Final Keypost: Is Tech Really Unhealthy?

As well documented in our class discussions and exploration, technology can be a beautiful thing! However, there are many downsides to modern technology as well. A few we viewed in class were things like younger suicide rates, revenge porn, and cyberbullying. With that being said, I wanted to explore how technology played a role in my life. Is it a good and healthy one, or one I should maybe reconsider?

Starting with the concept of giving technology appropriate time in my life, I would say I actually give it too much time. With a career as a sports journalist, it’s literally my job to be dialed into news that cycles throughout the day. Being late to, or missing a story can be a very big deal. Therefore, I’d say that while I do give too much time to technology, a lot of it is something I’ve felt forced to do. If I had the choice, I would be much less active on my computer and phone.

All that being said, technology is an essential tool that does make its user smarter, depending on how they use it. Because I use my technology to research, conduct business, and help grow my contacts, I would say it’s made me a smarter person. However, those that use their technology to waste time watching funny cat videos (no offense) are likely not gaining the same knowledge. Having the world at our fingertips is a powerful tool and I feel we must take full advantage of what it has to offer.

As I look to my family, friends, and even those much younger than me, I am fearful. I’ve seen firsthand how my niece, who is only a few years younger than I am, can’t stay away from updating her social life. In fact, she can’t even watch a full movie without quickly being distracted by her phone. It really bugs me.

Also, during the summer months, I work at my county’s Parks & Recreation as a summer camp counselor. At this day camp, we do allow our kids to play with their technology at certain times. It’s become so interesting and concerning to me that kids these days have no imagination because of technology’s impact. Once we “unplug them” for the day, they will sit in boredom, feeling like they have nothing to do. It appears that gone are the days children would use their imagination to play with each other, rather than pairing their Nintendo Switch’s to play Mario Kart. It’s scary that at one point, my generation was the age of upcoming technology, but now I have to call upon a six-year-old for assistance.

Overall, while I feel the use of technology in my life is too much, I have come to terms that most of it is necessary. However, as cited in my above paragraphs, I’m heavily concerned about what the future holds if we don’t teach our young the proper uses of this new tech. From an early age, they are taught to be infatuated it with. Parents handoff tablets like lollypops to limit behavioral issues. What is found in turn is the lack of basic human functions and skills. I believe we will see more and more that while this technology is certainly helpful, it will produce many dangerous consequences to our society. It already has.

Sources: http://medlawlit.blogspot.com/p/final-post-prompt.html

Research: TikTok's Diffusion of Innovations

In class, one key concept we learned about this semester was Rogers Diffusion of Innovations. The concept maps out just how ideas, that turn into successful companies, brands, etc, catch on. With new ideas coming out every day, only some of them can truly find their way to the top. 

Currently, one of the most present companies of today’s society is the social media app TikTok. TikTok’s initial presence debuted in 2014 when the app was under the name Music.ly. At the time, users could create short lip-syncing videos to TV show/movie soundbites or popular songs. The app was notable but eventually phased out of popularity rather quickly. 

I would call the users that first joined Music.ly early adopters. These users, usually from a younger demographic, hopped on the trend of using the app while it gained popularity, and most stayed as it transitioned into what it is today. I personally had a Music.ly account, but I never used the app. I honestly just didn’t understand it and it had no appeal to me. However, now I can’t imagine a day I don’t scroll through TikTok. 

Eventually, the company merged with another out of China and became TikTok. The new idea was to allow longer video lengths (up to 60 seconds) without a creativity cap. What I mean is that it was no longer just about music or soundbites, but more about whatever the user wanted to put into the 60-second time slot. This is certainly where the early majority came in. 

The app’s new algorithm tracked what the user would like, comment, and share to produce more of that particular content on its “for you” page. For instance, if you’re a supporter of Joe Biden or Donald Trump, you’ll see content related to those individuals more often. Because I’m a racing fan, I typically see a lot of content that has to do with racing.

As the popularity of this concept and app caught on, the late adopters have started to appear. TikTok truly controls the entertainment industry right now as songs that gain popularity on the app will gain wide popularity on the radio and other places. The app has helped create new stars and celebrities by its power to reach a very wide audience. Notable celebrities have run to the app in hopes to stay relevant. How wide is its reach you wonder? How about 1.29 billion users worldwide and growing.

While the popularity of TikTok doesn’t look to be slowing down anytime soon, there are people who refuse to join the service. Some just feel it’s not for them while others worry about their privacy. TikTok is known to track their user’s data, in what they say is to make the platform better. However, as its parent company was formerly out of China, President Trump threatened to ban the app unless sold off to an American company, as it became a security threat. 

Whichever way you look at it, you have to admit how amazing the growth of TikTok truly is. For an app that rebranded in 2018, it’s truly changed the shape of our entertainment world. Ask any college or high school student if they use the service, and I guarantee the overwhelming majority will say yes. 

Research: Invasion of Privacy

Imagine if in today’s world the use of advanced technology was taken away. No smartphones, no instant messaging, no Bluetooth, no streaming, no worldwide connection, no virtual assistant, you get the point. Some would say, “what an inconvenience!” while others would say “finally, how it should be!” I’d personally lean on the inconvenience side, as I’ve grown accustomed to these things. However, when really researching how much they’ve taken control of our lives, it does become scary.

As Dr. Andy Yen pointed out in a 2014 TedTalk, there will be kids today who never knew any difference in privacy. At the age of 19, I do remember stages of life without the use of the internet and certainly without the use of smartphones. However, I was also young enough to become very attached to them when they took off. 

With my generation being one of the early adopters of this internet at the fingertips concept, we all learned together how to use social media safely. However, I see things today that I would have never imagined we’d allow within these platforms. I also see pages and pages of terms that we so quickly scroll past and agree to because of our infatuation and in most cases, addiction to getting back in our social worlds. 

After the mentioned research, I now realize that we are agreeing to things like data storage that track our whereabouts on the internet, designed to give us advertisement’s that would be pleasing. I also notice that virtual assistants like Siri and Alexa are storing our voice recordings in hopes to “create a more user-friendly product.” How weird is that? 

The list of invasions of privacy goes on and on from phone call recordings to Bluetooth hacking. The fact that someone can easily obtain video camera footage from inside a child’s bedroom, and even talk to them is absolutely absurd and dangerous. In fact, in a TedTalk by Finn Latzow, he shows just how simple it is to hack into a child’s baby doll through Bluetooth and communicate with the child, even convincing them to “come outside and play.” 

 

So yes, while I agree that technology has proven to be exceedingly beneficial to our society and absolutely has brought along very great things, we need to start making our users much more aware of what they’re agreeing to. We also need laws in place that force companies to clearly disclose what private information the consumer is sharing. Otherwise, we’re in for a very messy future.

Key Post: EOTO on Propaganda

In today’s society, the use of propaganda is more present than ever among many different things. From the Merriam-Webster definition, propaganda is “ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause. We’ve seen this practice used all throughout history, but especially during times of war. 

In World War I, many countries, especially those of fascist and communist rule, used propaganda to help expand their power. In fact, this is the time period where the word became common and well-known. Here at home, we used propaganda within media and art to help motivated citizens to join the fight or do their part to help further our military. Everyone is familiar with famous pieces like Uncle Sam’s “I want you!” and Rosie the Riveter’s “You can do it!” posters. These were very popular ways of swaying the mind for a general-purpose that help the country. In fact, they’re still used and talked about as positive or motivating pieces today.

 

Adding to Merriam-Webster’s definition, Britannica.com says propaganda is “more or less systematic effort to manipulate other people’s beliefs, attitudes, or actions by means of symbols (words, gestures, banners, monuments, music, clothing, insignia, hairstyles, designs on coins and postage stamps, and so forth.)

In current times, Britannica’s definition is very true. With the political hatred being as intense as it is, we see propaganda used from both the left and right. Along with their extremely obvious bias, our media (network and online) is constantly displaying propaganda to support a position favorited by their organizations. ABC, NBC, CNN, etc were known for exaggerating (in some opinion’s) or showing untrue accusations about the former President Trump. 

In fact, a report recently came out that included an interview with a CNN staffer. The staffer made mention of how the network repeatedly used propaganda and bias to help sway voters in the 2020 election. "Look at what we did, we got Trump out," Charles Chester told FoxNews. "I am 100% going to say it. And I 100% believe it that if it wasn't for CNN, I don't know that Trump would have got voted out." He continued to make mention of certain instances, like the time President Trump had “shaky hands” and the network called in a medical professional to help put fear in American’s that the president was unwell and wouldn’t be fit for a second term. On the contrary, the staffer said they only showed upbeat and athletic videos of then president-elect, Biden, to push against the stance his age played a huge toll on him, even though it certainly does. In his closing remarks, he spoke on how the head of the network looks for stories that will instill fear into viewers on things they are against. A quote from Chester was “fear sells,” personally concerning me as these news organizations are forcing their own direction and agenda, not simply delivering facts. 

On the other side, organizations like FOX News and Newsmax claimed for months after President Trump’s election loss that there was obvious evidence that supported fraud activity within voting. In fact, the news organization OWN still claims President Trump won the 2020 election and has continuously refused to call Joe Biden “President Biden” or Kamala Harris “Vice President Harris.” With their own display of bias and propaganda, viewers are left to choose which side they believe.

The bottom line is propaganda isn’t going anywhere and as citizens, we need to be aware of when it’s used. Even with the pandemic, signs and ads are filled with sad-looking elderly people or doctors that say “protect us” among other phrases that medical professionals hope encourage people to follow CDC guidelines and eventually get vaccinated. While people will have differing opinions on this tactic, it’s up to us individually to decide how we understand the propaganda and what educated decisions we will make or not make because of it.  

Media Spotlight: Hattie McDaniel

 

Within media, certain people are credited for breaking down barriers and shifting change. One of these magnificent door-openers is Hattie McDaniel. As the first African American to win an Oscar, Hattie McDaniel was truly a trailblazer. However, her efforts weren’t always seen as successful.

McDaniel was born in Wichita, Kansas as one of 13 children.  Her parents were both formerly enslaved and her father served in the Civil War.  As McDaniel grew up, she and a few of her siblings knew a career in entertainment was for them.  Eventually, McDaniel moved to L.A., joining her brother Sam and sisters Orlena and Etta.

McDaniel first popped around from radio work to uncredited film appearances as she also worked as a maid.  Eventually, she gained notoriety and worked on many films, mostly as a maid, slave, or servant.  Becoming friends with many mainstream white actresses, McDaniel had finally made her way in as a colored woman.

When McDaniel landed her most famous and award-winning role as Mammy in Gone With The Wind, she was still met with discrimination and controversy.  In a time where the separation of race was still very prevalent, McDaniels wasn’t even allowed to attend the movie premiere in an all-white theater.  When accepting her Oscar, she was placed alone at a “colored only” table to remain separated. 

Within her own race, many African American’s did not appreciate the work of McDaniel.  While they celebrated representation within the Oscars, many, including the NAACP, condemned McDaniel for taking roles that degraded or weakened the look of colored people. As mentioned, McDaniel played mostly maid, servant, or slave roles and portrayed herself as uneducated or complacent with southern living in most films. 

When questioned about her stance on the criticism she received for not speaking out or blatantly supporting the fight for equality, McDaniel said this: "Why should I complain about making $700 a week playing a maid? If I didn't, I'd be making $7 a week being one."

Looking at McDaniel’s career as a whole, I would deem it very successful for the time period.  While she could have certainly used her platform to be more vocal about change, I think she instead decided to look out for herself.  We’re all a bit selfish at times and when success comes knocking, we sometimes surrender things to obtain it.  Hattie McDaniel did what she felt was right for her and I think we should all remember her as the trailblazer she was.

Sources:   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattie_McDaniel, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/oscars-first-black-winner-accepted-774335

Key Post: Emojis

Throughout history, man has always found out how to make things better and evolve. For instance, a fire was originally made by the striking of stone. Now we can create fire with the flick of a lighter switch. The same process goes for the emoji. 

If you look at the technology wall in Cottrell Hall, you’ll find 1979 credited with the first emoji. However, after my research, that date is only somewhat correct. Ever since typing became available, people have found a way to insert emotion-based signs. In fact, Abraham Lincoln once added a winking face ;) to a speech.

In 1979, legendary typographer Hermann Zapf developed an emoji library that wasn’t broadly successful, but certainly notable.

“Containing over a thousand designs for signs and symbols, the font was one of 35 PostScript fonts built into Apple's Laserwriter Plus, one of the first mass-market laser printers. Credited as helping to kick off the desktop publishing craze, the addition of Zapf Dingbats to the library of fonts available on the Laserwriter allowed anyone to print out symbols and simple images in their documents as efficiently as any other text, without sending more data to the printer,” Magenta.com reported about Zapf.

The first credited emoji list was actually made by Japanese artist Shigetaka Kurita in 1999. Kurita was played a role in the development team for “i-Mode,” an internet company produced by Japan’s biggest mobile carrier DOCOMO. Kurita wanted a more simple way to convey emotions and other information. One example he cited was making an emoji for weather patterns. Instead of saying “partly cloudy” in words, he envisioned programs displaying small pixeled emojis instead.

Kurita started by sketching 12-by-12 pixel images that he wanted to be selected from a keyboard grid. Sound familiar? The original character list included the sun, clouds, an umbrella, snowmen, a car, a tram, an airplane, a cell phone, TV, and GameBoy among other things, providing a variety of digital signs. 

With this new digital language established, the concept began to take off across Japan. Many developers made their own variety of emoji and by the mid-2000s, emojis were exploding globally.

In 2006, Google and Apple became increasingly interested in the emoji boom and set out to make the characters available in the USA. After a few years of working through Unicode, a universal coding platform, 625 emojis were made available for use in the states. Since then, Unicode has allowed other companies to use emojis as well due to their extreme popularity. 

While the Emoji hasn’t gotten any less popular, its change and regular updates have been the only thing keeping it relevant. Each new major iPhone update usually comes with an array of new emoticon features that are better designed than the last. Ask any teenager how often they use emojis and they’ll likely say at least once every three text messages sent. It’s a spectacular accomplishment to see the same 1979 feature of this ;) be just as popular now as this 😉. 

How many other modern technologies can you say have grown and evolved so much? 

Key Post: Speech Theories

In a recent class, we discussed the key speech theories and what each means to us. The list includes the marketplace of ideas, participation in self-government, stable change, individual self-fulfillment, check on government power, promoting tolerance, promoting innovation, and protecting dissent.  

We were then tasked with choosing a theory that means the most to us. With a list so stacked full of important concepts, it was difficult to pick just one. However, after digging into the list, my choice would be protecting dissent. 

In the United States of America, the First Amendment serves to protect our views, no matter any unpopularity among them. In fact, unlike many other countries around the world, the ability to speak out against the government is one of our most essential rights. It’s so essential that it is even encouraged and deemed a patriotic duty when our citizens make themselves heard. 

All that being said, it hasn’t been a cakewalk for America to abide by this freedom. In our past, we’ve seen examples of prior restraint, which directly goes against protecting dissent. For example, some parties have attempted and successfully stopped the production of material that could harm their image before its release.

In Near v. Minnesota (1931), Floyd Olson (county prosecutor, later governor of Minnesota) convinced a county judge to issue a gag order against two journalists. The journalists had written about accusations involving Olson and other politicians colluding with gangsters and planned to write more. The gag order was used to prohibit the journalists before they used their freedoms to write again. However, in the supreme court trial, a 5-4 decision was made deeming Minnesota violated the First Amendment. 

When looking for a perfect example of protected dissent, we have the fight for women’s suffrage. For years women were ready to have more responsibility than home care and in the early 1900s, things were boiling up. The government looked for petty crimes to silence these women but they could never outright take away their freedoms of speech, assembly, and peaceable protest. 

The right to protected dissent is exactly what kept the movement alive. Multi-colored women would gather from everywhere to deliver their patriotic duty by telling the government how they felt and what they wanted. As we know, in 1920 the government finally decided to pass the 19th amendment which granted voting rights to all law-abiding citizens, regardless of gender. The protests were very controversial and caused the women great pain, but their persistence proved we have a system of government that has to and will listen to its people.

In the midst of world chaos and confusion, it is very prevalent how necessary our protected dissent is in today’s society. Within the last year, we’ve seen people make themselves heard for what they believe in, and as a result, government action has been taken. This is how we take advantage of such a fundamental right, and this is why I feel it is one of our most important provided. If ever a time in which this right is stripped is a time in which our country will surely fall. 

Class Video: The Highest Court In The Land Remains Supreme

The Supreme Court of the United States of America has proven to be a vital part of the American government. Without it, there would be no official ruling branch on what is and isn't constitutional.

Every year, thousands of petitions flood the court in hopes of a fighting chance. With nearly 100 new cases a week, the court justices must decide which cases hold the most importance and are in need of individual consideration.

As demanding of a job serving on the Supreme Court is, most justices serve for an average of 16 years according to a video we viewed in class.  In total there have only been a little over 100 justices in the court's history. To serve in such an important position for that amount of time deserves a tremendous amount of respect from the American people.

Though we now see the Supreme Court as a major and necessary part of government, it wasn't always seen that way. Prior to chief justice John Marshall, the court was not taken as seriously and didn't even have its own building. With the help of his leadership, the court quickly gained more respect and consideration as a co-equal branch.

Even though Marshall changed the perception of the court in a good way, it does have many blackeyes in its history. One example of this was the Dred Scott decision in 1857.  The court determined that they "could not give blacks freedom" and that they would never be free citizens. Of course, the 14th amendment would change that ruling when passed in 1866.  

The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once said, "We the people was composed of a very small portion of those inhabiting these shores."  She went on to say that even though the court didn't embrace all people once before, they do today.

A common misconception of the Supreme Court is that its cases and discussions are kept very secretive.  However, justices want the American people to know this couldn't be further from the truth.  There is no type of inside story like other forms of government may have.

When the justices meet to discuss a case, they always start with shaking one another's hand.  This process reiterates the common purpose to make the best decision according to the constitution.  As an American citizen, this process makes me feel good because of how awful political agendas have become in other forms of government.  With this common purpose of protecting constitutional rights in mind, justices try to leave political opinions at the door.

Though we may not always agree with the decisions from the Supreme Court, we must always take into account how hard these men and women are working for the maintaining of our rights.

Research: A First Amendment Current Event

During a recent class, we were asked to research a current first amendment issue happening around the country. One of the most present right now is the permanent Twitter suspension of U.S. President, Donald Trump. 

On January 8th of this year, Twitter released a statement saying they’d permanently suspended the personal account of the President due to the risk of “further incitement of violence.” This sent many conservative users into an uprise, causing some to also be banned from the platform, and many others to freely leave on their own.

Alongside the argument that the President had not incited violence in his speech and subsequent tweets, many claimed Twitter had violated the President’s first amendment. However, as scholars of the first amendment, we know the government is the only thing that legally isn't allowed to take this freedom away. 

“Congress shall make no law,” tells us that a private company like Twitter has every right to limit our speech on their platform. We also submit to this when accepting the terms and conditions after joining the service. But should Twitter be allowed to silence the President of the United States over their far-fetched description of incitement? That opens a whole new can of worms to discuss. 

The issue of censorship is more present than ever. With unelected big-tech moguls like Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos, and others controlling our modern-day platforms of communication, should the government allow such powerful people make these decisions? It’s hard for me to believe that just because someone doesn’t agree with a certain political view of these big-tech leaders, they can be silenced completely. 

The scariest part is it isn’t limited to just these well-known social platforms. Even our cellphone providers have taken conservative apps and social media companies off of their app stores, making it nearly impossible to reach these alternative platforms.

With the amount of control these companies have over our everyday lives, the government must ask itself if these actions should be legal. I would encourage our citizens to continue speaking up, but how can they if they’re censored so heavily because of it?  

About Me: 5 Major Sources of News

In times like today, news can be found just about everywhere you look.  However, finding a source that fits you is getting harder and harder.  As we now enter a period of major censorship, this trend will certainly continue.  I personally like to view news from sources that have different perspectives and then compare them.

The first and likely biggest way I get news is from Twitter. The easiness of navigating Twitter is what made me so attracted to the platform.  Right as you click on the search button, you’re met with headlines and trends of that day's top stories.  Coverage of sports, pop culture, politics, and global happenings can all be found in one place. However, with the new outburst of censorship, it’s getting harder and harder to trust this source.

The second place I get my news is actually from the mobile app TikTok.  The app is designed with an algorithm that picks video content sent directly to the user's “for you page.”  Due to the app noticing my interest in politics and sports, my page shows a lot of breaking stories within those labels.  With an audience of one billion active users monthly, new sources and random users alike can express their feelings toward a certain story.

A third-place I get news is from Apple News.  Adding to the trend of easy access, Apple News is a program that has been installed on each Apple device since 2015.  When unlocking your phone, a simple swipe to the left can produce what Apple has determined the day's top headlines. Another large advantage to this source is setting notifications for certain topics.  If you’d like to see news about politics, you can get your phone to notify you whenever a political story drops.

My fourth news source would be FOX News within the television side of things.  As shown in my list, television has started to fade within news reporting.  With the few already mentioned social media sources, news can be found and navigated a lot easier among the younger generation.  However, when I have time I do still appreciate the commentary of television news.  I watch FOX News because they have such a different take on certain issues than those at other television outlets.  In efforts to try and stay well-rounded, I will then move to a different television outlet for the opposite take. 

My last source of news would be NBC or ABC news.  As mentioned above, in my effort to stay well-rounded, I will move from FOX News to a source like NBC or ABC to see the opposite viewpoint.  I feel this is a good strategy to follow as news today is heavily biased and seeing both sides allows you to make your own opinion on certain matters.  I feel we must stay open thinkers in today’s world and this practice allows me to do that.