Political Figures Utilize the Internet

I decided to use "Google News" in order to find recent information regarding the application of the internet. Through this I came across an article that addresses the use of the internet and video blogging by prominent political figures like Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Earlier this month I posted an article that also included a video of Obama addressing one of his policies, and attempted to analyze whether or not this form of presentation was beneficial for relaying information. According to this article, using media sites, Youtube, videos, and other direct forms of media are very beneficial to campaigning (particularly in raising money, as McCain proved successful). The article points to Obama as the man who really used social media to his advantage, by doing everything from broadcasting information via text message to garnering grassroots supporters. I can't think of any draw backs of this strategy. If all campaigning were done online, I would be concerned that certain groups (particularly the older generation) were being left out. However, it seems as though online campaigning/information services are just a complement to traditional forms of campaigning/providing information at this point. 

http://www.thonline.com/article.cfm?id=319004

~Zakiyyah~

Digital Self-Publishing

In class we've talked a great deal about bloggers and how the public has in some senses taken on the responsibility of informing itself. However, the internet has taken this concept to a new level through e-books. Authors are no longer waiting for publishing companies in order to advertise their books. Instead, they are going online and attracting audiences who support their work. What does this mean for the validity of authors who did go through the grueling process of trying to get published? Is this simple process a good thing or is it merely allowing people (who may or may not have credibility) to influence a potentially uninformed audience? On the other hand, is this another positive example of the "ordinary people" taking over the media, while traditional literary authors possibly diminish in importance? 

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ebooks-published-star/story?id=13316310

~Zakiyyah~

Customizing the News

Media sites seem to be attempting even more efforts to make the news more personalized. Media companies, including Google News, are attempting to track users' interests and filter news information based on the user's interests. Essentially, the site would create a customized news homepage based on your past news history. We've discussed in class the benefits and draw backs of personalized news, so naturally I have a few concerns. This encourages users to only receive access to limited information or one-sided information, which is already a problem with many other aspects of the media. Is this a good move for Google News and other media companies? Won't this new feature encourage further polarization?

http://www.webpronews.com/google-news-gets-more-personalized-2011-04

~Zakiyyah~

Evacuees of Texas Turn to Internet

I found an ironic example of how the internet can be of use in times of chaos. An article in the New York Times describes a recent incident in Texas where wildfires were threatening the safety of a community. Of course, in times of disaster, it is important to be able to communicate with other people beyond your own community. One woman had recently created a blog on her company's website and used the blog to complain about the horrible phone service that she, along with everyone else in the community, was receiving. The news traveled over to AT&T executives and other "high-level contacts" until an AT&T truck pulled up in the community to provide direct service and improve the community's phone service to five bars. The article connects this incident back to the power of the internet and the blog in particular, as a space in which members of the community can exchange information (including aerial surveys of their property). I believe one woman captured the essence of the article and what it is implying about the blog and the internet in general. She claims, "It’s the first time in my experience in a domestic disaster where citizens are taking control of their information,” Ms. Foster said. “We’re on the cusp of how we can use digital media to respond to these things. But it takes citizens to keep it together” (Seelye 1).  I do wonder how the results might have been different if this incident occurred in a poorer community that included people with less connections, but I do appreciate the importance of the blog itself in allowing people to seek help in the first place. What are your thoughts on this article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/25/us/25wildfire.html?ref=internet 

~Zakiyyah~

Freedom of Speech in the Age of Wikileaks

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/decision-canada/Free+speech+Twitter/4662251/story.html

I found this somewhat interesting article in the Montreal Gazette today that, among other things, discusses the effects of free speech in the age of Wikileaks and other social media. Despite the fact that this piece was incredibly long-winded and slightly tangential, it did raise several important points. Early on in the article the author, Juan Rodriguez, cites a line from Noam Chomsky's book that says, "When you get to a case where nobody likes what's being said, then somehow defense of freedom of speech disappears." This sentiment is directly related to what happened with Wikileaks. I understand that the Wikileaks dilemma is very complicated in that it is very hard for the government to be both secure and transparent -- there are just some secrets that must remain secrets. However, Asange's actions also come from a very real place; he was motivated by his right to freely express himself. I don't know that I'll ever really understand the ramifications of Wikileaks. However, I am not sure that it is right for the media to vilify Asange and call him a traitor nor is it right for the media to praise him and call him a hero. Within reason, people like Asange should be able to exercise their constitutional rights. Due to the evolution of the internet, the public has the opportunity to exercise its rights more than ever before and in new and different ways so not only should we welcome this sort of civic engagement, but we should be better prepared for it.

-Chibuzo

Internet Freedom and Democracy

I found a fascinating article in the Huffington Post that discussed the relationship between the internet and modern democracy. It provides an analysis of how "Freedom House" ranked the independence of various countries according to their internet freedom. According to the article, internet freedom is defined as "absence from politically motivated control". While reading this article, I immediately thought of countries like China and Egypt, who have attempted to maintain control of their citizens by restricting internet access. Apparently, the United States comes in at number two on this list, with nations such as Russia and Thailand being of the most concern. However, I'm glad that this article was written because it expresses the role of the internet, blogs and open dialogue in shaping democracy. When certain nations were seen as having more internet freedom than others, I tried to contextualize that information based on the state of politics in those countries and whether or not they had stable democracies. Are there any thoughts on this article?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-wagstaff/global-internet-freedom-bloggers_b_852514.html?ir=Technology

~Zakiyyah~

Is the Internet Taking Over?

There's a recent article in the Huffington Post about the impact of the internet on our daily lives. The article points out that on one hand, the internet allows people to tie different aspects of their lives together and can be very beneficial in the political realm. However, it also mentions that the excessive use of the internet could be detrimental to society, and distort our ideas of the real world. I have personally found that the internet, particularly social media sites, have been very useful for political figures seeking to promote their ideas. Do you agree with either of these statements? If it's just the excessive use of the internet that is harmful, could we possibly find a way to indirectly mediate people's use of the internet?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-friedman-lmsw/internet-addiction-should_b_851684.html?ir=Technology

~Zakiyyah~