Have a Coke and a Smile. That was mine!

Wow! The next big thing in advertising/public relations, that’s a good question. And with so many different messages already hitting us from so many different directions could there possibly be a next big thing. Is the next step personalization of the message being presented the next big thing? Will voicemail messages or text messages be directed to us with our names attached within the messages. That, of course, goes back to some of the issues we have talked about throughout the semester, how much information do we want advertisers, or anyone for that matter, to have about us. The Madison Avenue’s 30-Second Spot Remover pointed out the fact that the advances in technologies and communication have made it possible for us to be surrounded by information we see and hear. It also points out that with these technologies we have the ability to click on icons and symbols, it gives the consumer the ability to control the flow.

For instance, the Chrysler makes the interactive cornerstone of its strategy article points out Chrysler’s customers ability to configure vehicles for themselves online. It mentions the interactivity of sites and the marketing strategy to talk to consumers individually. The same article also mentions the fact that marketers are shifting the ad money away from venues like television to Web based advertising.
One thing is for sure, the advertising dollar is shifting. In a class last semester Dr. Grimes said exactly that. In a conversation he had with the GM of GSD&M in Austin, an ad broker, it was reported that the money he was spending for his clients was going more and more towards Web based advertising.

Internet Communications…Let’s Get it Right!!! mentioned one key element in online advertising. And that was the ability or importance to reach consumers in the confines of their homes. Is that the next big thing, email messages that are deliver via the Internet to targeted audiences, and not just spam or phishing expeditions, but highly targeted personalized emails. As if it was coming from a friend, a friend named Barnes and Noble, for instance. The article also talks about the equal playing field that businesses are on on the Internet. Large or small businesses have the same footing on the Internet, given the message presented in an effective and proper way.

The Brawny blazes trail but winds up lost in woods article was a great example of not having an effective message. Or as the article put it, cutting-edge and forward-thinking and ultra-pioneery. That would no doubt be an issue of any marketing or public relations message, the minute you go ultra-pioneery, is the minute that your audience has just tuned you out. Like the article points out there are far to many things to take up our time, trying to figure out an advertising message should not be one of them. And that then leads into the digital-talent dearth breeds crisis article. Does that mean there will have to be more Brawny ad campaigns because the lack of talent creating the advertising is not available. Or will it lead to an influx of new and young talent entering a field that is looking for the next big thing.

I had remembered last year about some talk going on about messages being left on the NIN website, but not being a fan didn’t really pay a lot of attention to what was happening. Secret Websites, Coded Messages:The New World of Immersive Games was a fascinating article. To learn what all the talk was about was fun to read. It kind of reminded me of the movie The Game. That would have to very close to the next big thing, were consumers are no longer passive observers, but actually living out the storyline. Nike, Google Kick Off Social-Networking Site has the same appeal of being more interactive with a specific target audience. Soccer fans for instance can be connected to each other via the networking site. But will it eventually just become an extension of Nike or Google, time will tell. Not as next big thing potential as the immersive games concept.

Stakeholder Strength: PR Survival Strategies in the Internet Age was very interesting. We talked about this last week, the ability for groups of people to assemble and get the message out. This ability, no doubt, gives shareholders the access to not only the corporations they invest in but also the other shareholders that have done the same thing. It gives the shareholders tremendous amounts of power they may not have had in the past. And with this power corporations must be more diligent in their efforts on how they handle public relations issues regarding stocks, hirings, firings and other investments. The access shareholders have to the Internet narrows the world in which corporations and investors function in.

Next big thing in advertising, if I had the answer I probably wouldn’t mention it here, in fear someone would steal my idea. Oh, and it's a good idea.

ARRGGHHHH

I am nowhere near creative enough to attempt to predict what the next"Big Idea" in advertising may be, but, with the help of the reading, I can tell you where I think the current trends will take us. First, I would like to say that advertising in the Internet age is defined and will continue to be defined by the Interactivity and non-linear nature of the Web. Julie Roehm of Chrysler describes Chrysler's new online push as an inevitability. She describes their objective as making the interactive nature of the web the center of their new marketing strategy. The idea is to catch people doing what they would do anyway, look for cars online, and then pull them in and keep them on the site with various interactive modules. According to the article, their approach seems to be working considering that a large percentage of the audience members looked participated in several of their modules once they were directed to the web site.

Greenberg in Madison Avenue's 30-Second Spot Remover from the New York Times agrees that advertising is no longer about linear communication. Greenberg demonstrates that traditional media need not be left in the dust of the Internet when it comes to Interactivity. In his Times Square shoe ads, people could send text messages that would change the design of the shoe in the ad. To a certain extent people have always been entertained by advertising. Now it seems that people are saying to big business "If you want our attention above all of the noise, then you need to make it fun and new." And right now that means Interactivity.

I certainly think that Social Networking Sites will continue to play a grand role in advertising in the future, mostly through word of mouth. However, I think endeavors like Nike and Google's Joga.com will not thrive. Joga, because it is soccer centric and is pulling from a massive fan base might be one of the only examples of this model working. What won't work is if every person who wants to sell a product decides to a create a social networking site around that product or activity. If you play close attention, you will notice that we are collecting more and more of these sites and going to them less and less. Figuring out a way to position yourself favorably on the already existing networking sites is the best bet. Using the resources and the networks that already exist to create a buzz about your product would be better than latching onto the idea of the social networking site as if it's the Holy Grail of Internet advertising.

From my perspective, the new advertising concept that I think has the potential of the most longevity over time, IF done correctly, is the ARG. If Interactivity and non-linear communication is key, then ARGs seem to provide an experience for consumers that is unparalled in traditional advertising. The article Secret Websites, Coded Messages," the author gives a wildly popular Nine-Inch-Nails ARG that really pulled fans into the game. Combining a sort of online treasure hunt with real world elements, the ARG merges the online world with the real world in a way that allows the consumer to enjoy the anticipation of a product almost more then the product itself. If the purpose of advertising is expansion of brand awareness then the ARG seems to supply that need for the advertiser while catering to what the online consumer wants from their products; interactivity.

A recent example of an effective ARG was the one for the movie Cloverfield. I was glad that this was included in this article because I believe that without the buzz and mystery created by the ARG the movie would not have been a success. My boyfriend followed the ARG almost obsessively and we did go see the movie on opening weekend. Although entertaining, Jeff agrees that the ARG was more fun then the movie.

Some of the main reasons that the ARG can be effective is that people really can find a lot of entertainment from these games, especially the ones that manage to merge reality and the Internet world, help people feel connected and a part of a larger community. Nothing could be cooler than finding that flash drive in the toilet and discovering that there is a previously unrecorded Nine-Inch-Nails song on it, making you the one who helps the rest of the people following the ARG get to the next level.

Another main reason is that most of the people developing these ARGs really understand the person they are catering to. Nine-Inch-Nails going so far as to embed clues in the album expecting to show up on torrent sites before the original release is an example. Actually wanting someone to steal your album seems counter to what most of the music industry has been ascribing to.

Of course there are many instances where ARGs have been a failure and if products continue to pail in comparison to the ARG leading up to them people may lose interest. However, if marketers and advertisers can continue listening to their consumers and giving them an experience that is part role-playing game, part treasure hunt, part on-line community the ARG can grow and expand and be used for many other industries.

Much credit should be given to the web for the gateway it has opened for the PR and Advertising market.
For example, the article Chrysler makes interactive the cornerstone of its strategy by Oser and Halliday discussed the ways that Chrysler like most companies advertised to their by using the Internet to provide feedback from their valued purchasers/customers to the public. Strategies like this are what keep companies in the forefront because it presents the public with a genuine feeling and honest experience, not any gimmicks. The public are able to see satisfied customers sharing their experiences with Chrysler with them.
Advertising will continue to remain successful as long as the bridge is open to the public, therefore their must be a continuous trend of interactivity with the development of advertisements which is the secret ingredient that keeps advertising alive.
To give examples on how beneficial interactivity on the web can be, let’s take a look at Conceptualizing and Measuring the Perceived Interactivity of Websites by Gou Wu who discussed the interactivity of the websites by its site visitors and defined the interaction as a psychological state.
The author breaks the interactivity into three dimensions of where a scale was to measure the users perceived control over the web, their perceived responsiveness and their personalization of whatever the site they are on.
Sometime ago I would’ve stated that the public relations and advertising connection from artist to fan would’ve been a fad, but I surely think that will become a trend just because of the lack of representation in the public relations department and advertising departments of the record companies. The only way it will become a fad is if the artist or record company’s budget runs low to where they cannot do any promotion.
In an interview with Trent Reznor in an issue of WIRED Magazine, Reznor stated how he began a project where he created a game based off of his album called “Year Zero” which is NIN (Nine Inch Nails) fifth studio album and whether he knows it or not, but created a interactive field with this campaign. It was a new way to not only advertise his album, but to use the internet and every digital aspect for what it’s worth. Reznor’s idea was revolutionary because he stepped into a different world where he was able to connect with his fan base through the web and reach the fans who are heavy internet users or gamers on a new platform.
This was a way of creating an existing connection between fans and their music. These action’s were set in motion for an artistic side to be valued and illustrated, since the usual selling methods of CDs, commercials and word of mouth is simply old and worn out. I think many artists will continue to use this new trend/fad in the advertising/public relations?
THAT IS THE NEXT BIG THING. I think it offers more credibility to any product that is trying to be pushed.

My Crystal Ball is a little fuzzy...

but I think advertising is going to become less in your face. For example, CNN.com has an ad on their homepage for Travel Deals from Sherman's Travel. The full name of the company isn't on the site at all. You have to click on it to find out the company's name. There isn't a pop-up, there isn't a huge ad that comes up if you accidentally roll over the ad (those are annoying). By the way, I'm not very savvy about advertising...so...be gentle!

The Nike-Google Social Networking site, www.joga.com, seems to be an interesting idea but it's invitation only. My issue with this is that people invited to the site most likely already buy Nike products. Why not make it open for everyone? Homes says this is the latest example of how Nike is "keeping in touch with its core consumers: young males who increasingly get their information from digital sources". But, what about other consumers like women? In a previous PEW article men and women were equally likely to use the Internet to buy products. Also, 66% of those who go online are women while 68% are men. I don't think this type of advertising will be a trend because it is too specific in terms of the audience.

I felt the Garfield article regarding the Brawny Academy was funny. I think the concept was good but the execution - not so much. I don't feel that a "Survivor-like" weekly Internet program is really going to up the sales of paper towels. I like how Garfield pokes fun at the concept by saying "We're supposed to lean forward on our desktops to follow the adventures of eight dopes who we probably wouldn't even exchange pleasantries with at the bus stop?" He goes on to say that these videos are targeted at women. I certainly would not a) watch these videos or 2) buy these paper towels because some random guy ran some sort of obstacle course. I don't really think there is a way to properly advertise for paper towels other than showing that Brawny is a thicker towel able to absorb more mess than the other brand(s). Their website now offers "one minute solutions" to tasks like cleaning the fridge, keeping lettuce fresher longer, and making sure your crystal wine glasses sparkle!

I enjoyed O'Brien's article. He talks about how "they (consumers) can bypass unwanted advertising". This is why I love DVR. I can record a show and fast forward through 3 minutes worth of commercials. When I have the time...and sit down and watch programming - that's what I want to see. Recently ABC announced plans to block people from fast-forwarding through commercials while using video-on-demand. Here's the article. O'Brien also mentions that "technology has put consumers in the driver's seat by giving them a vast array of new choices for better information". He goes to mention the interactivity and creativity ads. I think this goes back to what I said earlier about non-intrusive ads. We can click on an ad and go to a website but only if we want to. P.S. I like the Hell's Kitchen/Lonelyville/Death Valley bit.

I think Chrysler's online ads were smart, funny and a good idea. I would much rather listen to someone like "the Glitter Goddess" than a paid actor. I want to know that I'm getting a good value for my money, especially when it comes to buying a car. When I bought my car, I did what the article mentions. I went online and researched different cars before making the ultimate decision. Of course I test drove and all that jazz first. But, going online to look at different makes and models helped me to narrow down my choices. If I would have seen these ads I would not have bought a Chrysler but they would have been fun to watch! I also like the other interactive features like the games. Chrysler can get e-mail addresses to send information etc. to customers or potential customers.

I like Reznor's idea in the Wired Magazine article. However, I don't think I would have put a USB drive I found in a bathroom stall into my computer. I think having all those pieces come together is an innovative and interesting advertising campaign. He was able to get his message across as well as advertise for his latest album using a newer medium in a relatively new way. It got people involved and was a lesser invasive form of advertising. They also mention JJ Abrams using similar tactics for Cloverfield and AI. I think I may be in love with 42 Entertainment. Think they'd hire me? 

When I was declaring a major in college my parents wanted me to go into some sort of computer/digital field. I resisted and now I wish I would have - or maybe minored in it. I knew that it would be a big field but after reading the Digital-talent article I wish I would have joined the digital party a little earlier. But I guess it's good that I showed up right? Anyway, if I knew as much about flash, InDesign, and other software I would probably do the same thing these guys are doing and charge more. They know there aren't that many people with these skills (which I hope to have someday!) and they are in high demand. 

As far as PR goes I agree with Marken's statement "for public relations people e-mail and Internet-based communications provides a new and exciting opportunity to reach people directly". They can send interactive press kits, alert media outlets to press conferences, etc. He also mentions the Internet "puts all businesses large and small on a competitively equal footing". I think this is true in most cases - depending on how it is used. However, I wonder what will happen if the net is no longer neutral and restrictions are not only placed on residential broadband but also commercial.

Sorry for rambling...:)

Yay! I get to write about advertising!

Let me start by saying, I really enjoyed the readings this week as they are in my field of interest and work experience. I have spent about 7 years studying and working in the advertising and research field and I am finally excited about the direction things are headed for the advertising industry. But before talking about the future, I have some thoughts on the current articles and studies. I’ll apologize in advance for the length of this blog post. ☺

Firstly, Creamer’s article is humorous to me. I wasn’t as fluent in online advertising strategies when the dotcom bubble burst, but now that I look back on it – it seems that too many people jumped on the bandwagon at one time and the content wasn’t meaningful or relevant enough for consumers….yet. The people who developed the skills needed to create advanced interactive technologies online got dumped simply because the business model didn’t work. Now that the content is innovated and meaningful, it doesn’t surprise me that agencies cannot afford to hire these specialists. I would charge a ton myself knowing that I am one of a “small” community of people capable of Flash, InDesign, and other software skills. A side note on this one – what’s with everyone jumping ship at Omnicom’s Organic? Could it be that the company still doesn’t pay you for overtime when you are working an average of 70 hours a week?

Marken’s article reminds me of a workshop I had to attend when working at Millward Brown. It was designed to help us effectively and efficiently construct emails and other forms of online communication to project teams and other departments. Emails should be short, simple, separated into short paragraphs when there is a lot of information to convey, and the use of bullets is highly recommended to organize thoughts. In regards to users’ actions online, the data is not surprising to me. I see that number for purchasing items online growing significantly over the next few years. In regards to businesses online, I loved this quote: “The Internet puts all businesses – large and small – on a competitively equal footing if it is properly and effectively used.” I completely agree with that and I will take that a bit further by saying – if you don’t have a presence online in the current market, you don’t have a chance.

This topic leads into the chapter in our book. The Internet is definitely becoming a powerhouse for revenue and commerce. Since this book was written, I’m sure these numbers are tremendously higher given the growing number of consumers becoming more comfortable with purchasing products and services online. A lot of businesses popping up on the Internet have been fortunate in that it doesn’t cost a lot of money to start, you can find the type of audience you are looking for no matter how obscure, and if you have it to sell, there is someone out there who will buy it. With that in mind, advertising will always be what helps these online centric sites survive and generate profit outside of selling goods and services.

Regarding Huang and Lin’s study on exposure to banner advertising, I am going to be extremely bold and call bull*&^% on this one. Here is why – effective advertising cannot and is not judged by the number of times someone could possibly see your advertisement. They state in this study’s findings, “the audience’s on-line banner exposure can be best analyzed by its web site visits.” After millions of dollars in online advertising research every year, brands are completely aware that just because they are present somewhere and the web site gets hundreds of thousands hits per day, it does not dictate whether or not someone actually saw your advertisement even one time visiting. In fact, that is why first party cookies have become the backbone of online research. Once someone is exposed to a test ad, the cookie attaches itself to their IP address. Then when that person is solicited to take a survey and chooses to participate that cookie is then relayed back to the data processing program along with their answers to brand equity questions. If the ad was not appealing or eye-catching, people who have an exposure cookie, meaning the ad was present on the site when they visited, do not remember it being there and definitely don’t remember what brand or product it was for. And they will “not remember” it no matter how many times it shows up in the rotation of ads. So my point would be that the term “exposure” in this study would have to mean that the ad was present, not that a consumer or visitor actually saw it.

Wu’s study is more relevant in that it is about the user/viewer’s perception of interactivity. I can relate that to advertising because “message responsiveness” determines the success or failure of advertising and it is completely about the consumer’s view of things, not the technicality of the advertisement. I do have one issue with this study and that is I wish Wu had performed analysis on more than one web site. He chose the nutritional supplement category and the category is everything when it comes to the amount of involvement the consumer wants when viewing it. Involvement and interactivity go hand-in-hand for me.

Now – on to strategy. Tim O’Brien’s article discussing the ideas of Greenberg is right on track. While the Internet can make it very easy to become too complex, the challenge for advertisers will be simplifying that so that consumers don’t overlook your message. There are too many alternative options out there now for consumers so if you screw any part of it up (by being too complex or requiring too much from the consumer) then they will move right past you to find an easier way. And, yes, a lot of consumers are “tuning out” advertising messages with the use of TiVo; however, they are interacting with brands more now than ever before even if they don’t realize it. If you surf You Tube for a little while, you will find that consumers are making their own commercials about brands they have strong feelings about, whether good or bad. That is why IMC has become a large part of an advertising plan when about 10 years back, it was a separate department or outsourced to a promotions agency.

Merwe, Pitt, and Abratt talk about the implications for Public Relations in all this innovation of advertising. Given that consumers are creating more and more of the content online, PR is experiencing a dramatic increase in unplanned messages and having to respond. I like the term “killing the physical distance” in this article because it shows how much the Internet is eliminating the gatekeepers that exist with traditional forms of media and bringing messages to everyone in the world no matter the geographic location. The result of advertising moving to personal, two-way relationships with consumers means that PR’s role becomes vital in “policing” that communication. Can you imagine the nightmare for the PR firms for Chase and Microsoft? ChaseBankSucks.com and, my personal favorite, MS-Evil: The Evil Empire are both web sites giving the consumer the voice, but a PR professional has to work with it, not against it, to be successful in the current realm of online messages.

Chrysler’s strategy in moving money from traditional media to online is one that I think many other brands will be following in the next few years. Because the research isn’t solid enough just yet to justify a significant increase in prices for online advertising placement, it is a gold mine for big brands. Television spots are extremely expensive to produce and place and are getting more expensive due to decreasing overall ad revenue for broadcast. Magazine placements are also expensive and full of clutter, probably as much as television, and we all know newspaper subscriptions are the lowest they have ever been. It simply makes sense to move ad money online. Where else can you specifically target the consumers you need to talk to, develop individual relationships with them, and generate a nice ROI when it comes to long-term brand equity? Chrysler’s strategy of being open-minded and on the edge will benefit them greatly in the grand scheme of their brand image.

Brawny, on the other hand, is wasting money…and wasting it in poor taste. I agree with Garfield’s thoughts about the brand not knowing its consumer very well. I’ll add to that by saying Brawny obviously doesn’t know enough about the purchase process for its product either. Paper towels are an extremely low involvement product. The only thing a brand can hope for in this category is to be top-of-mind or have a great shelf placement when the consumer is hurrying down the paper products aisle looking for the reasonably priced, better soaker-upper brand. Maybe a catchy slogan or memorable icon or mascot will help you out here but you are wasting money with an online television series that grocery shoppers have no interest in watching or time to even devote to what paper towel brand they will buy the next time they are at the store. About as far as I get is “Hey, that one has eight rolls and costs as much as that one with four. That’ll work.”

Nike and Google have a cool idea with the soccer social networking web site; however, I can foresee some obvious problems here, which I am sure they are aware of as well. One being that an invitation only social site is not going to give them the numbers required to make this venture worthwhile to Nike. While it may help Google get a foot in the door with social networking (in 2006), Nike will suffer in the ROI department. Their apparent solution is to start creating ones for other sports, but that means going against the new model of OpenSocial and connecting all SNS to reduce the maintenance and profile creation requirements on the part of SNS users. While it sounds cool, I don’t think it will take off and that is why they weren’t as “public” with its release as any other venture between two massive brand icons would be otherwise.

Now, after ALL that – the future of ad/pr strategies, in my opinion, is headed in the direction that Nine Inch Nails singer, Trent Reznor, and 42 Entertainment went with the marketing strategy for his new albums and tours. What an amazingly creative and engaging way to get consumers excited about your brand (because a band is brand icon as well). I had never heard of anything like this before and it reminded me of that movie, The Game, with Michael Douglas.

Point being with that example is that when consumers feel as though they have more control over exposure to advertising and the degree to which they interact with brands, advertising becomes more successful. When I teach the Media Planning chapter in the Intro to Advertising class, I use the term “Touchpoints” a lot. The industry calls it brand contacts, but it is basically the idea that advertising has to find a way to become a subtle part of a consumer’s everyday life and appear to be something chosen, not shoved down their throat. I think the movement away from traditional forms of advertising, with the exception of product placement in television programming and movies, is going to be the next major trend because it is becoming all about Integration. How can you make yourself relevant and meaningful enough to every individual you encounter to influence him or her to WANT to interact with your brand?

The next "Big Thing"

I believe that the next big thing in advertising and marketing will be new and innovative forms of non-invasive advertising. The kind of advertising where company’s sponsor an event, activity or place, and brand their product around it. Or where a company is too completely integrated with a technology, show or idea that it is hard to tell the two apart. A good example is the reading on Joga.com, the social network for soccer fans. Being supported and funded by Nike allows Nike to place ads and product placement all over the website without being too “in your face.” Everything on that site revolves around Nike, even the articles written are by Nike, therefore any information a fan receives on the site points towards one thing… NIKE.

A similar situation is shown in the article on the Nine Inch Nails tactic to promote their album. Non traditional advertising will and is becoming more popular in the advertising world. Companies everywhere are, “using the media of today,” to promote their products including the internet, social networks, and other new “fad” technologies. As new technologies are created, new ways of advertising will also be created, and the cycle of innovation will continue. With the use of the internet and new technologies, the possibilities are endless when it comes to marketing to the public. From a simple banner ad, to a complete hide and seek game distributed on many platforms, customers everywhere will be smothered by “silent advertising.”

The poll in the article, “Madison Avenue’s 30-second Spot Remover,” shows that consumers are tired of being “bombarded” by marketing and try and avoid the ads at any cost. They do not want to buy products which have overwhelmed them with ads. This seems to have been the trend in advertising for a long time, and a reason why new, innovative and less invasive advertising is becoming more and more prominent. Like the article says, “Overload is a huge issue.”

Take the Advertising out of Advertising

I must first apologize to those in the advertising and pr fields. I do not like advertising or public relations. I avoid advertising like the plague. I do not watch network television, aside from professional football. I dvr all of my shows specifically so I can speed through the ads. I do not read magazines, because I would rather not spend my hard earned money on a publication in which at least 75% of the content is advertising. I try to avoid buying clothing that is advertised. I am sick of advertising and managed public relations campaigns. I want something authentic, something real. That is why I see the future of advertising as taking the advertising out of advertising.

Amazon.com's user recommendations and user generated lists are far more successful models for advertising than any other form. I am more likely to listen to a real person who has bought a product than any managed and contrived advertising campaign. I am even more likely to rely on the opinion of someone I know. I think that facebook and other social networking sites can be the vehicle for massive amounts of user generated ratings, information, and suggestions that will be a far more effective form of "advertising" than traditional ads could ever be. Not only is this information more effective, but it costs a fraction of what a traditional ad campaign would. This idea is completely Long Tail, which I believe will be the savior of the media industry. User generated niche content is the answer to the future of advertising.

Auto makers such as Chrysler and VW are wisely going down the path of customization. The option of personalizing one's vehicle is a brilliant idea that other companies should follow. There are over 300 million people in the U.S.; people want to stand out and be individuals. People do not want to own the same car as their neighbor, they want to own "their" car. This creates a brand that the consumer actively experiences instead of passively consuming a mass produced product or message. The article on the guerrilla campaign Trent Reznor compiled for the release of Year Zero laid forth a challenging blueprint for the future. He created a grass-roots campaign that embraced fans and included them in an overall experience that transcended the music in a way that was stunningly brilliant. Year Zero is also a great album that I would highly recommend listening to and allowing yourself to absorb it as a complete work of art.

It all boils down to time. I simply do not have the time to sit through advertising. What's even worse is that fact that most products/services being advertised to me are things that I have zero interest in consuming. I heavily research my interests and purchases, which is a far better way for me to consume information. I need access to information on my specific interests and luckily the Internet provides that very thing. User generated content in the forms of reviews, comments, and suggestions, customization, and creating a grass-roots authentic experience should be the future of advertising.

Advertisers will get even smarter......

I want to start by saying…I was a volunteer at the rally and it was an amazing experience! I got to meet Obama and wow….I’m still excited!!!

Now to business…..

The Internet has opened new doors for advertisers and public relations specialists all over the world. It has taken the term interactivity to new levels and created a world of user generated content. The release of DVR and TiVo has presented new challenges to advertising executives. Users can now forward through ads and avoid them all together. I have noticed an increase in product placement over the years, a tactic that is still successful because it is advertising that cannot be avoided. Oser and Halliday discussed the ways that Chrysler was advertising to their audiences. According to the authors, Chrysler used the Internet to provide testimonials of real customers; this is a good tactic because people like to tell their story and giving them control over their story makes them want to get involved. According to Timothy O’Brien, “it’s not about linear communication, and the millennials understand that; it’s about symbols and icons and you click here and you click there and you control it”, this is a good point, and has been proven successful with several different companies like Chrysler and even Doritos.

In the future I think that commercials may scroll across the bottom of our favorite TV shows and there are even talks of the ability to purchase what we see on our television screens. I think that advertising will remain successful as long as it continues to have the interactive side where consumers feel like they have control. The Rose article also presented a really good advertising tactic. I think we are generally curious creatures and the idea of using ARGS like Nine Inch Nails did is a good idea. I know that if I have called numbers that I heard in a song just out of curiosity and more recently after I watched the movie Untraceable I had this urge to visit the website in the movie (terrible…I know).

I think that the Internet has been very beneficial to advertisers as well as public relations specialists. According to Marken, for PR, the Internet “provides a new and exciting opportunity to reach people directly-press, industry analysts, consumers, business partners and business associates”. Correspondence is much easier to send and is much more efficient. Marken also discusses the importance of writing skills for those in the PR profession. According to Marken, poorly written emails are “ a poor reflection on your organization and you”. Like advertising, I think that PR is going in the direction of becoming more interactive, for example the KFC commercial that had a hidden message, and if figured out you could get something free. Consumers like to be a part of the message; I think it offers more credibility to the product.

"The Next Big Thing"

What do you think is the next big thing in advertising/public relations? If you don't have a crystal ball or have a specific idea, talk about the general elements of the next trends in the field. What trends currently going on in ad/pr do you think are actually fads?

Advertising and PR are not my topics of expertise, so forgive me a bit if I take more of the advertised-to perspective.

Based on a lot of what we've read and considered about the impact of new media in our lives, and the trend towards personalization, interactivity and "the long tail" of things, I would venture a guess that all these same things will have a significant impact on advertising and PR.

If I look at advertising aimed at the public before I was born, I can get a sense that the advertisers were trying to convince people that their product was best, in the same way we still expect political candidates to engage us when seeking our support. Soon they started to have famous or important people tell us why they though the product was the best, in the hopes that we would follow along with those we so admired. Then it was about us, with faceless voices or simply embedded messages trying to convince us that WE could be better, faster, smarter than all the rest - if we used that product.

The common element to all these approaches is that we simply passively received the message from a single authoritative source, which controlled the shape and delivery and expereince of the advertising message. Surely, if new media is to have the same sort of impact on advertising and public relations as it has on seemingly everything else, these things will be the first to go. Vandermerwe's article seemed to understand this best by looking at the communication modes made available by new media.

You can already see this when you look at how successful technologies "advertise" themselves. There are no television ads, fliers in the mail or logos on sporting equipment for things like Flicker and Facebook yet we all know of them. Users themselves advertise the technologies, slapping logos like "Powered by Netscape" and "Support Web Standards: Use Firefox" on their own personal spaces of the Web. Users speak about, even advocate for, technologies like Tivo, becoming more ardent spokespersons than the companies that sell the products. We tend to find out about what we might like to use through people in our social sphere, or from people who have used similar products or who have similar tastes to us. My husband adds to our music collection every so often by listening to Pandora. And finally, we tend to have more personal investment in products and services we are able to contribute to. For example, users of YouTube contribute to the wealth of videos available on the service. They're far more invested in YouTube than any other video-sharing service because of this, and more likely to enagage in the kinds of activities that promote products and services in this new media enabled world.

I'm not sure how convinced I am that Immersive Ad Campaigns might be the key to the next big thing in advertising, partly because it's still such an orchestrated effort. Such things often do work, spectacularly well, once or twice before becoming "Tired". While we do gravitate towards playing the kinds of games that immersive campaigns can be, we also tire of them easily. Instead, I lean more towards Marken's simple message of effective email. It seems a bit pedestrian these days (is email old new media?) but it's an easy was to start the cascade effect of user supported advertising by keeping the message clear, simple and portable.

I also agree with the New York times article, "Madison Avenue's 30-second Spot Remover,", that technology is goign to wreak havoc on the agency business and that, despite the possibilities, that consumers are so swamped with pitches that they tune them out. I know I do.

In fact, several years ago I decided to make my home environment as advertising-free as possible, at least on the surface. I'd noticed that photos of dreamy, comforting and clearly restful rooms, gardens, spas and other physical spaces in lifestyle and home and garden magazines were often devoid of any advertising. So, I took to recycling the cereal box as soon as it came home from the grocery store (putting the contents in a glass jar). I tossed fliers and junk mail as soon as I took them out of the mailbox. Bathroom products whose labels I could not remove were relegated to baskets, boxes and drawers. The effect is startling and apparently noticeable to many who visit; I regularly get comments on how "restful" my home is.

This doesn't mean I'm an advertising agency's worst nightmare however. Not only am I still exposed to advertising in several traditional mediums, but I'm also a part of the effect of new media in helping others advertise. Several of my friends know of my knowledge for cooking techniques because of my online activity. Subsequently they came to me for advice on a brand of cookware. I might write of the same on a blog and provide a link to an electric tea kettle I recommend. And I quite deliberately peruse the smaller ads in my cooking magazines, visiting websites of specialty dinnerware. In other words, there are places where I can't escape advertising, places where I still seek it out, and new media arenas where I advocate for the products and services that I prefer. I'm just not going to allow it to passively surround me any longer.

The problem then, is in measuring the effectiveness of the message and the channels it is put through for any given product or service. Wu explores this a bit in the article, Conceptualizing and Measuring the Perceived Interactivity of Websites about measuring the interactivity of websites. But as we've seen before, this can be problematic, especially given the problems inherent in operationalizing "interactivity" (and quite possibly, "web site" now. But that's another essay.)

I envy them (ad and pr agencies) not the task.

The Internet on Everyday Life? The Internet IS my Life!

For me the Internet is my teacher, my friend, my way of life. The internet is the gateway to all knowledge in the world. Poetry, war, music, animals, science, even the blueprints to how to make an atom bomb can all be found on the internet of today. It's like one big text book for every class you will ever take, and it's as portable as the nearest computer. I check my bank account, pay my taxes, buy movie tickets, and keep up to date with what is going on in the world all through the net. I can scarcely recall a world without the Internet. Before the internet came to be people had to drive or walk all around to different places in order to gather and send information to others. Businesses had to go to their suppliers, or at the very least haggle with them over the phone while constantly being put on hold, while they can now order all the parts and merchandise they need from their respective websites. Employers and employees can email each other news updates and questions in the comfort of their chairs instead of running all over the place and trying to track down that certain someone. Fliers are almost extinct, saving many trees in the process, as people are finding it easier to advertise on the web and via emails.
Families can equally stay in touch and communicate with each other with ease via email or programs like Skype Instant Messenger. Everyone has become linked closer together through the Internet as more and more users join every day. People can check the news and read about their favored politician or presidential candidate. Many people are using the web as their main source of information on candidates, much to the dislike of some campaigners. "Prominent commentators have expressed concern that growing use of the internet would be harmful to democratic deliberation. They worried that citizens would use the internet to seek information that reinforces their political preferences and avoid material that challenges their views." I can see the problem they are referring to if people just look at what they want to see, and not the whole picture, possibly resulting in poor judgment and the election of someone ill equiped for the job (though in my opinion that's been the case for the last decade or more).
Some people believe that the internet, while containing many advantages, might not be as good a thing as most believe it to be. I myself admit to being dependent on the Internet for nearly all of my academic work, as well as news and entertainment. I used to be a big online gamer, and still play from time to time. If I were to lose the internet for good I don't know what I'd do, besides freak out. Just the other day the internet was down in my apartment for about 4 hours and I was beside my self not being able to check emails and facebook or look at youtube. I'm sure I'm not the only one. If the Internet were to go down permenantly, I think many people would have a hard time coping. I would probably at the very least lose contact with half my friends and fail half my classes.

The Internet and Every Day

Every day the internet makes my life more bearable!! I work full time and I’m taking three classes this semester, so I’m seriously limited on time. The internet is a blessing for me. I can research projects for work and school; find information on topics that interest me; keep in-touch with family and friends through e-mail, instant messaging, and social networking; shop; and even take care of personal business like changing the address on my driver license, paying my bills, or registering to vote in a new county. Talk about convenience!! The internet is nothing but beneficial for me with my chaotic schedule because it makes my life easier.

Though there are disadvantages to all great things, the internet is no exception. Information obtained online cannot always be verified, time stamps aren’t always accurate, the excess of information sometimes makes searches for specific information difficult and time-consuming (though not as time-consuming as searching through documents in the library or other sources of paperwork), sites are not always current, documents may not load or download when needed, et cetera. For me, the advantages greatly outweigh the disadvantages.
As for the readings, I don’t know why the numbers from PEW Internet Research studies always surprise me, but they do. I find it fascinating that internet users know more about political issues than the political candidates themselves. And that the majority of Americans still get their political news from television and newspapers, instead of the internet. Even when the internet has instant updates as new information becomes available and also provides a better opportunity for exposure to various sides of issues. Though I suppose how much exposure a user gets to various sides of an issue is dependent upon how much or how little information is sought by that user.

As far as the articles about Apple versus PC, I have my own preferences. My very first computer was a Commodore 64, which I used for assignments in the 4th grade. Back then, I was WAY ahead of the game using a personal PC for class work. But then, summer computer camps and middle school had only Macs, and I was required to take a programming class, too, so Macs were IT for me. Then, in high school, yearbook layout was done on PCs, so another switch. Gah!! My first round of college was PC-friendly, too. Now, for round two of college, it’s back to Macs. I’ve learned from personal experience that I prefer PC’s because they work best for my personal needs. But Macs, on the other hand, are my first choice for creative work when I need it. Not sure who will win the PC/Mac battle, but experience tells me it’ll always be a tug-of-war between the two.

I like how Rheingold refers to the internet as the WELL in his book. It’s a great analogy, really. If a user is thirsty, and keeps drilling for information, he’ll eventually reach the water’s surface. And the user just may be blessed with a bottomless well!

We Are All Married to the Net!

At this time, I feel almost redundant repeating how much I think the Internet is the Last Great Human Invention, so I would not exhaust or belabor this observation. I agree with the observations in the “Internet and Social Life” piece.

So on PCs and Macs first. Like most people, I was enslaved to the PC for so long until I was exposed to the Mac from Apple about a year ago, since then me and my Mac sleep together and are inseparable. Ok, may be that is too much, but I think one of the great things Apple has been able to accomplish over the years is to make its product aesthetically attractive to the eyes and very user-friendly. But what Apple does even better is to make products that converge together such as the iPod , iPhone and what ever iGadget that Steve Jobs and his engineers are cooking up. Also, does anyone notice that you don’t get a lot of viruses or piracy attacks when you use a Mac?

The Pew Research folks conduct such wonderful surveys that capture a wide range of what people are thinking and what they are doing. What the survey results shows to me is that the Internet is an indispensable tool. It does not control our lives, but we can use it to enhance and refine our lives and the activities we value. ( I think McKenna and Bargh made a similar point). People flock to the Internet for different reasons, Star War fans look for information on Star Wars collectibles and conventions, bikers look for information on biking, etc. It is then not surprising that political information seekers go beyond just information that they believe in or are already comfortable with and seek more and even varying views on all sorts of issues.

Like any other aspect of our lives, the Internet has come to change and define politics. It has brought a transparency that was not there. We all remember the Macaca moment of Sen. George Allen in 2006 thanks to YouTube. But beyond Youtube, it allows more people to be involved in politics, it allows not traditional constituents to donate little sums of money to their candidates (Howard Dean, Ron Paul, Barack Obama, etc). But the Internet is also a strong vehicle for bringing democracy to closed societies. Because of its open nature, amid attempts by governments such as China and North Korea, the internet remains still the most potent way to get information into an doubt of a closed society.

Personally, I would say that the Internet has had a positive effect on my life. I cannot imagine life without my laptop and being able to get online. Interestingly enough, outside of work, it is websites like the New York Times, Washington Post, the Economist, Wikipedia, CNN etc, that occupy my “online” time. If you like to devour information, you can get lost in the virtual world wide web. I am not going to admit to being addicted to the Internet, but sometimes (ok most times) when I am in front of the computer, I prefer people just IM me instead of calling me over the phone or trying to talk to me in person, IM is not as distracting!

I heart me some Mac and I heart me some Double IPA.

I think that, obviously, the Internet has vastly

 affected our daily life. It is weird that I cannot imagine going without the Internet today, but I can remember in high school when I would connect to my Juno mail once a week and download my messages. Mainly consisting a lame Ska bands’ newsletters and the weekly movie schedule from the theatre.

 

According to the PEW studies the Internet has an effect on our voting habits and how we stay informed politically.  I can sort of see some of the “smart mob” techniques described by Rheingold being utilized in the current democratic candidate race.

 

When Obama spoke in Austin the first time a year ago, I remember getting several text messages informing me about it and then seeing bulletins on Myspace linking me to the live feed.

 

I felt that Bargh’s and McKenna’s section on community involvement is strongly supported by the Facebook model of digitizing an individual’s real life. I feel that my own experience with Obama’s 2007 speech is an example of the positive social effect being online can offer.

In my opinion, and based on my experience, I do feel the overall effects are positve.

 

Now to the Mac VS PC.

 

Being that I have been a Mac owner for the past four years and have been employed by Apple for a stint, I am unapologetically pro-Mac.

But, I am not one of those blindly follow-Jobs-off-a-cliff-Mac-beats-PC-at-everything guys.

 

I have a friend who works in the videogame industry as a renderer. He owns a clocked up Dell machine.

 

It looks sort of like a speed boat knocked up a tup-a-ware container.  

BUT, I know his machine is better than mine for what he does.

Mine is better than his for what I do…

Blog for class. And try to stay trendy and hip at coffee places.

 

As far as the reading goes, I think Gene Stienberg’s Mac VS PC tests were fair and balanced, although I wonder how the tests would end up today.

 

My switch from PC to Mac was not as clumsy as Fitzgerald described it. But, I did have a few friends with iBooks who let me play around on them a few times before I got mine.

 

And I disliked the Tweakheadz Lab article due to the fact that the author assumed that Mac users are also wine cooler drinkers. Not so. 

internet...

The Internet is absolutely beneficial. At home and work, the Internet quickly is quickly replacing our traditional communication methods because of its efficiency. The Internet overcomes distances between A and B, so the role of information over the wire in a society becomes bigger and more important. Bargh and McKenna mentioned that the Internet is also a mass medium because it can reach over thousands people at the same time. Although some people worry about the increased usage of the Internet reduces face-to-face communications which may cause negative outcomes, such as loneliness. However, the interactivity of the Internet encourages meeting new people and networking the people who we have already known.

The authors of The Internet and democratic debate said the internet plays a huge role in people’s news gathering. Whether it is political and economical news, more and more people are exposed on the internet than any other media today. Internet also provides different views that “traditional” media don’t. I think that is the most unique advantage having the internet. Internet is able to affect somebody without direct meetings, and it has the power to change other people.

We talked about the bad sides of the internet addiction last week, such as anonymity. However, I think the internet works positively overall because it brings more chances that we can participate in. It supports the democracy from the bottom, offers more opportunities whatever the interests are, and lets to meet different people.

...With a Side of Responsibility, Please

Okay, these readings hit home because my research deals with how emergent technologies have created a new vehicle for collaboration within society. Much of the theory behind this aligns with these readings, so I'll just dig in.

Jenkin's work on convergence likely stuck with me the most because of how it relates to Jay Bolter's concept of remediation. Remediation is how we in the literati and print-based culture tend to view media evolution. Remediation describes how media tend to imitate one another as they adapt to a societal role: thus print and web design both mimic each at first as they fight out their respective roles in each other's presence. Convergence can be seen as the place where content overlaps in remediated media. This is important to me because convergence and remediation allow fragments to be joined more easily than in the past. Today you can join concepts from TV, music, and Joyce together on the Internet with a picture of your kids to create something new. This is part of the new collaborative culture: kinda like Evil Burt. We now all own access to once privileged fragments to do with what we want. The challenge now is for pedagogy, especially secondary schools, to catch up with teaching methods that promote responsible rhetoric and collaboration with this new power.

That's also the frightening aspect of this new collaboration. Mob rule historically isn't the sunshine and happiness revolution often preached. Responsible revolution generally develops through extensive argumentation and deliberation. The new powers of the digital mob and raw democracy discussed in both Poster and Rheingold threaten responsible discourse. I was pleased at how Rheingold looked at the darkside of the digital mob, because it's more worrisome than the benefits for now to everyday life. The anonymity of the Internet to hide dangerous elements has now given way to a method for those elements to physically manifest and act. It's a tough trade off because I do not want to sacrifice my non-virtual civil liberties due to a perceived need to protect society from these forces, but I also cannot deny the danger. What is needed is a means to effectively communicate and engage publicly in these forums with detailed debate, and not simple rumor mills and mob friendly sound bites. I wanted people engaged in their community, but not at the expensive of responsible deliberation.

I think how we train ourselves to collaborate with these technologies will affect daily life more than time restraints. I think some of the researchers overlook basic science in understanding why these technologies give me more personal and family time.

Time = Distance / Rate

If I collaborate across greater space at greater speed, I save considerable amounts of time. Since the Internet grants superior speed-to-distance ratios, this offers me more time to contribute however I wish: family, friends. personal reflection, or community interaction.

Whether working from home, ordering online, or researching online, I cut down on commute, searching, and waiting in line. This dramatically affects my daily life in a way not fully explored in the readings; though most touch on related topics.

However, the collaborative elements the readings discuss do present the more important ethical considerations of these new technologies to daily life. How we collaborate in mass, how we make decisions and deliberate with one another remains paramount. Social interaction on the web remains an emerging topic as Bargh and McKenna demonstrate. Though I wonder if we don't see the best in our partners online due to the fact that the current method of communication is so devoid of detail that we simply fill in that void with our own self. We do this in normal communication, but one wonders how much we amplify this online.

For random closing thoughts: I'm a Mac guy at heart, but I use both because IBM-PCs are cheap and I'm a student. The supremacy of platform gaming makes IBM-PCs nothing better than the cheapest option. I thought the articles did a great job talking hardware, but the lack of Linux references kinda lessens their weight from software platform POV.

I also want to say that the McMillian article ranks as the most useful piece I've read all year in any class. A great starting point for making some research choices on Internet sampling. Now I have to rework my paper again.

So, the good? Superior and more democratic collaboration and content production with more time to do so. The bad? Mob rule combined with anonymity granted to potentially harmful minority sects--in other words, a lack of regulation regarding the worst aspects of the most important elements within a functional democracy, freedom and minority protection.

The Internet...daily

Howard Rheingold's discussion of computer-linked communities, particularly the WELL, in The Virtual Community showed a more optimistic side of how the Internet can be used to connect with others and create new relationships. Rheingold describes the people he met and how they helped one another through illness and fund raising. However, he also mentions some of the darker aspects of the community such as Blair Newman, who was addicted to the WELL and eventually committed suicide for apparently various reasons.

Those are the two poles of the web. It would be difficult to say whether the effects of the Internet on everyday life are negative or positive, because it depends on the person and how they are using it. The Internet has a positive effect in that it democratizes information. Anyone who has access can retrieve information on just about anything they need to know. However, there are those who feel they cannot remove themselves from the Internet or feel the need to be malicious. It would probably be safe to say the majority of users fall in the middle.

Mark Poster's essay on Internet and the public sphere take a different point of view on the usefulness of the Web as a tool for democratic discussion. He criticizes it by challenging the meaning of "public" on the Web and states it may not be democratic forum for expression and discussion. However, the study, The Internet and Democratic Debate, from the Pew Center found Internet users do not search out political messages or new reports solely focused on their personal points of view. The Web maybe more democratic than some are willing to give it credit for.

The Internet has proven to be a great tool for politicians as we have seen so far this election season. YouTube has helped popularize videos from political fanatics who otherwise would not have their voices heard or their issues addressed. Blogging has left no news unturned or embarrassing moments unremarked.

The Internet has changed the way we communicate with one another and how we spread information. Whether it is negative or positive is up to the user. However, I would contend arguments saying communication has been negatively affected by the Internet may not know how to use the technology.

Convergence Culture: Making the internet a part of our everyday lives

Today we live in a world of a fast paced, technology driven socitey, where new media are becoming a part of our culture. Because of its diversity of web design, the internet is convergence. The internet is all of our old media combined into one. The web looks like the newspapers, the televsion, the movies, It takes on all forms of media that have been used in the past, and only makes them bigger and better because of the strech of hyperlinks. As media consumers we take in all we can get, through radio, television, newspapers, telephones, and especially the internet. We use all of these media combined on a daily basis. In this day and age, choosing a Mac or a PC is a big deal, because whichever we choose will be the interface that we interact with on a daily basis. After reading all of the material today, many questions come to mind. How does the internet effect our day to day lives? Are families being distanced because of the generational digital divide, or are they closer than ever because of the many ways that they can stay connected through the internet? Are communities being torn apart because of the internet's anti-social design or does the internet's interactivity help us to get to know our neighbors in a new way? Do we look on the internet for our favorite candidate and get one sided information from a single sorce, or do we check out every candidate's page because of the availablity of information on the internet? In my opinion, the effects of the internet on socitey are mostly positive. With the internet we are expanding ourselves to reach new dimensions that we could never reach before with older technologies. We are becomming more aware of our surroundings with just a click of a button. We are more involved with politics and get a better more diverse vantage point of the candidtates and their issues. Communites are growing stronger by the day with social networking sites that help you to get o know your neighbors. We are more connected with our families in new ways that help us to communicate faster on a daily basis. The internet is a beneficial part of our everyday life.

Life and the Internet

I think that overall, the internet has definitely made an impact on most Americans' lives. Last semester I studied (in Dr. Subervi's class) the ways the 2008 presidential candidates are trying to reach potential voters by websites. I believe that the internet has helped spread messages so quickly, and especially political messages. One picture posted on the internet can then be spread to other media sources, such as TV. or newspapers.
The Pew article states, "Internet use is not the only factor associated with exposure to a wide range of political arguments. Education levels, interest in the campaign, and age are among the other factors tied to the number of points of view people encounter."

I also think that community involvement can also be boosted by the internet. My neighbor has a sign posted on his fence that promotes Obama and gives an email address to connect with other supporters in our same zip code.

On one hand, I think that the growing importance of the internet in our daily lives can be a positive thing. The Internet & Social Life article states that the main reason people use the internet is for email. The internet allows for people to send a quick hello or picture to family members and friends all over the world.

The negative side of this is that communication can become less personal feeling when it is done over the internet. I'll admit, I've ignored a phone call then responded to a voicemail by email just so I wouldn't have to talk to the person. And how many of you have IM'd your roommate while you're in the same room? I think that it provides a can also false sense of connection. Well, people are connected, but they may not be doing that much actual communication on the internet.

Also, I think the ability to invent a new life for yourself is kind of scary. The CyberDemocracy article states, "Individuals invent themselves and do so repeatedly and differentially in the course of conversing or messaging electronically.” I know that one of my friends has two Myspace profiles. One profile he is "Nathan" (his real name), but on the other he is "Jody" (made up). In his real profile he is in a relationship, but is listed as single on the other profile. Even his hobbies are different. Just that one example leads me to believe that really nothing can be trusted online. If a close friend of mine can manipulate hundreds of people to believe he is someone he's not, then no telling what else is made up or incorrect. While I was doing the readings today, there was a guest on Dr. Phil who was taken for $5,500 by her boyfriend whom she had never met in person, only online. This is when I think the internet becomes just another way for bad people to do bad things and take advantage of those that aren't so smart.

But, I'm not like an internet hater or anything. I love being online. I just think you have to be smart about it, and sort of treat it like everything else...in moderation.

Effects of the Internet

The Internet has profound effects on everyday life.  We are constantly being thrown websites all over most of the media, the only contacts people sometimes have are their e-mail addresses, and important information is being exchanged over facebook messages or on myspace walls.  I have been told several times to "facebook" someone for information instead of meeting up or calling them (maybe they just don't like me and it's a fake account?).  Aside from that, people can look up any information they need at the touch of a keyboard, and with broadband, they can do so quite instantaneously.  That's why "wired Americans hear more points of view about candidates and key issues than other citizens" (PEW).

While people use the internet to search for information they support or are already knowledgeable in, they use it to search for information they oppose (like certain presidential candidates) or want to learn more about.  This is interesting to read, especially as the Texas primaries are nearing and I catch myself constantly looking up older debates between candidates on youtube.com or appearances on the Tonight Show.  However, those who look for this information do so in conjunction with television, or their main source of news.  I find it interesting that the internet has not replaced traditional media (yet) in peoples' endeavors to get their regular news, but they are instead verifying or replaying this information via an online forum.  Of course, I still watch CNN on TV (and I prefer to do so) but I watch replays or clips I wasn't able to view realtime on the Web.

Most essentially for America, I think the Internet provides an open forum for democracy.  The PEW report suggested that people are "not using the internet to screen out ideas with which they disagree."  I think this is mainly because people can look up information they want on their own time instead of ever feeling like it is being shoved in their faces.  If someone wants to learn about a different point of view, they can do so at their leisure, such as the issue of gay marriage being sent to their e-mail account.  They can open it any time they want, as opposed to a television commercial or show that has to be watch in realtime.  Of course, this information would not be possible in the first place in mainstream media.  The controversial topics or unpopular choices have a home on the internet and can easily be found in their most raw form without scrutiny from large corporations, advertisers, or conglomerates.

While these may be some political effects of the internet on life, it is absolutely affecting interpersonal relationships in more influential ways.  The "Internet and Social Life" article had a lot to say about this.  While being a personal media tool, the internet is also used as a mass medium.  Here, we can see an intertwining of intimate material in a communal forum.  This type of communication forces members to reevaluate their trust boundaries on a different platform.  Those who move to their relationships online almost have to create a new sense of how large or small their "personal bubble" will be.  Information you want some people to know may not extend to others who you want to remain acquaintances with, and vice versa.

It seems by the readings that those who move their relationships online tend to increase contact with their social networks and feel more socially extroverted than those who are not online.  For instance, according to the Internet and Social Life article, "the more hours the average respondent spent on the Internet, the more time he or she also spent face-to-face with family and friends." Also, it was interesting to see how internet users are more able to find groups and support for any kind of stigmatized illness or special fringe interest or identity.  I understand how it may be difficult to find others that share the same kind of impediment to meet any other way, and an online forum provides an unobtrusive, open place to do so.

I think the options the internet provides are hands-down positive.  Just being able to access this information is incredibly helpful, and its effects seem to be overwhelmingly positive.  It seems like while there are few fringe studies that show negative effects, I think you can make the argument that eating a banana or jumping rope has its ill effects as well.  Most people have become more knowledgeable in many areas of study, more social, more apt to discuss topics, and more influenced by the internet than by any other media.  We not only use the internet for information and entertainment, but we rely on it to exchange important, personal communication with one another.  

it's an Inet life

What is the Internet's contribution to Global Warming? How do solar flares and/or sun spots effect my computer's performance? Well, these smart ass unanswerable questions are my responses when I can't quite explain what going on beneath these plastic keys.

Professionally in my everyday life, I have been working in the newspaper industry for the past 4-5 years, and I simply can't imagine how a newspaper was published (for hundreds of years) without the aid of the Internet. The efficiency the Inet and new technology provides is unheralded. In the article Smart Mobs: The Power of the Mobile Many, we see this efficiency in action. The ability for the Manila citizens to organize and coordinate by text messages to topple the reigning President Estrada is a testament to the nature of modern technology. And not surprisingly we see this technomenon again and again: The 1999 "Battle of Seattle, The 2000 up rise against gas prices in Britain, The 2000 political demonstration in Toronto, The 1992 bicycle rally in San Fran, and do i need to even mention the success of Ron Paul and how he raised more money in one day than any other candidate in history. This Smart Mob generation is merely tipping the glass of what it foreshadows.

Politically, (Sunday you'll love this!) Technology has made the democratic process so efficient that one day I predict voting will be completely unnecessary - click the link below: If it doesn't work well i will blame sun spots or solar flares.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks?utm_source=EMTF_Onion

Ok - all kidding aside, this new age of cyberdemocracy is upon us and the impacts new media has on the political sphere is yet to be fully maximized. Again, i point the impact Ron Paul and his cyberturf-roots movement has had on the 2008 republican nomination. Another example of how democracy is becoming decentralized is the YouTube debates. and how this gives the people a chance and a voice to ask the candidates questions they otherwise would have been silent or voiceless. The ability to fund raise and utilize Inet social networks allows grassroots movements a louder voice on the national platform. Mark Poster in his article, CyberDemocracy: Internet and the Public Sphere claims that we will need a new term for democracy that defines how leaders and followers are mediated in cyberspace and constituted in the relation to the evolving mobile identities. Here he reiterates this decentralized theme of cyberdemocracy. In the Pew findings: The Internet and democratic debate - they discovered that the Internet contributes to a wider awareness of political arguments, and that the Internet news is mostly used as a complement to more traditional media. And the most surprising statistic they found is that most Americans prefer their news media sources to have no obvious bias. Yet, many others prefer news sources that either confirm their own views or challenge them.

Socially, the Internet and new technology has shaped our culture in a variety of ways. And as I might hate to admit it, American Idol has shaped how Americans can communicate. Similarly, to the smart mob concept - millions of Americans text their vote and for the best pop idol. and now we are texting our vote for the best superbowl commercial, best slam dunk, and only god knows what else. In the article, Buying into American Idol: How we are being Sold on Reality Television, it analyzed how these online communities pool together their votes and determine the outcome of the show. The article also explains that as cyberspace broadens the spere of our social interaction, it becomes even more important to be able to talk about people we share in common via the media that people from our local community who will not be known by all the participants in an online conversation.

Another social impact the Inet is having on us is the new label of Internet Addict. Although in Chou (et al) research, A Review of the Research on Internet Addiction they determine that a person is not addicted to the Internet but to various applications within the Internet, for me this is a moot point. It is like arguing that an alcoholic is not addicted to drugs but to alcohol only.

Internet and Everyday Life

I agree with Manasian (as cited in The Internet and Social Life) that the Internet is changing every aspect of our lives. I don’t know of anyone who doesn’t use the Internet everyday for not only seeking out information but for keeping in touch with family and friends, even if it is just through email. I think it is working to bring together a very large audience by putting in contact people who would probably never meet otherwise. I think the argument over whether the Internet will affect society positively or negatively is one that can’t be resolved in one direction. Everything we do has positive and negative outcomes, it just depends on how you use the Internet that will make it a good or bad thing in your life. People who do become depressed and lonely with only CMC in their lives are the ones that are not seeking out a balance with face-to-face relationships.

I actually feel a bit sorry for Rheingold’s wife and daughter he spoke of because the man was obsessed with his relationships on the WELL. I do think the virtual community did wonderful things for each other, not only online, but definitely in RL. However, I do think he was spending way more than 2 hours a day on that thing and I’m sure his family felt pretty neglected. That’s just an assumption though. I was waiting for the section on Addiction in that book chapter and was pretty disappointed that he discussed Blair’s choosing of virtual community addiction over cocaine addiction instead of talking about the amount of time spent staring, typing, and reading on the Internet when compared to the time he spent away from it. I was hoping for a realization there…didn’t get it!

I do think it aids in community involvement. Pew states that political information seekers are not only looking for reinforcement, but they are looking to be well informed from all sides. I think that’s great, and in the case this year of Ron Paul, the Internet has carried the man. If it weren’t for the online communities that have rallied to form offline communities for Ron Paul, I don’t think anyone would really know the man’s name. In Smart Mobs, Rheingold talks about how the formation of these groups isn’t always about protesting issues; it’s about group dynamics and finding other people around the world with similar interests. Technology has provided these groups with a means to congregate quickly and easily and sometimes they are for just hanging out and others are for protesting a cause they do not believe in. In one case, they overthrew the President of the Philippines – but hey – to each their own in this case. The interpersonal relationship devices used in Tokyo and Japan are really cool if you ask me. I actually think about the concept of the ImaHima sometimes. I wonder when I am sitting at a coffee shop or at the mall by myself if any of my friends are close and have some time to grab something to eat or hang out. What a great idea.

As far as democracy goes – the Internet is bringing that term to mean more than it ever has before and it definitely has some of the politicians and scholars freaking out. Poster’s essay, although way confusing in the way he writes, is just basically talking about how the nature of the Internet is decentralized, so there is more of a dialogue occurring than a hierarchical structure. Since people are getting ideas from other people who are getting ideas from other people, a richer democracy is occurring because there are tons more voices in the mix.

Overall, I see the Internet as a positive influence in my life. It makes my day easier, my workload easier to manage, helps with my time management and gives me access to any information I can possibly seek. But I also do not spend all day and all night on it, I don’t get the shakes if I don’t have it for a day, and I still nurture every personal face-to-face relationship I have in other ways. There are always going to be people who don’t do the right thing or abuse the things they have. That’s just life.

Oh, and P.S. I am Apple ALL THE WAY!! Tell me a PC is faster or plays music better, whatever! All I know is my desktop PC crashed at least twice a year and I lost hundreds of documents, photos, and music. I have had a desktop Mac and now a MacBook for almost two years and I haven’t had one bad thing happen to me yet. Faster is a perception as far as I’m concerned ;)

Life and the Internet

The internet is beneficial to humanity. This is of course a subjective statement but when thinking of pros and cons of the internet, the pro category always wins (at least in my book). Communication, technology, information, research, and business; in our current day these would be greatly restricted without the internet. It can be argued that our society has grown dependent on it, but with something so helpful, it is not hard to do.

When talking about the internet and social relationships, it is easy to assume that it does nothing but damage interpersonal relations. The article The Internet and Social Life from Bargh and McKenna states, “Despite past media headlines to the contrary, the internet does not make its users depressed or lonely, and it does not seem to be a threat to community life.” The article also states in its conclusion that the internet allows communication that keep ties close. Relationships with family and friends that do not live near are made easier with internet communication. It also talks of the formation of new relationships due to similar interests and values. There are countless groups and sites for certain types of people and they build relationships with each other on a level they feel comfortable with. A downside of the internet in the article is “it already plays a significant role in crime and terrorism by enabling private communication across any distance without being detected.” This is a given as we have been hearing about incidents for years that were made possible with little trouble thanks to the internet. While the internet is used as a negative tool by some, I still believe that it benefits more than it damages.

The Jenkins article Worship at the Altar of Convergence was interesting with its concept of the participatory culture. It states that “rather then talking about media producers and consumers as occupying separate roles, we might now see them as participants who interact with each other according to a new set of rules that none of us fully understands.” The flow of media content and communication is ultimately decided by the users and their participation. The internet allows us to write, interact, and brainstorm with other users and even companies to express opinions and develop ideas. Relationships are built online through this participatory culture along with collective intelligence. The article says that “none of us can know everything; each of us knows something; and we can put the pieces together if we pool our resources and combine our skills.”

This is possibly best demonstrated in the article by Castells called The Culture of the Internet. Collective intelligence is seen with the hacker group and their interesting culture. The article almost reads like a cultural researcher watching a distinct group from afar. To be honest, I did not know there was a difference between crackers and hackers. Knowledge is power. The hackers use the concept of collective intelligence to accomplish tasks and build relationships in the process. The idea of the cracker is of course a negative aspect to the internet and does nothing but cause trouble. The article stated that hackers and those of other means have “a shared belief in the power of computer networking, and a determination to keep this technological power as a common good.” The hackers, and even crackers, are building relationships while doing something they are interested in. In the process they have built their own culture with “professional” relationships.

Even when thinking of the articles about Mac vs. PC, you can argue that relationships and cultures have been built around the “epic battle.” People like to have friends with similar likes and dislikes, the internet provides that for them (even though it can be considered impersonal because it is not face-to-face). The internet is a valuable social tool in this sense because some people who may not have many friends are allowed to find some with their beliefs and values. This may be seen as positive because friends are a large part of one’s development and they need to be found somehow. It may be seen as weird by some but soon it may be completely normal.

Community involvement and politics are made easier through the internet as well. Events and resources are more accessible to all that want to attend and help. People can become familiar with each other through internet groups and sites for political causes, candidates, or community service events. Relationships can be built through the internet, relationships that can even be beneficial on a community level. The PEW report shows how our voters are much more informed and knowledgeable on the issues when they go to vote. The internet allows users to gather information that will help make their important democratic decision.

In conclusion, the internet is a positive force on mankind as it allows for us to be informed, have easier communication (even across long distances), corroborate with peers we have never physically met and accomplish tasks, and build new relationships that may possibly benefit everyone. Negative aspects of any situation are going to stand out more than the positive. In the case of the internet though, the positive aspects are much more in number.