My Blogging Experience

This semester I was challenged with the task of starting a blog and updating it weekly for my Media Law and Literacy class. I took this as a chance to write about topics that are interesting to me yet still relating to the class topics. 

Some topics I covered along the way are the Music Modernization Act, an Antitrust Investigation into Google, the Supreme Court, Individual Self-Fulfillment, students valuing their grades over their comprehension, the invention of the Camera Phone, Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation, and questioning if privacy still exists in today's world. Although all of these topics were interesting to investigate and form my own opinion on, my favorite blog posts to write were When Did We Become Prisoners to Our Smartphones?, My Online Presence, WikiLeaks, and Cord Cutting. These topics were my favorite to write blogs on because I found out that I had strong opinions on them that I felt confident enough to share. A major part of blogging is finding out how to use your voice and formatting it properly. I believe through these four blogs listed above I was able to do just that.

In the blog, When Did We Become Prisoners to Our Smartphone that was reflecting on this video I was able to form an opinion that our society's addiction to our smartphones and social media is destroying us even if there are some positive aspects to owning a smartphone and participating in social media.  

In the blog, My Online Presence, I explored how much of my life I share online. I discovered I share probably more than most people through documenting moments in my life on YouTube and constantly sharing photos on Instagram/Instagram Stories and Facebook. I came to the conclusion that it is alarming how much someone could find out about me through my online presence but that I can protect myself somewhat through privacy settings. I decided I will continue to share parts of my life on social media to keep my friends and family up to date. 

Before I wrote the blog about WikiLeaks, I did not know anything about it. This allowed me to research WikiLeaks and form an opinion without pre-existing opinions interfering. I was able to determine that "There are instances where crucial information is revealed through WikiLeaks that people have tried to hide which I think is important for the public to be aware of. Also, mainstream news sources can be biased so WikiLeaks can provide another point of view. However, users of the site must remember to investigate what is published to determine the facts". 

In the blog that discusses cord-cutting, I was able to share the benefits of canceling your pay-TV plans from my point of view. My family is one of the many households that have canceled their pay-TV plans. With this, I was able to provide a recommendation of switching to YouTube TV to save money and share that in the future I will not be purchasing my own Cable TV plan. 

Keeping a weekly blog this semester has led me to be a more informed individual. I am not one who keeps up with the news and events going on around me but through the process of researching topics to write about I was able to gain an understanding of how important it is to be plugged in with the world surrounding me. For future students taking this class or anyone who wants to start a blog, I recommend that you blog about topics that fascinate you that way the blog posts come naturally and do not seem like a difficult task. I found out that I enjoy blogging and hope to start a new more personal blog in the near future. 

Does Privacy Still Exist?

The World Wide Web was created roughly 30 years ago. Today the internet is used for just about everything, such as shopping, communicating, business matters, and so much more. The typical person lives their lives online. Most people know that what they post or use the internet for is not really private, but the question is: "How many people really know what that means?".

This week in class we watched Ted Talks about one's privacy, one of them was about 'electronic tattoos'. It essentially compared ones life online to tattoos on our bodies. Yes, tattoos on one's body are permanent, that is why some people refrain from getting them, but our digital footprint is even more permanent. Electronic tattoos will live far longer than our bodies will, that is why it is important to be careful what you share or use the internet for.

However, even if one does not use the internet or they are careful about how they use it, they still can be tracked in other ways. For example, this Ted Talk focused on automatic license plate readers. When someone first hears about automatic license plate readers they might not think much of it but they can be used for more than you think. Location records are kept by police departments of every plate that passes them by resulting in a huge pile of information about where Americans travel to. This information can reveal where you live, if you go to church, and just what you do on a daily basis. One instance, in particular, that was highlighted in the Ted Talk was of this man who went to his police to see what they had on record of him. There were several pictures of him from the license plate tracker, even pictures of him and his daughters getting out of their car in his driveway! The important thing to note is this man has no criminal record.

The last Ted Talk that I found interesting talked about wiretapping. Our telephone companies have provided wiretapping assistance to governments, they have "built surveillance features into the very core of their networks". Our phones are wired for surveillance first. Anyone could be monitoring your phone usage, your own government, a stalker, essentially any party that is able to hack into the surveillance system of your telephone company. Luckily, iPhone has built-in encryption tools that make it hard for someone to hack into your messages which the government is not happy about because the encryption tools are on by default. Government officials believe all communications should be available to governments in order to keep everyone safe. Their argument is that we all use the same communication devices as a terrorist, therefore, we should be using devices that allow wiretapping. This is an interesting point, but I disagree. I do not like the idea of any government being able to wiretap anyone's phone throughout the entire world because this also means any hacker could wiretap those phones.

There seems to be no way to live a private life in this day and age. One can try their best to live a private life but there seems to be no escape to at least some of your personal information being exposed. The scary thought is that all of these monitoring devices that exist can be misused.

Cord Cutting

This week in my Media Law and Literacy class each group did presentations on differing topics. The topic from another group that I found most interesting is Cord Cutting from the group presenting on Policy.  

Cord Cutting is when people cancel their Cable and Satellite TV plans and replace it with streaming services. This had become very common nowadays through how popular streaming platforms' own original shows are becoming, how convenient it is, and how much money is saved.  

Since 2012, pay-TV has lost 10 million subscribers which allows streaming platforms to raise their monthly fees but it is still cheaper and less of a hassle than pay-TV. Not only are several households switching to streaming services, but those who are still watching traditional TV are watching less.  According to the presentation, it can save between $24-$100 depending on which plan one previously had. Other positive aspects of switching to streaming services are that it removes subscriptions to unwanted channels, there is little advertising, you can watch whenever and wherever due to downloading features. One can also watch an entire TV series without having to wait for a new episode to release. Additionally, subscribers of streaming services have access to exclusive TV series and movies. For example, both Netflix and Hulu release their own original series and movies.

My family is among the many households that have replaced our pay-TV plan with streaming services. We had Direct TV but it was annoying how many extra channels we had to pay for that we did not even use. We found ourselves using Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime more than our pay-TV plan. 

My parents have seemed to have found a great alternative to pay-TV which is YouTube TV. YouTube TV is a live TV streaming service that has many major TV channels available such as Fox, HGTV, ABC, CNN, CBS, NBC, ESPN, Disney Channel, and many more without all of the extra channels pay-TV makes you add to your plan. YouTube TV has become the number one service for cord-cutters. 

When I move into my own home I will not be purchasing a Cable TV plan because I do not watch live TV. I believe many people among my generation and the generations that follow will do the same. 

WikiLeaks

This week in Media Law and Literacy class we separated off into groups to build a presentation for next week's class. My group was assigned to present on Mediasphere including the topics of MSM, Alternative Media, Echo Chamber, Whistleblower, WikiLeaks, and Citizen Journalism. The topic I researched was WikiLeaks. 

WikiLeaks was founded by Julian Assange in 2006 and it is an international non-profit organization. It releases news leaks and classified media. It is essentially a whistleblowing platform that receives its content from anonymous sources. It is a place that releases information for the public to have access to the raw documents that other news outlets would not consider publishing. 

This platform forces transparency and gives the public more information to determine their own judgment based on the matters being discussed. However, if things are not substantiated it could spread false information among the general public. 

WikiLeaks has affected society as a whole and it will continue to do so for as long as it's around. For example, President Trump used information from WikiLeaks in his 2016 campaign to use against his opponent. WikiLeaks is not a credible source that politicians and our entire society should rely on. WikiLeaks has enough power that it can influence political campaigns, public policies, how businesses are run, etc. but it should not. No matter what the instance is, society could be basing its foundations off of rumors. Society is basically taking a gamble on what to believe and what not to believe. 

Misinformation about certain segments of society can also occur. Spreading false information can happen to any segment of society whether it is about the minority or majority, the rich or the poor, what age you are, what gender you are, and what your sexual orientation is.  Any group can be a target. 

Wealthy people are impacted by WikiLeaks as they can become a target. This article mentions a few billionaires who suffered from a WikiLeaks posting. In addition, those who are not well educated could take the information at face value. As for young, they may not have enough life experience or awareness to determine what might be true and what might be false. They are more likely to fall for false information because they are naive and gullible. As for my generation, we tend to get our news from less traditional sources and often opt out of researching matters independently to check those sources' credibility. We typically believe anything we see online. We have a reputation of just reading the headlines and making our judgments from there. 

Attitudes could be influenced by information whether it be true or false. There are instances where crucial information is revealed through WikiLeaks that people have tried to hide which I think is important for the public to be aware of. Also, mainstream news sources can be biased so WikiLeaks can provide another point of view. However, users of the site must remember to investigate what is published to determine the facts. 

My Online Presence

This week in my Media Law and Literacy class we discussed how anyone can learn about you through a quick google search. I personally have had social media accounts since I was around 12 years old. I have since deleted many of my old posts and even created a whole new Facebook account while I was in high school to avoid embarrassment. The social media sites that I have accounts on are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. I believe I share more about my life online than most people. 

On Facebook, I do not write posts but I always share pictures. I share photos from just about everything in my life, anyone could learn a lot about my interests and who I am just based on my photos. Someone could discover that I am a dancer, I attend High Point University, I have three dogs and two cats, I enjoy pizza, I have a boyfriend, I have two nephews, I like to travel, I am in a sorority, I enjoy concerts, and so much more. However, I do utilize the privacy settings on Facebook. 

On Twitter, I have not created my own post in years but I occasionally will retweet someone's tweet. Someone who views my Twitter would be able to get a glimpse into what kind of person I am. 

On Instagram, I post my favorite pictures and usually tag the location of where I took them. My Instagram is public for anyone to see, however after reading this article that talks about one's online presence I will most likely stop tagging locations near where I live. I do not feel the need to private my Instagram as I tend to view it as a way for future employers to see what I am like outside of the interviewing process. 

Very few people I know post on YouTube but I am one of those people. I have documented parts of my life on YouTube and it is intended for anyone to see. Except for locations, everything I post on my various social media accounts I am not afraid for anyone to have access to.

I will not, however, add my phone number to my accounts and my email is private on all my accounts as well. 

Despite the amount of information I put online, when I google "Emily Johnson" I do not pop up. I have a very common name so this makes sense but even when I search my name and add my hometown after it, only my LinkedIn shows up. What I found interesting is when I search my dad's name followed by my hometown my address pops up, along with his phone number and my phone number, his birthday, his political affiliation, that he married my mom, and that he has two sons. It lists both my brother's names but according to google, I do not exist in my family. After not being able to find much of myself on google I tried one more search, "emmie_emily", the username I use for my social media accounts. I was disappointed yet not surprised to see that several pictures of myself showed up. 

For me, social media is a way for friends and family to stay updated on my life but for others, social media can be damaging. Some may compare their lives to others based on what they post. I only post about positive moments in my life on social media and so do many others. Therefore, people need to remember to not compare themselves to others based on their social media accounts because it is not the full reality.  

Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations

  

This week in my Media Law and Literacy class we learned about Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations (or Ideas) shown in the picture above. For any innovation or idea you think of, you can view it through the lens of this theory. However, some ideas never make it out of the Exploratory Era which is under the 'innovators' section of the bell curve. In this blog post, I am going to explore the innovation of the camera phone through this theory. 

The Exploratory Era for the camera phone was in 1997 when the first noted pioneer or innovator, Philippe Kahn, created the idea of the camera phone. He did this by connecting his camera to his flip phone through a computer. He was then able to take a picture of his newborn daughter and send it to 2,000 people in real-time which before this was unheard of.

It was not until two years later that the first commercial camera phone, the Kyocera Visual Phone VP-210, was created. It was released in Japan in May of 1999. This phone could transmit and receive messages in real-time and store up to 20 JPEG images. The early adopters of the camera phone used it because it was a new technology that provided an easy way to take pictures and share those images with others. It allowed for a whole new form of communication to take place.

It took awhile for the camera phone trend to hit the U.S. In November 2002, over two years since the Samsung SCH-V200 launched in South Korea, the Sanyo SCP-5300 (also known as the Sanyo Katana) went on sale in America. This idea was able to catch on and spread when it became more accessible. Not only were more people owning cellphones, but they were also owning cellphones with a camera built into them. Once someone saw others using one, they wanted to join in on the convenience.

I believe the tipping point is when phones without cameras became less accessible. Today most people who have cellphones have one with a camera and it is typically a smartphone. It is hard to find a cellphone that does not have a camera.

Those who do not have a camera phone are to be put under the 'laggards' section of the bell curve. There could be a few reasons some people do not own a camera phone. One reason is that maybe they are old such as in their 80's and find no reason to have one. They did not grow up with cellphones or even ones with a camera, therefore, they find no reason to own one. Another reason could be that someone cannot afford the device. No matter what the innovation or idea is there will always be a small percent that never joins in on the use of it or only joins when they are forced to.

To learn more about camera phones and their negative and positive impacts check out my other blog post here.

Individual Self-Fulfillment

Individual Self-Fulfillment: Free speech enables individuals to express themselves and thereby create their own identify — and, in the process perhaps, find kindred spirits. Freedom of speech thus becomes an aspect of human dignity, human agency, and autonomy.


This technology-driven world where virtually everyone shares their opinion through an online medium in one way or another has pushed me to believe that Individual Self-Fulfillment is the most important value of Free Expression. Without the ability to post one's opinions on social media or a blog post like I am right now, there would essentially be no point for these mediums to exist. As I scroll through social media it is flooded with opinions, whether they are about certain events happening in the world, a person, a product, or their political views. As humans we desire to voice our opinion on things that matter to us. Without someone being able to share their personal opinions with others it would result in them feeling restricted. 

Luckily, through the First Amendment, Americans receive six freedoms, freedom of speech, freedom from religion, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition. The First Amendment serves not only the needs of the polity but the needs of the human spirit–a spirit that demands self-expression. The fulfillment that comes from speech is intertwined with a one's power to think, imagine, and create. Without the ability to speak one's mind, the United States would be a very different place than it is today. 

How the Camera Phone Came About

This week in class every student did a presentation on the evolution of different technologies, my presentation was on the evolution of the camera phone. Every presentation opened up my eyes to how technologically advanced our world has become. The following is what I presented. 

In 1997, Philippe Kahn created the idea of the camera phone by connecting a camera to his flip phone through his computer. His idea of this invention was sparked by the birth of his daughter. He took a picture of his newborn daughter and then sent this photo to 2,000 people in real-time, which was unheard of at the time.

The first commercial camera phone was the Kyocera Visual Phone VP-210. It was released in May 1999 by Kyocera Corporation in Japan and it retailed at $335 which was considered to be expensive back then. It had a 110,000-pixel front-facing camera which some people did not understand the need for the camera being on the front. However, today almost everyone uses their front-facing camera whether it is to FaceTime someone or take a selfie. This phone could transmit and receive images in real-time which is something that has become normalized and expected through the advancement of technology today. Lastly, it could store up to 20 JPEG images, which is an extremely small amount compared to storage on smartphones today.

The camera phone has impacted society today in numerous ways. Today it is hard to find a phone without a built-in camera. The cameras in smartphones have become so advanced that it negatively impacts photographers and their business. People may think why hire a photographer when I can take just as good of photos on my phone? In addition, it can impact the photo printing business because most people no longer print their photos because it is all stored on their phones. However, the ability to combine communication and imaging has allowed people to stay connected with one another.

Through the use of social media such as Instagram or Snapchat people have the ability to share what the are doing when they are doing it. This too can have negative impacts as one can become addicted to social media and people can judge others' quality of life based on what they post.

To learn more about the impact camera phones have on the world today click here.

When Did We Become Prisoners to Our Smartphones?

The video above highlights a major problem in our society today, the addiction to our smartphones and social media. Today almost everyone has a smartphone, even people who cannot really afford to pay for one. When did the world become this way? Perhaps it became this way when the use of social media became popular.

Social media is a way to help people stay connected with one another, except our society is overusing it. According to writer Saima Salim, internet users are now spending an average of 2 hours and 22 minutes per day on social networking and messaging platforms.  I know some people who spend more than that a day on their phone. There are many problems with this overuse, one of them being that people could accomplish so much more in their day if they did not have the distraction of their cellphone. I know college students who complain about how much work they have to do but then sit on their phone for hours instead of completing assignments. Another problem is that our phones hinder connecting with others on a personal level. When a group of friends go out to dinner or hangout you often see them on their phones the entire time instead of talking with one another. This does not allow you to actually get to know them on a deeper level, you only know them based on how they make themselves appear through a screen. Another issue is that one can miss out on their own lives. People are so focused on capturing every moment that they see their lives through a screen, they are not truly living in the moment. 

There is a possibility that if people did not only highlight the best moments in their life and put on an act for the internet that social media may not be as bad. However, our society has made it hard for one to just be themselves without someone judging them. People make judgments on other peoples quality of life based on what they decide to share. Social media has caused so many people to compare their lives to others that no one can truly be happy anymore because there is always a chance to compare your life to others. Based on how people present their life it can look better than it really is. 

Our addiction to our smartphones and social media is destroying us. I agree that social media has some positive aspects, such as sharing important news or influencing others in a helpful way but I believe that the negatives outweigh the positives in this situation. A good majority of our society recognizes this problem yet we all still participate in it. 

When Did Grades Become Of More Value Than Learning?

'Grade anxiety' is something I and many other conscientious students struggle with. Personally, 'grade anxiety' causes me to worry more about getting an A on an assignment or test rather than actually learning and applying the material. If I receive a B on a paper I view it as a bad grade, while professors view this as a good grade. When did this viewpoint change? This is true for many students, which is something that needs to be addressed. When did we let America reach a point where it is so competitive that we value GPA on a resume rather than one's knowledge and skills? 


American college students are a product of their society. I, as a college student, believe my perfectionist attitudes toward school evolve from growing up in a country that has so thoroughly degraded its public vision of life to an endless quest for wealth and power. Every aspect of our lives is measured and compared, this is especially true for newer generations. We base our success on how much money we have, how many social media followers we have, and our grades. Grades, with the weight of an institution behind them, serves as a final judgment for many students. In the minds of students, receiving A's gives them a better chance of reaching success, anything less than the optimum might lead to unhappiness. 

There is no avoiding the conclusion that 20-year-old adults obsessing and crying over their grades is not a sign of societal health. Perhaps America should adopt different styles of schooling, Finland's elementary schools allow children plenty of free time for play, while also encouraging them to indulge their curiosities in the classroom. While in the United States, an American kindergartener has an average of 30 minutes of homework per night.  

The idea that school is the most important thing in life is ingrained in us students just at the young age of 4. I hope that soon one day students will be able to develop their passions and have less of an emphasis on grades.

Has Google Become too Powerful?

48 U.S. States, Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico have launched separate investigations about whether Google has violated antitrust regulations. The United States Department of Justice has already begun its investigation. This investigation sprung from concerns about Google becoming too dominant in the online advertising space and as an internet search engine. There are additional concerns that Google may be behaving similar to a monopoly, buying out any competitors thus having major control of the advertising market. 

Google has a major online presence, nine of 10 online searches are conducted through Google. I use Google as my primary search engine, as do many others, it has not been an issue for many, including myself, to use Google until the company has been criticized for prioritizing its subsidiaries in search results. There's definitely concern on the part of the advertisers themselves that Google wields way too much power in setting rates and favoring their own services over others. Small businesses with low advertising budgets are suffering due to Google's high rates, they do not have a chance in advertising on Google and besides Google, there are very few options to go. Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge emphasized the importance of this issue by stating, "When my daughter is sick and I search online for advice or doctors, I want the best ones — the best advice or the best doctors — not the ones who spent the most on advertising".  

The consumer is not only impacted by what company is advertised first but also by how much that company had to pay for their advertisement. The higher Google's rates are, the more the advertisers have to pay, causing the customers to pay more.  Jen King, the director of privacy at Stanford's Center for Internet and Society addressed this issue by stating, "There's definitely concern on the part of the advertisers themselves that Google wields way too much power in setting rates and favoring their own services over others". 

     The Antitrust Investigation into Google will take some time and as of right now it is unknown what kind of penalties Google will face. Possible outcomes for Google are that they might be forced to change their business practices, have to pay a large amount of fines, or forced to spin off search as a separate company. 

The American People's Court

 

After watching an informational video about the Supreme Court, I was able to fully grasp just how fragile and important this system is. The Supreme Court is "the most powerful judicial body on earth" yet their power lies in public faith and the trust of the American people. 

The Supreme Court is made up of the chief justice of the United States and eight justices who all make their decisions on cases based solely on the Constitution. The Supreme Court determines their decision on a case in private. During the video, some of the justices stated that they go into conference with an idea of their decision and sometimes end up changing their decision based on what is said by another justice. Serving on the Supreme Court is an immense responsibility, advice from experienced justices to newer justices have said to give it three or five years then the work will not seem overwhelming. The Supreme Court receives about a hundred new cases every week yet they only consider about a hundred a year. Something that stood out to me is that the justices individually meet every week to choose cases to consider and no matter who and where the case comes from they all receive the same consideration. 

Overall, it is important to know that the Supreme Courts "legitimacy is in the Constitution". The Constitution is the basis of freedom and Americans accept that. If the court were to ever stop supporting the Constitution or the people ignored the court's power then the Constitution that keeps the United States one of the freest nations in the world "would cease to exist". 

Video Links: Part one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWRoXYRsaeo&feature=youtu.be

Part two:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca8qSuWxcG8&feature=youtu.be

Digital Streaming No Longer a Financial Void for Music Artists

A new album from your favorite music artist releases, do you race to the store to buy a physical copy or do you stream the music from the convenience of your own home? 76 percent of music listeners now stream their music. However, music artists often point out how they are underpaid or not paid at all by streaming services due to longstanding challenges and actually finding the right people who are owed the money. It did not matter how many times their music was streamed, until now.

In October of last year, President Trump signed the Music Modernization Act which simplifies how the streaming services pay the songwriters through building a licensing system. This new system will ensure that artists are paid for their music that is streamed. Essentially this law is closing a loophole in copyright law so it better fits the digital era. 

The making of this law not only united the streaming companies, labels, and songwriters but it united the House and the Senate. The Music Modernization Act passed without opposition which is typically unheard of lately in Congress. Music artists Dionne Warwick and Smokey Robinson expressed their support in this legislation by going to Congress. Robinson testified that this was a "livelihood thing" for musicians.

While most find this to be a good solution to a longstanding problem the constitutionality of it is being questioned by some. Personally, the only way I listen to music is through streaming applications, therefore, I believe music artists should receive royalties for their music that is streamed.