"Keeping it Legal"

From Dispatches.

Again, I reference my project with the topic of this chapter. This chapter explains the situations in which one can commit plagerism, as well as describing the line between "intellectual property" and "fair use" as well as other legal aspects of journalism. Perez Hilton was sued in the beginning of 2008 for copyright infringement by Sony/BMG for posting the newest Britney Spears track. By reading this chapter, it seems as though Perez could have been sued for "market potential," "commercial use," as well as plain-old copyright infringement. The song, which had not been released, was leaked to Perez. However, probably mostly because Perez boycotted all of Sony/BMG's artists, Sony/BMG dropped the suit without any penalty to Hilton. While he argued that he complied with FCC standards and removed to song after receiving a warning, the case never went to court.

"Promoting Your Blog"

From the essay in Dispatches.

This essay actually relates to my research topic, since I'm looking at celebrity gossip blogs. The first things I notice in Dispatches is something I have observed by following Perez Hilton: a well-promoted site updates frequently, has quality material, and, because of it's reputation for speed and quality, gets linked to by other blogs and sites. This is undoubtedly why Perez Hilton is so popular: his business embodies all of these qualities, and combats the #1 problem with having a successful blog-- getting noticed. Fortunately for Hilton, celebrity blogging is a popular topic for people to follow, unlike the "niche" topics described in Dispatches. Another aspect I recognize is the power of "keywords" so that people notice and search engines pick up these different or strange classifications. Hilton's site offers "Music Minute" for music updates, "Photoshop Awards" for celebrities on magazines or promotional ads, "Icky Icky Poo" for subjects that aren't socially acceptable for most people, "Anglophilia" for posts on British celebrities, and so on.

Social Networks on the Rise

I think what is most interesting about “Social Networks on the Rise” is the acknowledgment of collective wisdom. The most important innovation that the Web has brought is the place where those who are curious can find an answer, while those who have answers to some questions—and the way the web works, that question-pool is limitless—can add their input. This chapter mentions wikis as a social network—interestingly enough, while Wikipedia (-media, etc.) acts as an encyclopedia, it’s generated by individuals who has specific information (and, hopefully, supported by the checks and balances system that other users offer). I’ve contributed to Wikipedia, before they put the limits on submissions, and so has my boyfriend, who is a shy expert in music theory and Japanese video game soundtracks. As there will always be strange and, what were previously unanswerable, questions, social networks offer more than traditional methods can—even if, sometimes, a teenager looking to prank a rival high school messes up the information (and, yes, this did happen at my high school). If news and information is free-flowing, education is limitless.

Researching the Internet Experience

I read the appendix in Online about the research of the individual's experience with the internet. One of the introductory points caught my eye: that internet exploration is done by people from all backgrounds. Everyone is interested in just how people respond and use the internet. As one of my professors said today, there isn't a lot of studies on people and the internet-- whether it be about responses, reactions, usability, etc. It's interesting that such a widespread tool isn't over-researched, let alone barely researched. The article goes on to mention the different topics for research, including technological aspects (software, etc., and how we use them) and the social aspects. The last part seems useless for us, because it has to do with the ethics of researching-- isn't that something for marketing or journalism? But, I suppose, there will be some use for it; ethics are in every situation, especially when polling others.

"Blogs as Soapboxes"

In "Blogs as Soapboxes," Stefanac talks about the role of pundits in media and the blog world as well as their importance. Bloggers who freely write biased politics-- the opinion-based approach-- act as examples of their parties or lack thereof. An Libertarian will write about how crazy the two-party system is, a Democrat will write about whatever the Republicans are up to, and the Republican will write about whatever the Democrats are up to (of course, all three groups-- and the rest of bloggers who have different parties-- will speak of more than my example gives). In a way, these bloggers give American citizens and political figures/observers an idea of how the major parties are feeling about a certain person or situation or law (so on and so forth). These bloggers are vitally important for the transfer of opinions, where the goal is for universal knowledge. All McCain has to do to find out about the public's-- or a party's-- opinion of Sarah Palin is to type her name into any blog database. Pundits typically are at the extreme end of their party's beliefs, so blogging pundits are useful to guage the general opinion of political current events. I think that this is a very useful aspect of blogging, as most people can find time to read a blog before they tune into CNN or FOX News for an anchor's opinion.

Wagner

I had a difficult time reading Wagner's essay. As it was written in the 19th century, it does not follow modern standards of grammar: thus, several topics, definitions, and thoughts were long-winded, wordy, and flowing, without a discernable stop, into the next idea. However, I think that the most important part of this essay is that Wagner asserts that man is the primary perceptor of nature-- that is, man is able to see nature as a whole and can interpret it. This ability allowed humans, historically, to perform an interpretation of nature and the animals that surround it. From the perspective of our class' subject, blog writing, it possibly could be asserted that Wagner's essay alludes to the role of truth or mistruth in performance-- to a blog writer, that performance would be a blog, and he can choose how to perform his interpretation. This aspect of human nature can lead to a full spectrum of opinions, interpretations, and information: the soul of blog-writing. My interpretation could be completly wrong, but, as I said, Wagner's essay was a little over my head.

In my writing experience, I pretty much have always used a computer. Of course, I have lived in a time when the average person didn’t have any access to a computer, so I remember life without them—my first story was written on Post-Its (I was five). Since my mother has been involved with computers since 1974 (she programmed and controlled the attendance program for her high school), I’ve naturally been very adept with computers, due, simply, to exposure: she made sure my siblings and I had access to one as soon as we were old enough to learn.

Now, it has become so ingrained in me to write at the computer that it has actually become an issue for me to write on paper. Just last week, we had a practice essay-test in my film class, and the paper worked out fine—with a ton of cross-outs and scribbles. After getting really frustrated with myself—blaming my inability to write a coherent thought on not writing at all over the summer—I realized that I was so used to being able to having the freedom of a word processor. When writing on the computer, users have the option to write whatever they want: if it doesn’t work for the document, just delete it and rephrase (or copy and move). On paper, this method is not so practical.

My word processor of choice is Word. I shouldn’t say that this is a choice, because I’ve tried to switch to other programs and just can’t shake my slave-bond to Microsoft. I use it for every type of writing I do: essays, poems, stories, blog-writing, etc. It has come to be that I rely on Word to get my ideas out. While it is true that hand-writing ideas and essays takes entirely too long, that isn’t the reason for my junkie-like tie to Word. I see the empty document on screen and just start typing; after a while, I usually get my ideas out just by expressing my thoughts on-screen and then I organize.

However, I think the whole system is the reason I choose to write in Word: not only physically, such as using the keyboard, but I can also tap into any resource I want to help me formulate my ideas (Encarta, past papers, the Internet). Word pleases my stylistic needs, copies and pastes, corrects my spelling, and helps me put out an organized paper (this one excluded, as it seems to be more informal). Without Word, I don’t know if I would have chosen to be an English major; I like the idea of spending my workdays typing at a computer—it’s an individual activity, expressive, and includes a variety of projects to produce. Suffice to say, after this rambling narrative, that I love writing, but only on the condition that I can do it in Word.