Based on this debate and previous readings What Definition of democracy do you feel is most fitting for us to use in-conjunction our growing reliance and integration of digital networked technologies?
1. I think a straight forward democracy fits the most in a growing reliance and integration of digital networked technologies. Democracy is a society that comes together to share ideas and issues and base their choices off those ideas. Which is what Jimmy Wales somewhat says. The internet allows us to connect with other. It lets us interact with people right away and faster. We can get a response in seconds instead of waiting a week for a letter or mail.
http://www.democracynow.org/
http://www.democracynow.org/
How does your answer to #1 fit into the unchecked nature of Web 2.0 technologies, and what are some tangible examples of this? Do you feel this is an important issue that needs to be addressed further?
2. This fits into the unchecked nature of web 2.0 because like I said the definition best fits self regulation of internet. Tangible examples are websites like facebook. When a group or a society meets they share ideas. Because of anonymity on the internet people can share, show and say whatever they want even if it becomes a problem. I think this is a problem because the internet is causing more and bigger issues than face to face confrontations. The internet and facebook allows people to say and do what they want.
Define and describe the phenomenon of the Media echo-chamber as described in the Internet Debates. What are some examples of this silo effect, and do you believe it is an issue that needs to be addressed? Why or Why not?
3. The phenomenon of the media echo-chamber is when people view reports and news an may only interact with people who share the same views. An echo-chamber or a silo is when people may feel certain ways about things and only look for information that can support and back up what they may believe. Example of this might be conservatives. They only get news from fox news because it is considered to be more conservative media. I believe that this is an issue that needs to be looked at. People need to view things from all angles and different points of view. If we only look at the things we agree with, we are missing other facts and information that may expand out learning and persuade us.
What are some ways that expertise and authority could be (or is being) enforced on the internet? Who would be behind these forces? Why do you believe are they are needed or not needed?
4. There are several different ways that expertise and authority could be enforced on the internet. One way is information websites like Wikipedia and ask.com. People can go in and change information on Wikipedia, no one actually knows if the information is credible or correct. On ask.com, it is a website created for people to ask questions and get answers. Some answers seem valid but others don’t. It is somewhat like a blog. Another way could be if websites like facebook were regulated and checked on. Things could be deleted whenever it was necessary. Site owners are the people that could enforce this authority on the internet. I don’t think this is needed. I think that most people on these sites are old enough to know right from wrong and true from fiction. However, and age limit for several websites should be mandatory, I believe.
Give a through example of an adaptation or improvement made by a of a social, political, or cultural group, government, business or individual to keep up with changing nature of the internet.
6. One example could be different businesses and companies trying to keep up with changing technologies, and others. The internet is constantly making upgrades. Facebook and itunes are constantly being upgraded. So many people are on the internet that small businesses have even made websites because they believe it is the best way to get their business across. My mother is a website designer and many small businesses and car dealer ships have asked her to make a website for them.
http://www.coachlightmotors.com/
http://www.coachlightmotors.com/
Is democracy threatened by the unchecked nature of the internet?
7. I really do not believe that democracy is threatened by the internet. Computers and the internet support democracy by helping people come together and socialize to make choices and ideas. The internet allows us to communicate faster and in different ways. Internet fives us accesses to all different types of information. A democracy is when people have say. Only if the internet was checked would out democracy be threatened.
No comments:
Post a Comment