monkeys in a barrel

Tea Party and Wall St Protests: Inherently Opposite

2011-10-08T15:05:00.005-04:00

I, like the rest of the country now, am still absorbed in the coverage of the Occupy Wall St protest. As you may remember this event caught my attention from the very beginning and I was disappointed in the little coverage it received. But now even with the media circus going on, I am still unhappy. There is undeniably a lot of coverage in the media but the analysis is so basic to me. "Basic" is honestly the best word that I could come up with without insulting the many journalists who I know are now rigorously playing catch up in reporting this event. But honestly, all these comparisons with the Tea Party are simplistic at best. The Tea Party is a wing of the Republican Party; it always has been. While they have been portrayed as the angry renegade group, the Tea Party has never suggested a structural change of the our current political system. NEVER. What they have done is demand a return and a reinvigoration of the most conservative and parochial ideas this country has ever seen. They are reformists at best.

This is NOT the same as the Occupy Wall St. These people are not reformists. At least not from what I can tell. The change they ask for, the demand for more participation is in its very essence revolutionary. It is at its roots a denouncement of capitalism. And these days people seem to be equating being American with being Capitalist, a statement I will always strongly disagree with. The Occupation protests all over the country are spotlighting structural problems with our economic system and though they may not have the language to explain it yet, they want structural solutions. Naturally this is a strange idea to most people and unfortunately the media seems to be confused as to how to respond to it. But I don't blame them. This is a new idea at its core. One that is rarely given credence in the public.

Angered Journalist Speaks Up: Police Brutality on Wall Street

2011-09-28T16:15:00.001-04:00

Men Set the Pace, But Women Draw the Race

2011-09-06T01:06:00.009-04:00

The most intriguing sentence of the Belkin article to me was, "It might as well have been the 1950s, but with skimpier clothing, fewer inhibitions and better birth control. " In that one line there was both a brilliant observation, but also a dangerous assumption. While she seemed to ask "Are women any more equal in or outside of the classroom today than they were in the 1950s?" I was more interested in asking, "Who determines what 'progress' is within the women's movement for equality?" Is the way a women dresses to a college party an indicator of how far all women have come in the fight to be taken seriously. On the one hand, Belkin observed that her female students were at the top of the class and that they competed on par if not better than their male counterparts. But somehow once they stepped into the social realm of college life, their roles regressed and women somehow no longer could think for themselves.

While I thought the actions of the Duke fraternity students were despicable, I don't judge the women who showed up either. I cant speak for all women, but I can say that for my friends and I it's important to us to be dressed in a way that allows us to be both comfortable and confident when we go out. And many times that means being "sexy" (and we all have different definitions of what that means). But at the same time I think that we are all smart, driven and socially critical young women. And that DOESN'T change if we wear a skimpy dress to a party. We all know very well what men's intentions are when we are invited to a party. But we also know full well how we expect to be treated and what we will allow and what we wont. As Belkin says "men may set the pace", but women determine the direction and the course of the race. Feel free to challenge me but as young women we are subject to many social pressures, but part of becoming an adult is learning to know what you will and wont stand for. Belkin may just be observing women and men at that critical stage. Then the question becomes how do those same pattens of social behavior change once we enter the "real world"? Do they just disapper? I doubt it. But Ill let you know this same time next year.

Refections on Times Square Bombing

2010-05-02T21:33:00.014-04:00

Saturday nights' attempted terrorist attack in New York's Times Sqaure, brought me right back to the day of 9-11. Once again my home is front and center of the discussion about national security, terrorism and possible connections to Islamic radicalism. Could it be that almost ten years later, New York could be no safer than before. I guess the fact that it was an "attempted" attack should count for something, but with last Christmas' attack also looming in my mind, I feel like this is just a game of Russian roulette. And New York has no choice but to play. All politics aside, my reaction comes down to a very unavoidable fear. Unavoidable not in the sense that its innate, but in the sense that no one is offering me an alternative way to feel. Pundits have no answers, neither do law enforcement or politicians. The fact is that either you feel fear and push incidents like this so far in the back of your mind, that you can continue to think about the "normal" things. But its a catch 22, because people say that if you feel fear, then you let "them" win. But if you dont feel fear than you've missed the point and there's nothing to worry about.

What my fear tells me is that there is a threat in the world that is out of my control to stop or to solve. So what is there to do? New York is my home and it is to millions of others as well. So how am I to feel? I go home in a couple of weeks by a bus that drops me off directly in the middle of Times Square. Normally I hang around to enjoy the noise and the smells. This time I think I'll just hurry home.

Why I Am Passionate about the AIDS Fight

2010-04-28T01:32:00.004-04:00

I know that this video is probably from before the election, but I just thought it was important to post in light of South Africa's recent efforts to fight against the AIDS epidemic. I have been thinking about the AIDS fight in general recently. Every year I do the New York AIDS walk, not because I think that raising my little $2oo dollars will make any real difference but for purely selfish reasons. I need to be reminded that this is something that affects every community, not just LGBT or African people. And I also need to feel empowered that I can do something about it. Seeing all those people walking with so much energy and resolve is inspiring. I wish I could articulate why I feel so passionate about this issue. No one close to me has been affected by AIDS, but how often is there a negative force in the world that affects so many people, yet is completely preventable and treatable. Its not cancer. We can stop it. Its not some genetic disease. We can do something about this.

A Double Feature: Jessica Simpson in Morroco

2010-04-18T22:18:00.003-04:00

Jessica Simpson's has a new reality show where she goes to different countries and tries to understand what their definition of beauty is. I saw this episode and thought it symbolized so much. There are so many assumptions behind the very idea of a show like this. Who is to say that you can ever understand another culture? They are not static things with unchanging definitions. How do you define an Indian type of beauty versus an American one, when both dont technically exist, when people would contest with either definition. And Simpson's attempt at cultural sensitivity and immersion is recognized for what it by the woman in this video. It's a shallow attempt at understanding in order to reinforce your own "correctness" (for lack of a better word). What do you think? Do you see something else happening in this video? I'm only interested in the first two minutes of it. But maybe you see more.

This Week's Video: Islam's "The View"

2010-04-18T22:05:00.002-04:00

Check this out. Barbara Walters' "The View" has an Arabic counterpart on MBC. I came across this PBS video featuring four Islamic women who talk about all kinds of issues from an Arabic/Middle Easter prospective. They represent different nationalities, ages and ethnicities and they talk about tough issues such as homosexuality and women's rights.

It made me think about how Americans talk about the Islamic world as if it's so static, as if nothing will ever change. But so much has changed already and will continue to even as we debate about it. And even as I am writing this blog, I become more aware of my own stereotypes about Islam especially as it pertains to women. You learn a lot just listening to people talk about themselves. I wonder what these women would think if they watched the American "The View."

WIDE ANGLE | Dishing Democracy | Excerpt | PBS
Uploaded by pbs_usa. - News videos from around the world.

Creativity Needed in Immigration Debate

2010-04-14T07:40:00.004-04:00

This was in the Huffington Post today. Originally reported by the LA Times, it talks about the new immigration law that just passed in Arizona, allowing cops to check anyone's immigration status if there's "reasonable suspicion." The ACLU is outraged calling it a warrant for racial profiling while supporters of the bill (mostly Republicans) argue that "Illegal immigration brings crime, kidnapping, drugs and drains our government services." I must say that I hate bills like this. Not only are they slippery slopes for all kinds of civil rights violations, but they are just not creative. Legislators keeps trying to use the same approach for an old issue. The reality is that this kind of aggressive, warrantless lawmaking doesn't accomplish anything. It doesn't deter illegal immigration, it doesn't decrease crime and it certainly doesn't foster community support. What is "reasonable suspicion" when it comes to determining if someone is an illegal immigrant? What does an illegal alien look like? In Arizona, I imagine that they look similar to a Mexican American? Or are illegal Canadian immigrants just as much of a threat? Let's not make the mistake of not seeing the subtext of this law. Law makers are desperate. They dont know what to do anymore when it comes to this issue. Arizona is a central point for crossing the border illegally into this country and it is a legitimate interest for the State to figure out what to do. But this is just stupid and lacking in any type of creative analysis of the real problem.

Wikileaks VIdeo Is Disheartening.

2010-04-12T10:30:00.007-04:00

So I promised that I would follow Youtube for this semester. So this week's feature is of course the Collateral Murder Wikileaks video (below). At first I didn't fully understand the implications of this video and I'm not sure even now that I do. But I feel as if this video may be showing us what the true cost of war is. We civilians don't see it too often, but this is the answer. To ask someone, man or women, to kill someone else on command, is an inherently dehumanizing act, one that I can only imagine is deadening to one's soul. This is the only possible reason I can imagine for the horror and plain cruelty shown in the Wikileaks video. Where is there to go from here if this is the result of war? What noble prize is at the end of this treacherous path? I think about Obama's acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Award ceremony. He basically said that violence in some situations has to be used in order to achieve better ends. But I dont think I believe that anymore. I dont see what good can come from this. I dont see where such dreadful means lead to bountiful ends. I dont have the answer, but I feel further away from it than I did before seeing this.

By the way, in the past week this video reached #6 on the top viral video chart with over 6 million views.

Drag Show Comes to Trinity!

2010-04-06T22:33:00.005-04:00

Two of my best friends are planning a drag show to be held at Vernon Social Center next Friday, April 16. Day by day, I see them working out the details and honestly I have never been more exited about any event on campus. It is EROS' biggest event of the year and for once, Trinity will get to see the Hartford that I get to see every weekend. Few students realize how large of a gay community there is in Hartford and the club scene is full of fun times placing one dollar bills in the "hands" of beautiful drag queens. But seriously, this event is about more than just divas doing their best Gaga impression (although that will be part of the night as well). Its about bringing the community together in support of a group that too often feels unwelcome and unsupported. This night is about awareness, inclusiveness and singing Bad romance at the top of your lungs.

So come out and support EROS! And dont forget your 1 dollar bills. The theme is Divas/Ladies Night. Beyonce doesnt stand a chance. ; )

Africa, Abortion and the Globalizing of Ideas

2010-03-28T21:10:00.005-04:00

So I decided to trash the idea about posting all of the free writes from my trip to Miami with Habitat. Even I dont care about what I did on Wednesday at 3pm. I learned a lot and it was a rewarding experience. The END.

But I was reading All Africa as I do every week, when I came across this opinions piece on abortion. It is a pretty liberal view about Kenyans not mixing the issues of abortion with the issues of religion. It was surprising to me because I have this idea of Africa (with the exception of a few countries)as being stuck in this conservative state where religion, politics and ethincity are so closely intertwined that ideas such as the ones stated in this article are chocked out. But I was wrong and pleasantly surprised. Whether or not you agree with the author, the fact that this discourse is happening is a sign of global progress. These ideas about life-saving abortions are ones that orginated somewhere else and yet are influencing poltics in countries once dismissed as being archaic. Hence when we talk about globalization, lets not just talk about commodities and corporations. Lets talk globalization and activism as well.

Day One. Religion and Community Service

2010-03-28T12:51:00.006-04:00

Okay so its not actually day one. But it was our first day on the construction site. Yesterday was a day of tanning and frivolous fun at Miami's tourist-filled South Beach. But today, we got to see the beginnings of a little community, thirty or so single family homes all lined up, painted in soft pastel colors with gray roofs. It was so cute, but far from complete. To think this is how communities are built. There is no magic "suburb" machine that just spits them out. They are built, brick by brick, hand over hand.

Another surprising note! I didnt know that Habitat was a christian based organization and I didnt realize how international it is. I suppose it doesnt matter that it has a big religious following but something about it made think. Like today, when a pastor gave the daily devotional by reading a few words from the Bible and one of the groups from another school walked away before he had a chance to even ask us to bow our heads. I assumed they were jewish since the older man they were with wore a yomaka. I realized then that religion can be just as alienating as it can be uniting. But at the same time, I felt that it was rude of them to walk away during the pastor's speech. He was speaking to a group of over 100 volunteers, all united by a common cause and a call to labor for the betterment of the community. Maybe that should be more important than religious affiliation. And yet, I still wondered how religion and community service intersect. What would one be without the other? Habitat has been around for over 50 years and is an international force among the NGOs of its kind. But what would it look like if it didn't have that christian foundation?

I'm BACK from Miami with Habitat!

2010-03-28T12:41:00.003-04:00

So for Spring Break, I decided to go with Habitat for Humanity to Miami. While I had an amazing time, the place where we stayed was way below par to say the least and needless to say I didn't have internet access so I couldnt blog. But as english297 suggested, I did do some free writing over break and was surprised by how my own reflections on each day spiraled into so many other topics. So I will post my ruminations, if only to share with the public sphere the journal of my "alternative spring break." Also I hope it will serve as a kind of therapy. I never thought that helping to build a house for someone else would be so rewarding. I was with my friends. I was working with my hands and learning in way that college students rarely get a chance to. I loved it and hopefully rereading my thoughts will inspire me to write our next opinions essay.

Sanchez, Poetry and Power

2010-03-17T13:20:00.006-04:00

Okay so I never got to talk about my dinner with the AMAZING poet Sonia Sanchez. First, I must say that it was an honor and second, wow, she is so small in person:)But anyway the reading was amazing. I have been to poetry readings before, but Sonia Sanchez brings a whole different kind of energy when she reads.

Sometimes I think about how poetry has changed. In New York, Spoken Word is the newest thing among youth and its so powerfully performed that slams are attended by people from all walks of life. I fell in love with it when I was eleven watching Russel Simmon's Def Poetry on HBO. Artist like Sanchez inspired a whole generation of young poets, like myself, and activism is alive and well in their work. I'm so amazed by this thing called poetry and how it passes along certain traditions especially among urban youth. Where is their place in the public sphere? Where do they have power and access? And is the world willing to listen?

Mckee Misses Mark

2010-03-17T12:52:00.005-04:00

I'm not sure what Mckee is arguing in his chapter entitled, "Spectacle." It seems like such an obvious argument that cultural difference should be accepted and visible in the public sphere. And last time I checked, they already were. At least in America, rap is no longer just a Black art form. Sure, predominantly Black people are the main rap artists, but the music is enjoyed by all races and ethnicities (and should I mention all parts of the globe). So who is Mckee arguing against?

His second point about rap being a form of political communication is a little outdated. Sure rap may have originally been a political medium, but anyone can see that it has evolved since then. Some types of rap have no political content and unfortunately that is what tends to be most popular in the public sphere today (just in America though). But Mckee seems to confuse art/music with serious discussion and communication. Its unfair to assume based on a historical context that Blacks prefers oral and performative traditions when it comes to talking rationally. Its music! It was never meant to be taken for true discourse. Its a form of expression. So why are we even justifying labeling it as spectacle.

Commercialization...Not Quite Buying It

2010-03-10T12:14:00.004-05:00

This is a strange book. At first glance, the idea of commercialization is interesting. But the concept is so statist. There's too much of a top-down model analysis as if people have no say as to how they are portrayed, as if they have no choice in what they watch. Mass Media is not some omniscient untouchable thing. We created it and we define to some extent what it is and what it portrays. Now I do believe that there are people in more of a position to influence what we consume,but like so many institutions, media is hierarchal and that is where the problem is most apparent. If everyone can consume it but not everyone can produce it, then those at the bottom are portrayed through the lens of those at the top. And so the stereotypes of the working class and other cultural groups are reproduced.

ConnPIRG is Awesome!

2010-03-06T22:10:00.005-05:00

I just wanted to give a shout out to ConnPIRG. I just saw a report on the news about how students from Connecticut College are doing a really creative advocacy campaign to support the bill for High Speed Rail. Five students are biking from train station to station and reporting their travels via Facebook and Twitter. How cool is it that college students are out there proving that we still have the political voice and activist mindset of our mother's generation. I just thought it was something cool and positive to report.

Reflections of Mckee: Introduction

2010-03-03T07:55:00.001-05:00

I tend to agree with Gromm. The issue of fragmentation that Mckee mentions was the most interesting point for me as well. It reminded me a lot of the issues concerning gay rights and the way it is being compared to the African American Civil Rights Movement. There has always been some tension between the two groups over the comparison. One group feeling like the comparison is legitimate and should be a uniting force and the other group feeling the need to distance themselves as much as possible from it. It is interesting which commonalities get pushed to the forefront. I mean which identities people prefer to cling to and which ones get dismissed as being irrelevant or superficial.

Mckee also makes a point of saying that this book is written in a "postmodernist" analytical framework. From my Mass Media and Pop Culture class, I am well aware of the idea, and I thought I liked it until Mckee used it to make the claim that negative words could be "reclaimed." He states that he purposefully uses historically derogatory terms in order to redefine them in a more positive light using the postmodernist prospective. I find this problematic and dangerous. I hope he explains more later. But as of now, I don't buy the claim that the connotation of words can simply be transformed by misuse. I recognize that words are simply signifiers. They only have as much meaning as we give them. But I worry about who is in the driver's seat. Like Marx and Gramsci, I worry that it will always be the people in a position of dominace that will have the power of "reclaiming," or "redefining" these words. Even when Blacks use the term "nigg**" or Gays use the term, queer, the word never truly loses its original meaning. I dont think it ever becomes a positive term. It just takes on a different cultural attitude, one that helps the group deal with the trauma of what the word originally meant.

Is Politics Broken?

2010-02-16T22:04:00.001-05:00

It's a fair question, and CNN took it on tonight. Republicans and Democrats have come to a stalemate on so many issues that even politicians are beginning to question the very structure of America's main legislative body. Bill Maher thinks that our system is broken. Indiana Senator Bayh stated simply, "the people's business is not getting done," and the media flocked to his statement like geese.

But he just said what we already know: partisanship has halted all attempts at compromise and actual reform in Washington. Why do we praise politicians for stating the obvious?

But as for the main question of this blog, does this period in American politics indicate the need for a fundamental change in the way that legislation gets passed? I dont think so. The problem isnt the system. It's the parties and the inevitable consequence of groupthink. The alliance of similar views seems to lead to a paradox where even those who agree are divided by refusal to compromise over relatively minute details. So the bigger question is who needs to bear the brunt of failure in this stalemate, the system or the individual. I choose to go with the variable that been in place for over 200 years.

We Are The World 25 For Haiti Video

2010-02-14T21:24:00.000-05:00

Conincidently, I was checking the top viral videos for this week and the We Are The World 25 For Haiti Video was number 1 with 1,402,365 views and 1,959 blog posts. WHEWWW! Sak Pase!

"What ifs" - Thoughts on Haiti Relief

2010-02-14T20:34:00.000-05:00

I was reading a NY Times article about how the education system in Haiti has been completely devastated due to last month's earthquake. I was glad to see the Times covering a really specific long-term effect of the quake. While most of the U.S. is aware of the international effort to help with the day-to-day needs of Haitians, few realize the long-term consequences of such a disaster. If we consider that higher education is really one of the only ways to achieve any kind of mobility in Haiti, then as a result of the quake an entire generation of aspiring students have another huge obstacle in escaping poverty. It is unfathomable.

But then I started thinking about the "what ifs." What if colleges all around the world could step forward and help with the one thing they know best? What if the rebuilding of Haiti's education system was the priority instead of something to be left by the wayside. What if schools like Trinity, Wesleyan, and Yale (and colleges of equal caliber in other countries) created education programs in Haiti for both its students and for Haitians? Wouldn't that be an amazing way to aid Haiti's recovery. There have been nationwide relief efforts done by college students including Trinity already. But what I have in mind is not just about raising money. I want a long term plan that is not just about recovery, but about the progress of a nation. So that the next time disaster strikes, the government may have more of the means necessary to help its people. But these are just the ramblings of an international studies student too idealistic for her own good.

Sunday Pundits Bore Me

2010-02-07T14:38:00.000-05:00

I just finished watching all the Sunday morning pundit shows or as I call them, The Sunday Funnies. You all know their names: This Week, The Chris Matthews Show, Meet the Press...blah, blah, blah. I keep hearing the same names, the same talk, the same advice to the Commander-In Chief. Either it's becoming redundant or I am just tired of listening. Maybe they are right. Maybe even politically conscientious people are just tired of listening, but not just to Obama. But to the news people too. I certainly feel a little impatient. Most days all I can stomach is Jon Stewart. How sad is that.

Trinity: The Iron Bubble

2010-02-05T07:50:00.000-05:00

Recently, I have been thinking about the iron bubble we all live in also known as Trinity College. It is really starting to upset me how students seem to alienate themselves from the Hartford community. Whenever people talk about going to the store or needing to travel off campus, I always sense this weird apprehension as if there is some boogy monster waiting to steal their teddy. It's like they separate Trinity in their mind from Hartford and move it into a world of "otherness." It's insane. Trinity is a part of Hartford and we cant keep avoiding it or worse, fearing it. We spend a ridiculous amount of money on tuition to live in a city for four years and yet so many people seem to want nothing to do with it. Being from New York, I guess I am missing some crucial detail in my understanding. But even students at NYU and Columbia dont shy away from exploring the City just because there's crime, or because it's a new environment. In summary, I am a little disappointed I guess. The Admission department has tricked yet another student into believing its biggest lie: "Trinity has great community relations"....HA!

GOT IT!....Maybe

2010-02-01T16:50:00.000-05:00

My previous post got me thinking about Youtube. The "Hitler Responds to Ipad Video" got over 2 millions views and has been posted on hundreds of blogs. This has some interesting implications for the online community and the public sphere at large. I have so many ideas and it's completely painless to blog about them. Perhaps I will follow Youtube for class. Maybe I will just check out what the top videos are each week or each day (viral videos) and analyze them. See where that leads me. What do you all think?

Hilarious Video! Enjoy.

2010-02-01T16:35:00.001-05:00

Hitler Responds to the IPad - Watch more funny videos here

I found this hilarious spoof about the Ipad and it reminded me of Dr. Bronner's post a couple of days ago.

Cindy McCain, not quite what I was expecting

2010-01-31T12:59:00.000-05:00

I must admit that I didnt think an interview with Cindy McCain would interest me much. I mean during the campaign she just wasn't at the forefront as much as Michelle Obama was. I am sure part of that was due to the media hype surrounding the Obamas at the time. Nevertheless, I must say with details of a multi-million dollar liquor empire, a past addiction to pain killers, a spontaneous adoption in Bangkok and the portrait of the strong, enduring yet caring homemaker--I was sold.

As sternly as I opposed the McCains during the election, this interview didn't necessarily trigger the polarizing feelings usually accompanied with writings about political figures. How did Levy manage such a thing? I wonder if it was the intermingling of intriguing anecdotes and the pieces of the past that nicely strung together to give the reader a more human portrait of Cindy. But parts of this interview confused me. There were times when I honestly couldn't tell whose side Levy was on. Parts of the interview seemed like an attack or perhaps just took on a more condescending tone that disrupted any kind of sympathy that I begun to feel for the typically stoic-looking woman.

But anyway, for my interview I might consider weaving the background/biographical stuff throughout the piece. I liked the way Levy introduced the background information in places that were the most relevant to the present. It was obvious that she was trying to show a different side of Cindy McCain or at least explain the public's common impression of her. I am just not sure it was always successful.

Day One. Just Thoughts...

2010-01-25T19:07:00.000-05:00

Welcome to the chaos that is my mind (hahahaha). It is a new semester and I'm excited about taking this blog in a whole different direction for this class. New ideas. New Sources. New Angles. Yeah! Okay that's too much excitement, but you got the idea.

So I started posting a few things that peaked my interest recently but I haven't gotten a chance to really think about them. Lately I have been thinking about the global perspective on American issues. Like how the election of President Obama has affected the rest of the world. Or what the world thinks about the American debate over universal health care. Basically, how are our issues being presented and what kind of reactions are out there.

I'm also interested in the whole Palin thing. She's obviously not going away but I just love how Fox and other media outlets have almost legitimized her name. It's crazy. I want to follow her and I'm sure the rest of the country will be as well. It's not like they have a choice. Honestly I see a presidential run in her future and frankly I'm scarred.

But back to the point, I want to follow some more international, non-American based outlets of news. I'm going abroad next year and I think getting a more non-America centrist perspective would enrich my experience. Not to mention, that CNN is really pissing me off these days. But I digress.Lets talk about how the Haiti relief effort is being covered since it's the biggest and saddest headliner as of recent. Or the recent Massachusetts election and what that means for Obama's health care bill. But all that will come in due time I guess. Stay tuned.

A Non-Conclusion

2009-12-14T17:34:00.000-05:00

My conclusion is that there is no conclusion (ha! how pretentious is that for an answer). Seriously, I can't agree or disagree with McLuhan completely and I still can't difinitivly define any of the many outlets that we have examined this semester either. The Internet is so undefinable and yet new media analysts devote so much time to doing just that. Being a part of a generation raised in the tempo of new media, it was really healthy for me to slow down and examine the medium that has determined a lot for me already. But I am not sure what it really changes, knowing all that I know now about the nature of Wikipedia and Google. Do I have any more choice in whether or not I participate? Probably not. If truth and education are suppose to liberate my mind and being in more ways than one, then I must say I feel a little more entrapped.

The Medium is the Message

2009-12-14T17:12:00.000-05:00

Let's talk about this video as the medium.

McLuhan, chapter 25

2009-12-14T16:23:00.000-05:00

McLuhan:

"The electric gives powerful voices to the weak and suffering, and sweeps aside the bureacratic specialism and job descriptions of the mind tied to a manual of instructions. The "human interest" dimension is simply that of immediacy of participation in the experience of others that occurs with instant information" (254).

It is as if McLuhan is talking about how the Internet has transformed the media rather than the telegraph. New Media by nature is about human interests. It is about the reaction rather than the action itself. McLuhan talks about the immediacy of the telegraph and it was perceived by literary sophisticates as distasteful. It reminded me a lot of Murdoch's attitude toward aggregators. It is the attitude of those who feel left behind by a medium they don't understand and would rather not try to understand. The difference between the effect of the Internet and the telegraph, I think, is that the telegraph was a compressional force. It forced different mediums to come together (i.e. The Associated Press example). The Internet, I think, is expansional. It forces companies like Google to expand beyond its original intention, beyond its original specialization. And the nature of the Internet itself (inter connecting networks world-wide) makes it the perfect medium for organizations to stretch beyond itself and link multiple outlets together, which creates sites like Facebook, Twitter, etc and aggregators like CT Report. That, of course, explains a lot about how my generation prefers to communicate. We constantly want to be connected, yet have no idea how to do it with our senses alone.

Aggregators Are Just Not That Good

2009-12-14T12:24:00.000-05:00

I thought a lot about news aggregators when we were discussing possible models for the CT Mirror. It strikes me as odd that so many people use sites like Digg and Memeorandum in the first place. Honestly, Digg is just like the news version of Twitter, pushing only the most popular stories to the forefront and neglecting, consequently, anything more contextually relevant. Memeorandum does a great job of grabbing everything but a crappy job of sorting it based on relevancy or some kind of quality analysis. I still use nytimes.com and Cnn.com. Arguably one might say that I am limiting myself and not getting the whole picture of the news that is out there but whose to say that the Huffington Post is either. As for Mr. Dankosky question: No I wont pay for any of it. I wont pay for the Nytimes or the Huffington Post. There are just to many sources of news out there and none of them are so outstanding and exclusive to warrant me buying a real subscription.

Aggregators are great for traditional newspapers, expanding their readership and becoming their "free paper boys." But as a consumer, personally I would rather go straight to the source. On most days, I am not interested in being linked to the New York Post or the Courant. As for the argument by Murdoch that they don't invest in journalism, I think is just annoying. Don't get mad at The Huffington for doing your dirty work or for saving you money. Aggregating is not the same as plagiarism and while I think they certainly have a role to play, I hope that this is not the future of media. There is already enough of a top-down model to journalism. Aggregators just become another filter that consumers have to get through. Some find it convenient. I just think it's superfluous.

WNPR was talking about new stories as intellectual property. I fear this idea. On the one hand, we all need and want quality journalism, good reporting and well-written stories. But for the most part, the news itself is the gold. Just tell me what happened and dont claim it as some kind of entitlement because you discovered it first. It belongs to the public. Yes, a journalist should be given credit but I have a problem with Murdoch's attitude. He doesnt own the actual news part of a story.

Twitter...may be not like all the rest

2009-11-23T16:31:00.000-05:00

At first I didnt think that Twitter was anything new. I mean the FB status updates do virtually the same things as Tweets. One of the biggest criticism of sites like Facebook and Myspace is that they are one of the most obvious indicators that today's youth are overly self-indulgent and Twitter is no different. I mean honestly who cares about "what's happening," with you at any random moment of the day or what the 411 is every time your mood status just happens to change. Lots of cultural analysts have written about the whole, "everybody wants to be a hyper local celebrity" phenomenon but Twitter is bigger than that I think. Sure, on the surface it indulges the current trend of of Facebook, Myspace and Youtube, which allows people to "broadcast themselves" in a way that doesn't make them seem completely insecure and shallow.

But I think the Osterman Blog has a point, Twitter is about the followers as well as the followed. It is not AS one sided and self-indulgent as Fb, which really doesn't have a way of telling its profilers how many views they receive daily or what their followers to followed ratio is, because that was never the point of FB. ITS ALL ABOUT YOU. I think it is fair to say that Twitter's low retention rate is in part due to the intimidation users' first feel looking at their f:f ratio. Nobody wants to have to work for popularity, acceptance or fame. I mean if you cant even be a celebrity of your on Twitter world than what the hell is the point.

2009-11-16T14:23:00.000-05:00

Social Networking

2009-11-16T13:38:00.000-05:00

So the importance of social networking sites seems to have already been beaten to death. Companies, whether online-based or not, have traditionally used sites like Facebook, Twitter, and iGoogle to: 1)promote upcoming events 2) create a dialogue surrounding their service 3) attract followers of similar services to their own or 4) just keep tabs on what their customers are looking for. For the Connecticut Mirror project, I looked at two challenges: a)Is there a way to use social networking sites even more specifically than the usual way businesses have been and b) how do we get older people or those less inclined to use Fb (i.e Dan) to follow the trend as well.

I think the point is to use those sites as a way to compensate for what the Connecticut Mirror site would probably inherently lack. For example, it would not be able to post infomation as quickly as Twitter. But the advantages of "microblogging" for a start-up news aggregator are just too good to overlook. With each post, you give the reader five more links to look at. For sites like the Ct Mirror, it is not about how much original content you provide but how easily you can provide people with the information they want (just like the Google model).

Further sites like FB are generally better at organizing reader's comments. If a company does a good job at continually posting on its FB page, it can provide all of the conveniences of microblogging, linking to more expansive articles, and providing a space for discussions. In the meantime, the main site will provide links to not only the main social sites but also to apps for smartphones (i.e. Blackberry and iphone).

Just Thoughts...

2009-11-10T20:19:00.000-05:00

So I struggled to define exactly what this new online news service is . So far I got--it's a non-profit, local/hyperlocal, online news provider/aggregator. If that is not complicated enough, my group talked about using social networking sites, embedding video and podcasts, allowing for some citizen journalists and possibly crowd-sourcing by allowing comments on articles.

I am particulary interested more in the social networking stuff. Meaning how do we use sites like Fb, Twitter, Myspace, etc. to not only attract web news surfers but also retain a loyal user base. Should we follow the business model that other online start-ups are using or should a news site like this be more traditional with its approach and allow the content to attract people on its own.

This week I will be looking at how other local/hyperlocal news siteshave incorporated video, how they have appealed to their users through social networking sites and what the "promise," "tool" and "bargain " are of some of the other social news/community news sites.

Is There More Bias in Local News?

2009-11-08T18:47:00.000-05:00

I must admit I am not very enthusiastic to report the election results of my hometown: New York City. Bloomberg, the incumbant, who has already been in office for two terms won by only five points promising yet another four years full of the most Republican-esque policies in the most consistently democratic state. It is an irony that I will never understand. Anyway, the polls prior to the Election showed that Bloomberg was ahead of his challenger, Bill Thompson, more than 18 points. But surpringly, Bloomberg won by only five on Election Day.

The Amsterdam News, one of the most local and historic papers in the City, reported that even though Bill Thompson was defeated, the amount of votes he got was actually a victory! It was one of the most bias and slightly ridiculous articles that I have ever read. Who wants to defend a loser! The Amsterdam News was the only paper to endorse Thompson and considering that Bloomberg is not especially popular in the black community, it is no surprise that the Harlem-based paper was not happy. But honestly, they could have just reported the facts. While it is true that Thompson did better than was expected, I would not start praising him as the noble underdog just yet. After all, especially in the case of elections--almost really doesn't count.

This got me thinking. Is there more allowance for bias in more local reporting? Do the readers of these papers or websites really care about objective reporting or is it okay because they are reading the articles in a more subjective context. The Amsterdam News has a very specific audience. I doubt that anyone was upset about the post-election article that so obviously supported Thompson and opposed Bloomberg. I mean if it's only "your people" that are reading, does objectivity really matter?

Response to Shirky... Duh?

2009-11-02T17:35:00.000-05:00

Shirky is either a brilliant "new media" analyst or a reporter of the blatantly obvious. Honestly, I am not sure which. He makes the point that it's the little inventions or advancements in new media (i.e. camera phone, e-mail, the Web) that make the greatest impact. In short, "new behaviors" matter more than "new technologies" (159-160). Well I think everyone has already realized the amazing significance of email. And I am not sure what the new behavior is. Is it that advertisers are now applying the science-based, viral infection pattern to marketing. Or is it that people are actually more susceptible to it because of the Web. Either way, Shirky seems to be downplaying the significance of the inventions and overstating the change in human behavior. I don't think the desires or needs of people really changes or at least it doesn't change as fast as the inventions produced to better meet those needs or desires.

Television News Disappoints Again...

2009-11-02T16:06:00.000-05:00

The Trent Lott story is just too juicy. I don't know where to start. Obviously someone (or in this case, all of the mainstream news ) made a huge boo-boo. As we all know, any story involving race, presidential candidates and Southern segregationists should have gotten as much coverage as swine flu or a political sex scandal. And yet...Nothing! It is time that mainstream news, especially television, admit that it has forgotten its purpose. It has replaced all sense of inquiry and responsibility for investigative reporting with trivial conventions. William O'Keefe's explanation simply isn't good enough. Since when did news have to have the public's reaction before a story became worth reporting. The story is what triggers the reaction, not the other way around. By the way, Rosen's whole explanation of the news cycle's logic was brilliant and so sadly explained the issue with television news. No wonder young people, ages 18 to 24, don't watch television news or read the paper, and rely on Jon Stewart for their current events updates. It turns out now we should add blogs to our list. How sad.

Wikipedia, It's So Open

2009-10-30T14:04:00.000-04:00

I have always loved Wikipedia. Like Google, I am afraid that its usefulness just always seemed to outweigh its deficiencies. It is always the first result to appear in a Google search and once I learned that the Supreme Court was using it, I really just let go of most of my reservations. I mean if the highest court in the land is doing it, then who am I to question?

But when I went about registering as a member of Wikipedia and became fully aware of the mess I could potentially make, I realized that there were some slight differences. For one, Google is like this divine untouchable thing in the Internet world. Sure, we can all use it but for the most part its technology is off limits to us. Not so with Wikipedia. Wiki is like this lowly, more common-man thing that is fully capable of being touched, corrupted, molded, etc. It's interesting that such a trusted source is so open and as a company, Wikipedia is proud of it. What an entirely different approach to climbing the ladder to Internet greatness. While most companies relish in their own exclusive claim to a product or an idea, Wikipedia has no secret. Its intellectual property is us.

Trusting Google

2009-10-18T22:49:00.000-04:00

Okay, so how does Google work? From what I can gather, most people think Google searches the whole Internet and then compiles all of the information based on relevancy But according to this, Google is more like a massive database that only compiles as much as it is legally allowed to and as much as it "googlebots" or its web crawlers can touch. Apparently, the genius and the danger of Google is its algorithm, its patented code, which allows it to sort its data more efficiently than any other search engine. The privacy issue that Google is always battling is central to understanding how the search giant operates. Each one of Google's media outlets (i.e. Youtube, Google Earth, Gmail) involve extracting valuable information from its users in order to provide its services. But as it compiles this information, Google is sitting on heinous information that the government would love to have access to such as details regarding child pornography, terrorism, international trade secrets...and the list goes on.

The problem for me is that I trust Google. It is naive I realize and to those paranoid, overzealous, corrupt-corporation-takes-over-the-world conspiracy theorists, I am probably offering myself up for the privacy slaughter. But for anyone who uses Google, they know that it is just too good to leave alone. Further, I think in many other ways, we all have already lost our privacy to the digital age. If someone wants your information bad enough, nowadays it does not require much to get it. The question is: how aware of it as a user are you? As Googlers we take great comfort in being relatively oblivious as to what Google actually is. I do not think it is a coincidence that Facebook is big and yet no one knows much about it; Google is even bigger and yet billions know even less about it. Someone has to write a sociological dissertation explaining why no one really cares. But juts for kicks, I hypothesize that it is because of trust. We trust that Google is the friendly and gentle emperor it seems to be that controls almost everything and shares its secrets with no one. But on the bright side, it is so good to us. So as long as it plays along with our expectations, we "trust" it not to be evil.

On a Lighter Note

2009-10-01T15:11:00.000-04:00

Just because I thought it was hilarious....lol.

I don't mean to be a bummer...

2009-10-01T14:24:00.001-04:00

This is not to bring anyone to tears but like my fellow blogger, zefrank, I had a similar and saddening experience only this past week . A friend of mine passed away suddenly on Monday at age 17 and within a few hours, the entire campus knew of her death. Within that same time frame, all 4oo of her Facebook friends knew about the sad news as well. As all of her friends (including me) began updating our facebook statuses to include warm reminisces ("missing you always" or "RIP *****"), it suddenly occurred to me that maybe we shouldn't be posting this on Facebook at all. I mean what if one of her relatives, who had not been told yet, was looking at the page. No one deserves to hear news like that on Facebook. What about her boyfriend? Had anyone told him yet? Messages began appearing on her wall by 11 am. We had only found out at 9am that same morning. While zefrank feels that Facebook allowed him to feel closer to his cousin and more involved in keeping her memory alive, this situation, for me, was not the same. I began asking myself whether it was thoughtful or insensitive to post such personal news online for the world to see, even among so called "friends." Granted, Facebook groups were also created posthumously in loving memory of my friend so that we all could express our sympathies and condolences. But what are the rules? What are the courtesies? Her facebook has since been taken down. But I wonder how long people would have continued to comment on her wall and what the societal implications of that are.

Capitalism Corrupts Journalism...a little bit

2009-09-27T10:31:00.000-04:00

You know that the times have seriously changed when a college newspaper editor is shaming one of the oldest newspapers in the country for the age-old crime of plagiarism. I must say that I am not surprised though even the Times has its occasional hiccup, but stealing from your competitors is a new low. How can you claim to deliver a better product (in this case being the most accurate and complete coverage of local and national news) and then steal the work of your "inferiors." It is indeed ironic.

As for the CJR comments criticizing the way the Courant chose to correct this mishap, I agree that simply rewriting the stolen material does not correct the central issue. The Courant did not have the permission of the Inquirer nor did it give credit to the original source of the information.

That said, Starkman seems to be overly concerned with the fact that the Courant was "treating competitors as though they were some kind of free Associated Press." My issue with what the Courant did is not about money; it is about ethics and social responsibility. This is the problem with the capitalist model of journalism. The idea that newspapers are competing not over the quality of their reporting but over how many subscribers and advertisers they have is problematic. The focus of editors has become pleasing and enticing the public instead of informing them. The CJR is right--newspapers don't deserve to make it if they continue to resort to gimmicks and consequently, lose sight of the aim of good journalism. But perhaps another reason newspapers are declining is because in their haste to grab the consumer, they forget to do their job. Produce a good paper and never mind that your sales are decreasing ever so slowly. Call me idealistic, naive even. But I would rather have a quality newspaper with 246 years of "integrity and credibility," than see one slowly waste away to become nothing more than a tabloid over the next 20 or 50 years.

Viral Culture, Viral Obsession

2009-09-25T13:49:00.001-04:00

Okay so I was reading this book about the "viral culture" of the media. The author, Bill Wasik, argues that the new outlets of media-- blogs, online videos, e-mail, websites-- have all taken on a viral way of spreading information.

Nowadays news stories are reported sort of like hit-and-run car accidents. A story is reported, almost instantly there is a mass flood of attention and then it's gone. Like the Annie Le story, it was like we cared for five minutes and now.... Annie who? Even the most tragic stories are only given fifteen minutes of fame and then it's over. There are always exceptions though (i.e. O'Jay Simpson and Jon Benet). But besides those special stories that seem to mutate into objects of social obsession, I agree that the country goes through stages of ADD. Last year, the obsession was Obama-mania, then swine-flu, or the AIG bonuses. It is interesting to see how an event with moderate significance is reported over and over again until the public gets the hint that they should obsess about this as well. The problem then becomes who gets to decide what we obsess about. I will admit that I am a sucker for conspiracy theories and that I imagine someone like Rupert Murdoch is behind some mass plot to incite all liberals to madness. But that is so irrational, or is it?