Google Gets Friendly!!

Inspired by social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, Google has decided that it wants to add a social layer, leading to its idea of "online friendship". However, Google friends would be people within your Google contacts, Google talk, and people connected to your Google profile. Although the confusion that this might cause is problematic, my major concern is how Google plans on using this social layer as a new source of information to add to its search engine. Apparently this new feature would be used more for sharing information than for simply providing more interaction. From my understanding, Google, which is widely known and designed as an informative search engine, is now trying to add a social feature where people will have more access to information based on who in their network of friends has liked it, regardless of credibility or applicability. Although this may link people within the same network together, could this also potentially alter Google's somewhat objective nature and provide more possibilities for the polarization effect?

Decide for yourself:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/03/31/google.friendship.plus1/index.html?hpt=Sbin

This link provides a better explanation of the feature itself:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/223854/google_wants_you_to_like_1_but_will_you.html

~Zakiyyah~

Wikipedia: Communication Styles Make a Difference

I found an interesting article in the New York Times that explains why men seem to be more frequent contributors to Wikipedia than women. Initially I was puzzled by the idea because we have discussed in class that women tend to be more frequent users of social media sites. What makes Wikipedia so different? According to Susan Herring, Wikipedia presents a tone of communication that is more intimidating to women, causing them to shy away from it. Unlike social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, Wikipedia doesn't allow its users to have as much control over communication and has a "neutral point of view" policy that matches a more masculine style of communication. What do you think? If "far fewer women than men said they weren’t interested in the topics of discussion" as the article states, could it be the partiality of this virtual environment that is preventing women from participating?

Read more about it here:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/02/where-are-the-women-in-wikipedia/communication-styles-make-a-difference  

~Zakiyyah~

Wikileaks & Manmohan Singh

This past week Wikileaks caused yet another controversy by releasing cables related to the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh that suggested that Indian's ruling party had bribed lawmakers in a confidence vote over the US-India Nuclear Pact. On this issue, I checked out a number of different American and Indian news outlets and I noticed a general consistency in the news reporting although some news articles were significantly easier to understand than others. One of the best articles I came across was from India Realtime, a blog extension of the Wall Street Journal which aggregated responses from columnists from different Indian news outlets on the subject.

http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2011/03/26/what-they-said-the-wikileaks-allegations/?mod=google_news_blog

I wrote in my paper that Wikileaks represents a new type of news outlet in that it provides news (directly from primary sources) yet, is also a popular subject of news articles given its controversial nature. Though the Singh refuted the veracity of the Wikileaks documents, it is difficult to argue with primary-sourced information.

On another note, I've noticed that I rely on traditional news sources like the Wall Street Journal to filter through the Wikileaks documents for me instead of directly reading from the Wikileaks site. In this sense, traditional news sources are still very relevant to making information accessible and easy to understand.

-Connie

Blog Posting DQ's

Blog Posting

A post should describe briefly (no more than a paragraph) and with enough information to be useful to you in crafting your final paper. Include the hyperlink to the story.

Here are some suggestions about what to look for and comment on ….

1. How much attention does the issue gets in the news overall? (Consult the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s New Index and New Media Index (journalism.org) as well as the Pew Research Center’s News Interest Index for information on which news stories are prominent and which interest the news audience.
   
   

2. Which aspects of your issue are reported?

3. Which stories grabbed your attention? Why? To what extent did the stories provide background for understanding what happened? Was background information common in some outlets and not others?

4. Which news frames (e.g. conflict, celebrity, human interest, personalization, dramatization, simplification or popularity) predominate in news about your topic? If there are contested frames (e.g. Administration vs. Republicans in congress), which frame predominates? Is the news about your topic mostly negative? Does morality play a role? Is the news nation-centric? Were there differences in framing or emphasis across media or countries?

5. Were explanations offered for actions or events described in the story? Did explanations vary across ideological, national, or media divides?

6. Were there many visuals or video reports? What was in the visuals? Did the visuals favor one side or interpretation of the story? Include examples.

7. Who are the sources (e.g. public officials, experts, people on the street) for the views expressed in the stories you follow? Is there a balance of views in reporting your issue?

8. Did the stories contain advice about how to influence events? Was the reporting on your topic useful to citizens?

Wikileaks & the Law

Can we govern information in cyberspace? This article provides an interesting perspective on the role of law on information in cyberspace. The rhetoric surrounding the internet is that it is a forum for free speech-- the true equalizer in a socioeconomically and educationally divided society. However, increasingly (as we have seen with the Wikileaks debacle), the internet can become a highly political space with different companies, individuals, and groups waging hacking wars on eachother. Companies like Paypal bent to the pressure of the U.S government to cut off service to Wikileaks. Since there is no government of cyberspace nor any due process of law, can the internet provide a truly democratic space? Or is its anarchical system one that encourages confusion and guerilla computing?

"The physical structure of the Internet is still so decentralized and resilient that it serves the purposes of free speech and spreading information. But the larger issues are ones that have been present from the beginning. Even though [the Internet is] transnational, companies are located in physical spaces and can be prosecuted by specific national governments. That is going to continue to be the case, and we're going to see a further balkanization in which governments do what they can in their own space and bump up against what other states are doing in their own space."

http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/wikileaks-challenges-internet-freedom/p23661

- Connie

The Function of Wikileaks

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/12/09/what-has-wikileaks-started/wikileaks-is-no-whistle-blower

I came across this opinion piece regarding Wikileaks and I was curious about what you think of it. The author discusses how Wikileaks has changed the face of whistle blowing. He seems to suggest that the anonymity that Wikileaks provides essentially challenges the validity and integrity of those who choose to speak out against the government. I am not so sure I agree with this. It is true that Wikileaks makes dissent virtually faceless, but isn't that a good thing. To me, this forum provides a safe space for dialogue and accountability and would not function in the same way if it wasn't anonymous. What are your thoughts?

- Chibuzo

The Internet as Public Sphere

I recently came across a website that has a section entitled "The Internet as Public Sphere: Contesting Social Networks". It's not necessarily an online newspaper but nonetheless it brings up issues similar to what we've been discussing in class (such as themes like distrust) and the role of sites such as Youtube and CNN in the public sphere.

                                    http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/Dietel/internet.htm

~Zakiyyah~