Blog #9: Extending my proposal

This is the third of three makeup blog entries where I missed the original deadline.

---

After bouncing around among three potential topics, I finally settled on arguing for the implementation of an in-school program. This program addresses many of the issues discussed in other classmates' paper topics. There are three issues in particular that the program aims to address: Access, knowledge, and safety on the Internet.

Kessler, Jason. "Principal to parents: Take kids off Facebook." CNN.com. CNN, 30 Apr. 2010. Web. 5 May 2010. Path: http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/04/30/principal.facebook.ban/?hpt=Mid.
This is a recent-breaking story out of New Jersey that addresses one of the existing needs my program targets. Principal Anthony Orsini wrote that "the main problem is that tweens do not have the resilience to withstand internet name-calling." And the problem with this is that kids do not have the education or the know-how to resist name-calling and other examples of cyberbullying. "They are simply not psychologically ready for the damage that one mean person online can cause," he said. Through cyberbullying awareness lessons, students will be armed with the skills to "just say no" to online meanness and pettiness, so they can ideally prevent the damage from happening in the first place.

NCSL. "Sexting Legislation 2010." Ed. Pam Greenberg. National Conference of State Legislatures, 15 Mar. 2010. Web. 25 Apr. 2010. Path: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?TabId=19696.
This is a list of state legislation that addresses sexting, which is a component of my modules on Internet literacy. Legislation in 15 states aims to educate young people on the risks of sexting, deterring them from engaging in it at all, and developing appropriate penalties to those who do engage in the act.

National Council of Teachers of English. NCTE Search. NCTE, 29 Apr. 2010. Web. 29 Apr. 2010. Path: http://www.ncte.org/search?q=k-12+internet+literacy.
NCTE is a JSTOR-like resource for English teachers. I was directed to this site by an English professor on campus, and plan on pulling from the various links for my exhibit of a 30-minute lesson plan on K-12 Internet literacy that I would hand out to potential volunteers.

• CyberAngels Internet Safety Program. Guardian Angels, Inc., 25 Apr. 2010. Web. 25 Apr. 2010. .
• i-SAFE Inc.. i-SAFE Inc., 25 Apr. 2010. Web. 25 Apr. 2010. .
• WiredSafety: the world's largest Internet safety, help and education resource.. Wired Kids, Inc., 22 Jan. 2010. Web. 25 Apr. 2010. .
These three sites are online Internet safety resources that I visited to see what kind of curriculum already existed. These three were the most detailed and thorough resources I could find on the topics I wanted to cover. They give me a good base to build upon, and also gave me an idea of what topics were lacking coverage and still needed to be addressed in a new program. Further, these resources are limited in their physical scope; two exist solely online, while another has limited in-class exposure. Additionally, these resources approached the information from the standpoint of a parent looking for information on how to protect their children online. I want my program to include the idea of peer accountability and be in classrooms across the country, similar to the existing DARE program nationwide.

To flesh out my research on how prevalent Internet usage is in the 8- to 13-year-old range, I'll be pulling data from Pew Research Center. I will be looking at educational resources from PBS for my exhibit as well. I will also look for information regarding two media-focused teenage suicides that resulted from alleged online bullying from peers. However, I want to stay away from a lot of sensationalism and try to present a clear, logical argument for why this program needs to be implemented in the classroom, and how it can benefit students as we go ever-more virtual in our day-to-day interactions, particularly with regard to sexting, digital overshare, privacy and information/Internet literacy, since these issues seem to be most pressing for our younger users.

Blog #6: Where hierarchal standards originate

This is the second of three make-up blog entries where I missed the original deadline.

---

In Lev Manovich's dicussion of esthetics and professionalism in computer animation, the subtitle of his article "'Real' Wars," he hits on one very important note in the beginning: The visual result of a product is a hybrid of client desires and the talent of the designer. He focuses in on 3D computer animation for this particular article.

3D animation is special because of its ability to simulate meatspace reality that eventually become indistinguishable between the virtual and visual (see James Cameron's "Avatar" for a recent example of this). Illusionism is key, and in computer animation it can be the combination of network logos, virtual elements, real environments, the simulation of real-world interactions among space, light, atmosphere and environment (among others), and how it is interpreted through the computer's interpretations of the elements of meatspace cinematography (lighting, lens, movement, etc.).

Though the aim of illusionism, one could say, is to ultimately (but kindly) fool the viewer into believing that what they are seeing on the screen is more than just the representation of reality -- that it IS reality. The fluidity and difficulty of the motion, image smoothness, lack of pixel edging are not only more persuasive in achieving this goal, but signal just how good the designer behind the screen is. They become trademarks of designers, and their tools for industry-wide competition.

Manovich brings Bourdieu's argument in 1984's "Distinction" into the article, to highlight the aristocratic consumption of cultural items and how every social class distinguishes itself from the classes on the rungs above and below by adopting "particular esthetic values." Manovich argues that this serves to give separate classes identity and reaffirm casteing.

This argument, Manovich continues, carries into the working world and levels of professionalism among designers. Computer animation and its esthetics are where the distinction of the rungs separating the professionals from the amateurs is most likely to be true.

Computer animation and its illusionistic ways can be traced to earlier photographic and film technologies, which Manovich goes into to further distinguish the distinction between the amateur and the professional in the design industry.

Could the user of these technologies see a return on their investment through their work? If not, more likely than not they were an amateur. Could users meet the technical standards? Did they have the means to access the tools needed to advance in the industry? The quality from FCC-specified NTSC equipment to home-brewed equipment may not be significant, but the cost is, and that's where the separation of these two classes seems most noteworthy.

But it goes beyond the tools that define amateur and professional. The unspoken esthetics do their part as well in this distinction. Smoothness of color transitions, aliasing, texture, complex movements and environment interaction simulations can all be achieved across varying levels of tools, but only the high-end (and thus more expensive) tools can properly simulate, render and display these elements at their highest qualities. To an extent, Manovich argues that even the more complicated steps for animations (utilizing multiple elements, for example) further separate the professionals from amateurs. Anyone could potentially make a 3D logo swoop in from off screen and fly around with the right software, but the high-end animations are defined by their intricate layers and details achieved through the many pieces that interact with one another like plates on the earth's lithosphere.

So Manovich lauds the abilities of the professionals to make multiple objects interact realistically with one another in a virtual environment. But then he gets into the esthetics behind choosing the medium of computer animation itself. By simply choosing this medium over all other media, there is already an implied element of prestige in your project. At the time of writing this article, 3D computer animation was the most expensive video effect. But beyond the financial aspect, it signified that this company was technologically savvy and on board with the advent and innovation of computer-based media.

Ironically, you run into designers that accentuate the artifice of their design by request; the photo-realism potential of computer animation tends to eliminate the symbolism of using this medium. Manovich cites the use of super wide lenses in animations, rollercoaster-like camera tracking, object placements, abstract design, exaggerated reflections, and even using over-the-top geometric design to downplay technical possibilities. By simulating that Tron speedbike look, designers sneakily acknowledge the full potential of the software and hardware at hand.

Was the use of unnaturally-bright and -colored objects in "Avatar" intentional not just to convey the alien-ness of the planet Pandora, but as a nod to computer animation sequences of years past? The electric colors were reminiscent of "Tron" in some scenes, which once was seen as the height of computer-based animation. The range of motions, of emotions, the visual reality sought by the illusionistic ways of the medium in this new world indeed achieved a rather photorealistic experience for viewers (save for the 8-foot-tall blue cat people on screen), but there also was an acknowledgment of the fantastical details that could only be achieved through 3D computer animation.

I feel that this supposed acknowledgment, intentional or otherwise, does more to separate the professionals from the amateurs. And yes, the quality of the animations also further distinguishes this separation of experience in the field. And Manovich wraps up his argument thusly: "the standards of the smoothness and complexity in three-dimensional computer animation effectively serve to protect the status of professionals because they are perceived as esthetic ideals rather than as weapons of professional competition."

These standards, it seems, aren't tools within the industry to promote one designer over another, but rather they are an acceptance and perpetuation of the standards already established within the system. Further, these standards are not only embraced by the professionals within (harkening to a sort of "good ol' boys club" almost), but a reflection of the expectations of the paying clients -- the people who are financially backing the continuation of these esthetic standards. It is an industry where, perhaps, the professionals embrace these standards not only because it elevates them above the amateurs, but because they also are paid to perpetuate these rules as the standard of excellence.

When the money changes the expectations, so will the talent level of the professionals. Innovation comes with money. As long as the money is demanding photorealism in an abstract environment, then that is what the designers will continue to give to the average consumer.

As I learned in the paper industry, it's not the consumers who determine the trajectory of medium development, it's the advertisers.

And to tie everything back to that key point I highlighted in the first paragraph, this, I feel, was also the underlying message of Manovich's argument: The standards determine the professionals, and the money determines the standards.

Blog #4: Giving the underdogs a chance

Ed. note: This is one of three blog entries that I didn't write by its initial deadline.

---

In the January 2007 issue of Wired magazine, Lawrence Lessig takes on the Department of Justice ruling against Microsoft and its OS monopoly in "I Blew It on Microsoft" (Source).

In 1997, Lessig says, the US Department of Justice filed an antitrust case against Microsoft. Four years later, the US Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the OS giant had unfairly (and illegally) used its size, power and market domination to maintain its hold on said market. Its aggressive behavior in the market, the courts asserted, minimized new efforts from the competition. Lessig contests that the Dept. of Justice was hesitant to file a lawsuit, but that it collectively admits it had no idea how to otherwise rein in Microsoft and its Windows-based monopoly. Potential competitors asked for restraint from the US government. If they wouldn't step in, who would?

Lessig goes on to say that it was a difficult issue to address in the first place. He indicates that Microsoft Windows was in the lead in the OS market because an OS is a standard and that "over time, one tends to dominate." It would seem that it is in a business' best interest to continue to be the best, one might argue (and Lessig does). Could the government stand a chance against a business model? And how do you regulate a giant like Microsoft?

Lessig reluctantly wanted to regulate the big businesses. He also figured the market would take care of it, as the natural cycle of the market is wont to do. But, he admits, he is a lawyer, and wasn't trained to see things in the light of "how will this make me money?" In a way, he indicates, this is where the underdogs like Linux come into play. Sure, they aren't commercially a huge success, but they had figured out how to create a system where everyone was a volunteer and no one had absolute power over said system.

It's neo-socialism in an open source world. (My words, my interpretation, not his.)

He ties all this into the still-ongoing "network neutrality" debate that still pops up on the radar today. Again, Lessig runs into the issue of being a reluctant regulator on how networks determine was is and isn't going over their wires. And it seems unlikely that any new underdog developer will come from behind to completely overtake the popularity of such services providers as AT&T.

That being said, he admits, there are "forces mucking up the game" for those who would seek a monopoly on access to the Interwebs. Linux-like volunteers and local governments are establishing neutral networks where anyone and everyone can work to further "blisteringly fast" broadband networks. Many more volunteers are building free wireless protocols that are legal and don't shift control to the bigger parties.

These activists, as Lessig calls them, recognize the truth in an economic principle: private ventures owned by users create different business models.

Lessig remains skeptical as to whether or not these homegrown ventures stand a chance at checking the powers-that-be or powers-to-come, but also points out that they at least have the big guys scurrying to encourage states to shut down these municipal broadband providers.

So, Lessig says, those who oppose net-neutrality regulation a la Microsoft and the OS market should oppose the regulation of last-mile broadband's most important competitor: the little guys. "Municipal competition won't kill commercial broadband any more than Linux has killed Windows," he says, and I agree 100%. But just as Linux may have changed the business model of Microsoft, so could city government competition with last-mile broadband.

After all of that, Lessig's argument boils down to this: If we want the broadband system and its business models to be self-regulating -- from today through tomorrow as we had desired in the recent past -- then the government cannot interfere and label these underdog ventures as crime. The government must not regulate from a legal standpoint; rather, they would do well to allow the market to regulate itself as developers come and go and come up with innovative approaches to issues such as widespread network access. To interfere on behalf of Big Business, as Big Business is frantically wishing to happen, would allow the Big Business monopolies to thrive and continue their vise-like grip on the market.

I think that this is an issue that is pertinent even today, particularly with the development and dispersal of services such as Google WiFi. It even could tie into the contract-based monopoly AT&T has with Apple's iPhone service. It seems worth noting, though, that underdogs figured out how to jailbreak the formerly service-bound phones to bring them to other networks. This has not gone without notice, as Apple is claiming that jailbreaking the devices could pose a threat to national security (Source).

Who knew AT&T and Apple took its competition so seriously? The act of jailbreaking and unlocking a phone must pose more of a threat from the underdogs than we give credit.

Or it could just be an attempt from the Big Guys to shut down the Little Guys before they get too far with their development of removing the tethers of crappy service and sharing that fire with the rest of the world. Since when has competition done Big Business any favors, anyway?

Presentations, the end!

Brent Rust
Online activities change us! (We are moved and lifted by your presentation :).)
You can still be essentially anonymous online, but it's the exception rather than the rule to be who you really are in that environment. The advent of technology has made it more acceptable to hold these standards and exercise these practices today than it was 15 years ago.
Yup, works for me. Get your research in there and back it up with your resources and it will be great :).

Cynthia
Cyberspace gives underrepresented groups more choices about representation that are not available through traditional media.
Cyberspace has the growth potential to allow for more voices to be heard.
Again, yep, works for me. Nothing to add here.

Neil Fastabend
Cell phones and Internet-ready smart phones are narrowing the access portion of the digital divide around the world, and that is a good thing. Cell phones are narrowing the digital divide: check. We live in a hybrid space that allows us to connect wherever, whenever: check. The opposition is wrong, you will prove it: I hope you will! The examples you used really help flesh our your paper, which is excellent. Good job.

Josh Cook
Internet activism is a necessary tool for physical activism in the real world (Get'r'done!)
I think you've covered what you need to cover. I have nothing to add. As you said, git'r'done.

GOOD JOB EVERYONE!!! We've made it! Good luck on your papers, and with the rest of your finals.

Presentations, week 3

Today marks the start of the end. Thursday will be the last day of presentations.

Dan Anderson
Correlations between virtual gaming and virtual community (particularly w/r/t Xbox Live)
"The learning principles of video games are enhanced in online environments, and this enhancement may account for an increase in the number of online gaming community members." Perhaps address the demographics, if available? Is there any information on differences from subcommunity to subcommunity (ie Gears of War versus Modern Warfare 2 -- two similar games, but potentially vastly different crowds)? I like that you were not absolute in your argument; it leaves room to say "such and such lends to but does not directly cause ...", and allows you to find more information to support your paper, which already sounds strong. I think 10 pages will be easy with your approach.

Mike Payne
Real crimes vs. cyber crimes
"We need to invest more time, resources, money and caution in our online lives, more-so than in our real lives these days. Virtual crimes can be more dangerous than meatspace crimes because of how widespread and fast they are." I feel like this is a lot of hyperbole without a lot of hard data to back up what you're saying. But the tips you provided for protecting yourself online were good, and your anecdotal support provided a look into why we should safeguard ourselves because of how easy it can be to have this happen. Find more statistical data, rely less upon hyperbole (80-year-old granny turning into a 6'5" brute at the door), and I think your paper has strong potential.

Lee Kidd
"Youtube's unique roles in political activism and inadvertent perpetuation of hate."
Yours is... a rather strongly-worded argument. For every racist and bigoted video of protest, there is a counter-protest that is not racist or bigoted. How much of the attention these videos are getting can actually be attributed to mainstream media and not YouTube? YouTube itself is not a tool of hate; it's the users that perpetuate this hate. YouTube is a medium through which they deliver their message (which more often than not is eventually censored by the community!). If YouTube did not exist, the "haters" would find another medium, and so would the counter-haters, to send forth their messages of activism. You could then argue that every medium, if used for political activism, perpetuates hate. Make an argument specific to YouTube, instead of accusations, and how we as users of this forum can diminish hate perpetuated by our media -- not "mainstream media" media, but the different methods of interaction and presentation available to anyone who has an opinion.

Angel Almaraz
"Students need to become actively involved in learning how to use new technologies, which can be accomplished by applying the concepts of video games in education."
Everything seems solid! Addressing the negative views of video games in an educational context will help to solidify your paper even further, and connecting Gee's theories will be supportive too. Addressing the issue of access in the classroom versus outside the classroom should be noted in your final write-up as well.

Derek Nelson
Mobile phones and the digital divide
Mobile technology is positively affecting the digital divide. Addressing issues of accessibility, education, etc. PHONE GOOD.
Virtual and hybrid community is key to your argument. Good on ya for acknowledging that the divide will still persist, but that the phones will continue to help educate users of mobile media and perpetuate a worldwide network that doesn't rely on phone lines. I have no bad feedback, because your topic and information are great! And you presented well under a time limit, and the faster you speak, the more people think you know what you're talking about ;).

Me! I wrap up today's presentations. Give me feedback, people!
Immediate feedback:
From Julie: Include an exhibit of a typical 30-minute "lesson plan" that one could distribute to potential program volunteers.

Presentations, day 4

Dena
I walked in late, but it looks like you're attacking copyright and governing body legislation w/r/t the world wide web. As has been said in class, be aggressive! Attack your topic without mercy ("this proposed legislation is ineffective because..."), and don't wibble from your point. I found this article online last night, and you might be able to glean some pertinent information for your research: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/acta-is-here.ars.

Michelle
"It may not be long before the virtual is real." Excellent topic, excellent information, nothing for me to add here. The examples of Second Life and the 3D interfaces were great.

Brittany
Mobile locative marketing: Big Brother with a commercial twist! Very interesting. I want to say that Starbucks is already implementing this with their "MyCard" app on the iPhone, where you can pay for your coffee in some stores by flashing a QR code from the app on your phone. I know that Payless Shoes will send discount text messages on occasion, too. Does "personalized" advertising play into this? There is development going into advertising that actually advertises specifically toward your demographic, based on things like perceived age, gender and race, as you walk past certain kiosks. So could that, in theory, be locative and interactive? Anyway, that could be another angle from which to approach some of your information.

Mark B.
"The Cost of Access in WoW"
I AGREE 100% WITH YOUR ARGUMENT. This is a strong part of why I stopped playing (well, that and school), and this is why my husband is thinking about ending his subscription as well. It is interesting to note the decline in quality the game's community feel has suffered as a result of ActiBlizzard's desire to be more accessible. Even though I'm familiar with what you're talking about, I'm not entirely sure I have anything to contribute.

Chris
"Community fragmentation will continue to persevere in the digital community even if we get past the digital divide." I like that you're basically acknowledging that the digital divide might be healed one day, but that other issues will still persist, which will create a digital divide of a different nature. Um, nothing to add again, because I think you've got a good idea of where you're taking this.

Class presentations, continued, pt. 3

Today is day one, week three, of presentations! Is this the halfway mark? Indeed, I do believe it is!

Quiet Mark
Online Enabled Activism
Argument: "Cyberspace and online communities are two of the most important tools in saving the environment." Good approach, liked the example of EcoSnoop and similar iPhone applications, and I can't really find a chink in the armor, so to speak. Broaden your scope a bit to include a couple other examples of "then" versus "now," (excepting Hanford, of course), and focus on what's already being done in response to current eco issues, and I think you'll have a very strong paper.

Sarah
Presenting yourself differently in cyberspace
Yes, true, we are familiar with this concept. Make it about the "why" of these actions and the control we have (or don't have) over the presentation of oneself online instead of rehashing ideas we've heard before. You have good research already, and the potential for a good paper. Just push it to that edge of "so what?" and this paper will go beyond what's already out there.

Cassie Lane
Social Networking Sites in the Classroom
"Social networking sites should be used by teachers and students in a classroom to enhance the learning of different content areas. Not only do these sites enhance the learning, but they also draw in the students who aren't engaged in the classroom learning." Good examples of sites that could benefit this method. Include the issues of access and parental knowledge to fill in some gaps in your paper to solidify your argument.

Week two, more presentations!

Today marks week two of presentations!

Katie Shaw
Bridge the Divide
Katie proposes bridging the gap between underprivileged students and privileged students with regard to technology. Beyond just students, getting parents and teachers involved is a great approach. Utilizing charts to compare before usage and after usage to see the effectiveness of this proposed project is also good for reference. I could see this project, if it ever gains footing, being implemented well within our community because there really is such a wide divide between the haves and have nots in our school systems. I feel this is something that could have real-world implications outside of the classroom environment.

Beau Yancey
Technology benefits greatly from gaming
Good contrast of "what your mother told you" and "what your mother doesn't know" to address both sides of the argument. Great examples of how video game technology past is influencing medical and military technology of today. It seems like you have a good, strong arguments on striking a balance between "hardcore gamers" and the idea of gaming and how both influence everything around us today.

James Cavanah
Learning can be based on the symbolic processing the mind undertakes when playing a game
Strong, potentially super cool topic. Make the connections a little more obvious to your thesis (learning leans heavily on symbolism, knowledge and access) and I think you will have a very strong paper. What you told me this morning about your paper was AWE-SOME. I think if you'd just chewed the cud on that in the class presentation instead of worrying about Prezi, your topic would have come across so much clearer :). It was an awesome topic then, it will be a strong topic in the end too.

Hans Wellenbrock
Social networks bridging the chasm
The thing that went "BAM!!" to me was this point from Silva e Souza: "The shift from static to mobile interfaces brings social networks into physical spaces." RUN WITH THIS, plzkthx. I feel like a lot of your points went back to that particular line. I like that you addressed that poor does not necessarily mean technologically illiterate, particularly among the younger generation. I like, also, that you had fun with making your presentation.

Spencer Towne
Do games generate better soldiers?
Have you addressed the video game "America's Army"? This was a game released by the U.S. Army specifically for the purpose increasing the public opinion of the army and increasing recruitment. Could you perhaps address, if not the quality of soldiers, perhaps the quantity of soldiers as a result of military fighting simulators? Excellent list in comparing the consequences of real versus virtual space, I think this will go a long way in your argument.

Feedback on thesis presentations, day one

Today kicks off final paper thesis and progress presentations in the course. Constructive feedback, only; no dislikes based on slide colors!

Lorena Swift
China: Communication in Crisis
A good starting look at the Great Firewall of China. I definitely second the notion of trying to route your Internet through China via Firefox plugins. The word for "America" in Mandarin is "mei" (美). I hope that this helps with your "search for America from China" searches :).

Sheila Newsom
Gender Roles and Social Networks
I think the look at Facebook/MySpace/StarDoll presents a good background for the traditional social networking "gender" norms, so keep that information in (but with less emphasis). Analyzing children's/young teen's social networks is a good approach to this topic. To further bolster your paper, I would suggest taking a look at Neopets and Webkinz, or even some Disney-based networks, to see how gender is approached in those realms as well.

Maurice Smiley
Mobile technology and how it's changing the agricultural world (I think)
No comments. Sounds like you know exactly where you're going and what you're talking about with this topic. This sounds absolutely brilliant and I kind of wish I had your brain power for this course.

Corrinda Lathan
Educating through Gaming
Loved that you got the class engaged by means of a memory game :). Are you looking at games across all platforms or specifically board games or specifically video games? (I think video games may tie more into our overall course theme, but gaming is gaming and the same rules in board games apply to video games as well, so... not sure where I'm going with that.) At any rate, I think Lorena had a good question after your presentation. Perhaps you should take a look at how the education world is embracing the technology to go with these changes in gaming (or, conversely, not embracing) and how this is (or isn't) impacting changes among children and how they learn.

Kathleen
Old school politics, new school media
A question: Does political standing (left-wing vs. right-wing) indicate how technologically savvy a candidate may be? Or the demographics they are reaching successfully? To say that McCain/Palin barely scratched the surface is something of an understatement; I would argue that Palin goes beyond the norms of her party and internet use. Her e-mail was hacked, which dealt a harsh blow to the campaign; she used Facebook and Twitter then and still uses these tools to rally her followers to her cause, even though she isn't running OR in a position of political power anymore. BUT, that being said, you've got a strong start. I like the main question you're addressing of if the use of new social technology was a critical factor in the outcome of the election, and was actually going to ask if you were going to address that (but you beat me to it in your presentation).

Good job to everyone. You've set the bar high. Good luck to everyone who will present next week!

Catching up

This weekend, I will be playing catch-up in my blog entries to get up to speed. I will post an extended proposal on a new final paper topic relating the startlingly aggressive behaviors of online "alpha women" to the hegemonically masculine environment of the Internet (and how we've seen it before and how, potentially, this could alter the state of gender balance on the Internet [please note that this last one is a stretch and may not actually be presented in the final paper]).

I will also attempt to write summaries for the articles I missed, and will tackle some of the extra credit entries as well. Upcoming blog entries will be (gasp!) on-time and the arguments within will be well-presented.

While I do care some if this late work is seen as "too little, too late" with regard to my blog grade, I at least want to make the effort, because damnit, I'm tired of feeling anxious. I want to be able to enjoy this class (and care!) again, like I did when the semester started. And perhaps when I get up to speed, I can stop having panic attacks whenever I start thinking about this course and its workload.

Lights out across the globe

On March 27, 2010, from 8:30 to 9:30 p.m. local time, people around the world were encouraged to turn off the lights and go off the grid. The World Wildlife Foundation organized this event primarily online (and through various printed materials and QR codes in larger metropolitan areas) as a call to action against climate change.

Climate change itself is a fairly controversial topic in the science world and, admittedly, in the "I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, but I'm jumping on the bandwagon anyway!" world as well. I say this with regard to both extreme stances: "climate change isn't real" and "climate change is mankind's fault".

Participants were directed to the official "Lights Out" Earth Hour site, where they could click on one of hundreds of compact fluorescent light bulbs to declare that, for one hour, they would go without their power-drawing doodads and go by candlelight instead.

There are no official numbers, but on the event's website it says 500 people participated. It is assumed that thousands more across the globe participated as well without declaring officially that they would take a stand too.

The idea was, that by "millions of people" working together, mankind could make a positive impact on global change and, ultimately, the overall health of Earth.

It is interesting that an event that focuses on turning off power requires, in part, the use of computers to declare that you're taking part in said event. It almost seems counter-intuitive to do so through such means, but it is understandable that the WWF would want to be able to reach the widest number of users who would, in fact, have at least basic access to electricity-driven lights. This, I suppose, is the point of the campaign after all. It is not to go completely off the grid, but to just be aware of the impact of turning off your machines (or shutting off the main breaker in the house) for only one hour.

Even the use of the QR codes mentioned earlier in this write-up requires some form of advanced(-ish) technology, such as a smart phone, to be able to read and decipher the message hidden within. This seems to be, to me, a reflection of the digital divide we encounter daily. Again, it's interesting that this seems to be directed more at the people who are more likely to already be interested in the goal of this sort of campaign, or these sorts of technologies. Those who have smart phones, who are on the Internet more often, who know how to decipher a QR code -- isn't it shown that they are more likely to be left-leaners or more liberal than their smart phone-less, TV-watching counterparts? (This is a sincere question, not rhetorical, since I don't presume to even begin to know the answer.)

With regard to the mainstream media, it seems that this event was, to some extent, reported. The first page of results from a Google News search shows reports on this event from March 28 up through a couple of hours ago. The former are more along the lines of "this is what this event is!" and the latter are reports of the impact the event made on energy use in several cities. One city reports that its consumption of energy went down 3.4 percent during the event.

Newspapers, online and printed alike, seem to have reported adequately enough on this. Even twitter is still talking about it (and participating) almost two weeks later, which I think really speaks to the power of word of mouth on this medium. I cannot comment on television news media, however, because I don't watch the tele and didn't check the sites of the major organizations on that day.

(Related to Twitter and news: This past week's earthquake in northern Mexico/southern California had massive hashtagging on Twitter. The hashtagging was so fast, apparently, that theoretically users just outside the boundary of the quake zone could receive tweets about the quake before they could feel it. For a funny take on this, check out XKCD.)

In summary, Earth Hour was, and continues to be, a success due in large part to the Internet and in small part to contemporary mainstream media. This was this event's second year in action. It will be interesting to see what digital media it uses next year to get the message out (website, QR codes, iPhone app, widespread text messaging, in-game "product placement"?), how pervasive the message will be because of the Internet, and how much more successful it will be next year.


-------
For more on Earth Hour, check out these links:
http://earthhour.hadw.com/
http://www.hornallanderson.com/#/project/121/
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22earth+hour%22

Let's try this again.

Taking a stab at this again, because I was a bit, erm, vague in the first attempt:

For my final paper, I want to take a look at the digital divide w/r/t gender and access, specifically being female and how this may or may not impact one's use and access (and perhaps gender dominance) of digital and social media.

An article I found recently asks, essentially, do ladies dominate Twitter? And the blog writeup that accompanied the link argued, "No, they don't. But they dominate other sites." How is this so? And how, exactly, is this accounted for? If not Twitter, where do women dominate? What about ChatRoulette? It's a social medium (ladies!) with a gambling- and voyeur-type preface (dudes!), so who are you most likely to "next" upon? Early statistics show it's more likely to be a guy, but why?

Do societal expectations of domesticity hurt or help women in the digital divide? Does it depend on the area of technology that determines how adept (or inept) women may be? Does it depend on cultural values and where they live? Do women see less of a divide in social media, but more of a divide when it comes to video games or programming? If so, why? Where do forums, generally social in nature but more text based in execution, fall along the social media spectrum, and does this affect how many users are of the female persuasion?

These are all topics that I hope to address in my paper, and perhaps a few more that I haven't touched on that may come to me in a "Eureka"-type moment.

I anticipate that research on ChatRoulette will be sparse because of how new it is, but I also imagine that what I do find with be pretty helpful in the long run. Though limited in number, amounts of data and reports I've seen so far seem to be surprisingly in depth.

Suggestions? Tips? Questions I maybe haven't considered that I should? Leave it in the comments.

Feminism and games: A paper topic (or, My black and blue pony)

Sorry for spacing the Friday at 5 p.m. goal. I even had my topic picked out! I was just busy getting ready for a weekend at Emerald City Comic Con, which was sadly a bust because I didn't get to see Stan Lee OR Leonard Nimoy. But I got a neat shirt and some cool prints out of it, so it wasn't so bad.

But more on to the topic: what is my paper topic? I've decided to revisit a subject I wrote about for a 500-level class last semester: video games and gender. I enjoyed this topic quite a bit, and feel like I may even have some new views to throw into my paper blender thanks to another semester of theory education. I have new material (thanks, FF13 and Bayonetta!) to use, new studies to pull from, and new lessons on a "feministic" approach to digital media with respect to video games.

I'll probably end up pulling from my original paper (but not the entire thing, because that's academic dishonesty right there) and using The Big Pink Reader, as well as a couple of other books I have scattered around my house, for my academic sources.

Moreover, this topic will be a challenge to address again because it has been such a short period of time between papers. But I also remember finding great new studies literally the same day I'd turned in my paper and being so frustrated that I couldn't include that data, and also feeling like I hit the page limit on that term paper before I'd even really begun to get into my arguments. I may have some material I'll be able to sweep up from the cutting room floor, polish up and present as new-new.

We'll see how it goes. I may even end up trashing the original topic and going for race and video games, which should present a fantastic challenge thanks to my Wonderbread upbringing and, thus, perspective on games.

SHOULD BE EXCITING. I can't wait to start writing this the weekend before my presentation! (I won't, really, but procrastination is how I roll more often than not.)

Happy spring break, digital savants!

Nerd spiker

Lori Kendall's "Oh no! I'm a nerd!" really resonated with me, and perhaps it's most because the subjects of her study reminded me so much of myself and my group of dude friends in high school.

Kendall studied men, specifically nerdy men, as they formed a community in the online forum called BlueSky. There is a lot of self-deprecating nerd humor ("HOW DID I GET SO NERDY?"); "didja spike her?" is a common joke when meeting a female is brought up in conversation, meaning did the guy have sex with her, but because these guys are self-identified nerds they never sincerely mean this question -- they admit as much when questioned by Kendall. There is a lot of discussion regarding "jerks always get the ladies but nice guys never do" and a lot of what could be seen as color-blindness, where a nerdy Asian gentleman identifies as not being traditionally "Chinese American," but aligns more with a color-free nerd-like Americanness that seems to be addressed often in forum discussions.

It also struck me as a, perhaps unintended, commentary on "guys will be guys," even in the digital realm.

I saw BlueSky as an extension of my high school group, where it was a bunch of nerdy/stoner/skater dudes and me, the token chick. I felt like I was reading transcripts of our conversations from way-back-when. I think, even with the hegemonic masculinity and semi-misogynistic attitude toward nerd women (see the section on convention/gamer chicks), I would have felt safe and welcome in BlueSky because these are "my people".

Yes, even with the objectification. I was also one of those self-deprecating nerds in high school; it added to the bond I had with those guys. And yes, there were jokes about spikin' her or spikin' him, but to be included in that line of joking is to be part of that crowd.

But I think that that's what makes up a key component of guys being guys; objectification isn't limited to the jerks. The nice guys do it too.

I really do feel that the argument Kendall was going for was guys will be guys, and even the "nerdy but nice" guys are still guys who resort to making crude, self-deprecating jokes about spikin' females and blubbery whales in chain mail. But this is part of male bonding, on- and off-line. This is how men distance themselves from women (while sometimes even including women, in my experience) and establish dominance (even if not the alpha male), thus continuing the hegemonic masculinity so often ascribed to in American society. Or, in this case, online society. What we may see in BlueSky we now see in 4chan and Kotaku, among others, and will see in future dude forums yet to come. As long as nerds are commiserating, there will always be dudes talkin' about spikin', even if it doesn't really happen outside of the digital realm.

Hollywood's mojo no-no?

HOLY CRAP.

Let me just say: I love this week's blog topic BECAUSE I was just talking about exactly this in class yesterday. But only Julie heard me. SO, this will be new to everyone else.

Granted, I'm probably not the first to bring this up in the history of race and Hollywood, BUT I DIGRESS.

[Caps are cruise control for excited, btw.]

In chapter three of "Digitizing Race," Lisa Nakamura addresses several topics, particularly with emphasis on people of color (POC) and lending their "mojo" to a film. The films she taps in this discussion (with regard to mojo) are "The Matrix" trilogy.

Her argument, as I saw it, can be summed up as this:
POC represent the human, the organic, the steampunk, the uprising against a machine-ruled world. They represent the connection to the spiritual side, to a more analog time. (Neo, for those curious, qualifies as a POC, having claimed an Asian heritage early in the film.)
White can be summed up as "the man," oppression, nonhuman (Agent Smith = virus; The Architect = Program 0), Utopian sci-fi (which, in my mind, is worlds apart from steampunk), a pristine, ultra-sanitized sort of cleanliness. They represent a more secular existence, and have more intuitive connection to computers (gesture-based, rather than analog inputs through a mouse and keyboard).

BUT, more importantly is this distinction: White equals uncool. POC equals cool.

Think about it: Morpheus, Niobe, Neo, Trinity (who, though not a POC, dresses in black in her Matrix existence), Link, Zee, Chara: ALL KICK-ASS.

Agent Smith, The Architect: "old, white pricks," a bit on the nerdy side. (In part, both characters remind me of the head game developer in "Grandma's Boy," but that's neither here nor there.)

So let's bring this analysis into something new, something fresh.

I present, for your consideration, "District 9".

[SPOILERS AHEAD. IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN "DISTRICT 9" (and shame on you if you haven't) PLEASE SKIP THE FOLLOWING. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED.]

We start out with Wikus, your atypical sci-fi hero. He's a bit nerdy, works for his father-in-law, and doesn't command much respect from the military rangers he's been placed in charge of for the Prawn (the aliens of this film) eviction operation.

In fact, you kind of spend the first 30 minutes of the film laughing at this bumbling protagonist. What kind of sci-fi hero is this??

Well, he's the kind who gets sprayed in the face with a liquid from the alien technology while looking through an alien shack for contraband weapons.

AND THAT'S WHEN SHIT GETS CRAZY. :0!!

In short, his DNA begins to mutate and splice with the alien DNA found in the liquid. Throughout the course of the film, the viewer sees him slowly change from all human to a hybrid to, eventually, a Prawn. (Or so it is implied. The film never says outright that it's actually him at the end.)

During this transformation, he's tortured by the government company he works for (his FIL leads the experiments), he breaks out of his laboratory prison environment, and makes a break for District 9 to hide among the Prawns. The rangers try to find him, the Nigerian gangs try to take his transformed arm for their witchcraft purposes (which is another level of POC mojo altogether) and gunfights with aliens and Gundam mecha and Wikus and rangers ensue.

And by the end of the film, our former sweater-vest-wearing nerd is a complete, legitimate bad-ass. And he gets progressively cooler from the first exposure to the last firefight.

But during all this, he gets progressively closer to this film's version of "POC/other" and further away from white. Or closer to "cool mojo" and further away from "nerd."

The viewer sees the transformation, too. First a hand turns into an alien appendage, he loses finger nails, his skin comes off in chunks to reveal the new alien body beneath the surface, he loses teeth, hair, and one of his eyes changes size and color.

We are actively engaged in his transformation from nerd to mojo. And it is visually thrown in our face. It's not something like in Steve Martin's "Bringing Down the House" where we sort of see this white guy go from acting white to acting "black," and we have to make the correlation ourselves ("Oh, he's wearing baggy pants and a beanie and saying "yo," I guess that means he's black-ish?").

And we are made to feel uncomfortable for the way he is treated. The government doesn't try to save him, they try to harvest him so they can use his DNA to utilize the alien weaponry. Steve Martin's "transformation" is more for laughs; Wikus makes you pity him, want to cry for him (he is made to shoot another Prawn during the government's testing), cheer for him, and hope that he'll overcome the rangers and the government (mostly portrayed by white actors, it is worth mentioning).

[OK, SPOILERS ARE DONE.]

The Prawns are wild, they scavenge, they eat cat food (...what??) and cow heads, they are tricked and cheated, they speak in their own clicks and trills (but can understand the Johannesburg English spoken by the white characters; the white characters can understand the Prawn language as well). Their shacks are thrown together with what they can find, but they still manage to be technologically advanced as a race. But even in their advanced airship, which has gesture-based interface, they still have to "plug in" to a gelatinous operating device to get the bird going. (Also, to an extent, they remind me of the Troll race in "World of Warcraft," who are said to sterotype from Caribbean POC.)

But they also add Mojo to the film. Would we be as interested in this film if it were a bunch of Steven Spielberg's ETs running around? Perhaps not. But these guys, they are EXOTIC. They add a sense of steampunk and organic otherliness to this film's world of clean labs and white hazmat suits, just as the POC in "The Matrix" do.

Would the films be the same if POC weren't such a major part of the stories? It would seem weird to see a Zion full of white, clean, slicked-back white people; it would be weird to see aliens who looked "like us" taking up residence in dirty shacks and being treated with such hate and anger. Why is it OK for the rangers to shoot the Prawns point-blank? Would we support it if the Prawns looked like white humans instead of land-walking crawdads?

I'm.. not entirely sure where I'm going with this now. I think that using POC (as major characters or to base an alien race upon) is a step in the right direction for Hollywood, but until we start seeing Hollywood take a more active role in portraying POC in ALL aspects of life (and not just the bearers of Mojo for the film's plot devices or to provide a sense of "other"), it will continue to be just another cinematic gimmick.

A quick follow-up

Just to be clear:

No, you didn't miss anything. I didn't do the "theorist article summary" blog.

Last week was hell for me with regard to my schedule, and this weekend wasn't much better with regard to my health. So, no blog.

I'll be back on task this week with blog #5.

Thanks for understanding.

xoxo
K

Hybrid ni kawatte, iinuketa yo!

Or: Someone set us up the blog.

Or: For great hybrid.

(Or, translation: In the name of hybrid, I'll kinda try to explain something!)

Conversely: Kristin didn't understand a lick of this week's readings, and instead will try to ramble in an attempt to "get" hybrid spaces.

So, the bit I think I did get this week was in de Souza e Silva's "From Cyber to Hybrid" essay.

On page 763, dSeS talks about, basically, the shift from static interfaces to mobile interfaces, and how this shift forces us to take a look at what we consider "digital space." Size determines what we see as static and mobile -- do we have to sit at a computer to go online, or can we go online with our pocket PDA and cell phones? Then, perhaps, because of cultural experiences and the way we have grown up with accessing cyberspace, we see "Internet" as something restricted to static interfaces and solitary experiences, as with the home computer. In some cases, such as with Japanese teenagers who only go online with phones, they don't see it as accessing the Internet because it isn't behind a bulky computer (and, conversely, perhaps it isn't through Firefox or IE). In particular, because it is on-the-go and because it is seen as a component of their social spaces. Did digital space used to be only a static experience, once accessed through a desktop computer? Has digital space merged with social space as a result of our use of mobile media to access the Internet during "in-between" time and incorporating it with our day-to-day activities?

(*reads the rest of the prompt* ...ok... and then... ah!)

It's been a long day. My brain is ready to implode.

And I hear my husband playing "CoD: Modern Warfare 2" in the background, which is only wanting to drag me further away from this blog entry.

I support whatever dSeS said above. Or what I think she said. I think that there is a shift from static to mobile interface with regard to Internet access, thanks in no small part to items such as the iPhone. Or with netbooks and wireless cards.

I know I have resorted to neglecting my desktop unit, in part, because it's easier to jump on my laptop or my phone, do whatever Internet business I need to do, and go. Or handle the Internet business on my iPhone while between classes or in the car with Marcus (the aforementioned husband) at the wheel. I think, in part, this is also because my desktop is a 5-year-old beast in serious need of a video card upgrade. And because having the time to sit down at my workhorse and load it up and casually peruse the Intarwebs is something of a luxury for me, for most of us, in this go-go-go society we live in.

Also, because it is easier to incorporate my iPhone and all its handy apps into whatever I'm doing -- getting coffee, checking my bank account, checking in at WSU Tri-Cities -- than it would be to do all the same on my desktop (or, for that matter, on my laptop).

There is something to be said for the convenience that this shift from static to mobile offers us, and as a society that loooooooooooooves its convenience (same with Japan), it's no wonder that we are ever steadily embracing our mobile-social spaces.

That being said, I've been known to hesitate visiting social spaces if I know their 3G service is less-than-great. How else am I supposed to see what my friends are posting on each others walls, upload photos, how my crops are doing in Papaya Farm, read stories that aren't so average, and battle my generic Pokemans against your generic Pokemans???

With that, I'm out. I'm starting to use "their" and "there" interchangeably, which is never a good thing for a former-editor-turned-designer.

And I'm finding this lolcat funnier every time I look at it.

Enjoy.

Whu?

Huh? What happened? I blacked out there for a moment.

*scrolls down to previous blog*

...Ohhh.. right. Long blog is long. Sorry everyone.

The TL;DR version:

I'm a virtual recluse, choosing to extend my meatspace existence into my online communities (see: Facebook, Twitter) because online people are meanies and cliqueish and I don't want to risk rejection by anonymous doodieheads (see: news forums, web comics, Gawker media services, etc). Also, I like donuts. OM NOM NOM.

Making the comment circle tomorrow. Have a good weekend, everyone!

It takes a community to raise a blogger

Leave it to me, the social networker who relies so heavily on her peers to find out what's going on out there, to blow the deadline on an entry about community.

What is community? Well, it's more than just a fantastic show on NBC starring Joel McHale. It's a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists.

I'm a participating member of a small handful of communities, two in particular: Facebook and Twitter. Of these networks, I'm a participating member of further subcommunities within.

On Twitter, I have my DTC friends, my designer friends and my newspaper friends with whom I communicate -- some of these circles tend to overlap in my little Venn diagram of community.

On Facebook, I'm a part of Mid-Columbia Brides as one of the models, a fan of a couple of bands who I help promote when they come to town, and a follower (and derbier-hopeful) of the Atomic City Roller Derby Girls. Then I have my regular communique with, again, DTC, designer, high school and newspaper friends.

These are not exclusive to the virtual realm. In fact, I would consider these an extension of my "meat space" existence. They act as a way for me to keep in contact (constant or otherwise) with members of these groups when we can't be in a face-to-face environment. Sometimes this is because of schedules; other times it's because of geographical limitations.

If these weren't an extension of my "meat space" (which would make an excellent name for another social networking community), I feel like they wouldn't have as much of an impact on my life as they do now. Specifically, I don't know that I would have a reason to be an active member of these communities without the real-world extensions and implications that they present.

I used to be a member of the virtual World of Warcraft community, with very limited "meat space" interaction with anyone I played with. It was fun, and had some pretty real effects on my life outside of the game, but I began to see that it wasn't a very positive environment for a Care Bear such as myself. It got to the point where I realized that paying $15 each month to be whomped on and made fun of wasn't worth it, especially when, as a young nerdling, I was able to experience that for free in the physical world. (As a poor college student, it also got to the point where it was either WoW or food. And I like to eat. A lot. So my decision to leave a fairly abusive community was an easy one, to say the least.)

I've been a member of various forums online, such as news aggregates and webcomics, but interest waned quickly. I found that I prefer supportive communities, and that it helps to be thick-skinned and quick-witted when dealing with the veil of anonymity -- two things in which I was sorely lacking in my days as a not-so-young nerdling.

One community that I've been wanting to become an active member of, but have settled for trolling on instead, is Jezebel. It's a news blog about sex, gossip, fashion, video games, politics and entertainment with a feminist bend. The men and women who actively comment and argue in the space below stories seem to have formed a tight bond with one another, and I love reading the banter and thoughtful insight that most members have to offer. And everyone seems to come from different backgrounds all around the world, and many have even formed meat-space friendships counterpart to their virtual community, which is awesome for such a huge community. But there's a catch! You have to audition to become a commenter. And if you finally do get past the auditioning process (which, I think, means you have to be approved as a member by several "star commentors") , there seems to be this constant pressure to always be witty or insightful or clever or just plain crap-free. And that's hard to do on a consistent basis! I think I could do it, but sometimes I black out at the keyboard in a fit of feminist rage just *reading* the stories, and when I wake up I have no idea where I am or how many small dogs I've punted or how all these boxes of donuts got into my home. I imagine that, for me, it would be difficult to form a thoughtful coherent comment with all of those donut crumbs clinging so desperately to my face.

More than that, I've observed that while the community of Jezebel tends to be supportive and positive, they take a while to warm up to newcomers, particularly if the newbie's ideas don't mesh 100% with the ideals and aesthetics of the group. Having dealt enough with that in middle and high school, and being beyond all that clique crap on the whole, sometimes it's just easier to play observer instead of being an active participant. (Taking that passive stance is, for the most part, how I managed to survive those seven years.)

And that is a barrier in this community to the greater group of "non-members" that I find in many communities I'm part of or would like to be a part of: the groupthink mentality. It can be really, really hard to gain any ground if even one member of the community isn't hip to your jive. ("Duh, Kristin.") And I think that in a day where everyone can so quickly learn to use the tools provided by platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Livejournal, WoW and others, it isn't so much a matter of "have vs. have not" or being information literate; it's a matter of being "cool enough," "smart enough," "average enough" or "feminist enough" to be a part of that community.

Virtual community isn't just a place where people with common interests can get together and discuss those shared likes and dislikes; it's that group in the corner whispering behind notebooks and peechees, and you're either in or you're out. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, either; that's just the nature of the beast! It's how it is now, and it's how it has been for as long as there has been a need to declare such a thing as being "distinct in some respect from the larger society."

Same cliques, different medium.

Jiving with Cyberspace

The definition of Cyberspace, as given by Benedikt, that jived most with me was the third entry:

Accessed through any computer linked into the sytem; a place, one place, limitless; entered equally from a basement in Vancouver, a boat in Port-au-Prince, a cab in New York, a garage in Texas City, an apartment in Rome, an office in Hong Kong, a bar in Kyoto, a café in Kinshasa, a laboratory on the Moon.

I think of the vast network of connections as a space that literally can be accessed by anyone anywhere, as long as they have the means necessary. And it doesn't even have to be a computer anymore -- your PDA, a handheld gaming system, your MP3 player can all tunnel into this location.

I especially found the part about Port-au-Prince timely, after the earthquake in Haiti. Thanks to the lack of geographic bias found in connecting to Cyberspace, people in Vancouver, in Rome, in Hong Kong are able to connect to friends and family in Haiti, whether it be by phone or Internet. And even though there might be some delay in connecting because of a surge of traffic, it can be comforting to think that, because everyone can enter equally, once you're in, you're in, and you have the same chances of finding that person-to-person connection in Port-au-Prince as you might in Texas City or Kyoto.

There's no height restriction, no age limit, no permit required. Cyberspace could in fact be the last unbiased frontier in our ever-connected global village.