Isaac Ramnaraign
Blog post #3
The bubble
Apart from what Clive Thompson stated about diversity in search engines, Eli Pariser had a more compelling argument about the phenomenon known as the bubble. The bubble applies to the concept of two different people searching the same topic on google, and having different results. Pariser was talking about how the platforms uses our history, and our browser to make the results better in our favor. However, is this really a good thing? What if I do research on India and end up finding out more on Bollywood movies and cinema, rather than the poverty and human trafficking that occurs every year, just because results show more of the good side rather than the bad side of India?
This is what Pariser meant by the bubble. The bubble relates to containing information to match our Queue rather than showing a widespread of results that are related to the topic as well. If I spend more time researching foods than politics and I end up googling Japan, I will most likely have a few search related pages on japanese food rather than the politics that is ongoing over there.
Clive Thompson talks that this diversity may be a good thing. Although he did mention that it is bad because it keeps the truth from us, he said that this makes us more diverse because if our results show up the same, everything we search will be the same. Our interests, topics all would be less diverse because the search engine lacked our interests. Just like using youtube and having a recommendations bar. If I like listening to Pop rock music, the recommendation bars will have music similar to my taste and that makes me different. If these platforms did not use our history for recommendations, we will not be able to explore more into our interests, rather we will most likely see what everyone else is seeing and that can cause many artists to lose content, or to be recognized. At the end of the day, we are people who strive but lack the ambition to do more. Social media is just media, and these are just words behind a computer. In order to make a difference, we need not to only spread awareness to the topic but to actually take physical action towards it. Our actions speak louder than words and so far the only news being broadcasts are of those who use action more than a few words on a website.
Thursday, October 6, 2016
Obama campaign tactics
Isaac Ramnaraign
Blog post # 2
During the 2012 presidential election, Obama used many campaign tactics to spread awareness to his cause. Most funds were accomplished through the use of social networking. Obama's advantage on the Internet has been even more abundant when he also uses youtube to broadcast his political views. Even in 2008, the beginning of the age of social media, his campaign paid for 914.5 million displays of ads on Web sites like Yahoo.com and aol.com in September, while the McCain campaign had only 7.9 million display ads on the Web, according to the ratings service Nielsen Online.
He basically also created a facebook page in 2012 to update voters on the campaign so far. Although Romney used similar tactics, Obama made numerous appearances on shows such as Jimmy kimmel Jimmy Fallon, and Jay Leno who all have massive youtube accounts and accommodate about 5 million views per viral video. Another tactic he used was also having a white house meeting with famous youtubers who vlogged about their time meeting the president. This skyrocketed his campaign on youtube and made the viewers of each youtube visit and participate in his campaign page.
In my opinion, it is all used for propaganda to make others view the opponent of his campaign as bad. Although I am an Obama supporter, there is no denying that social media is the new form to spread propaganda across the nation. Websites such as CNN, BBC, NY times, all are considered news outlets but lack the truth. They anticipate and only publicize what most Americans care about most rather than just posting the truth of what really is going on.
Blog post # 2
During the 2012 presidential election, Obama used many campaign tactics to spread awareness to his cause. Most funds were accomplished through the use of social networking. Obama's advantage on the Internet has been even more abundant when he also uses youtube to broadcast his political views. Even in 2008, the beginning of the age of social media, his campaign paid for 914.5 million displays of ads on Web sites like Yahoo.com and aol.com in September, while the McCain campaign had only 7.9 million display ads on the Web, according to the ratings service Nielsen Online.
He basically also created a facebook page in 2012 to update voters on the campaign so far. Although Romney used similar tactics, Obama made numerous appearances on shows such as Jimmy kimmel Jimmy Fallon, and Jay Leno who all have massive youtube accounts and accommodate about 5 million views per viral video. Another tactic he used was also having a white house meeting with famous youtubers who vlogged about their time meeting the president. This skyrocketed his campaign on youtube and made the viewers of each youtube visit and participate in his campaign page.
In my opinion, it is all used for propaganda to make others view the opponent of his campaign as bad. Although I am an Obama supporter, there is no denying that social media is the new form to spread propaganda across the nation. Websites such as CNN, BBC, NY times, all are considered news outlets but lack the truth. They anticipate and only publicize what most Americans care about most rather than just posting the truth of what really is going on.
Life on the internet
Isaac Ramnaraign
Blog post #1
Effects of Social Networking
Assumed that you were born in the 1990s or mid 1990s for example, there is relative chance that you grew into the age of the internet. The internet is the biggest breakthrough of the modern age. Everyone depended on it for entertainment, information and social interaction inside a network base. Which brings us to social interaction, which includes myspace, twitter and of course facebook. Hiding behind a keyboard gives us more confidence in speaking out of what we are afraid to say in person. Often children of the new age are subjects to social networking more because most of their interactions with people are on social media websites. Social media has became the easiest way of match making, contacting families and propaganda. Not the mention cyber bullying which is becoming the fastest growing cause of teen suicide.
However social interaction on social media has its dark corners. No matter what network, platform or media site we use, there is one factor behind everyone you talk to online and that is the human factor. There are some dangerous people out there who spends their time stalking and harassing others. Growing up online has led you to also become victim to its aspects. I grew up online. I use to spend most of my days watching youtube videos, following daily vlogs and meeting girls online because I was too shy to talk to them in person. I still do the same thing, except now I am older and my priorities of having school and a job separates me from assuming my basic entertainment hobbies.
Apart from that, social networking has led to better communication tactics with family, applying and finding a job faster, and overall change the state of everything social. What is a norm then is not a norm now. I think fundamentally we are the same, but the means by which we socialize is different. So that does not mean we don't grow up too fast. If anything there are major statistics that suggest we are actually growing up slower than past generations. For example, age or marriage, age of being financially independent, and when do you leave home for good. Social networking is more good than it is bad. It is not the concept that makes social networking what it is, it is the people behind it.
Blog post #1
Effects of Social Networking
Assumed that you were born in the 1990s or mid 1990s for example, there is relative chance that you grew into the age of the internet. The internet is the biggest breakthrough of the modern age. Everyone depended on it for entertainment, information and social interaction inside a network base. Which brings us to social interaction, which includes myspace, twitter and of course facebook. Hiding behind a keyboard gives us more confidence in speaking out of what we are afraid to say in person. Often children of the new age are subjects to social networking more because most of their interactions with people are on social media websites. Social media has became the easiest way of match making, contacting families and propaganda. Not the mention cyber bullying which is becoming the fastest growing cause of teen suicide.
However social interaction on social media has its dark corners. No matter what network, platform or media site we use, there is one factor behind everyone you talk to online and that is the human factor. There are some dangerous people out there who spends their time stalking and harassing others. Growing up online has led you to also become victim to its aspects. I grew up online. I use to spend most of my days watching youtube videos, following daily vlogs and meeting girls online because I was too shy to talk to them in person. I still do the same thing, except now I am older and my priorities of having school and a job separates me from assuming my basic entertainment hobbies.
Apart from that, social networking has led to better communication tactics with family, applying and finding a job faster, and overall change the state of everything social. What is a norm then is not a norm now. I think fundamentally we are the same, but the means by which we socialize is different. So that does not mean we don't grow up too fast. If anything there are major statistics that suggest we are actually growing up slower than past generations. For example, age or marriage, age of being financially independent, and when do you leave home for good. Social networking is more good than it is bad. It is not the concept that makes social networking what it is, it is the people behind it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)