How has the internet changed our notion on ‘collective identity’?
Glen Waine
As different forms of technology have been produced and laid upon the public it is a definite trend above anything else that technology especially the internet has made the public lazy. Although this is definitely true it can be argued that instead of it making people lazy the internet has justly just made life easier. As the internet has progressed many uses have also developed, people can now choose to even do their grocery shopping over the internet. This being a very simple day to day chore has been made perhaps overly simplified due to the internet. As the internet has progressed from its origins in the 1990s as ‘the web 1.0’ a large following of gadgets have been created as it has changed to what Is called ‘web 2.0’. Items which are considered to be more or less ‘miniature computers, such as iphones’ have been created with very hi-tech additions such as the touch screen, the fact that devices such as these are also available to access the internet show the technological advances that have been made to make something so advanced fit in your pocket. The age of this new media has broadened the horizons and brought forward a large scale of new communication techniques all thanks to the internet. People can now talk to each other free of chare using the internet, social networking sites such as facebook, msn and twitter allow this to happen. The public can now very easily socialise with other people online from all over the world but is this effecting the British notion of collective identity?
The internet is definitely effecting our ideology of collective identity, as our new found love of being able to talk and send information across the world seems to allow use to in some way merge with other cultures in a digital format removes certain aspects of being individual and different into one global networking audience. The media has such a large audience due to not one single culture but other cultures surrounding it working together and merging in a way to develop[ technologies. One very large influence (especially on the internet front) has been America. Britain gets a lot of its media from America, especially films as a large percentage of films are primarily American funded. It can be argued that as other cultures have slyly integrated themselves with Britain through the media and internet that certain influences have been made on unwary people without them knowing. For example certain T.V advertisements that encourage you to ‘claim money’ for accidents and injury’s at work have most certainly migrated from American culture to British as suing is seen as a very Americanised thing to be done now a days.
It has been argued that a possible watershed would have a good effect on internet users. The idea of limiting internet use to certain times could effect the country in different ways. For Young people who use the internet more than anyone else it could be seen as both a good thing and a bad thing. As people can see the internet as being very distracting it also provides a wide range of information that can be accessed fast. This makes it very hard to decide if a watershed would be beneficial or not as students can use it to work as well as use it for games and social networking.
The generation that has grown up with the internet using it regularly is known as ‘digital natives’ while the generation that just missed the internet developing or grew while it was in its very early stages are known as ‘digital immigrants’. The contrast between these two generations is very large as digital immigrants lack a very basic understanding of how the internet is used in theory making it harder for themselves to use.
Sabbah said ‘web 2.0 isn’t a thing, it’s a state of mind’ this is very true as what he is trying to say is that the world has become so reliant on the internet that is has fused itself so much in to our day to day routine that at a flick of a finger it can be accessed. This is definitely seen in the teenage use of the internet who would be referred to as ‘digital natives’, one statistic about teenage internet use is that teenagers generally spend at least 2 hours a day on the internet. This statistic clearly show how much this generation relies on the internet therefore how much It will in the future as well as the next generation, or whatever is to replace internet 2.0. This being said our notion of collective identity being in tatters already could disappear in future generations quite easily as the ideology of using the internet on such a regular basis to do things that can be done in person but in such a more easy way for the user using the internet. It can definitely be said that our idea of collective identity has had a large impact on by other cultures and ideologies from countries such as America and across Europe.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Notes
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Notes
Today’s average graduate has spent no more than 5,000 hours reading and more than 10,000 gaming as well as 20,000 watching TV.
Due to the day in day out use of technology and the fact this generation has literally grown up around it, has effected the way today’s students fundamentally think and process information. - Possibility that brain structure has physically changed.
Students who have massively integrated technology into their lives are known as digital natives.
Those people who were not born around new technology but have developed a linking for it later in life are known as Digital Immigrants. - Older generation tends to not rely on things such as the internet as a first option rather than digital natives.
Teaching problem as teachers are speaking in out dated language and as effect are struggling to teach a group who speaks a entirely different language.
Digital Natives used to receiving information really fast.
Digital immigrants don’t see how education can be fun or in other words learn through using T.V and the internet, this is of course due to the fact that they didn’t grow up with it learning how to use it.
Today’s teachers need to learn how to communicate in the same language as the students in order to allow them to reach there full potential. ß methodology.
Games introduced to help aid learning with software such as CAD.
Example of how the idea of fun plays a acute role in learning, “There is no reason that a generation that can remember over 100 different pokemon cant learn the names, populations, capitals of all the 81 nations in the world, it just depends on how its presented”.
Today’s average graduate has spent no more than 5,000 hours reading and more than 10,000 gaming as well as 20,000 watching TV.
Due to the day in day out use of technology and the fact this generation has literally grown up around it, has effected the way today’s students fundamentally think and process information. - Possibility that brain structure has physically changed.
Students who have massively integrated technology into their lives are known as digital natives.
Those people who were not born around new technology but have developed a linking for it later in life are known as Digital Immigrants. - Older generation tends to not rely on things such as the internet as a first option rather than digital natives.
Teaching problem as teachers are speaking in out dated language and as effect are struggling to teach a group who speaks a entirely different language.
Digital Natives used to receiving information really fast.
Digital immigrants don’t see how education can be fun or in other words learn through using T.V and the internet, this is of course due to the fact that they didn’t grow up with it learning how to use it.
Today’s teachers need to learn how to communicate in the same language as the students in order to allow them to reach there full potential. ß methodology.
Games introduced to help aid learning with software such as CAD.
Example of how the idea of fun plays a acute role in learning, “There is no reason that a generation that can remember over 100 different pokemon cant learn the names, populations, capitals of all the 81 nations in the world, it just depends on how its presented”.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Moral Panics Essay
Compare and contrast three case studies how do moral panics help form fragmentation in cultural identity? Glen Waine
Case studies used: Rave culture and ecstasy, Video Nasties and Aids
Moral panic can be described as the intensity of a negative feeling towards a particular group of people who appear to be threatening social order at a certain time. In this essay I shall be contrasting three rather different forms of moral panic these being Aids, Rave/Drug culture and Video Nasties.
Raves were originally founded in America, namely Chicago, New York and Detroit but the culture migrated to England around 1988. Raves tended to be located in rural areas, such as large barns, unused or abandoned air fields and large fields in the country. As these raves were illegal the organisers had a technique to limit the chance of police interference. Organisers would keep the rave in question secret until a matter of hours before it was due to begin, as once a rave had started police were almost powerless due to being so massively outnumbered. By the end of the 80’s raves were seen as the largest youth culture Britain had ever encountered as it was seen as a somewhat ‘breeding ground’ for the sale and intake of drugs. Raves also generated a massive revenue for the actual organisers, which could range from £50,000-£75,000. It was not the actual ideology of the raves themselves which caused such a moral panic but the drug uses which went hand in hand with them. Amphetamines were the most commonly used type of drugs, as the consumers would ingest them to be able to dance and stay awake for the entire night. It was not until the media got involved with a relation between the raves and drug culture that a panic set in. The Sun and Daily Mail both published articles about a Midsummer Night Dream party (19890 which took place at an abandoned airstrip; headlines included ‘Ecstasy Airport’ and the articles tended to emphasise the events as nothing more than a attempt to hook an entire generation on drugs under the guise of friendly party’s. Shortly after these articles were published the Media started to focus more on the drug use rather than the events, which was triggered by the death of Leah Betts. Although her death is still closely related to rave culture she actually consumed ecstasy at her own home and instead of dieing of an over dose her death was actually due to swelling of the brain from water intoxication.
Raves and drug culture caused fragmentation and panic particularly with parents. The way the media portrayed and worded their articles turned the minds of thousands of parents creating a great deal of concern with what their children were doing particularly when going out. In terms of cultural identity it would be unfair to say that any one country would be overly ashamed of their appearance due to drug taking as it happens all over the world. Although you can certainly argue that when comparing the generation in question to previous ones a massive change is clearly there, which among other things creates a large sense of worry but with a topic so wide is sadly unavoidable and to an extent uncontrollable.
The next moral panic issue I will be discussing is Aids. This issue can to some extent be linked to the influx in rave and certainly drug culture. As the epidemic was recognised in 1981 - 1986 ( closely related timeframe to rave culture) and one of the ways it was being transmitted was through the use of drugs, although it being heroin and any other drug where it was being administered intravenously. This caused a very large panic with drug users and people/family familiar with drug users. Aids caused a great deal of controversy and stigma especially towards gay men and drug users with the press having headlines such as ‘Gay Plague’. As there was such a panic arisen by the media all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories were being thrown around, such as the disease was created in order to commit genocide and even to kill off homosexuals. Naturally the gay community would have been set into a massive panic but also largely scared of in some cases reporting having the disease, due to the stigma that came with it. Sadly Aids was not only being contracted through sexual activity and sharing needles. Haemophiliacs who needed regular blood transfusions were contracting it to through being given infected blood. This sparked off a large scale panic in itself as all given blood that needed to be used in certain medical procedures could be infected. This itself made people very sceptical about not only aids but medical procedures.
Aids has caused a large collection of opinions on a variety of relating subjects that have linked from the epidemic, but it has been questioned whether moral panic is really the right word to describe it. “ It is time to recognise that the Aids scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, and which should be vigorously tackled by the medical authorities, the ‘war against Aids’ was turned into a moral crusade” - Brendan O’Neill.
The term ‘video nasties’ refers to films that are looked down upon for their massively violent content. The term was first introduced in the beginning of the 1980’s and progressed through the 80’s. The films in question were usually looked down upon by religious organisations and the press. Very much like rave culture it was not the actual ideology of the videos that people had a problem with it was more what seeing them would do to peoples perception and judgement especially young children. The most famous case of this is the James Bulger murder. The murder was apparently of a result of 2 boys carrying out a scene they had seen in a film. This type of moral panic is not seen as bad as it could be until actual acts start occurring from the interpretation of certain films being seen. Before the James Bulger happened a ‘moral crusade’ against hugely violent films was launched which involved the UK’s video recordings act. This act tightened restrictions on the codes of censorship on videos, this led onto the banning of many films. Before this act was introduced there was only the Obscene publications act which defined the term ‘Obscenity’ as something that which may corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it. This definition being quite vague was open for interpretation by everyone but it was solely reliant on the director of public prosecutions to decide whether certain films were fit for public viewing.
All 3 examples of moral panic I have mentioned all occur in relatively the same timeframe. Each one interlinks with the other in some degree especially the aids and rave culture examples. Each one causes fragmentation in different ways and to different extents but they all seem to lead the same trend, this being once the subject is raised and commented on by the media its from then that the public escalate it resulting in external opinions leading to panic. Its also easily seen that over the period of time the media or press get involved with it turns into somewhat of a bounce back scenario. What I mean by this is that the media will say something then leading to public reaction which again will return to the medias opinion.
Case studies used: Rave culture and ecstasy, Video Nasties and Aids
Moral panic can be described as the intensity of a negative feeling towards a particular group of people who appear to be threatening social order at a certain time. In this essay I shall be contrasting three rather different forms of moral panic these being Aids, Rave/Drug culture and Video Nasties.
Raves were originally founded in America, namely Chicago, New York and Detroit but the culture migrated to England around 1988. Raves tended to be located in rural areas, such as large barns, unused or abandoned air fields and large fields in the country. As these raves were illegal the organisers had a technique to limit the chance of police interference. Organisers would keep the rave in question secret until a matter of hours before it was due to begin, as once a rave had started police were almost powerless due to being so massively outnumbered. By the end of the 80’s raves were seen as the largest youth culture Britain had ever encountered as it was seen as a somewhat ‘breeding ground’ for the sale and intake of drugs. Raves also generated a massive revenue for the actual organisers, which could range from £50,000-£75,000. It was not the actual ideology of the raves themselves which caused such a moral panic but the drug uses which went hand in hand with them. Amphetamines were the most commonly used type of drugs, as the consumers would ingest them to be able to dance and stay awake for the entire night. It was not until the media got involved with a relation between the raves and drug culture that a panic set in. The Sun and Daily Mail both published articles about a Midsummer Night Dream party (19890 which took place at an abandoned airstrip; headlines included ‘Ecstasy Airport’ and the articles tended to emphasise the events as nothing more than a attempt to hook an entire generation on drugs under the guise of friendly party’s. Shortly after these articles were published the Media started to focus more on the drug use rather than the events, which was triggered by the death of Leah Betts. Although her death is still closely related to rave culture she actually consumed ecstasy at her own home and instead of dieing of an over dose her death was actually due to swelling of the brain from water intoxication.
Raves and drug culture caused fragmentation and panic particularly with parents. The way the media portrayed and worded their articles turned the minds of thousands of parents creating a great deal of concern with what their children were doing particularly when going out. In terms of cultural identity it would be unfair to say that any one country would be overly ashamed of their appearance due to drug taking as it happens all over the world. Although you can certainly argue that when comparing the generation in question to previous ones a massive change is clearly there, which among other things creates a large sense of worry but with a topic so wide is sadly unavoidable and to an extent uncontrollable.
The next moral panic issue I will be discussing is Aids. This issue can to some extent be linked to the influx in rave and certainly drug culture. As the epidemic was recognised in 1981 - 1986 ( closely related timeframe to rave culture) and one of the ways it was being transmitted was through the use of drugs, although it being heroin and any other drug where it was being administered intravenously. This caused a very large panic with drug users and people/family familiar with drug users. Aids caused a great deal of controversy and stigma especially towards gay men and drug users with the press having headlines such as ‘Gay Plague’. As there was such a panic arisen by the media all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories were being thrown around, such as the disease was created in order to commit genocide and even to kill off homosexuals. Naturally the gay community would have been set into a massive panic but also largely scared of in some cases reporting having the disease, due to the stigma that came with it. Sadly Aids was not only being contracted through sexual activity and sharing needles. Haemophiliacs who needed regular blood transfusions were contracting it to through being given infected blood. This sparked off a large scale panic in itself as all given blood that needed to be used in certain medical procedures could be infected. This itself made people very sceptical about not only aids but medical procedures.
Aids has caused a large collection of opinions on a variety of relating subjects that have linked from the epidemic, but it has been questioned whether moral panic is really the right word to describe it. “ It is time to recognise that the Aids scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, and which should be vigorously tackled by the medical authorities, the ‘war against Aids’ was turned into a moral crusade” - Brendan O’Neill.
The term ‘video nasties’ refers to films that are looked down upon for their massively violent content. The term was first introduced in the beginning of the 1980’s and progressed through the 80’s. The films in question were usually looked down upon by religious organisations and the press. Very much like rave culture it was not the actual ideology of the videos that people had a problem with it was more what seeing them would do to peoples perception and judgement especially young children. The most famous case of this is the James Bulger murder. The murder was apparently of a result of 2 boys carrying out a scene they had seen in a film. This type of moral panic is not seen as bad as it could be until actual acts start occurring from the interpretation of certain films being seen. Before the James Bulger happened a ‘moral crusade’ against hugely violent films was launched which involved the UK’s video recordings act. This act tightened restrictions on the codes of censorship on videos, this led onto the banning of many films. Before this act was introduced there was only the Obscene publications act which defined the term ‘Obscenity’ as something that which may corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it. This definition being quite vague was open for interpretation by everyone but it was solely reliant on the director of public prosecutions to decide whether certain films were fit for public viewing.
All 3 examples of moral panic I have mentioned all occur in relatively the same timeframe. Each one interlinks with the other in some degree especially the aids and rave culture examples. Each one causes fragmentation in different ways and to different extents but they all seem to lead the same trend, this being once the subject is raised and commented on by the media its from then that the public escalate it resulting in external opinions leading to panic. Its also easily seen that over the period of time the media or press get involved with it turns into somewhat of a bounce back scenario. What I mean by this is that the media will say something then leading to public reaction which again will return to the medias opinion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)