"Time's Person of the Year: You" by Lev Grossman
December 13, 2006
Summary: This article talks about the world, as a collective force, coming together and making something that could be great. We are now shaping what the future will bring.
Response: Grossman's article was a nice change of pace. Instead of writing about the horrors of the recent web, he considers it an accomplishment. He praises the human race for coming together and being able to share ourselves with one another. I agree that it is an accomplishment of commonality between mankind; however, some of what is available needs to be taken with a grain of salt. If someone makes a YouTube video of the end of the world, there is no need to go hide in a bomb shelter, but rather praise their creativity. As long as people have an understanding of what is credible and not, the world is not at an eminent threat of destruction by the Web 2.0 which others fear.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Reading Log
"Internet Smackdown: the Amateur vs the Professional" by Tony Long
June 21, 2007
Summary: Long writes an article in which he looks at a main issue which is brought up in debate by Andrew Keen: an amateur blogger is not the same as a professional journalist.
Response: Although Long agrees with what Andrew Keen has said in previous articles, his does so in a more tasteful manner. Instead of writing in what seems rash and demeaning, like Keen, he presents the issue like a true journalist. I agree that there is a distinction between being a journalist and an online blogger, and with this distinction should be the appropriate credentials. Journalists work hard to learn the craft of their trade and because of this are able to write what our society considers good articles. Even though bloggers may not have formal training, they do have opinions and should not be discredited merely by they're lack of academic qualifications. People may be trained to look at events in different ways and because of this may have a worthwhile opinion. Long sums up the idea quite nicely, "They're bloggers. No shame in that. Just don't confuse blogging with journalism."
June 21, 2007
Summary: Long writes an article in which he looks at a main issue which is brought up in debate by Andrew Keen: an amateur blogger is not the same as a professional journalist.
Response: Although Long agrees with what Andrew Keen has said in previous articles, his does so in a more tasteful manner. Instead of writing in what seems rash and demeaning, like Keen, he presents the issue like a true journalist. I agree that there is a distinction between being a journalist and an online blogger, and with this distinction should be the appropriate credentials. Journalists work hard to learn the craft of their trade and because of this are able to write what our society considers good articles. Even though bloggers may not have formal training, they do have opinions and should not be discredited merely by they're lack of academic qualifications. People may be trained to look at events in different ways and because of this may have a worthwhile opinion. Long sums up the idea quite nicely, "They're bloggers. No shame in that. Just don't confuse blogging with journalism."
Reading Log
"Web 2.0 The second generation of the Internet has arrived. It's worse than you think." by Andrew Keen
February 15, 2006
Summary: Keen's article basically shares his point of view how the temptation of using the internet and the new Web 2.0 revolution has consequences on our society that users are unaware of.
Response: After reading a few of Keen's articles it seems like he has a serious vendetta out for the modern internet. Talk about a glass half empty kind of guy. He can present decent arguments about the reliability of sources diminishing, but some of his other claims seem to have illogical reasoning. Keen claims that, "We will lose our memory for things learnt, read, experienced, or heard" without the influence of what he considers credible sources. Just because we read our news off of a computer screen rather than a piece of paper does not make it any less reliable or mind stimulating. On the contrary I believe people are more informed. Never before could you look at the New York Times or Boston Globe within seconds of each other and compare different points of view on similar issues. Since reading the news is now more convenient, people will be more apt to do so. Keen also compares us to Kafka's work stating we are "incapable of thinking deliberately" with the newfound developments of the internet. On the contrary though, since people now have an outlet to express their thoughts, they are more likely to do so and actually generate their own ideas. Just because you can read about someone else's opinions doesn't mean you are incapable of making your own. If Keen is going to claim this then he might as well go as far as saying that anyone who considers another's opinion, whether it be reading their book or listening to a speech, will no longer be able to come up with the own opinions and is a forced into the same beliefs.
February 15, 2006
Summary: Keen's article basically shares his point of view how the temptation of using the internet and the new Web 2.0 revolution has consequences on our society that users are unaware of.
Response: After reading a few of Keen's articles it seems like he has a serious vendetta out for the modern internet. Talk about a glass half empty kind of guy. He can present decent arguments about the reliability of sources diminishing, but some of his other claims seem to have illogical reasoning. Keen claims that, "We will lose our memory for things learnt, read, experienced, or heard" without the influence of what he considers credible sources. Just because we read our news off of a computer screen rather than a piece of paper does not make it any less reliable or mind stimulating. On the contrary I believe people are more informed. Never before could you look at the New York Times or Boston Globe within seconds of each other and compare different points of view on similar issues. Since reading the news is now more convenient, people will be more apt to do so. Keen also compares us to Kafka's work stating we are "incapable of thinking deliberately" with the newfound developments of the internet. On the contrary though, since people now have an outlet to express their thoughts, they are more likely to do so and actually generate their own ideas. Just because you can read about someone else's opinions doesn't mean you are incapable of making your own. If Keen is going to claim this then he might as well go as far as saying that anyone who considers another's opinion, whether it be reading their book or listening to a speech, will no longer be able to come up with the own opinions and is a forced into the same beliefs.
Reading Log
"Reflections on the First Decade of Blogging" by Dan Farber
February 25, 2007
Summary: Farber gives his thoughts upon blogging and the controversial reliability of the internet. He uses Andrew Keen and his opinions introduced in his book "The Cult of the Amateur" to show the dangers of the internet to our society. Farber also defends the common bl0gger and gives ideas to how the system can be improved.
Response: I liked the way at which Farber considered the issue. Not only did he give the pros and cons, but also gave ideas on how to improve for the future. Farber said that many bloggers are informed specialists and do in fact know what they are talking about, we just need a better way to distinguish them. I agree with him. Not everything about the internet being ruled by the common person is bad. Look at how fast we can find information. Instead of having to search through books, as long as you are an informed user, you can in fact find reliable information. It is when people are ignorant and are unaware of what truly can be used as fact is when problems arise. Atleast since Farber was presented both sides of the story I feel I can consider what he is saying. He doesn't seem to be overrun with bias and opinion, but instead is presenting valid arguments for both sides allowing the reader to make their own opinion.
February 25, 2007
Summary: Farber gives his thoughts upon blogging and the controversial reliability of the internet. He uses Andrew Keen and his opinions introduced in his book "The Cult of the Amateur" to show the dangers of the internet to our society. Farber also defends the common bl0gger and gives ideas to how the system can be improved.
Response: I liked the way at which Farber considered the issue. Not only did he give the pros and cons, but also gave ideas on how to improve for the future. Farber said that many bloggers are informed specialists and do in fact know what they are talking about, we just need a better way to distinguish them. I agree with him. Not everything about the internet being ruled by the common person is bad. Look at how fast we can find information. Instead of having to search through books, as long as you are an informed user, you can in fact find reliable information. It is when people are ignorant and are unaware of what truly can be used as fact is when problems arise. Atleast since Farber was presented both sides of the story I feel I can consider what he is saying. He doesn't seem to be overrun with bias and opinion, but instead is presenting valid arguments for both sides allowing the reader to make their own opinion.
Reading Log
"The Cult of the Amateur" by Michiko Kakutani
June 29, 2007
Summary: This article shows the more negative side to the new age of the web, Web2.0. Kakutani uses Andrew Keen's book, " The Cult of the Amateur" as his main defense. This book claims that the web is being dominated by unreliable sources and because of the threatens to change the traditions of the web. One example used is that people are more likely to use Wikipedia which is run through anonymous authors who may or may not have knowledge on the subject, than an established Encyclopedia written through scholars.
Response: Keen brings up good argument for the fate of our internet. As the popularity of "fad" sites increase, such as myspace, youtube, and facebook, slowly the main interest of our internet is being created through the common person. Learning about one another is not the bad part of this new age of internet, what is threatening is the line between fiction and reality is slowly disappearing. No longer will we be able to determine what is based upon fact rather than merely one's opinion. If other people start to basing their thoughts and decisions on only limited or inaccurate information, our society may not be able to run as we know it. Sites are slowly losing their credibility and many of the people using these resources may be unaware of their decay.
Even though the information of Keen's which Kakutani presented seemed to be credible, he made a statement in which he lost not only his credibility but also respect. Mr. Keen says, "history has proven that the crowd is not often very wise." He gives examples comparing slavery and infanticide to the war in Iraq and Britney Spears. His article did not have any facts to justify the statements he made about our military. Not to mention that claiming the support of our troops is unwise is quite demeaning to this country and the people who are fighting for it. It is uncalled for to compare such a serious and debatable issue with something as horrifying as slavery or infanticide. If this was merely his attempt to voice his thoughts on current issues, than perhaps he should be using the internet sites which he was previously bashing for being supported without fact to voice what appears to be a comment from merely his own opinion.
June 29, 2007
Summary: This article shows the more negative side to the new age of the web, Web2.0. Kakutani uses Andrew Keen's book, " The Cult of the Amateur" as his main defense. This book claims that the web is being dominated by unreliable sources and because of the threatens to change the traditions of the web. One example used is that people are more likely to use Wikipedia which is run through anonymous authors who may or may not have knowledge on the subject, than an established Encyclopedia written through scholars.
Response: Keen brings up good argument for the fate of our internet. As the popularity of "fad" sites increase, such as myspace, youtube, and facebook, slowly the main interest of our internet is being created through the common person. Learning about one another is not the bad part of this new age of internet, what is threatening is the line between fiction and reality is slowly disappearing. No longer will we be able to determine what is based upon fact rather than merely one's opinion. If other people start to basing their thoughts and decisions on only limited or inaccurate information, our society may not be able to run as we know it. Sites are slowly losing their credibility and many of the people using these resources may be unaware of their decay.
Even though the information of Keen's which Kakutani presented seemed to be credible, he made a statement in which he lost not only his credibility but also respect. Mr. Keen says, "history has proven that the crowd is not often very wise." He gives examples comparing slavery and infanticide to the war in Iraq and Britney Spears. His article did not have any facts to justify the statements he made about our military. Not to mention that claiming the support of our troops is unwise is quite demeaning to this country and the people who are fighting for it. It is uncalled for to compare such a serious and debatable issue with something as horrifying as slavery or infanticide. If this was merely his attempt to voice his thoughts on current issues, than perhaps he should be using the internet sites which he was previously bashing for being supported without fact to voice what appears to be a comment from merely his own opinion.
Introduction
Hey,
my name's Lindsey and I'm a senior biology major. I won't lie, the reason I'm in this class is because it sounded a whole lot better than speech, not to mention if I actually make it to Med School one day, advanced writing is required. Even though this isn't my first choice of subjects, I figure I will make the best of it while I'm here.
my name's Lindsey and I'm a senior biology major. I won't lie, the reason I'm in this class is because it sounded a whole lot better than speech, not to mention if I actually make it to Med School one day, advanced writing is required. Even though this isn't my first choice of subjects, I figure I will make the best of it while I'm here.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)