Final Blog Post/Presentation | My Relationship With Technology : How Online Technologies Changed Mass Communication

Mass communication is exactly what the words mean-communication to the masses. Mass communication has evolved from a more crude capability to the online format of today. Oral histories were one of the first forms of mass communications. Beginning in prehistoric times, writings were how people communicated. Communicating heritage, lore, and traditions were necessary to a society. Then printing technologies led to the development of the printing press which evolved into newspaper publications, radio, and then television. In more recent times, media has been communicated either through print (newspapers, magazines, etc) or through television, ads, and radio. When the internet was developed, new technologies were developed that allowed online communication like email. This need to know and need to share attitude led to the development of technologies that could deliver communication and information to the masses in an efficient and global way. 

Most young adults use some form of technology every single day. It is pervasive in our lives and consumes a tremendous amount of our time. Laptops, iPads, and cell phones are nothing more than travel size computers. Access to information and resources is just a click away. Growing up, my dad was always a huge Apple fan so he was always quick to have the newest gadget. Although exposed to all these technology products,  I was a little delayed and even restricted in having access to online technologies like social media apps until I was almost out of high school. I was not allowed to have Facebook or Instagram until after I was already driving and then once allowed, I had to become 'friends' with my parents, teachers, and coaches on all platforms. (My mom's way of making everyone accountable I guess). I grew up with what I believe was healthy limits. I was not allowed to have certain apps at all and had Facebook a long time before I was allowed to add Instagram. Some online technologies like blogs were popular long before I was even born. In high school, I took a writing course where we wrote using an online blog much like this platform.

Blogs are, "regularly updated website or webpage and can either be used for personal use or to fulfill a business need." (Hubspot, 2020) It allows users the ability to post content quickly. Whether that involves voicing an opinion or publishing information, the potential to reach a global audience is easy. Blogging allows you to post and create the content you want to consume and communicate. Today businesses use blogs to market to their audiences. Including a blog on a company website helps create a personal connection with customers. Commenting on posts is expected and welcomed because it has the potential to drive traffic and sales. 

Today there are blogs about a great number of topics. There are food blogs, lifestyle, travel, personal, business, news, and more. Everyone is a writer and everyone can participate in mass communication with a hit of the 'publish' button. Blogging allows us to connect with others we may have not otherwise. Access to other ideas and and endless amount of information is a real advantage. Blogging has helped promote our freedom of speech. Because people can publish anything they want, blogs allow such freedoms on a large platform where people can openly express themselves. Blogging has allowed society to stay better connected. Whether that is posting vacation photos, or family events, blogs connect people across the globe. It allows a sharing of ideas and culture that may not otherwise be easy to do. 

Blogging has opened up an entire industry where people can make a good income from posting blogs. Becoming a 'blogger' is a legitimate career path where income potential can be enormous. Bloggers make money by writing for companies, promoting products/services or from selling advertisements. Bloggers today help to build online communities, they share knowledge, and help build an online websites visibility. Blogging has the potential to reach a large audience. Blogging was the precursor to social media applications like Facebook and Twitter.

Following the blog came the introduction to social media technology. Facebook launched in 1994 by Harvard students Mark Zuckerberg. According to a recent poll, "seven-in-ten U.S. adults (69%) say they ever use Facebook." As the chart shows, no other platform outside of YouTube comes close to the number of adults using the platform. (Pew, 2021) 

Users on Facebook

With so many people using Facebook, it is not surprising the platform has certainly changed how we communicate and changed the worlds communications. The platform allows us to connect globally while sharing our ideas in a quick and efficient manner. Families in different parts of the country or world can be totally engaged in each others lives on a daily basis. No longer are the days when telephones are needed to communicate.

This form of communication provides most of us a sense of community where we share our personal lives with others. It is also a place where we gather news and information. Connecting with others can be very personal and the platform enables users to form groups so connecting with those who share similar interests or causes is easy to do. Engagement on this platform acts as a silent communicator. When we post a photo or upload a video, it is human nature to anticipate the response we may get from others. Will they like our post or comment or share an emoji with us? 

Facebook was the very first social media app I was allowed to have. I enjoyed posting photos (under strict mom guidelines) and would get so excited when my 'friend' count would increase. As ridiculous as that seems now, it mattered and I definitely took note. Questions of why someone unfriended me or how was my friend count compared to others? That was the unhealthy part of using such technologies and as we all know, those 'friends' aren't all friends. I can't imagine being a young teenager today given all the social media technologies available. 

After the creation of Facebook, another social media platform was established. Twitter was founded by Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams, Biz Stone, and others as a microblogging site. A Pew Research study done in 2020 showed that 23% (one-in-five) of U.S. adults were active on the platform. Users on this platform can learn about what is going on with the biggest news events today. Twitter allows users to follow and engage with celebrities and political figures. Because the content is limited to a lower character count, the platform is quick and easy to skim. The famous hashtag (#) was born in 2009 when Twitter formally adopted the hashtag. The creation and use of the hashtag added to how we communicate by creating hyperlinks to additional information. Want to promote a cause? Just use the # symbol and attach the name of your cause for the most up to date news and information. 

Companies use Twitter to promote their business and to connect with their audiences. Used as a marketing tool, Twitter can help a business grow their follower base. The platform allows for 'likes' or 'retweets' of posts. This type of engagement and re-sharing of information helps to put that information in front of a larger audience. Because information on Twitter is done in a more conversational format, the networking possibilities are endless. Building a brand, connecting with customers, and getting your message to the masses has been made easier and more efficient because of this platform. 

Earlier this year a poll was produced by Pew Research that examined trends in tweeting? I found this report surprising because over a three month examination period, it was determined that one quarter of Twitter users are producing the vast majority of all tweets. Of all the adult users on the platform only "the top 25% users by tweet volume produce 97% of all tweets." (Pew, 2022) I have to ask myself what are the ramifications of this? Are a select few controlling what information is consuming our Twitter feeds and if so, what relationship does this have to mass communication? Does the minority comprise the majority of what information is communicated? All questions we should consider when jumping on the bandwagon of the various social media platforms. 

When I created my Twitter account I didn't even have a need for the account but opened it because my friends had one. Today, I feel like there are so many technologies available and we feel inclined to have them even if we don't use them. I am certainly guilty of this. I have apps that I never use but feel this almost psychological pull that I can't get rid of the app because what if? What if I need it or someone needs to contact me using the app? Is this unhealthy? Yes! These technologies hold power over us, they make us 'fit in', they make us feel included, current, and connected. That human need for connection is very powerful. Whether that is in-person connections or online connections, the psychology is the same.

Blogging, Facebook, and Twitter have all brought many advantages to our daily communications. With faster access, instantaneous reach across the globe, and potential exposure and reach to millions of people who we would not otherwise have connections with have made our lives richer. Online technologies have simultaneously changed how we communicate and even the language we use to do so.

Communication is now shorter (due to character counts), is more targeted, and filled with symbols (👍😍💜🙏😡🎄) like the thumbs up, heart, or smiley face that convey certain emotions. Today our written language consists of such symbols. Lazy? Perhaps but they make communicating quick and easy. When platforms like blogging, Facebook, and Twitter are used with integrity and for the good, they offer a voice to the voiceless, a sharing of ideas and cultures, connections with past friends, and a way to maintain the relationships we value most. We can promote our new business ventures, make announcements, voice our political support/opposition, join a cause, advertise, market, find a significant other, explore travel options, shop for goods/services, form groups, and document our lives by a simple click. Today, the world of mass communication is more efficient but with this efficiency comes real life problems. 

There is a price for that efficiency. The price comes with privacy issues, cyberbullying, exposure to inappropriate content, only receiving half the story, content control, it is addictive, effects on mental wellness, effects on literacy skills, isolation, and the list goes on. Life as we know it is unimaginable without mass communication. There is no shortage of ways for us to communicate today and do so in an instant. These mass communication resources have changed how we think, how we interact, and even the written language we use today. We should not underestimate the power that new technologies have over us and should use these resources in an informed way.  

Like most young adults, the bulk of my online presence is on Instagram and Tik Tok. I think I probably spend too much of my valuable and very limited free time on these technologies but probably still less than most students my age. As a competitive rower the last eight years, I don't have a lot of free time. Being on the water four hours every day doesn't provide a huge amount of time for me to be online and for that I am thankful.

As seen in the infographic below, the evolution of mass communication has undergone significant change. People have long had a desire and need to stay connected and mass communication has allowed that. Today, online platforms like blogging, Facebook, and Twitter are allowing those connections in a far more efficient and grandiose way. With the ability to reach millions of people, the power to communicate information, ideas, and news are endless.

INFOGRAPHIC OUTLINING MASS COMMUNICATION THROUGHOUT HISTORY

History of Mass Communication

Group 3 | Disinformation Presentation

In this weeks group presentations, group one's topic was Awareness. The presentation I enjoyed the most was about disinformation. This particular topic resonates with me because I believe it is a pervasive problem. Disinformation is described as, "false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth." (Merriam-Webster 2022) I believe disinformation is a threat to democracy. 

The presentation discussed how disinformation is misleading and filled with biased information. This problem exists in part because of social media and it's quick and efficient access to spread misleading information or outright lies. 

Disinformation is spread in a variety of ways. The presenter discussed a few of those formats. One such format was through propaganda. I learned that propaganda (the attempt to persuade an audience toward a specific idea) was popular during World War II. Listen to any politician and you will often hear them present the opposing parties views in a negative way. This is commonplace today and although we recognize it, it still sends a strong message that is often believable; especially when it is your own party participating in the cause.

Another form of disinformation is done through name calling. This concept is used by the propagandist. This strategy is effective in the spread of misleading information because a person can be linked to a negative idea. Examples would be if someone called you 'racist' or 'fascist.' This causes resentment in the larger audience and fulfills the original agenda set by the propagandist.

Glittering generalities is used to spread untruths. Using words or phrases that stand out to the audience can be an effective strategy. This works sort of reverse where bad ideas are presented as good. Words can mean different things to different people. When you look at words like, 'justice', 'hero', 'democracy', those words can mean very different things to every person. The goal of this strategy is to influence the audience to be in favor of the idea. There is nothing factual about it and instead relies on vagaries or emotions. 

Transfer is a technique is used when we associate ourselves or a group to be an integral part of a larger cause. The association of one to another is a very powerful tool that is often used to spread disinformation. 

When someones name is offered up and we see that person as a knowledgeable or as a distinguished expert, that testimonial can be used in a negative way. This is often seen when celebrities endorse or reject an idea, product, political leader, etc. This is very powerful because it relies on the prestige of the celebrity and takes away all critical thinking or need to look at the facts. Turn on the news any night of the week and you will see this playing out. 

The Plain Folk strategy attempts to solidify all of us into one boat. Any time someone starts a sentence with, 'Most Americans...,' you should beware. The presenter spoke about how this is used extensively by politicians when they claim they are the exact same as us. Every political campaign uses this strategy to create the idea that there is a relationship, therefore we should side/believe with them. 

The last concept discussed was Bandwagon. This is a common propaganda technique that the propagandist uses to try to rush us into thinking as they do or else we may miss out. This certainly makes me think of a shady salesman and is used in advertising. You have definitely seen it before. The 'Act Now' statements make us want to rush out and act immediately and act without thinking. We are pushed into acting because other people are doing it and so should you. 

The world we live in today is filled with practices that employ all these techniques. This is exactly why the spread of disinformation occurs. Entire campaigns consist of strategizing and employing these exact propaganda techniques in order to win us over. This type of information is misleading and relies on appealing to our human emotions. It is a form of manipulation that can be used for harm and the news media is but one source that has perfected it.

 

EOTO: MSM | Mainstream Media

Today we live in a world that is saturated with numerous ways to reach people. MSN or mainstream media is the major source of communication and describes large mass news sources found in print, TV, radio, but also news on the internet, podcasts, film, satellite radio, and social media. These media outlets are owned by a small number of conglomerates like Disney, At&T, CBS, Comcast, Newscorp, and Viacom. The delivery of the news was once contained to either print, television, or radio but today the internets sophisticated technology allows for multiple news outlets, each with their own agenda, audience, confirmation bias, and slant. A recent report stated that, "the idea is that when six corporations, whose primary motivations are to ultimately profit as much as possible, are in charge of what we consume, the narratives do not challenge the status quo in the ways that could inspire large-scale change." (Pathfinder, 2022) Like most things in life, there are both good and bad implications to mainstream media. 

Mainstream media comes with many positive benefits. Mainstream media outlets help to keep us connected. Before such conveniences, knowing what happened in the other part of the world was impossible. For example, today we can find out about major weather events taking place thousands of miles away. This type of connectivity is very convenient and certainly makes our transmission of knowledge and information instant. MSM is also good for business. Marketing and advertising has helped to make business easier for communicating with customers. MSM is also beneficial in educating us about other cultures. The internet allows for instant discovery of new places all around the world. Mainstream media also provides a voice for those who can teach and inform who otherwise may not have such an opportunity.

Mainstream media influences every single person on the planet and every society that has access to it. If you look at television alone, you will find the wealthiest and poorest among us all have televisions. Programming is aimed at all ages, backgrounds, and socioeconomic status. The negatives of mainstream media do exist and one of the biggest problems is that great influence exists for those in power. Celebrities, large corporations and those in positions of leadership control what media is transmitted to us. No surprise that MSM can also be used to spread hate and disinformation. What greater resource to spread lies and promote propaganda than through mainstream media. I believe one of the biggest problems is that with all the mainstream media outlets, we are being bombarded with round the clock access. When our focus is on non stop media then we are no longer engaging in personal connections. The next time you are at dinner, stop and look around at how many people are on their phones. Mainstream media is right at your fingertips and this instant access allows for instant influence-whether good or bad. Television alone reaches millions of people. With younger adults being the target audience for television programming, marketing products and ideas can be very powerful. 

Trust in our news sources is at an all time low. In a research study conducted by Pew Research, "Fewer than half of U.S. adults (45%) say the public has at least a “fair amount” of confidence in journalists, including a mere 6% who think Americans trust the media “a great deal.” A slim majority says the public has either “not too much” confidence (43%) or no confidence at all (11%) in the news media." (Pew, 2020) The study went on to indicate that overall Americans feel more negative about the news media's role in society. 

The amount of media available and the mass consumption rates of people in the United States has grown exponentially but trust in the media has been on a gradual decline since the 1970's. In a Gallup survey done during the pandemic year of 2020, distrust in mass media was extremely high with three key findings:

1. 9% in US trust mass media "a great deal" and 31% "a fair amount"
2. 27% have "not very much" trust and 33% "none at all"
3. The percentage with no trust at all is a record high, up five points since 2019.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx

Mainstream media can affect different segments of the population differently. When looking at male versus female segments, women are disproportionately represented. Women are less likely to be seen in mainstream media. Women are less likely to be featured as experts in news stories, less likely to be a reporter and under represented as serious characters in children's film. These truths create harmful stereotypes. 

Age is yet another factor to consider. Children spend an enormous amount of time in front of the television and it has the ability to either help (as in educational opportunities) or harm (as in being exposed to content that is not age appropriate). Teenagers are also affected both positively and negatively. The positive aspects are improved reading skills and motor skills but the negative aspects are risk of increased obesity (from non-activity), being exposed to violence on TV, or depressive episodes due to anxiety over things like exaggerated body image or targeted narratives that only tells half truths.

When looking at those of wealth versus those without, mainstream media may affect these two segments differently. Those with wealth would naturally have more access to additional media outlets like film, newspapers, magazines, or satellite radio than those who may not be able to financially afford resources like satellite radio. Access to these types of mainstream media allows those with greater incomes, greater resources for information. This disparity to access has a negative affect on those in the lower income levels because their information and access is limited.  

When examining how mainstream mass media may affect those who are gay or straight, various outlets serve in the role to inform, advocate, and transform public opinion. In a recent article titled, LGBTQ Politics in Media and Culture, it was noted that media sources like newspapers, network and cable television, were the primary outlets that informed the mass public whereas the entertainment media like television and film help to "cultivate our culture's shared values and ideas, which infuse into the public's political beliefs and attitudes." (Oxford, 2020)

My own mainstream media access is tremendous. Living in a time and in a world where connecting globally is a real possibility, there is no shortage of input from such sources. I think I probably have all forms of access. Mainstream media affects our daily life, the choices we make, the political views we hold, how we vote, what our mental health is like, or how we feel about ourselves. There are other issues for my generation that should be considered. Time management is often lost because of the access we all have to mass media. Checking our phones or online news several times a day takes away from our productivity at school and work and not to mention our lack of relationship building. The spread of untruths largely stems from sources in the mass media through disinformation and misinformation. My generation is especially susceptible to it because our belief systems are still maturing.

Because of such influences, both positive and negative, it is crucial for my generation to thoroughly investigate all information and not take the easy route of believing everything we hear/see. For me, I believe it is all about taking responsibility and accountability and to stop being sheep. Parents taking responsibility for how many hours their children are in front of screens, voters are responsible for holding their elected accountable, and citizens are responsible for holding mainstream media outlets accountable for the stories they report and for what narrative they choose to uphold.  
 

{Extra} MSM During the Pandemic | Narrative & Accountability

In preparation for an upcoming assignment, I investigated what mainstream media (MSM) was this past week. Mainstream media is the major source of communication and describes large mass news sources found in print, TV, radio, but also news on the internet, podcasts, film, satellite radio, and social media. Mainstream media has both positive and negative affects on us but in the last few years, I believe the negative aspects far outweigh the positive. 

I believe there are many positive aspects to mainstream media and mostly because it does provide fast and easy access to information. But I believe this information comes at a huge cost and it was back during the pandemic of 2020 that these truths became apparent to me. As a graduating senior who was forced into lockdowns and mask wearing the last three months of high school, I had way too much time to watch the nightly news broadcast. Life forever changed during that time. I began keeping a video log of sorts and would snap a photo each night when Fox News would announce what day of lockdown we were on. Day 18 led to day 43 and eventually school was completely cancelled. Every report on every news channel was reported with fear and the unknown. It made no difference if you were tuned into CNN or FOX, every broadcasted news conference told the same story that we should be aware, we should stay home, we should distance, and we needed to trust those making the recommendations. It was that 5 letter word that is the problem ~ TRUST.

For months I did not see my grandfather for fear of spreading the virus. For months my only outlet was taking hikes in local parks with my parents, working out, and doing everything through zoom. For months you could not see a dentist, go to a nail salon, go out to eat, travel by plane, or even schedule a vacation. Businesses closed down, people lost their jobs, and the world began to feel very small. As a graduating senior who had no graduation at all, no huge party, and no senior trip, the effects were real. Second only to my devastating medical diagnosis a year earlier, the lockdowns took a toll on me and on everyone across the world. 

How much blame should be assigned to mainstream media for their part in all the drama that played out that year? Entire school systems shut down even though there was no medical reason to do so since young children were not major spreaders of the virus. The narrative then was that schools should remain closed. After a while parents began to openly speak out at school board meetings. Often parents who spoke their opinion were either removed or arrested. Why? Why would local school board meetings react so violently to someone expressing their opinion? People were singled out if they were not in support of mask mandates or if they spoke out against those in power. 

It was mainstream media sources that refused to listen to medical advice from professionals who spoke out against the agenda and narrative that was being promoted by those in charge. How many decisions were made during this time that centered around what those in leadership wanted versus what was truly good for the people? And if that isn't bad enough, that the most powerful people in the world (our elected officials) pushed such a narrative, the worse reality is that it was done so by mainstream media. Mainstream media was the deliverer of the information. I believe had media sources done their job and investigated, asked the obvious questions, and pushed for the government to listen to the medical opinions of those who understood the virus, our country and the world over would not have suffered. Why didn't the media hold those in power accountable? 

Now two years later, research is showing the decision to keep children home has had some devastating setbacks. Not only were kids behind in reading and math skills but unfortunately some have experienced social delays. Did we as a society not learn anything from those mandates, closures, and decisions? The media needs to hold those with power, those who make decisions over the lives of the people they are supposed to serve, to a higher standard. More importantly, mainstream media needs to hold themselves to a higher standard by reporting the whole story, the entire truth, and asking the tough questions.

Privacy | Online and Off

Sarah E Harvey

It was about seven years ago that I first realized that photos other people take of you can end up on the internet. Growing up, my family would occasionally have photos done by professional photographers. When I was thirteen years old, I had some photos done and a couple years later I found images of my photo shoot plastered on the internet. Do a quick google search of Sarah E Harvey and click on images, and you will see some of those photos of me as well as a high school photo and writeup that was done by a local news channel in 2020. 

Privacy is an illusion. I firmly believe that and after watching multiple Ted talk discussions, I am even more shocked to learn how privacy may becoming a thing of the past. I especially loved the talk given by
Juan Enriquez where he described our digital online life like a tattoo. He explains that tattoos tell a story. Whether that story is something serious, funny, beautiful, or even a mistake, a tattoo is permanant. Our digital tattoos also tell a story which can also be good or bad and can be used either for or against us. What if we make a mistake in life or do something to embarrass ourselves or our family and that information gets put into the digital world for all to see? 

We already know that surveillance exists. GPS, facial recognition, credit scores, reviews we write, cookies on our computers, and our online posting behaviors are among some of the more well known technologies. But what about the automatic license plate readers that are readily available on police vehicles. Such devices are able to record license plates, who is driving a vehicle, and who the passengers are. This means every time an officer drives by our homes or passes us on the road that we become part of a permanent record of sorts. In the Ted talk given by Catherine Crump, an American law professor, I learned that the federal government is soliciting mass amounts of data from police stations across the nation. It doesn't seem to matter if the data is linked to a wrongdoer or someone who is completely innocent. The data collected is made available on each and every one of us. My thoughts go to the 'what if's.' What if such surveillance has you near the scene of a crime? What if you had done nothing wrong but because your license plate or your face was recorded harm could come to you. 

Now think about your phone. Most of us cannot live without it. We don't leave home without it, we keep it in our presence all the time. It is there beside us while we sleep, when we go on vacation, and when we have what we think are private conversations. According to the Ted talk given by Christopher Soghoian, telephone companies have long been tapping telephone lines. Telephone surveillance is actually built right into the networks making surveillance part of their plan. This creates an open door for hackers and anyone else wanting to do harm to come right inside. This talk spoke about the cost we pay for such surveillance under the guise of things like national security. Compromises in security and privacy happen all the time. People's personal credit is hacked allowing identity theft. Entire governments can be hacked by people wanting to shut down major systems and to cause interruptioins. One point Soghoian makes is that the change that is needed will cause institutions like law enforcement to expend more efforts in doing their jobs.

Cyber crime and cyberbulling is a real thing where terrible things can happen to individuals whose privacy is invaded. Ted talk speaker, Darieth Chisolm, found out the hard way when compromising photos appeared on the internet after a difficult breakup with an ex boyfriend. Lack of legislation and laws do not make prosecution or remedies to situations like these easy to fix. Like most prosecutions, there are loopholes and gray areas that make justice impossible for most people. In Chisolms' case, her pursuit and fight did eventually lead to the prosecution of the offender and Chisolm now uses her platform to inform others about this type of abuse. Her case was the very first international case recognizing this type of crime. She advocates for stronger social responsibility in posting, more stringent enforcement of laws, and accountability for online companies. Her movement is called, 50 Shades of Silence, and has become a global movement giving voice to victims of cyber harassment and online crimes. 

Andy Yen, founder of a company called Proton, recognizes the need for a complete overhaul of the internet. Although the internet has certainly made life easier, it has also come with some negative things like data collection. When thinking just about emails, which we assume are strictly between the party sending the email and the one receiving it, we assume that communication is private and for our eyes only. That is far from the truth because of private and public keys that exist on servers and our computers. Yen's company has developed an email system where both the private and public keys are only held by the parties involved in the email. Companies are not interested in securing our data through email encryption because that would reduce their revenues. Optimized ads need to know all about us. Advertising generates revenue and since invading our privacy is key to that formula, companies are not on board with changing how secure our emails are. 

The scariest Ted talk discussion was led by Finn Lutzow Holm Myrstad regarding a child's toy called the Kayla doll. Introduced to children, the doll connects to the internet making it possible to interact with the child. What researchers found was that anyone with a smart phone could connect with the doll and have complete conversations with the child. This was a major security flaw and terrifying. The doll was banned but this leads me to wonder about smart thermostats and speakers we have in our homes. Are those also subject to anyone being able to hack in and listen to our private conversations? The doll used an app like so many technology products today. Apps always require those irritating terms of use protocols. I am definitely guilty of just accepting without reading one single word. 

Dating apps work in the same way. Sign up with an account, agree to the terms, and off you go. What research has shown is that some apps are having you agree to allowing the app to use your personal photos and allowing it forever with the inability to change your mind. You may ask yourself what is the harm? Think about the possibility that because your online personal Information is found on the internet that you could be discriminated against, suffer a financial loss, not get a job, or be called out on something that was posted ten years earlier. That is the reality of posting personal information and agreeing to terms of use without being informed. 

The need for safer internet usage where our rights to privacy are respected, is needed. Enforcement and laws need to be in place to help protect those rights. We are all subject to this loss of privacy. Data has already been collected on all of us. It is going to be held in storage forever. Our personal data will outlive us. This is a serious issue because there is something very sacred about privacy. Our online privacy is just as important as our physical privacy. We don't walk around naked nor do we choose to share our private thoughts so why would we want our personal information (photos, videos, location, emails, etc) to be shared with total strangers? 

The government is supposed to protect us and to defend our civil liberties. Is the government compromised? Are they beholding to big lobbyists and companies who want our information in order to make a buck? It seems their priorities are a little twisted and their loyalties are misplaced. I don't know what we can do to protect ourselves. I believe some of the technologies that exist are so obscure that we don't even know they are there. Certainly a starting point is to educate ourselves about the realities of the world we live in. We should definitely be conscious of the personal information we willingly put on social media and we should also assume someone is always watching. 

{Extra} China Shutdown Horrors

The topics we have discussed in my media law class has me taking notice of things I hear on the news and see on social media. Last night on the Tucker Carlson show, there was a great deal of talk about the covid shutdowns taking place in China. The people of China are protesting against the covid policies involving testing and lockdown procedures.  The people are calling for the removal of President Xi Jinping which speaks volumes. This comes after residents died after being locked inside a building that caught fire. Law enforcement in Shanghai has even gone as far as to enclose complete areas of the city using spiked fencing to prevent people from leaving. Temporary shelter areas are being constructed across several cities which look a lot like modern day concentration camps. 

John Ratcliffe, the former director of National Intelligence spoke about China being a complete surveillance state with little to no regard for the rights of citizens. Building massive quarantine camps, separating people and making them sleep in public bathrooms, separating children from their families is just some of what is going on. In the city of Shanghai some 25 million people were held up in their homes for  months. Suffering from shortage of food the lockdowns took their toll and the people understandably are beginning to break their silence. 

In my opinion, the lockdowns experienced here in the United States were a bit much. Closing businesses and schools, recommending people stay home and avoid one another, mandated mask wearing, and of course all the misinformation that was fed to the American public about the virus.

Apparently the Chinese government has taken over all social media so to censor what information people are receiving and having access to. A recent BBC report stated how, "Tens of millions of posts have been filtered from search results, while media are muting their coverage of Covid in favour of upbeat stories about the World Cup and China's space achievements." (BBC, 2022) 

Unbelievably, people here in the United States, like Dr. Fauci, famous celebrities and even people within our own government are not speaking out against the Chinese leader for what is going on in China. How is that even possible and what am I missing? Isn't China somewhat of a dictatorship that suppresses free speech? And doesn't China really dislike the United States and especially dislike the idea of a democracy? If this is so, how does our own government turn a blind eye to the horrors taking place in China? Wake up people!

 

 

 

Living in the Age of AI

Artificial intelligence (AI) is defined as,"the ability of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot to perform tasks commonly associated with intelligent beings. The term is frequently applied to the project of developing systems endowed with the intellectual processes characteristic of humans, such as the ability to reason, discover meaning, generalize, or learn from past experience." (Britannica, 2022) 

I for one take for granted the ease and commonplace of computers and their technologies are in our lives. Growing up in a time of convenience, where speakers in your home and car can answer questions, give information, and even set reminders, it is easy to understand all the positive aspects these technologies offer. Many of these make life easier and more efficient. But with such efficiencies come concerns. 

In the documentary, In the Age of AI, seen on Frontline PBS, the advantages and disadvantages  in changes AI brings is discussed. We know such intelligence brings faster, more efficient technologies and in this day in time when everyone wants information now, AI technologies play a huge role. I will begin by addressing key questions for consideration.

What are positive aspects of more and more complex artificial intelligence and machine learning? The positive aspects are that tasks that once took more time to complete can now be done instantly. Information that once took time to research is now available by voice commands. Want to know what the weather is two states over? No problem, just ask Siri. 

What did I learn after watching the documentary? I learned more than I really wanted to know or wanted to acknowledge because it really is disturbing. Technologies that we now enjoy in our cars, at home, and on our devices have made life easier in many regards but there is certainly a price to pay for this convenience. The documentary perfectly explained how such automation depletes jobs because machines can do the same work faster and without human intervention. This takes away jobs and opportunities from people. Unable to support their families and devoid of having a meaningful career some people could suffer from psychological problems like depression. People need a purpose and 'work' is one way purpose is given. Rise in unemployment occurs and especially within sectors that are predominately performed by women. This causes further inequality for an already marginalized group. There is no sector safe from this form of takeover.

With the replacement of jobs as we already see in automobile factories for example, comes a bigger moral issue. The film mentioned that AI is what drives inequality because it is a form of automation which is a substitution for capital for labor. Those at the top stay there while those at the bottom (our factory workers who are replaced) are now not able to compete and maintain employment resulting in decline in income. Does the convenience of all this automation come with a price? I believe the price is human existence. If you remove people from the equation, take away their jobs, take away their purpose, then we are left with a society operated by machines that are controlled by the elite. This doesn't sound much like a democracy does it?

There is no doubt that with any advancement there will be positive and negative outcomes. AI brings about significant good but if not kept in check or if used in the wrong way, it can be extremely dangerous. The film discusses the race between the two AI super powers China and the United States. The President Xi Jinping, of China is fully embracing technology to lead China into the forefront globally. As the two superpowers diverge in their goals and ideas and especially since the trade wars have created animosity and don't promote a sharing of any ideas, then our nation may be headed into greater tensions with China and possibly other rival nations like Russia. 

Author, Kai-Fu-Lee of the book, AI Superpowers China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order, What I found surprising is that Lee believes AI has a lot of potential for fully liberating us from routine jobs and will encourage thinking in the next twenty years or worst case AI will be used for evil purposes by those in positions of authority. In the case of China where their own President was willing to re-write their own constitution for the purposes of making himself President for life. If a leader of a nation is willing to do that, you must ask yourself what else they may be willing to do? Is AI more suited for an authoritarian country than a democracy? 

I find it extremely frightening that such intelligence could end up in the wrong hands. In the hands of a country like China or Russia who may not place as much value on human life. The film discussed how in 2009, in the capital city the Urumqui riots occurred resulting in deaths, imprisonments, and even torture of its own people. China increased its AI surveillance of citizens under the guise of protecting the country from unrest and serving as a predictor of such behavior. Today there are barcodes on homes, and cameras on every corner. Companies like Megvii produce software technologies that have facial recognition capabilities, track automobiles, and even know who someone is by how they walk. This certainly brings up major privacy issues.

So what about privacy and are their pros and cons? I believe privacy is one of the biggest issues  that we should be concerned about. The mega technology companies like Google, Apple, Facebook, ATT, and Comcast can collect data about us. These companies collect data like what our preferences are, where we vacation, what we purchase, who we are friends with, what our routines are, and more. Are the smart appliances we purchase a good idea? Are listening devices truly helping us? When we use social media apps, our location and preferences are being tracked so that suggestions can be made but do we really benefit from such an interjection of suggestions? I know that the companies benefit but how much do humans actually benefit and is it taking away our own ability to seek out our own desires?

I believe our government would state that AI promotes our national security but does it? The benefits could include superior technologies that could save lives. For example being able to predict mechanical failures in weapon platforms is a positive outcome of AI technologies. The downside could be a breach of security within such platforms that could be used against us. Hackers are prevalent and are always looking for areas of vulnerability that could be used to their benefit. As more and more data is gathered, the potential  for a problem is high. Risk of identity theft, fraud, account hacking, interruptions in services like power or water are real considerations. Although companies can better detect potential threats, it is the online cyber criminals (both domestic and foreign) that continue to develop more and more sophisticated technologies of their own. Unless there is a tight leash on the data, we as individuals and nation will be compromised. There are always going to be those who wish to do harm and getting ahead of such risk is necessary this day in time. 

In a recent research poll conducted by Pew Research looked at how Americans view global threats. In the chart below, the findings indicate that Americans are concerned about how infectious diseases are spread, how our relationship with Russia is and certainly growing concerns over the China/Russia relationship. The bulk of respondents definitely felt that cyberattacks from other countries were a major threat to the United States proving that the awareness of such threats is a real concern.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/06/06/americans-see-different-global-threats-facing-the-country-now-than-in-march-2020/

The biggest takeaway for me is that with such advances in technologies comes risk and those risks must be weighed for how much benefit they bring versus how much potential problem. Like most things in life, if there are not rules and regulations governing those technologies, it is only a matter of time before we could fall victim to those who wish to bring harm both on our home turf and abroad. Yes our privacy is under attack and our freedom of expression as well. If you look at China and how they are currently treating their citizens and how very little care is taken to ensure the protection of their human rights, we should be very alarmed and mindful of these realities.