Final post: Ethnicity and Cultural Translations to the Web

In this unit, we're examining ways in which race, ethnicity, and class play out online, especially in social networks like Facebook and MySpace. In other words, we're looking at ways "real life" is reflected - or transformed - in online social networks, and how the web may not be such a democratizing force after all.

So, for this final blog post, I'm going to leave you to generate the question to answer. What question(s) do this week's readings raise in your mind? How would you answer those questions? Can you point to examples you've encountered online in your own social networks?

New prompt: Piracy

In our earlier unit on copyright, many of you jumped into discussions about piracy and its relationship to copyright issues, especially in the music industry. In this unit, we focus in more specifically on piracy and music and the impact piracy may or may not have on this industry. In particular, you'll watch a movie that investigates lots of issues related to copyright and music. The movie itself was made through crowdsourcing, with footage submitted from all over the world.

It's a fun movie that I'm certain you'll enjoy - please be sure to watch it.

So, for this week's post, discuss how this unit has extended your understanding of copyright issues, and particularly if these new readings and the movie have changed your thinking at all since our earlier study of copyright. Do you see evidence of the music industry being hurt by piracy? Do you see benefits to artists as the result of piracy? Where do you stand on the RIAA's efforts to curb illegal downloading?

Since college students are often the group doing the most music downloading (as many of you noted in your earlier posts!) they are also often the most likely to be hit with lawsuits or fines, so this topic particularly affects you!

New prompt: Net Neutrality

Since the moment of the realization that the Internet could become a commercial arena, the issue of net neutrality has been an issue. Should the web remain open and free, or do companies have the right to charge for access to certain sites, or at certain speeds?

This week, take a position on this long and hotly debated issue. Be sure to demonstrate you understand the widespread implications of net neutrality, but create a short argument for how you think net neutrality should be legally applied to the web.

Is it important to free speech, democracy, and the economy that it remain open to all? Or is it fair in a capitalist system that companies should charge for access to certain sites, or charge more for higher-bandwidth uses, especially considering that some users use far more bandwidth than others?

The Internet vs. Traditional Media

Great job so far on providing provocative posts and thoughtful comments this week!

This week we are looking at ways that the Internet is impacting traditional media outlets like newspapers and TV, and how journalism has been affected by the rise of Internet and blogging. These include what some see as a negative impact that is killing journalism, TV, and papers, and what others say are innovations in sharing news and information with new and broader audiences.

For your next prompt, I'm going to leave this one open. You may comment on any aspect of the readings, though keep your topic focused (perhaps to just one type of media outlet, like newspapers OR TV) and, as always, take a position on your topic with solid evidence and reasoning.

New prompt: Cyberwar

Here's an updated word cloud of our class blogs so far!

We continue this week with more on Hacktivism, but now taking it to a much deeper and more political level as we examine it in the context of war. In particular, we look at ways that the internet and it use (or abuse) can have a real impact on the lives of whole societies of people.

This week with your post, we'll do something a little different. First, this will be a bit of an open post in which you should take a reasoned position on an aspect of hacktivism and cyberwar; that is, argue for a particular point of view related to the topic. So, for example, is Wikileaks valuable to democracy? Does Wikileaks undermine democracy? Are distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attacks a fair way to engage in "war," especially compared to traditional war? Or more dangerous? Etc.

THEN, when you comment on a classmate's blog, play DEVIL'S ADVOCATE to their position. In other words, how can you challenge their points, or come up with reasonable alternatives to their position? Has the poster overlooked an important point?

Let's get some real discussion going this week.

Hacktivism

Welcome back from spring break!

For the next couple weeks, we are focusing on the idea of activism on the web - specifically a kind of activism known as hacktivism. Hacktivism is a way of advancing a cause or staging a protest by hacking into the opponents' computer systems or websites, as opposed to more traditional forms of activism like demonstrations, letter-writing, or even coups.

For this week's post, consider the ethics of this form of activism, especially in reference to the specific articles and case studies you read. Also consider that these examples are international in scope, so American ideals (and laws) of free speech don't necessarily apply.

So: choose one of the examples of hacktivism and discuss its implications. Is it an effective means of protest or achieving justice? Does it seem to violate civil or human rights? Should there be more international regulation of such acts - and is such regulation even possible? What do you think the future might hold in terms of new forms of political protest online, or what might the consequences of such acts be?

Sixth blog post: Copyright and Fair Use

The web has made posting, downloading, and remixing copyrighted content infinitely easier, which can be a great boon for critics and artists, and a painful thorn in the side of copyright owners and corporations. This week, you've read quite a number of disparate articles about how copyright law came to exist in its current form (Lessig), different takes on the value of copyright, alternatives to standard copyright licensing (Creative Commons), and legal ways to use copyrighted material (Fair Use).

This week, consider both sides of the coin: how you might feel as someone wanting to use copyrighted material in a video or other work, and as someone who owns copyrighted material that someone else wants to use in THEIR work. Where do you stand?

This is a bit of an open post week, so address points of interest that came up for you in the readings and videos, but in particular, consider whether you think law as it stands is fair. Does it go too far? Not far enough? Is the internet harming copyright owners and their livelihoods, or killing creative industries like music and movies? Is the widespread dissemination of copyrighted material online actually making our culture better? Do the benefits of remixing and reposting copyrighted material outweigh the harms?

 Be sure to consider Lessig's points about the historical goals of copyright and how those goals have changed over time.

Fifth blog post: Anonymity, Deception, Trolling

Often hailed as the worst movie of all time.

First of all, I've got to say that I love all the images you're finding!

Now, for this week's post: consider the way the Internet allows us to manipulate the way we present ourselves to others (and how they present themselves to us). Also, choose almost any YouTube video with comments allowed and take a scroll through them. Or check out the comments on most local newspaper websites - those without comment moderation - and see what kinds of unfiltered thoughts pour through.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of remaining anonymous online? Why do think the web has produced the phenomenon of "trolling," and why do you think people feel so comfortable saying things online they likely wouldn't say in person? How do we determine whether we're being deceived online? And, bonus points: how do we combat the negative effects of some of these developments?

Fourth blog post: On crowdsourcing and collaboration

To be sure, the web has introduced unprecedented ways to bring people together in collaborative forms.

Based on this week's readings, what do you think are the advantages and drawbacks of online collaboration and crowdsourcing? Do you agree with Howard Rheingold's assessment that cooperation and open source initiatives are ultimately about self-interest? Or Nicholas Carr's claim that we overly celebrate the amateur, instead of trusting the professional, online? Is crowdsourcing enabling new forms of knowledge or art or innovation to emerge, or is it just another tool for collaboration, as humans have always done?

You can, in particular, consider the recent events in Egypt - what role has collaboration through social media played in fueling the protests (or news reporting) there?

Respond to any or all of the above questions in this week's post. And remember - the best posts will reference specific examples in the readings, include an image, and include a title. Due Wednesday, February 9th.

Third Blog Post: Open Response

Now that you've gotten the hang of how blogging works, it's your turn to take a little more control. So, this week, in reading about how (and if) the web is changing the way we think, your task is to come up with a response on your own. You can choose any aspect of the topic and readings for the week, and craft a thoughtful response - or discuss questions that these readings raised in your mind.

Due Wednesday, February 2nd, with comments to be posted by Sunday, Feb. 6th.

Second Blog Post: On Corporate Tracking and Privacy

Lots of good blog posts in this first round!

For your second round, due by Wednesday, January 26th, address the following question:

This week, you read quite a bit about how companies track your activity online - your search terms, your "likes," your ad-clicks - as a way of creating very targeted advertising. Do you agree with this practice? Is it an invasion of privacy, even if your name isn't directly linked to your online activity? Or do you think this information is fair game?

Consider, in particular, that the internet services you use for "free" are largely financed through advertising, and that you probably prefer ads that are most relevant to you. Is it worth it to have your online activity used in this way, or are these companies getting to close to becoming a kind of "Big Brother"?

First blog post: On privacy

Google CEO Eric Schmidt has been quoted as saying, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

Now that you've read quite a bit about the origins of the Internet and definitions of "privacy," do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Is there a difference between "private" and "secret"? After all, there are lots of things that aren't secret - going to the bathroom, for example - that usually we still would like to be private.

So, in other words, how do you feel about some of the loosening of privacy controls and more open displays of what were once considered private behaviors on the web? 

The best posts will specifically reference the readings in your reply.

DUE: Wednesday,  January 19th