Many authors claim that Internet, as a significant social phenomenon, has a controversy social role.
At the beginning of the third century there were a lot of discussions about disadvantages and risks using the Internet. Particularly, multimedia network Internet became global, planetary network, whose influence is empirical nontransparent, though very important for whole society. Because Internet became basic of virtual reality, researches on this field became necessary. Internet changes range and time’s relations between people and features. Authors claim that Internet presents last step for completing human liberty.
“Internet is making dummies from my perspective. Human being acts in unreal situation, he/she interactively communicates with abstract companion. He/she buys goods or all kind of services with virtual money, cooperates through the screen with lots of unknown companions around the world.” (Panian)
With Internet appearance, man stepped in virtual world in whom casual, classic, psychical criteria and laws doesn’t exist. Internet became basic of virtual reality because human imagination creates notion of something that it’s not available at person’s feelings. In fact, it assumed all areas of apparition inside occurrences.
Paradigm of virtual reality and “Internet way of living” (Bill Gates) brings numeral and complex social changes. Internet positively affects, without a doubt, on quality of life. But, from other perspective, there are some negative tendencies like increase of estrangement because of the lack of moving in real space, or increase of volume and modality of “computer-generated criminality”. Panian said that the privacy of individual has been jeopardized. People are being encased in their virtual worlds. He said that if we accept virtual reality as welfare of technological development, we should learn how to control that, all of the new devices and services.
China and South-Eastern Asia are already trying to control and abridge the content on the Internet.
Even in USA, politicians and religion groups insist on harsh control of flow of information on the Internet. For this, there were public justifications that were based on their efforts to stop pornography.
In fact, the main thing was who is going to control infos inside society.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Violence on media effects audience? Vol. 2
Many scientists researched effects of violence showed through video, mostly with laboratory's experiments and polls.
William Belson explored violence effect on group of 1565 young people between 13 and 16 years old from London. He divided Experimental and Control groups on group whose participants are fond of aggressive scenes and on one whose participants aren’t. After two years of research he appointed that “aggressive young men” committed a lot of violence, fans of action videos committed 11,27 % more violent deeds then anyone else, and 49 % of them committed rough violent deeds.
Albert Banura, psychologist from Stanford, made an experiment in kindergarten with children from 3 to 5 years old. One person would take a doll, swear and beat it up in front of the kids. At first children would be confused, but when they took them to the next room, which was filled with similar dolls, all of the kids started doing the same. This experiment confirmed that there is a short period effect of violence on youth showed on screen.
Psychologist Steven Brody claims the opposite. In his researches he pointed out the confirmation of theory of catarza: “Observation of “played violence” helps preventing violence in real life, being that TV shows and movies can canalize aggressive expressions and feelings; their aim should be absorbing aggressive feelings and stopping from sense of danger and antagonism."
Scientists S. Freshbach and R. Singer agreed with him and showed, through their researches, that children acted more violent after watching TV shows like »Lessi«, than after shows like »FBI«.
Scientist Huesmann made the most important long-term research in this field in 2003. He used the sample of 330 kids, who were at the beginning of the research in 1977. from 6 to 10 years old. And then, after 15 years, he used the same sample on how did video violence effect them. Key result of the research was that video violence showed to children in their early age, afterwards influence on aggressive behavior. Author claimed that cause of this connection is viewer’s equalizing to aggressive protagonists and their apprehension that TV shows are real. Effect of violence on media has been established apart from social status, intellect or parental model of the used sample.
There are also long-term researches that didn’t show increase of violent and antisocial behavior under the media influence.
After inducting TV at Small Island Saint Helens in south Atlantic, study pointed out no increase of violent behavior of children, even though the amount of TV violence was the same as in Great Britain. Authors of the study claimed that the reason for this lies in that that this small community has firm social structures, which prohibits that video violence provokes any violent, or some other antisocial behavior. They didn’t point out that the kids didn’t learn how to behave antisocial; they pointed out that their environment restrain them to behave like that.
William Belson explored violence effect on group of 1565 young people between 13 and 16 years old from London. He divided Experimental and Control groups on group whose participants are fond of aggressive scenes and on one whose participants aren’t. After two years of research he appointed that “aggressive young men” committed a lot of violence, fans of action videos committed 11,27 % more violent deeds then anyone else, and 49 % of them committed rough violent deeds.
Albert Banura, psychologist from Stanford, made an experiment in kindergarten with children from 3 to 5 years old. One person would take a doll, swear and beat it up in front of the kids. At first children would be confused, but when they took them to the next room, which was filled with similar dolls, all of the kids started doing the same. This experiment confirmed that there is a short period effect of violence on youth showed on screen.
Psychologist Steven Brody claims the opposite. In his researches he pointed out the confirmation of theory of catarza: “Observation of “played violence” helps preventing violence in real life, being that TV shows and movies can canalize aggressive expressions and feelings; their aim should be absorbing aggressive feelings and stopping from sense of danger and antagonism."
Scientists S. Freshbach and R. Singer agreed with him and showed, through their researches, that children acted more violent after watching TV shows like »Lessi«, than after shows like »FBI«.
Scientist Huesmann made the most important long-term research in this field in 2003. He used the sample of 330 kids, who were at the beginning of the research in 1977. from 6 to 10 years old. And then, after 15 years, he used the same sample on how did video violence effect them. Key result of the research was that video violence showed to children in their early age, afterwards influence on aggressive behavior. Author claimed that cause of this connection is viewer’s equalizing to aggressive protagonists and their apprehension that TV shows are real. Effect of violence on media has been established apart from social status, intellect or parental model of the used sample.
There are also long-term researches that didn’t show increase of violent and antisocial behavior under the media influence.
After inducting TV at Small Island Saint Helens in south Atlantic, study pointed out no increase of violent behavior of children, even though the amount of TV violence was the same as in Great Britain. Authors of the study claimed that the reason for this lies in that that this small community has firm social structures, which prohibits that video violence provokes any violent, or some other antisocial behavior. They didn’t point out that the kids didn’t learn how to behave antisocial; they pointed out that their environment restrain them to behave like that.
Violence on media effects audience? Vol. 1
Physical and psychical violence is, as many authors claim, only one of the negative media effect on public. Disputes of consequences of media effect are old as well as media itself. Spreading the violence through media mainly relies on showing war and disastrous images; images that put an emotional patch on the viewer. But, it can be many more.
There are many theories that can put a patch on this thesis about violence effect, but I will point out 4 of them: thesis of catarza, thesis of habitualition, theory of learning and excitation transfer theory. They perfectly define how and on what basis does violence, showed through media, effects public in general, especially youth.
Thesis of catarza- Intercessors of this thesis set out a presumption that impulse for aggression is native and that the recipient, in imagination he/she dynamically associates in violent deeds which he/she only observes, becomes less decisive to act aggressively. Though, this thesis is empirically disproved. The main intercessor of this thesis Seymor Feshback claims that stipulations which enable catarza, don't appear every day, in stead of aggression which appear more often.
Thesis of habitualition- According to this thesis, all day consummation of video violence get make viewer less sensible. With this, violence is consider as normal, all day behaviour and exemplary way to solve conflicts. Rather, the tolerance toward violence increases. This thesis is not completely affirmed. But, lots of researches show in some cases we are able to sight of imitation's effects. Especially at images of suicides. Researches show that Werther effect of imitation is very present.
Theory of learning- Intercessors claim that the person's attitude comes from continually reactions between factors from person and environment. Some authors claim that people, doing what others do, accept different patterns of attitudes in practice. This thesis assumes that a person can decide whether or not he/she will do that, depends on the consequences of he's/she's usage.
Excitation transfer- Thesis is founded on presumption that different medium content can provoke unspecific emotional alert to recipient. That states create "potential toward impulse", which intensives particular attitude. What kind of attitude will it provoke depends on the factors of the situation, not particularly of the quality of media content.
There are many theories that can put a patch on this thesis about violence effect, but I will point out 4 of them: thesis of catarza, thesis of habitualition, theory of learning and excitation transfer theory. They perfectly define how and on what basis does violence, showed through media, effects public in general, especially youth.
Thesis of catarza- Intercessors of this thesis set out a presumption that impulse for aggression is native and that the recipient, in imagination he/she dynamically associates in violent deeds which he/she only observes, becomes less decisive to act aggressively. Though, this thesis is empirically disproved. The main intercessor of this thesis Seymor Feshback claims that stipulations which enable catarza, don't appear every day, in stead of aggression which appear more often.
Thesis of habitualition- According to this thesis, all day consummation of video violence get make viewer less sensible. With this, violence is consider as normal, all day behaviour and exemplary way to solve conflicts. Rather, the tolerance toward violence increases. This thesis is not completely affirmed. But, lots of researches show in some cases we are able to sight of imitation's effects. Especially at images of suicides. Researches show that Werther effect of imitation is very present.
Theory of learning- Intercessors claim that the person's attitude comes from continually reactions between factors from person and environment. Some authors claim that people, doing what others do, accept different patterns of attitudes in practice. This thesis assumes that a person can decide whether or not he/she will do that, depends on the consequences of he's/she's usage.
Excitation transfer- Thesis is founded on presumption that different medium content can provoke unspecific emotional alert to recipient. That states create "potential toward impulse", which intensives particular attitude. What kind of attitude will it provoke depends on the factors of the situation, not particularly of the quality of media content.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Feedreader 3.12
It's probably nothing new but it's useful to know (or repeat the knowledge).
XML presentes the data format which supplies users around the Internet with new desireable contents. Web pages which change their content pretty often uses them a lot. If you want to be able to oversight them, you'll have to use the aggregator. Best aggregator in this point of view is Feedreader 3.12.
Feedreader (http://download.feedreader.com/FeedReader312Setup.exe ) is a FREE RSS (XML) news aggregation and probably the best solution that provides robust,state-of-the-art features in an intuitive, user-friendly environment. It works on principles such as linking and connecting programmes and web pages using feeds. When you demand the content from your programme, it gets in contact with the web page and takes over the data you asked for.
Data are usually in HTML format, but it can also be in others, such as multimedia.
Advantages comparing with web pages are the following:
Users are always informed of the content without visiting the web page itself.
Content is presented pretty simple and it's not necessary for a user to aknowledge the whole complex navigation of the web page.
Multimedia content is automaticly saved on the users's computer.
Advantages comparing with e-mail:
Users are not obligated to give their e-mail adresses if they want to use this Internet software (caring their privacy).
When users are willing to stop receiving data, they just remove the link of that web page from the programme.
I remeber how thrilled I was when I found out about this software.
Journalists are in the best position. With this, they can follow a big amount of news from different sources, they can specify news, they can make their own archive of news which they can also use pretty easy.
XML presentes the data format which supplies users around the Internet with new desireable contents. Web pages which change their content pretty often uses them a lot. If you want to be able to oversight them, you'll have to use the aggregator. Best aggregator in this point of view is Feedreader 3.12.
Feedreader (http://download.feedreader.com/FeedReader312Setup.exe ) is a FREE RSS (XML) news aggregation and probably the best solution that provides robust,state-of-the-art features in an intuitive, user-friendly environment. It works on principles such as linking and connecting programmes and web pages using feeds. When you demand the content from your programme, it gets in contact with the web page and takes over the data you asked for.
Data are usually in HTML format, but it can also be in others, such as multimedia.
Advantages comparing with web pages are the following:
Users are always informed of the content without visiting the web page itself.
Content is presented pretty simple and it's not necessary for a user to aknowledge the whole complex navigation of the web page.
Multimedia content is automaticly saved on the users's computer.
Advantages comparing with e-mail:
Users are not obligated to give their e-mail adresses if they want to use this Internet software (caring their privacy).
When users are willing to stop receiving data, they just remove the link of that web page from the programme.
I remeber how thrilled I was when I found out about this software.
Journalists are in the best position. With this, they can follow a big amount of news from different sources, they can specify news, they can make their own archive of news which they can also use pretty easy.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Trust between journalist and public
John Whale in his "The Politics of the Media" said that 'Media' is an unattractive term. It is foreign in form and vague. A rocket-launched satellite can be a medium of mass communication, so can a brick wall. But, the term is convenient once defined. It is used as a short name for the news around the world, distributed through newspapers, radio, TV or Internet.
Truth has no alternative. It is the basis of the journalism. News is true or they’re not news at all. Journalism, as well as the communication itself, is based on truth. Louis D. Boccardi once said that good writing is a meter of practice, that story must be well written so that it could be normally read by the readers. But, to say more it’s a meter of profession. He said that the journalist should be proud of his job and for the commitment that he preformed to the readers.
For a journalist it’s very important the way the readers accepted his text or a certain TV shows. Mass communication is adjusted to public, who is very numerous, heterogeneous, and of course anonymous.
Boccardi said that public has a right to know and has the right to understand. That kind of communication between journalist and public is very important. Lie is a part of the media’s manipulation and that is something that a journalist should avoid. The most important reason for this avoiding is the same public’s trust. If the journalist decide to invent information, and the public finds out that it is a lie, it’s more likely that he automatically loses lots of readers, credibility itself. And of course that is not the aim of one journalist. It’s totally opposite. He should be able to attract more and more readers with his text. And the best way to do it is to tell the truth.
True/Untrue?
Truth has no alternative. It is the basis of the journalism. News is true or they’re not news at all. Journalism, as well as the communication itself, is based on truth. Louis D. Boccardi once said that good writing is a meter of practice, that story must be well written so that it could be normally read by the readers. But, to say more it’s a meter of profession. He said that the journalist should be proud of his job and for the commitment that he preformed to the readers.
For a journalist it’s very important the way the readers accepted his text or a certain TV shows. Mass communication is adjusted to public, who is very numerous, heterogeneous, and of course anonymous.
Boccardi said that public has a right to know and has the right to understand. That kind of communication between journalist and public is very important. Lie is a part of the media’s manipulation and that is something that a journalist should avoid. The most important reason for this avoiding is the same public’s trust. If the journalist decide to invent information, and the public finds out that it is a lie, it’s more likely that he automatically loses lots of readers, credibility itself. And of course that is not the aim of one journalist. It’s totally opposite. He should be able to attract more and more readers with his text. And the best way to do it is to tell the truth.
True/Untrue?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
