As capitalism runs its course and develops new technologies, society is left to pick up the pieces and figure out where these new technologies will lead them. Ever since I learned to use the Internet as a child, I have become accustomed to seeing more and more fascinating technology developments that have changed the way I communicated as the years went by. Now that the Internet has infiltrated more aspects of human life, it has become necessary to reflect on how this critical juncture will continue to affect our society. In Digital Disconnect, Robert McChesney provides an analysis of the arguments that the celebrants and skeptics used to express their views of the Internet. McChesney then moves past these arguments to explain how the PEC plays a key role in determining the direction that the Internet is heading towards. By assessing McChesney’s views, I hope to develop my own interpretation of the Internet’s impact on society.
As this critical juncture begins to take place, there has been much debate between scholars as to whether we should be enthusiastic or wary of these new changes. In Digital Disconnect and in his lectures, McChesney observes both views in an attempt to advance the discussion. On one side, the celebrants are embracing the Internet as a medium that will change society for the better. In Digital Disconnect, McChesney says, “In sum, the celebrants reaffirm one of the most important original arguments from the 1990s, that the Internet will be a force for democracy and good worldwide, ending monopolies of information and centralized control over communication” (McChesney 8). In my opinion, this celebrant view should only be regarded as a best-case scenario because of the unexpected obstacles for society that can...
... middle of paper ...
... using the PEC, I have been able to analyze a few problems with the Internet, and I have been able to develop an understanding of how these problems can affect our democracy. These problems include heavy commercialization, media consolidation, and a lack of a public sphere.
With an entity as vast as the Internet, it is not surprising that a variety of unanswered questions will arise. I’m positive that the Internet will continue to confound scholars as it continues to quickly evolve. By analyzing the views of the celebrants and skeptics, I have been able to understand the potential that the internet has. By using the PEC, I have been able to understand how democracy and capitalism relate to the issues of the Internet. In the future, I hope that society can develop a further understanding of the Internet and move toward the Internet that the celebrants had hoped for.
In conclusion, Carr and Gladwell’s essays have proven that the internet positive effects are outweighed by its negative effects. Carr has found he is unable to finish a full text anymore or concentrate. He thinks that the internet has taken our natural intelligence and turned it into artificial intelligence. Gladwell discusses how nowadays, social activism doesn’t have the same risk or impact as former revolutions such as the Civil Rights Movement. The internet is mostly based on weak ties based among people who do not truly know each other and would not risk their lives for their
The internet is used today for many reasons. It is a platform for people to stay in touch with others, entertain themselves and complete work tasks. In the following articles, “Internet Addiction Left my Brother Homeless” by Winston Ross and “The Pointlessness of Unplugging” by Casey N. Cep, the internet is discussed very deeply, but in two varying lights. In the article by Cep the author is writing from personal experiences and research. In the article by Ross the author is writing merely from opinions. Another major difference in the two pieces is the main idea of the articles. In Cep’s article the main idea of his work is the idea of Unplugging from the internet. In Ross’s article, rather, the main point of his work is to discuss internet
In “‘Plug In’ Better: A Manifesto”, technology writer and commentator Dr. Alexandra Samuel states that she believe that there is a middle ground between completely “plugging in” and “unplugging”. She states that we should approach our online interactions in the same ways we approach our offline ones. In “Attached to Technology and Paying a Price” (part of the New York Times’ “Your Brain on Computers” series), journalist Matt Richtel details technology’s effects on an actual family and recounts their experiences. Although Drs. Restak and Samuel are both widely respected in their individual fields, Mr. Richtel’s journalistic career has been almost exclusively devoted to studying technology’s impact on our lives and attention, and his views are voiced loudly throughout his work, even though they are not explicitly stated.
The advent of the internet signaled a revolutionary shift for society, in which participation in massive amounts of information was easily and rapidly accessible to any connected country. This digital revolution gave rise to monolithic digital communities that dominate the web and strongly influence the globe; Twitter helped Belarusian youth organize flash-protests against their authoritarian government in 2006, while Wikileaks continues to serve as a public international clearing-house for whistle-blowers. But despite these resounding stories of success, concern is spreading that there is an underlying problem with our digitally enhanced society – especially in the western world. Widespread debate has been sparked by the digital revolution over modern technology's influence on younger generations, with experts combating each other over whether the internet is dulling or expanding young minds. This debate is not restricted to education, but extends to cover issues of morality and perspectives. Education issues are tied to lacking cultural awareness and political activism, but world-views are a separate and altogether more severe problem for the next generation. As the internet becomes more embedded in our lives, youth are retreating into the isolation of private social bubbles and turning reality into a remote abstract concept. Apathetic, amoral and disconnected youth in the western world are spreading to replace the active socially charged older generations.
Internet as a medium has been a thoroughly discussed topic, especially in recent years with the rise of the World Wide Web. Analysis of relevant literature in the topic shows that the internet is not a new medium. This argument can be shown by looking more in depth into what defines a medium and what defines the internet. From that analysis by looking from a historical point of view the internet can be seen as an old medium which uses re-mediation to deliver content to users. The connection between internet and its users has helped the internet influence the way media is viewed today. Although the internet is not a new medium the content it presents is new. The advances in technology have helped the use of the internet reach new heights in terms of interest and it's capabilities are now being utilised by the masses. This rise in popularity has given the implication that the internet is new. These points can be analysed in more depth which has led me to take the stance that the internet is not a new medium.
The internet’s dominance in modern society has been increasing ever since its inception. Society today is more connected today than any other time in history, considering the invention of the smart phone, social media, and the proliferation of internet connected devices driving our ability to always be reachable (Castells). Dave Edger’s The Circle helps to illustrate aspects of our modern society, though exaggerated at points, which enables us to critically examine some aspects of the modern, internet connected society. Specifically, in The Circle there is an expectation to be “connected” to the internet in both the workplace and outside it; ultimately, this requirement leads to stress on the workers and a strain in their relationships with
The Internet’s roots can be traced back to 1962 (“Internet History” n.d.). With the Internet, people are provided with the power to search vast amounts of information and have the ability to participate and engage conversation in many forums. The Internet allows people from different cities and countries and with different backgrounds to connect and communicate in a digital world. As opposed to sitting in a room with a hardwired connection, people can now go mobile with the Internet. Laptops and smartphones allow the Internet to fit in backpacks and pockets. The question remains – does the Internet threaten democracy or help it? With information comes misinformation, and the answer isn’t simply yes or no. However, more times than not, the Internet aids democracy by creating a citizen who’s more aware of a variety of issues.
Essay #2: The People’s Platform Optimists of the technological future would say that the Internet has become a “people’s platform” – a free and open space in which anyone can do and say anything online. The rise of amateur artists, journalists, and content creators making and profiting from their work online has left many feeling hopeful and maybe a little too dependent. These “cheerleaders of progress”, or techno-optimists, hold the belief that the accessibility and ability to efficiently share information creates a connectedness that should be celebrated and results in an equal paying field. However, skeptics of the Internet (techno-skeptics) or the “prophets of doom” would argue that the interconnectedness of the Internet in our everyday
Surveying the Digital Future: How the PC and Internet are changing the world. (1999, June). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Communication Policy.
The Internet began in 1969 as a project “ARPANET” funded by the U.S. Government, since then the use of the Internet has exploded. The number of users who use the Internet has rapidly grown from 738 million in 2000 to 3.2 billion users according to a new report from the International Telecommunication Union. The Internet is constantly expanding and evolving and the use of government regulation on the internet has become a big issue. Censorship of the Internet has be suggested to prevent many things such as pornography, hateful speech, and instructions to make bombs. Censorship of this content has be justified to lead to the greater good, even if consumers are limited to the information they can find or put on the internet. The internet it a
We are at the height of the digital age, a closely integrated society where information is being commodified, and sold. This is referred to as an information economy, and it is a global epidemic that is only being made possible by our growing dependency on the Internet. The Internet has successfully woven itself into the very fabric of our society, and the implications of this integration can be taken very arbitrarily. On one end of the spectrum it is seen to be both a social, and societal detriment. While on the other, it is seen to be a necessary tool for innovation, and a medium for efficient communication. It is clear that the Internet is very much a part of our society, but what were to happen if it were to play an active role in the construction of our democracy? To understand the answer to this conundrum we must first take a look at how each side of this controversy understands the concept of democracy itself.
The Internet has become a major tool for communication and access to information for over two and half billion people (Wright 121). Although Internet has become an unavoidable reality that is consuming our planet in a web of information. This process is being shaped by our actions and choices which ultimately drives us together (Deibert 11). Nowadays China has over 538 million netizens, the world’s largest online community (Feng & Guo 335).
...our direction” (p. 163). He goes on to say that “If we’re ever to recapture these fundamental kinds of information, it’s necessary to start by remembering just how divorced from the physical world many of us have become” (p.164). These passages from the essay give the results of survey great support. As time goes on society gets further and further away from their roots. Technology is spreading all across the world. Other countries of the world are devoting just as much time to these new technological marvels as Americans do. It is my belief that before it is all said and done every person in every city across the globe will own a television, and be connected to the internet truly making it a World Wide Web.
For example, it has become a new medium for play and entertainment for children, but is this a healthy alternative to older forms of play? And what about parents who use technology just to keep their kids quite? As with all new technologies, there are pros and cons. Although, it is unfair to blame a technology because of the content people put on it. Greenfield, Patricia, and Zheng Yan put it best when they say, “Just as we cannot ask whether a knife is inherently good or bad, we cannot ask whether the Internet is good or bad; we can simply document how it is used.” So, as much as some may blame the Internet for its problems, the real war is against the substance within the Internet (Greenfield, Patricia, and Zheng Yan 390-93). And thus comes the main argument against the Internet, is the composition of the Internet harmful to
Days, months, and years go by and we do not notice them. Living in such a busy world, we are not always aware of the changes in our lives. Twenty years ago, if someone was told we would be able to buy groceries, pay our bills, buy stocks or even a car through the use of a computer, we might have laughed and blamed too much science fiction television for such wild accusations. However, as the next generation of children grows up, they may find it funny that people still send letters to each other through the post office. The development of the Internet has given us the ability to communicate and exchange information instantly across vast distances. The Internet has caused a huge impact in the communication field, and has made our way of living and working a lot easier, faster, and cheaper than before.