Blog Post 11

I have always been curious about "Big Data"; since I've been in the DTC program, every single class I've taken has dealt with a few of the same issues.  Copyright, fair use, data mining and social media have all been a part of my college education.  It wasn't until now that I started to think about how data analysis would come off if it were applied back to the real world.  Since the digital age is such a recent era in the span of human societies, some of our functions, terms and procedures have crossed into the digital world (saving, file folders, trash, desktop).  We are now becoming more and more aware of the cross back into the real world.  Some of the data that is collected from the internet may include how often users access a site, how many times users click on a certain link and how long a user stays on a single page.  This type of data mining is obviously quite similar to the type of data mining that happens in the real world.  A retail store can track how many customers enter their store, record how long they stay and calculate which items are the most popular. Data mining becomes questionable when simple numbers are replaced with personal statements, opinions, photos and videos of individuals.  One would argue that the internet should be considered a massive public forum when anything and everything that is communicated is fair game to not only view but also analyze.  But if Copyright law applies to all creative works until it is specified for some type of creative license then how does social media fit into that?  Can Copyright be applied to blogs?  Let's look at it from the other end.  Is it legal to collect song lyrics of popular artists and analyze their contents if those lyrics are protected by copyright law?  They are very difficult questions to answer and I am certainly not qualified to do so.  I will however quote my mother to end this post.  She told me this when I started using AOL Instant Messenger back in 7th grade: "The internet is not written in pencil but in permanent ink, it can never be erased.  Be careful what you type and always mean it."  Since then I have always lived by those words when it comes to my interaction on internet and so I can honestly say that if someone were to use my information for analysis, I don't think I would mind.

Blog post 10

Slee proposes, "Forswearing "new and social media" as a category allows us to include the Benghazi radio stations and newspapers, because they are no longer outside some artificial digital boundary. It frees us up to talk separately and distinctly about blogs, SMS, and Facebook without trying to tie them together in some fake unity: each of these media have distinct architectures, different user bases, different governance models; they serve different purposes, have different interfaces to the rest of the world, and are subject to different commercial pressures."  I think this is an interesting point to make.  Although each of these types of outlets are essentially different they all serve a generally similar purpose: to distribute information to those that cannot be reached face to face.  This can be distinguished from advertisements, music and television because mass communication like that is a one way street.  Each of the types of communication listed by Slee allow for instant response, collaboration and innovation between individuals.  Slee writes "Egypt's rebellion, while of course it is unique, is not a new type of rebellion. There are parallels to other rebellions, including the use of cultural space where the ideas and dreams of a generation could be shared in a semi-public fashion, and the use of new media technology to spread the word to a wider public."  I couldn't disagree more.  The cultural revolution of the 1960’s relied on different outlets of communication in order to make change.  The work young people did in order to achieve their demands was quite different.  Neither way is better of course; both means of communication have been appropriate for the environment the changes were happening in.  Slee also makes an interesting thought by saying, “Forswearing "new and social media" would force us to drop the empty and misleadingly binary talk of "Internet Freedom" and acknowledge the sliding scale of rights and freedoms that govern individual transactions in both the digital and non-digital realms.”  Has the name “social media” become synonymous with “Internet Freedom”?  It’s difficult to say.  I know that in the last 5 years users of social media have felt more and more comfortable with sharing personal information online however I think that’s starting to regress.  The consequences of being so open online have become more serious and relatable.  Most social organizations have policies regarding social media; those not affiliated with a governing body that will guide them to appropriate social media etiquette must either take responsibility for themselves or suffer the repercussions.  I don’t think eliminating the works “new media” and “social media” will have as much impact as Slee believes.

Blog post 9

There were two statements that stood out to me in the reading.  The first (page 7) stated, "In this sense, digital consumers are often no less materialistic than material consumers: the only difference is that their material has become digital."  This idea has actually been a recent issue in my own personal life.  It first came about when I started listening to Macklemore's new album The Heist, specifically the track named, "Wings" which is basically about Macklemore's relationship with a pair of shoes he had when it was a kid.  He talks about how this piece of merchandise held such high value in his life  that it took him years to realize that they were simply just shoes.  When it comes to the digitization of our economy I think we need to be very careful.  It is now normal for money to move back a forth without it ever being tangible; for instance, I receive a paycheck through direct deposit and then use my debit card to purchase something online.  That money has gone from my employer to me to a retail business without ever becoming physical currency (cash).  This can be related to the reading we did earlier in the week that focused on the market, equity and credit.  Since credit nowadays in purely digital, it has become quite easy to spend beyond your means and fall into debt.  Because all of this money is digital (or perhaps conceptual), the sense of losing is diminished.
The other statement that really rang true said, "from a consumer’s point of view, information goods are “experience goods”: that is, their value is derived from experiencing them and absorbing their content."  This also relates back the reading we did earlier this week.  As a class we discussed how information only holds value if there is an audience to put value on it.  It must be experienced in order for it to move from simply data to information that holds value.  Value is given by the audience, not necessarily by the creator.