Homework Exercise # 1

CNN reported that Congress in Alabama approved same-sex marriage and joins the 37 out of 50 states that have legalized same-sex marriage. Since Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage in 2004, multiple states including North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida have all accepted same-sex marriage within the past year. This shocking revelation that ultimately would not have been possible 50 years ago because same-sex marriage was unheard of in society for it’s nature of being seen as a vulgar poison that effects people which is against God’s vison of happiness. I still believe we live in this society as some individuals still feel this way. To enlighten this theory, a quote from the same CNN article states that “UCLA think tank, in only seven states do a third of residents or fewer approve of same-sex marriage”.  One state from the south that is currently fighting the rights of same-sex marriage is Texas as Supreme Court Attorney General Ken Paxton states that he will make it his life goal to void out same-sex marriage across the country.  

Same-sex marriage is no different than interracial marriage in society during the Civil Rights Movement. The infamous case of Ruth Williams and Seretse Khama of 1956 brought attention to the media because they were the first public interracial couple and as a result of their love for one another, they were exiled from society. But now almost 60 years later, we live in a world where is commonly heard of for another race to marry outside their own because we are all people and the color of our skin should not restrain us from happiness. So why should our choice for who we want as our spouse matter if it’s our God given right?

One advantage that we have in this day and age is the power of social media to view that there are others who are proactive toward same-sex marriage along with activist groups to expand and share our views. During the Civil Rights Movement, the human voice could only go but so far because we were restrain to television and radio as our only news source and it was almost always an biased view of the given situation. We also can now see the struggle that those go through to fight for their voice to be heard which is why the United States is more lenient on Same-Sex Marriage. Here’s hoping the other 13 soon join the party.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/20/us/alabama-same-sex-marriage/

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/britain-meddled-in-forbidden-love-affair-between-ruth-williams-and-seretse-khama/story-fnb64oi6-1226728576121

http://www.kvue.com/story/news/local/2015/02/19/texas-state-leaders-step-in-to-stop-same-sex-marriage/23704309/

“Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics?”

1. Why do the Democratic leaders embrace blogging as a potential political communication considering the traditional media landscape in politics?

The progression of Netroots usage since 2004 has caused the Democratic Party to enable more usage of social media, email, message boards, RSS feeds and blogs to promote the political party. Netroots used for the Democratic Party have also made it easier for Politicians to tackle issues quicker, cheaper, and interactive with voters and becoming more involved in their daily life which is impossible to do with simply promoting using television or newspapers.

2. Blogging encourages a participatory culture. In what way does the participatory culture in blogging expand digital media convergence?

Because a large segment of the American public turned to the Internet to speak for themselves, we turn to blogging about social issues that affect us as a whole, more people from across the globe on other sides of the world can gain support in your favor. When it comes to digital media convergence, blogging about an issue like a local gang in the city terrorizing pedestrians can make headlines in the newspaper and create support groups to prevent them on social media like Facebook.

3. In the article, the author says: “The ability of the Internet to erase geographical distances can become a structural weakness in elections where district lines and eligibility are key.” How can blogging counter this weakness in the process of turning the net roots to grassroots?

Though we can blog about issues that affect us and larger issues which will gain a following, in order to become grassroot, we must call to action otherwise a voice still remains as just a voice.  A quote from the article by Pew scholar Michael Cornfield sums up the meaning of grassroot when he states that, “raising money at a nationwide level for a special election is one thing, but raising it and developing a core of activists and all the ready-to-respond messages when you have to run hundreds of races simultaneously–which is what will happen in 2006–is another thing.”

4. The author spends the second half of the article discussing the lack of diversity in current blogosphere dominated by elite bloggers. Please use the concept of digital convergence to explain how blogs can become the real bearer of freedom, democracy, egalitarianism, and participation in the new media communication?

In my personal opinion after reading the article, the best way to tackle these issues on a new media convergence level is by creating organizations, pages on social media, and posting awareness for the issues along with hosting events. Thinking that every “like” on your page acts as a new customer and we have to sell our idea like a vender in order to get the consumer to buy our product. Communication is also key because we should all be able to discuss issues and agree based on a diplomatic solution as a democracy. 

Virtual Revolution

Questions for the documentary “Virtual Revolution” part 1, 2, and 3.

1.       The web is celebrated as the revolutionary technology that is great leveling of humanity creating equal opportunity, equal access, and equal potential. However, there are only a quarter of people on the earth who can use it. How do you explain the controversial argument here?

1.As mentioned in the beginning of the documentary, there are countries in Africa like Guan have finally been introduced to technology to convergence with the World Wide Web which was not available beforehand. They join the other 80 to 75 percent of the world who does not have access in the opportunities that society in the UK and the United States have because of funding for technology. The argument is that there’s an entire population that does not have access like the 2 billion because they lack the resources to do so. It’s our job as the 2 billion who are able to enable the Web to expand to everyone for the sake of knowledge we can all enrich.

2.       How is Wikipedia the best example to implement the leveling ideas of the Web rooted in the cultural revolution of 1960s, namely the Libertarianism in the counter culture? How does it explain some of the digital convergences?

2. In the 1960’s, there was a mixture of Left and Right-Winged ideas based of the status of the United States and the role our country plays in society. Within this period, humanity gained a sense of freewill which carried over years later during the early days of the internet which gave people a place to resent opinions, have their own views on controversial topics, and define oneself which led to the revolution that shaped what the internet is today.

3. How does the Web make it possible for different kinds of digital convergence?

The Women from Kenya was able to document the revolution and protest during their countries election and expand the struggle on a global stage which would not have been possible without the aid of digital convergence of combining traditional journalism with the internet using her site to share her voice.

4. How can the Internet become a challenge for traditional authority? Use the political landscape changes in some counties to illustrate your answer.

The internet challenges the amount of interaction we have when industries look to hire which hurt us but also advantage us by opening doors to a larger world so business are able to hire a professional in other country for the same job offered in the opposite country. Job opportunities have also open because of the internet because we live in an age when salary can be strictly based on what material you release to the public online (YouTube).  

5. Do you believe that getting information free can set us free eventually? Why or Why not? Do you see any concerns of the complete freedom or self-expression without limit on the Internet? Why or why not?

Wikipedia is an empowering search engine that is offered for free but the site serves as a search engine that anyone can edit or change without rehabilitate which can hurt our way of thinking. It also makes us dependable of one search engine when there are other resources outside the internet that we gain access to and in some cases are easier to access outside the 25 percent. Self expression is also halted because of privacy acts that prevent free expression on social media sites.  A message that could be seen as slander or racist can be flagged and taken down at the social media request  which limit the amount of power we have.

6. In traditional media communication, it has the “vertical” authority. In the Web communication, it becomes “horizontal?” How do you explain the change? How does this create the possibility for digital media convergence?

The idea of linking everything as one to be connected and the ability and ambition to have information, equal access from multiple sites has made our web communication more horizontal than the traditional vertical view which only enables one source. The possibility for digital media convergence is also open because the web has become a part of our daily life in the news (Newspapers offer free subscriptions as oppose to buying a traditional paper along with the news constantly updating for the user)

7. Why is that the Web is free critical for the success of the Web itself? How does that clash with the corporate business ideology? How does that pose challenges for copyright issues at the same time? What will happen if the Web is not free?

The World Wide Web is free access without the interference of the government. We have an entire network dedicated to the freedom to gain knowledge and make profit even if it means illegal ways (downloading music, movies, online books, etc) which interfaces with copyrights and limits our expression. If the media and content was not for free, I guarantee the 22 to 25 percent who use the internet would be significantly lower.