Net Neutrality

“There has never been a time in history where more of our ‘culture’ was as ‘owned’ as it is now. And yet there has never been a time when the concentration of power to control the uses of culture has been unquestionably accepted as it is now” (1). Lawrence Lessig wrote this statement in his book Free Culture. This statement reigns extremely true to today’s society where the majority of our culture and what we value in life is owned. Now the topic of net neutrality is arising causing major concerns.

The premise of net neutrality is that there should be no restrictions on content, usage, or other principles for using the Internet. “The debate centers on whether it is more ‘neutral’ to let consumers reach all Internet content equally or to let providers discriminate if they think they’ll make more money that way” (2). If two users par for Internet access both should have the same level of speed and right to go on any website they choose. Major service providers are now proposing that certain websites will be restricted or slower depending on how much each company pays to that service provider. If you want access to that site it will be much like a cell phone bill where you pay extra for certain added features and websites.
There is a big discrepancy between what the public wants and what the private corporations want. The public wants the Internet to be a place that is free to roam without certain information being inaccessible, but the service providers see this as a way to make enormous amounts of money and make it a more competitive market. Even websites such as Google are opposing this idea because they realize it will lose users on their web sites, “A coalition of more than 70 technology companies, including internet search leader Google, online retailer Amazon and voice over internet provider Skype, is calling on the CRTC to ban internet service providers from ‘traffic shaping,’ or using technology that favours some applications over others” (3).

Work Cited

1. Lessig, Lawrence. Free Culture. New York: Penguin Books, 2004. Print.

2. Wu, Tim. “Why you should care about network neutrality. Slate Magazine. 1 May 2006. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. .

3. Jay, Paul. "Google, Amazon, others want CRTC to ban internet interference." CBCNews. CBC, 24 Feb. 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. .

Media Hegemonies/Mapping Who Owns What: Time Warner

Time Warner Company is a huge contender in the media world. The companies they own range from television to Internet to print. Not only do they own these companies but also many of them are leaders in their field. Time Warner owns hundreds of major companies such as:

HBO

CNN

Warner Bros.

Time Magazine

Sports Illustrated

People Magazine

In Style Magazine

Amazon.com (partial)

Cross media ownership can have effects on the production and accuracy of work yet Time Warner seems to keep each company separate and thriving. HBO is a hugely successful television station with hit shows such as Six Feet Under, Entourage, and True Blood. Many shows are filled with nudity and course language but these values are not transferred into other forms of media such as CNN, which is also one of the most trusted names news. Although there can be overlapping information and biases, Time Warner successfully produces Warner Bros. aimed at children as well as Sports Illustrated. Theses two companies have completely different target markets and represent vastly different things yet parents do not see a problem in letting their children watch Warner Bros. cartoons yet will not find it acceptable for their children to be looking at a Sports Illustrated magazine. A family can be influenced by a Time Warner company many times throughout the day from morning cartoons, news programs, magazines, and even the internet.

Lawrence Lessig discusses how the world as changed in the form of media ownership, “In the past 20 years, the nature of media ownership has undergone a radical alternation” (1). Today, a group of large companies own the majority of media that the public sees. It is not solely every company working as in individual, it is a group of companies owned by one large ‘mother’ company. This generates more money that can be distributed amongst the group. It is especially usefull when new companies are starting when they need financial assistance.

Work Cited

1. Lessig, Lawrence. Free Culture. New York: Penguin Books, 2004. Print.

2. “Who Owns What.” Columbia Journalism Review. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. .

Activist Project: Global Medic DMGF

I first heard about Global Medic David McAntony Gibson Foundation in my media writing class. This foundation is a charity but it also pushes for the government to stop wasting money on other forms of disaster reliefs. When the government vows to give money to support other countries around the world when in need, many other companies take a percentage for their help. When the government gives money to Red Cross, they have to then find other organizations in these countries that can use them money to provide aid. They also take a 12% of the money to support their company and its work. This takes away from the aid relief that can be given to people in need.

DMGF uses Global Medic as its operational arm to provide assistance to countries going through disasters. All of their workers are volunteers and the money they receive goes straight the relief support. Last year alone they purified and provided 153 000 000 liters of drinking water. DMGF’s main goal is capacity building, which means that they use professional rescuers and medical personnel to train others in countries in need such as post-conflict nations. This allows them to continue rebuilding their country when DMGF leaves.

DMGF urges the government to support their organization instead of going through many companies that dwindle down the amount of financial support is provided. When they are given money, it goes straight to support whatever causes DMGF is helping. In May 2008, and earthquake struck Sichuan province in central China. Global Medic was the only company asked by the Chinese government to deploy a rapid response team.

I personally am not involved in any activist project, but I do believe that this is a valuable project that can use more support. Many times people get caught up in life and focus on what they can do to make things better for themselves and forget that there are millions of people in need. The focus needs to be moved to what can I personally do to even provide the smallest bit of help to others in need. A big step would be writing to the government, trying to urge them to take advantage of this thriving foundation and support their cause.

Work Cited

1. GlobalMedic David McAntony Gibson Foundation. Web. 20 Nov. 2009. .

Culture Jamming

Culture jamming is a form of art used to disrupt and upset the mainstream institutions or advertising. It uses existing advertisements or logos, alters their intended usage or meaning and creates them into a parody. Many times the statement the creator is trying to make opposes what the existing advertisement believes or supports. Culture jammers use this to show the strong contrast between what moral values they uphold compared to what certain companies, or even the government may want you to believe.

Culture jamming functions like any other form of advertising, “It can help outreach by functioning as normal advertising does, influencing viewers to change their ideas and behaviors, or reinforce the attitudes of those who already agree. (As a result, it can even be somewhat useful for making change directly for issues the public has scant awareness of)” (1). These advertisements and art pieces make people think about the true messages corporations are trying to send out. The only reason why culture jamming is not as successful as commercial scale advertising is because they do not have the funds to thrust repetitious advertisements on society.

Culture jammers thrive on pushing the boundaries and creating powerful statements opposing conformity. “We are a global network of artists, activists, writers, pranksters, students, educators and entrepreneurs who want to advance the new social activist movement of the information age. Our aim is to topple existing power structures and forge a major shift in the way we live in the 21^st century” (2). Adbusters defines themselves as pranksters, which is not seeing in a very positive light, yet they do this to show that ever action they perform is in hopes of changing our society for the better.

The example I choose was a photo of a baby with all the different popular logos and symbols seemingly tattooed on his body. The message that is trying to by emitted is that from birth we are bombarded with ads and companies trying to capture our attention from the youngest age possible. Once they get your attention these companies try and push their lifestyle choices on you. This has a great effect on your life, almost as if you were tattooed with logo.

Work Cited

1. Faludi, Jeremy. “What is Culture Jamming Good For?” Worldchanging. 8 Aug. 2005. Web. 20 Nov. 2009. .

2. “About Adbusters.: Adbusters. Web. 20 Nov 2009. .

Buy Nothing Day

“Buy Nothing Day is your special day to unshop, unspend and unwind. Relax and do nothing for the economy and for yourself - at least for a single day. It's a reminder to stop and think about why you're spending.” (1). The premise of Buy Nothing Day is a good but in reality buying/spending nothing all day is not practical. It is not simply the act of going out and purchasing something but the spending money on anything such as turning off the lights or flushing the toilet. Although the creators of Buy Nothing Day do not expect such extreme actions, if we truly followed the name and bought nothing not many people would participate.
By creating a designated day to promote consuming less and conserving energy, Buy Nothing Day’s creator Ted Dave actively promotes decreasing our daily expenditure. Many people can perceive this event as useless and ask, why would this help when we can simply go back to the store the next day and buy whatever we wanted on the 25^th? While many may not completely participate, the fact that they have become aware of this may cause them to control their spending. The attention that this day brings to the cause of decreasing the worlds over consumption is almost as important as people not purchasing itself. This day will remind people that 20% of the world uses 80% of the resources.
This day needs to be advertised a lot more because many people, including myself, have never heard of it. Hopefully this day will follow earth hour in numbers and become a widespread day that helps our world conserve resources. In John Berger’s Ways of seeing he states, “It suggests that if he buys what it is offering, his life will become better. It offers him an improved alternative to what he is”(2)..Although it is a very positive event, many corporations will see this as a negative situation for their business. They are trying to sell their products to consumers as a lifestyle. Major companies such as NBC, CTV and MTV will not even play the advertisements on their stations because they understand that their businesses will be negatively affected by having a considerably less amount of viewers. Similarly, retail owners will also be strongly affected by this day and may have special promotions to entice people to their stores.
I believe that this day reminds people that they need to spend their money wisely and remember that they are not the only ones affected by every purchase they make. Even if this day is not supported by other organizations, it promotes a positive message and will cause people to alter their mindset when dealing with consuming.

Work Cited

1. "Buy Nothing Day." Buy Nothing Day. Web. 19 Nov 2009. http://www.buynothingday.org/

2. Berger, John. Ways Of Seeing. London: Penguin Books, 1972. Print.

3. "Buy Nothing Day." Adbusters. Web. 19 Nov 2009. http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/bnd

Participatory Culture

Social networking websites became extremely popular in our generation. The first encounter I had with this form of participatory culture was MySpace in grade nine. High school is all about fitting in when you first leave the safety of elementary school, which caused me to evaluate what things other kids were doing and try and fit in. MySpace was the perfect forum for this and I soon created my own account. From that point on I have been constantly connected to some form of social networking, whether it be Hi5 or Facebook.

Today these sites are marketing themselves to every possible age and group. MySpace is for young high school kids and for bands to display their music and promote their image. For older people Facebook is a way to reconnect with old friends from years back. My mother recently created an account and has reconnected with people she knew when she was in high school in Trinidad and Tobago. For university and college users it is just another way to stay on top of new plans and relationships.

The problem with younger users is that they are not aware of the implications some of their actions on these social networking sites can cause. “And indeed, words and pictures have great powers to tell stories when creators fully exploit them both”(1). Scott McCloud explains in his book Understanding Comics, that when words and pictures are placed together they can imply meaning. When younger girls have racy display pictures or pictures in their bathing suites they don’t understand that they are advertising their bodies and making themselves an object.

When using these sites we need to understand that words and pictures can be distorted and changed for the creator’s purpose. If your privacy settings are not strict and fully limited on you’re profile, most of the things you say, and pictures you are tagged in can be viewed by other users. When I use Facebook I make sure that only my friends can view my profile and pictures and I keep in mind whenever I take pictures with my friends that Facebook will be their final destination. I am constantly on Facebook, even while I write this the Facebook window is minimized. It takes up a lot of my time and one of my friends even deleted her account because she realized that instead of “lurking” other people’s profiles and adding pictures, she can make more of her time by doing homework or completing other tasks. Although it is not fully deleted, this still takes a great deal of strength to do. Cutting yourself off from a major form of communication that your peer’s use is hard but it can have substantial rewards.

Work Cited

1. McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics. New York: Harper Paperbacks, 1994. Print.