It is hard to tell how much blogs have influenced my life. I'm what they call an 'early adopter' and I've been actively blogging since 2002, when I was 15.
Blogs first made their way into my life when I became politically active and then as a way to vent about random things and now as my number one source for new music.
Blogs have become my main source for news on every level. It isn't that I don't trust mainstream media, it is that I don't see my needs and interests being met by television or newspapers. Mainly because they all report on the same thing. I watch the news everyday but it is more background noise than anything else. I need alternative point of views, one that I don't get from 6 news stations which all report on the same issues, topics and do so in almost the same way. CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, & MSNBC don't cut it for me. You can tell they try to include "interesting" things in their reports like what Britney Spears is doing but seriously, WHO CARES ABOUT BRITNEY SPEARS and why are you reporting it on the NEWS!!!
I will be the first to admit that I love good gossip just like everyone else but I don't need to hear about it on my news. I stopped buying gossip rags in exchange for the FREE online blog version. Even PEOPLE has one. Has it hurt it's sales? Obviously not if they're still able to pay obscene amounts of money for pictures of 'Brangelina', J.Lo's, and Xtina's baby photos.
The main influence blogs have had on my life can be seen in my musical tastes. Beaumont, TX doesn't leave an 'alternative' music scene. Blogs helped me find music that I wasn't seeing on MTV or hearing on the radio. As I browse facebook I'm noticing people I went to HS with that left Beaumont have started to listen to better music as well. Is it the move and exposure to different places? Or their exposure to blogs. For me, both. Blogs like Stereogum and Brooklynvegan are all NYC based bloggers who are an alt. voice to the Pitchforks and Rolling Stone (magazine) out there. I get to read and hear about bands I don't hear on the radio or see on TV or in magazines and without that, I'd still be the little girl stuck on pop culture.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Code of Ethics?
I’m not much of a blogger myself but I do like to check out my friends blogs. It’s a way for me to keep updated with what they’re doing. Most of what I look at is photo blogs because I don’t like to sit in front of my computer reading, the less reading I have to do…the better. I don’t like to search random blogs since I don’t really trust the reliability of these blogs.
I found an article that addressed the issues of ethics in blogging, specifically for political blogs, entitled “If I Break a Rule, What Do I Do, Fire Myself?” Ethics Codes of Independent Blogs. The article looked into who the writers of these political blogs were, whether they were journalists, professionals, etc. and if there was a code of ethics stated on the blog. It also questioned whether or not there should be a code of ethics and if so what it should be. A lot of people are turning to blogs now as their information source so I think that reliability is a major issue. The conclusion is that bloggers might not accept a code of ethics. One blogger asked, “if I break a rule [of ethics], what do I do, fire myself?” Others feel that there is no need for a code of ethics since “the blogosphere will typically ‘fact-check you’re a** if needed. Bad info and continued lies calls your credibility into doubt, which makes your blog a lot less worth reading. Sort of a self-correcting phenomenon’ (Dube, 2003).” What do you think? Should there be a code of ethics for blogs and what would it include?
As I’ve already mentioned I don’t like to read blogs or articles on my computer which is what I’m doing now, so I’ll admit that I haven’t read the article completely through. If you’re interested in reading the article here is the link.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=25138376&site=ehost-live
I found an article that addressed the issues of ethics in blogging, specifically for political blogs, entitled “If I Break a Rule, What Do I Do, Fire Myself?” Ethics Codes of Independent Blogs. The article looked into who the writers of these political blogs were, whether they were journalists, professionals, etc. and if there was a code of ethics stated on the blog. It also questioned whether or not there should be a code of ethics and if so what it should be. A lot of people are turning to blogs now as their information source so I think that reliability is a major issue. The conclusion is that bloggers might not accept a code of ethics. One blogger asked, “if I break a rule [of ethics], what do I do, fire myself?” Others feel that there is no need for a code of ethics since “the blogosphere will typically ‘fact-check you’re a** if needed. Bad info and continued lies calls your credibility into doubt, which makes your blog a lot less worth reading. Sort of a self-correcting phenomenon’ (Dube, 2003).” What do you think? Should there be a code of ethics for blogs and what would it include?
As I’ve already mentioned I don’t like to read blogs or articles on my computer which is what I’m doing now, so I’ll admit that I haven’t read the article completely through. If you’re interested in reading the article here is the link.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=25138376&site=ehost-live
Why Do People Blog
My post today will deal with blogs and how to personally make it better. The following link discusses the growing rate of bloggers and why people blog. http://ezinearticles.com/?Blogs--Why-Do-People-Blog&id=161399
Like with this blog layout, a lot of people blog because of the freedom provided and the availability of creating your own layout. I think that most people will agree that they blog because of the options and variety that they can pick from.
The next link discusses on how to make your blog successful.
http://ezinearticles.com/index.php?5-Tips-To-Creating-A-Successful-Blog&id=1118124
One tip that I think is important is to create layout for your blog that is easy to read and friendly for the eyes. People will not stay and read a blog that is too busy and has too much going on. Write enough info so that the reader gets what you are trying to say but don't write too much that your reader gets overwhelmed.
Like with this blog layout, a lot of people blog because of the freedom provided and the availability of creating your own layout. I think that most people will agree that they blog because of the options and variety that they can pick from.
The next link discusses on how to make your blog successful.
http://ezinearticles.com/index.php?5-Tips-To-Creating-A-Successful-Blog&id=1118124
One tip that I think is important is to create layout for your blog that is easy to read and friendly for the eyes. People will not stay and read a blog that is too busy and has too much going on. Write enough info so that the reader gets what you are trying to say but don't write too much that your reader gets overwhelmed.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Blogs and Feminism
"Believing that knowledge is power, Feisty Aphrodite leverages grassroots media activism to empower women, raise awareness, and evoke social change" is the mission statement that is found on the Feisty Aphrodite blog site. I think that this shows how blogging can raise interests and awareness to causes that affect us today. Feisty Aphrodite is geared towards educating people about media and the propaganda that it feeds us. Feisty hopes to achieve an awareness for issues, instead of attention for the everyday media that focuses on a tiny aspect of what's really going on. Feisty also has tags to other topics such as feminism and health, activism in Africa, and sexual discrimination.
This adds to the idea that blogging better public interests. A blog like this gives a vast amount of knowledge readily to the reader.
A link to the site can be found here and you can look around the website for news and issues that is currently being discussed. http://www.feistyaphrodite.com/about/
This adds to the idea that blogging better public interests. A blog like this gives a vast amount of knowledge readily to the reader.
A link to the site can be found here and you can look around the website for news and issues that is currently being discussed. http://www.feistyaphrodite.com/about/
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Where do blogs come from?
The blogosphere is the internet counterpart of the public sphere which was first introduced by Jurgen Habermas. Habermas’s Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, discusses three ideologies associated with a public sphere which is comparable to what a blogosphere is and does.
In order for a public sphere to be considered as such, the group or groups must engage in rational critical debate, free of status or control. What Habermas wanted was for what was being said to be more important than who was saying it. Secondly, these groups should draw attention to problematic areas that weren’t discussed or questioned within the political arena (and in this case, mainstream media and the way they report on politics). Lastly, Habermas wanted the debates to be open to everyone and accessible to everyone who wanted to participate in them.
This fits with the way the Internet acts as a neutral zone, free of dominant control by media conglomerates. Blogs (the Internet) have really revitalized the idea of a public sphere because it really revolves around Habermas’s first and third values which define the public sphere as being free and inclusive to all and blogs allow for this. One of the Internet’s dominant roles is to provide access to information. Kees Brants claims that “because of its horizontal, open, and user-friendly nature, the Internet allows for easy access to, and thus greater participation in, the public sphere. Time, place, and money are less of an issue…Moreover, the psychological barrier of speaking in public and the private hesitation to come out with specific ideas, claims, and blame are less pressing” (Brants). People turn to blogs because it is a convenient way to be able to discuss issues as well as find information relevant to the topics in which they are trying to learn more about.
I'll source the Habermas and Brants article soon.
But there's the theory that I feel blogs are based around.
EDITED: One of the topics we discussed in class in reference to blogging, was how instead of diversifying people's ideas, it actually narrows people's viewpoints because then people can choose what they want to read and see. This, then, completely undermines what Habermas wanted from his public sphere. He wanted people to actively engage with other people, other groups and actively discuss issues that support and oppose what a person's viewpoints may be.
When you are reading blogs that discuss issues, do you read blogs that oppose your viewpoints or support it? Or both? Do you engage/comment with either or do you just read blogs?
In order for a public sphere to be considered as such, the group or groups must engage in rational critical debate, free of status or control. What Habermas wanted was for what was being said to be more important than who was saying it. Secondly, these groups should draw attention to problematic areas that weren’t discussed or questioned within the political arena (and in this case, mainstream media and the way they report on politics). Lastly, Habermas wanted the debates to be open to everyone and accessible to everyone who wanted to participate in them.
This fits with the way the Internet acts as a neutral zone, free of dominant control by media conglomerates. Blogs (the Internet) have really revitalized the idea of a public sphere because it really revolves around Habermas’s first and third values which define the public sphere as being free and inclusive to all and blogs allow for this. One of the Internet’s dominant roles is to provide access to information. Kees Brants claims that “because of its horizontal, open, and user-friendly nature, the Internet allows for easy access to, and thus greater participation in, the public sphere. Time, place, and money are less of an issue…Moreover, the psychological barrier of speaking in public and the private hesitation to come out with specific ideas, claims, and blame are less pressing” (Brants). People turn to blogs because it is a convenient way to be able to discuss issues as well as find information relevant to the topics in which they are trying to learn more about.
I'll source the Habermas and Brants article soon.
But there's the theory that I feel blogs are based around.
EDITED: One of the topics we discussed in class in reference to blogging, was how instead of diversifying people's ideas, it actually narrows people's viewpoints because then people can choose what they want to read and see. This, then, completely undermines what Habermas wanted from his public sphere. He wanted people to actively engage with other people, other groups and actively discuss issues that support and oppose what a person's viewpoints may be.
When you are reading blogs that discuss issues, do you read blogs that oppose your viewpoints or support it? Or both? Do you engage/comment with either or do you just read blogs?
Our World Digitized: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Last Thursday evening I went to a presentation at MIT called: Our World Digitized: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. There were 3 well known media studies authors there; Yochai Benkler, Cass Sunstein, and Henry Jenkins (only the moderator though). Their discussion wasn't specifically on blogs, but they did mention it and some of their ideas do relate to blogs.
Sunstein started off one of his arguments with a study he was a part of in Colorado. He took people from Colorado Springs and people from Boulder, both of which are political opposites, and got them together to talk about politics. They were given a few questions beforehand and were to answer them based on their opinions. Then after the study they were to answer the same questions. After being with people like themselves for a while the peoples' ideas became more and more radical. He used this to outline that political bloggers only link to like-minded bloggers where they say why their candidate is the best and why the others are a bad choice. Sunstein's basic argument was that the Internet is polarizing because of this. Benkler's response to this is that it is just a facilitator because people have been doing this for awhile (used Fox News as an example).
They both also mentioned that people that are talking with like-minded people feel smarter and think that the people they are with are smart as well, so it makes us feel better about ourselves. They both also agreed that this clustering is good and bad. It is good because people become involved and have their say. But it is bad because people become more ignorant toward other opinions, their opinion is the only one that counts.
They also talked about Wikipedia and its goods and evils. I was fading and starting to lose interest so I didn't take any notes on that either. You can listen to the whole thing and eventually see a podcast and a videocast here.
What does everyone else think? Do you think that blogs make people ignorant of other people? What are the pluses and minuses? Do you think Wikipedia is good? Can you think of other ways that online communities, or clusters as they called them, are bad for society?
Sunstein started off one of his arguments with a study he was a part of in Colorado. He took people from Colorado Springs and people from Boulder, both of which are political opposites, and got them together to talk about politics. They were given a few questions beforehand and were to answer them based on their opinions. Then after the study they were to answer the same questions. After being with people like themselves for a while the peoples' ideas became more and more radical. He used this to outline that political bloggers only link to like-minded bloggers where they say why their candidate is the best and why the others are a bad choice. Sunstein's basic argument was that the Internet is polarizing because of this. Benkler's response to this is that it is just a facilitator because people have been doing this for awhile (used Fox News as an example).
They both also mentioned that people that are talking with like-minded people feel smarter and think that the people they are with are smart as well, so it makes us feel better about ourselves. They both also agreed that this clustering is good and bad. It is good because people become involved and have their say. But it is bad because people become more ignorant toward other opinions, their opinion is the only one that counts.
They also talked about Wikipedia and its goods and evils. I was fading and starting to lose interest so I didn't take any notes on that either. You can listen to the whole thing and eventually see a podcast and a videocast here.
What does everyone else think? Do you think that blogs make people ignorant of other people? What are the pluses and minuses? Do you think Wikipedia is good? Can you think of other ways that online communities, or clusters as they called them, are bad for society?
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Reliable Source of Blogging
Our second part of the project that we are doing in media class deals with bloggers. When talking about blogs, there's a variety of things to keep in mind. Who is the author and what are they writing about? And how reliable is the source? Are we referring to blogs that discuss deep topics such as politics/controversies/healthcare, etc? Are these blogs by professional people who have expertise in the field? Or are we talking about blogs that are for recreational use, where people use blogs to post opinions about anything and keep journals online?
From personal experience, I have been a blogger for many years. I blog online basically just to use as a journal. I rant about frustrations, talk about something interesting or funny that happened that day, or just write about future plans. I do read up on blogs by both professionals and by everyday people on topics such as tax and everyday personal issues. I enjoy reading both for the variety and relatability.
So what types of blogs do you guys follow? Do you follow the ones written by professionals or by people like us? Does it matter to you if the source is reliable for news or not?
From personal experience, I have been a blogger for many years. I blog online basically just to use as a journal. I rant about frustrations, talk about something interesting or funny that happened that day, or just write about future plans. I do read up on blogs by both professionals and by everyday people on topics such as tax and everyday personal issues. I enjoy reading both for the variety and relatability.
So what types of blogs do you guys follow? Do you follow the ones written by professionals or by people like us? Does it matter to you if the source is reliable for news or not?
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Boston Media Makers Meeting
9AM is very early for a college student to be waking up on a Sunday Morning! But having good breakfast food was my motivator.
Basically, what it is, is a group of people from all over the Boston area and beyond, meet the first Sunday of every month and they gather and there's a 3 min. round table introduction. For some extensive minutes by David Tames go here. He had some very nice things to say about Bentley's media program. I basically introduced this project about mapping media makers and video game developers to a room filled with bloggers! It was great, I hope I get to interview some of them for this blog and for the mapping project. Steve Garfield, who runs the monthly Boston Media Makers meetings, will be one of the first people interviewed and I think that David is also very interested so I will make sure to keep you updated as to the progress on this project.
-Mai
Basically, what it is, is a group of people from all over the Boston area and beyond, meet the first Sunday of every month and they gather and there's a 3 min. round table introduction. For some extensive minutes by David Tames go here. He had some very nice things to say about Bentley's media program. I basically introduced this project about mapping media makers and video game developers to a room filled with bloggers! It was great, I hope I get to interview some of them for this blog and for the mapping project. Steve Garfield, who runs the monthly Boston Media Makers meetings, will be one of the first people interviewed and I think that David is also very interested so I will make sure to keep you updated as to the progress on this project.
-Mai
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Boston Media Makers
Tomorrow will be my first meeting. It'll be interesting to be able to talk to bloggers, etc. 10AM is early but I hear they make good brunch. I'll post up what I learn and who I spoke to soon.
-mai
-mai
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)