week 13: Things.. please love me back

So as we embark on our very last blogs of the semester, i'm here to rant about the internet of things. I would definitely say that I keep track of all my things online. My phone bill, rent payments, income, social relationships, photos I like, subject outlines etc. The internet of things has all these things accessible only a few clicks away. Sounds like a dream to me. I am not the most organised of people so having everything together in the one place where I know I can't lose it, makes me feel better about life.

Although the internet of things is about uniquely identified objects and their virtual representations in an internet-like structure. I find it to be like a robotic intelligence to think that you could have some sort of relationship with things you own is crazy. Things that have no purpose other then to do the job they were designed to do. The possibilities are endless if you think that your things had a voice and you had a way of easily communicating with them. You would get so much done and be so much more organised.

At first when I thought about the internet of things I was thinking Web 2.0. Then I understood what Bleecker was really suggesting. The idea that our things were all connected to their source. The fridge being connected to the supermarket, a house being connected to the person who lives there etc. The internet and evolving technology has shown me that there a no limits. We just don't know what will come next. So there is no reason to doubt that everyday objects might have the possibility to connect with a range of other things.

The concept is a little daunting to me as I don't understand how technology is able to keep up with our constantly changing society.

week 12: The apple doesn't fall far from the tree

Ahhhh! It took until week 12 but finally the controversial topic has arrived. I must say that I am looking forward to reading many posts on this topic to see what the general consensus is but my hypothesis is that apple will beat google, androids, pc's and all those other fun things.

First things first. Apple products look great. So sleek and shiny and light. I can tell you right now, I would rather slip a little macbook into my handbag then cause injury to my shoulder from lugging around a brick of a pc in a lap top bag. But then we explore the inner workings. I've never owned a macbook. The only real exposure i've had to them was listening to friends go on and on about how great it is. Since coming to uni i've had the joy of sitting and playing with a few macs in my journalism subjects. They are fun to an extent. But one thing I can't stand about them is the right click. I HATE IT! When you're typing on word and you need to correct a mistake on a pc just give the word a little right click >>> fixed = too easy. I'm sure you mac users will tell me though that there is a much more efficient way to do it on an apple product and that i've just been to naive to work it out.

So my opinion on the Apple vs. Google debate is that Apple is too restricting. I feel with Google and android you can get programs from here, there and everywhere. Apple has great products but I think you can only keep apple with apple and not mix and match with different products. I feel android gives me more freedom. I wish though I was more educated on Apple products because this whole blog could be complete lies and Apple could be actually amazing and not restricting or any of those things I said. Drawing from my experiences of Apple, they are not self explanatory and i'm usually a fan of self-explanatory type things. Again, is this just me? Am I the only person in the world who doesn't reap the amazing benefits of having an Apple product other then the fact they look cool and could save me from severe shoulder trauma?

Also I have had an android phone for a year and a half. I once drove off with the thing on my car roof and the screen didn't even scratch. My friend had her iPhone4 for no longer then a week and the glass screen had shattered into a million pieces. So many people I see with iPhones have cracked or shattered screens.. but hey can I really blame apple? Maybe they are just careless?

I took it upon myself to read a bunch of things written by people to gage their feelings on androids and iPhones. Brian Cooley   described apple to be 'more of a cult then a product.'

I think I need to buy some sort of apple product in order to become a true fan. I'm sure I could be easily converted!

week 11: Lets start a riot

Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites would not exist without the people who are apart of them. We, as the contributors to these sites, make these sites worth joining and reading. I feel that with this weeks reading that social networking can contribute a lot to riots and protests. Facebook and Twitter make is so easy to get a message out to a large population efficiently and quickly. With these events and groups it is likely that people will show up and there will be protest. It is crazy how much power that not only the internet but new media can have on the world.

'that these digital tools are simply, well, tools, and social change continues to involve many painstaking, longer-term efforts to engage with political institutions and reform movements.' (Morozov, 2011) I agree with Morozov  as he acknowledges that these digital tools, even though they are simply tools, do play a part in orchestrating massive events such as protests and riots. Like I said earlier, without the people contributing to social networking sites, there would be nothing on there. Why wouldn't you use these sights to easily let everybody know what is happening. People all around the world has access to this and the sharing of links makes it like a digital word of mouth (which we all know is a very effective way of sharing information). 


As we talked about Arab Springs in the lecture, I do believe that without social networking, this wouldn't of been able to be achieved so easily. Social networking is engaging and people are interested in the information that is posted on there by other people in society. 


What is more effective? One person protesting an issue or a mass group of people? Obviously the massive group is going to draw more attention and be taken more seriously as it is evident how many people are actually effected by the issue that is being protested. The internet is the best way to accumulate these massive amounts of people and without social networking the results just wouldn't be achieved. 

Week 9: Engaged politics online

It is said that the use of new media has become an addiction. A reason why it is seen as an addiction is because individuals are given a chance to influence others with their personal opinions. People use new media such as Facebook and Twitter every day, mostly to communicate with others and to correspond about events that are currently affecting their lives. The internet has exploded with new media over the last few years and this has enabled each individual to have a personal say on the internet.

In a political sense, these new media technologies have given people an online presence and a voice. It is an opportunity to have an opinion broadcasted. New media such as Facebook and Twitter do have the potential to promote an engaged politics.

People speak and write because they want to know more about themselves and know more about other people. New media not only gives a chance for someone to voice their opinion, but also gives others the chance to comment and rebut your thought. This encourages extended thinking beyond the original thought and is educating to both parties of writers. People from across the globe have access to these social sites which helps promote a diversity of issues from all over the world. This allows individuals who use social networking, to make judgements through a global scale.


Crabtree  discusses the idea of using social networking sites and the internet to promote an engaged politics. 'The political potential of the internet lies not in connecting people to politicians [but] in the possibility of bringing citizens together to help themselves.' (Crabtree, 2003). The idea is discussed that politicians seem to be coming less truthworthy and citizens are turning to online bloggers and other online personalities to source help. 


Crabtree made me realise that the internet really can tell you anything you want to know. I know personally whenever I want something or want to know something i'll jump straight onto Google and have my answer in 5 seconds. Who can complain about that? Crabtree discusses why the benefits of the internet. I feel like we turn to people online in forums and social networking sites for advice because I know that I feel they are on the same level as me. I believe that they are regular citizens like myself and can offer me advice through their own experiences and I think this advice is much more justified. 


With the issue of Julian Assange, if there is somebody exposing these 'misconducts' to us then who are we to trust the government with our issues? How do we know what is the truth? This online activism of Wikileaks is important in ensuring we are all aware of the happenings around us, even if we aren't directly being told. 

week 8: Can I really live without Twitter?

How Twitter will change our lives. Correct me if you disagree because I can say the only effect Twitter has had on my life was it being where I found out Ricky Martin finally confessed his sexuality. But this makes me think that maybe I am not using Twitter to its full potential because if it is meant to be changing my life then something is seriously mistaken. 


I guess I was kind of against Twitter from the start and it was exactly because of what Johnson stated. 'The one thing you can say for certain about Twitter is that it makes a terrible first impression. You hear about this new service that lets you send 140-character updates to your "followers," and you think, Why does the world need this, exactly?' (Johnson, 2009). I figured that this was a new social site that just took what was popular from Facebook which was the idea of status update. I didn't understand why you wouldn't just use Facebook considering all its other features.

Then I noticed you could follow celebrities to find out what they've been doing if you are really that interested. I find that Twitter gives you a bit of an ego boost when it notifies you that you have been re tweeted or when people start following you. In a way, it concretes your online presence making you feel your free speech and thoughts are of some value to somebody out there. 'In short, the most fascinating thing about Twitter is not what it's doing to us. It's what we're doing to it.' (Johnson, 2009) I find this comment by Johnson to be very true. It's becoming a space for citizen journalism and another media platform where people are getting information about serious issues. Twitter gives us exposure to more opinion and different angles that we wouldn't necessarily see in the newspaper or on tv. There is limited control of what other people say. It also gives people a chance to respond to comments. Politicians like Julia Gillard have a chance to respond to what people may have said about her. Also, subjects in the news have a chance to tell their side of the story. 


Again Twitter is another means for free advertisement. If somebody is talking up a great cereal they had for breakfast, that comment is probably going to trigger in your subconscious the next time you are tossing up between Sultana Bran and Just Right. 


Twitter will also make you a better writer. Due to the 140 character count, it forces you to have clear and concise writing. short messages and short paragraphs always make writing look more appealing to read. 


So do I think Twitter will change the way we live? No. As I said, I may not understand the functions of it as much but doesn't that just mean it is not having a great effect on my life? I believe Twitter definitely has great aspects but I can't see how this alone can be life changing. 

week 7: And you know that about me... how?

It's crazy that you never think about where your information is. I am scared that if my computer or hard drive fails, i'll lose my music, photos, identity!!!

But then I think... my music is on my 8 tracks playlists, photos are all on Facebook so hello identity. I would like to know though, why is my information good enough to be stored and where is it all? How can there be something so huge that it can hold the entire contents of every single person's online presence? I'm sure there is a database that has everything about my life that's been posted somewhere on the internet. From the storage of information i've put into the internet people would know my passwords, credit card number, preferences and interests, friends, places i've been, photos of me, things i've bought, songs i've listened to. It's scary. I have shared more things about me with the internet then I have with any person. To me, this seems unhealthy. The things I have typed into the internet, a lot of it I wouldn't tell a person.

What if one day this mysterious secret place where all our information is stored explodes or is uncovered?! I would be exposed and there would not be one secret. People would see what i've chatted to my friends about or what i've googled out of interest (which I assure you is nothing out of the ordinary). But that is not the point.

We as online personalities slightly have a bit of control. We control what people know about us and what is stored in this gigantic database. We also have control of what we advertise. If I status about a great steak I had at Outback Steakhouse, then that is free advertising for them. SCORE!

Now onto the fun part. This weeks reading by Kelly  was especially interesting as it discussed the issue of internet copy. It did make me aware that a lot of things i've written (like this blog) are more than easy to copy.  But even onto bigger and better things than that, movies. Since i've discovered project free tv, my attendance to movie theatres has severely declined and this does mean bad things for the economy. 'We can start with a simple user question: why would we ever pay for anything that we could get for free? When anyone buys a version of something they could get for free, what are they purchasing?' (Kelly, 2008) This is such a good question. I would never buy something that I could get for free and to you that may seem immoral but I am a uni student who makes no great deal of money so yes, I can admit this and I guarantee I am not the only person. 


The economy just wouldn't be getting the money it used to due to these free options. People pay for quality and authenticity but I feel purchased versions need to offer something more to us so there is more of an incentive to pay. 

Week 6: continual evolution

I can think back to the time my Dad first set up the Internet at home. I remember being so mesmerised and so confused at why we would need such technology. After exposing the unlimited possibilities of the Internet, I became dependent on it.

I can think back to the time my Dad first brought home a DVD player. I couldn't understand why our trustworthy VCR player was being ignored. I remember asking him how we would possibly tape things off the TV.  When watching my first DVD and learning the joys of scene skipping and bonus features and I quickly became obsessed.

Now I have a TV with a built in DVD player, USB port, HDMI connection, digital set top box. All things have converged into one and this seems to be the way of the future. When you think we have everything we could possibly have, there is something else we realise we need to make our lives more convenient.

So that's an introduction into technological convergence. But, what about convergence culture? Jenkin's definition of convergence is 'n the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behaviour of media audiences who will go almost anywhere
in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want.' With media convergence, it is the idea that every story can be told on a wide range of platforms. It is the idea that information is put out there to the world and Jenkins used the example of the 'Bert is evil' image.



The culture of convergence is brands getting sold and consumers having no where to escape as they can now be targeted on every media platform. 'In the world of media convergence, every important story gets told,
every brand gets sold, and every consumer gets courted across multiple media platforms.' (Jenkins, 2003).

As technology has converged, it has been easy and efficient to tell these stories. Free streaming of movies are available and I can say that I am constantly streaming or downloading.

People now need to alter their ways of life to have a relationship with technology. Advertisers now need to take new media and social networking sites into account in order for them to reach an audience effectively. Different types of media need to come together in order for it to be more convenient. Rather than owning all these different types of media, why not bring it all together into one?


'Media convergence is more than simply a technological shift. Convergence alters the relationship between existing technologies, industries, markets, genres, and audiences.' (Jenkins, 2003).

So overall, we can say that media and technologies are going to continue to shift and evolve and it is our job to keep up with it and adapt to these new ways of life. I think due to these convergences, we mainly need to adapt our means of communication.