New Media Studies

Again, another GREAT day of presentations.

I really liked the presentation involving Amazon.com… so much information that really gets you thinking about something you may use on a daily basis without even considering its history and purpose!  Amazon.com is another example of the myraid ways in which people connect over the internet. 

I also really enjoyed the Webkinz presentation.  Many social sites exist on the internet, and are definitely no place for younger children to be.  It’s great to see that instead of criticizing and wondering what to do about our culture of social networking online and how it affects children, Webkinz is creating a safe place for them to go where they can interact with other people in a moderated form.  Mind you, I’m not forgetting that Webkinz is about money as well, it’s just nice to see a site that addresses and fixes a problem that many see with children interacting with others online. 

Good work all!

I really enjoyed the projects and the information they presented on Thursday.  I thought the lacrosse concept was very interesting, and the project of creating a social site that could turn into something bigger was great.  I really think that the site has the potential to go somewhere. 

It was great to see projects that involved topics that the presenters were passionate about and really wanted to learn about.  I think that’s why they were so interesting, because the presenters themselves were so interested in the subjects and really put their effort into them. 

 All in all, a good day, and I look forward to next Thursday’s presentations!

Tim Berners-Lee’s article, “The World-Wide Web,”  has a great section that was interesting to read- entitled The Future.  What was under it?? “Hypertext editors allowing nonexpert users to make hypertext links to organize published information.  This will bring the goal of computer-supported collaboration closer, with front-end update, and annotation…” Sounds a lot like Wikipedia now.  Or how about, “Conventions on the Internet for charging and commercial use to allow direct access to for-profit services.” Remind you of Ebay, Paypal, Amazon, basically any site out there today?” Reading articles like this really makes you wonder what is in store for the future, our future.  If what was written in 1994 has evolved, I wonder where our internet will be in another ten years. What will we be able to do, to expand on? I’m especially interested in where we will go with communication technology.  The World Wide Web is described as allowing one to “find anything that is “out there…” so where will we go from here?

This article, Video Games and Computer Holding Power, by Sherry Turkle,  was a weird look into the future- the things that Jarish wanted to create are so eerily similar to what is available now.  I’d really like to find out where he is now, what he is doing, if he got a chance to pursue his dreams. 

I love what the article said in the beginning, that the changes to our era “have been rapid and disquieting.  We are ill at ease even with our children, who are so much at ease with a technology that many of us approach at arm’s length.  They take it for granted.  To them it is not a new technology but a fact of life.”  How true this is.  I am a member of that generation, that grew up living with computers, living with technology, living with instantaneous contact to everyone and anyone I could possibly want to talk with, learn from.  And yet we still find ourselves drawn to solidarity.  This article highlights video games, and the fantasy worlds that people want to  (and eventually will) create.  Because the article is written in the 1980’s it is tempting to laugh at the past, to tell the author, “If only you knew what was in store for the future…” Our future selves are probably thinking the same thing as well. 

 Back to solidarity.  Jarish said while playing games, “you feel sort of cut off.  When I play the game, I start getting into it, and you start taking the role of the person…”  And as Turkle mentioned at another point, people consider, when playing Pac-Man, that they ARE Pac-Man, as opposed to just moving Pac-Man around.  People form bonds with the games they play, immersing themselves totally.  However, I feel we may be starting to move away from this.  Games have become ways to be other people and other things (like older games) but at the same time, this facade is used to interact with other people.  Games like Halo 3, World of Warcraft, and Second Life (although I don’t fully consider this a game) all involve interaction with other people who are also immersed in their gaming personalities.  It is interesting to point out this evolution, and it goes to show that although we are solitary at times, we do strive for interaction.     

It’s been a crazy and hectic week. Sorry for the lack of blog posts.

Abbie and I have decided on and have started our final project, and I really like where this will go and I think we can pull and learn a lot of information from it.  We are going to become experts on privacy on the internet, with a focus on Myspace and Facebook.  What I find particularly interesting is that people put what they consider “private” information on these websites and expect the website to keep that information private.  I kind of think that’s like putting your name and address on a sticky note and sticking it inside a random library book- someone is going to get to it eventually.  the privacy of these sites has become an issue over the past few years, and it is interesting to look at these two sites, which are basically all about “putting it out there.” More to come later.

Ok Dr. Campbell. Sorry for the change of topic again. But Abbie and I are now leaning towards internet privacy, and how private your infomation really is, if it’s meant to be on the internet or not.   We are also going to explore what information you can gather from the internet about someone without even knowing them.  I think this is going to work out well, and Abbie and I have already found some great information.

While reading this text, I found a lot of the views were very similar to my sociology class, where we are currently discussing how the poor are a product of the rich, have no power because of it, and are subjected to “rich” standards of living and are thought to be inadequate because of it.  Illich brings up a good point, that “they are schooled in a sense of inferiority toward the better-schooled.”  I also agree with his idea that “we need a law forbidding discrimination in hiring, voting, or admission to centers of learning based on previous attendance at some curriculum.”  By forcing children into this set curriculum, where they are expected to all perform at the same level, learn the same material, and function in the same way, we are creating a failing system that is in fact leaving these children behind.  It is a “prepackaged process” that does not cater to everyone’s individual needs.  Modern schooling has become a way to churn out copies of what everyone is supposed to become in the labor market. But we aren’t all the same. Now, I am in no way saying the poor should stay poor and the rich should take everything.  But our current educational system, which is supposed to be “equal” leaves poor children behind and lets rich children buy their way into a higher education.  But our current schooling system across the world needs to be redone.  Illich brought up a lot of good points, and I hadn’t really considered them until now.  While I am no expert on this subject,  but as Illich says, “relational structures we need are those which will enable each man to define himself by learning and by contributing to the learning of others.”

The video art that was shown on the video we watched in last class was amazing.  The expressions, the surroundings, it set such a mood.  I would really like to see an exhibit like this.

 I looked up video art, and found a great video about Buky Schwartz.  My favorite part is the square, where he builds it yet walks through it as if it isn’t connected.  The square is there, but at the same time it isn’t.  Had we been looking from a different angle, we would get quite a different picture.  But Buky Schwartz creates a great image that only exists in the monitor, as is mentioned with the yellow triangle exhibit that is created.  Everyone should watch this.

http://blog1.videoart.net/?p=26

Lucasfilm’s Habitat is similar to Second Life, a virtual world where people interact, live in communities, play games (although what exactly IS play?? What a discussion today…), make friends, wage wars… all exactly similar to real life.  Well, I tried my hand at Second Life. It seemed like a pretty cool concept that I thought would make a great project.  But unfortunately… (I’m sad to admit this Dr. C) it was a little scary for me.  When people came up to me to help me, I felt like they could see me, not just the avatar, but through my computer screen and actually SEE me sitting at my computer.  It really felt like a real world.  Everyone had their own personalities, everyone was either shy, outgoing, or in between, there was places to go, things to do.  I even felt like the same rules of my life were in Second Life.  My avatar really became me.  During the first few days I was trying it out, I found a free store island and picked out some clothes.  During my  struggle with actually figuring out how to put them on, my avatar accidentally ended up standing in the middle of the crowded store, well, naked.  It was embarrassing for me.  Sitting at my computer, I still felt the same shame had I actually been in that store where my avatar was, with people walking by and able to see.  Even while I write this, I find it difficult to separate myself from my avatar in Second Life when talking about it, and honestly that creeps me out.   So it looks like Second Life is not for me. 

It is interesting to see how Lucasfilm’s Habitat really turned out just to be like real life.  People found ways to become rich and productive, people stole, people argued about violence.  I guess we can’t make a perfect place, even online.

My project about Second Life with Andy and Abby has unfortunately been halted due to inability to actually understand Second Life… well at least on my part.  I gave it a try, but unfortunately I feel very lost in a very big world.  So I asked my teammates if we could change topics.  While over Spring Break, I found myself drawn to YouTube out of boredness and the need to laugh at ridiculous things people do.  One video that I have seen before in the past but stumbled upon again is the “Charlie Bit My Finger” phenomenon.  The video features two children, sitting on a chair, doing nothing really, until one of the children bites the other’s finger.  This simple video has become a cult favorite.  Many people have recreated it.  What is behind this phenomenon?  I even stumbled upon a video of a woman recreating the scene with monkey puppets.  What is behind this video?  The parents have even begun posting other clips of the children.

Another video of the same caliber is the “Numa Numa Dance” video, which is a little more popular than the Charlie video.  This also started out simple- a kid sitting in front of a computer dancing to a song he loves.  It also became a cult classic and has been reenacted by many people.  Another such video- the Star Wars Kid- known for filming himself twirling a lightsaber.

What I would like to explore is the cult following behind these simple videos and why they show up on the Internet.  What are the most popular recreations of these videos, and why are they created over and over again? Is it a need to be exposed like the people featured in the original videos?  In realms of creation, I think that recreating one of these videos and posting it online to see how many people view it and if we get any comments would be interesting to see.  Why would people want to watch other people they don’t even know act like OTHER people that they don’t even know?  

I decided on a change of project topic over Spring Break, and am currently trying to figure out what readings I can tie into this project.  I plan on blogging more about this in the future.