Everything is rushed. Anita Dunn says, “When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this” Instead of seeking context or disputing a claim, reporters often simply get two opposing quotes and file a he said/she said story.
Distributions of news are more rushed today since people demand continuous news from the internet on constant basis. Journalists are required to provide news as how people would like to take it. On page 4 of Non-Stop News (last paragraph), Anita Dunn says, “When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response.” People want to instantly know what the answers are to their questions and don’t necessarily need the extended story. When people are on the go and often so, they don’t have that time to read a lengthy article. They want to know the gist of the story. Facebook’s postings for example are where some people get their news. Quick and easy.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Non-Stop News
Andrew Kohut, Pew’s polling chief, notes that the media’s focus had “much to do with how different he is as President. His race. His temperament. He’s a new kind of President, and the press is fascinated by the new.” Even within the Beltway, operatives cheered for the election of the first African-American President. Mark McKinnon, who served as a media adviser to President George W. Bush and to John McCain during the primaries, refused to work against Obama after he won the nomination. “It’s like rooting for a teen-ager to win the U.S. Open,” he said. (Melanie Oudin, a seventeen-year-old from Georgia, was in the U.S. Open quarter-finals at the time.) A Pew study found that in Obama’s first hundred days in office stories about him that were “clearly positive in tone” outnumbered those about Bush in his first hundred days by a ratio of nearly two to one.
The second paragraph on the third page helped me understand the article better. Andrew Kohut spoke of how the media focused on how different the new president is. How even though others were running, more people cheered for Obama because he would be the first African-American President. When Obama won the election, as Pew’s study found out, his first one hundred days in office were positive and outnumbered those first one hundred days for Bush. This goes to show that the media does look for new stories to focus on. That new is better than old and that stories never end. Those people who note these stories look at them more in-depth.
The second paragraph on the third page helped me understand the article better. Andrew Kohut spoke of how the media focused on how different the new president is. How even though others were running, more people cheered for Obama because he would be the first African-American President. When Obama won the election, as Pew’s study found out, his first one hundred days in office were positive and outnumbered those first one hundred days for Bush. This goes to show that the media does look for new stories to focus on. That new is better than old and that stories never end. Those people who note these stories look at them more in-depth.
“This time, though, the battle between the President and the press is different. There is a third party involved-the Internet-and no one can control a story for long.”
This is in the second column on the first page about a third of the way down. And before this quote Ken Auletta talked about how Obama was negatively affected by the press during his speeches in health care, economic rescue plans, Afghanistan, and education.
So not only can Obama being negatively affected by the press now, but he also has the Internet with or against him depending on the news. When George W. Bush was in office he didn’t have twitter, facebook or YouTube so he couldn’t promote news that way, but Obama does. And because the internet is so large, it spreads a whole lot quicker and it is a whole lot hard to control what is being said.
Looking back I almost, and I mean almost, think it would have been better to stay in Bush’s time when there was on YouTube, facebook, or Twitter, because it has had some really negative things about it, but it has also help the President in promoting himself, so I think it is up to the individual.
This is in the second column on the first page about a third of the way down. And before this quote Ken Auletta talked about how Obama was negatively affected by the press during his speeches in health care, economic rescue plans, Afghanistan, and education.
So not only can Obama being negatively affected by the press now, but he also has the Internet with or against him depending on the news. When George W. Bush was in office he didn’t have twitter, facebook or YouTube so he couldn’t promote news that way, but Obama does. And because the internet is so large, it spreads a whole lot quicker and it is a whole lot hard to control what is being said.
Looking back I almost, and I mean almost, think it would have been better to stay in Bush’s time when there was on YouTube, facebook, or Twitter, because it has had some really negative things about it, but it has also help the President in promoting himself, so I think it is up to the individual.
“This White House, like others, does its best to manipulate press coverage. Obama’s communications staff, according to Kumar, has swelled to sixty-nine people, from fifty-two under Bush and forty seven under Clinton.”
This passage comes from a section starting with “The transformation in media technology has also altered government communications strategy”, and the passage I chose is a result of that. With the rapid growth of news in technology, they must be ready to answer questions that the American people have in a much more timely fashion, or problems could arise. One of the examples they give is comparing when Obama was on vacation with when Kennedy was on vacation. Obama was in Hawaii, and failed to respond to a terrorist attempt to blow up an American airliner. With his absence and him not answering, Janet Napolitano had to take his place claiming that “the system worked”, Janet and Obama both were criticized. Back in 1961 Kennedy was on vacation during the Berlin wall going up and no one even pressed him for six days. This shows the gimme generation in full swing, we want answers and we want them quick. We like things to come fast, and get bored a lot faster then the generation before us. Even the most extreme tragedy in America will eventually just kind of vanish. With Obama having the largest communication staff, this could mean that the white house has the largest role in the media that it has ever had before.
This passage comes from a section starting with “The transformation in media technology has also altered government communications strategy”, and the passage I chose is a result of that. With the rapid growth of news in technology, they must be ready to answer questions that the American people have in a much more timely fashion, or problems could arise. One of the examples they give is comparing when Obama was on vacation with when Kennedy was on vacation. Obama was in Hawaii, and failed to respond to a terrorist attempt to blow up an American airliner. With his absence and him not answering, Janet Napolitano had to take his place claiming that “the system worked”, Janet and Obama both were criticized. Back in 1961 Kennedy was on vacation during the Berlin wall going up and no one even pressed him for six days. This shows the gimme generation in full swing, we want answers and we want them quick. We like things to come fast, and get bored a lot faster then the generation before us. Even the most extreme tragedy in America will eventually just kind of vanish. With Obama having the largest communication staff, this could mean that the white house has the largest role in the media that it has ever had before.
"'What happened today?' isrepaced with 'who won today?;' The public debate cheapens."
This is at the end of the secound paragraph on the first page of this article. Obama is giving a speech about a famous news caster who had recently passed away. The president was explaing how the news caster had become a symbol of truth in America and he was a breed of journalist that is rare in our world today. The article goes on to explain how in realitly Cronkite (the news caster) just read from a telaprompter and had now actualy impact on the news or information he recited. The article goes on further claiming that even though Obama's speech was heartfelt it was also serving a purpose. Presedent Obama's chief speechwriter says "The President is on a mission to not just change politics in Washington but to change that culture of Washington, and the media is a part of it."
This is at the end of the secound paragraph on the first page of this article. Obama is giving a speech about a famous news caster who had recently passed away. The president was explaing how the news caster had become a symbol of truth in America and he was a breed of journalist that is rare in our world today. The article goes on to explain how in realitly Cronkite (the news caster) just read from a telaprompter and had now actualy impact on the news or information he recited. The article goes on further claiming that even though Obama's speech was heartfelt it was also serving a purpose. Presedent Obama's chief speechwriter says "The President is on a mission to not just change politics in Washington but to change that culture of Washington, and the media is a part of it."
Really?
“The transformation in media technology has also altered government communications strategy.”
This passage is shown on page 43 and is the first sentence in the second paragraph. The author, Ken Auletta, is stating this.
In my perspective, this means that having the internet and other forms of technology has caused the news to change vividly. By having everything be needed instantly, the government is having a hard time keeping up with stories and issues because the media has evolved to need news instantly. This relates to me personally because I recently had a friend die. The accident happened at 9:32 am on Saturday and I found out about her death at around 9:50 when I got on Facebook that morning. It shocked me because everyone was writing post about it and I just thought they had the wrong girl’s name. All I could think was, "Really?". It definitely didn’t seem accurate because Facebook is normally not a reliable source, but in this case it was true. This causes conflict because what if my friends on Facebook did get the wrong name. This would bring up at lot of trouble with my friend because she would be getting accused of getting in an accident she didn’t get in. I find this important because it is critical to get the correct information but with today’s desire for news the moment it happens makes it hard to be 100% accurate.
This passage is shown on page 43 and is the first sentence in the second paragraph. The author, Ken Auletta, is stating this.
In my perspective, this means that having the internet and other forms of technology has caused the news to change vividly. By having everything be needed instantly, the government is having a hard time keeping up with stories and issues because the media has evolved to need news instantly. This relates to me personally because I recently had a friend die. The accident happened at 9:32 am on Saturday and I found out about her death at around 9:50 when I got on Facebook that morning. It shocked me because everyone was writing post about it and I just thought they had the wrong girl’s name. All I could think was, "Really?". It definitely didn’t seem accurate because Facebook is normally not a reliable source, but in this case it was true. This causes conflict because what if my friends on Facebook did get the wrong name. This would bring up at lot of trouble with my friend because she would be getting accused of getting in an accident she didn’t get in. I find this important because it is critical to get the correct information but with today’s desire for news the moment it happens makes it hard to be 100% accurate.
Non-Stop News
~The Transformation in media technology has altered government communications strategy. “The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore,” Mark McKinnon, the media adviser, said. “In the old days, you could say, ‘we’d like October to be about the environment’.” Today, a vicious news cycle swallows most White House strategies. When the Berlin Wall went up; in 1961, President Kennedy was on vacation. “For six says, no one pressed him hard for a reaction,” Beschloss said. “If that happened now, president Obama would have three seconds.”~
I thought this part was very interesting, it really shows that bad habit of instant gratification we want all the time, and for the president if he’s not ready to respond in seconds then he gets all the shame. I just feel that it really isn’t fair to the president, how much does he do in a day? More then, I’m sure anyone can imagine, he’s not running a classroom he’s running a country. Yet the media seem to forget this, it’s fun for them to build up hype about bad things the president is doing because it gets a reaction from their audience. It’s amazing how fast technology has grown, but when it comes to the media, it seems we haven’t quite got the hang of how to use it. The Media Advisor for Obama can’t even really help control what the press is saying. In the old days people used to love the presidents they were glamorous and respected and most of all they had control over what was said about them. Hoover is a great example of why you don’t want to cross the president, he killed many people with his own troops trying to run people off of a protest against him, these days it’s the media that is almost controlling the president. As the media gets stronger we are going to need stronger and stronger leaders that won’t let such awful media take over.
I thought this part was very interesting, it really shows that bad habit of instant gratification we want all the time, and for the president if he’s not ready to respond in seconds then he gets all the shame. I just feel that it really isn’t fair to the president, how much does he do in a day? More then, I’m sure anyone can imagine, he’s not running a classroom he’s running a country. Yet the media seem to forget this, it’s fun for them to build up hype about bad things the president is doing because it gets a reaction from their audience. It’s amazing how fast technology has grown, but when it comes to the media, it seems we haven’t quite got the hang of how to use it. The Media Advisor for Obama can’t even really help control what the press is saying. In the old days people used to love the presidents they were glamorous and respected and most of all they had control over what was said about them. Hoover is a great example of why you don’t want to cross the president, he killed many people with his own troops trying to run people off of a protest against him, these days it’s the media that is almost controlling the president. As the media gets stronger we are going to need stronger and stronger leaders that won’t let such awful media take over.
Manipulating Press Coverage
“The White House, like others, does its best to manipulate press coverage. Obama’s communications staff, according to Kumar, has swelled to sixty-nine people, from fifty-two under Bush and forty-seven under Clinton. The shop is led by Robert Gibbs, whose office has the most contact with reporters; Dan Pfeiffer, the communications director, who focuses on media strategy; and Jon Favreau, the chief speech writer, who heads a team of six writers.”-Ken Auletta, Non-Stop News
In the passage above, Auletta is explaining the expansion of Obama’s communications team and comparing it to previous presidential communications teams. By doing so, he is adding onto the idea that due to today’s internet communications and rushed media, the presidential campaign has been forced to change drastically, both in size and in the way it operates. I think this passage means that as the years continue, presidents will continue to have to change their campaigns and the way the White House communicates with the media in order to protect themselves and get their stories through to the press and public correctly. That the growing number of communications staff will only keep growing in order to attempt to control the media. By having to do so, to me, it takes away the commanding voice and regalness that presidents once had, which I think will affect presidency all together in a negative way.
This idea is important because the President is questioned, scrutinized, and praised, all in a matter of minutes, and if it’s filed so quickly, without consulting with the experts, who knows what’s truly accurate and what’s rumor? This is significant to the future and value of presidential press, and to Americans being able to trust what they read about the presidential campaign. How can we as Americans be expected to make an educated decision about who our president should be when the press and presidential media doesn't take the time to talk to the experts about which facts are true and which are false?
In the passage above, Auletta is explaining the expansion of Obama’s communications team and comparing it to previous presidential communications teams. By doing so, he is adding onto the idea that due to today’s internet communications and rushed media, the presidential campaign has been forced to change drastically, both in size and in the way it operates. I think this passage means that as the years continue, presidents will continue to have to change their campaigns and the way the White House communicates with the media in order to protect themselves and get their stories through to the press and public correctly. That the growing number of communications staff will only keep growing in order to attempt to control the media. By having to do so, to me, it takes away the commanding voice and regalness that presidents once had, which I think will affect presidency all together in a negative way.
This idea is important because the President is questioned, scrutinized, and praised, all in a matter of minutes, and if it’s filed so quickly, without consulting with the experts, who knows what’s truly accurate and what’s rumor? This is significant to the future and value of presidential press, and to Americans being able to trust what they read about the presidential campaign. How can we as Americans be expected to make an educated decision about who our president should be when the press and presidential media doesn't take the time to talk to the experts about which facts are true and which are false?
Non-Stop News
Most Relavant:
“Like other American workers, journalists these days are crunched, working harder with less support and holding tight to their jobs. Eight to sixteen times a day, Chuck Todd, of NBC, hustles from his cubicle in the White House basement to a patch of grass nicknamed Pebble Beach, where he conducts standup interviews for NBC and MSNBC. His day begins at dawn, when he scans the press and writes the opening page of NBC’s blog ‘First Read,’ then throws on a jacket to appear on the ‘today’ show or on ‘Morning Joe,’ on MSNBC. Before the day ends, he has also written eight to ten tweets or facebook postings and three to five blog entries.”
I feel like this portion is relevant to the paper because it talks about how a journalist does their work, I know not every person works like this but it’s not a focused effort when they do. Have you ever tried to write a paper while juggling 3 other things? In personal experiences I get distracted and will lose my train of thought then my paper becomes weaker. If journalists are working on evidence for multiple papers a day, then writing them at separate times, how often do they get side tracked? Obama says “The transformation of media has not only undermined the imperial institutions of mainstream media; it has undermined the imperial presidency” and this connects because we learn how journalism has changed in this paragraph. They used to focus on one topic, instead of the 50+ you see in our newspapers today. I think someone who is old enough to remember the old newspaper styles and was subjected to the real life side of the paper should go in and compare how accurate the journalists were compared to today.
“Like other American workers, journalists these days are crunched, working harder with less support and holding tight to their jobs. Eight to sixteen times a day, Chuck Todd, of NBC, hustles from his cubicle in the White House basement to a patch of grass nicknamed Pebble Beach, where he conducts standup interviews for NBC and MSNBC. His day begins at dawn, when he scans the press and writes the opening page of NBC’s blog ‘First Read,’ then throws on a jacket to appear on the ‘today’ show or on ‘Morning Joe,’ on MSNBC. Before the day ends, he has also written eight to ten tweets or facebook postings and three to five blog entries.”
I feel like this portion is relevant to the paper because it talks about how a journalist does their work, I know not every person works like this but it’s not a focused effort when they do. Have you ever tried to write a paper while juggling 3 other things? In personal experiences I get distracted and will lose my train of thought then my paper becomes weaker. If journalists are working on evidence for multiple papers a day, then writing them at separate times, how often do they get side tracked? Obama says “The transformation of media has not only undermined the imperial institutions of mainstream media; it has undermined the imperial presidency” and this connects because we learn how journalism has changed in this paragraph. They used to focus on one topic, instead of the 50+ you see in our newspapers today. I think someone who is old enough to remember the old newspaper styles and was subjected to the real life side of the paper should go in and compare how accurate the journalists were compared to today.
My Take on Non-Stop News
"Just six years ago when George W. Bush was finishing his first term, there was no Facebook, no twitter, no YouTube; dozens of regional newspapers and TV stations were highly profitable and seemed, at least to themselves, inviolable. Between 2006 and 2008, daily online news use jumped by a third, which meant that one-quarter of Americans were getting their news online. As media outlets multiply and it becomes easier to disseminate information on the Web and on cable the news cycle is getting shorter, to the point that there is no pause, only the consistency of the web and the endless argument of cable"
When reading this quote, I start thinking about times before the infamous Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Most people would just get their news off TV stations such as CNN or the various local channels available, but nowadays it seems like the internet has taken over the news in a big way. The news is now interpreted into new sheds of light and most people get a better sense of understanding when the news is dissected and analyzed. I know that people on YouTube tend to speak their minds when it comes to any subject and news is one of them and the consistency of this nature is very great.
When reading this quote, I start thinking about times before the infamous Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Most people would just get their news off TV stations such as CNN or the various local channels available, but nowadays it seems like the internet has taken over the news in a big way. The news is now interpreted into new sheds of light and most people get a better sense of understanding when the news is dissected and analyzed. I know that people on YouTube tend to speak their minds when it comes to any subject and news is one of them and the consistency of this nature is very great.
Hanna's Non-stop news
" for each Democrat that watches Fox News there are eighteen Republicans, and for every Republican who watches MSNBC there are six Democrats."
At the beginning of page 47, Ken Auletta is talking about how cable has grown more partisan. Auletta uses these stats from TiVo to show that Republicans favor Fox News and Democrats favor MSNBC. It goes on saying how Fox News's ratings are higher than CNN, MSNBC, and CNBC combined.
I think this stat is important because it tells us that despite what cable news wants us to believe, it is extraordinarily partisan. Because of it being so partisan is greatly affects our views on politics and can greatly influence what we put on the ballot.
I think that I was drawn to this passage because I have always grown up watching Fox News. My parents have always gone to Fox over any other cable news. I didn't really see Fox as something different, I just thought it was "another news channel," but these stats have showed me that it really is very partisan and that someone needs to have a nonpartisan just the facts news station.
At the beginning of page 47, Ken Auletta is talking about how cable has grown more partisan. Auletta uses these stats from TiVo to show that Republicans favor Fox News and Democrats favor MSNBC. It goes on saying how Fox News's ratings are higher than CNN, MSNBC, and CNBC combined.
I think this stat is important because it tells us that despite what cable news wants us to believe, it is extraordinarily partisan. Because of it being so partisan is greatly affects our views on politics and can greatly influence what we put on the ballot.
I think that I was drawn to this passage because I have always grown up watching Fox News. My parents have always gone to Fox over any other cable news. I didn't really see Fox as something different, I just thought it was "another news channel," but these stats have showed me that it really is very partisan and that someone needs to have a nonpartisan just the facts news station.
Non-Stop News
"As criticism of the president has escalated, the Administration has at times seemed affronted by the impertinence and the haste of coverage. This White House does expect a fairly deferential press."
This was taken from the first full paragraph in the third column on the first page. The first sentence from this piece comes from Auletta himself. He is basically saying that since the president has been in the media's eye, the amount of disrespect has increased rapidly. The second sentence from this piece comes from Jonathan Weisman, the Wall Street Journlal's White House correspondent. He is saying that this new Obama administration expects respectful coverage in the media.
From what I have been able to compare between President Bush's administration and President Obama's, I have seen that Bush definitely received a great deal more disrespect throughout most media coverage during his time than Obama has. Although this is true, Obama hasn't even been in house for too long. Almost two years now compared to Bush's eight. So I think the Obama administration will see it's own fair share of disrespect in the coming time.
This was taken from the first full paragraph in the third column on the first page. The first sentence from this piece comes from Auletta himself. He is basically saying that since the president has been in the media's eye, the amount of disrespect has increased rapidly. The second sentence from this piece comes from Jonathan Weisman, the Wall Street Journlal's White House correspondent. He is saying that this new Obama administration expects respectful coverage in the media.
From what I have been able to compare between President Bush's administration and President Obama's, I have seen that Bush definitely received a great deal more disrespect throughout most media coverage during his time than Obama has. Although this is true, Obama hasn't even been in house for too long. Almost two years now compared to Bush's eight. So I think the Obama administration will see it's own fair share of disrespect in the coming time.
In the article “Non Stop News” by Ken Auletta one vital passage of the article is “Everything is rushed” Anita Dunn says “it’s not because they’re interested In having a discussion. They are interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.” Instead of seeking context or disputing claim, reporters often get two opposing quotes to file a he said/ she said story”
This quote was addressing to the fact that media requires for a quick paced news stories that can be brought to the story as soon as possible. Journalists are required to feed the stories on line and on print without enough time for a throughout outlook on the news concept. The idea of Auletta was that with the multiple daily news cast the news loses most context with without the time to conceptualize the news. In the passage Auletta quoted Anita Dunn, and his quote helped put the idea into a simpler from of saying exactly what he was saying but also summarized and reassured his own ideas of the effects of the non- stop news.
I feel as though this means that reporters are making news stories fit into the from that would be more beneficial to the reporters usage of the news, so it can be adapted into a quick story. Also, the quote was implying reporters are also simplifying the news by getting quotes for only adding to their own needs not to help explain the story. Thus doing so is making the news only partially correct and somewhat deceiving. Word choice of this passage suggest that the demands of myriads of news reported the minute the events take place allows negativity for both the reporter and the receivers of the news.
This passage can be put into the context of many areas of anyone who lives within the pop culture society. Not only is the want for quickness making it difficult for news readers and reporters. But, also the need for quickness is changing many daily tasks. So many things, fueled by technology require a fastens to be done that without the time to do so correctly these tasks aren't done as correct as possible. Also, this reminds me Ken Robinson idea of education in trying to make students learn as quickly as possible then the children don't have the opportunity to explore all subjects.
This quote was addressing to the fact that media requires for a quick paced news stories that can be brought to the story as soon as possible. Journalists are required to feed the stories on line and on print without enough time for a throughout outlook on the news concept. The idea of Auletta was that with the multiple daily news cast the news loses most context with without the time to conceptualize the news. In the passage Auletta quoted Anita Dunn, and his quote helped put the idea into a simpler from of saying exactly what he was saying but also summarized and reassured his own ideas of the effects of the non- stop news.
I feel as though this means that reporters are making news stories fit into the from that would be more beneficial to the reporters usage of the news, so it can be adapted into a quick story. Also, the quote was implying reporters are also simplifying the news by getting quotes for only adding to their own needs not to help explain the story. Thus doing so is making the news only partially correct and somewhat deceiving. Word choice of this passage suggest that the demands of myriads of news reported the minute the events take place allows negativity for both the reporter and the receivers of the news.
This passage can be put into the context of many areas of anyone who lives within the pop culture society. Not only is the want for quickness making it difficult for news readers and reporters. But, also the need for quickness is changing many daily tasks. So many things, fueled by technology require a fastens to be done that without the time to do so correctly these tasks aren't done as correct as possible. Also, this reminds me Ken Robinson idea of education in trying to make students learn as quickly as possible then the children don't have the opportunity to explore all subjects.
“Between August of 2008 and March of 2009, the Obamas appeared on the cover of People five times, CBS and ABC aired specials on the new President and his family. In June, NMC’s Brian Williams hosted two hour-long broadcasts on the First Family, including talk about the family dog and footage of the President munching on M&M’s. A center for Media and Public affairs report round that in Obama’s first fifty days in office he received more than three times the coverage than his processor had.” -Ken Auletta
*
In the passage above, Ken Auletta is explaining how the Obama’s were broadcasted an immense amount more than his the preceding president, George W. Bush. Pointless things such as, Michelle Obama’s work out plan, or Barack Obama eating M&M’s were aired and published on front covers of magazines. I was drawn to this passage, because it seems Obama’s glorification of being president was/is taken away from him by the media. Publishing such things in the tabloids only makes him look worse than he actually is. Well, to some people. Other people look past such bogus things, but others are drawn into purchasing a magazine or watching a television show, if it previews the president of our country eating M&M’s or the first lady working out. Later in the passage, it talks about how there is a website, where white house photographers post slideshows of photos, of what is going on inside of the white house, so people can have their fix of images. It’s not fair to the president that people look down upon him just because of what the media is forcing him to be, rather than his political views. This passage is very significant because, it is happening now, each and every day and we are involuntary forced to look at it on our store shelves, see it on newspaper headlines, or online sites.
In the passage above, Ken Auletta is explaining how the Obama’s were broadcasted an immense amount more than his the preceding president, George W. Bush. Pointless things such as, Michelle Obama’s work out plan, or Barack Obama eating M&M’s were aired and published on front covers of magazines. I was drawn to this passage, because it seems Obama’s glorification of being president was/is taken away from him by the media. Publishing such things in the tabloids only makes him look worse than he actually is. Well, to some people. Other people look past such bogus things, but others are drawn into purchasing a magazine or watching a television show, if it previews the president of our country eating M&M’s or the first lady working out. Later in the passage, it talks about how there is a website, where white house photographers post slideshows of photos, of what is going on inside of the white house, so people can have their fix of images. It’s not fair to the president that people look down upon him just because of what the media is forcing him to be, rather than his political views. This passage is very significant because, it is happening now, each and every day and we are involuntary forced to look at it on our store shelves, see it on newspaper headlines, or online sites.
(Found on 3rd page, first column)
"Non-Stop News"
"He's as relentless in working reporters as he is in working congressen. He cajoles, lobbies, berates, and trades information, because he understands it's better to work with the media than to shut it out."
This quote is said by Peter Baker about one of Obama's Administration press office people named Rahm Emanuel. This quote said by a reported directly displays the understanding that Obama has about the media, that it is better to keep them happy than your enemy. It also connects to the central claim in this way because a President doesn't have an unchalleged voice that he used to have, "the transformation of media has not only undermined the imperial institutions of the mainstream media; it has undermined the imperial Presidency." Obama understands this so he alters his Administration to focus evenly on media as congressmen because now days it is equally important to keep media and congressmen happy inorder to keep a positive outlook on your Presidency. I was definitely drawn to this quote because of the support it gives to the central claim which is essential in helping the reader understand the authors opinion. This quote was directly speaking about how Obama has organized his Administration to satisfy the media more than any President in history. It also creates sort of a new idea of how following Presidents are going to have to organize their campaigns and Administration in order to satisfy the media, and ultimately become the next President. Obama has sort of adapted to this technological revolution which gives him a positive Presidential outlook, and has ultimately started a revolution for being elected to Presidency.
This quote is said by Peter Baker about one of Obama's Administration press office people named Rahm Emanuel. This quote said by a reported directly displays the understanding that Obama has about the media, that it is better to keep them happy than your enemy. It also connects to the central claim in this way because a President doesn't have an unchalleged voice that he used to have, "the transformation of media has not only undermined the imperial institutions of the mainstream media; it has undermined the imperial Presidency." Obama understands this so he alters his Administration to focus evenly on media as congressmen because now days it is equally important to keep media and congressmen happy inorder to keep a positive outlook on your Presidency. I was definitely drawn to this quote because of the support it gives to the central claim which is essential in helping the reader understand the authors opinion. This quote was directly speaking about how Obama has organized his Administration to satisfy the media more than any President in history. It also creates sort of a new idea of how following Presidents are going to have to organize their campaigns and Administration in order to satisfy the media, and ultimately become the next President. Obama has sort of adapted to this technological revolution which gives him a positive Presidential outlook, and has ultimately started a revolution for being elected to Presidency.
Ken Auletta's "Non-Stop News"
"The mainstream media overwhelmingly gave him a total pass when he changed the subject from Reverend Wright.. to the reace of America" The speech was watched by millions of people on YouTube, which meant that for the moment, at least, the campaign had succeeded in circumventing the filter of the press.
Ari Fliescher, the former press secretary to George W. Bush said this about Obama. Hillary Clinton and John McCain were both against all the campaigning through Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The article also talked about how in the Clinton era, campaigns weren't done on networking sites such as Twitter and so on, which all go around the filter of the press. During the Clinton era, the only way of campaigning was to actually go out in the world and do it by imagination such as interviews to the press. What I got out of this passage was that there was some tension with the other candidates because they didn't use Twitter, Facebook and other social networking sites. Clinton and McCain also backed off the campaign for "charges of race-baiting" because Reverend Wright was taking sides with Obama-- and so did the press. This is important because the fact that Obama was getting more attention than other candidates were pushing the candidates away and making them mad. Obama is black, has a family and a beautiful wife; everyone was attracted to him and his life style. But many political leaders didn't like the favoriteism.
Ari Fliescher, the former press secretary to George W. Bush said this about Obama. Hillary Clinton and John McCain were both against all the campaigning through Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The article also talked about how in the Clinton era, campaigns weren't done on networking sites such as Twitter and so on, which all go around the filter of the press. During the Clinton era, the only way of campaigning was to actually go out in the world and do it by imagination such as interviews to the press. What I got out of this passage was that there was some tension with the other candidates because they didn't use Twitter, Facebook and other social networking sites. Clinton and McCain also backed off the campaign for "charges of race-baiting" because Reverend Wright was taking sides with Obama-- and so did the press. This is important because the fact that Obama was getting more attention than other candidates were pushing the candidates away and making them mad. Obama is black, has a family and a beautiful wife; everyone was attracted to him and his life style. But many political leaders didn't like the favoriteism.
"Non-Stop News" by Ken Auletta
"They don't represent the public any more than other people do. I don't believe you have a check-and-balance function." Bush boasted that he did not read newspapers or pay attention to television news. By contrast, Obama, according to Gibbs, is "a voracious consumer" of news.
What I like about this passage is it makes a good point. Being the president, you cannot focus on what the news is saying. This article talks about how Obama in comparrison to Bush got so wrapped up in pleasing the reporters and in various ways has tried to get them to pull their punches. Over the years the media has changed vigorously, it does not get the chance to cover up mistakes or edit your words. Instead, it is spread directly to the public as soon as the speech is over. What you say is what everyone hears, instantly. The sources of this are through through media such as Youtube, T.V. news, internet sites, etc. People even have internet on their phones so they get the news instantly. Bush is giving some advice that helped him to Obama. I think Bush is right, the news is there to single out your mistakes for everyone to see, it's their job. What you can do to get back at them is not let it get to you, but in order to not let it get to you, because I know anyone who hears bad things about themselves it will hurt you, you can't watch or listen to what they say.
What I like about this passage is it makes a good point. Being the president, you cannot focus on what the news is saying. This article talks about how Obama in comparrison to Bush got so wrapped up in pleasing the reporters and in various ways has tried to get them to pull their punches. Over the years the media has changed vigorously, it does not get the chance to cover up mistakes or edit your words. Instead, it is spread directly to the public as soon as the speech is over. What you say is what everyone hears, instantly. The sources of this are through through media such as Youtube, T.V. news, internet sites, etc. People even have internet on their phones so they get the news instantly. Bush is giving some advice that helped him to Obama. I think Bush is right, the news is there to single out your mistakes for everyone to see, it's their job. What you can do to get back at them is not let it get to you, but in order to not let it get to you, because I know anyone who hears bad things about themselves it will hurt you, you can't watch or listen to what they say.
Non- Stop News
What really made me understand this article more is when the author told us that George Bush 6 years ago didnt have facebook, twitter, youtube, dozens of regional newspapers and TV stations and etc. That made me realize Obama is more exposed to the media alot more than previous presidents and the media is watching his every move and people around the USA can know what his life is like and what he is doing since they can have access to online newspapers and such. Ken Attuela is saying this in his essay and almost seems like he thinks Obama can't help being so exposed to the media. Later on in the essay he indeed starts talking about how reporters and such are to blame for this overdosage of media to higher end people especially. I think that the author is right, George Bush didnt have all of these reporters on him like flies like they do to Obama. Obama does have more pressure then Obama with being on Americas side and pleasing them and I think reporters need to back off a bit of Obama and give him space to breath and think.
"Non-Stop News" by Ken Auletta
“Everything is rushed. Anita Dunn says, ‘When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.’ Instead of seeking context or disputing a claim, reporters often simply get two opposing quotes and file a he said/she said story.
Anita Dunn said “When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.” In saying, Dunn’s point is that journalists seek out each other and use each other not because they personally would like to hear each other’s point of view, but instead they need a response for whatever story they’re covering. The need to file five times a day brings a frantic rush to reporters and journalists alike resulting in news having no depth and the quality of the story suffers. The immediate access to news makes it hard for anyone to keep up with anything, be it journalists or just average people hearing about it. I think its interesting that the point of journalists calling each other is to get a response from one another, rather than having an in depth discussion about the topic. I also like the inference that Ken Auletta makes about the news stories/ journalists’ writing just turning into a “he said/she said” story that has no depth or meaning. Instead of actually putting time and effort into a piece, journalists have to get their writing done, and get it done as soon as humanly possible. This “need for speed” is increasing more and more as news is becoming more accessible to the populous. The immediate access and 24 hour news cycle means news must be updated constantly. For journalists and reporters alike, this non stop pressure leaves no lag time for a journalist who used to be able to take their time and put thought effort into a piece. Journalists used to be able to research and get solid facts before they started writing and published a piece, now they don’t even have time to get any for sure facts or even at least two sides of the story. I think that because of this our news is not always as accurate as we would like to think and we only see one side of an argument. News stories used to be well thought out and could be written with a lot of time put into them, not a quick writing session getting down the not always solid facts and calling a friend for a response.
the now news
non-stop news
The transformation in Media technology has also altered government communication strategy. "The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore."
This is on page 43 last paragraph in the first Column. Aurthur Ken Auletta is saying it and he quotes Mark McKinnon.
The transformation they are talking about is how technology is effecting the media today. Technology is speeding up the news proses, now anyone can get any news they want just by checking the computer or the T.V. so the reporters need to keep it all up to date much more and accurate so they don't lose viewers. "Nothing can drive a news cycle anymore." no one can just decide that they want to report on a certain thing at any given time, now they report on the current news the new news.
This reminds me of how younger generations want everything now. If we want to know something we want it now. There are different ways to get information and quick we have this need for instant gratification.
The transformation in Media technology has also altered government communication strategy. "The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore."
This is on page 43 last paragraph in the first Column. Aurthur Ken Auletta is saying it and he quotes Mark McKinnon.
The transformation they are talking about is how technology is effecting the media today. Technology is speeding up the news proses, now anyone can get any news they want just by checking the computer or the T.V. so the reporters need to keep it all up to date much more and accurate so they don't lose viewers. "Nothing can drive a news cycle anymore." no one can just decide that they want to report on a certain thing at any given time, now they report on the current news the new news.
This reminds me of how younger generations want everything now. If we want to know something we want it now. There are different ways to get information and quick we have this need for instant gratification.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Responce #5
In the article, "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution," the author, Cynthia L. Selfe, an English studies teacher, writes about three forms of advertisements using computers. Selfe gives a description of a popular social narrative-one that people wish was true-and a revision of that same narrative-one that shows the real picture. And through the revised narrative, Selfe opens the eyes of her readers as to how technology is deceiving them. Selfe claims that "an exclusive focus on the positive changes associated with technology, often serves to distract educators from recognizing how existing social forces actually work to resist change in connection with technology." In other words she wants the educators, who are mainly her readers, to realize that though it brings about positive social changes, technology also hides the negative side of things. It has a mask that distracts us and keeps us from seeing the whole picture.
The very first narrative she explains to her readers is one of a 'Global village'-the popular social narrative. And "according to this popular social narrative, the computer network that spans the globe with serve to...bind together the people of the world regardless of race, ethnicity, or location." So computers are used in such a way that they connect all the people in the world. That is just an awesome picture: no more separation based on borders and ethical and racial differences, we would be connected with different cultures, and be able to see how other people live. We would all be living in paradise because those are the things that would cause wars to break out and technology could bring it down, if not stop it. But then we see the revised narrative, the "Electronic Colony", and the true reality of what we do with technology is put to light. "In this story, Americans use technology to become world travelers, to learn about-and acquire knowledge of- other cultures while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and, thus, comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village." We are too lazy, too full of self worth, to actually go out into the world, but instead we sit around and have the computer screen tell us what is going on in the world. We don't use the technology given us to help shape a better world, but take the easy way out instead and experience the world just the way it is from our computers. Selfe even shows the readers a picture of a white woman sitting in her living room that displays artifacts from around the world and a big screen full of "exotic people and far-off locations" and a computer that displays a world map on it's screen. Sure we can see what is going on, but we don't get to live it. We don't get to smell what they smell, live the way they live, eat what they eat, we live in out own little bubble of a world in our own homes.
Now a days, I think that in a way this is still going on, not necessarily with computers as it's focus as to why we don't do what we should do, but there are still commercials on TV's that ask you to support kids from another county by sending a monthly check, they don't ask you to come down and see the child face-to-face, form a relationship with the child, or live the we that they live. Their just asking you to send money not experience what they have been experiencing their whole lives. So I believe that we are starting to form a better connection with other nations, but we haven't come very far. We've gone from sitting in our living rooms, looking at the computer screen, to picking up the phone and sending money, but there is still more we could do. Selfe told her readers "twenty percent of the population currently consumes eighty percent of the resources." So one thing we could do is share those resources help them get better food, warmer clothes, and safer house. These are just a few steps we can take in order to get from the "Electronic Colony" to the "Global Village".
The very first narrative she explains to her readers is one of a 'Global village'-the popular social narrative. And "according to this popular social narrative, the computer network that spans the globe with serve to...bind together the people of the world regardless of race, ethnicity, or location." So computers are used in such a way that they connect all the people in the world. That is just an awesome picture: no more separation based on borders and ethical and racial differences, we would be connected with different cultures, and be able to see how other people live. We would all be living in paradise because those are the things that would cause wars to break out and technology could bring it down, if not stop it. But then we see the revised narrative, the "Electronic Colony", and the true reality of what we do with technology is put to light. "In this story, Americans use technology to become world travelers, to learn about-and acquire knowledge of- other cultures while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and, thus, comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village." We are too lazy, too full of self worth, to actually go out into the world, but instead we sit around and have the computer screen tell us what is going on in the world. We don't use the technology given us to help shape a better world, but take the easy way out instead and experience the world just the way it is from our computers. Selfe even shows the readers a picture of a white woman sitting in her living room that displays artifacts from around the world and a big screen full of "exotic people and far-off locations" and a computer that displays a world map on it's screen. Sure we can see what is going on, but we don't get to live it. We don't get to smell what they smell, live the way they live, eat what they eat, we live in out own little bubble of a world in our own homes.
Now a days, I think that in a way this is still going on, not necessarily with computers as it's focus as to why we don't do what we should do, but there are still commercials on TV's that ask you to support kids from another county by sending a monthly check, they don't ask you to come down and see the child face-to-face, form a relationship with the child, or live the we that they live. Their just asking you to send money not experience what they have been experiencing their whole lives. So I believe that we are starting to form a better connection with other nations, but we haven't come very far. We've gone from sitting in our living rooms, looking at the computer screen, to picking up the phone and sending money, but there is still more we could do. Selfe told her readers "twenty percent of the population currently consumes eighty percent of the resources." So one thing we could do is share those resources help them get better food, warmer clothes, and safer house. These are just a few steps we can take in order to get from the "Electronic Colony" to the "Global Village".
Monday, November 1, 2010
Kylie's Response on "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"
In our culture today we lean on believing what is shown to us through pictures, adds, and graphics. In the essay “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution” by Cynthia L. Selfe she discusses the impact technology has on us along with the fears and the essentials of it. Selfe’s first narrative was “The Global Village and the Electronic Colony”. In this popular social narrative she explains how the computer network that spans the globe will serve to erase meaningless geopolitical borders, eliminate racial and ethnic differences, re-establish a historical familial relationship which binds together the peoples of the world regardless of race, ethnicity, or location. We are supplied with information about these topics through news, radio, and internet, but the issue is that it is edited so that the cruel and depressing stuff that is actually happening to others like us is hidden. We know its there, yet we are not obligated to hear or go through the painful obstacles others go through without a choice. The internet have created a separation between Americans and people of other races and locations by creating a defined knowledge. This knowledge is limited. Americans know what is going on, but without having to physically or mentally go through it they have lost remorse and sympathy for those in different situations. We only allow ourselves to know what we are comfortable knowing. Selfe says, “In fact, we find ourselves, as a culture, ill equipped to cope with the changes that the ‘global village’ story necessitates, unable, even, to imagine, collectivity, ways of relating to the world outside our previous historical and cultural experiences.” In this essay she give examples of two pictures. In the first figure it is an ethnic man with the world above him and the text says, “For the world to have a future we must work together as one tribe.” In the second figure it has several pictures of a man and of his tribe the texts for this figure is, “Welcome to the planet. Virgin’s one tribe. Virgin’s one world atlas. Welcome to One Tribe and One World.” With our technology today we rarely can even tell when we are just getting the re-told and revised facts shown to us. She goes on to explain in this essay, “This re-telling and re-vising of the Global Village story- we can now call it the Electronic Colonial narrative- happens very naturally within the discursive venues available to our culture- on television, in our classrooms, in books, and articles, and in corporate settings- often without anyone noticing because the elements of revised Electronic Colonial narrative are so much more familiar and acceptable to us than were those of the original Global Village story.
After reading this essay, I agree with Selfe’s understanding of technology and how it have impacted us without even realizing it. An example of this could be, my friend and I went on the internet and we came across an add for donating to the cause of Africa and Global Hunger. Instead of donating or even giving the add the time of day, they move on to check their Facebook to distract them from the hard truth. Last week I was in a class at my high school and we are picking debate topics and mine is abortion. I was on the internet looking up statistics and information and a page popped up, it was a picture of a baby who had been aborted and it broke my heart. This is a first-hand picture of what is happening in real life, and after seeing that picture it impacted me so much. We are given many opportunities to hear or see the cold facts on which is happening, but it is in our hands to click the button or not change the channel. The revised and blinded version of facts are supplied in many places and in the essay Selfe describes how we use that to claim we can understand and experience what people in other places are going through. Yet, we do not know what they are going through, it is not happening to us, we keep it “arm’s length away” from us so that we do not have to suffer.
After reading this essay, I agree with Selfe’s understanding of technology and how it have impacted us without even realizing it. An example of this could be, my friend and I went on the internet and we came across an add for donating to the cause of Africa and Global Hunger. Instead of donating or even giving the add the time of day, they move on to check their Facebook to distract them from the hard truth. Last week I was in a class at my high school and we are picking debate topics and mine is abortion. I was on the internet looking up statistics and information and a page popped up, it was a picture of a baby who had been aborted and it broke my heart. This is a first-hand picture of what is happening in real life, and after seeing that picture it impacted me so much. We are given many opportunities to hear or see the cold facts on which is happening, but it is in our hands to click the button or not change the channel. The revised and blinded version of facts are supplied in many places and in the essay Selfe describes how we use that to claim we can understand and experience what people in other places are going through. Yet, we do not know what they are going through, it is not happening to us, we keep it “arm’s length away” from us so that we do not have to suffer.
Taylor's response to Cynthia Selfe's "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"
The Internet. One of the only mediums that people of today can instantly connect to people all over the world with one click of a button. With that one click we can talk to people worldwide, explore ancient ruins, travel over the African jungles, along with other endless possibilities. The internet literarily gives us the world at our fingertips. We like to think of the internet as “The Global Village” where everyone all over the world can be connected and come together in one place. Some think that the internet can bring everyone together in a sort of melting pot, where all peoples of the world can coexist despite the barriers of racial and cultural differences and political boarders. Cynthia L. Self, author of “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution”, thinks otherwise. In “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution”, Selfe discusses a few of the popular narratives, what people like to think, versus the revised narratives of the popular narratives, the reality rather than fantasy. In Selfe’s book, one of the popular narratives she talks about is the idea of the internet being a “Global Village” that brings everyone together. Selfe then introduces the revised narrative, which is that the internet is an “Electronic Colony” rather than the utopian ideal that is the “Global Village”. Selfe herself writes that “the global village retains its reach, but it becomes a world in which different cultures, different peoples, exist to be discovered, explored, marveled at-in a sense, known and claimed by-those who, can design and use technology. Inhabitants of this electronic global village, in turn, become foreigners, exotics, savages, objects to study and sometimes, to control”. With this quote, Selfe is discussing the fact that many countries, such as the United States, feel superior to other countries and can therefore have the access and privilege to just use them as a sort of entertainment. Selfe also discusses that not all places have the same equal access to technology as others making the ideal of equality and the “global village” near impossible for some to be a part of merely because of inability to access computers because of area or poverty. Because of this, the internet has naturally become an “electronic colony” where more fortunate places and people can, as Selfe puts it, marvel at others who are looked at as “foreigners, exotics, and savages”.
I agree with Selfe’s idea that the internet is an “electronic colony” rather than a “global village.” I feel that although the internet in a sense puts the world at your fingertips, it is a kind of experience that is not as unique and firsthand. Selfe advocates the fact that “Americans use technology to become would travelers, to learn about- and acquire knowledge of- other cultures, while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and thus, comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village”. Selfe’s point is that by seeing the world through a screen on a desk or in your own lap in the comfort of your own home, people cannot thoroughly comprehend what it is they are seeing or reading about. The internet makes us feel included but the reality is that we are really comfortably removed from the situation, overlooking the fact we’re in the comfort of our own homes in our own comfortable living rooms sitting in a warn nice chair. I can agree with Selfe’s claim because my life experiences with the internet confirm the feeling of being a part of something when really I’m simply just watching from a comfortable distance. This “electronic colony” is not a new idea that came with the internet and new technology; it is now just more accessible to the populous. This idea is all around of everywhere, not only the internet, but in the news media on the television and on the radio as well as in books and magazines. Sure I can see poverty on a screen and feel bad and feel this motivation to try to help and make a difference but I’m not there experiencing it right among them. Although I personally in no way feel inferior to other people because of my race or where I live, there is no way I can fathom or feel what they are feeling and they struggles they go through. I’m not living there, I’m not immersed in the poverty itself, I can’t smell the air or feel the hunger or sadness they are feeling. I am just simply sympathizing with them through what I’m seeing through a screen. Though I concede Selfe’s theory on the “Electronic Colony” ruling the internet and media rather than the “Global Village”, I still insist that the internet is a start and step towards the idea of the “Global Village”. Although we are just seeing things through a screen, this could inspire some to do more and actually make a difference.
Reading Response on "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"
In Cynthia Selfe’s writing, "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution," she discusses about the fears and facts of technology around the world. She talks on three narratives that America believes when it comes to technology: "The Global Village and The Electronic Colony", "Land of Equal Opportunity and Land of Difference," and "The Un-Gendered Utopia and The Same Old Gendered Stuff.” Selfe explains in the first narrative that Americans have relied on technology doing the work for them; Americans have less effort doing the labor and have turned to technology for faster results. For example, instead of making that trip to the library to research about a subject or matter, we would rather resort to the internet as opposed to reading a lengthy book (more time consuming). Selfe urges, “Americans use technology to become world travelers, to learn about- and acquire knowledge of- other cultures, while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and, thus comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village.” She argues, just because we have watched it on the television, it does not mean we have truly experienced it. Therefore, when the technology does the labor for us (when the internet does the researching for us), granted that the results may come faster but the experience of pursuit is not attained (we have not really immersed ourselves in that book). In the second narrative, Selfe points out that America may indeed be a land of equal opportunity, but it is only the land of opportunity for some people. There are many different ethnicities from other parts of the world seeking permanent residence in America, but only those who can afford spending money on immigration requirements can make it. On Selfe’s third narrative, she talks about how technology was initially designed for men since women’s roles in the 1950s were housewives. But now, women go head to head with men; women are doing the same profession as men do. At the same time, we now have men prefer to be “housewives”. The point is there is no ruling on which profession belongs to what gender; both men and women escape the conventional references placed upon them.
I’d like to focus on her first narrative, “The Global Village and The Electronic Colony”. Technology has truly changed my life; I particularly rely on the internet to do the work for me like researching a subject matter as opposed to stepping out from my house to go to the library. I agree that the internet also has its downfalls seeing that for this case, I actually miss the experience in chasing the answer through reading books. Yet, I still maintain that the Internet comes very handy for me. I can send an email to a relative overseas and they instantly get my message. If I were to compose my message on a paper and actually mail the letter out, delivery would certainly take longer. They would most likely get my letter several days later. It would probably be okay if the message you want to convey is not that crucial, ofcourse it would be a joy to receive a tangible letter where you can see and feel the handwriting of the sender. However, I’m sure many would resort to the Internet when something crucial comes up and message must be sent instantly. Technology has its pros and cons. We can always limit ourselves from going overboard but the choice comes from us whether we want to make a change or just the same- happy the way use it.
I’d like to focus on her first narrative, “The Global Village and The Electronic Colony”. Technology has truly changed my life; I particularly rely on the internet to do the work for me like researching a subject matter as opposed to stepping out from my house to go to the library. I agree that the internet also has its downfalls seeing that for this case, I actually miss the experience in chasing the answer through reading books. Yet, I still maintain that the Internet comes very handy for me. I can send an email to a relative overseas and they instantly get my message. If I were to compose my message on a paper and actually mail the letter out, delivery would certainly take longer. They would most likely get my letter several days later. It would probably be okay if the message you want to convey is not that crucial, ofcourse it would be a joy to receive a tangible letter where you can see and feel the handwriting of the sender. However, I’m sure many would resort to the Internet when something crucial comes up and message must be sent instantly. Technology has its pros and cons. We can always limit ourselves from going overboard but the choice comes from us whether we want to make a change or just the same- happy the way use it.
Reading Responce #6
In our culture, as Amercians, we tend to believe what we are shown- whether that be adds or photographs. In Cynthia Selfe's essay Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution, she discribes three different popular narratives- which are when we create fantasies of how we like to think of technology and all of he positive influences it has given to us. She then explains her revised narratives- what technology is really doing to our society. With her audience mainly being to educators, she states " an exclusive focus on the positive changes associated with technology, often serves to distract educators from recognizing how existing social forces actually work to resist change in connection with technology." She is saying that as educators, all focus on technology has been on positive changes while casually ignoring the social ways in which technology does not support change. In her essay, she compares the popular narrative- what we want to believe, with her revised narrative- what we really believe.
The first narrative, The Global Village deals with the fact that we would like to believe that "technology will help us create a global village in which the peoples of the world are all connected." It is nice thought that we have access to all these people around the world. We don't have to worry about race, what country you are from and all walls are torn down. It is then highly disapointing when she discribes that her revised narrative as "the global village [retaining] its geographical reach, but it becomes a world in which different culture, different peoples, exist to be discovered, expored, marveled at." In a sense of learning and education about other societies other than our own, the internet is a great source. However, in the sense that we are connecting with people from all over the world as if there are no barriers between us, that is highly unrealistic and nieve. We cannot possibly create a "global village" on the internet, it's just not possible. The internet can be very unsafe at times because you don't know who you are really talking to and if they are telling you the truth. So to simply rely on thinking that we as a world is becoming a community due to the internet, its foolish.
The first narrative, The Global Village deals with the fact that we would like to believe that "technology will help us create a global village in which the peoples of the world are all connected." It is nice thought that we have access to all these people around the world. We don't have to worry about race, what country you are from and all walls are torn down. It is then highly disapointing when she discribes that her revised narrative as "the global village [retaining] its geographical reach, but it becomes a world in which different culture, different peoples, exist to be discovered, expored, marveled at." In a sense of learning and education about other societies other than our own, the internet is a great source. However, in the sense that we are connecting with people from all over the world as if there are no barriers between us, that is highly unrealistic and nieve. We cannot possibly create a "global village" on the internet, it's just not possible. The internet can be very unsafe at times because you don't know who you are really talking to and if they are telling you the truth. So to simply rely on thinking that we as a world is becoming a community due to the internet, its foolish.
As for the next two popular narratives, they explain how in "this landscape, Americans like to believe, [it] is open to everybody- male and female, regardless of clor, class or connection'', while the last popular narrive is focusing mainly on gender biases. The revised narrative is that "Amercia is the land of opportunity only for some people" and that they don't show any kind of minority. I don't think this it true nowadays. I think that today, companies that air ads, are so affraid of being pegged as predidous that they steer clear of most things that are biased and try to put in more minorites while still keeping in mind as to who their audience is. This is a hard task, you aren't going to please everyone. We all need to remember that we are not at the point where everything is perfect, but we are trying and hopefully, we will get there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)