Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Question for Friday, March 16th

We're back at it! We have three chapters in a row to cover now that we are back from Spring Break. Please read S2:U1 from your textbook and post One (1) interpretive question for Friday's class.

That's right, only one will do for the next few classes.

16 comments:

Katie's Page said...

On pages 83-85, it talks about how the nation is in a digital divide, we are all fortunate enough to have access to phones, computers, and other technologies but other countries do not. The countries that do not have any access are mostly poor countries that cannot afford these technologies.

How do you think communication and social interaction is different in countries that do not have access to telephones, internet etc... Do you think they have better or worse social connections?

Rachael said...

Pages 91-92 discuss the issues of privacy online. The book states that privacy is the most important ethical concern surrounding the Internet, because everything online can be monitored in some way.



How do you think privacy effects our everyday use of the Internet? Are you ever concerned about privacy issues? What are some things we do online where we would need to worry about privacy?


-Rachael

Cassidy said...

In S2:U2 on page 100 our book discusses how CMC offers a way for a person to fake and identity. It talks about people attempting to be of a different gender or race. In some aspects this could be beneficial to the CMC user; however it could also be threatening. As we saw in the episode of “Buffy” that we watched in class, it is easy for people to fake an identity, and it can sometimes become dangerous for those they communicate with.

It is very easy for a person to fake an identity. I found a website at http://www.zulugrid.com/2006/06/16/false-identity-generator/ which helps a person to create a false identity for a variety of different reason.

Is it wrong for a person to fake an identity? What if they are not harming any one else? Is it unethical for some one to lie to another person on CMC?

Leah's Blog said...

Page 85 of the textbook discusses the idea that more than half of the world has not engaged in CMC. What do you believe are some reasons as to why technology is so prominent in our nation and not others? Also, do you believe that globalization will continue to grow forcing more nations to use CMC, if so why?

Shauna said...

Page 85 states that "over half the world's population has never made a telephone call, so certainly well over half have never engaged in CMC." Have you ever thought about this before and does this statistic shock you? Does this change how you view CMC in the world? Do you think people without CMC use are missing out by not enjoying this "privilege" or are somehow lacking in their communication?

david g said...

on page 89 (box CI1:8) the book talks about the British government's attempts at building an electronic community. The plan worked this way, the government donated 100,000 recycled PC's to some of the poorest, most depressed regions of Britian. And while this sounds good in theory, a year after the plan was put into effect, only 6,000 PC's were distributed. Families were told that they would have to wait until 2009 to get their PC.

My question is this, the idea sounds good in theory but is it tangible? in other words is there a way to effectivly execute this plan to build a stronger online community?

-david g

Jill Carle said...

On page 91, the book discusses how autonomy gives a voice to those who usually don't speak for themselves. It also states that "autonomy suggests independence, free will, or action." This can be a great thing for those in poor and underdeveloped nations who usually do not have a say in things like we do in America. I agree with the book when it states that online anonymity can increase autonomy, but what happens when the government of these countries interfere with the free speech of these individuals who want to be heard online, such as Zouhair Yahyaoui (pg. 91)? I think that there is a real possibility that a lot of information is not shared by people in these countries not only because there is a lack of internet connectivity, but also because they fear punishment from those in power. I think that there should be some way for these people to remain anonymous online to get their views heard, but on the other hand, that also raises the question of something like terrorism and not being able to trace it. Can there be an equilibrium between anonymity and autonomy in these third world countries?

Anonymous said...

On page 85 of the text book it states that over half the world's population has never mde a single telephone call. That statistic shocked me at first, but once I thought about it, it didn't seem quite so absurd. I personally can't imagine my life without the telephone. How would I communicate with my friends and family that I don't see every day?
Do you think these individuals who have never used a phone feel they are missing out on something? Do you think they wish for our type of communication? Or do you think because they have never experienced these luxuries that are invisible technologies to us they feel no need for them?

Melissa Hennen

DJ Yokley said...

Page 92 in our book talks about privacy and CMC. The book states that everything online can be monitored in one way or another. This being said, What are some privacy issues we face with CMC that we do not face in FtF? On the flip-side of that coin...what privacy issues are a non-issue with CMC, but a serious issue in FtF?

Ashley C. said...

On pages 83-84 our text discusses how our nation is more technologically advanced than other nations. We have access to so many different types of technology that we almost separate ourselves from these less fortunate countries.How different is it in another country without the use of advanced technology? Could we live in their obsolete world? Are they comparable to the amish?

Brittany Donegan said...

On page 91, the book refers to a term called "autonomy", which means being able to speak or care for oneself, rather than being spoken for by others. Considering CMC is a huge phenomena in the United States, and autonomy allows one to be self-ruled, the idea of autonomy seems to go right along with the whole concept of American democracy. However, how might CMC vary within other countries? Do you think that countries ruled by a strong dictatorship may have a much less autonomous version of CMC? What are some of the reasons that autonomy may vary within other countries or cultures? Does speed and availability of CMC have anything to do with this concept of autonomy?

Rachel B. said...

On page 85, the book states that "A United Nations report on the digital divide estimates that 4 billion people around the world will probably never get online." To me, this seems like quite a claim. That's almost two-thirds of the world's population! The book then goes on to address globalization, which allows the "increased mobility of goods, services, labor, technology and capital throughout the world." Is it not feasible, then, that due to the rise of globalization over a great amount of time, most of the world could get online? Or does globalization favor the richer, more powerful countries, only adding to what we already have? Does technology also follow a pattern similar to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer? Will it only get better for us, or is there any real hope that third world countries could ever pull ahead in technological advancements?

Anonymous said...

On page 83 they discuss how most of us are surrounded by communication channels and tools that always keep us connected. Whereas some people and some cultures don't get the pleasure of always being connected. At any given moment we can be reached through numerous technologies but we don't think about the necessary things that we need to keep us connected and the cost of it. A computer alone is expensive and when it comes to buying the internet it's not cheap. Until I read this I never thought about the people who have never used the internet. This made me think about what life would be like without the internet and computers. Computers are almost just as important as telephones because we use it as a source of commucication. Do you feel that the cost of computers and the internet isn't fair and that it isn't right that certain cultures have never used this technology because they can't afford it? Do you think that it effects them not to have computers or the internet or do they feel that it's nt a necessity because they've never had it?

Jenyce B.

Anonymous said...

Globalization is taking place full force in the United States making the country and the world more ‘flat’, as some would say, on behalf of our technological capabilities. With this technological upsurge, tags along other privileges taken for granted, like privacy and safety. We do see serious problems occurring with these privileges such as credit card fraud and even on TV show like Predators.
Globalization has not put so much as a dimple in many parts of Africa. The map on page 84 suggests less than two percent of the country has access to the internet even though their industrialization and business is no where near the level it is among the United States. However, the problems caused by child predators and internet scammers are non-existent.
Assess the difference in situation these two countries are involved in according to global politics and determine whether the people of Africa would welcome the social problems caused by internet privileges in exchange for industrialization. If they could see before hand all of the problems the internet could stir up--- would there be a second look at bringing the internet to the country or is there no-contest?

--pamela

Chris Norris said...

In the opening of the chapter, it talks about how a very small percentage of the world has access to the internet. The table shown at the bottom of the page easily ilustrates this. I ask this question:
If more of the world were connected to the internet would it be easier for interaction amongst cultures? Would this lead to less violence between cultures and a better understanding of other cultures and their beliefs? How much of an impact would world wide communication (via CMC) have on each and every country?

-Chris

Jamie Rae said...

Page 85 talks about globalization. One of the views about globalization is that it will lead to more free and open societies and the internet plays a large role in that freedom. It seems to me that so many freedoms are being questioned about what kinds of information should be on the internet. Will globalization and more people having access to the internet really provide more freedom, or will it bring more restrictions?