BLOG 6 “THE DEATH OF THE NEWSPAPER”

BLOG 6 “THE DEATH OF THE NEWSPAPER”

This has been a topic of debate for years since the inception of E-reader devices. An E-reader is a device that can display digital images of books and magazines. These readers can come in many shapes, sizes and formats. Some of the more popular readers today for reading magazine are called tablets. These tablets primarily have either Android or Apple operating systems on them and are basically flat portable computers. 

I agree John Temple (former editor and publisher of The Rocky Mountain News) (see video below) that the news paper will not die out. But, I believe it has significantly lost revenue and its reader base in the last 5 years and will slowly continue to do so. At a minimum, it will slowly continue to loose its “paper format” readers. I believe there is 3 reasons for this: competition, price, and convenience. With such a large amount of web users and tablet users, the digital newspaper is slowly taking over and because of the simplicity (compared to printing) of creating digital newspapers and magazines, there are many more people in this field creating mediums for reading the news. This is reducing the number of people reading the larger newspapers news and is also driving down the price of the newspaper itself. If you look at the iTunes app store, there is now a section just for news papers and news. That section has thousands of news mediums and the cost is incredibly cheap. 

In order for the large companies to stick around, they need to be competitive in the digital market. And, thats exactly what they are trying to do. evolution is important for any business but right now, the newspapers are really needing to evolve fast or they could possibly go out of business. 

BLOG 5 “BANNING BOOKS FROM SCHOOLS”

BLOG 5 “BANNING BOOKS FROM SCHOOLS”

I wanted to start this blog by saying schools banning book is completely ridiculous! Maybe the school hasn’t heard but there is a new thing out there called the internet. So, even if the school has a very good reason (although I can’t think of any) to ban a book, the student who wants to read it can turn use their smart phone to find the book in a matter of seconds. Oh and by the way, since they are banning books, they should ban the internet. Actually, if they are going to ban the internet they really should start with TV since their is much worse content on many prime time TV shows than there is in a dictionary. Anyone who has watched a prime time TV show (The Office, Parks and Rec, Modern family, to name a few) has probably learned about SEX, heard hundreds of foul words, and been exposed to extreme violence or adult situations. But, the fact that a student can find the book anyways isn’t really the main topic of discussion here so i’ll save that for another day.

That felt more like a rant then a blog post but hey, someone needed to say it :)

To provide you with a little bit of information on why books are banned, here is what the Office of Intellectual Freedom has listed for the 3 primary reasons for ban requests:

Quote:

Often challenges are motivated by a desire to protect children from “inappropriate” sexual content or “offensive” language. The following were the top three reasons cited for challenging materials as reported to the Office of Intellectual Freedom:

1. the material was considered to be "sexually explicit"
2. the material contained "offensive language"
3. the materials was "unsuited to any age group"

I actually don’t disagree with the concept. Its good to want to protect our children. I have 2 children and its a continuous effort to ensure that they don’t learn anything too adult until they are old enough. 

My concern lies in the reasoning and motives of the people asking to have the books banned and then the schools who agree to do the banning. If its a book about Karma sutra, lets ban that thing. But the dictionary??!! hmmm. seems kinda silly. 

If its really that much of a concern, a modified version of the book needs to be produced and distributed in lieu the original. 

That would be my suggestion.

BLOG 4 “To err is human, to repent is divine; to persist is devilish”

The poor richards almanac, written by Benjamin Frankilin was an annual publication released from 1732-1759. The almanac contained a mixture of seasonal weather forecasts, practical household hints, puzzles, other amusements and witticisms. 

One of my favorite quotes from the almanac is this:

“To err is human, to repent is divine; to persist is devilish”

I found this quote to be incredibly simple and yet be right on target when it comes to human behavior. My understanding of the quote is that people make mistakes and need to seek forgiveness. But, if you intentionally persist, you dont care about the mistake and continue the same behavior. I like how he uses the word devilish because it gives it the feel of your doing something evil since you have chosen to continue the mistake multiple times. 

I definitely need to purchase a paper copy of one of these. An orginal would be even cooler :)

Will definitely be getting this version on Amazon:

Link to the book on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-Richards-Almanack-Thrift-Editions/dp/0486408914

BLOG 3 (SOCIAL INTERACTION)

BLOG 3 (SOCIAL INTERACTION)

Its amazing how things can change in such a short amount of time. When I was a kid I was always outside playing. If I wanted to talk to a friend, I would ride my bike to their house and knock on the door. Most of the time my friend would already be at the park playing and the friends parent would tell me where they were and I would ride my bike there to meet them. In rare occasions if I couldn’t find them, I might later call their house  to see if they were home. Even in this scenario, I would still want to go meet them to hang out because face to face communication was my primary means of communication. In fact, most of the time my parents didn’t even want me to use the phone. 

Now days, its the exact opposite. Face to face communication is often used to talk to a person only when they didn’t answer a phone call or text.

The question to be answered in this blog is does the internet inhibit real social interaction or promote it?

I think thats a unique question that is really left up to an individuals interpretation. Let me explain what I mean:

Technically, then internet promotes more interaction. There is significantly more potential for a person to have much more interactions via the web than in a face to face scenario. Also, interaction is almost instant and there are many form of communications. People preferences for interaction can be appeased easily by just changing the internet platform used to interact. Its much easier for a person to conduct hundreds or thousands of interactions a day using multiple platforms and to me that makes it seem that people can now be more social.

After some thought i determined I really need to define what a “real interaction” is. After a lot of searching, I couldn’t find a definition the the words “social interaction” so I decided to break them apart and see what I thought.

“Interaction” definition (via wikipedia): Interaction is a kind of action that occurs as two or more objects have an effect upon one another. The idea of a two-way effect is essential in the concept of interaction, as opposed to a one-way causal effect

“Social” definition: he term social refers to a characteristic of living organisms as applied to populations of humans and other animals. It always refers to the interaction of organisms with other organisms and to their collective co-existence, irrespective of whether they are aware of it or not, and irrespective of whether the interaction is voluntary or involuntary.

So, its seems that physical presence isnt listed and based on this research, a interaction via the web would be a real social interaction.

To answer the question specifically, NO, I DO NOT thinking the internet is inhibiting social interactions. 

The above answer is my unbiased answer to the question :)

However, The dying art form of face to face communication is incredibly sad. The ability to communicate in person is absolutely essential in order to efficiently function in daily life and work. 

Although the internet isn't inhibiting our social interactions, it does seems to be inhibiting our ability to communicate in person (generally speaking, looking at the issue from a statistics standpoint). 

I have posted an article below that gives some incredible statistics on the internet and social interacrtion

Article LINK:

http://www.eaglenews.org/study-shows-internet-is-replacing-real-social-interaction-1.2645627#.UQFW96VOTkc

BLOG 2 "MEDIA CONVERGENCE"

In the video below titled Media Convergence by CBS, Jeff Greenfield explains that over the last 20 years there has been an extreme evolution in the delivery of news and media. Before the evolution people used television and paper as their primary means to receive the news and these methods accounted for 70% of how people receive their news. Now days, the Internet is the primary delivery platform and has assisted in the reduction of older delivery methods of news and media consumption (according to the video) which is now only 30%. 

Jeff Greenfield mentions at the end of the video that a love of story telling, clear vivid language, and a respect for history are essential in the delivery of news and that is how CBS has remained a credible and popular news source to this day.

I agree with MR. Greenfield. Credible news and media should always take these factors into account and without them, there really isn't a sure way to receive honest and well constructed news. However, there is an issue with this concept. The internet has billions of users, social media sites have hundreds of millions of users and news/media can also now be instantly be delivered via dozens of methods to mobile devices. The issue lies in the fact that not everyone who publishes or posts news and media know or even care about these factors that MR. Greenfield has mentioned. Honest and credible news isn't always the agenda of people and some people just don't care. Furthermore, its apparent the even the more credible news agencies have begun using less than honest stories to play into the agencies own agendas. 

The bad news is that the credibility of news will only get worse with time and there isnt much WE can do about it.

The good news is that having knowledge on this issue and evolution of media can keep you aware of the possible discrepancies in the news your are receiving and remind you to be open minded and possibly view the same news from multiple sources. 

(MEDIA CONVERGENCE, CBS NEWS "01 FEB 2009")
Video LINK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdJlyh76dEc

BLOG 1 "INTERNET JUNKIE"

With a score of 23, I ended with an "Average" on-line user score on the Internet Junkie Test. Thats amazing to me because I use the internet on a daily basis! Between my iPhone, which I rely on for email, texting (family and work), FaceTime, and online internet use ...AND... my computer usage for work, school and fun, I probably total about 3-4 hours of daily usage.  I DO NOT however have an addiction to the internet. In fact, its quite the opposite. Although I do agree that when I use the internet, it is A GOOD USE OF MY TIME because it simplifies my daily tasks and allows me access to virtually unlimited amounts of information, I usually feel tired of having to use the internet because I do use it so frequently. In fact, if I find a chance to not use the internet I almost always take it. This is most likely the reason for my LOW scores on the junky test. 

Unfortunately, I do believe my frequency of internet use is the best use of my time. The internet is an invaluable resource. However, I do believe that people and business is slowly becoming to dependent on the internet. It seems that the more people rely on the internet, the less self sufficient they COULD become. 

If the internet was gone one day, I think many people would have no idea what to do with themselves. 

Link the Internet Addiction Test:

http://www.netaddiction.com/index.php?option=com_bfquiz&view=onepage&catid=46&Itemid=106