I think it would be interesting to create a site with limited information so that it is easy to trace the transitions of the information.
The website would consist of the 5 top news articles of that week all based on different sorts of topics Politics, Fashion, Celebrities, World News, Sports. Then connect these articles to a network of people with profiles so that we can see who they are and possibly better determine why they might be interested in the information they are selecting.
The point of the site would be to gossip, to pass the information on to other people who they think would be interested in knowing these particular bits of information. One precurser would be that, in order to pass the information the sender has to comment on it adding their opinions and thoughts on the situation. This way you can trace how and idea about information becomes influenced as it passes through social networks.
Does the reaction to the information grow into something?
What cultural indications are apparent in looking at reactions to information and how it is processed?
Because you are letting the information move randomly based on human interest you will be able to see initial reactions to information and the same information as it is passed on. Hopefully the same people who are on the receiving end of information will also participate and initiate the passing of information. In which case you can see how a specific person reacts and takes in information while also seeing how they pass on information.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
The entire world exists only in order to be televised.
Reading Notes:
In reference to cybernetic theory Shaviro points out that, “networks are self generating, self organizing, self sustaining systems.” (P.10)
Then he shows a relation between this idea and the algebra of need; “Total need guarantees total participation; and total participation means total subjection.”(11)
The point made about there being no panopticon in this day and age but rather surveillance that is not placed in one specific location or by one specific viewer is fascinating to me.
The argument is made that the cameras are not their to catch people doing wrong but rather to deter it. Just by the mere presence of surveillance we are regulating ourselves into better behavior.
Earlier in the reading Shapiro says that television persuades and cajoles us into doing the work of policing ourselves. It creates dialogue and participation.
Reading Response:
All of these ideas make me think about the state of society, as we know it today. In many of the conversations I have had with peers in the past few years several people have expressed the sentiment to me that they feel like their lives are being watched, that their lives are leading to something climactic or straight out that their life should be a television show.
Many people seem to have this sense that their life is worthy of examination or discourse be it through television or participation in online networks. I think that’s really what websites like facebook and myspace are about. And in a sense we begin to live our lives as if we were stars of our own production. While it wasn’t mentioned in the reading these are examples that came to mind in reading this analysis of new media networks.
Many people say that myspace is addictive. Shaviro hits it on the nose in his algebra of need, the need really going two ways. Our need to constantly reference who we are and our identities through who we know, what we listen to, what we read, what our interest are etc. and the networks need to exist which is always based on advertisements and essentially the system of a capitalistic free market.
Shaviro is right in saying that these mediums are inescapable. I have gone through periods of no longer wanting to participate in “the media” so to speak. What ends up happening is you become a social leper. When you extract yourself from the media network you extract yourself from the human network because we have come to the conclusion that this is how we will interact with each other in a general sense.
I had an uncomfortable moment this week where I was on a date and the guy I was out with was making references to pop culture left and right. Out of the 20-30 names that were dropped I think I knew about 5 of them. Interestingly enough in the context of dating or courtship, a basic human interaction since forever, I now need to know certain kinds of information to connect with someone and possibly someday find a mate, to in fact self generate myself (i.e. procreate).
It was clear that my date was disappointed in that fact that I wasn’t impressed with all the people he knows because I was not participating in that network and our connection suffered because of it. I now feel like, if I ever go out with him again I should prep myself by watching ESPN for an hour, or listening to the Wendy Williams gossip radio show before we interact again.
Pop references aren’t the only networks out there but the idea is it seems like information now is a key element in how we relate to one another even in the most basic is natural ways. Everything is mediated.
In reference to cybernetic theory Shaviro points out that, “networks are self generating, self organizing, self sustaining systems.” (P.10)
Then he shows a relation between this idea and the algebra of need; “Total need guarantees total participation; and total participation means total subjection.”(11)
The point made about there being no panopticon in this day and age but rather surveillance that is not placed in one specific location or by one specific viewer is fascinating to me.
The argument is made that the cameras are not their to catch people doing wrong but rather to deter it. Just by the mere presence of surveillance we are regulating ourselves into better behavior.
Earlier in the reading Shapiro says that television persuades and cajoles us into doing the work of policing ourselves. It creates dialogue and participation.
Reading Response:
All of these ideas make me think about the state of society, as we know it today. In many of the conversations I have had with peers in the past few years several people have expressed the sentiment to me that they feel like their lives are being watched, that their lives are leading to something climactic or straight out that their life should be a television show.
Many people seem to have this sense that their life is worthy of examination or discourse be it through television or participation in online networks. I think that’s really what websites like facebook and myspace are about. And in a sense we begin to live our lives as if we were stars of our own production. While it wasn’t mentioned in the reading these are examples that came to mind in reading this analysis of new media networks.
Many people say that myspace is addictive. Shaviro hits it on the nose in his algebra of need, the need really going two ways. Our need to constantly reference who we are and our identities through who we know, what we listen to, what we read, what our interest are etc. and the networks need to exist which is always based on advertisements and essentially the system of a capitalistic free market.
Shaviro is right in saying that these mediums are inescapable. I have gone through periods of no longer wanting to participate in “the media” so to speak. What ends up happening is you become a social leper. When you extract yourself from the media network you extract yourself from the human network because we have come to the conclusion that this is how we will interact with each other in a general sense.
I had an uncomfortable moment this week where I was on a date and the guy I was out with was making references to pop culture left and right. Out of the 20-30 names that were dropped I think I knew about 5 of them. Interestingly enough in the context of dating or courtship, a basic human interaction since forever, I now need to know certain kinds of information to connect with someone and possibly someday find a mate, to in fact self generate myself (i.e. procreate).
It was clear that my date was disappointed in that fact that I wasn’t impressed with all the people he knows because I was not participating in that network and our connection suffered because of it. I now feel like, if I ever go out with him again I should prep myself by watching ESPN for an hour, or listening to the Wendy Williams gossip radio show before we interact again.
Pop references aren’t the only networks out there but the idea is it seems like information now is a key element in how we relate to one another even in the most basic is natural ways. Everything is mediated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)