Thursday, October 30, 2008

random thoughts about this whole election thingy

Please find a collection of random thoughts about the role of the media in the election.

U.S., that is.

There was also a recent federal election in Canada. Funny thing is that the entire process, from dropping of the writ to final tally, took less time than even the nomination process for either major U.S. party... How does that happen?


The maturation of the internet within the electoral cycle:
Former Democratic Party presidential nominee Howard Dean may have started reaching out to the electorate using the internet back in 2004 but it has greatly matured in these intervening years. Online donations have become a major source of campaign financing and will only develop. Also, creating a database of voters/potential voters grew in sophistication. From now on, any candidate looking to win a major political office at any level will need to have a serious strategy to elicit funds and find potential voters. I am unsure how fundraising strategies will significantly improve from the present - there is only so many ways, and so many times, you can get people to open their wallets. But tracking people to elicit as much information as possible, and get-out-the-vote developments, will only improve.

...

The rapid response unit:
Campaign strategists have exponentially increased the speed with which they spread information about their candidate (flattering), the other candidate (unflattering) and responses to perceived misinformation (using flattering information to put their candidate in the best light after being made to look unflattering by their opponent, usually by making the other candidate look unflattering).

And repeat.

The 24-hour-news-cycle mandates almost instantaneous response to any accusations. Both parties put a premium on answering as quickly as possible so that any rumors could not gain traction. For the most part, candidates were able to define themselves and not let the other party do it for them.

...

Hillary's flame out:
Carol Moseley Braun was the first, and only, African-American woman elected to the U.S. Senate. She also briefly ran for the Democratic presidential nomination.

I can't find the quote, but I believe it was Ms. Braun who said she faced more difficulty being a woman than a person of color in politics. (If you find the quote, please please please let me know). After Hillary's shoddy treatment during her campaign, and even Governor Palin (please see “Clothes Shopping Spree Scandal”), I believe that is still true.

Sure, you could make a pretty convincing argument that Obama organized the pantsuit off Hillary's team. However, her entire time in political life has been an endless parade of chauvinistic sentiments rationalized through the idea of gender equality/neutrality. She has been a veritable lightning rodham for criticism that has just been too angry in tone and too negatively gendered given the realities of the situation at hand. Whether it was criticism regarding her efforts in the health care reform initiative (Bill 1.0), the Lewinsky scandal fall out (Bill 2.0), the "could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas" comment, or even her hearty laugh (for the love of God can you please stop!) (2008 Democratic Nominee Campaign), the press has been a little to eager to pounce at even the slightest mishap or hiccup. We simply need more females working in politics and this kind of stuff needs to end. Why any sane person would run for public office these days is beyond me.

...

Sensical Springer:
I saw a tidbit on television the other night where Jerry Springer spoke eloquently about the need for universal health care and education as well as the importance of the middle class. When a sensationalistic talk show host is saying some of the sanest policy statements during an election campaign, you know things are messed up.

Next thing you know, we will be seeing Secretary of Defence Steve Wilkos.

"What?!? Secretary Wilkos wants us to replace all military rifles with folding chairs from his show?!?

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

an ode to community

“His overall conclusion is that virtual communities cannot reclaim ‘lost’ community in society, largely because the cultures and identities created are ‘too partial, heterogeneous and fluid to create a strong sense of membership and belonging’” (Van Dijk, 1998, 59 in Jankowski, 2006, 63).

community is permeable.
organic.

we’re still hunter-gatherers.
but we hunt with cunning sharpened by textbooks,
and gather in our pocketbooks.

moving from group-to-group,
their contours are more or less the same,
it’s what’s inside that changes.

or does it?

the play remains the same,
it’s just the actors who change.

we are part of more-and-more groups,
but in less-and-less personal ways.

introduction,
interaction,
and emigration
seem …
somehow …
less traumatic in the virtual world
than face-to-face.

“who do YOU think you are?”
“why the hell did you do THAT?”
“hey … where are you going?”

in the good old days,
leaving a group seemed more difficult.

a departure implied a slight.
indifference
can change diffidence
to belligerence.

You talkin' to me?
You talkin' to me?
Then who the hell else are you talkin' to?

in present days,
information surrounds us,
envelops us,
becomes us.

traffic moves
from the front sidewalk
to the front cortex.

physical impact becomes mental.
emotional.
spiritual?

possession is unimportant,
transformation assumed,
and dissemination key.

"Who gets what to the most whoevers"
is the headline of the day.
why is irrelevant.
when? instantaneous.

"HAVEN’T YOU READ MY E-MAIL?!?"

where goes our information flow,
there goes our social glow.

social structures evolved
through medieval torture,
and victorian proper,
to modern,
post-modernism.

are rules
even rules
when they’ve been …
ruled out?

the formalization of …
informality?!?
staid strictures secede,
silly sensibilities slowly surface.

old society,
its mores ever-shifting,
becomes embedded
on new society.

that is, if there ever was one...

old society, that is.

virtual communities can’t “reclaim ‘lost’ community”
any more than mrs. c. can call the fonz and richie
back to the dining room table.

an illusion
captures the imagination
because it’s elusive.

was there ever really a community?
or was it just something we made up?
to help us get through troubling times

nostalgia
covered in sepia
leads to dementia?

was that my family?
or your family?
who’s family?
the cunningham family?!?

hysteria!

goodbye 50s pot-roast.
hello tomorrow’s ...

oh, who knows?

well joanie, you're going to have to wait until tomorrow night to see how this story turns out...

References:
Jankowski, N. (2006). Creating community with media: History, theories, and scientific investigations. In L. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), The handbook of new media, updated student edition (pp. 55-74). London: Sage.

Van Dijk, J. (1998) The reality of virtual communities. Trends in communication 1(1) pp. 39-63.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Legal issues in virtual ethnographies

Legal issues in the making of a virtual ethnography: The Louise Woodward case
Louise Woodward was a British au pair responsible for caring for the two Eappen children over their parents' long periods of absence. Matthew Eappen suffered a brain haemorrhage, 'shaken baby syndrome' and died from damage caused inside his skull. He was 8 months old. Louise was charged with murder. The presiding judge released his decision on the case through the internet. This choice leads to many interesting issues.

Firstly, was there a legal requirement for the presiding judge to release his judgment in a more traditional method? (e.g. in a paper format for newspapers)?

Probably not.

American states publish reports of appellate level cases in legal reports which go all the way up to the Supreme Court. In the jurisdictions of England and Wales, higher English court decisions are reported in a complete series from the Year Books of Edward II to Henry VIII to the present. Similarly, Canadian provinces have official legal reports for superior and appellate court decisions as well as for federal courts and the Supreme Court of Canada. Although criminal cases like the Woodward case would normally need to be reported in a formal legal reporter to become a part of the "public record", it does not appear as though there is a firm legal requirement for the presiding judge to report it to the press, print or online.

Further, regardless of legal requirements to share results, since the Woodward case was criminal in nature, it would be difficult to find an appropriate traditional medium which could support its gravity and widespread concern such a case would create. For example, municipal and regional newspapers do not have jurisdictions that mimic the national nature of, or international interest in, a criminal offence. As a result, although it appears as though there is no legal compulsion to publish in the popular press in any manner, even if there was, it would be difficult to choose an appropriate medium that has suitable scope.


Secondly, is it morally suspect to release a legal decision on the internet?

In this case, arguably yes.

The case was decided during the infancy of the internet (1997) and relatively few people had access to information provided this way. Since the legal decision in this case was a public issue of wide concern (e.g. care of a child), this information should have been published in the most pervasive and least restricted manner. The internet arguably did not meet this criteria at that time.

However, perhaps you could potentially make the alternative case today and especially "tomorrow". Given the high penetration of broadband access in homes, perhaps internet publication is, or will be, the only way to fully inform the populace about matters of public concern. As the balance transitions from print to online news consumption
, perhaps the internet will be the only medium of choice. But given economic barriers and resistance by a minority of citizens to be plugged in, will full internet access ever occur? Will tomorrow ever come?


Finally (I had to stop somewhere), was it legal or moral to conduct a study based on this subject matter?

It was definitely legal, probably moral, but personally a bit strange.

In this case, it appears as though there was separation between researcher and subject. The periphery of the internet culture that circled around the issue was surveyed, not the sufferers themselves. Even then, as long as subjects were informed of the nature of the study and were treated in a civil manner and with care, legality should not be an issue. However, is it ever truly moral to exploit someone in a tender situation, even in the most peripheral manner even if it contributes to the "common good", the banner for most research? Hmmm...

References:
Hine, C. (2000) Virtual ethnography. London: Sage. (Ch. 4: The making of a virtual ethnography).

Carr, D. (2008, October 29) Mourning Old Media’s Decline. New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/business/media/29carr.html?scp=4&sq=gannett&st=cse

Friday, October 10, 2008

The final project. Duh duh duh…

(1) Reflections on what I think I need in order to move forward on my final project? (more concrete questions, more reading in a particular area, etc.)
I am interested in the hesitancy in classmates registering for Second Life accounts. Given that all of us are enrolled in a course entitled “Social and Communicative Aspects of the Internet and other ICTs” and that all/most/many of us are studying within Communication, Computing, and Technology in Education, I would have expected a higher rate of adoption. As a result, I am interested in possible reasons for this resistance to embrace this particular technology.
I am planning on looking more into questions about how identity is formed, online representations of identity and any similarities or differences between the two. Due to my relative lack of familiarity with the field, these areas all look like ripe for further reading and questioning. To be honest, I do not think I know enough about the field at this time to ask any informed questions...

(2) How can you get what you need?
I am unsure whether or not, at this time, I will be conducting a traditional literature review/discussion of a given topic or a project/mini-study. I am initially swaying towards the literature review because of my lack of background in the area. I do not think I really know enough about this subject area to conduct a proper study. I think I will initially investigate studies/readings concerning traditional forms of identity formation, studies/readings about online identity formation and any overlap through an online and offline search of Columbia resources.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Technological determinism

Technological determinism - negotiating the space between its extremes
By far the most dominant theme I have encountered during my time in the Instructional Technology and Media (ITM) program is the idea of technological determinism (TD). For the sake of clarity of thought in this discussion, I will define TD as "the human tendency to create the kind of society that invests technologies with enough power to drive history" (Marx & Smith, 1994, p. xiv). Also in this piece, the ideas of “hard” and “soft” determinism are compared and contrasted. “At the ‘hard’ end of the spectrum, agency (the power to effect change) is imputed to technology itself, or to some of its intrinsic attributes; thus the advance of technology leads to a situation of inescapable necessity” (Marx & Smith, 1994, p. xii). In contrast, “[a]t the other end of the spectrum, the ‘soft’ determinists begin by reminding us that the history of technology is a history of human actions … Instead of treating ‘technology’ per se as the locus of historical agency the soft determinists locate it in a far more various and complex social, economic, political, and cultural matrix”(Marx & Smith, 1994, p. xiii).

The reason I have found TD so prevalent in my readings, conversations and thoughts in ITM is that I use it as an analytical framework within which I examine the interplay of technology within a variety of settings. I find the TD framework especially useful when it contextualizes spatial, temporal, psychological, social, economic, political, and, of course, educational issues. When the implementation of a technology is implemented, its effect needs to be measured. These interventions invariably take place within a physical or online setting (spatial) and occur over time (temporal). These effects usually manifest themselves in either micro levels (psychological) or macro levels (social, economic, political), or a combination of the two. Like many distinctions, the lines between these issues and levels can become easily blurred. Similarly, educational milieus, whether at the school, university or alternative settings, are ripe for technological interventions and the examination of their effects at a number of levels depending on the requirements of specific research questions. As a result, I have found TD to be a particularly fruitful in looking at the myriad number of issues involving instruction, technology, media, communication, computing and education.

Two lingering questions
In my first post for this blog, I formulated two questions that had arisen from my readings and discussions within my courses in Communication, Computing, and Technology in Education (CCTE). I further reflected on why these questions were important to me in relation to my personal and academic interests. These questions were first, what is TD? Second, how are competing intellectual schools of thought reconciled?

With regards to the first question, from the earlier thoughts in this post, it is pretty clear that the idea of TD is still quite relevant to my thoughts. Given that I use it as an analytical framework across issues and levels, I am sure it will remain with me throughout my interrogation of technology, media and education issues. Given my multidisciplinary academic background in education, media, law and social sciences, this framework seems especially well-suited to the way I normally look at issues. And if I had to categorize myself, I would be a soft determinist with respect to most technological interventions. Although the cumulative power of technology can be incredibly strong, I would normally situate it within a wider “social, economic, political, and cultural matrix". As such, I would conceive of technology as a strong current within a powerful river consisting of other complementary, or competing, flows.

My second question, how are competing intellectual schools of thought reconciled, is much less developed right now but will take greater prevalence later on in my academic career. At the moment, I have a relatively limited background in some psychological and technological issues that are inextricably linked to technological interventions in educational settings. For example, I am just becoming more familiar with issues like constructionism, constructivism, and behavioralism on the psychological side as well as the incredible number of software, hardware intitiatives that have been, are, and will be taking place in schools, universities, etc. I am hopeful that as my understanding of these concepts and interventions grow, I will be able to more fully integrate them within my ever-evolving personal philosophy of technology, media, instruction, communication, computing and education. However, I am respectful of the fact that these things take time… Wish me luck.

References:
Marx, L., & Smith, M.R. (1994). Introduction. In M.R. Smith & L. Marx (Eds.), Does technology drive history?: The dilemma of technological determinism (ix-xv). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.