therealcarsontravis-blog

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

“Why are Koreans so devoutly Christian, more so than any other Asian culture?”

For 16 weeks, we’ve discussed the dependent and influential relationship between media and politics. We’ve discussed rising trends in the digital age, analyzed the integration of social media into modern elections, and expanded upon concepts of data collection and its ability to manipulate the masses into consuming pieces of propaganda or falling victim to trolling behavior. However, during this entire class, the one variable we’ve yet to cover has been the role of religion in this new digital-political age – until now. While it’s no secret that today, the number of Americans who self-identify as non-religious are at an all time high, that doesn’t necessarily mean that spirituality, sense of community, and the public services traditionally provided by churches are any less prevalent today. Nevertheless, for the communities who still actively engage in religious practices to this day, to what can we attribute to their unwavering commitment to their faith?

           In this weeks reading Digital Christianity in Korea, author Sam Han addresses the prevalence of Christianity and the role it plays in the daily lives of Korean Christians living within South Korea and the United States. The author begins by addressing a question highlighting the pervasiveness of Korean-Americans participation in University affiliated Christian clubs. The question asks “Why are Koreans so devoutly Christian, more so than any other Asian culture?” To explain why there is such a large number of Christian Korean-Americans, Han first explains that as Korean immigrants came to America, Korean churches quickly became community centers that provided basic services for Koreans immigrants new to America. Because these churches became community cornerstones in Korean-American culture, Koreans who were both Christian and non-Christian had to be involved in a church, enabling Koreans who were devout Christians with a distinct social advantage.

           Now that we understand this somewhat dependent relationship between early Korean immigrants and churches, Han introduces us to a term referred to as elective affinity.  In 1934, German sociologist Max Webber published The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, proposing that elective affinity is a process through which two cultural forms – political religious, intellectual, or economical – who have certain analogies and intimate affiliations engage in a reciprocal relationship of attraction and influence, mutual selection, and mutual reinforcement (Weber, Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions). Basically, because these churches offered essential services to Korean immigrants, Korean-American culture was formed around the church—creating a reciprocal relationship for Koreans who participated in their church by offering social/economic benefits of being apart of a certain group. Therefore, I believe we can attribute the participation of Korean-American’s in modern Christianity to the early public services and social structures built around churches in Korean communities.

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

How do we deliver Information in a world saturated with Information?

Technology has always made us better. Not always smarter— but better. Fire kept us warm and cooked our food, the wheel enabled us to travel over long distances, and language allowed us to communicate and cooperate with one another. Today, our technologies are obviously more advanced—but does this necessarily mean that we are getting more advanced as well? Given our ability to access and share information at speeds previously unimaginable by humans, you would think humans living in the digital age would be more efficient in their everyday life and more aware of current events than any other group of people in human history. However, I propose that there is a limit to our understanding of the world—and that humans can only process a fixed amount of information before we become apathetic to the content we are consuming.

In chapter 8 of Information Overload: How Increased Information Flows Affect the Work of the Human Rights Movement, authors Sottas and Schonveld analyze how human rights organizations have addressed the challenges of distributing information in the digital age through the eyes of the World Organization Against Terror (OMCT). Modern technologies such as the computer and the internet, along with other communications technologies, have forever changed the way we as humans function in our day-to-day lives: from making the global-economy more efficient, connected and dependent on one another, to empowering world-leaders to more effectively communicate with their people and other sovereign entities, the manner in which we receive, consume and provide information seems to have radically changed overnight—giving rise to both great advances and newfound challenges in the age of information. While its true we have unlimited access to incredibly accurate and up-to-date information, this constant stream of news and communication has caused a phenomenon called “information overload”—making the distribution of news significantly more difficult for Human-rights advocates and organizations.

Sottas and Schonveld explain that the fundamental issue in dispersing information from the perspective of a human’s rights organization such as OMCT stems from basic economics—as the cost of distributing information drastically decreased, such entities were quickly enabled with the ability to disseminate information on extraordinarily large scales, which naturally caused a dramatic increase in the supply of human rights information.  However, because there is no commensurate change in the demand for such news, a “tidal wave” of human-rights information has been produced that will have little effect on a majority of the public, because as the supply of a good goes up without a proportionate change in demand, the value of the good will plummet. This can be largely attributed to the fact that while computers have an unlimited capacity to produce and multiply information, the human capacity to process/add meaning to this information is unfortunately finite—meaning there is only so much information we as humans can absorb before concepts or material become meaningless.

So what does this mean for human’s rights organizations and other NGO’s who rely on grassroots-organizing and frequent news dissemination to achieve their objectives? How can they effectively distribute their information without getting lost by the wayside? Sottas and Schonveld propose that by focusing on quality over quantity of information, following-up with members of their organization regarding news updates specific to their interests and highlighting the sources of new information, human right’s NGO’s such as the OMCT can successfully articulate and deliver their message to a wide-range of human rights activists in the digital world.

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

If Fox News isn’t gone by the time I’m dead, we’re all doomed.

During week 14, our discussions centered around the idea of “digital citizenry”. Ideas were posed to us such as “what does online civic engagement look like?” and “what does it mean to be a digital citizen?” Ultimately, we came to the conclusion that while there’s no tangible definition of what it means to be a digital citizen, we could all agree that there is a difference between being a citizen in the real world and being a citizen in the digital world—most notably in how people interact with one another online vs. in real life. Our professor ultimately led us to the conclusion that internet itself needs a constitution to outline the general rules each person must abide by when using the internet. While I certainly agree that an internet constitution in necessary in a digital future, how could we ever establish such a document so long as the internet remains a commercialized service in the hands of private companies?

           In Digital Citizenship, author Karen Mosberg analyzes the relationship between technology, participation and communication, and uses theories of political communication, particularly those pertaining to the influence of the media on public participation, to consider how the Internet could influence political participation. Since the advent of the internet and its integration into the electoral process, scholars and political pundits have been skeptical of how this unprecedented technology would affect the democratic process. While many people choose to remain optimistic and believe the internet will facilitate a “more democratic system” by empowering each person with their own online presence and access to up-to-date information, Mossberger proposes that because we treat new communication systems as commercial enterprises opposed to entities that are not for profit and publicly subsidized, private companies can harness these new communication technologies to persuade public opinion specific to a specific political agenda. For example, media conglomerates such as CNN and FOX utilize all forms of social networking, various email blasts, and 24/7 news coverage (available both online and on TV) to put a particular “spin” on current events that appeals to and mobilizes their respective political parties. Because of our 1st amendment right to free speech, which extends to these corporations, such entities operate with little to no oversight from the government on the reporting’s, finding and discussions endorsed by their network.

           However, if the internet and other communication networks operated as a public utility offered to the public by the government, and additionally news networks were publicly subsidized and held to a high journalistic standard, the way in which we consume and participate politically may alter drastically. I propose a more regulated “free press” that prevented the dissemination of “Fake News” that causes, divisive, nasty and partisan politics would lead to a change in how members of opposing political parties engage with one another. If the news we consumed on a daily basis was fact checked by an independent, bipartisan federal entity that was was unbiased of political partisanship and “money politics”, the arguments, discussion and discourse from members of opposing political parties in everyday deliberations would be much more neutral and open to change, as their respective political beliefs would not be reaffirmed in the eco-chambers of news networks and forums partial to one political party. Essentially, to promote a healthier and more inclusive political environment and engage more voters in the democratic process, the Internet would have to transition into a public utility facilitated by the Federal government, accompanied with legislation establishing an independent news regulatory agency, and the foundation of an internet constitution.

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

Will Netflix be the end of the silver screen?

In Chapter Two of Astra Taylor’s “The People Platform”, the author details the relationship between productivity and the advent of modern-age technology. In many cases, the invention of the personal computer marks a new era of exponential economic growth, increased manufacturing efficiency, and the introduction of a neoliberal free market. In this regard, the term efficiency evolves into a term which “promotes markets and competition over the public sphere, and profitability above all.” Moreover, while many businesses and corporations have experienced their respective organizations make incredible strides on the backs of new technology, the process of production in industries that produce or use art, music, media or culture remains relatively the same. While there is no denying that the arts have benefited from the advent of new technology, the arts simply do not benefit from technological advancements in comparison to other industries. Taylor proposes that the process an artist goes through to to write a novel, conduct an orchestra or produce a play today has remained largely the same as it was 50 years ago—the only difference being the amount of capital available to invest in new-age media, the quality of production has elevated, and the increased efficiency of distributing these various forms of media. However, with these new advancements also come new costs— increasing the general cost of production for any piece of media. Alarmed by their observations, economists William Baumol and William Bowen, made the argument that increased economic growth generates a “cost disease”, and in the case of labor-intensive creative productions, the cost of facilitating these productions is disproportionately increasing in comparison to other manufactured goods.

My question is, what does this mean for the future of America’s media empires? As consumers begin to favors low cost digital streaming services (such as Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime) instead of buying or renting traditional DVD’s, and with the general cost of producing such pieces of media, I wonder what conventional film companies will do to compete in a market of consumers that prefers to wait until films are available on streaming services instead of opting to purchase them from online distributors or from electronic stores. As we’ve seen, media conglomerates are beginning to merge together in an attempt to consolidate their collective resources to combat the increasing cost and demand of high-quality media. I propose that this practice is ultimately unsustainable, and just as any other kind of good or service, if we do not monetarily support those who produce these pieces of media, they will simply not be able to continue to do so. The payouts these companies receive from the royalties on streaming sites such as Netflix will simply not be lucrative enough to finance their day to day operations. What concerns me is that alternative sources of revenue may be sought after to help bridge the gap between the cost of production and increased demand—such as governments, special interest groups or multinational corporations. Because the media American’s consume is so widespread, influential, and powerful, I suggest that we as consumers directly support the media organizations we love and know in order to retain the creative freedom and expression that only comes with strong financial backing.

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

Research Outline: TOTUS - Troll of the United States

[therealcarsontravis-blog]

What we choose to support is what will ultimately survive.