I have learned a lot about collaboration in this class. I think that the most helpful reading for me in this class was Tuckman's Stages of Group Development.By applying some of rules in this reading, I think that I have improved some of my ability to work in teams. I loved working in teams this semester and look forward to seeing my classmates next year. My favorite blog post is my second one called Class dates 1/31 and 2/2. It provides an overview of the readings "The Secret to Smart Groups" and explains the classifications of different types of groups using characters from Breaking Bad. Another one of my favorite blog posts is about "Wikipedia and the Death of the Expert." I talked about my experience with Wikipedia and linked one of my favorite viral internet videos to my post as an example of some of the content that goes viral. Two of my best comments:
The three people that influenced most in this class were Eden, Miros, and Caleb.Eden was a great leader and produced amazing work and ideas. Miros and Caleb were reliable and positive. I have Miros in three of my classes and he is really responsible. They were all really easy to work with!
Hi everybody! This week we deepened our understanding of Spreadable Media by Jenkins et al. In class, we tried to understand the distinction between spreadable and sticky media. When I think of spreadable media, I think of sites that does not provide content itself, but instead is generated by the users themselves. This leads to the users becoming the consumers and producers of popular culture. I think that Twitter is the embodiments of spreadable media because it does not generate much of the content that keeps users on the site and it allows for easy communication/"copying"/retweeting. I also think that it is very democratic because it allows for honest public discourse on a very influential and media friendly platform. I think that Reddit and its frequently discussed hivemind compared to Instagram is a good example of the importance of the demographic that uses the social media (male vs female demographics and differing values/interests). It is important to note that these platforms are not purely democratic and moderators have admitted to manipulating the visibility of certain opinions (see this article about Reddit's CEO meddling with Trump supporters' posts) Sticky websites, on the other hand, rely upon their own content to maintain their user/consumer base.
This picture exhibits the interconnected nature of spreadability and sticky content. This sticky content developed by Buzzfeed is being spread through highly spreadable media (Twitter)
I envision Buzzfeed to be an embodiment of a sticky website because they develop material specific to their demographic and user content (only in the form of comments on posts) is barely visible. Buzzfeed certainly follows the sticky business model built upon demographic data, as seen in this picture (as of 4/23/2017):
This picture discusses a specific television show that would be nostalgic for millennials and a list of memes. It also contains lite news articles that contain simplified news stories. Thank you! Have a great day :)
Hey everyone! This week we read Wikipedia and the Death of the Expert by Maria Bustillos. The article claims that the three main advantages of Wikipedia are that: 1) Wikipedia offers comprehensive citations and source material and therefore provides a better entry point for serious study 2) Is instantly responsive to new developments 3) It provides the history and the controversy of any given subject McLuhan believed that "technology alters cognition itself, all the way down the its deepest, most elemental processes." I thought that it was confusing that the article first states that sites like Wikipedia has caused the internet to become anti-intellectual and then it later stated that we are all "entering into the democracy of the intellect that is already bearing spectacular fruit". They stated that the internet is facilitating a number of spectacular project, such as the Gutenberg Project, Tor, and Linux. I understand that they are attempting to discuss all sides of an issue but I was still confused about the point that they were trying to make at the end of the article. I believe that they were simply trying to say that experts are no longer the authority upon their subjects anymore due to the democratic/Maoist nature of collaborative sites such as Wikipedia. I think the implicated devaluation of the contributions of the common people really undermines the overall point of the article. Maybe I missed something? It seemed elitist while conceding that common people can do some things. This article mentioned Comcast and how internet user were able to improve some of Comcast's customer service through mass outcry. This Reddit link goes to a subreddit that explains how/why it escalated to the point that thousands of people collaborated to associate Comcast with the Nazi symbol.
The association of the Nazi symbol with Comcast was the result of massive collaboration through the website Reddit
I love Wikipedia because encyclopedias never really provided enough information for me to completely understand certain events throughout history. I like that it was made for common people like me and I feel that I have better understanding of information I am interested in for it. I actually based a large amount of my history research proposal on an Anti-Suffrage Wikipedia page. It provided a lot of background information and gave a broad overview that I couldn't find in my primary sources and I was able to cite the Wikipedia sources in my proposal. I don't think that I would've gotten such a good grade on it if it weren't for Wikipedia.
I wrote my proposal about anti-suffrage men and (especially) women and the relevance of public discourse in a political forum. Turns out, there isn't much relevance and politicians just care about maintaining power most of the time.
We also read about Spreadable Media-guided Resource Demonstrations. I linked the study guide because it is really helpful for understanding such a dense chapter. It really makes sense that the platform that the information is shared on impacts the spreadability of the content. For example, I never would've found out about Marnie the Derpy Dog if it weren't for my sister sending me the link on Instagram. The convenience of being able to access information definitely impacts whether or not I'm going to look at something. Typically if I have to choose between a video and gif, I am always going to choose the GIF because it is easier to view in public and I don't have to wait for the video to load.
This video is of the adorable Marnie the Derpy Dog, who has a massive internet following
This week, we read The Tweaker by Malcolm Gladwell. I had heard that Steve Jobs was pretty strange before, but I had no idea it was to the extent that the author asserts that it was. The article states that Steve Jobs waited to buy a washer and dryer for 8 years because he was such a perfectionist. I certainly couldn't have dated the man; He sounds exhausting. The article also states that the industrial revolution occurred in England because it possessed an advantage in "human capital", which means that England possessed a large population of engineers and artisans that could tweak existing technologies. I thought that it was interesting that he and Gates did not get along at all, especially since they're both such influential visionaries in today's society.
The antagonistic relationship between Gates and Jobs has been lampooned in popular society. The above rap battle is an example of how well their poor relationship was known.
We also watched RIP Remix Manifesto last week. Here are some of my notes on the film: - There are four main ideas of remixing: 1) Culture always builds on the past 2) The past is always trying to control the future 3) Our future is becoming less free 4) To build free societies you must limit the control of the past - corporations unfairly control most copyrights and buying the rights to most songs is extremely expensive (Girl Talks album would cost a few million to buy all the songs used) - "nobody creates in a vacuum" basically means that without the ability to use past songs, new music will be difficult to create - Brazil is leading in sampling and creating great new music As much as I wanted to like GirlTalk's music, I couldn't get into it! I suppose I am a purist when it comes to Black Sabbath. I think that its great that Brazil is making inexpensive HIV medication for their people. I am really happy to see how their music (remixing) programs help the youth and I can't wait to see the art that these kids make!
This week we read "Is Foucault a Plagiarist?" by Mickey Hess. It states that Foucault faulted the reader for not knowing Marx's principles and states that his literature is so pervasive that people should know what it is. The reading also states that "hip hop producers create powerful juxtaposition by recontextualizing sources" and that sampling "transforms critiques, and responds to sources." The reading also asserts that hip-hop producers guard their sources to prevent legal action or to protect themselves from being copied. In academic writing, on the other hand, sources are highly recommended because they give their assertions credibility. These conflicting messages of sampling are resolved with Hess stating that he desires for his students to examine and critique their sources, and therefore create original arguments. I thought that this was interesting because many teacher do not possess the same mentality and they do not enjoy critiques of material that they provide. If I were in their position, I would probably feel the same way. I also thought that it was funny that Foucault thought that Marx was so pervasive within culture that he assumed the reader would know his material from his; I have no idea what Marx's principles are and only vaguely know what he probably wrote about. I think that was great that Foucault was building upon another philosopher's ideas, however I do think that it he might've been trying to take credit for Marx's work. We also listened to the audio clip entitled "Renegades". I cannot find the clip on the internet so unfortunately I can't link it. Essentially, the clip states that the illegality of sampling was why sampling was so lucrative to musicians in the first place; It seems that the musicians associate sampling with Robin Hood in that it gives control of the music back to the people and musicians and out of corporate pockets. I thought it was interesting that the interviewee stated that he did not feel guilty sampling other artist's material because the music industry did not pay the musicians that created it. I think that the music industry is terrible in that it does not take care of the artists and really does appear to be corrupt. I have a friend that states that she is fine with illegal downloading because the artist does not really receive any money from their album sales.
Here is a short video of Left Eye from TLC breaking down how much she made
