Mobile Journalism

Story telling is something that we as humans have been doing since our existence and will continue to do as time carries on. The central idea behind storytelling is still present but the way in which we report news is ever evolving. Old legends told over campfires turned to public broadcasts of interviews. More recently telling a story to millions has been simplified to pulling out your phone and recording yourself. What comes with mobile journalism in addition to efficiency is mobility. Given these mobile journalists are utilizing platforms such as twitter and facebook to get there message out, the tap of their thumb has the power to inform the whole world about anything. Unfortunately this strength and potential for influence can be a weakness in the wrong hands. For example anybody can become twitter famous and people become famous for doing rather dumb things. The fact that they are “twitter famous”, though, means that they have a collective of individuals listening to whatever deranged stories they decide to tell. Same could potentially hold true for journalists, anybody can buy a tripod and everybody has access to an iphone. With that being said we can rely on the validity of the news source they are reporting for and weed out amateurs if you will. I think this new direction that journalism is heading is great because of the increased accessibility it grants people. In class someone mentioned how bulky and hard a camera is to get around but an iphone goes and sees everything we do and is no bigger than the palm of your hand. Such versatility has granted reporters the ability to share things and events that restrict camera’s and tv. I do think that a regulation with mobile journalism will come eventually but by then I’m confident there will be a simpler more effective type of journalism.

No surveillance


imgres-7I think the most threatening aspect of social networks is being overshadowed by cyber bullying and false news. We live in a crazy time with crazy values, especially when people would rather protect there feelings and flow of news than there identity and privacy. Although “feelings” and false news are problems no one questions the amount of information Facebook has access to. We learned that Facebook’s face recognition technologies are better than the CIA’s, that in itself is enough to raise some eyebrows. It has also been speculated and proven by some studies and articles like The price of Free that Facebook  sells information to third parties. So whats stopping Zuckerberg from potentially selling this information to the CIA and whats wrong with the CIA having such access? If allowing the CIA certain information sworn private by Facebook is morally wrong then why isn’t selling to advertisers seen in the same light. I think people are too distracted by more popular issues with technology to actually read what they are giving access to when accepting terms and conditions. Reading through all of those pages is a nuisance but perhaps  that is because such companies don’t want you to read them. How is it that the user manual is one sentence and the terms and conditions are 5+ pages. It is such a well known fact that people dont read these conditions that companies have been known to hide financial compensation within the terms and conditions behind a simple email address. Once this issue is addressed I believe a more private platform will be invented and made available free with the same privatization as telegram. We learned that telegrams producers are so serious about privacy that Putin single handedly kicked them out, thats the type of guaranteed security my friends and I can get behind.  Perhaps telegrams producers will even be responsible for this new social media. A safe network like this is necessary because if Facebook or twitter were to go down theres no saying how much information would be exposed. Americans operate under the “if it’s not broken then don’t fix it” mentality. Therefore mo one will emphasize the value of privacy until all of there information gets stolen and unfortunately a cyber attack might be essential in pushing us towards a more private world. Eventually people will want some type of security in the event of a cyber war or hacking and companies such as telegram are in a perfect position to inherit such cyber responsibilities.

Zen in the (social) network life.

There’s no question that the topic of social media is heavily debated. Conversations about  millennial’s time spent on “that tiny screen” seem to occur more and more. More often than not the  question being asked is are social media platforms bad. Flat out, point blank are apps such as twitter and facebook ruining the way we communicate with each other? The flaw in this question is that it’s hypothetical, twitter and facebook have already been influencing us for years now. The question of whether these social networks are good or bad is outdated because whatever impact they have had on us is past tense.With that being said the way we communicate is crucial because it shapes our culture and who we are. New social networks birthed a new culture, ideals, and even a new set of rules and guidelines. My age demographic has witnesses this technological boom and in a sense were the technological boom. We are living in a technological growth so rapid that we don’t even know the/our potential. More often than not those deeming social media and  such accessibility as bad are from an older generation. Us millennial’s are literally watching this new culture grow, the older demographic is watching theirs deteriorate. No one writes letters anymore, no one uses pay phones and some people don’t even feel the need to talk because they can express themselves online better. The disappearance of this old culture is at the root of older peoples skepticism about everyone staring at those screens. With that being said, there are many negatives surrounding social media. Just like anything, people abuse platforms and this is where the concern is at. In moderation, gmail, twitter and instagram are healthy and progressive but only in moderation. It is easy for these apps to take over your life, however if used properly these apps can cause great joy and even convenience. There is a reoccurring theme that could be applied here: the platforms are not the problem but the users are. As long as you surround yourself with a health community both online and offline one should live in harmony both on the web and in real life. The problems occur when people let these networks take over there lives. When someone sends a friend request instead of actually approaching them, when someone updates snapchat every 30 seconds instead of enjoying what there cameras pointed at. Social media should be used as a tool and not a drug and as long as we respect this we in will be okay.