Blog 12: My Relationship With Technology

 My Relationship with Technology

Childhood through High School

Throughout my childhood, I did not use technology very frequently, as my parents were sure to limit it in my life as much as possible. I enjoyed my childhood thoroughly, and learned how to do things for myself without the aid of a phone or computer. This taught me self sufficiency and independence early on, and these are still characteristics I possess. The friendships I made and the relationships I cultivated were not tainted with the vanity of likes, shares, and followers. Of course, I learned the basics of using a computer and phone, however, I did not grow up with one in my hand. 

I am so grateful for this because by the time I got to high school, I was not allowed to use technology at all throughout the day, save for the one computer room my school had. If someone had to accomplish academic work, such as working on a paper, it could be done in this room. Aside from that when school started at 8 AM, all phones had to be powered off and put away and if a teacher saw a student on their phone they were at risk of being sent home for the day. Of course students flirted with the line of what they were allowed to do, and we all quickly learned that our teachers were not bluffing, students did, in fact, get sent home for using their phones. 

I am so grateful for this experience because I learned more in my four years of high school than during any other time in my life. And even better, I learned it from books and lectures, which almost seem to be a lost art in our current day and age. As a result of this experience, I am able to hold intelligible conversations, I am a proficient reader, and I have built relationships with people by forming genuine human connections. 

Although the progression of technology in our society is undeniable, and it would be foolish to ignore it, I am so proud that I am able to live without it. It has become important to me to strike a healthy balance of technology use in my life, because it is necessary to use it in our society, but I do not wish to form an addiction.  I mostly try to use technology to enrich my life, rather than to fill a void. 

My Relationship Now

As I entered college, I did not have the same restrictions on technology in my life, and I found myself using it much more. In high school I would estimate that my average screen time a day was about two hours. Now that I am in college it ranges more towards five hours a day. That is about 20% of my day spent looking at my phone! Realizing this fact made me aware that I want to make a change in my life. 

I was specifically impacted by the article "I'm 14, and I quit social media after discovering what was posted about me." It heavily reflected ideas that I hold about technology and social media usage. In my lifetime, I will never be truly anonymous, and things that I post are going to follow me forever. This is why I am careful to keep my online presence respectable, because it is a reflection of myself, my values, and my character. My mother always told me "If you would not shout it from the rooftops, do not put it in writing." This is a much more important concept now than ever, because if that writing is digital, it is nearly impossible to take it back. I value my reputation and my safety, so I am truly skeptical of the dangers of my digital footprint.

Making Necessary Changes

While I used to fill my free time with watching TikToks and scrolling through Instagram, I have decided to spend more time a day reading than sitting on my phone. This goal has helped me to lower my screen time and I feel that my attention span has already gotten better and I feel much happier. I even noticed that I am getting better sleep again! I also decided to leave my phone at home when I go out during the day. This venture was less successful for me. I have stopped doing so because it made it hard for people to get in contact with me if they needed to. However, if I am only leaving my house for a short period of time I will still leave it from time to time. If I need to have my phone with me, I have started to put it in my bag and check it periodically throughout the day. 

Technology, although a blessing in many capacities, has had detrimental effects on my over all mental well being, and limiting its power over me has been truly eye opening to the negative effects it has had. I am grateful for the way I was raised, because technology has not been too detrimental in my life. However, it is important for me to be aware of the role it plays in my day to day life, and I will continue to treat it as a tool rather than a crutch that I need to lean on. 

Blog 11: EOTO Reax 2

The Overton Window

Overton Window Overview

I was very interested to learn that is a concept called the Overton Window that explains the range of theories and opinions that the general public is willing to accept. This theory is helpful for public and governmental figures to curate the platforms that they will align themselves with and the opinions that they will advertise. Ideas that fall far outside of the Overton Window are most likely not going to be accepted by the general public as they are too radical. Ideas that fall just outside the Overton Window may be accepted in the coming future, however, they are probably too radical to advertise at the present time. Ideas that fall inside the Overton Window are considered politically safe, and for this reason they are usually the ideas advertised by politicians. This window heavily influences policy and for this reason politicians monitor the changes and shifts in what falls into it. Additionally, politicians slowly introduce ideas that fall just outside of the Overton Window and after enough time they are usually widely accepted. This is, in large part, the way ideas change over time. 

Moving the Overton Window

The Overton Window naturally shifts over time as cultural, moral, and social ideas evolve. This window is often shifted in the wake of social movements or societal crises. For example, in our post 9/11 society, it is considered more acceptable to search people and their belongings in airports, whereas it was not widely accepted previously as it was considered an invasion of privacy. This concept translates into most currently accepted norms, because at one point they were most likely considered radical in some capacity. For example, the way we consider different races, genders, and sexualities has shifted radically over time, and as a result so have the policies related to them. It is vital to understand this concept in order to cater political platforms to the general public and their accepted ideals. 

 

blog 10: Living in the Age of AI

Living in the Age of AI

The Threat of AI

After watching the documentary "In the Age of AI" I was frightened to see just how advanced technology has come, and how much it has penetrated our society. Automation, the substitution of capital and labor, has become very powerful globally. I was particularly unnerved to learn that with the expansion of AI, about 50% of jobs currently occupied by humans will be threatened by automated devices in the next 15 years. These jobs mostly include those held by women, such as cashier work, clerical work, and human resources positions. This will perpetuate current inequalities in the work place, however it is not only minorities that are at risk. AI is projected to penetrate every part of our economy, including positions in law, finance, HR, and many other sectors. 

As AI is programmed based on prior human knowledge and experience, it is highly efficient compared to the work that one human can do effectively. This will become problematic if AI is able to penetrate careers that people can not do as efficiently. AI, as helpful as it may be in some aspects, is a threat to human interaction, human employment, and the healthy operation of our society.

AI and the Loss of Privacy

In addition to threatening job security, AI is going as far as to threaten our privacy. AI has become very powerful, as it has been programmed to understand who is smart, who is not, who is racist, and even who is gullible. This advanced understanding has led to AI tracking people's digital exhaust to target specific people's habits and interests. This has led to something called surveillance capitalism, which has claimed private human experience. 

Large companies, such as Google, have taken advantage of this technology to collect very specific data from individuals and to sell it for their own profit. On one hand, this has helped them to efficiently target advertisements to specific individuals that fall into the target demographic of products and services. However, this is a complete invasion of individuals' privacy, and most people are unaware that their private information has been harvested for the benefit of large corporate entities. 

Blog 9: EOTO 2 — The Spiral of Silence

The Spiral of Silence

The Spiral of Silence Theory 

The Spiral of Silence Theory asserts that when people believe they are in the minority, they remain silent about their beliefs and opinions out of fear that they will be ostracized from society for voicing their views. This essentially means that there are viewpoints that are not expressed during contentious periods of time because people become fearful that their safety or their reputation will be damaged. Below is a graphic that depicts this theory.

History 

This theory was first introduced by Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann in 1974 when she presented her findings in a series of scientific articles. She was a German political scientist and she has published books pertaining to her theory that explain many instances of social silence. This theory explains why emotionally and morally tense arguments are often met with hesitation from one or more sides.

Implications 

The process of this theory goes as follows: people take note of what behavior is met with social support and what behavior is met with social rejection, from there, people who hold minority opinions retreat and quiet down and people with popular opinions shout their views from the rooftops. This puts the process into motion. As some people become louder other become quieter until they fall to silence. This is when people begin to withdraw their opinions from social and political debates either because they question the validity of their opinion or they are not willing to face the repercussions that will come from voicing it. This implies that in very contentious times oppressed people fall into a silence that is hard to break. This tends to effect those who are marginalized and those who are being targeted socially or even by their own government. 

Examples

In an extreme case, this explains why many Jewish people remained silent during the racial genocide that was targeted against them during World War II. They felt that their disdain for the situation was not supported, thus they felt safer remaining silent. Had they vocalized their contempt for their aggressors, they would faced damaged reputations and even harsher consequences, including death. On a smaller scale, this could even include the hierarchy found in many companies and institutions. If a higher-up decides to make changes or express certain sentiments to those below them and they are not met with backlash then any dissenters that exist within the institution will not vocalize their discontent. If a majority of inferiors do not object, then often no one will.

Modern Day

In our increasingly politicized world, this phenomena has reared its ugly head very often. People refuse to speak their mind in school settings, work settings, and on social media for fear of being 'cancelled.' However, we can see that many others break out of this cycle because it has become very common for people to share their opinions far and wide to anyone that will listen. There is an apparent push and pull between those who choose to stay silent and those who find it necessary to speak - and to do so loudly. 

Essentially, public opinion acts as a social control that can effect anyone and everyone. In modern day America, the mainstream media writes the script of public opinion and they have full power to take advantage of this to give some a voice while stealing other's voices at the same time. If they write the script, then they have the power to play puppet master over our whole society, and if someone doesn't like it, we theoretically may never even know. 

Breaking the Spiral

The key is to understand the cycle and to intentionally work against it. A voice, even just one, is a very powerful thing. In America, we have the privilege to use our voice however we see fit. Although the mainstream media and the propaganda that they spew is hard to combat, we have a unique opportunity to take advantage of our First Amendment rights to break the spiral. I truly believe the pen is mightier than the sword and we, as Americans, have almost unfettered access to the pen. This is a great blessing, and with this blessing comes the responsibility to use our access to the pen to speak freely. Of course, this may result in social consequences. This would be uncomfortable for some, but we are not made for to be comfortable, we are made to be great. Ideas are meant to be shared. I may not agree with all of them, but I respect people's right to express them. With the proper intentionality, this spiral can, and should, be combatted, and ideas can be spread freely.

Blog 8: Diffusion Theory

Diffusion of Innovations - Snapchat

Innovators

In September of 2011, Evan Spiegel, Bobby Murphy, and Reggie Brown launched an app that has heavily impacted the very nature of communication. This app, called Snapchat, is widely recognized for its mascot, who has adopted the name "Ghostface Chillah." This app gained traction pretty quickly due to the fact that you can communicate by sending pictures and then the pictures delete subsequent to the recipient opening them. This heavily appealed to younger generations and the app has continued to grow in popularity. 

Early Adopters and Common Users

The earliest adopters were the younger generations at the time of the apps release. This primarily included middle-school and high-school students who had smart phones. As younger generations grew older, they became the primary audience. As it stands today, almost 50 percent of users are aged 15-25. With this being the primary demographic, snapchat has added new features to appeal to this audience, such as filters, a chat feature, and SnapMaps. I remember when I was 8 years old Snapchat was released, and I couldn't wait to get my own phone so that I could use it. When I turned 14, I was finally able to start using Snapchat and I was so excited to be able to use it to talk to my friends and send pictures and videos to them. 

Late Adopters, Laggards, and Long-tails

There is a large population of people that were skeptical of Snapchat and what it had to offer. This primarily includes older generations aged 40 years and older. This age group, which includes Gen. X and Baby Boomers, has begun to break into the world of Snapchat. For example, my grandmother has gotten a smartphone after moving to Florida because it helps her to keep in touch with the rest of our family even though we are further away. Since she has bought that phone, she has gotten Snapchat and she frequently uses it to update my siblings and I on her life. Now that Snapchat has become very mainstream the age demographic has become a bit younger and a bit older than it previously was.

Positives and Negatives

This technology has changed the nature of communication as it is now mainstream to share pictures and videos of your day to day life with anyone who you add on your platform. It has made communication very easy, especially among teens who often use it as a primary form of communication. I have kept in touch with friends that I have from all over the country by using Snapchat. However, there are a plethora of negative effects that have stemmed from allowing Snapchat to become so mainstream. These include, but are not limited to, predation, addiction to electronics, and bullying. In addition, one very rampant downside is that revenge porn and leaked nude photos have become very common. These consequences have done a lot to induce anxiety and depression in young adults and it has contributed to rampant self esteem issues across the broad spectrum of users. I do not believe these consequences outweigh the benefits that the app offers.

Blog 7: What I Learned in EOTO

The History of the Postal Service

During our Each One Teach One presentations, I found the topic of the Postal Service very interesting. I was shocked to learn that the first traces of mail can be dated back to 2000 BC in Ancient Egypt. This is very interesting because I tend to think of this as a modern day innovation, but it is, in fact, ancient technology. From there, mail has been in use but it was not until later that a postal service was officially established. 

The first comprehensive postal system was established in France in 1477. From there, postal services expanded to Britain. In America, Ben Franklin helped to develop the United States Postal Service deriving inspiration from the French and British systems. The United States Postal System was officially established on July 26, 1775 during the Second Continental Congress. 

Establishing a comprehensive postal service has been overwhelmingly beneficial for communication in the world. Through the Civil War, the use of our postal system was extremely important in aiding war efforts. The use of a trans-continental postal service was even more beneficial in American efforts during World War I and World War II. Having this private method of communication is so advantageous for an army, however, it is possible for mail to be intercepted. This has led to even more advancements in the field of the postal service to accommodate for these detriments. 

Unfortunately, just like any form of technology, the Postal System can be abused. People have used the Postal System to mail weapons, traffic drugs, and even plant bombs. These added dangers have led to advancements in mail screening and other precautions to avoid having this system be abused. 

As technology has advanced so greatly, we are seeing a decline in the usage of the postal service, however, considering its history and its current advantages, I do not believe we will find ourselves living in a world where the postal service is completely obsolete. 

Blog 6: The Censorship of Anti-War Voices

The Censorship of Anti-War Voices

After exploring both ANTIWAR.COM and The American Conservative, it is evident that these opinions of anti-war sentiment are not shared among the common public and the main stream media. I believe this is because it is far more profitable to encourage war in our society. It is a commonly held opinion that America, as a world superpower, feels the need to act as a police force against evils in the world. I do not necessarily disagree with this, however, there is often a push to engage in conflicts that America has no business engaging in. For example, the mainstream media heavily pushed for American involvement in Ukraine. I believe this is because America stands to gain something, and as a result there is a push in the media to stimulate pro-war sentiments in the American public.

In an article titled "Is Anybody Telling The American People About The War?" Rod Dreher comments that  "It is my strong impression that the American people are largely clueless about the maelstrom into which their leaders are taking them. They are clueless because our media have decided that there is one correct position on the war." Simply put, the American government thrives on involving itself in unnecessary conflict, and as a result, there is no space for anti-war voices in our media. By omitting these voices from popular broadcasting networks and print media, it keeps the American people ignorant, allowing the American Government to continue to wage unnecessary wars, raising death tolls and promoting violent pro-war attitudes nationwide. 

As citizens who are subjected to censored media, it is our job to seek out differing opinions and to collect all of the facts about what our country is involving itself in. It is a travesty that innocent lives are being lost in order for governments to profit, and the American people have not objected, because we are relatively ignorant about this topic. The bottom line is that just because war is profitable it is not necessarily just. It is becoming increasingly necessary for dissenting voices to gain a platform to make anti-war opinions more mainstream, or we face the risk of never breaking our current cycle.