The Emerging Struggle for a Free Press

I found that one of the most prevalent issues when talking about the upcoming election in comparison to this article was actually right on the first page. The author discusses the fact that much of our country does not vote, and that the elections cater to the wealthier classes. It is interesting because in the 2008 election it is fairly obvious that both candidates are trying to appeal to the more average citizens and are pushing them to vote as well. Many of Obama's policies are in support of citizens who are of lower social status. Whether it be his healthcare reform or his plan for tax payers, he is clearly out there to help the lower classes, and therefore would also be encouraging them to vote. Even McCain with his "Joe the Plumber" deal appears to be trying to appeal to the lower social classes.

The article relates to the upcoming election in other ways as well. For instance, it describes the way that people complain about getting too much information, but also desire it as well. I think that this has come into play in the election, seeing as we are now able to get more information than ever before on the candidates. Many people have been complaining that the campaigns are too negative and each candidate is essentially trying to destroy the other, but because of the amount of information that is available, I feel that this is the future of the Presidential campaign. The candidates must bring up and attack their opponent's on the issues because if they do not, average citizens like myself can easily go online and dig up some of this information, and then wonder why such issues weren't covered.

Steve Kurtz

Although I had learned about Steve Kurtz and his story prior to this class, I have definitely gained some new insight on the situation. For starters, I had not even considered the role of the amateur in this case before today. I had actually thought about it in the opposite way, believing that because Steve Kurtz was a scientist, the situation was taken more seriously than if he were just an average citizen. In other words, because he knew what he was doing, this was more of a problem. If he were a typical citizen, perhaps this whole experiement would have been seen in a more innocent light.

However, now that I think about the fact that Kurtz was viewed as an amateur scientist, my views change. The concept of an amateur may have given the government the impression that Kurtz's work and ideas were not credible. Perhaps if Kurtz were a well-known and respected scientist in the field in which he was experimenting, the police and criminal system would have had more faith in his experiments, and instead of regarding it as a terrorist plot, it would have been considered science.

Kurtz mentioned that he and Ferrell were both easy targets for the judicial system, and I think he is absolutely right. Between Kurtz having suddenly lost his wife and Ferrell going in for Cancer treatment, it almost seems as if the government were taking an "easy out" and tried to make themselves believe that they were doing our country a favor by making these two men out to be criminals. The American people are easily manipulated, and so if we were told that these people were potential terrorists, I don't see why we wouldn't believe it. Sure, some people may be skeptical, but it just goes to show how much faith we put in our judicial system and government.

I will say that I am relieved that the courts ruled in favor of Kurtz. It is a shame that he had to put up with this nonsense for four years of his life, but I think that his story is quite beneficial. It uncovers some of the aspects of our courts that would likely be swept under the rug otherwise. I understand why we have the Patriot Act, and while I do believe it is necessary in order to keep the United States safe, it can also be taken much too far.

Cult of the Amateur Quiz

1984 / Web 2.0

Amber and I were discussing online shopping, specifically using Google Checkout. Her mom had stored all of her information in this specific checkout system, only to later find out that if she did not log out, all of her credit card information would be open for anyone who comes on the computer to see. In addition, other online shopping sites like amazon.com have access to this information.

I understand that online shopping is very popular right now, but hearing about stories like this scares me. It's much too easy for someone to get credit card information, but what really makes me nervous is how other websites are able to simply get a hold of all of this. Sure, amazon is a secure site, but I'm sure there are plenty of hackers out there who are smart enough to figure out how to get all of this information onto their websites as well. It makes me nervous to think that once you put something on the internet, there's no taking it back. Because someone, somewhere, will more than likely have it stored.

This idea leads me to think about the section in "Cult of the Amateur" that talks about the woman who's search engine entries were tracked and followed for multiple months. After you close out of Google, you would assume that the information you had entered is gone. After all, with millions of search inquiries being entered in, how could they possibly keep track? Well, they've somehow managed it.

All of this makes me wonder not only who can we trust...but what can we trust?

Contrast between cnn.com and cnn iReport

CNN.com and cnn iReport have obvious differences.

First of all, the stories mentioned on CNN.com deal with the nation as a whole. While you're able to go to sub-sections of the website and find information about a variety of topics, the homepage deals with breaking news and topics that impact the nation as a whole. There is a bar on the top of the homepage dedicated to "hot topics", which deal mostly with the US Economy and presidential debates, but are sure to include pop culture icons such as Lindsay Lohan as well.

Next we've got iReport. The homepage showcases articles of lesser importance. For example, the new layout for Facebook has made it onto the iReport homepage. Other articles that relate to Yankee Stadium, Gas Prices in one specific part of the country, as well as amusement parks closing down are in the top five or six articles on the page. While I'll be the first to admit that some of these pieces may be interesting, they are of lesser importance than national news.

However, CNN.com and iReport do share a few similarities. Both talk about politics as well as the recent harsh weather conditions our nation has been dealing with. But while CNN's information is more factual, iReport takes on a more opinionated approach.

I want the truth!

Andrew Keen would be the first to say just how difficult it is to find a truth on the Internet. While considering this assignment, I first tried to come up with some kind of blog or informational website that uncovered a truth before any other source. When I couldn't think of anything, I took a break and checked my e-mail only to find some junk mail from Amazon.com. Then it hit me.

Product reviews!

Advertisements are notorious for bending the truth. Whether it be a shampoo that is promised to make your hair 10 times stronger, a luxury hotel in the Bahamas that is five star quality for a two star price, or even a new electronic gadget that you absolutely cannot live without - it's hard to figure out the truth of the matter. After all, advertisements are only going to explore the benefits of a product.

But by logging onto amazon.com or many other websites which offer the option for product reviews, consumers can finally get the truth. Of course, opinions differ, but by having the option of reading multiple reviews, consumers can get a good feel of exactly how "true" these advertisements and promotions really are. Keen may argue that these reviews are made by mere amateurs, but when it comes to buying a new DVD player, I would prefer hearing about an amateur's experience with the product rather than the entirely positive description of the player written by the manufacturer.

web 2.0 untruth

Alright, now I understand that this assignment was to contrast an "untruth" with a "truth", but I realized that I don't even need to go searching for untruths on web 2.0 - I look at them everyday (multiple times a day, actually.)

I'm an avid reader of a gossip blog named "Oh No They Didn't!" (ONTD). It's an addictive celebrity gossip blog that I can't help but glance at every now and then (Or every few hours. Oops.) Since this a gossip blog by nature, it's hardly a surprise that a great deal of the information on there is false. Within the past month or so, I have seen postings claiming false deaths, arrests, pregnancies, etc. Yet it's difficult to filter out what's true and what's clearly made up, seeing as some of the information posted on ONTD is true.

Today I read a rather humorous article which was originally posted on tmz about Miley Cyrus and her hopes of getting fired. A link to the article is here:

http://www.tmz.com/2008/09/20/disney-to-miley-face-the-music-or-else

Basically, the article claims that Miley is an ungrateful and rather obnoxious individual. Her co-stars can't stand her, and her father is no better. Now, is this true? I'm sure not. I mean, she seems like a sweet girl, right? But how would I know? What is stopping me from telling my friends that Miley is a terrible person? Well, the fact that none of them care about Miley Cyrus is setting me back, but that's probably the only thing.

When it comes to celebrity gossip, I would say that the only source I consider to be reliable is an interview in which Miley denies all of these claims. Or maybe her co-star can explain how all of the claims are false. But even then, how would I know the real truth? I'd really have to physically be on the set of Hannah Montana or in some kind of executive Disney meeting to discover the actual truth...and believe me, I can do without both of those things.

Long story short, this little article was posted this afternoon, and has already gotten hundreds of comments. Most of which are from people who seem to take all of this very seriously. Whether they are defending Miley or simply agreeing with the article, most of these comments appear to be from individuals who assume the article is true and based on fact.