Disproving Science

Text message conversation (as if I'd communicate any other way):

Marc: It's baffling how, according to my neuro/bonding class, we shouldn't be close friends (because of distance and propinquity)... but we are. We're defying science

Me: Technology.

Enough said.

Ok I'll add this little bit. That isn't your run-of-the-mill community college psych or bio class (It's taught by her). It's pretty "neat" (Marc's word, not mine. I'm not taking the nerd points here.) to see technology's affect on our social lives manifested.

I'm not getting into all the sciency jargon here, mostly because I don't know it, but I'll leave you to your own devices in thinking about how technology just isn't changing how we communicate, but how it is challenging the science behind everything, and will be forcing a rethinking of, well, everything.

Science is something non-scientists take for granted all the time. It is probably more important than anything else in our lives (especially human bonding), but we, as lay peoples, don't understand a thing about it. Weird how tech will reshape not just how science is practiced (with all those newfangled superfabulous microscopes and xray machines) but its scholarship and pedagogy as well.

Weirder is that we still haven't, as a whole, accepted this fact that technology is pushing us into a totally new Age. As if we haven't seen the impact of technology on business enough already (music industry, publishing industry, journalism industry, movie industry, advertising industry, fill in the blank), we're still playing dumb to the coming techxaflood.

Maybe I just have a problem seeing things in the macro instead of the micro, but if we're planning on getting out of this better off than we were going into it, we need to start looking at the big picture. Because even though tweets are only 160 characters, they have a lot bigger impact than their short and sweet existence implies.

omg text messaging get out

Yesterday I had a digi-déjà-vu experience. I've talked lots and lots about how tech has infested our lives in so many ways. This is another of those "omg get out of my life technology" experiences.

I have a friend, we used to date. We're best friends, by someone's definition somewhere. But from June 2007-February 2009, we didn't talk. For a number of those months, we weren't even facebook friends, and not on each other's buddy lists. So we were completely digitally disconnected. With "digitally" being superfluous in this situation since we had no forms of communication between us that were not digital. Goes to show just how important technology is in our lives and relationships.

When we reconnected in February, we talked on the phone (old fashioned) and then re-friended each other on Facebook (new school). There was some wall-to-walling, as we happily spent a few days talking and catching up. Some weeks after, our daily communication dwindled down to a few times a week, then less. Unless there was a major issue in one of our lives, we almost never talked (read: IM'd). It was fine.

It was fine because we were living our own lives and the lack of proaction on the other end didn't justify me going out of my way to chit chat more than I did, either. But, after some weeks of no interaction, I get a phone call. Someone's having a problem and needs to talk to me because I'm trustworthy, etc. I am a good friend and I will always be there for someone I care(d) about so much. So we have that conversation, and after, I realize that friendship needs to be on a more two-way street. It shouldn't just be when there are problems or issues. I became indifferent on whether we talked, and I was fine with not having that in my life. Weird, since it used to be the only thing that I wanted back in my life.

I got an instant message a few days ago though with a cell phone number. The previous phone had been disconnected for over a year, so there had been no cell phone to cell phone contact for us (i.e. no text messaging. :gasp:)

With the new phone came an unlimited texting plan, though. And I happen to be a slave to texting. Oddly enough, with the connection established between us via text messaging, I felt like I was letting this person back into my life. I felt an active bond that I had not experienced in a while. I am aware that technology plays an unequivocally integral role in so many facets of my life, but it's dominance over my emotions seems a bit shocking and a bit odd.

As a product of this tech-generation, I am not surprised at technology's role in my life, but I am impressed that it has permeated so greatly into my very being. I don't know if this is a good or bad thing, but I know that it is something. Being aware of it, though, should be helpful, and I think it is something that we all need to be mindful of: know just how far you are willing to let technology into your life. It's pulling more strings than you think, and despite how much we value our tech, we can't afford to be puppeted by it.

You Did What?

So I get a text message from my friend. "deleted my facebook"



WTFYOUDIDWHAT?!

I kind of freaked out a little, and of course had to check to make sure she was telling the truth.

I really didn't get it at first. I'm always a little bit shocked when people tell me they don't have Facebook or AIM or are never online. It's so the norm that someone who isn't an avid user of (all of) these social technologies better have a damn good excuse as to why they are being so rebellious. It's like the new version of the sixties counterculture is making yourself unavailable to modern communication technology.

Or is it?

My friend got rid of her Facebook account because "it doesn't let me avoid people." So true. The problem with our technology is not that it allows us such easy access to one another...it's that it allows us too much easy access to one another.

Sure there are some pretty good privacy options. But what about when you need a break? What about when you don't want to see someone you are no longer friends with? Defriending is a social taboo; taking such drastic action is just being immature. But logging on is basically being forced to encounter updates and wall posts and pictures and lifestreams of a person who makes you throw up a little in your mouth every time you see them is just not okay for me.

The fact is, it is so hard for us to turn off the access to this goldmine of information. There is so much information-- so easily accessible--we really don't even have to do that much to get to it. It doesn't involve anything sneaky (although Facebook stalking is certainly an art form) and it doesn't involve anything that should make you feel guilty. But it does. It's added stress, and sometimes the costs of such valuable and relied-upon technologies are not outweighed by their benefits.

I'm thinking about giving up my Facebook. I couldn't do it though. When I want an outlet, it is there (although I should probably be more tactful in posting status updates.) While some of the best advice I have ever gotten is to "cut out the fat" -- i.e. just get rid of the things in your life that are causing you problems, it is so difficult. I can't stop checking Facebook. It's just too easy. I'm just too used to it. Hell, it sounds like I'm trying to get myself off cigarettes. It's ridiculous. But I don't know what to do. Should I get rid of my Facebook? Would it make me a happier person? I wonder...

As it turns out, this seemingly extreme action of removing oneself from the Facebook world is more common than I thought. And many people share my sentiments about the website that we all once lusted for in high school (because that was when Facebook was only for college students). It would be good for me to focus more on real life...not the Facebook real life, but the real real life. Going outside. Getting to know myself. Spend time on things that are more important, like studying rather than figuring out who my ex is now getting with. Facebook is self-mutilating, and it needs to stop.

"I deleted my Facebook"

"YOU DID WHAT?!" "I'm so proud of you!"


Image from Facebook



[Addendum]
Because my laptop+browser+Blogger do not get along, I can't post comments. I wanted to post this in response to the people who left me comments below:

"These comments are all great. thanks a lot!

Vinal: good point about "hide" functions of facebook. I think I've taken advantage of it once. I feel like it's a big of a cop-out, just like defriending someone is, but I don't know. I think with the new layout and engine behind it, facebook will give you more of the people go you looking for and less of the people you don't. So maybe it knows....

and the balance between new media life and real life is becoming increasingly blurred. So much so I'd argue that for some people, they are almost mutually inclusive. This is probably not a great thing.

Allison: I agree with everything you said. But yes, we always end up going back. I guess it's not a bad thing, so long as we've learned how to control ourselves haha. Thanks for the luck :)"

Plan Shman

*No links this entry. and no pictures or videos. Just good ol' fashioned writing.*

Hi, Blog. Welcome back to me. It's good to see you again, especially after a rough weekend, you know, with the breakup and all.

Despite that looming feeling that something wasn't right in the relationship, I thought we could work through it. I always said, "if we're having issues you need to tell me what's on your mind. Especially after some of the things you let slip. Because I want it to work out, and I like you."

"I like you, too" was the response.

Well either someone is a great actor, or someone is really confused. And the whole having the break up talk while I'm blackout drunk was NOT part of the plan. Even if I may have kind of sort of maybe initiated the conversation by trying to drag out whether or not things were okay between us. Still...not part of the plan. At all.

I remember before we met and starting the whole dating thing I didn't want a relationship at all. In fact, I even told all my friends after we starting seeing each other pretty frequently that it's not going farther than just casually dating or whatever. It wasn't exclusive, and we hadn't even talked about anything.

But that went on for two months...and by two months it was time to talk. Someone wanted more, but I wanted to keep things open. That was the plan. A week later I wanted a relationship, but lo and behold, those feelings weren't mutual anymore. Fine.
And then a few days later, a relationship was born. Talk about going against the plans.

In total, we we unofficial for 3 months and official for about 3 weeks. I never planned on anything that happened in the course of that 4 month time span.

Which I suppose makes perfect sense.

Nothing ever goes according to plan; it seems that is just the way of the world. This, naturally, is true for new media technology as well. I know, me tying my life drama into new media academia is a bit of a stretch, but the metaphor is constant. New technologies are invented, and unfathomable uses for said technologies become fathomed. No one ever expects certain things to become fads. Take Facebook, and Twitter for examples. Social networking has spiraled almost out of control. With the micro-details of everyones personal life flying through the Internet free as birds (my details, obviously, included) there's been so many developments that no one could have predicted upon the introduction of such technologies.

We all know that things will change. But knowing how they will change is the variable. It is the challenge that we have to deal with, and maybe even part of the fun. But just like everything in life, change is complicated. Especially with relationships, and especially with how new media technology is impacting our everyday lives. Our technologies are practically as day-to-day as our relationships are, and the drama that follows is just as natural.

But, in this time, the best advice is that, we can't control what happens, we can only control our reaction to it. The music industry is struggling to learn these lessons, from how it has acted in the past decade in response to MP3s and file sharing and new media technology that involves digital music.

Hard work and good intentions will go far, and some general intelligent oversight will go a long way -- in relationships and in developing a new technology--but nothing protects us from what we don't know.

Does that mean eventually we will succumb to our technological advancements and that machines will finally rule the world? I don't think so. But it means that, while we will probably end up okay, we're always going to be developing, advancing, expanding, and learning. Maybe it is the big picture we need to focus on, and just keep on taking new and unforeseen innovations and making the best of them. Controlling our reactions instead of trying to control what we can't control. That is the only way we won't fall victim to our "plans."

Blog Blog Blog Blog

The world loves blogs. While blogs may be "new media", the obsession with blogs en mass by the masses is easy to explain. Perez Hilton's blog is nothing but a liposuct-ed digital tabloid. It's a picture a la Perez, and some brief words putting it in context. That's it, plus some ads, and of course, the requisite comments. Scott Schuman's The Sartorialist is just a photo blog of people who look good, with sections for where he's been featured in the press, a bio, and yes, the comments. ArsTechnica is a news site that incorporates what I would consider blogs in its coverage of all things technological. It's a site that has a lot going on: journals, reports, reviews, news, forums, the ability to comment, and more. Although it seems like the mass media (and new media is fast becoming the new mass media) is so decidedly liberal (and people think thats a bad thing), Hotair.com is a place where everyone can get their conservative fix (but its just for laughs...). Hotair is a collection of blogs, videos, news stories, and whathaveyou. It's the republican equivalent of a bad episode of the Colbert Report*.

Anyway, these four blogs are all diverse personalities in the blogosphere. Despite their differences, though, they are all blogs, and naturally share some fundamental characteristics. The comments, the short-form (on average) article, a more lax user interface that conveys "this is cool and you want to be here" instead of "8am organic chemistry" (or, for those that like orgo, "8am creative writing"). This description is common of the natural habitat for blogs. Sure, there are blogs that are more in-depth and professional, but ultimately, they exist to open a new line of communication between writer and reader, thinker and lost soul, you and me and whoever in between†.
Where blogs differ, however, is important to discuss because that is where they succeed in catering to their audience and attracting (and maintaining) their niche. The blogosphere is aptly named--as widespread and encompassing as our atmosphere--and to be seen by the naked eye something must exhibit qualities different from the other things in the area.With all these blogs floating around, each successful blog positively must have its own appeal to certain sets of people.
Most of what we've been talking about in this class is aesthetics. Why put an image here, or there. The use of color, the focus on text. Is there too much or too little going on on the page? I suppose innately blogging depends on aesthetics in order to secure its readership, but the purpose of blogs is not an aesthetic one. While aesthetics or art may be a subject of a blog, the act of blogging itself is not, firstly, an experiment in aesthetics. That comes after the writing, after the image, and after the hyperlinking. Only then should a blogger be concerned with perfecting the image his or her blog projects. Unless of course the blog is about what looks pretty.

I went on a tangent, but with all that said, I can analyze the four aforementioned blogs in the context of blogging.

Perez Hilton's blog, which to be unfamiliar with you must surely have been living under a rock and/or born yesterday, is a celebrity gossip, photo and text based blog. You can easily spot your friends and colleagues reading Perez because of its trademark pink background and its paparazzi style pictures adorned with Perez's special white touch. The focus on Perez's post is the image. The text acts to contextualize the image and briefly offer Perez's take on the story. It is humorous, satirical, and borderline defamatory.
I'll digress here and write a little on the issue of intellectual property and how it applies to something like Perez's project, since I have an interest in IP. Perez uses (and adds to) pictures that are often taken by paparazzi or professional photographers (yes, I separated them). Sometimes they come from news articles. Perez uses these images, which he does not own, and puts a humorous, yet understandably (from the point of view of the celebrity being featured) negative light on them. Celebrities, because of their celebrity status, are not subject to the same protections from demation that lay citizens are. For them, it becomes much more of a tast to prove defamation in a court of law. Additionally, Perez's use of the images could arguable fall under fair use: he is making a derivative work (a new image, in effect, <<(someone just farted in my African Culture class. fyi)>>, because he uses his digital white marker to add to the original image and thus creates his own, new, work), and he is making a parody. Of course, he is profiting from his work, so to use the original pictures, he must license them. He can't use and profit from them without paying, since he does not own them. If he was not making a profit and his blog was not as famous as it is, he would probably be able to skid by without paying to license the images. Anyway, don't go starting your own Perez-type blog without the right legal counsel.

Perez is many people's guilty pleasure, I feel like. They won't admit to liking, let alone reading, this blog. But we all know we've checked it out. It's great for celebrity and entertainment news, plus its damn entertaining. It is simple and to the point. It requires barely any cognitive ability to use and enjoy (you could just look at the pictures and laugh), and for whatever reason, America is beyond obsessed with living vicariously through celebrities. So it is no suprise that Perez is successful. His mixture of personality (the pink, and subsequently, Perez's personality as revealved through personal appearances), the humor, the celebrity gossip, and the simplicity of his blog is perfectly crafted for success.
His commenters are people with seemingly nothing better to do than "argue" about Britney Spears, but to each their own. That's the beauty of blogging, that oft-mentioned line of communication that is now open between...anyone and everyone who cares enough to put forth their two-cents.
<>

Much different in topic and design from Perez is the blog The Sartorialist. I must admit, at first I read that word as "satiralist" and thought it was some blog satirizing news or whatnot. I was wrong. And, shocked to learn it was a fashion blog. Then I looked up the definition of sartorial and everything made sense.
This blog is purley photo based, has a nice clean white background, clear navigation on the left pane and a bit more on the right (the typical archives, calander, etc). It has no crazy ads like on Perez and it comes off as a much more professional type blog. Which makes sense. The author is not making fun of people who look odd, he's actually going for the people who look good and noteworthy. Its fashion for fashion's sake, and that's it. Simple black text, and commenters who stay on topic, proffering their own views on the fashion highlighted in the picture. The post topics are not eye-grabbing or catchy alliterations, they just note where and maybe what the photographer was shooting. Everything here sharply contrasts with Perez's blog, and I'd venture to say the readership is somewhat different, as well. Although I wouldnt be too surprised if there was a bit of crossover between the two blogs: people like celeb gossip and people like some good fashion sense. I could see the female twenty-something office professional having a dedicated interest in both blogs. So I guess that nulls my point. But brings up another interesting point: how to such strikingly different blogs capture the same audience? I guess that is a stupid question: the two blogs are two different products, totally. So, someone can like Ice Mountain water and Coke. both beverages, but so different. I should take this part out, it makes me look stupid. But I won't.

Moving right along, ArsTechnica is a favorite site of mine. It deals with all things tech, from games, to windows and mac, to science, to tech policy (my primary interest). The posts are mostly blog-like, meaning they are not terribly long, feature heavy linking, and after are written with a more relaxed tone. Sometimes there will be reviews or longer journal-type articles with a more "professional" or academic feel to them, though. Ars is a site bustling with information. I find myself only intereted in the front page articles and rarely ever venture anywhere else within the site. It has much more going on than the Sartorialist does, but it is not merely a blog. It has ads and features, much like you are reading a newspaper or magazine online. It is respected in the field of tech-journalism, just as the Sartorialist is respected in fashion. And yes, Perez is enshrined in...pop culture. The writing quality and comment quality is high on Ars. The commenters often stay on subject and add their own relevent views to what the author may have missed, or they take a new spin on something. I find it is always good to look at these sorts of comments because they give the intereted reader a broader perspective and it helps take away the inherent flaws in reporting, including some bias. For anyone intersted in anything remotely tech-related, you probably already know of Ars. But if you don't, you should absoluetly check it out.

Lastly, Hotair.com. I am going to try really hard not to hate on this site as much as I'd like to, given my crazy liberal perspective on everything. This site confuses me, as do most conservatives. They talk about how the liberals dominate everything and then they combat it with something not serious. This site loves that it brings humor into the picture. But good lord if you want to combant the liberal sway you keep complaining about then please do something convicing. If you are going to make bad jokes...give up. Liberal jokes are funny. Ann Colter is the devil. Common knowledge unless you really hit your head hard when you fell off the wagon. Conservative humor is whiny. Yes, the rightys all complain that all the liberals do is whine whine whine. Sure. But we arent joking around. When you joke, you whine. It's different. They are different. sigh.

So, hotair.com is this aggregation of news and such that somehow takes a rightward view of things. Their headlines right now include: "Most Tech Savvy White House evah Can't Figure Out E-mail" Hell, it is "eva" not "evah". Clearly, conservative journalists are outtah touch. Ok, so their headlines are funny because I like making fun of them. The articles are relevant. It's the same stuff being put up on CNN and the Times and local news stations. They just take it and make it look like America is stupid. Oh wait.

The site is laid out rather well I think. Its got its popular links at the time (linking to real news stories from other outlets), headlines in the middle (hotair original content), which are backed up with images. And on the right pane are ads and links. The articles I guess are written in legible english without too many grammatical errors. These are pluses. The commenters seem to be convervatives who are agreeing with the content. I imagine the readership is mostly conservative, and by mostly I mean like 99%. The other 1% are people like me who are looking for entertainment/doing homework. I actually, though, wouldnt be opposted to checking this site out more. It's good to make fun of, and its not exactly fox news. I hope. Not yet, at least. And yeah, I am always willing to hear another perspective on things. Even if all it does is bolster my own opinions.

So. Lots of blogs in the big blogosphere. They do what they need to do to survive, and the ones that do do it well. Survival of the bloggest. Lame. Lame. Lame joke. I need to publish this now and get to class.




*Forgive my bias.
†Forgive my rhyme