Embracing The Increasingly Fast Pace and Changing World

The age of technology that we live in today allows us to constantly and continually receive information at an alarmingly fast pace. Technology allows people access to instantaneous updates, everything from what their roommate is thinking about to being able to keep track of current events provided by online newspapers.  So how does this effect individuals as they are constantly bombarded by an endless stream of information that is available in the day and age that we live in?  Within Alvin Toffler book Future Shock that I am reading, he address the issues surrounding the accelerated pace that comes with technology.  One of the main issues he address within his book is the divide between accepting and rejecting the fast past world that he lived in.   He observes in his book two reactions towards the fast paced society in which people during the 70’s were living in. The first group he describes are people who enjoy living in a fast paced society while other individuals in response wish as he states to “get off the merry-go-round” (37).  Though the American society in the 70’s was vastly different from society today, there still exists today the concern of trying to have a happy medium between embracing technology, while at the same time trying to not be consumed by it.

While exploring Flickr more, it’s interesting to see how much information is shared and uploaded on the photo sharing site.  It is easy to spend hours looking and browsing through photos and groups on any social sites ranging from Facebook to Instagram. So though we live in a much faster pace today,  the concerns and issues of how people deal living in a fast paced world are still valid concerns today. Do you ever feel overwhelmed at the amount of information that is obtainable in our society? How do you find a balance between being connected and finding time to disconnect?

Zooming in on Present Shock

As I've been reading Present Shock and working with Evernote, I have begun to find little vinettes that are beginning to shape my focus. I am continually fascinated by this idea of present shock and time compression as it relates to the digital age. One thing that Rushkoff talks a lot about is how social media contributes to present shock. We are simultaneously wired into many different networks, all trying to capture the present moment. The problem is, once we capture it, it's gone. Another interesting aspect is that we are so concerned about what is going on elsewhere at any given moment. This is evident by how we read Tweets, view Instagrams, Facebook posts, etc. When we place concern in what is going on somewhere else at any given time, we miss the moment in our time. This is not completely avoidable, but Rushkoff claims that we can be smarter about our technology use. We can teach it to fit our needs rather than being ruled by its predetermined settings. The bottom line is that social interaction is changing, and we can either actively find ways to cope and manage our interactions, or we can passively be drowned in an onslaught of social media and personal accounts that trap us in present shock.

As for my curation, Evernote has been extremely helpful in allowing me to keep track of certain sources that I come across relating to these ideas. The most valuable thing I have encountered was being able to save an article that I found on Douglas Rushkoff's Twitter account. He is going to be part of a public Google hangout discussing new kinds of movements that are occuring in the Digital Age and contrasting them with 20th century movements (for exmaple, the Civil Rights movement). Rushkoff will be leading the discussion. I clipped the article and the link to Evernote and set a reminder so that I can watch the discussion. I hope to be able to engage in some conversations about it afterward. 

I also found an article relating the NSA fiasco to present shock, which was pretty interesting. I took a screenshot of the webpage through Evernote to show here: 

Selfishness, The "Public Parts" Perspective on Copyright

I have to admit, before our class discussions I was unaware of the present issues our copyright laws create. I was aware of the inconvenience it caused when I really wanted a song that hadn't made it to Spotify yet or a tv show that I really needed to see the next episode but all of the links kept being removed due to copyright issues.  In Public Parts by Jeff Jarvis, Jarvis argues for the necessity of public sharing, both for success in business and in our personal lives. As you can imagine, he does not view copyright laws too fondly.

In fact, Jarvis compares the governments hunt for terrorists to their similar hunt for media use violators. He writes, "In 2011, the Obama administration proposed criminalizing unauthorized media streaming as a felony and empowering the FBI to fight it using wiretaps." Is copyright an issue that is threatening our nations security to the point where our rights to privacy can be violated? If so, I feel that some major reforms need to be made in regards to our copyright laws. Jarvis explains that much of prosecution on copyright violations come as a result of fear and companies trying to protect their ancient methods of doing business, as they refuse to change. He explains that this is something that happens all throughout time-people are reluctant (and lazy) to change their ways. When the radio began covering news, the traditional papers began to panic, same goes for when the tv came about. The papers complained that not only was the radio cutting into their sales, but it was violating their copyright. It's this selfish mindset of protecting what has been instead of adapting and rising to the new possibilities that creates the problems. Jarvis writes, "Other companies have attacked Google or Facebook instead of learning lessons from them. Yet more have threatened to extend copyright or hamper the doctrine of fair use to disadvantage newcomers." Content and distribution are no longer reigning in business, but relationships are.

I believe that copyright is still needed, that people should have the right to protect their work, yet the laws need to change as they are now being used to hinder progress, and to selfishly protect businesses that refuse to adapt.

Curation on Fan Culture

Fandoms in General: 
So following various fandoms on Feedly had amazing results as far as current events.  I watched when the writer for Star Wars Episode VII was dropped and the preview for the next Captain America movie was released.  I also witnessed casting decisions for the upcoming 2015 film "Avengers: Age of Ultron" were hinted at or made. 

As a curation tool, Feedly had its drawbacks because since I am focusing on fan culture I want to keep in touch with the fan base, but the news articles were mostly from established news organizations and were at most opinion editorials about the occurring events.  So for more specific data, I logged into my newly created twitter account and looked up the response to Aaron Taylor-Johnson's casting as Quicksliver in Avengers 2.  The response has been mostly positive, in the sense that the fans seem to think he will be good for the role.  But there is some indignation that he was hinted at getting the role at least four months ago and this only just became official.

Specific Fandoms: Marvel's Agents of SHIELD.
 I used Storify and Twitter to follow Marvel's "SHIELD" and fan responses to the show.  I used links from Twitter to find reviews and fan comments.  What I am finding is that in spite of the show's huge opening ratings, ratings are declining and fans are complaining about the weakness of characters/actors/storyline/etc.  But the fans who are supportive of the show--and  friends I have talked to--say that the naysayers were expecting too much since the show has just started and the story needs time to build.  And the low ratings are because people aren't tuning in to ABC on Tuesdays at 7 or whenever but they are downloading the show from ABC.com or Hulu.  The responses on Facebook seem a little more moderate.  At Medieval Club tonight a friend told me that he watched SHIELD on the internet during work--and even Joss Whedon's other shows, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly, took a while to take off. So these findings show that the fans have nothing to complain about--yet. It is clearly a good strategy to utilize both online resources and my social graph. 

My personal questions about the show:
1 . What do I think of the girl in the flower print dress from the last episode?  She's creepy.  I look forward to her creeping me out because apparently she's good at it. 
2. Is Coulson really "alive"? I am hoping against hope that he is.  But apparently "they" did something to him.  My friend at club was hopeful. 

self-generated meme

I'm not a hundred percent sure what I'm doing or what I'm planning to do. What I need to do next is find online forums and blogs for the fandoms as well as do more in-depth investigation of current events and talking to people.

Mashup in the Context of Present Shock

As I was flipping through Present Shock, I noticed a chapter on Mashup and Makeup. This is particularly pertinent to our recent discussion of remix and mashup culture. Rushkoff begins with a description of the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. He explains that, in an effort to freeze their appearance in a state of timeless beauty, they have surrendered their ability to communicate effectively. 94% of language is body language, and these women are unable to use their faces to provide context to what they are saying. Plastic surgery, Botox injections, and collagen infusions have created a physical mashup of was once their face. In trying to preserve the present, they have estranged themselves from actually participating in and connecting with what is present all around them, including other human beings. Here is a video for illustrative purposes (though I won't blame you if you don't make it all the way through...I almost couldn't).

As Rushkoff says, "No wonder they have so many misunderstandings" (150). They send false signals that do not adequately convey their feelings. Rushkoff goes on to relate this to mashup by showing that being stuck in the present moment is due in part to the ready availability of anything to everyone. This constant availability stops new and emerging genres and cultures from fully developing. There is no place for a new genre to thrive, collect itself, grow, and create a base (if that makes sense) without becoming viral and available to the public almost immediately. Therefore, as a substitute for these new genres and cultures, we turn to mashup. Rushkoff does not discount mashup as unoriginal, thoughtless creation, but instead sees it as an artful phenomenon. He says, "Mashup is to culture as genetic engineering is to biological evolution" (154). I thought this concept was a fresh take on the idea of mashup. He sees mashup as a product of present shock. 

Remixing and Mashups

I was so glad that we covered remixing and mashup culture in class. I think it is always interesting how people could create a new product, a new creation and make something totally new and different.  Creating remix and mashup videos within our community is a very common and popular thing to do.

In fact, many people within the class have already bloged about this subject Paul in his blog post talked about video Game Modding and Melody within her post talks about remixing within cultures. Remixing culture, as stated in class, provides individuals the opportunity to view music and media in different way.  Remixing allows individual to make and create popular videos such as this one where the top 50 music hits were mashed together in one song.

So why has remixing been so popular?  How can videos(such as the one above) receive over 40 million views? Why would people take the time to create multiple website and give lots of advice of How to remix?

Though there are many factors that all contributes to why remixing is so successful, this blog posts address some of the reasoning and factors of how and why remix culture is so prevalent in our current society.  It states that one of the prevalent reasons of how it can be so successful is because it allows people and individuals choose specifically moments, or songs such as the top 50 hits of 2012, and then allows them to create a video that other people are able to relate to.  Like many people and expressed and stated, they also believe that the purpose of the creation of the copyright laws are outdated and no longer apply to our current society.

In the book I am reading for class Future Shock it addresses the different issues that the American society faced in the early 1970's.  During the 70's technology and digital culture were at there beginning stage as different projects concerning technology and the digital realm were beginning to be developed.  The author Alvin Toffler expresses his concerns concerning the public regulating the area of technology.  Toffle states that " Where self-regulation fails, however, as it often does, public intervention may well be necessary, and we should not evade the responsibility.  Tofflers point that we as a society are expected to treat I guess you can say our technology right as we would with any other rights.  This issues comes up in may ways within technology as was brought up in class concerning aspects of technology such as how copyright laws are outdated, and because of this it is hindering our ability as individuals in a media and digital culture world to not only share information, but also in our ability to express ourselves.

The example of Youtube that was discussed in class is a classic example of how our copyright laws and media worlds are clashing in a negative way.  So how do you think this change will come about?  Do you think that it will be easy?  Do you have the confidence that issues such as copyright laws can be changed and amended or do you think that the issues are so complicated that coming to a mutual agreement will be impossible?

my curation experience with diigo

via

Over the past week or so as I have been exploring Diigo, I've used to the tool to track my research concerning public sharing, and in particular, online missionary work.  One of the unique tools Diigo provides is that it allows you to see other bookmarks and lists that other users have curated. This was helpful in finding information concerning online sharing in general, and even other enthusiasts of Public Parts by Jeff Jarvis, however it was difficult to find information specifically related to the LDS effort to use digital tools to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. So in that way, Diigo was not as useful as it might have been with another topic. However, the highlighting, bookmarking and note taking features were extremely useful in tracking my research through various church websites and blogs. It was a funny thing to hear Elder Ballard explaining the digital realm in a very similar way to Jarvis.  

Elder Ballard stated, "Those conversations will continue whether or not we choose to participate in them. But we cannot stand on the sidelines while others, including our critics, attempt to define what the Church teaches. While some conversations have audiences in the thousands or even millions, most are much, much smaller. But all conversations have an impact on those who participate in them. Perceptions of the Church are established one conversation at a time." This sounds very familiar, as Jarvis likewise stated, "To make those [real] connections, we must be public and share. We first have to reveal ourselves as members of those groups." Ballard's talk was given back in 2008.  As I've gone through various blogs I've seen both good and bad examples of this in action.  It's not enough just to throw in the word "mormon" or "lds" and call it good. Yes, we must identify ourselves as members of the LDS church, but we must do so consciously.  Ballard continued on in his talk to expound upon the idea of explaining things online very clearly and simply. I found some wonderful articles, both by members of the Church and others, who discussed the need to consciously create a positive online identity, or as Jarvis calls it, a "brand". 

As I continue on in my research, I want to focus on not only the content that has been circulated, but how it was received. I'm hoping to look into several blogs that I have discovered and bookmarked through Diigo, and explore how those not of the LDS faith received and responded to the information. 

What have your experiences (good or bad) been with sharing your religious beliefs online?