Kids Table

After reading a few chapters of Clay Shirky’s “Cognitive Surplus, creativity and generosity in a connected age,” I came to a conclusion, many parents and members of generation X simply cannot grasp the fact that the world is changing. Their children or younger siblings are growing up in a world that is completely different from their own. The reason for this is obviously the digital revolution and increasing level of connectivity between people that exists today.  Members of generation X were treated like children while generation Y has the ability to act like an adult.

                Generation X’ers grew up in a generation where the primary methods of receiving information came in three forms being television, print and radio. Members of generation Y face a completely different reality; we have the internet, which can arguably be considered one of the greatest tools that has ever been available to the finger tips of mankind.  As a result of this, “For the first time in the history of television, some cohorts of young people are watching TV less than their elders” (Shirky 11). This is understandable because now kids have another means of entertainment where they can consistently access the information that they want and that they deem to be important. Many members of generation X don’t quite have this act down yet; they are use to the old gate keeping process where they are simply told what is important instead of seeking out what interests them.

                I believe that generation X is the last generation that will be subjected to this horrible reality that has taken hundreds of years to evolve. This process was started by Gutenberg and he could actually be blamed for this with his invention of the printing press. This unleashed books to everyone at an affordable price so they could somewhat seek out the knowledge that they desired. Eventually the technology evolved to make books even cheaper but they hit another snag and ran into several “Walled gardens” that prevented them from being able to fully join the conversations that the books respective authors were trying to create. These barriers came with publishers and individuals who were appointed to positions to judge what is important and what is worth publishing in books and newspapers (Gate Keepers). Later down the road these barriers remained in place and also evolved with the invention of radio and television, fast forward to the 90’s and this model was destroyed.

Generation Y’s great liberator was the internet; it provided anyone and everyone with a forum where they could freely voice their opinion without anyone policing or enforcing. The internet eventually evolved to web 2.0 which allows open conversation between all about anything.  With this tool our generation is encouraged to communicate and collaborate through the existing infrastructure of web 1.0. 

Generation Y is encouraged to have an opinion, the atomization of social life removed generation X from feeling like they could participate in conversation. “The atomization of social life in the twentieth century left us so far removed from participatory culture that when it came back we needed the phrase ‘ participatory culture’ to describe it ”(Shirky 19). Technology gave us a means to do this on a massive scale, before we would primarily speak to members in our own circles and now we can do it on a larger scale. The recipients of media can no longer be labeled as silent consumers.  Generation Y now has the access to satisfy the two primary purposes of media, being accessibility and permanence. “Accessibility means that a number of others can read what a given person writes and permanence refers to the longevity of a given bit of writing” (Shirky 34).  Obviously this lack of a barrier creates more freedom for those willing to publish but it also has the ability to lowers the standards of what people consider good writing.  Gutenberg can also be blamed for this, “Before Gutenberg, the average book was a masterpiece. After Gutenberg, people got throwaway erotic novels, dull travelogues, and hagiographies of the landed gentry of interest to no one today but a handful of historians. The great tension in media has always been that freedom and quality are conflicting goals.” (Shirky 46-47).   The barrier in Gutenberg’s time prevented risks from being taken on potentially good novels and books, because one person deemed the concept unworthy.  For generation Y this doesn’t exist which obviously has lead to a mass amount of garbage being on the internet, the modern day equivalent of this is essentially a blog. 

The easier it is to publish thoughts and ideas the more average those thoughts and ideas become, which is why generation X had no problem with gate keepers. Xers don’t know how to search for information of value on their own, the abundance of knowledge, writing and ideas is overwhelming to most, but generation Y does. Previously we treasured many ideas because they came few and far between. This didn’t necessarily mean they were ideas or books of high quality, but we deemed them worthy of praise because we didn’t have as much to compare them too. The removal of the gate keepers has allowed more ideas, books, discussions whatever you want to call it to form. The definition of quality is changing because we now have more to compare with, which has the ability of inspiring better work, if you know how to find it. Xer’s need to be provided with knowledge, while Y knows how to find it, generation X’s concept of media was nothing more than a few power networks on TV in addition to a few power newspapers and the radio. This model has completely changed w the internet.

Generation Y has discovered how to harness the power of the internet and our cognitive surplus, “ The harnessing of our cognitive surplus allows people to behave in increasingly generous, public and social ways, relative to their old status as consumers and couch potatoes” (Shirky 62). Generation X existed as a child of the media, who was used to being treated like a child and was, forced to sit at the kids table. They had to eat whatever their parents (newspapers) told them to, listen to whatever their parents said (radio) and watch (television) whatever their parents wanted them to. Generation Y sits with the adults and actively has the ability to shape and change the world. 

Taking on the system

Attempting to get my hands on Markos Moulitsas Zuniga’s book “Taking on the System” was partially my own method of taking on a system. The system that I had taken on was the Lehigh University Bookstore.

To put it lightly they hit me with the okie doke, they found a way to disallow me to return books that I had purchased the day before. To add insult to injury the day after my purchase my professor informed me that we didn’t even need the two books.  The greatest part about this whole situation is that the clear cut genius who worked at the register completely failed to mention that they didn’t have a return policy. Since this instance I told myself that I would never purchase a book from the Lehigh bookstore ever again.

Taking advantage of the fact that I was a member of the first real generation that had the potential to communicate with mass amounts of people without any kind of gate keeper, I immediately went to twitter. Yes, I know I speak entirely too much about twitter in my posts but I feel like it is such a great example for so many different things.

With a string of angry tweets I attempted to inform others of the horrible experience that I had with the bookstore. I received a few reply and re-tweets, however ultimately my warning and issue was relatively unheard. The span of my communication was not anywhere near as far as I thought it would be. It also didn’t surprise me very much either considering I only had about 250 people following me at the time.  

This was almost a text book example of “Taking on the System’s” foundational rule, “Without the media little can be accomplished”. If you cannot influence the flow of information, you cannot affect change on any substantial scale.” Obviously this is not a life and death type issue but the principle remains the same. People now have the ability to openly and honestly express their opinions in many different ways without requiring approval from anyone, and more importantly without being censored by any type of gatekeeper. Amateurs can start a revolution, and have in a few different countries.  

Several social revolutions have been spurred by Twitter and amateur voices seeking a place to be heard. The most notable one to date would be the recent revolution in Tunisia, where citizens used the site to speak out on the political unrest that was occurring within the country. The method was actually so affected that the government attempted to block citizen’s internet access. It also spurred another revolution in Egypt, where journalists posted articles on their own blogs in addition to tweeting about events and uploading videos of social unrest onto Youtube. Twitter and social media, aka forums where people can freely voice their opinion without worrying about being censored or gatekept, could potentially be blamed for destabilizing an entire region, simply by giving amateur people a voice.

Amateurs now have the power to have their voices heard as if they were professionals, not just through Twitter but also through blogs, Youtube and Facebook. Society no longer has an infatuation with the professional person and professional institution. Prior to our generation, in order to be successful, to have credibility or to have any influence, you had to be a professional. Technology is a major factor in this change. Zuniga’s example of this came with Wikipedia, which is the definition of a user based and user-maintained site.

“The encyclopedia uses the collective power of its massive community to produce and police the quality of the content rather than depending on a handful of ‘experts’. According to its own website, in early 2008, Wikipedia had 75,000 contributors working on 9 million articles in 250 languages.”

An amateur based encyclopedia is now considered to be a highly credible source of information, which is something that would have never happened prior to our generation and technology. The gate keeping concept of someone needing to be a professional to produce credible and professional quality material no longer exists. This really can be seen within the music industry. Artists are now completely aware of how they are being hustled by major labels, which has led them to bypass the process of recording and distributing through a label completely.

Zuniga speaks of a group called radiohead, who I am not quite familiar with, but they were very successful. After being Okie Doked by their label six times, they decided to record the album themselves in a home studio on relatively inexpensive, non “Professional” equipment. The group then proceeded to distribute the album strictly online in a digital form. They allowed fans to purchase the album for a price that they determined. On the average, fans paid between $5 and $8 dollars per album, and the album went platinum. The group made more money off of their single, digital, label-free album, than all six of their previous albums put together. Artists now can get themselves in the door and distribute their own music without the gate keeping of a record label or distributing company. Music fans will ultimate be the death of the major record label, simply because they will continue to buy their favorite artists regardless of the way the music is produced or distributed. This also comes as a result of technology. Digital media has unlocked the door for musicians to really turn a profit in the industry.

With blogs, amateur journalists managed to cause social change, and digital music artists were given the ability to actually turn a profit on their music. In addition, with Wikipedia, amateur people managed to create a credible encyclopedia. The removal of the gatekeeper in society has the potential to benefit us in many different ways. It also has the potential to make it harder for users and consumers to find the information they want, simply because now there is more information than ever out there for people to consume.

The Sticky

Taking a refreshing break from witnessing a mass amount of bracket busting and from celebrating Farokhmanesh day I decided to write this mandatory blog post.

      Within Ideas That Stick by Chip Heath and Dan Heath, a lot of important things are discussed and ironically a lot of these ideas stuck in my mind. Haha funny right?  The concept that stuck with me came as a result of the “Six Principles of Sticky Ideas,” the principles were simplicity, unexpectedness, concreteness, credibility, emotions and stories.

      The easiest way to get the majority of people to grasp and understand a concept or an idea is to simplify it down to its most basic and raw form, unfortunately a vast amount of the world doesn’t have the same intellectual capacity as the minority amount of college educated people out there. The example I’m going to use for this blog entry is twitter as an entity. In its raw form twitter is a very very simple thing, you are given 140 characters to express your thoughts per message.

      The second step is unexpectedness, people need to pay attention and remain interested in the idea. The example the Heath’s used was popcorn and how one bag of it is essentially as unhealthy as eating a full days worth of fatty foods. With twitter the unexpectedness comes with how deep it can take us into each others thoughts and minds.  The way the human mind works we keep looking for more and more knowledge. The unexpectedness actually catches our mind off guard and creates and opens a gap in our knowledge and then proceeds to fill that gap with this information.

      The third principle is concreteness, these ideas are supposed to be explained “in terms of human actions,” twitter does this very well. Taking a visit to the “about” section of twitter I went on to find that twitter defines itself as, “a real-time information network that connects you to the latest information about what you find interesting. Simply find the public streams you find most compelling and follow the conversations.” There is no ambiguity within this it clearly states what human actions can occur and what information people can take from the site. This isn’t as concrete an image as someone mentioning a candy apple that has a razor blade hidden in it but it still gets the point across.

      The fourth step comes with establishing credibility and getting people to buy into and believe in the idea or product that is being pushed to them. The Heath’s speak of credibility in the literal sense of cold hard facts, an example of this comes with their reference to a presidential debate that occurred between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, Reagan destroyed Carter by simply asking voters to ask if there were any positive changes since Carter took office. With twitter a different form of credibility was used, this credibility was established by its users and subscribers. The general population gained an interest and validation from the fact that countless amounts of celebrities were using the social networking site and through their verified accounts they could see a credible in-depth look at the lives of some of their favorite celebrities. These celebs made people buy into the concept of twitter, in addition to celebrities various news outlets started to create their own twitter accounts and were providing the public with factual information at a higher rate of speed then they ever could before.

      The fifth step comes with people becoming emotionally invested in twitters case addicted to this idea or concept. The Heath’s example of this is the emotional feeling that individuals get from knowing that a bag of popcorn is the equivalent to however many meals I previously mentioned, that is something the mind is going to remember and can tangibly comprehend as bad while knowing that a specific amount of grams or calories is in that same bag of popcorn.  With twitter the emotional investment comes from the fact that humans are given a tool to freely express their opinions about anything and everything with no immediate repercussions, in addition to forming weak tie relationships with people over the network. Twitter users become attached to some of the people that they are following because it provides them with a way of connecting and interacting with their lives. This is extremely apparent with the super fans of generation Y who form obsessions with non talented musical artists such as Justin Beiber, his fanatic fans kept him as a trending topic for months.

      The sixth and final step comes with getting people to act upon these ideas, and this all comes through storytelling. The book references firefighters swapping stories after every fire as a means of gaining experience, twitter has the same potential. Being a site where individuals are given the ability to tweet about whatever they want, this leads to people tweeting about their personal experiences.  Within these tweets people who could potentially go through similar experiences will now have the opportunity to almost pre-live these situations which could potentially benefit them and prevent them from making the same mistake that the other user made.  On the other hand it could also potentially influence users to step out of the box and try new things.

            In conclusion the Heath’s have come up with a very respectable concept that ironically forms the acronym of “success”, which is a pretty sticky and simple idea. To be successful a simple unexpected concrete credible emotional story filled product has to be created, in Twitters case this was created, as of September 2010  the site that was initially launched in July of 2006 now boasted over 175 million users who were tweeting over 95 million tweets per day. The idea and concept of the site is something that has clearly stuck and at this point looks like something that will be stuck with our society for an extended period of time. Especially with the existence of generation Y super fans that yearn to know about Justin Bieber and co’s every thought and movement. 

Tip Me

‘Open Scene’,

A senior basketball player lays sick in bed with a fever of 102.7 the night before his Senior Night against none other than the team’s most hated rival school. Members of his family have flown all the way across the country just to see him play. To say the player felt a bit guilty would be a slight understatement, however his primary goal was to simply lower his temperature to 99 degrees so he could play in the coming game. To make a long, fever-plagued night short, the player somehow manages to lower his temperature and though still sick, manages to play. While it was not the most efficient performance of his career, he helped his team to a thrilling victory. However, the player is still not healthy; post game, his fever shoots up to 103.7 and he is again bedridden. He just cannot seem to break his fever. Unfortunately it wasn’t a Beiber fever (sike). He is also told to stay away from his teammates for obvious reasons – no one wants to start a mini epidemic.  After resting for another two days, the player starts to feel better and again is given limited playing time as he helps lead his team to another victory and secure a third place finish. The outcome of this game is not as favorable; the player again ends up confined to his bed for the entirety of the next day and is forced to miss one of his favorite classes. After missing almost a week’s worth of class and barely contributing on the court, the player starts to feel rested and healthy and finally gets to return to hanging out with his team. Crisis averted? False. A few days later one of the player’s teammates begins to feel sick as well.  Has a mini epidemic begun? 

            Unfortunately, the player in this story is me. I had inadvertently become an infector and a connector but hopefully not a super infector; only time will tell. Still, sicknesses are not the only thing that are picked up and transferred between people.  In Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point, he explains the spread of Hush Puppies and syphilis, but fads and epidemics can run deeper and be more powerful and dangerous then these examples. Back the late 90’s, every parent on the planet wanted to be able to give his child a Tickle.Me.Elmo toy. Elmo is a loveable red Sesame Street character who is always so happy and so cute. The toy version everyone wanted would laugh, shake and giggle when squeezed. Cute, right? Of course! Who wouldn’t want one? This epidemic can be easily explained with Gladwell’s three rules of an epidemic: the Law of the Few, the Power of Context, and the Stickiness Factor. With Tickle.Me.Elmo, the Law of the Few was satisfied by the fact that one very smart man at Tyco-Toys gave a Tickle.Me.Elmo to Rosie O’Donnell’s child. This gesture was where it began. O’Donnell’s child loved the toy so much that it she promoted it on her television show. By being a mother, she became a maven. Today Show anchor Bryant Gumble ended up hosting the Today Show with one on his lap, and in doing so, he played the role of a connector. 

            Almost more important than this was the Power of Context. As both of these shows air during the time of day when expectant and stay-at-home mothers are sure to be watching television, they were the perfect channel through which to advertise the toy. The stage was set and the conditions were almost perfect for an epidemic to take off. The right people had been provided with the toy and the right people had been exposed to the toy. All that remained was the last rule of an epidemic, the Stickiness Factor. This factor is some kind of unique quality of the toy that will stick in the mind of the public consumer. Being a Sesame Street character, Elmo already was stuck in the mind of the consumer. The loveable little red guy had already taught many young children who watch sesame street valuable life lessons. Additionally, the generation that had grown up watching Sesame Street now had children of its own, and poof! Just like that the Tickle.Me.Elmo epidemic took off that holiday season.

            Parents rushed out to local toy stores to get their hands on the hottest toy of the season, and in some cases even injured themselves, store employees and anyone else who attempted to get in their way. Reports of people being trampled on, ribs being broken, pulled hamstrings, concussions, and even a report of the crotch being yanked out of an employee’s jeans showed up all over the media, all as a result of Tickle.Me.Elmo fever.  To this day the Tickle.Me.Elmo doll remains to be one of the best selling children’s toys of all time. This epidemic slash virus was definitely not the first and will definitely not be the last. Many may also remember the Furby craze which occurred just a few years after Tickle.Me.Elmo, along with Pokemon, Beanie Babies, Pogs and the almost useless Tamagotchi.  The list could go on for days. These fads all took place prior to the creation of Web 2.0 which has made the viral process of spreading ideas even easier. A prime example of this comes with the teen artist, Justin Beiber. He parlayed Youtube videos of himself singing, dancing and playing musical instruments into a full-fledged career. Who needs talent anymore? With Gladwell’s three rules of an epidemic, fame and commercial success can be achieved at least on a temporary level. These days, it is easy to place oneself in position to be discovered, but becoming anything greater falls upon one’s product or ability because if one can’t “stick” in the minds of the public, one will definitely not remain a hit. 

Better Late Than Never, Never Late is better.. Here Comes Everybody

Prior to today (Feb 11), I did not really believe the theory that social networking creates weak ties that benefit those involved. The prime example of this concept that I was familiar with came from Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody. Within the first chapter Shirky, gives the example that many east coast residents might be familiar with. A woman named Ivanna left her phone, a Sidekick, in the back of a New York City cab. This account happened during the age when not everyone had a Blackberry or iPhone. So, Ivanna contacted a tech-savvy friend and asked him to email the phone with a message offering a reward for its return. However, there was no response.  Eventually, Ivanna gave up and bought a new Sidekick. The transition was made easy because her cell phone company’s network stored all of the information on her old phone, so as soon as she activated her new phone all the data was immediately transferred.  The most significant part of the story is that Ivanna could actually see everything that the person who had stolen her sidekick was doing on her old phone. She attempted to contact this person and got no response, so she proceeded to contact the police to try to recover her stolen property. Of course, they were of no assistance. Her tech-savvy friend then made a post on his website entitled “StolenSidekick” in order to inform friends of the situation that Ivanna was in. He started to form weak ties with various people who also saw a problem with Ivanna’s experience with the police and the person who stole her phone. The blog post continued to grow and grow and was eventually picked up on Digg and gained even more notoriety. This led to the story being picked up by local media outlets. At this point, the public outrage became so great that the police were compelled to act and eventually arrested the 16-year-old girl who stole Ivanna’s phone.  

To me this, Ivanna’s situation was a heartwarming, feel good story about the wonderful power of weak ties that were created through social networking, but initially, I did not believe that I could actually gain any type of knowledge through the weak social networking ties that I have established. I quickly realized that I was very wrong.

This change in opinion came as I was strolling through the Lehigh Valley Mall with one of my teammates. We ventured to the mall for the purpose of finding some Valentine ’s Day gifts for significant others, so naturally we had to go to a candy store because what kind of woman doesn’t want some kind of chocolate for Valentine’s day ? The store contained all of the usual heart shaped boxes of chocolates, stuffed animals, balloons, and other cliché gifts.  My teammate selected a traditional white teddy bear holding a heart that said “I love you” filled with chocolate which is pretty much the standard for Valentine ’s Day. None of this was surprising, but what shocked me was once we got to the register I saw a sign for “Dipped Berries in a velvet heart box,” aka chocolate covered strawberries. The shocking part about this was that each individual strawberry was $21.99! As the ever-connected social media junkie that I am, I immediately took a picture of this and uploaded it to Twitter with the caption, “Women out there if your man get you chocolate covered strawberries you better like them.. look at that price.” I honestly wasn’t expecting any kind of response from my followers; I really just wanted to put that picture out there so people could see how outrageous the price was. However, my Professor replied to it and Retweeted it to his 733 followers. Of course, as a result of the laws of social networking one of his followers also replied to me.

A weak social networking tie had just been formed, and from this a discussion began between my professor, his follower and I.  The follower asked my professor and I if we dipped our own strawberries, and I was a bit slow to respond so naturally, my professor sassed me because that’s the kind of teacher student relationship that we have.  I finally responded “Haha, I was actually just talking to one of my teammates about doing that.” My professor responded with “I actually could dip my own strawberries. Praying we’re still talking about the same thing.” The content of the conversation is irrelevant really, but it sets up the lesson that was learned.  His follower than replied “How do you season the chocolate?” At this point I start to realize that this weak tie that I had just formed is about to give me a mini lesson on how to make homemade chocolate covered strawberries. I told the follower that I simply planned to melt either a Twix or MilkyWay in a pot and dip the strawberries in the melted candy. The follower goes on to mention that the Twix might be a bit messy and suggests that I may also want to try to simply melt a Snickers and put that on top of some ice cream.

Weak ties in social networking are real. They have a lot of power to influence and help individuals who are just looking for some guidance or suggestions from people that they are more than likely to never speak to. The fact that a random writer, translator and PR consultant would take the time out of her night to give me advice on how to make chocolate covered strawberries is amazing to me because these weak ties really have the capability to make things a lot easier for people. Simply because now we have the capability to use our biggest resource which is each other, these weak ties foster communication and, although not all of it is meaningful, it is definitely helpful. 

We The Media

            As I sit in front of my computer preparing to write another response paper for my #Jour 325 class, I really start to think about how privileged I am. Trigged by the first chapter of author Dan Gillmor’s We the Media,  I realized that American journalists and pretty much anyone else who wants to voice his opinion on a subject can do so freely and without concern of persecution by those in power or the government in general. Journalists and citizens in other countries do not experience this extent of freedom. A perfect example of this can be seen in the Iranian government’s attempts to suppress its citizens from expressing their opinions on a botched election via Twitter. Censorship by the Iranian government is a complicated topic, however the point here is that social networking in the form of Twitter played a role in the controversy.

            Web 2.0 has arrived. Gillmor’s desire for the web to be a writeable and not just readable realm is a reality for the children of Generation Y, which is the most digitally native generation the world has ever seen. The Web has truly grown to be a product that almost defines us as a generation. With the ability to post videos, essays, blogs, and pictures at any given time, Web 2.0 allows users to play an active part in the online community.

Gilmor writes, “Newspapers flourished during the 19^th century. The best were aggressive and timely, and ultimately served their readers well. Many, however, had litter concern for what we now call objectivity. Papers had points of view, reflecting the politics of their backers and owners” (Gillmor, 3). Web 2.0 also spurs objectivity because consumers are given access to many different opinions and thoughts which is something that Web 1.0 and print newspapers did not offer. In addition to giving people many different choices and opinions, consumers can directly comment on stories and postings which spurs discussions that would not have been available to previous generations.

Web 2.0 essentially shrunk the planet and initiated the concept of the world as a global village. I became familiar with the concept of the world as a global village in the Media and Society class that I took this past semester. The speed and accessibility of information, pictures, video’s and other forms of consumed media have turned the planet into an interconnected and ever-evolving community. Almost everyone can be found and contacted via Web 2.0;  images and information on distant countries and cities are instantly accessible with the simple click of a mouse.   

           

            One of the most beneficial creations of Web 2.0 comes with the concept of a wiki and primarily Wikipedia. “In just over three years of existence it has become a valuable resource and an example of how the grassroots in today’s interconnected world can do extraordinary things”(Gillmor, 148). Wikipedia works off of the model of user participation; anyone can access, edit and add information on the various sites and pages.

This fully embodies the purpose and concept of Web 2.0,

It defies first-glance assumptions. After all, one might imagine, if anyone can edit anything, surely cyber-vandals will wreck it. Surely flame wars over article content will stymie good intentions. And, of course, the articles will all be amateurish nonsense. Right? Well, not necessarily. The open nature of Wikipedia has been its greatest resource, and it has emerged as a credible resource. (Gillmore, 148)

 By allowing user participation, Wikipedia pages tend to be very natural and unbiased even on very controversial subjects, as it gives both sides of an issue the opportunity to post information. To fit it into context of the global village, students in Australia can view and edit the same information that students in America can. Wikipedia is a digital library at the center of a digital village that billions have to which billions have access.  Expanding the concept of the global village and the “read and write web”, people no longer have to go to one central location to access news or information. Children of Generation X had only three primary ways to access current and breaking news: the newspapers, radio and television, while Generation Y has the web. This provides them with copious amounts of ways to access the same information at a faster rate. Almost all of the information I hear about current events and issues comes from the Internet. More often than not, my friends inform me about these things rather than the media outlets themselves, which ultimately is the purpose of the read and write web. Social networking sites become a way to disseminate information in ways different than professional media outlets.

            Gillmor’s vision is now a reality, Web 2.0 and the various forms of new media that are arising with it definitely have the ability to cause social change. The average person now has more power then ever to influence others. For example, I set up a blog in less then five minutes and now I can use it to freely say whatever I please to the viewing world. I am not the only one getting out and doing things like this. This ease of access is enabling people to cover events that previously would have been deemed far too unimportant for major media outlets to cover. But now these issues are being brought to the proverbial table and people are starting to act upon them. Regular citizens of Generation Y have far more power to cause change then any other generation because now everyone has a voice. This can even be seen with in the title of Gillmor’s book WE the Media; the media is now us. We no longer rely on others to provide us with something that we are fully capable of creating ourselves. We are now moving and creating the news as a society and a global village, however this has the ability to cause its own unique problem, a problem to which we act simultaneously as the solution. Eventually many media outlets and reporters are going to become extinct. But maybe that is a change that we need. The scribes gave way to the printing press and the printing press gave way to the Internet. Who is to say that journalists will not give way to the people?  

The Cluetrain Manifesto

I can say without hesitation that the Internet has the capacity to change its user’s lives. As a digital native the internet touched my life at a very young age, and I have witnessed firsthand its evolution to a more user friendly web 2.0. Not many people  expect me to have seen and experienced this phenomenon seeing as I am an athlete and have easily been able to duck and dodge the “geek” label. What they do not realize is that my athletic involvement has not prevented me from being informed and in touch with new technology. For example, various aspects of the Internet, mainly Twitter,  helped me register for this course, upon several tweets and an email to my professor. Ironically, this ties into Christopher Locke, Rick Levine, Doc Searls and David Weinburger’s book The Cluetrain Manifesto. I took advantage of several direct connections who assisted me in joining this journalism class.
The Cluetrain begins with a list of 95 theses. Its most important was first, “Markets are conversation.” Having taken a media and society class last semester this idea jumped off the page at me because I was already aware of the fact that a discussion or conversation could not exist without an open forum for free robust conversation, and the Internet is the perfect place for this conversation to take place.
“The Internet became a place where people could talk to other people without constraint. Without filters or censorship or official sanction — and perhaps most significantly, without advertising”(Chapter 1, Levine, Locke, Searls & Weinberger). The Internet has forced people to clearly explain their stances on their respective issues and with their respective opinions because there is so much room for free interpretation of words. Originally the Forum for this literally required face to face communication between many people, but now the forum has been transported into large industrial buildings that house the various hard drives and servers that run many networks.  The Cluetrain had a problem with this because prior to web 2.0  caused the slight problem of depersonalization within the industries producing online products.

“Its increasing divorce from the day-to-day concerns of real people, commerce has come to ignore the natural conversation that defines communities as human” (Chapter 1).
 This excerpt shows that consumers could not really interact and get the proper feed back they required.  This means, for example, that the young parent who recently purchased his child a video game system, could not call the company for help with the device because of the existence of automated answering systems that provide needy customers with only a set amount of responses to their problems.
Steps to change this came when private companies started to deprogram their production lines and supply chain styles to encourage workers to start exchanging their ideas and opinions over the Intranet. Ideas began to flourish and things would never be the same simply because people were given the forum for genuine conversation occurs.
Now the customer service aspect of companies is incredibly efficient and effective. A good example of this is SouthWest Airlines. They have a Twitter site that often tweets about various promotions.  Customers can also mention complaints or issues with the company. The first major issue they encountered they handled very well. Actor Kevin Smith who is known best for his roles in “Clerks” and “MallRats” was thrown off of a flight because of his size. He instantly went to the Twitter world and began bashing @Southwestair. The Southwest customer service Twitter team instantly sprang into action and quickly and efficiently resolved the problem.
  The Internet is now evolving to be an extension of television as a result of the advertising, marketing a demographic issues that are being researched by various companies. Unlike television, the Internet does not shove information down its viewers throats. Internet users have the ability to interact with each other based on what they are watching. It has the capability to bring individual people together, those who were previously viewing certain shows by themselves and talking to themselves now have the ability to hop online and go on a website such as Twitter or Facebook and put their opinions out there for the world to see and discuss. The web really allows traditional media to stretch further and causes more discussion then what was originally intended. I found myself doing this as I was watching MSNBC’s “To Catch a Predator” and G4’s “Cheaters.” Ironically, “To Catch a Predator” is a series hosted by Chris Hansen where Internet predators that prey on unsuspecting minors are caught in an online sting operation. The investigation employs decoys who use various online chat services to get adult men to agree to come to the home of an innocent minor in the search for sexual pleasure.  This is an example of one of the downsides of chatrooms on the Internet. Chats have the ability to turn the world into one large community due to the rate at which information is being exchanged.

Ultimately, the Cluetrain really stresses the benefits of the Internet and its practical applications throughout the business world and regular day to day human interaction. It reitterates the fact that we as people desperately need a new world to speak in, and the Internet provides us with that realm. Social media is our outlet, and it is not regulated like all other forms of media, so there is so much room for total freedom of expression. Twitter pages and Facebook statuses draw attention from us because as humans we’re programmed to respond to a personal voice, and we see that voice within these posts.  Business markets used to exist purely because of face to face communication, but this is no longer the case. Now we can almost instantly communicate with each other over vast distances and at any point in time.