Hello everyone! I hope your Wednesday has been to your liking and that the rest of this week flies by smoothly. I recently watched the Oscar Nominated film "Social Network" that tells the real-life stories of the people behind the creation of the multimillion dollar corporation, Facebook. I have to say that in my opinion, it is a really great movie. I am not a film major and the closest I have ever been to that industry are the locations. What I liked about the movie was the story it told (a real one by the way) of one of the most revolutionary inventions of the 21st Century. After the film was over I had discussion with the people around me about the whole idea and discovered that what started as a simple "drunken/heartbroken prank" became one of the most prominent vessel to question authority. Based on what Jane wrote last week, we can obviously see the impact that these simple tools for entertainment have evolved into a completely different thing. Tweeting where to meet for a protest, making a Facebook invite to boycott a piece of legislature, making a Facebook group to fundraise for a relief fund to Haiti are just some of the many calls for action through this media.
This is the future. Do you guys think that this adds or takes away from the ability to question authority? What are some of the risks of using this type of media to do so? (i.e. Internet being censored) How well does "cyber-activism" impact the real world?
We are blogging about questioning authority... Is that going to make a difference?
15 comments:
I think that social networking can be a powerful tool in questioning authority. At the same time however, the longevity of data on the web can be incriminating. It can also be used against the questioners by those in authority. The more the government knows about, the harder it is to stay subversive.
Internet censorship is becoming an issue all around the world. Germany, Australia and China have all employed different levels of censorship. The US government has made several attempts of censorship but all have failed. Most likely due to the fact that freedom of speech is one of the most highly regarded necessities to the general populous.
That being said, I think that the internet is becoming a really good tool in questioning authority and I hope it continues. The internet is such a powerful resource and should be regarded as a tool for civil organization, without calls to violence or threats. The impact of cyber-activism will continue to grow in the future as long as the internet stays uncensored. Wikileaks is a good example of this. Although corporations have tried to limit Wikileaks the openness of the internet keeps the website available to anyone with a computer.
Social networking has become a very powerful tool in questioning authority in society today. While it is often used to question authority, on the same not, the authority can use as it against those that are questioning.
While attempts have been made in the U.S. to censor what we can access on the Internet, they have failed because of our right to freedom of speech. I think it has become difficult for Legislators to figure out where and how the Internet fits into the our Constitutional rights. I don't see any sort of censorship of the Internet passing in our country because it would deny our right to freedom of speech.
Our blogging isn't exactly questioning the authority itself, but it is letting express our thoughts and opinions on the issue or idea of questioning authority. To question authority, I feel you have to take some sort of action whether it be protesting, boycotting or simply writing a letter stating your concerns.
There internet is unquestionably the most accessible vessel for the ideas and causes of everyday people to get passed around the world, and social networking is something that allows you to share your own ideas with people you're associated with. So, this accessibility definitely adds to our overall ability to question authority, especially here in the United States where (as Jimmy and Bridget have said) any attempts at censoring exchanges on the Internet have failed because of our right to free speech.
In other countries, the citizens are not so lucky. Governments have recognized the spread of ideas that is generated by social network and some have tried to put a stop to it. For example in Syria, the citizens have been unable to acccess facebook or youtube before going through a series of proxies, until earlier this week (read details here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/08/syria-facebook-youtube-ba_n_820273.html). I thought it was interesting how in the article it talks about how even with this newfound access to social networking, a Syrian protest that was spawned online still fell through. It's difficult for us as Americans in this time period to even consider people being too afraid to question authority, and so we frequently take this freedom for granted.
I definitely think that the widespread access to a media that makes it very easy both to see other's thoughts and ideas and share your own makes it much easier to unite anyone for anything, and the ability to question authority is definitely included in this. I think that the risks are that it can be seen by everyone so if persons of an opposing ideal (whether it be the government or anyone else) can also see it and take action against it (or the person who generated it) in some form or another should they wish to. I think that "cyber-activism" can have an impact on people's actions (or the "real world") by helping to organize events, and by helping really anyone to share their ideas easily and quickly.
The internet and social networking are wonderful tools for questioning authority. There are so many sides to every argument and through the internet it is much easier to read a much wider range of opinions to help you make your own decision. Our blog is a small microcosmic example of this. On this one blog, there are about a dozen different perspectives. All of which are equally influential, but to different groups of people.
As awesome as freedom of speech via the internet is, I feel that there definitely should be some limits. However, people have very different ideas of what they feel should be on the internet. Censorship is always going to be too much or too little for some people. Amazon, for example, states that it is strongly against censorship, but should they really be aloud to market a pedophile guide on the internet?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11731928
I feel like the person involved with the above book took advantage of the lack of censorship...
The only real risk of activism on the internet is that what you say will always be "out there" somewhere for people to read. What we say now could potentially come back to haunt us later in life. Because there really is very little censorship in the US, we are free to say things which maybe we should not.
I think being more interconnected to everyone through the internet definitely gives us more freedom to question authority. We are more easily and able to respond to ideas and events and voice our opinion while the topic is still relevant. Back when this technology wasn't prevalent (Pony Express days for example), people only got to know what was happening long after it happened, leaving little room for the people to actually make a difference. Now people can be in the know all the time.
One of the aspects of webbing though is that people are more prone to speak their mind when they don't have to face a bunch of people directly. This makes for people, although they can more speak their mind, it also makes for a more malicious web. This jeopardizes the question of the safety of free speech in governments and therefore making the internet seem like a threat. This could mean internet censorship in the future for the USA. I know some countries have already done this (Canada has limited their internet plans and the amount of internet people can use).
The internet and cyber-space is too connected into the world around us for it not to affect and impact the real world. It is simply too ingrained into our culture. You see the impact of the web everyday as there are more and more 'discovery stories' from Youtube videos and blog posts, etc.
As far as questioning authority, I think the internet only magnifies the impact that questioning authority has. People can put an idea out there that questions the very base of people's beliefs or knowledge and it can travel all over the world, just because someone posted it to their blog or the online New York Times, of Youtube, you name it. If something is put out on the web, there is always a possibility of millions of people seeing it and with this kind of power, the question really is, how can the internet NOT make a difference?
I believe that social networking in the form of questioning authority is certainly a great way to include people that may not otherwise be able to be involved, therefore increasing the group that is questioning authority. It is cheaper and less time consuming and the way that everything is interlinked, a person can soak up a large amount of information quickly on one topic using many different sources.
The Egyptian unrest that we discussed last week is a prime example of this. If it were not for social networking many people outside of the immediate area, including several of us at UNM, would not have known about the protests. Even though it is simply online, it is still a form of support from all the way across the ocean. Social networking is allowing friends and families that do not live in close proximity to stay connected and in turn be included in one another's causes.
A similar example was a contest last year about which charity would receive a certain amount of money from some company based on how many likes the web page for that charity received on facebook. My human rights group was one of many to advertise for our top three charities and help get people around the campus involved in voting. It's another way of having an impact for those who may not have the time or resources to go to D.C. and lobby or stand on the street corner and protest.
I think that Sam and Meagan made really good and interesting points about how people will often say more over the internet than they would in person. I think that it brings up a whole different set of questions and impacts that the internet has on people because they will often express more ideas than they otherwise which, in the case of questioning authority, could either help the cause to gain more strength or it could cause more governmental censorship/intervention. It also is interesting to think about how it will affect coming generations (including our own) when it comes to getting a job and going into the real world, and how much of an impact the things a person is putting out there right now will affect them in the future.
Speaking of the impact on careers that Ben brought up, today at work was an example of such because one of my coworkers who apparently posted online about being hungover from her previous evening activities tried to call in sick and another employee who had seen the online post commented to the manager.
This is an example of how the rapid spread of information can be both good and bad depending on your perspective and it definitely goes to show that someone must be careful about what information they share online.
As much as it makes questioning authority for forward-moving, societally-benefiting causes easier it also makes questioning authority in negative, harmful ways easier as seen with online predators. Similarly, the wikileaks was brought up previously and is another instance of information sharing that could be both beneficial and yet when in the wrong hands, such as foreign enemies, potentially hazardous.
This goes to question how far individuals can question authority before endangering the greater population.
I think that social networking has become an effective tool in questioning authority. The recent events in Egypt are proof that people can question authority and actually generate change through social networking sites. I'll admit, social networking could include risks. Using Egypt as an example again, the government detained the Google executive that created the original facebook group, but, thanks to the wide-reaching power of social networking sites, the idea was already out; change was already in motion.
I think that our blog can be considered a form of questioning authority. We may not be "actively" protesting anything in particular, but we are sharing our ideas on the subject of questioning authority in general. I think that discussion and critical thinking about these sorts of things is questioning authority in itself.
I was going to say about what Jimmy said in his first paragraph right after reading the question. There is no doubt that authority is questioned daily with constant discussions of people's actions online. Social norms are questioned when people post curse words on their statuses or discuss sexual jokes online. The downfall to this is the lack of professionalism in the process. Swear words and other such things are seen by employers. This can really bring down one's purpose in questioning authority. My advice would be, while questioning authority online, is to do so in a manner that people will take one seriously and professionally. I am a firm believer in maintaining a professional image online so as to preserve ones image in real life.
All of the new forms of social networking are providing more opportunities to question authority. I do not think that they can really hinder it in any way because they just offer another outlet for people to communicate and the social networking "scene" can bring a different crowd of people. However, I don't think that most personal facebooks are used to question authority.
A risk to using these social networks is that they are excluding a huge portion of the population because not everyone has a facebook. As well as, people can set their information to private, which completely hinders the ability to communicate one's questioning of authority.
Within our blogs, we are questioning authority, however, I do not think that this is going to have a major impact on the world around us. This is more of an informational form of questioning authority. We are just getting our ideas and opinions out there to be heard.
All of the new forms of social networking are providing more opportunities to question authority. I do not think that they can really hinder it in any way because they just offer another outlet for people to communicate and the social networking "scene" can bring a different crowd of people. However, I don't think that most personal facebooks are used to question authority.
A risk to using these social networks is that they are excluding a huge portion of the population because not everyone has a facebook. As well as, people can set their information to private, which completely hinders the ability to communicate one's questioning of authority.
Within our blogs, we are questioning authority, however, I do not think that this is going to have a major impact on the world around us. This is more of an informational form of questioning authority. We are just getting our ideas and opinions out there to be heard.
I feel like using the internet is obviously a great method to organize protest and yet it also makes us so dependent and vulnerable. Vast amounts of people can coordinate their movements with the push of a button from one end of the globe to another. However, the government having the power that it does, easily can censor this and even cut off this source of communication along with all the other beauties of modern day life. Access to such things is easily limited and therefore it allows us to become unorganized and fall at the mercy of their superior control of technology. It has the great good of allowing us to so diversely coordinate service, protest and boycott, and environmental activism, yet it also puts as at great risk of chaos. No good comes with at least some bad I suppose. I feel like just blogging about all of this allows for us to see both sides of what we are questioning and therefore our understanding deepens. It makes a difference by making us more aware of our surroundings, of the ideas out there, and the possibilities for different points of view of freedom, justice, and life itself.
The internet definitely allows ideas of questioning authority to spread at a rapid pace, but it takes a lot more than just an idea for questioning authority to be effective. I think the internet is an easy place to get a group together for some sort of cause and to put ideas out there, but like Bridget said, it takes more action to make a difference. Simply typing out your ideas online will not bring about a change until you act on them with protests, letters, etc. I think the internet is necessary to organize a large group of people, but the internet alone is not enough for questioning authority to work.
Also, as many people have said, what you post on the internet can get you into trouble. Depending on how well you use it, the internet could either help or hinder your intentions.
Post a Comment