Assignment 12: Blocking the internet

Network neutrality is a current topic that has apparently sparked much debate in all levels of society. After reading the articles, I saw that this is a relevant topic, even though I had not given much thought to it previously. With the popularity and usage of the internet continuing to rise, this debate will continue to heat up and sooner or later a decision is going to have to be made in order for some stability to come about.

The topic of network neutrality seemed very confusing at first, and the use of a lot of technical words may increase that confusion. However, this article from Information Week cleared up some of the gray areas. Professor Timothy Wu coined the term and defines network neutrality as "information networks are often more valuable when they are less specialized - when they are a platform for multiple uses, present and future." My understanding of this is, it is better that as much information as possible can be accessed by a computer. If the information is chosen or specialized, the uses of a computer decrease greatly. It should serve society better to treat all internet traffic equally (neutral). How would it benefit someone to not be able to access certain information?

People who support network neutrality argue:

• Without neutrality legislation, cable and internet service providers (ISP's) could control a user's access, only allowing them to access certain information. This censors information from people, with the company deciding what gets seen and what doesn't. Also, certain applications and high rates can be selected.
• Online speech and democracy would be reduced. Would this affect Wikipedia?
  
• Customers paying higher rates, could be prioritized favorably with connectivity and content issues. Quality of service may be reduced for some users.
  

People who oppose network neutrality argue:

• ISP's should be able to block out harmful material such as viruses and spam.
• Some information is more important and should be prioritized/more accessible. Innovative material and medical information is cited in this category.
• With less information traveling across networks, bandwidth would increase, creating a faster internet
• Illegal file sharing could be monitored
  

Obviously there are people on both sides of this debate. Many things are at stake such as the democracy and free speech of the internet, which has increased recently. The relevance of online blogs has reached real life situations such as political races. Online games such as Second Life have real world ties as well. Censorship would become an issue. The internet is part of the mass media, and if this information is selective, internet companies may be telling people what they can or can't be exposed to, which may create legal issues. However, some people aren't getting the information they need, and if this can be given to them more effectively, it would increase the productivity of the internet. Connectivity issues and viruses are a problem, and also lessen the chance people can get the information they need.

Overall, I would support network neutrality and the fact that all internet traffic should be treated equally. People should have the right to access any information they want. Productivity of certain people's lives may decrease if the applications they use online are blocked. Mass media would change because the internet would not be able to provide all the information that should be transmitted to the public. The issue of censorship would only increase. In regards to the argument of connectivity or viruses, I would be in favor of working hard to develop new technologies to combat this, rather than try to block internet flow. There is probably much more information regarding this debate, but on the surface it seems the casual internet user would be in favor of network neutrality.

Assignment 11: WOW

Virtual economies have become an extremely relevant subject when discussing the internet, especially since the introduction of World of Warcraft (WOW) in 2004. The issues that surround both open and closed virtual economies have found their way into real life, and create both problems and benefits for many people. Not being able to exchange real money for virtual money, like in World of Warcraft, and being able to do so, in games such as Ultima Online, both carry their own benefits and negativity.

In a open virtual economy real money can be spent on items in virtually created shops in online games, according to Wikipedia. In Ultima Online, a man named John Dugger bought a piece of real estate in a virtual world for $750 on eBay. This transaction is a small part of the real world economy that exists, and generates $300 million in annual revenue each year. This created business is a benefit for the people who are making the money, but seems somewhat ridiculous for the people spending the money. Is taking a weeks salary and spending it on virtual property really worth it? Is increasing your virtual status more important than your real life status? This seems like it could be a starting point for financial problems if one's spending gets out of hand. It can be like gambling in the sense that some people might not know when to stop spending, and then it is too late.

In regards to the gaming aspect of an open economy, some people and game creators frown upon the spending of real money to purchase virtual goods. Since people of any age can play, the older and more wealthier players can advance in the game easier and more quickly by spending real cash. Blizzard, which created World of Warcraft says this practice is against WOW's egalitarian spirit. The purpose of the game, they say, is to advance in status by bettering yourself within the means provided by the game.

World of Warcraft is a closed virtual economy. Virtual goods are bought and sold within the game by using the virtual money that is earned. This has not stopped games from using other techniques. According to the MSNBC article above, players "gold farm" or accumulate virtual currency and then sell it for real money. This is a huge industry, and is essentially the same as an open virtual economy. Wikipedia states that a taskforce has been set up in the game Final Fantasy who's job it is to delete users who sell in game currency for real world money.

Obviously there are issues regarding putting real currency into virtual worlds. While many people benefit, and a whole new economy has been crated from these virtual worlds, there is always a danger of taking it too far. As stated, people could find themselves in financial trouble by buying a $100,000 virtual space station for example. Virtual communities have also been created in these games, and people can use money to increase their group's status in the game. This can be seen as a positive and many relationships, good and bad, have been created through these online games. The controversy about using real world money will continue and so will other questionable behavior. This YouTube video shows a virtual funeral for an actual person's death being ambushed by other players:

Assignment 10: Journalism and Frozen Pizza

Journalism is something that is very relevant to society today in both print form and online. As the use and dependence on the internet increases, it is important to understand the differences and similarities of getting news from the internet as opposed to reading the paper.

Wikipedia defines journalism as "a discipline of gathering, writing, and reporting news," and that it "applies to various media, including but not limited to newspapers, magazines, radio, and television." This is broken down further as both print journalism and online (cyber) journalism are defined. Print journalism obviously refers to articles written in newspapers, magazines, newsletters, etc. Online journalism includes not only the websites of various newspapers, but the idea that video, audio, and picture slide shows to enhance articles. Often these websites are another place to place an existing print article, but instead of waiting for deadlines or release sates, the articles can be placed online as soon as they are written.

A good way to compare the two journalism tactics is to compare two articles about the same topic. There is an article on CNN.com about a recent recall of frozen pizzas and the fact that they might have been contaminated by E. coli. The same article ran in Friday's edition of The Buffalo News. The article is located on the bottom of page A6 and is considerably shorter than the online version of the story, in what looks to be a lack of space.

Overall, the online source is similar to the print source due to the fact that the article was written by the Associated Press (AP). If the print and online sources both subscribe to the AP, they are free to use the articles and materials written by AP staff, and thus may both use the same information. It seems that since the Buffalo News was lacking space they had to consolidate the original AP article and only use some of the information.

However, on CNN.com there are various links throughout the article leading to more information. A section in the middle of the article has the title "Don't miss" and has related articles listed underneath it. There is also a chart with the products and product numbers of those being recalled. The hyperlinks "E coli" and "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" are present in the article and when clicked on, leads readers to all other articles tagged with the words "E coli" and "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" respectively, even if they have nothing to do with the pizza story itself. There is also a section at the bottom of the CNN article that provides links to various outside blogs such as "Daily Barf" and "Celebrity Blitz." These blogs have their own entries about the specific article viewed (E. coli pizza in this case) and provides links to General Mills and overall advice like "GET RID OF THEM PRONTO!"

Even though the specific writing style may be the same in both articles, the hyperlinks and blog articles are "online journalism" and differs greatly from print media. As the internet continues to grow, people may find that there is so much more information online and may end up turning to CNN.com and blogs for their information rather than read the paper every day.

Sources:
E. coli fears prompt recall of millions of frozen pizzas. (1 November 2007). Retrieved 2 November 2007 from CNN.com. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/01/pizza.recall.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch

E. coli prompts pizza recall. (2 November 2007). The Buffalo News. p. A6

Journalism. Retrieved 2 November 2007 from wikipedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism

http://celeb-blitz.blogspot.com/2007/11/frozen-pizzas-recalled-due-to-e-coli.html?referer=sphere_related_content