Sesame Street and Attention Spans

My kids could care less about Sesame Street. I grew up on it, but they’re like “Snuffa-who-luff-what?” They don’t’ want to sit and simply watch a TV screen with which they have no input. They’ve got Dora teaching them to read and type on a computer where what they input makes an actually difference as to what happens next. Leap Frog, Nintendo DSi’s (the list goes on), true interactive learning is at their fingertips and they love it. But when they do sit down and watch Nick Jr. (about 98%  of what they do watch), I can see the producers do still stick with the shorter show for shorter attention span programming from the Sesame Street days. I often wish my daughter’s favorites, the Bubble Guppies and Yo Gabba Gabba, would last longer than 20 minutes so I could get some stuff done!

Since I usually share a quote and a thought, here’s one that made me love my gamer-ness (and that I’m passing it on to my children : ) :

“Mander claimed that television commands our attention but not our cognitive activity, indeed that it suppresses active attention and makes viewers into zombies (in Sesame Street’s case, one supposes, zombies who count and spell).”

Now, I do believe in physically activity, which video games lack, but my PS3 solves the problem discussed in the quote…the games command our attention AND our cognitive activity. My kids aren’t zombies, trust me. I wish they’d ‘zone-out’ from time to time, but I’m not that lucky.

To conclude, probably the most interesting thing about this article to me was how it got me thinking, “well, duh?!” I mean, how are we supposed to have marathon attention spans when we’ve got SOOOO much constantly coming at us? Not including TV (which does count for a ton), we can still have work and/or school and/or relationships and/or (the most traumatizing of all) CHILDREN in our heads (and ears!), the radio on, be stuck in traffic under huge billboards next to a guy waving a sign for cheap pizza while talking to your passenger who’s sending and receiving emails on his phone all while texting your wife “what’s for dinner.” Whew, it’s exhausting and if you paid attention for longer than five minutes, it could kill you.

Sarcasm got the best of me again.  :D 

Sharxjay signing off for the summer, have a great one, ciao!

Collective Behavior

First things first..."Sociologists have been researching collective behavior longer than new media have been in use" is a ridiculous statement to make. Although this was a well written and interesting article, I laughed when I read that. Wasn’t the written word a form of ‘new media’ at some point long ago? Pretty sure it was ‘in use’ and is much older than sociology and sociological research, I’m thinking.

As for the ‘2 or 3’ main ideas about the article, although there were many, I only want to talk about one…the Producing Consumer concept, or ‘Prosumer.’ The case study of the ‘Bus Uncle’ incident does indicate that we now reproduce and reinterpret what we’re given on the web. But what about off the web? Aren’t we prosumers in our everyday lives as well?  I feel with the feedback from us (in the form of whether or not we buy) that companies are exposed to, don’t we, the consumer, choose what will survive in any given market? I believe we ‘prosumed’ (my new past tense term!) the gaming phones that are out today. And Netflix (bye bye, Blockbuster). Heck,  even Volcano Tacos at Taco Bell (they were supposed to be ‘for a limited time’ but made their way onto the permanent menu probably because I alone eat so many of them!).

Okay, back into focus. I’m simply trying to say although this is an interesting term, it is not a new concept. The web has simply made it much easier for us to offer feedback to companies and Youtube video producers alike. Actors have said “you know you’ve ‘made it’ when they parody you on Saturday Night Live’…now Youtube vids have ‘made it’ when a couple hundred strangers mock, rehash or in other ways regurgitate them. Gaming phones came about because people LOVE their phones, and many of us LOVE gaming, etc, etc.

Hope I didn’t lose you all! ‘Til next, Sharxjay : )

the Good Enough Web (gew.blahblahblah.com? Naa, wouldn't of worked ; )

For this article we were asked to share what we learned and found interesting. I had to search outside the article to understand it since I had no idea what these terms were:


The Gopher protocol /ˈɡoʊfər/ is a TCP/IP application layer protocol designed for distributing, searching, and retrieving documents over the Internet. Strongly oriented towards a menu-document design, the Gopher protocol was a predecessor of (and later, an alternative to) the World Wide Web.
The protocol offers some features not natively supported by the Web and imposes a much stronger hierarchy on information stored on it. Its text menu interface is well-suited to computing environments that rely heavily on remote text-oriented computer terminals, which were still common at the time of its creation in 1991, and the simplicity of its protocol facilitated a wide variety of client implementations.

(found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopher_(protocol) )

Wide Area Information Servers or WAIS is a client–server text searching system that uses the ANSI Standard Z39.50 Information Retrieval Service Definition and Protocol Specifications for Library Applications" (Z39.50:1988) to search index databases on remote computers. It was developed in the late 1980s as a project of Thinking Machines, Apple Computer, Dow Jones, and KPMG Peat Marwick. 
WAIS did not adhere to either the standard or its OSI framework (adopting instead TCP/IP) but created a unique protocol inspired by Z39.50:1988.

(found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_area_information_server )

I found it interesting that I had no idea what these terms were! I’m well into my thirties and ‘from’ that era, a young adult in ’91 and ‘94 when those conferences took place. I was getting into computing, everybody was. I paid attention to tech stuff because I was into the stock market, everybody did. I knew what Linux was, got the just of html…but WAIS and Gopher? And I giggled when the article called them “real competitors” to the web, really?! I guess that just further proves another point of the article, the web wasn’t the best available technology, it was just good enough (and the most widely used and accessible : ).

Hope everyone’s paper is going well, I know I’m having fun with mine…signing off, Sharxjay

Virtual Deciet!

I really thought this summed up this article quite well: "The Internet did not create grifters...if anything, the Net has simply changed the dynamics of the game."
Yup, my thoughts exactly : ) It also said because of the mediums vulnerability to deception that Internet users should "adopt a healthy scepticism when online." I'm a mostly trusting person, but I keep a safe distance, especially emotionally, from strangers and strange things online as well as in real life. Keeping my guard up online comes natural to me since its always served me well IRL.
I do feel bad for the people who ended up feeling betrayed by the story. The sense of belonging to something, even simply praying for a cause, is very powerful and when those trusts are damaged...well this article points out exactly what can happen. I think Debbie knew what she was doing. I totally don't buy her "Oops, I didn't mean any harm" bit at all. She wanted what every 'cool blogger' wants...readers! It was wrong letting people comment and support and gather around this 'story' knowing that everyone else thought it was real. She should have let them in on her little secret earlier, like right away. Too bad they couldn't revoke her blogging license or something : )
So that brings me back to the beginning...people like this exist, with or without the Internet. Be careful who you choose to trust, period.

the End of Paper!

Besides the creativity inspiring things Coover discovered in his workshops, which I will address, I thought it reassuring that "the very proliferation of books and other print based media, so prevalent in this forest-harvesting, paper-wasting age, is held to be a sign of its feverish moribundity," was stated so perfectly well! : )  I know I'm concerned for the generations to come. Electronic teaching, reading and writing practice all save paper, and the planet!
Secondly, this quote made me smile: "But they also engage in continuous on-line dialogue with one another, exchanging enthusiasm, criticism, doubts, speculations, theorizing, wisecracks. So much fun is all this, so compelling this 'downright celebratory' experience..." Does this sound familiar to anyone? : )  I know I enjoy classes like these where we all engage and encourage each other, make some new friends.
Last, I wanted to know if anyone would be interested in a blogging "Hotel" like the community created one in the article? Jk, but how fun of an assignment would that be for a fiction writing class?!
Good luck on our 3rd test everyone!! Ciao for now, Sharxjay.

Blogging and Privacy

First of all, let me just say that I was amazed at how far Karen McCullagh went to define privacy. I did a ‘wiki’ for Dr. Coopman’s 181 class last semester on a similar topic I entitled “Privacy and Social Networking: Managing Your Personal Information” (if interested, found at http://comm181.pbworks.com/w/page/38889344/Jay-B ) and of course defined privacy management…once. This woman went above and beyond, and there were two or three definitions of just ‘privacy’ that I wish I’d used. The simplest was Warren and Brandeis definition as “the right to be left alone”. I got a kick out that one. Also, I liked what Westin offered, “the claim of individuals, groups, or institutions to determine for themselves when, how and to what extent information about them is communicated to others.”

As did I in my more Facebook oriented paper, McCullagh raised the point that the expectations of individual bloggers is the key. You are posting potentially dangerous information that is archived and stored for potential predators to sift through and possibly hurt you with. It is important to realize and plan for this each and every time you post anything to the web, be it Facebook, Blogspot, Twitter, Yelp or whatever.

Lastly, I really enjoyed how this article discussed why we take the privacy risks in the first place…the rewards of social interaction! I omitted this type of thing from my paper, delving more into an educational type of warning for individuals to watch their online behavior for their own sake. But as a newfound blogger myself, I wish I had a least touched on the positive aspects of SNS and blogging, cause they are real and immeasurably wonderful! : D

Ciao for now, Sharxjay.

Lit Review Topic

I am going to do my research project on the wonderful, magnificent, and in all other ways utterly amazing PlayStation 3. As it is much more than just a gaming console, this devise, one I dragged my feet to purchase, has become the entertainment hub of my household. It has enabled me to meet a variety of new friends from numerous countries, and enriched my life in ways I never imagined possible before Internet gaming existed. Since Blockbuster and Hollywood Video both closed down in Gilroy, we stream movies through this ‘gaming’ console from Netflix, PS Store and Vudu. My son and I play games. My wife shops and collects and sorts music. My daughter, who’s 3, is learning to read. It is an amazing device that has changed the daily routines of my household. So, although it needs some polishing, my research question will be something like “what is PS3 and PSN and how/why do they rock so hard?” Okay, so it needs a lot of polishing, but you get the idea…til next time, Sharxjay.

Personal Dynamite Media!

How cool was that article?! I thought the introduction "from a cafe, on a computer that fits in an overcoat pocket" really summed up my take on this article. I learned, first off, a bunch of old acronyms, like PARC, and that Silicon Valley locals, Xerox, had a huge role in the development of some of the pioneering research that led to me having some seriously cool gadgets that make my daily life a ton easier...and waaaaay more fun!
I really liked (I think it was) figure 26.2, the one of the "mock dynabook." Nothing mock about that anymore, just ditch the keyboard and you've got an iPad! Lol. Sometimes the age of the writings gets to me, but then some like this hit a home run. The way things were predicted by forward thinkers of the past astounds me sometimes.
To conclude I'd like to mention my 6 yr. old son's Nintendo DSi. This is a gaming device my Mom paid $159 for to give to a 4 yr. on his birthday. I thought she was crazy, but my son now draws, writes, films short footage pieces, edits them with sound, sends instant messages to his buddies who also have WiFi, and of course plays video games both solo and versus others via the Internet on...and it fits into his coat pocket. Wow, when I was 8 I thought Pong was cool. 'Til next, Sharxjay signing off.

Technomedia

It was nice to read something that is relatively new, compared to some of our foundation readings at least. Sam Han does a great job of illustrating his points about how far media has come, and possibly where its headed. The first idea that caught my attention was the 'digital divide' stuff. He says "for those whom the promise of globilization had yet to be realized, new media technologies became an integral part of not only the discourse of modernization, but of global justice." I couldn't agree more that it isn't fair that some people live without the technologies that shape most of our lives. I can't imagine life without my cell phone, or even my PS3's capabilities to play versus thousands of other gamers from around the globe. But what's the answer? How do we fix the fact that it isn't cost effective to set up billions of dollars worth of equiptment to serve the 12 people who live in Nowhere, Montana? And do those 12 people even care about being connected? Could the Safeway thats 200 miles away afford to bring them their Internet ordered groceries anyway? My point is, their experience with the 'missing' technologies would be vastly different than mine is anyway.
Secondly, I thought the Mechanical, Electric, and Broadcast period breakdown was cool. Even though we sorta studied the 'history' in the earlier reading, I found this one more interesting. Especially since he touched on the coming 'virtual' phase. I do agree that we're moving toward that. Has anyone seen the holographic keyboard you can get for your Ipad? It's so cool, reminds me of something out of Star Wars...
Very cool read, see you all soon, Sharxjay.

Second Life

Wow, this was a cool article. I'm growing rapidly more and more interested in Second Life, and I might just have to check it out pretty soon. Although I'd hate to end up spending my IRL (in real life, cool acronym!) money on some sweet Adidas or something for my virtual self!
The one really main point was interesting for sure. That gender plays a significant role in the way your Second Life player is perceived and interacted with online should come as no surprise at all. I mean, it makes a huge difference in real life, too, right? Chivalry still exists, at least for gentlemen like me :-) and I know I interact much differently with women than men not only IRL but in online gaming worlds as well. I've mentioned the blow 'em up style racing game I play plenty in my past blogs, so I'll beat that drum again. When I play versus men (or unknown) characters I'm my usual villainous self, whereas when I know I'm up against a girl I'm much nicer and way less vengeful for instance, so the findings of this article are of no surprise to me. Ciao for now, Sharxjay.

Computer Power and Human Reason

   For starters, let me say I'm not so sure I fully understood this article. Or I did and it was incredibly simple...one or the other. It seemed to me Wiezenbaum was trying to tell the therapists from the 70's to calm down, and that his 'doctor' program couldn't go on to be a fully automated theraputic program because computers lack wisdom and reason. The real underlying problem, according to Wiezenbaum (and as a Comm. major I agree), is that the computer lacks the basic understanding of the language because it was recieving input out of context. The importance of the context of what's being said is huge in actually understanding any given situation. And even though in the Rogerian theraputic form, which simplified things for the programer because it basically just regurgitates whats been said to keep a 'subject' talking, the out of context understanding the computer demonstrated made it obvious to him that it could never replace human interaction in therapy sessions.
   What I found myself thinking, however, is how we are all programed, to a certain degree, to respond to certain things in certain ways. I mean, the 'how are you?' question we've all been asked a million times is almost always answered 'fine, and you?' even if your not fine, and don't care how they are. The difference, as Weizenbaum points out, that we read and understand the context of the situation, and can therefore alter the feedback/response accordingly. I hope that's what we were supposed to get out of this article, cause that's what I got...until next time, Sharxjay.

TV and Society

  
  
   Hmmmm...What did I learn from this reading? Well, the word 'thence' (apparently meaning 'then hence') for starters. And that Mr. Williams' 'z' key on his typewriter (1972!) didn't work (realiSe, organiSe, too funny :). Seriously though, this reading was a trip. It did make me think about how we decide to use (or not use) any new given technology is what makes or breaks its social meaning. And I did learn a lot about the history of the development of television.
   More interesting (at least to me) to write and talk about, though, was this particular quote early in the chapter:
"If television had not been invented, this argument runs, we would still be manipulated or mindlessly entertained, but in another way and perhaps less powerfully."
   I guess we know Mr. Williams' stance on TV! Mindlessly entertained?! He had obviously never seen America's Got Talent. I mean male pole dancers, high dives into blow up pools, Sharon Ozborne...need I say more?! Ok, Ok, my sarcasm's getting the best of me again.
   TV is a very powerful form of entertainment that does manipulate us to a great extent. And I found it very interesting that he predicted had TV never been invented that we'd have been 'mindlessly entertained' in some other fashion...did someone say Facebook!!? I partake too, not baggin, just calling it like I see it. Perhaps not less powerfully, Mr. Williams. You should see how addicted the teens of today are to the Internet in general and especially sites like Fb. Great insight from the 70's, and a great read...'til next, Sharxjay.

Just Like Me...Only Faster!

   I found a number of things interesting in this article as I am a ‘gamer’
with a few avatars myself. I play very little “first person” anymore, as I’m
addicted to one awesome racing game, Blur, at this time (I’m represented by a
Grim Reaper avatar…so scaaaarrrryyy 8-0) and I’ve never been involved at all
with “Second Life.” But I certainly followed the ‘a lot like me’ results they
found in the article with the virtual style, first person games I have played
in the past.

   The one quote which caught my attention and I’d like to touch on is this
one: “The aesthetic reference for Second Life does not appear to be, however,
exactly the same as that that prevails in the media, in particular, that that
rules in fashion.”

   One of the cool things about online gaming is the normal rules of media,
fashion, heck acceptance and judgment even, don’t apply anymore. So it’s not surprising
and definitely a plus in my book that this holds true. When we already have to
deal with the pressures of regular life’s regulatory rules of what’s cool and
what’s weird, I think it’s fantastic to have a virtual place to escape that
exact kind of thing and go just be me…only faster! Go Grim Racer Go!!

'Us' Media

   "Don't hate the media, make the media." This, I think, is the one thing I'd certainly highlight as a main idea of this reading. Whether they were talking about the producers of independent radio or the everyday Facebook or blogger, it seems to me that understanding the "power of communication, both for the self and the group," is the key 'takeaway,' if you will, for this chapter.
   I would also like to briefly agree that community media is definately democratic in form, due to the promotion of free speech as well as the more diverse range of viewpoints. Both of those make community media (NPR soooooo reminds me of Dr. Ted Coopman now...) a very important addition to our society.
   Last, I wanted to (again briefly) appologize for the sort-ness of my posts this week. I suffered a twin blister injury on my left thumb and middle finger Sunday and am in serious pain while typing! To prove I'm not making this up because it worked for our instructor ;-) check out this picture I took yesterday (and its slightly worse today!):

(had to drain them this morning...)
Ciao for now, Sharxjay.
  

Uses and Gratifications of SNS

   We covered gratification theory a bit in Dr. Byrd's Comm 101C class last semester. I remember I found it interesting and valid, but we didn't apply it to Facebook (I'm not going to mention MySpace after this, no point anymore!). I hadn't seen the 'process and content gratification' breakdown by Kayahara and Wellman prior to reading this article. It seems like a useful tool, being able to categorize types of gratifications one would experience from using SNS. I also found this quote very interesting, “the person follows his or her
interests, choosing media content according to his or her needs and synthesizes that content to
satisfy those needs.” That is why the Internet is so much cooler than TV and other older traditional forms of media as far as gratification is concerned. Our ability to customize and re-customize our needs based on our changing wants. This was a really good article, see ya'all next post, Sharxjay.

The Medium is (totally tied to) the Message

   Why do I feel like if I had eaten a pot brownie or something this article would have become clearer to me sooner than it did on just coffee and cereal? Mr. McLuhan, dude, you wrote an article that somehow managed to both oversimplify AND dig extremely deep all at once ;-).  I sure hope we won’t be docked for sarcasm…I’ll be in big trouble!
   So on to the “two or three interesting ideas from the article.” I think that what McLuhan is really trying to say in this article is simply to be cognizant of the medium you choose for a particular message because they're undeniably interconnected. That’s it…a message you want to deliver is inevitably effected by the media by which it is delivered. A few passages that stuck out and brought me to the aforementioned conclusion:

   “…because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action.” To me, this is why to get work done or share information you’d probably choose email as the medium, whereas if you needed to deliver news of someone’s death or other tragedy you’d probably choose face to face.

   “…’content’ blinds us to the character of the medium.” With this quote I see his point, but disagree. Say I’m in real estate trying to sell a home to a client. If I were to pull up on a Harley (my McLuhan style ‘medium’) and say “this is a great home, perfect for you and your family,” versus pulling up in a Mercedes (new ‘medium’) and saying the exact same words (message), I do believe the ‘character’ of the Harley versus the ‘character’ of the Mercedes would indeed be noticed. My two mediums bring with them different connotations. My Mercedes medium implies that I’m a yuppie who probably knows what I’m talking about when it comes to real estate and that I can be trusted, whereas the Harley…well, not so much. It would be nice if people would be ‘blind’ to the difference of showing up on a Harley or in a Mercedes simply because my content stated “trust me, buy this house,” but it just doesn’t work that way. Would the ‘content’ “your Mom just passed away” ‘blind’ any of us to how insensitive, impersonal, rude and downright wrong it would be to deliver that message via email? Sorry McLuhan, I’m not fully stretch’n quite that far, but I get it.                                   
'Til next time, Sharxjay out.

Consequences of Extroversion

How 'bout that...I just found out I have a highly arousable cortex area of my brain! Lol.
   Yes, I'm an extrovert, and yes, I'm highly arousable in most areas of my brain. Turns out, according to Adam Acar, that my extroversion is the number one indicator of my OSN size. And we all know size matters!
   Okay, okay...enough silliness. I love statistics, and this was a great empirically backed article. It looked into the effects of certain variables on one's social network size and the time spent on social network sites. Some of the variables were extroversion versus introversion, body image, self-esteem, anxiety and gender and the article did a great job reporting the findings as to whether or not these variables had an impact on time spent on and size of one's social network. I also found it (predictable but) interesting that on average people's online networks nearly doubled the size of their 'real world' networks. I would have guessed and agreed with the article, however, that because extroverts have more social options, that the less socially optioned introverts would be spending more time on the net networks. But Acar threw that hypothesis out, so I guess I guessed wrong. Apparently, extroverts spend more time on and have bigger networks. We're extroverts, so that makes sense.
   One thing that surprised me for sure was that income levels, year in school and relationship status had little to no impact on social network size. I know enough single people to have seen often the 800 plus 'friends' they compile trying to be cool or land dates or whatever. I'm thinking skewed sample on that one.
   Lastly, I was really impressed by Acar's assessment of his own research's shortcomings, stating what needed to be done to further understanding in this area. It seemed to me that he'd done an adequate, thorough enough job, yet he delved into what could be done better. I hope he did indeed get his PhD!
   Until next time, Sharxjay signing off.

Quality of Email Relationships

   This was an interesting article to read sitting here in 2011, chuckling at how the 'online relationships' in question were restricted to only listservs and email. It would be a much more interesting article now with Facebook in existence.  And Match.com, eHarmony and the like. Not to mention Skype, which would gray the lines of the studies as it could be counted almost simultaneously as electronic, computer mediated and sort of 'telephone', too. Plus with ten plus more years growing up with Internet know-how under their belts, the kids today have a much greater chance to achieve 'quality relationships' than ever before.
   I'm not so sure I really 'learned' anything in this article, just reinforced some hunches, I think. This study was done long enough ago that I'm 'from' that era...the late 90's and early 2000's when the Internet and email were new technologies. We weren't as used to them in our everyday lives as f2f or telephone 'communication episodes', so I have always felt that the quality of the relationships you build with faceless strangers pales in comparison to 'real life' interpersonal interactions. I'm still getting used to Fb for crying out loud! I'm an open book kind of guy in 'real life', often times getting looks from my wife as she utters "TMI, honey," and I still find myself feeling uneasy putting stuff up on the Internet for the world to see. So of course when they studied my generation eleven years ago they found those results. So there it is, that's what I learned...we need to 'redo' this study and include the kids of today who've grown up with Fb and Match.com and Skype and see what they say now!
   I found it interesting that the one part of the study, I think it was fig. 2 on page 8 or 9, reinforced what I previously thought about the usefulness of email to share info or get work done. People are chatty :-) and that 'wastes' time (in regards to work or sharing info, not relationship building) so when you really need to bear down and accomplish tasks, email is the way to go.
   Lastly I wanted to touch on the 'adding to' versus 'substituting for' f2f interaction thing. I agree with the article, it makes sense, that when you replace traditional interpersonal (f2f or phone) interaction with too much Internet, your relationship 'quality' will take a huge hit. And adding to f2f  relationships with MORE interaction possibilities will strengthen the quality of the given relationship...most times. However, I've (and I'm sure most of you ;-) ran into plenty of 'different' enough people in my day that I bet a select group of people experience the reverse. You all know who I'm talking about...the people that don't do well with other people. They don't take or give normal social cues in normal ways. They genuinely hate public situations, and usually don't get along that well with anyone face to face. If they're replacing their 'bad' f2f experiences with Internet relationships, where they can hide, or perhaps simply navigate through, some of their social 'differences', I bet the findings would reveal an increase in relationship quality. Just my thoughts, signing off until tomorrow, Sharxjay.
  

The Union of Man and Computer

   After reading the beginning of this article, I thought, "uh oh, more dry material for me to drudge through." But it didn't take long for me to really start thinking about what this article was really saying, and how dead right this guy was even though the article was obviously written along time ago. There's a newer commercial were people are ignoring life while giving all their attention to their phones. A wife in a sexy nighty trying to get her hubby in the mood, a kid trying to play baseball with his Dad to no avail..."it's time for a phone to save us from our phones" it says at the end. That's us now and this article said it 50 years ago!
   I think when this article was written we as a society were leaning toward a "symbiosis" with the computer, but its rather obvious now that our society couldn't function, at least as we know it, without our machine counterparts. I'm a bit older than most of my fellow students, and I remember having to plan things with people thoroughly before you separated or went about your individual business. Now, we rely so heavily on our pocket miracles, you can just hit the road and wing it. I can google directions, call anyone on a whim, get my banking done, snap photos and share them with the world...all instantly from a device in pocket.
   I really enjoyed the first weed of readings and am excited about were we are going in this class. Looking forward to next week...Happy Fathers Day everyone!

The Written Word

   In reading this overview of the history of written communication, I found myself hoping we won't be held accountable for all those dates on a test or something. Or at the very least hoping if we do I'll be able to sift through all of them quickly enough to get the correct answer without wasting too much D2L time.
   Anyway, this particular reading spread it's focus on many types of written communication, and it jumped around chronologically quite a bit. I'm reading about xerox machines in 1960 one second, then in the following paragraph I'm back in 1600 BC Egypt talking about the advent of snail-mail. In the beginning I found the chapter most interesting when it talked about the evolution of the written word itself, I've always been into hieroglyphics. I also never knew that the Chinese had been using movable type hundreds of years before Gutenberg got credit for inventing it in 1439. A few of the technologies, such as the radio-facsimile and TWX, I had never really heard of. Since the radio-fax got killed by TV and TELEX and TWX were used only by big business in the 30's it shouldn't surprise me I hadn't heard of them...learn somethin everyday I guess. Until next time, Sharxjay signing off. Ciao.

Facebook and Identity: Be Who You Want to Be!

    "Identity as it emerges in the mind of an individual cannot be separated from social processes and interactions." As a Comm. Studies major, I've heard it a thousand times...you are who you think you are, but also who everyone else thinks you are. But it never seemed more evident than in the Facebook case study by Katie Ellis. Even though I already unconsciously knew it, what I 'learned' from this article is my personal identity is in fact selected from an abundance of social identities. I have many roles; husband, father, student, friend, teammate, son, etc. But which do I choose to represent to the world, and myself, who I am? Interestingly enough, I chose a photo for my Fb profile of my wife and I hugging each other in formal attire at our best friends' wedding. As the article suggests, when I maintain my Fb page (and this blog ;-), I am selecting a 'me' to project to the world and to myself. Am I trying to show the world I look good enough in a tie to land a hottie wife, or am I simply trying to convince myself of that? The answer is both.
    I also find it incredibly interesting that George Mead, who was the first (in the 1920's) to say one's self is established through communication, was dead on and would have had a field day with Facebook. Katie Ellis' views are totally in line with what Mead was saying, and I agree with her in that Mead's theories have never been more evident than in the age of the Internet, where it's unique social context allows these behaviors to be accurately studied.
    Lastly, I would like to argue with Tara Brabazon. Does she really think we can't separate 'real' news from the Fb news feeds? If anything, I think the opposite is true. Today we are constantly forced to sift through videos of water-skiing squirrels and other crap in order to find accurate, trustworthy information...and I have noticed that we are becoming very adept at it. Maybe I'm not as addicted to the 'social landscape' on Fb as some, but I still believe we can equate what's relevant, and what's little more than entertainment, quite well.
  Until next time, this is Sharxjay signing off.

Introductory Post

Hello everyone. My name is 'Jay' and I'm excited to finally be blogging! I love to write, and have always envisioned myself doing this. Yet as a husband, father of two kinder-aged children and a full time student, I have been simply too busy to blog for pleasure. I'm a "real talk", "call 'em like I see 'em" kind of guy. An extrovert for sure. My wife is a bit more shy, to say the least.  She gets mad at the few moments a week I 'waste' on Facebook (she's one of the last people I know who doesn't have an account), and would've previously killed me for taking time away from the family to Tweet, Yelp or the like. Now I have an excuse, yay!

I am a Communication Studies major at San Jose State and expect to graduate with honors in the spring of 2012. My grades mean alot to me as I feel very fortunate to have been given this opportunity to finish my education. I do have an A.A. in Communication Studies from Gavilan College in beautiful Gilroy, California. Although I was born and raised in San Jose, graduating from Oak Grove High in 1991, I love it here in Gilroy and no longer have any desire to move back. Life here is a bit slower, something I, a very fast paced and pretty much 'hyper' individual, never thought would appeal to me. But there's a small town, community feel to Gilroy where you chat with and get to know your neighbors and store owners/workers and actually care about them...I fit right in!

As an aspiring Marketing Communications Specialist, I love being a Comm. major. I was briefly an engineering major first (way to much math and science), then an advertising major throughout my lower division G.E. Then I was lucky enough to find Communication Studies. I am diligently dedicating myself this summer not only getting an 'A' in this course, but also to finding an internship that will help successfully launch me into some decent money in the world of marketing after graduation. I do have a few leads, and am extremely hopeful about only one in particular, so to anyone interested in marketing communications, feel free to ask me anything, anytime.  

I worked for almost 20 years at the former "NUMMI" plant (manufacturer of the Toyota Corolla and Tacoma) in Fremont, Ca. During that time I managed to earn my A.A. and do nothing with it, as I was working a ton and making good money at NUMMI. However, it closed last April and my wife, an L.C.S.W. and SJSU alum, is currently the 'bread-winner' as I finish my B.A. Nearly 4000 union workers got laid off when the plant closed. I understand that only 6 of us were given the okay by EDD (California's unemployment department) to "retrain" at a University rather learn to be a truck driver or a plumber or something. So as I mentioned before, I feel extremely blessed for this, my best and last chance to earn my degree, and take my studies very seriously.

As students, we are all very fortunate to be in this position, but also very busy and sometimes stressed as we struggle to juggle work, relationships, kids (for those of us lucky enough) and our coursework. So I hereby offer my help and/or advise to anyone who needs it. In regular contact with all of my instructors, I 'stay on top of it' and love to help...clarification on assignments, questions about due dates, something your too embarrassed to ask the instructor, whatever.  Note my active email account at top and please feel free to use it. With that said, it is very nice to meet you all and let's have a great summer session!