Wednesday, March 28, 2007

COM125 Week 12: Reading Something Online Is Just More Fun

Let's face it, everyone wants to know what is going on in the lives of Hollywood's elite stars and when something happens to a celebrity, the whole world hears about it. Weather we wanted to hear about it or not, we got the news that Anna Nicole Smith was found dead in her hotel room last month. Anna was always in the celebrity news being portrayed as person who abused drugs. Last month, shortly after her death, you could not pick up a national newspaper, or get on the internet without seeing something related to her death or the after-effects of her death such as who her baby's father is, how she died, or where she was going to be buried. Many differences occur in news sources regarding this information filled topic such as presentation, attitudes, and the overall information context that is displayed. I have found through reading several print articles and several online articles relating the same topic, word choice is key in setting the mood of an article and one can express opinions through certain words, without stating them directly.

The New York Times printed an article on the cause of Anna Nicole Smith's death on March 27, 2007, almost two entire months after her passing titled, "Anna Nicole Smith’s Death Is Ruled an Accidental Drug Overdose." After reading the entire article, I found it to be fair; opinions were decided to be left out of the article and facts were the main aspect in the content of this article. Many things could have been said regarding the many prescriptions she was taking at the time of her death, but judgments were not on print. I felt that for this particular topic, death, it was probably an intelligent plan to get the story across and not get wrapped up in what 'could have happened' or who was at fault for this tragedy.

On the other hand, I read a blog regarding this topic of Anna Nicole Smith's death. It appears that the person who started the blog titled it, "Anna Nicole Smith's Death: Accidental OD." This title is almost exactly the same as the one printed on the New York Times however, the content of the material is drastically different. Throughout the blog, several people comment on how millions of people are not surprised of her death because of her history with drug abuse. Also, people accuse her family and friends of giving her these drugs to gain access to her fortune of millions of dollars. I was not surprised by the heavy opinions of this blog. Gillmor (2004) writes, "… bloggers and operators of independent news sites already do a respectable job of scanning for and sorting news for people who want it." Throughout his book, We the Media, Gillmor explains that the foundation of this country was based on many different kinds of freedom, freedom of speech contributing heavily to the United States Constitution. Resting on the very laws of this freedom of speech lies an entire online community devoted to giving their opinions (weather people want to read them or not) about topics that interest them or are in relation to current events. Part of their rights as American citizens is to be able to express themselves freely by stating where they stand on issues and events and these rights can sometimes be abused which is where lawsuits come into play.

Overall, many differences contributed to the general feel of the information being presented. In the news article, the information was professional, obviously because it was written by someone from the New York Times who has a responsibility to the reputation of themselves and their corporation. The blog entries were opinionated and lacked detail; they gave accusations when most of these people probably had no idea what they were talking about. Gillmor (2004) writes, "Call them newsmakers. Call them sources. Call them the sub-jects—and sometimes, in their view, the unwilling victims—of journalism. But however we describe them, we all must recog­nize that the rules for newsmakers, not just journalists, have changed, thanks to everyone’s ability to make the news." Most bloggers are not professionals, and you can never really trust what they write because of the fact they lack credibility, but if it wasn't for these people, I would be stuck getting my information from stuffy articles in newspapers!


References:
Anna Nicole Smith's Death: Accidental OD . Topix, Retrieved March 27, 2007, from http://www.topix.net/forum/county/broward-fl/T3F12SOCE0BHNDNH1

Finin, Tim (2006, April, 27). Proving that blogs affect society. Ebiquity Group, Retrieved 27, March, 2007, from http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/04/27/proving-that-blogs-affect-society/

Gillmor, D. (2004). We the Media. Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People, Retrieved March 28, 2007, from http://download.nowis.com/index.cfm?phile=WeTheMedia.html&tipe=text/html#chap3

Goodnough, A. Anna Nicole Smith’s Death Is Ruled an Accidental Drug Overdose . (2007, March 27). The New York Times

Monday, March 26, 2007

COM125: Soon Everything Will Be Online!

When I first read this assignment, I was not sure what to think. Do politicians really blog? Well, after coming across Hillary Clinton's Blog for Hope regarding issues surrounded by the American Cancer Society, my question was answered. I guess that when I think about blogging I think about MySpace and other websites where kids leave comments about meaningless humdrum. I did not even take into consideration that blogging has its perks when it comes to a society surrounded by technology and the internet.
The blog's title is BLOG FOR HOPE by New York Senator Hillary Clinton. It was started on Sunday, August 14, 2005 at 6:49pm. When I first started reading this blog, I was inspired by Hillary Clinton because her points made sense; she came across as a caring citizen of the United States of America and appeared to strongly believe in strong health issues. The more I read on her issues, the more I was persuaded to support her in her efforts to better the health care system. When I came across comments left on this blog I was not surprised that most of them were written in a professional and respectful manner. Most of the people who commented on Hillary's issues were in support of her and people actually added their input and ideas of how her proposals could actually improve. Some, like os21llc, just left comments like "Woot woot, Hillary! I respect your opinion and you have my vote in 2008!"
Hillary stands strongly on health issues such as early detection for breast cancer. She touches on how people do not get yearly checkups because of the cost of healthcare and that these checkups are essential to cancer detection. She also talks about reducing administrative costs of healthcare which with dramatically lower the cost of healthcare and make it more affordable for the common American people.
I believe that any way you look at a blog regarding politics, it is effecting politics in a good way. Blogs raise awareness on current issues surrounding people and political based blogs are no different. If there was a blog for example surrounding Hillary Clinton and her issues and the entire blog was bashing her as a political figure, I believe that I would see that as a good thing believe it or not. Even when people do not know where political figures stand on certain issues, they may have preconceived notions about the politician. Publicity is publicity any way you look at it and if people are writing bad things regarding politics, maybe they will be curious about the issues at hand and actually research them before commenting on the blog. Blogging has revolutionized the political world; anywhere you go on the internet, you see websites where political figures let you know where they stand on certain issues so sooner or later you are bound to come across some political knowledge. Alinta Thornton (2002) states that, "Increasingly, the media has become central to political life." Blogs are no exception. Politicians need to stay afloat in the media to highly raise awareness about their standings on certain issues and I believe this is where many past candidates have fallen.
So with the daily increase in the use of the internet, will online voting become a thing of the future? With the average worker in the United States spending at least some time at a computer everyday, isn't it likely that if voting were just a click away, more people would do it? I believe that this is true and if security were not an issue, online voting would not be a thing of the future but a thing of the present. "This is seen as a way to avoid the confusion of badly designed poll papers" (Thornton, 2002). Who can forget the Florida mishap in 2000? I believe that if the government were to in the future convert to online voting, they should stick with their decision strongly and work to every year improve on the security and advertisement of the convenience. Once people are convinced that 'holy crap, this does really work and I like it', online voting will be as popular as watching videos on YouTube.


References

Clinton, H. (2005). Blog For Hope. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://blogs.health.yahoo.com/blog-for-hope/clinton/;_ylt=Ap.h4Chl4r7PqETfF8szNExCsckF

Stross, Randall (2006, September, 24). The Big Gamble on Electronic Voting . The New York Times, Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/business/yourmoney/24digi.html?ei=5088&en=9bfe345825b02bea&ex=1316750400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

Thornton, Alinta (2002). Does Internet Create Democracy. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://www.zip.com.au/~athornto/thesis_2002_alinta_thornton.doc

Sunday, March 18, 2007

COM125 Week 10: Find Anyone Online!

As human beings, it is natural to flock into certain communities or social groups. These collections of people give us a sense of belonging as well as a positive feeling of acceptance. Weather you belong to a community of craftsmen or a community of drug dealers, what is important to understand is that you belong. Fernback and Thompson (1995) state that, “Community is an important aspect of life for most people.” What brings great satisfaction to people is knowing that there are others out there that share in the same interests and thoughts and even though we are unique, we find comfort in knowing that those interests and thoughts are not so extreme that we are considered bizarre.
Starting my second semester at the University at Buffalo, I found that I was lacking a sense of community myself. I decided to gather my friends together and ask them if they wanted to play on an intramural volleyball team. Everyone was on the same page as I was and thought it was a really great idea; this would get us away from studying and the dorms a couple nights a week and would bring us closer as a group. Naturally, since I put together the group I was named the captain of the team which basically meant that I dealt with the head organizer of volleyball intramurals at Alumni Arena. I was subscribed to the listserve which was specific for my day and time of play, Tuesdays at 10:00pm. This e-mail system relayed important messages which were specific to my team and the other teams that I played on Tuesdays at 10:00. After I received these messages, I would forward them to my team. If anyone had a question I could e-mail everyone on the listserve and people who know the answers and were kind enough would e-mail me back in a promptly manner. I would then forward the responses to my teammates. When the same person kept e-mailing me back over and over I felt that I had developed a relationship with this person that was something a little bit more than senseless e-mailing. We would then see each other on Tuesdays and talk before and after the games. Eventually, I introduced this other captain to my team and he introduced his team to me and my team. I feel that our teams clicked because of all of our similar care-free personalities. I felt a sense of community with these thirty or so people because of the fact that we all played on the same night at the same time. Boyd (2006) describes that “people chose to participate based on their interest in the topic.” All of these relationships that my team and I have developed with other teams in the intramural volleyball league have been started through e-mail and the listserve system.
At the beginning of the intramural league, it was hard to develop relationships with people though. Through using the listserve e-mail system, it does not really allow for personalization of e-mail and getting to know people’s personalities. The one size fits all e-mail that is sent to hundreds of people throughout listserve did not allow me to meet people but it was that system of e-mail which was the foundation of starting relationships with people and it broke the ice in introducing myself to hundreds of people.
I feel that because of the fact that I would see these people a couple nights a week, it was easier to develop relationships with them. For example, I am on a listserve for my PSY101 class which updates the hundreds of people in that class on class cancellations, homework, etc. Because of the enormous group involved and the one sided information exchange (teacher to class), it would be difficult to develop close relationships with people in that class which started with e-mail. It was easier being in a recreational environment where everyone shared a common interest and was interested in having a good time.
Online communities develop because of common interest. Fernback and Thompson (1995) say that, “We all need a sense of place, whether it be bounded territorially or in the "placeless" realm of cyberspace.” It is because of these online communities that people are able to express themselves and open each others minds to new ideas and awareness.


References

Boyd, Danah (2006, December). Friends, Friendsters, and Fop 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday, 11, Retrieved March 14, 2007, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/index.html

Fernback, J, & Thompson, Brad (1995). Virtual Communities: Abort, Retry, Failure?. Retrieved March 14, 2007, from http://www.rheingold.com/texts/techpolitix/VCcivil.html