ezekieltolentinopols341-blog

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

Reflection of : Without a net; The Digital Divide in America

In class we watched: “Without a net; The Digital Divide in America””

When watching this documentary I never realized how lucky I was to have had access to a computer my entire life. It’s just one of things I took for granted. What really hit it home for me was the school district that sends school buses to neighborhoods to give them internet access. I can’t imagine being a teenager without the internet. While discussing digital citizenship in class regarding the video it really opened my eyes as to how being digitally inclined can give people an advantage over others. Even thinking of some processes such as permit applications and appointment making is so much easier online.

Allocation of funds

In the video, I noticed that various school districts gave such a large attention into buying IPads and expensive apple products. I know I am deviating from the main point but I feel that if schools purchased affordable laptops, they could have saved a lot of money and can still teach kids how to use technology. Tablets are far more limited than a laptop plus a laptop is more affordable. Although tablets are more appealing to the youth and students real world applications for being sufficient on a tablet isn’t ideal. However, I am still convinced that the incorporation of technology into classrooms is beneficial to the development of our youth.

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

Societal Implications of Digital Citizenship

Chapter 1 of “Digital Citizenship” defines what it is to be a digital citizen. The notion of being a digital citizen just goes to show how technology has shaped our social structures and daily social interactions. Treating technology and the internet as an economic privilege helped me understand the amount of power that technology possesses. For an individual to have an advantage over someone else due to their access to the internet is a crazy thought but it is very much apparent in our current structures. Not being connected to the internet is a disadvantage in today’s standards compared to how it was two decades ago wherein internet connectivity was treated as a commodity. Now it is treated as a right.

Advantages of being a Digital Citizen

We are currently seeing that even in lower income jobs being digitally inclined is important. Now that more jobs are being automated and digitizing some processes, it is crucial for individuals to be digitally inclined. Being a digital citizen enables mobility for higher paying jobs and job security. The text also highlights that being digitally inclined is important in the “information age”. This is due to the fact that the internet enabled us to obtain information instantaneously and being unable to access this information is a major disadvantage. The inequalities within society go beyond income and assets, it is also defined by the capabilities of those who live in societies.

Digital Disadvantage in American Schools

For years we have always subscribed to the fact that to measure inequality is to compare assets or income of large groups. The text highlights how inequality also exists within a groups potential development. I believe that the fundamental issue of inequality boils down to where an individual begins their developmental process and in the United States that would be school. Currently, there are 11 million students in the United States without the proper tools to access digital learning programs. Most of these schools are in rural areas and for the most part, have inadequate funding to sustain the ever-growing digital curriculum. On the other side of the spectrum well-funded schools, mostly located in the middle class and affluent areas have robust STEM-driven classes complete with extracurricular activities such as robotics and coding. This immense disparity in curriculum is a major disadvantage to students in less funded areas because of the high demand for digital prowess in various industries around the world.

Digital Citizenship highlights what an individual needs to function in digital societies. Now that a new aspect of socialization exists online, we are forced to be digitally inclined. The tricky part of these digital groups and societies is that they can function in “real” world scenarios. We have seen online forums and media outlets used for political action and activism. These movements are very real and its implications should be taken seriously.

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

Self Determination Through Media

Reading: Digital Citizenship THE INTERNET, SOCIETY, AND PARTICIPATION Chapter 4 By Karen Mossberger, Caroline J. Tolbert, and Ramona S. McNeal

Past telecommunication technology did not intrigue a lot of political discussion due to its commercialized nature and the focus of entertainment media. It was complicated to use forms such as radio and cable for political participation due to their one-way channel of communication. However, the age of the internet changes everything. An inexpensive platform wherein both politicians and common folk can have a two-way conversation made the internet an amazing tool to urge citizens to be politically active.

Effectiveness

The texts boil it down to three ways the internet can encourage political participation. First, On page 87 it discusses the importance of deliberative democracy, the information and topics that are provided by media is an integral part of encouraging political discourse. News and media have been easily accessible and is constantly updated on the internet. Social media outlets are a great example of how news corporations can encourage political discourse due to the ability to spontaneously comment on topics. Second, political parties would send emails supporting their own party or discrediting the opposition. The text also stated that emails are statistically associated with voter turnout. The possible reason might be the personal connection an individual has with a candidate. Thirdly, simply being that the cost of circulating political information online is unlike any other media source; the vast amount of users that can obtain information is beyond the scope of other media outlets while being able to instantaneously update information.

My take (Self Determination Theory)

Social media outlets compel users to be active and politically engaged and is often undervalued when looking at the internet. In Psychology, the Self Determination Theory (SDT) is how people are motivated to act due to the external pressure of others around them. Due to the constant social interactions, we are surrounded with, we are motivated to do what others are doing. What better device is there to see what others are doing around you, than Social Media? For the past eight years, the main focus of all social media outlets is politics. To me it is not a coincidence that more social movements and political debate are happening on social media, I mean, everyone is doing it! There is an underlying pressure to know what is currently happening in politics because politics now more than ever have become part of our daily social interactions.

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

Essay Outline

In the last decade we have experienced a divide growing steadily in the United States between different political and social beliefs. In the 2016 presidential election it was more apparent than ever, Americans flooding the streets to protest the president-elect, damaging public property, and even harming those who supported him. This division driven by varying beliefs is one to be taken seriously because it is deeply rooted into our system of government. We this especially reflected within news and media outlets. And what better place is there to see these politically driven protests and political biases besides social media? The problem with social media are the algorithms used by these companies on what will appear on an individual’s news feed. These algorithms are creating social “echo chambers” that focuses the attention of users to information that pertains to them, giving positive reinforcement of their beliefs. The echo chambers are also affected by these large news outlets. Companies such as CNN and Fox are heavily biased form of news. But with people only accommodating one set of beliefs it will eventually lead to turmoil and a divide in our social structures. In the last presidential election we have already seen small violent outbursts across the nation. Some violent protests started through social media, created by hate groups.

To me the regulation of our News corporations is necessary, especially because it is such a large part on how Americans consume their information. For a media platform that broadcasts political information the freedom our News outlets receive is way too biased and unregulated. I think that the way the public handles and consumes their information is also a detrimental thing. A lot of people do not realize the biases that lurk within some media.  

If Americans are more responsible with their information then it would make the political divide of the United States, in a social level be less apparent. Regulations within news corporations are also very important due to the biases and misinformation that are circulating.

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

The Cultural Logics of Trolling Reflection

It is ironic to think that the commodity of social media which was meant to bring people together, developed a subculture of individuals who practice dissociative behaviors. In Chapter 7 of Whitney Phillips, This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture, she discusses how the trolling community started and how it manifests in the internet today. Jokes which are supposed to be light hearted and blithe took on a different manifestation in trolling culture which feeds on the emotional distress of those who are being targeted by the “troll”, the response of the party that is being used for laughs is what fuels the joke (punchline). But some might argue this type of humor is not new, take for example the comedic legend Don Rickles. His shows and monologues are built around making fun of his guests. But the term “troll” is used lightly on the internet, a noun used for someone who messes around with people, not necessarily out to hurt someone's feelings.

Phillips describes trolls as individuals who uses dissociative humor to gather laughs, well and fine, that is true statement but to paint the whole subculture of “trolls” as people to have a fetish for “lulz” with malicious intent is kind of tough for me to understand. Using such polarizing examples of trolling such as the creation of 9/11 memes and the attacks on mourning families isn’t an accurate depiction of “trolling” I think it is somewhat of an extreme statement to write off trolling as abusive and malicious behavior.

Similar to Don Rickles’ humor of ridiculing others, I think there is space for trolling in the internet. I know with the animosity of the internet is what makes it hard for trolling to exist and that is where trolling is most dangerous. Due to the lack on contextual evidence trolls have, they can’t measure the targeted recipients reaction. This is where Don Rickles and internet trolls differ the most. In an interview Rickles stated that he always took the person's reaction into consideration, if he goes too far with his jokes, he apologizes or stops immediately. The delivery of Rickles’ jokes is also what makes his way of trolling different. He’s witty and goofy, he keeps it light hearted due to his personality. Personality doesn’t really carry through when read online. There is place for trolling culture online but only when both parties are aware of it. For example the subreddit: “r/roastme” are of people uploading photos of themselves to get ridiculed and made fun of by strangers online. This is similar to a Don Rickles act because both parties know what environment they are in.

[ezekieltolentinopols341-blog]

The People’s Platform

As I read the second chapter of Astra Taylor’s, The People’s Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, I was greeted with a different perspective of what the internet could be, and the people who work within its boundaries. She describes the internet being an open space where websites can operate within a community of amatuer coders that constantly update, upkeep, and regulate these said websites. She paints these coders as artists where the incentive of maintaining the “internet” is for the preservation of a free, unmonetized system. Sadly, the internet is a market-based system, similar to older media outlets such as radio and cable, in which it promotes a unilateral economic gain for companies that have gained a foothold due to the timing of their creation.

The capitalistic model in which the internet operates is not a new one, every new public commodity or technological advancement in history, is quickly devoured by a type of capitalistic model, whether done on purpose from the get-go or it morphed into one. Large corporations such as Google, Youtube, and Facebook, in my opinion was not created to make billions of dollars. They were simply projects created by artists to share with the world. However, the amatuer creators of these large companies seeked investors to further the reach their websites and expand their visions. To me, wanting your project to expand by seeking monetary support is not wrong, anyone would do that if it means that the work I have done will finally give me the means to make money. But when the privacy and private information of the public is abused as a tool to fuel the economic growth of large corporations...then it isn’t so nice.

The biggest difference of social media and other media outlets such as cable or radio is the intimacy to private information that social media garners. Websites gather multitudes of information from your credit card number to what your favorite Shakira album is. For the amount of individualized information to fall in the hands of unregulated private companies rest assured, some of those information will be exploited to benefit those who are in power and those who are rich.

With the internet proving to be a pretty damn lucrative environment to me it is almost impossible for the public to switch to different model. The protection of our privacy and the alteration of the internet’s environment falls in the hands of both amateurs, to keep on creating and not succumb to the temptation to ball out, and the professionals to shift the status-quo and keep the public’s best interest in mind...you know when they decide to sell our search history to amazon, so we can finally buy that vacuum cleaner we were researching about.