There were many new challenges for me during this course blogs, facebook and online communities. These all had varying degrees of uncomfortableness for me. I haven't done any of these things before. Just getting going on the blog was broaching on unknown territory but joining facebook was the most uncomfortable task of all. I haven't even signed back in since I signed up.
I think that having to write a blog was good for me and now I'm much more comfortable with it and could find myself being much more creative. As far as facebook, I really have no interest but I found the whole experience a good introduction since it's a very big part of what people do in our society.
I found both books to be interesting but the Postman book was my favorite. I found the last chapter both inspiring and thought provoking. I think the assignments as a whole were just about right as far as workload.
My favorite part was reading the books my least favorite part was writing blogs. I found myself more interested and intrigued by your questions pertaining to the reading. It was hard for me to get the idea that the blogs carried more weight as far as points. I sometimes found it difficult to connect the blogs to the reading.
One thing that was frustrating was that when we logged into blogs it was impossible to find out if a particular person had written a blog without going to each individual link. I like to get my work done early so it was time consuming to find someone who had actually answered before the last minute. People were seemed respectful and thoughtful when responding to one another which was nice.
Overall, this class gave me a good overall view of some issues that need to be addressed by society and myself as an individual. It also reiterated some of the attitudes and beliefs I already held but maybe wouldn't have known how to articulate.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Whoa, it's not what you think?
I can't remember the exact details of the incidents because it's happened several times but the scenerio is the same. I will go to my e-mail and of course I look to see who the message is from before I open it. When a see a name then I immediately attach a particular relationship to that name or maybe something I know they are personally going through or maybe we are going through in our relationship. There are actually many things that happen before I open that message that influence how I anticipate what the message might be about including my mood.
There have been many times that I've initially read a message and interpreted it to be critical toward me or in some kind of negative light. The funny thing is that I'm not a negative person, in fact, I tend to be an optimist. I can only attribute this "negative" perception to come from my insecurities or maybe my attitude at the time.
I've learned to read a message and then reread it, sometimes several times, to make sure I'm interpreting it correctly. The truth is that in most every instance my first initial negative response was totally off. I know this has to do with the absense of nonverbals. Not being able to see and hear the person has everything to do with the difficulty in interpretation of the tone of the message.
An example would be that if I were meeting a friend for lunch we would probably exchange a hug or warm smile first which would set the tone for a positive encounter. On the other hand if there were nonverbals such as the absense of a smile or warm interaction then that would indicate something was not right between us.
That is the problem with internet only communication. When the relationship is heavily dependent on online communication only then the chances greatly increase for misunderstanding. I had a friend that lives in a remote area and we would only physically see each other once a year but we tried to keep in touch via e-mail. I sent an e-mail which she took completely out of context and the more I tried to explain online the worse it became and our relationship has never been the same. I now know that I should have at least tried calling her at the time rather than trying to make sense out of an already stilted conversation.
This would have never happened outside of cyberspace. We could have easily seen each others facial expressions and nonverbals that would have clarified the meaning of what was being said. As I'm writing this it even reminds me of the reading this week in "Wood and Smith" where the discussion of the "right" or necessity of the internet is addressed. This is one example where the internet was not only unecessary but determental. I'm one to use the internet to keep in contact with friends and appreciate that aspect of internet but at the same time maybe it would be good to be forced to actually use the phone or make the time to get together.
There will never be an equitable substitute for one on one, face to face communication. A handshake, hug or kiss is invaluable as a commmunication tool as well as essential for our well being. E-mail has it's place but I will not hesitate to call someone to clarify if I think something is wrong.
There have been many times that I've initially read a message and interpreted it to be critical toward me or in some kind of negative light. The funny thing is that I'm not a negative person, in fact, I tend to be an optimist. I can only attribute this "negative" perception to come from my insecurities or maybe my attitude at the time.
I've learned to read a message and then reread it, sometimes several times, to make sure I'm interpreting it correctly. The truth is that in most every instance my first initial negative response was totally off. I know this has to do with the absense of nonverbals. Not being able to see and hear the person has everything to do with the difficulty in interpretation of the tone of the message.
An example would be that if I were meeting a friend for lunch we would probably exchange a hug or warm smile first which would set the tone for a positive encounter. On the other hand if there were nonverbals such as the absense of a smile or warm interaction then that would indicate something was not right between us.
That is the problem with internet only communication. When the relationship is heavily dependent on online communication only then the chances greatly increase for misunderstanding. I had a friend that lives in a remote area and we would only physically see each other once a year but we tried to keep in touch via e-mail. I sent an e-mail which she took completely out of context and the more I tried to explain online the worse it became and our relationship has never been the same. I now know that I should have at least tried calling her at the time rather than trying to make sense out of an already stilted conversation.
This would have never happened outside of cyberspace. We could have easily seen each others facial expressions and nonverbals that would have clarified the meaning of what was being said. As I'm writing this it even reminds me of the reading this week in "Wood and Smith" where the discussion of the "right" or necessity of the internet is addressed. This is one example where the internet was not only unecessary but determental. I'm one to use the internet to keep in contact with friends and appreciate that aspect of internet but at the same time maybe it would be good to be forced to actually use the phone or make the time to get together.
There will never be an equitable substitute for one on one, face to face communication. A handshake, hug or kiss is invaluable as a commmunication tool as well as essential for our well being. E-mail has it's place but I will not hesitate to call someone to clarify if I think something is wrong.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Using the Internet
I interviewed people from all three generations but it is by no means a very reliable indicator for each generation. Just as we learned in Postman this week, there are many things that influence the answers we got. I suspect I would have to ask a much larger population of each age group to get a more accurate and representative picture. The reason I say this is because from middle age up the internet kind of meets a fork in the road. Those that have continued or began in the workforce will tend to use the internet more than their counterparts. Those who have never had motivation will probably not be so willing to be bothered. Younger folks who have grown up not knowing life without the internet don't really have anything else to fall back on.
The youngest person I interviewed was "Brett", middle age "Rick" and eldest "Deanna". Commonalities among all groups was e-mail. That seems to be the across the board most common use but so is research or information gathering of some sort. In Wood & Smith the point is made that home and offices are now merged (p. 147). We can see this phenomena in the fact that we conduct research, not at the library, but from our own homes. I'm a prime example since I'm right now doing my homework on my bed and plan to access the OSU library online to research material for another class. "Brett" says that he does his shopping online and uses it for entertainment purposes. Convergence of media taking place right in our own homes. We are virtually able to do just about anything anywhere and we've gotten to the place that we want or maybe even demand to have our wi-fi wherever we might be, imagine checking into a hotel without wi-fi these days or sitting in the airport with no way to connect?
Another commonality across the age groups is that the people I talked with agreed that they were pretty comfortable communicating on the internet. "Brett" was the only one in my groups that actively maintained a social networking site online. That is where I think the younger age group departs. Myspace, Facebook, and the other sites seem to be inhabited, in a larger portion, by the younger crowd. Somehow I can't imagine my grandmother with a Myspace account.
All ages agree that the technology has both good and bad implications. They all agreed that technology has brought us into a more fast-paced society and for the older crowd there is a resistance to that aspect while for the younger crowd it's okay. As I said before, the younger aged have nothing to compare it to. In general the attitude is that the internet is here to stay and the general consensus is that it's good to be able to keep in touch.
After reading Wood and Smith the point that really stood out to me was the example of how technolgy could save time by creating a feeding machine so people could continue working and not have to take time out to each (p. 147). I had to laugh because it's so true and crazy when you read it in print. Isn't it the same thing when we can't unplug from our cell phones or internet long enough to eat, shop, engage in an uninterupted face to face conversation? The idea of convergence used in the book is when communication, information and computer industries merge but this same thing happens in our life. I'm not trying to necessarily put a value judgement but rather step back, unplug and evaluate the overall picture.
There is always a tension between new technology and how things used to be and interviewing three different generations brings to light some of these issues. How do we go forward? What does it mean for society? Is technology what drives us forward or do we need to look at more intrinsic values?
The youngest person I interviewed was "Brett", middle age "Rick" and eldest "Deanna". Commonalities among all groups was e-mail. That seems to be the across the board most common use but so is research or information gathering of some sort. In Wood & Smith the point is made that home and offices are now merged (p. 147). We can see this phenomena in the fact that we conduct research, not at the library, but from our own homes. I'm a prime example since I'm right now doing my homework on my bed and plan to access the OSU library online to research material for another class. "Brett" says that he does his shopping online and uses it for entertainment purposes. Convergence of media taking place right in our own homes. We are virtually able to do just about anything anywhere and we've gotten to the place that we want or maybe even demand to have our wi-fi wherever we might be, imagine checking into a hotel without wi-fi these days or sitting in the airport with no way to connect?
Another commonality across the age groups is that the people I talked with agreed that they were pretty comfortable communicating on the internet. "Brett" was the only one in my groups that actively maintained a social networking site online. That is where I think the younger age group departs. Myspace, Facebook, and the other sites seem to be inhabited, in a larger portion, by the younger crowd. Somehow I can't imagine my grandmother with a Myspace account.
All ages agree that the technology has both good and bad implications. They all agreed that technology has brought us into a more fast-paced society and for the older crowd there is a resistance to that aspect while for the younger crowd it's okay. As I said before, the younger aged have nothing to compare it to. In general the attitude is that the internet is here to stay and the general consensus is that it's good to be able to keep in touch.
After reading Wood and Smith the point that really stood out to me was the example of how technolgy could save time by creating a feeding machine so people could continue working and not have to take time out to each (p. 147). I had to laugh because it's so true and crazy when you read it in print. Isn't it the same thing when we can't unplug from our cell phones or internet long enough to eat, shop, engage in an uninterupted face to face conversation? The idea of convergence used in the book is when communication, information and computer industries merge but this same thing happens in our life. I'm not trying to necessarily put a value judgement but rather step back, unplug and evaluate the overall picture.
There is always a tension between new technology and how things used to be and interviewing three different generations brings to light some of these issues. How do we go forward? What does it mean for society? Is technology what drives us forward or do we need to look at more intrinsic values?
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Online Community
This assignment was something I dreaded. I've never had the desire to join any kind of community online. I have to admit the reason is because I've followed the threads and posts of these communities and I've found them to be quite similar. The three communities that I've observed have been Craigslist, Rasa Malaysia, and Citydata.com. Craigslist may not be a typical community but there is a community that forms withing it as far as the musicians part. This is where musicians can look for either gigs or potential band members and such. There are often flair ups online regarding a particular place that refuses to pay or a musician that is annoyed by someone's post boasting of their own abilities.
In Rasa Malaysia, which is an asian cooking site, someone will post a new recipe and then there will be a flurry of responses. These responses will say things like "sounds good", "I hope to try it", make corrections, or talk about some related topic. The third site I've read is the Datacity.com where there is information about any city across the US. I've read this in order to research where we are moving to. On this site there is a community of people interacting usually based around someone asking questions of the community about what to expect, where to eat and so forth. People end up in online battles over what's good and bad about the place they live. My thoughts are "get a life". Sorry, but it seems so petty.
I've noticed that there are those responding in all three situations that seem like they are just trying to get into the conversation but really don't have anything to say. It seems to me that they seem like they are only "there" to find some sense of belonging. Then there are those that have anger or frustrations and use this forum as a way to vent and get others involved to fulfill their "need". Thirdly there are those that seem genuine in their attempt to be helpful or interactive in a way that seems to accomplish something.
Having said all that, I finally decided to join in a community that had to do with animals. We are moving out of state soon so I was trying to find an animal loving community that could give me suggestions on how to safely and comfortably move my cats across the country.
I posted a question and wondered if I would get a reply or be shunned. It took a day but I got three posts. One was okay but not very helpful, one had nothing to do with my question, they just wanted to know about the place we were moving, one was very thoughtful and helpful. I responded to the two that made sense and then the thoughtful one responded yet again. I found myself engaging in a conversation because we had found commonality.
She not only moved her cats across the country but she moved from Oregon to Arizona which is exactly what I'm doing. I could see how one could get pulled into a community such as this. Even the person who posted a little off the wall is now a person to me and I just accept her as "being in a different space" than me. Maybe she was just trying to find a place to connect with others. Maybe she's experimenting with identities (p. 139).
The issue with experimenting with different identities is also an intersting topic to me. The one talked about in the book Dlvl (p. 124) based on fantasy. These people have created a fantasy world where people speak Klingon. This community allows unlimited exploration of fantasy because the very nature is fantasy to begin with. I guess it goes back to "people have an intrinsic need for community" (p. 122) and it can take the form of shared fantasy, shared need (such as my case) or interest. The virtual communities have provided an easy and accesible outlet for all. I have to go now as I noticed my new online community friend, Belles, just posted to me (I'm not kidding).
In Rasa Malaysia, which is an asian cooking site, someone will post a new recipe and then there will be a flurry of responses. These responses will say things like "sounds good", "I hope to try it", make corrections, or talk about some related topic. The third site I've read is the Datacity.com where there is information about any city across the US. I've read this in order to research where we are moving to. On this site there is a community of people interacting usually based around someone asking questions of the community about what to expect, where to eat and so forth. People end up in online battles over what's good and bad about the place they live. My thoughts are "get a life". Sorry, but it seems so petty.
I've noticed that there are those responding in all three situations that seem like they are just trying to get into the conversation but really don't have anything to say. It seems to me that they seem like they are only "there" to find some sense of belonging. Then there are those that have anger or frustrations and use this forum as a way to vent and get others involved to fulfill their "need". Thirdly there are those that seem genuine in their attempt to be helpful or interactive in a way that seems to accomplish something.
Having said all that, I finally decided to join in a community that had to do with animals. We are moving out of state soon so I was trying to find an animal loving community that could give me suggestions on how to safely and comfortably move my cats across the country.
I posted a question and wondered if I would get a reply or be shunned. It took a day but I got three posts. One was okay but not very helpful, one had nothing to do with my question, they just wanted to know about the place we were moving, one was very thoughtful and helpful. I responded to the two that made sense and then the thoughtful one responded yet again. I found myself engaging in a conversation because we had found commonality.
She not only moved her cats across the country but she moved from Oregon to Arizona which is exactly what I'm doing. I could see how one could get pulled into a community such as this. Even the person who posted a little off the wall is now a person to me and I just accept her as "being in a different space" than me. Maybe she was just trying to find a place to connect with others. Maybe she's experimenting with identities (p. 139).
The issue with experimenting with different identities is also an intersting topic to me. The one talked about in the book Dlvl (p. 124) based on fantasy. These people have created a fantasy world where people speak Klingon. This community allows unlimited exploration of fantasy because the very nature is fantasy to begin with. I guess it goes back to "people have an intrinsic need for community" (p. 122) and it can take the form of shared fantasy, shared need (such as my case) or interest. The virtual communities have provided an easy and accesible outlet for all. I have to go now as I noticed my new online community friend, Belles, just posted to me (I'm not kidding).
Saturday, July 18, 2009
E-mail or Snail mail Does it Matter?
When first reading about this assignment my first thought wasn't about the medium I would use but more about how cool it would be. A lot of us are communication majors and this assignment is about a very positive communication act.
I immediately thought of two people, one being my sister-in-law and the other a former Pastor's wife. I began composing what I would say to each and I chose to send a letter to the Pastor's wife and an e-mail to my sister-in-law. I think it was based on the idea that my sister-in-law and I frequently correspond by e-mail since she lives in another state and I don't know my other friends e-mail.
I began by composing a letter starting with an introduction explaining that it was an assignment but that I had just been thinking about her and remembering some of her advice. My title was "10 things I learned from my Pastor's wife". I felt very inspired and enjoyed every minute of it as I wrote. I could picture her reading this and remembering our memories together and feeling good about her positive and memorable influence in my life. I just sent it yesterday so I don't know if I'll get a reply or not. It really doesn't matter to me. I think that it's wonderful to have a written and tangible document to look back on and be encouraged.
On the other hand I wrote my sister-in-law by e-mail. I loved writing this as well and it actually was much longer than the written because I can type so much faster and there is a uninterrupted flow when typing. I don't like the act of writing with a pen or pencil because I have messy handwriting. I'm kind of like a "mad scientist" because my mind often thinks much faster than I can physically write but typing gives me a better result as the letters always look neat no matter how fast I type. Rereading both my letters I really didn't find much difference in the tone or language I felt both accurately said what I intended.
In relating this to our reading the thing that stood out to me the most was Postman (p. 70) where he talks about our peek-a-boo world where info comes and then is quickly gone. In this assignment we find a reminder that some information is worth keeping and remembering and that is at the root of many our discussions, this "thing" worth sorting through and treasuring is "people". With all this information and technology there are still people at the beginning and end.
Postman says that we are trying to accommodate ourselves to this new technology. We wander if all this new information is our friend. Our "friends" are real people and what a wonderful idea to stop and do this very act of remembering and thanking them whether it's snail mail or e-mail. If e-mail makes it more conducive to keeping our friendships alive then use it. After all, isn't the idea that these things are merely tools and we have not only the choice but the obligation to keep them in their proper place!
In the end I agree that there are times when e-mail is not appropriate communication and it's good that we evaluate our use or misuse of it in this arena but more than that it's a valid option for communicating. I think having a piece of paper is good because it can be viewed for years to come but how cool to be able to send out 10 e-mails like this because e-mail makes the task seem so less daunting for some (like me). Write or e-mail so what, I think those that received either correspondence would say "just do it".
I immediately thought of two people, one being my sister-in-law and the other a former Pastor's wife. I began composing what I would say to each and I chose to send a letter to the Pastor's wife and an e-mail to my sister-in-law. I think it was based on the idea that my sister-in-law and I frequently correspond by e-mail since she lives in another state and I don't know my other friends e-mail.
I began by composing a letter starting with an introduction explaining that it was an assignment but that I had just been thinking about her and remembering some of her advice. My title was "10 things I learned from my Pastor's wife". I felt very inspired and enjoyed every minute of it as I wrote. I could picture her reading this and remembering our memories together and feeling good about her positive and memorable influence in my life. I just sent it yesterday so I don't know if I'll get a reply or not. It really doesn't matter to me. I think that it's wonderful to have a written and tangible document to look back on and be encouraged.
On the other hand I wrote my sister-in-law by e-mail. I loved writing this as well and it actually was much longer than the written because I can type so much faster and there is a uninterrupted flow when typing. I don't like the act of writing with a pen or pencil because I have messy handwriting. I'm kind of like a "mad scientist" because my mind often thinks much faster than I can physically write but typing gives me a better result as the letters always look neat no matter how fast I type. Rereading both my letters I really didn't find much difference in the tone or language I felt both accurately said what I intended.
In relating this to our reading the thing that stood out to me the most was Postman (p. 70) where he talks about our peek-a-boo world where info comes and then is quickly gone. In this assignment we find a reminder that some information is worth keeping and remembering and that is at the root of many our discussions, this "thing" worth sorting through and treasuring is "people". With all this information and technology there are still people at the beginning and end.
Postman says that we are trying to accommodate ourselves to this new technology. We wander if all this new information is our friend. Our "friends" are real people and what a wonderful idea to stop and do this very act of remembering and thanking them whether it's snail mail or e-mail. If e-mail makes it more conducive to keeping our friendships alive then use it. After all, isn't the idea that these things are merely tools and we have not only the choice but the obligation to keep them in their proper place!
In the end I agree that there are times when e-mail is not appropriate communication and it's good that we evaluate our use or misuse of it in this arena but more than that it's a valid option for communicating. I think having a piece of paper is good because it can be viewed for years to come but how cool to be able to send out 10 e-mails like this because e-mail makes the task seem so less daunting for some (like me). Write or e-mail so what, I think those that received either correspondence would say "just do it".
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Streching My Comfort Zone on Facebook
I'm probably one of the few if not the only one in this class who does not have an account on either facebook or myspace. Even thinking about it pushed me way out of my comfort zone. I guess I fear drawing unwanted attention and I don't necessarily want to have someone I don't know viewing my profile it makes me feel exposed, vulnerable and violated. As I actually began the signing up process I found myself being okay and a little excited about the possibility of an old friend finding me.
The initial information on the profile page was non intrusive. As I was posting my interests, activities, favorite movies and so forth I was also very conscious of self presentation. I wanted to make sure I was honest but I also was concerned about how I might appear to others. I took a look at my answers to make sure they made me sound like an interesting person. It's difficult to know what to reveal since the entries have the potential to be read by a wide and unidentified audience.
This goes back to our reading regarding social context cues I feel very insecure not knowing how to adjust or tailor my information. Without the ability to target a specific audience comes the uncertainty as to what might be interesting or appealing to the reader(s). Many of these types of cues are manifest by nonverbal cues which are completely absent in cmc.
I can put some information out there and try to paint a picture of who I am but we are all so multifaceted that as impressions are formed they fall so short of the whole person. There is no way that I could truly explain "me" on facebook nor could I truly and deeply understand another. I'm blinded by my own weaknesses and when using cmc I have a chance to filter and construct "me" but in face to face there is more opportunity for the other person to observe what I myself may not know.
I think cmc relationships could be good but now that I've initiated opening the door for online relationships, how am I going to manage them? At least in person we can kind of verbally say something like "we should get together again soon" or "give me a call" knowing that it's likely to never take place but online how do you politely say "bug off". I don't know I'm just asking. I don't want to feel obligated on a daily basis to e-mail or keep in touch.
I hope I don't sound too negative. Maybe I'm making much ado about nothing and will find that things won't get out of control. My observation is that facebook is an attempt to communicate what we want others to know about us. Facebook offers a way to construct ourselves in a favorable light to those we want to impress. It also offers the opportunity to occupy a different role or place in society. Some have chosen pseudonymity and maybe there's a little of that in all of us but maybe that's a given and we've all chosen to operate under that assumption.
The initial information on the profile page was non intrusive. As I was posting my interests, activities, favorite movies and so forth I was also very conscious of self presentation. I wanted to make sure I was honest but I also was concerned about how I might appear to others. I took a look at my answers to make sure they made me sound like an interesting person. It's difficult to know what to reveal since the entries have the potential to be read by a wide and unidentified audience.
This goes back to our reading regarding social context cues I feel very insecure not knowing how to adjust or tailor my information. Without the ability to target a specific audience comes the uncertainty as to what might be interesting or appealing to the reader(s). Many of these types of cues are manifest by nonverbal cues which are completely absent in cmc.
I can put some information out there and try to paint a picture of who I am but we are all so multifaceted that as impressions are formed they fall so short of the whole person. There is no way that I could truly explain "me" on facebook nor could I truly and deeply understand another. I'm blinded by my own weaknesses and when using cmc I have a chance to filter and construct "me" but in face to face there is more opportunity for the other person to observe what I myself may not know.
I think cmc relationships could be good but now that I've initiated opening the door for online relationships, how am I going to manage them? At least in person we can kind of verbally say something like "we should get together again soon" or "give me a call" knowing that it's likely to never take place but online how do you politely say "bug off". I don't know I'm just asking. I don't want to feel obligated on a daily basis to e-mail or keep in touch.
I hope I don't sound too negative. Maybe I'm making much ado about nothing and will find that things won't get out of control. My observation is that facebook is an attempt to communicate what we want others to know about us. Facebook offers a way to construct ourselves in a favorable light to those we want to impress. It also offers the opportunity to occupy a different role or place in society. Some have chosen pseudonymity and maybe there's a little of that in all of us but maybe that's a given and we've all chosen to operate under that assumption.
Friday, July 3, 2009
The World of Wall-E
One of the first things that stands out to me in this movie is the fact that society has become a technopoly. When Wall-E and his "girlfriend" enter the spaceship we see that people are bloated and fat from being plugged in and utterly dependent on machines. There whole "society" and existence is dependent on machines. The structure is topsy turvy as the machines define the human's existence so to speak. The people are obese and "comfortable" as they are continuously fed and entertained by technology. They are technically alive but yet they are not functioning the way a human should. They have given up there humanity. These are not people who are interacting with one another. These are not people who are communicating, thinking or even moving. This kind of hits home when we watch it. I think of how we tend to be so plugged in so much of the time that we are not experiencing all the nuances and pleasures of the unique position of being human.
In response to the reading I think that it shows how the decisions on how technology will take its place in society will determine our future. I don't believe that technology is necessarily bad but do we really have to invent every labor saving device just because we can. Maybe as individuals we do need to rethink where and to what extent it belongs in our life.
In response to the reading I think that it shows how the decisions on how technology will take its place in society will determine our future. I don't believe that technology is necessarily bad but do we really have to invent every labor saving device just because we can. Maybe as individuals we do need to rethink where and to what extent it belongs in our life.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Internet Fasting
Okay, lets just set the stage. I'm an "older" than average student so this whole blog, cyberspace, social networking, technopoly, mediated communication stuff is a bit out of my comfort zone. I have been actively using the computer for many years but maybe in a more limited way than many of my classmates. Internet "fasting" is not necessarily the trauma for me that it might be for my contemporaries. Having said that I must also say that it was harder than I thought as well. Even the thought of not being able to connect sent a shiver of panic through my soul "What about my e-mail?", "I might miss something in the news", "How will I stay connected in school?", "I feel somehow disconnected from the rest of the world". I imagine that I'm not alone in my imagined distress.
I chose to go "internet free" starting around 3:00pm on Friday to 3:00pm on Saturday. After I said my last goodbye's online. I decided that I would again take my place in society in merely 24 hours. It was hard!!! I ended my last session by making sure that all e-mails were properly dealt with and giving myself a good pep talk that disaster wasn't lurking in the wings. I realized that I could actually use the phone if I needed to talk to someone, that I could watch the news on TV and I still could use Microsoft Word to type schoolwork.
I don't spend more than about 1 to 2 hours a day on the internet unless I'm doing some kind of research so I really didn't have to find other ways to spend that time elsewhere. I did watch the news on the television but as we all know it was in the wake of Michael Jackson's untimely death and the airwaves were so flooded it was difficult to get away from it. I've not gotten into social networking online. I think I'm afraid to do it because I envision it being a burden to keep up with. I don't really know it that's true but I haven't had any motivation to find out.
I honestly think it's probably my age. If I were 20's then I think it would be quite different. Still I was surprised by the fact that the internet is a very important part of my life. E-mail is so great to be able to connect literally worldwide in such a short period of time. It allows me to get information so quickly that I can't imagine going back to only snail mail. I think there are times when there is no substitute for handwritten notes like a heartfelt thank you or sympathy in the loss of a loved one but to be without e-mail for even 24 hours seems debilitating.
I also realized how much I use the internet for research on a personal level. We are currently planning our move out of state when I graduate. We are looking daily for jobs and housing. I'm kind of hooked on having the ability to get to a job just as it's posted. I have several search agents and feel a sense of panic if I think I might miss that perfect job by not being able to connect online. I guess that's the point of this exercise, to be forced to evaluate what the internet means to all of us individually. I conclude that it's neither necessarily good or bad but as the reading pointed out it is important to take a "real" look at what it means in our life.
I chose to go "internet free" starting around 3:00pm on Friday to 3:00pm on Saturday. After I said my last goodbye's online. I decided that I would again take my place in society in merely 24 hours. It was hard!!! I ended my last session by making sure that all e-mails were properly dealt with and giving myself a good pep talk that disaster wasn't lurking in the wings. I realized that I could actually use the phone if I needed to talk to someone, that I could watch the news on TV and I still could use Microsoft Word to type schoolwork.
I don't spend more than about 1 to 2 hours a day on the internet unless I'm doing some kind of research so I really didn't have to find other ways to spend that time elsewhere. I did watch the news on the television but as we all know it was in the wake of Michael Jackson's untimely death and the airwaves were so flooded it was difficult to get away from it. I've not gotten into social networking online. I think I'm afraid to do it because I envision it being a burden to keep up with. I don't really know it that's true but I haven't had any motivation to find out.
I honestly think it's probably my age. If I were 20's then I think it would be quite different. Still I was surprised by the fact that the internet is a very important part of my life. E-mail is so great to be able to connect literally worldwide in such a short period of time. It allows me to get information so quickly that I can't imagine going back to only snail mail. I think there are times when there is no substitute for handwritten notes like a heartfelt thank you or sympathy in the loss of a loved one but to be without e-mail for even 24 hours seems debilitating.
I also realized how much I use the internet for research on a personal level. We are currently planning our move out of state when I graduate. We are looking daily for jobs and housing. I'm kind of hooked on having the ability to get to a job just as it's posted. I have several search agents and feel a sense of panic if I think I might miss that perfect job by not being able to connect online. I guess that's the point of this exercise, to be forced to evaluate what the internet means to all of us individually. I conclude that it's neither necessarily good or bad but as the reading pointed out it is important to take a "real" look at what it means in our life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)