1. Based on this debate and previous readings what definition of democracy do you feel is most fitting for us to use in-conjunction with our growing reliance and integration of digital networked technologies?
I believe that, based on this debate and previous readings, the definition of democracy that is most fitting for us to use is the regulation of the internet and the question at hand, therefore, is; should everyone be able to post “facts” on the internet or only scholars and professionals? Keen argues for a representative democracy where only the elite are able to post fact-based, researched, and edited articles on the internet. The average person doesn’t have the time or the resources necessary to do the research to make sure the information they’re posting is correct. Jimmy Whales on the other hand, argues for a direct democracy where the internet serves as a medium for open conversation and dialogue. I think that direct democracy best fits into our growing integration of digital networked technologies, but as direct democracy increases, reliability decreases. This is because anyone can post virtually anything on the internet without having the responsibility of making sure it’s true. Direct democracy, with scholars and professionals who post information on the internet would be a much better fit in terms of reliance on the internet for information. I think that what we need is a better combination of the two.
2. How does your answer to #1 fit into the unchecked nature of Web 2.0 technologies, and what are some tangible examples of this? Do you feel this is an important issue that needs to be addressed further?
2. How does your answer to #1 fit into the unchecked nature of Web 2.0 technologies, and what are some tangible examples of this? Do you feel this is an important issue that needs to be addressed further?
Direct democracy fits into the unchecked nature of Web 2.0 technologies we have today, while representative democracy does not seem as possible because it is all about experts, researching and fact-checking the information that it is made available for everyone to see. The most well known example of this is Wikipedia where almost every article can be edited anonymously. There are many other examples of direct democracy and the unchecked nature of Web 2.0 technologies however, such as facebook, collegeacb, youtube, and blogs. I have mixed feelings about the unchecked nature of the internet; in some instances like facebook and youtube, I don’t think its something we should be concerned with but on sites such as Wikipedia or other sites that are used for the purpose of learning information that we assume is accurate, I think that this is an issue that needs to be addressed further.
3. Define and describe the phenomenon of the Media echo-chamber as described in the Internet Debates. What are some examples of this silo effect, and do you believe it is an issue that needs to be addressed? Why or Why not?
3. Define and describe the phenomenon of the Media echo-chamber as described in the Internet Debates. What are some examples of this silo effect, and do you believe it is an issue that needs to be addressed? Why or Why not?
The term media echo chamber can refer to any situation in which information, ideas or beliefs are exaggerated or reinforced by communication inside an "enclosed" space, such as a chat room or website. One person spreads information by making a claim, which many like-minded people then repeat, overhear, and repeat again (often in an exaggerated or otherwise distorted form) until most people assume that some extreme variation of the story is true. A good example of this effect can be seen by examining political websites, especially at this time right before elections. Most people who are hardcore Republicans or Democrats will only go to sites that support people from their party without even pausing to consider other candidates who may have valid points. I think that this is an issue that needs to be addressed because in order to be good citizens we have to be well informed and well educated and that means hearing all different sides and opinions. Although I believe this needs to be addressed, I don’t know an effective way of changing this because I think it is part of human nature to be “stuck in our ways” and narrow-minded to some degree; people are always going to want to hear from people they agree with and who agree with them than they are going to want to hear from people who don’t.
4. What are some ways that expertise and authority could be (or is being) enforced on the internet? Who would be behind these forces? Why do you believe are they are needed or not needed?
4. What are some ways that expertise and authority could be (or is being) enforced on the internet? Who would be behind these forces? Why do you believe are they are needed or not needed?
While I think some form of authority is needed to enforce expertise on the internet, I can’t really think of a realistic way to accomplish that. I don’t know how one specific authority force could monitor everything that is posted on the internet because it would be too expensive and there is just simply too much. So what could we do instead to “check” what is on the internet? I think the best thing we can do is prevention. This could involve schools teaching classes on “internet responsibility” that would cover everything from making sure the things we upload and post are appropriate and accurate to how to tell if the things we are viewing are accurate, like using factcheck.com as mentioned in the video. While it may not be possible, at least at this point in time, to keep inaccurate information off the internet, it is possible to educate people, especially the youth, how to use the internet responsibly. There are certain websites, such as educational or government websites that are run with expertise and authority. I think something along this line should be a mandatory class. Another thing that could be done is to have an age restriction on the internet. But what would the age limit be, 10? 12? Older? Younger? And how would it be enforced? I think that most kids would be able to find a way to get around it.
6. Give a through example of an adaptation or improvement made by a of a social, political, or cultural group, government, business or individual to keep up with changing nature of the internet.
One of the best examples I can think of that applies to social, political, and cultural groups and business is the use of facebook. Any individual, group, or company can make a public page that everyone on facebook can “like” and then receive updates on. Businesses can also create ads that show up on the side of the screen. Facebook’s ad page claims that facebook ads can help businesses reach their target customers by connecting with more than 500 million potential customers, being able to choose their audience by location, age, and interests, and being able to test simple image and text-based ads and using what works. They also claim that having an ad on facebook can help businesses deepen their relationships by promoting their facebook page or website, using facebook’s “like” button to increase their ad’s influence, and building a community around their business. Facebook also provides case studies to demonstrate how effective ads on this social networking site are: http://www.facebook.com/advertising/?campaign_id=402047449186&placement=pf&extra_1=0. When I searched Google I found tons of sites that discuss how to use facebook to promote your business such as these:
USA Today discusses this trend in this article: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2010-07-22-techbiz22_ST_N.htm.
I think that advertising on facebook is a smart move for businesses because so many people are on facebook now, that without it I feel like they would get left behind.
7. Is democracy threatened by the unchecked nature of the internet?
No comments:
Post a Comment