of the dangers of the Internet and have all been taught to be cautious when talking to people online as we have no idea who they ACTUALLY are.
Before the lecture I did hold this negative image of a loner sat all day at a computer trying to make "friends" and form "relationships" online, and generally I imagined them as having no friends in real life, or being online for a purpose, such as pedophilia.
I now think that it is sad that society has these views, I agree that we must still be cautious because sadly these people do exist, however is it such a bad thing to create yourself a different identity for a day, or a week, and discover the worlds reaction to you?
I have personally never acted as someone else over the Internet, however I imagine, if performed safely, it would reveal a lot about our society. How would people respond to me on a forum if I told them I was homosexual, or living illegally in the country for example. I think the Internet has become a haven for those hiding from real life, and I am glad that they are able to "fit in" to an online society, however, despite my views being altered I still am unable to find online "relationships" normal, perhaps it is because I am lucky enough to be content with my real life relationships, or perhaps it is because the stigma is always going to be attached.
I think maybe we are so lucky to be able to act as we want in life, we forget that there are many people in many countries who just cant be themselves.
It is unfair in today's world to stereotype and group people however it is almost impossible not to. We are all so aware of the dangers of the Internet and have all been taught to be cautious when talking to people online as we have no idea who they ACTUALLY are.
Before the lecture I did hold this negative image of a loner sat all day at a computer trying to make "friends" and form "relationships" online, and generally I imagined them as having no friends in real life, or being online for a purpose, such as pedophilia.
I now think that it is sad that society has these views, I agree that we must still be cautious because sadly these people do exist, however is it such a bad thing to create yourself a different identity for a day, or a week, and discover the worlds reaction to you?
I have personally never acted as someone else over the Internet, however I imagine, if performed safely, it would reveal a lot about our society. How would people respond to me on a forum if I told them I was homosexual, or living illegally in the country for example. I think the Internet has become a haven for those hiding from real life, and I am glad that they are able to "fit in" to an online society, however, despite my views being altered I still am unable to find online "relationships" normal, perhaps it is because I am lucky enough to be content with my real life relationships, or perhaps it is because the stigma is always going to be attached.
I think maybe we are so lucky to be able to act as we want in life, we forget that there are many people in many countries who just cant be themselves.
Friday, 30 January 2009
Forums and Blogs in Conversation
Sonia Livingstone addresses that the internet may have "a radically new information and communication environment" when considering how people read from web pages.
I think that for many people, reading online is still a strange and uncomfortable thing to do. Likewise, writing and discussing subjects online can be daunting. Writing this blog, or a comment in a forum, I am unaware of who may come across my views and read them.
Hyperlinking makes reading online a completely different experience of reading for me. I find it hard to concentrate on a long piece of script online as it is, but having access to even more information can sometimes be overwhelming, allowing too many options!! I often print off a piece of online reading making it easier for me to digest and understand.
When it comes to writing online, be it in blogs or forums, at first I found it strange to be putting forward my views on topics in a more casual way than writing an essay. However, at the same time, the writing of these blogs are more formal than the style of writing I tend to use on a daily bases in instant messenger situations. This sometimes makes it hard to find the correct balance of appropriate writing style and expression. Talking in seminar groups, or conversations comes naturally, and I often find myself expressing views without even considering what I'm saying, however in a blog or forum situation I find myself putting a lot more thought into my discussion points. This is most probably a positive thing, as I find myself becoming more involved in the discussion.
I think that for many people, reading online is still a strange and uncomfortable thing to do. Likewise, writing and discussing subjects online can be daunting. Writing this blog, or a comment in a forum, I am unaware of who may come across my views and read them.
Hyperlinking makes reading online a completely different experience of reading for me. I find it hard to concentrate on a long piece of script online as it is, but having access to even more information can sometimes be overwhelming, allowing too many options!! I often print off a piece of online reading making it easier for me to digest and understand.
When it comes to writing online, be it in blogs or forums, at first I found it strange to be putting forward my views on topics in a more casual way than writing an essay. However, at the same time, the writing of these blogs are more formal than the style of writing I tend to use on a daily bases in instant messenger situations. This sometimes makes it hard to find the correct balance of appropriate writing style and expression. Talking in seminar groups, or conversations comes naturally, and I often find myself expressing views without even considering what I'm saying, however in a blog or forum situation I find myself putting a lot more thought into my discussion points. This is most probably a positive thing, as I find myself becoming more involved in the discussion.
Immersive Interactivity
Immersive interaction is explained my Lunenfeld as the in depth connection between a person and the virtual world. Lunenfeld suggests that many computer games, where the player becomes the character of the game, involve this immersive interactivity. The clarity and precision seen in some of these games allows a person to become immersed in the story and character they have "become". For many, playing these games acts as a cut off from the world, a chance to live as an action hero or to fulfill personal dreams. However, being immersed in a virtual world could be dangerous. There are already concerns of video and computer games becoming too violent and graphic, and children getting too engrossed in their chosen characters. For many people immersive interactivity is not necessary, many prefer 'extractive' interactivity, using chat rooms, forums and other hypertextual forms, each of these, however, can be just as addictive as 3D virtual gaming. With the Internet having so many choices, and different ways of interacting, people are free to discover themselves and what they like, whether it be through immersive gaming or forums and chat rooms.
Upgrade Culture
It is astonishing to think about how fast technology develops in our world today, when we consider that 100 years ago people had never heard of mobile phones. But will it ever stop? Will there ever be a time when we as a society decide that the technology we already have is enough for us in life?
We subconsciously know that every time we purchase a new phone, or up-grade an already perfectly good computer programme that another phone, ten times better than ours is being made and another computer programme has already been put into practice.
Is the reason behind this extreme up-grade culture, consumerism? Are up-grades designed for a money making purpose? We have become programmed to want the next best thing, to make sure that the programme for our computer is the fastest, most up-to-date programme around, and many people will pay a lot of money to make sure this happens.
I believe that as a technology reliant society we have come to expect upgrades, we know that within a matter of months or weeks something bigger and better will be available to us. Perhaps it is the greed of many of us which is causing this vast increase in upgrades. What would we do if suddenly the up-grades stopped, and we were forced to live with the technology we had at the time. Would we be able to accept what we have? I think that now we have seen the positive effects of 'up-grade culture' we will always be looking for more, 'up-grade culture' has become more than a money-making business, it has become a necessity for our technology reliant society.
We subconsciously know that every time we purchase a new phone, or up-grade an already perfectly good computer programme that another phone, ten times better than ours is being made and another computer programme has already been put into practice.
Is the reason behind this extreme up-grade culture, consumerism? Are up-grades designed for a money making purpose? We have become programmed to want the next best thing, to make sure that the programme for our computer is the fastest, most up-to-date programme around, and many people will pay a lot of money to make sure this happens.
I believe that as a technology reliant society we have come to expect upgrades, we know that within a matter of months or weeks something bigger and better will be available to us. Perhaps it is the greed of many of us which is causing this vast increase in upgrades. What would we do if suddenly the up-grades stopped, and we were forced to live with the technology we had at the time. Would we be able to accept what we have? I think that now we have seen the positive effects of 'up-grade culture' we will always be looking for more, 'up-grade culture' has become more than a money-making business, it has become a necessity for our technology reliant society.
Friday, 23 January 2009
The Internet and it's Impact on Society
Living without the Internet, for many, would seem impossible, and I can only agree. Once a person becomes reliant on the Internet for entertainment, researching information and to keep socialising it would be a disaster if that was taken away. For many people the Internet is a safe and exciting media concept however, with the Internet being open and available for everyone there is obviously a danger aspect.
I once was told that for every 'normal' website there are five pornographic websites available on the Internet. As well as these websites there is the danger of finding gambling websites, sadistic and cult chat rooms and other such websites which are causing the Internet to hold a negative image. This is worrying for many people who want their friends and families to enjoy the safer websites.
Society is also wary of the Internet and the way it forces many people to stay inside and glued to the screens of our computers. however, it can be argued that the Internet is not the only form of media causing laziness. And perhaps, if we are sitting at home doing nothing, maybe its a positive thing that we are still socialising and keeping up-to-date with the events of the world.
However, by using the Internet in order to know everything, are we starting to know too much when we come across websites about how to make an atom bomb?
I once was told that for every 'normal' website there are five pornographic websites available on the Internet. As well as these websites there is the danger of finding gambling websites, sadistic and cult chat rooms and other such websites which are causing the Internet to hold a negative image. This is worrying for many people who want their friends and families to enjoy the safer websites.
Society is also wary of the Internet and the way it forces many people to stay inside and glued to the screens of our computers. however, it can be argued that the Internet is not the only form of media causing laziness. And perhaps, if we are sitting at home doing nothing, maybe its a positive thing that we are still socialising and keeping up-to-date with the events of the world.
However, by using the Internet in order to know everything, are we starting to know too much when we come across websites about how to make an atom bomb?
Goebbel's Views Today and the Good of the Radio
It is clear from Goebbel's speech how enthusiastic and confident he was about the radio and its power. It is easy to understand why he saw the radio as such a positive form of media. The press, at the time was doing a good job at influencing people and delivering to the Germans the news from the world, however, Goebbel saw a newer, more exciting approach to the way the people received information.
However, today we are lucky to have such a wide variety of different shows and stations on the radio it is hard to see how the 'masses' can all be influenced in the same way. When the radio was first set up there was only one or two stations which meant that most people would be hearing the same things. This is not so today. His idea about letting the government control what is put across the radio, and using it as a form of propaganda may not be liked by many people today.
Radio today is a useful form of contact with the outside world, the variety of shows found on the radio mean that, somewhat like the Internet, you are able to listen for many different reasons, for company, for entertainment, for news up-dates etc.
Radio can be very influential, especially when a person only listens to one presenter and perhaps picks up their personal morals. However, I believe the radio to be a harmless form of entertainment and comfort for many people.
However, today we are lucky to have such a wide variety of different shows and stations on the radio it is hard to see how the 'masses' can all be influenced in the same way. When the radio was first set up there was only one or two stations which meant that most people would be hearing the same things. This is not so today. His idea about letting the government control what is put across the radio, and using it as a form of propaganda may not be liked by many people today.
Radio today is a useful form of contact with the outside world, the variety of shows found on the radio mean that, somewhat like the Internet, you are able to listen for many different reasons, for company, for entertainment, for news up-dates etc.
Radio can be very influential, especially when a person only listens to one presenter and perhaps picks up their personal morals. However, I believe the radio to be a harmless form of entertainment and comfort for many people.
Goebbel's Speech and Radio
For Germany during the 1930's the power of the media was great, especially when used for propaganda in the build up to the second world war.
Goebbel saw the radio as a new form of media which will be "for the twentieth century what the press was for the nineteenth century". He believed that radio would impact the masses in the same way the press did, using radio as a new form of gaining news stories and information. He claimed it should also be used to distract Germany from difficult times by using it as a form of entertainment for the people.
Goebbel felt that the government should use the radio to help influence Germans and to give comfort and keep them up-dated on news issues, claiming that he wanted a radio which "is an intermediary between the government and the nation".
Geobbel understood how radio can have power over people when finding a popular, trusted presenter, or selecting a frequently listened to time slot for an important show.
Goebbel saw the radio as a new form of media which will be "for the twentieth century what the press was for the nineteenth century". He believed that radio would impact the masses in the same way the press did, using radio as a new form of gaining news stories and information. He claimed it should also be used to distract Germany from difficult times by using it as a form of entertainment for the people.
Goebbel felt that the government should use the radio to help influence Germans and to give comfort and keep them up-dated on news issues, claiming that he wanted a radio which "is an intermediary between the government and the nation".
Geobbel understood how radio can have power over people when finding a popular, trusted presenter, or selecting a frequently listened to time slot for an important show.
Communication and the Internet
New Media is somewhat self-explanatory, the term "new" emphasises how recent this form of media is.
The Internet is expanding at such a rate and has quickly become a necessity in everyday life for many people.
The Internet is used for so many reasons, namely, in order to find sources of information, for social uses, entertainment, to order and control personal accounts, to learn, in order to purchase or sell and to keep up-to-date with current issues.
The speed and ease at which a person can obtain any of the above makes the Internet an increasingly popular form of media. Emails and chat rooms allow social relationships to form while websites allow purchasing and selling, or endless information to be required.
I find that certain people use the Internet for different reasons. For myself, the Internet is a way of finding information, whether it may be for my own personal entertainment or for a piece of work at university. I also use the Internet a great amount in order to keep in contact and up-to-date with friends and family. I use social networking sites, email accounts and messenger services to arrange contact with friends, or to help with organising meetings for work purposes.
I also find using the Internet to purchase a very quick and often cheaper form of buying, especially when choosing a holiday.
However, although many people, including myself, could not cope without the Internet, I feel it must still be used with trepidation. As the Internet expands so do viruses or unreliable websites.
The Internet is expanding at such a rate and has quickly become a necessity in everyday life for many people.
The Internet is used for so many reasons, namely, in order to find sources of information, for social uses, entertainment, to order and control personal accounts, to learn, in order to purchase or sell and to keep up-to-date with current issues.
The speed and ease at which a person can obtain any of the above makes the Internet an increasingly popular form of media. Emails and chat rooms allow social relationships to form while websites allow purchasing and selling, or endless information to be required.
I find that certain people use the Internet for different reasons. For myself, the Internet is a way of finding information, whether it may be for my own personal entertainment or for a piece of work at university. I also use the Internet a great amount in order to keep in contact and up-to-date with friends and family. I use social networking sites, email accounts and messenger services to arrange contact with friends, or to help with organising meetings for work purposes.
I also find using the Internet to purchase a very quick and often cheaper form of buying, especially when choosing a holiday.
However, although many people, including myself, could not cope without the Internet, I feel it must still be used with trepidation. As the Internet expands so do viruses or unreliable websites.
Thursday, 22 January 2009
First Blog
This is the first of my many blogs. I am still very confused about what exactly this is.
I am hoping that it will all become clear soon.
This type size is really cute!! I quite like it.....
This is the perfect opportunity to be good at computers as at the moment all I can work with is Facebook!?!
Much love guys. xXXXXXXXXXx
I am hoping that it will all become clear soon.
This type size is really cute!! I quite like it.....
This is the perfect opportunity to be good at computers as at the moment all I can work with is Facebook!?!
Much love guys. xXXXXXXXXXx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
