Ipods

Technology is continually advancing, and each new improvement has an effect on our lives. The invention of the radio connected people from all across the country by allowing them to hear about news simultaneously. But even though the speed and immediacy of the radio was beneficial, it is also speculated as a cause for a decrease in news consumption. Along with the invention of the radio came suburbia. Instead of people reading the newspaper on the train to work, commuters would drive in their cars and listen to the radio. The radio has the ability to provide people with news, but mostly, especially in the younger generations, the radio is used to listen to music. People would use radio stations to personalize the music they listened to and the limited amount of news they received on their way to work. Technological advancements have always had an influence on our lives, and recently it seems as though each new technology has led to an increase of individuation in society. People personalize their media whether its by listening to a select amount of songs on their iPod or only receiving their news from certain blogs. There are pros and cons to the occurring individuation, and I believe that the best way to maintain a healthy relation with the technology we use is to use everything in balance.
I think that personalization of technology is a benefit to people because it allows them to express themselves while making life more convenient. The iPod, or more specifically the iPhone, is a perfect example of how technology allows people to personalize their lives.



This commercial demonstrates how the iPhone allows people to bring all different parts of their world together into one, small piece of technology. A person can have their music, movies, photos, and contacts all in one place. Because of this all iPhones are different just like all people are different. The iPhone is essentially wrapping up some of the most important interests in a person's life into a single device. I think that this is phenomenal because it allows people to express themselves by displaying their photos and music which are things that people often identify themselves with. But it is also convenient because it allows people to watch movies on their cell phone that they can use to call someone over 3,000 miles away.

Personalization of technology does have some negative influences on individuals and society as a whole. Because people can individualize their technology to cater to their specific interests, they may be closed off to new information and ideas. I think that people may become to absorbed in their own technology that they might not notice things that are happening around them. If someone receives all their news from one source they may have a biased perception on issues or may be closed off to the importance of different issues. The personalization of technology is also consuming, which may explain why people text other people constantly instead of talking to the people around them. One of my greatest concerns is that the personalization of technology will lead to close minded people that lack the social interaction that is necessary for a functioning society.

Therefore, I believe that personalization in technology must be used in moderation. It is impossible to halt technological improvements, but it is possible to use personalized technology in balance with other sources of media that promote a sense of social integration, such as newspapers, television news, etc. Personalized news is a good tool to filter out some information, but it is also important to tune into other mediums so that we can receive a well-rounded idea of what is happening in the world outside of our iPhone.

The Web

The world wide web is extrordinary in its ability to provide people with access and opportunities that were never available before. One of the greatest features of the internet, as discussed in the articles, was it's ability to serve as a public sphere. A public sphere is a forum that allows an exchange of ideas and opinions between people in an effort to promote democracy. A public sphere must meet the following criteria: it must be a space for mediated discourse, must allow for new, previoulsy excluded, discussants, must be political in nature, and the ideas shared in the public sphere must be judged on merit and not on the authors status. While I believe that the internet has the potential to transform into a public sphere, I agree with the author Papacharissi, that the web can be more accurately defined as a public space. A public space serves as a place that is available for political deliberation, but is not limited to just that.
The internet has proven to be a great source of political information in the past, and has also been a space that allows for political discussion. Many activist groups have websites and blogs that range from the Green party to Gay Rights protesters. These placs allow people who may live on opposite sides of the country to be connected. Also, certain blogs have published information in the past, such as the Drudge Report that uncovered the Monica Lewinsky scandal, that has lead to political reform. I think that the internet has proven to be a great tool in politics today and is a convinent way for people to share their opinions and be involved.
Youtube.com is an especially important phenomena regarding the internet. Youtube alone has contributed to the way the web can be political in nature. Much of the news footage that has been aired previously on news shows has also been posted on Youtube. This allows people who may have missed important streaming live videos of events or speeches to watch the clips on Youtube. For instance, Obama's "A More Perfect Union" speech has been viewed almost 6 million times on Youtube.


Many may speculate that the exchange of political ideas or information online may result in "socially filtered" news. I personally think that even though the internet provides news in a new medium it is still valuable to people around the world. The interent allows news to be updated immediately and accessed easily which are great improvements. The internet may be used for many purposes, which are not all political in nature, but I believe that if the web contintues to develop it will become a great forum for political discussion and exchange of ideas.

News Agenda Setting

Agenda setting is a vital strategy that fuels the media. Agenda setting provides news sources with information to broadcast to the audience, however the issues that are made most important in the news may not be the ones that are most effective for the public. I believe that the largest problems with agenda setting stem from the the policy and corporate agendas. These two sources of information are the least concerend with the publics best interest, as shown in this video below.



Policy agendas are a way for the governemnt to feed the public information it wants the people to know through media sources. These agenda can be a form of propaganda trying to sawy the public opinion one way or another. Corporate agendas are even more slanted toward the public because it often consists of advertisements for large corporations. Instead of delivering the audience important information, coporation agendas try to market a product or service within the news.
I believe that media and public agendas are the most valuable to the audience. The media tries to relay information or stories to the public that are commonly reported on in order to give the public a well-rounded view of current affairs. It is hard for the media's agenda to remain completely uneffected by the persausions of the government and other corporations, as to what should be the most important topics. I believe that a way for the media to create the most accurate and thorough coverage is to "multiple perspectives" as as Herbert Gans discussed in one of the articles. If journalists adapted a method of mulitple perspectives agenda setting may become more objective and be healthier for our democracy.
Lastly, public policy is an important issue in agenda setting because the public is receiving the messages sent by the media. Personally, I don't know how much of an effect agenda setting truly has on the public. I believe that the media has a limited effect and that audiences tend to seek out information that is of interest to them. Agenda setting may have a greater effect on the public regarding some issues over others. For instance, issues that directly effect the public like unemployment, gas prices, etc. are already important to the public, so the media's agenda setting won't make these issues more or less important. However, agenda setting could have a greater effect on issues that the public may not experience directly such as foreign affairs. Because people are less familiar with these issues the media, corporations, and government have more leverage in swaying the publics opinion.

MTV

MTV began as Music Television but has turned into something much different. MTV is a cable television show that targets a teenage audience but serves as a grand commercial media source. According to the article from http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/pr.htm, MTV has fallen victim to the tactics of public relations by "routinely mapping out pre-arranged occurrences that are projected to look and sound like impromptu truths." MTV performs "market research" by interviewing teenagers on the current trends and fads they follow. However the teenagers are viewed as a customer. MTV doesn't have to give teenagers exactly what they want, instead they listen to the young so they know how to feed them information.
MTV started out persuading the music tastes of teenagers through the music videos and guest appearances of pop-stars, but I think that some of MTV's featured shows has gone to far. Shows like Spring Break portraying the half dressed girls and belligerent boys that depict the essence of "cool" for the younger generations. And although the footage may be entertaining is MTV benefiting the greater good of society by advertising that type of behavior? I believe that advertisers and PR firms need to be more cautious when targeting a younger audience. Teenage audiences are one of the most vulnerable demographics. The way certain advertisements on MTV are framed may affect the way the message is perceived by the audience. For instance, this commercial for "safe sex" was sponsored and aired on MTV:



The commerical is to persuade the teenage audience to use condoms when having sex, but the ad itself says much more. To teenagers this advertisement may speak more about the common one-night stand in college than about having safe sex. The way advertisements are created can have a large impact on the audience, and therefore, stations like MTV need to take more social responsibility for what is aired.