Orwell has, yet again, proven himself.
In 1984, his imaginary world has a language that is becoming more and more simplified each year, as the authorities replace words with bad connotations with the opposite of words with good connotations.
Wikipedia has a new function where one can actually change an article into "simple English"-- English without "big words". Here's the link for the descriptor page.
Wikipedia says they designed this for "people with different needs, such as students, children, adults with learning difficulties and people who are trying to learn English." I understand that Wikipedia would see the need for this, but at the same time it alarms me slightly. I have always been taught that you never learn by having things be easy for you, but the case about people with learning disabilities and those trying to learn english really struck a chord with me.
What do you guys think? Have you ever encountered a Wikipedia page where you weren't able to understand it because it was too difficult?
Friday, December 11, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Metaphysical blogging and the Power of the Media
I've never really been a fan of blogging (before this class, of course). There's something weird about it to me-- I'm just a high school junior, and very few people seem to care about what I have to say. So why would I blog?
According to several statistics, there are well over 100 million blogs, not counting China's near 73 million figure. That's a lot of blogs. CyberJournalist reports that there are approximately 18.6 posts per second. So who reads all this? I watched a video on Youtube about blogs, and one of the most interesting things that came up was "Blogs make the news a 2-way street." People comment on other people's blogs, of course, but why? Another point that came up in the informative video, aimed at people who were not aware of what a blog was, claimed that blogs give you "the Power of the Media." (I feel like this deserves capitalization, as it sounded decidedly profound). But how many people out there are actually posting news stories? And are these stories credible in anyway? Having skimmed through the "Next Blog" button on a classmate's blog, I have come to realize that there are several main types of blogs: People tracking someone with an illness, sports, celebrities, and those few people who think everyone needs to know absolutely everything about their lives.
While searching for statistics on the numbers of blogs, I came across this great article, written very much in the style of anAmericanStudies. Specifically, the article deals with the maturity of blogs. Blogs are relatively recent, and only lately have they reached any sort of legitimacy. There are also some great quotes from a Wall Street Journal writer, making an excellent point about blogs
"First, let’s step back and consider why we’re counting blogs at all. You no longer see articles that attempt to demonstrate the legitimacy of the Web by stating how many Web pages there are. But blogs are still in the process of entering mainstream consciousness, so numerical credibility is important; bloggers themselves cite the statistics a lot."
I, through anamericanstudies, have decided blogging isn't so bad, but I still think that people are starting to overestimate their importance and how much people want to know about them .
So, fellow bloggers-- would you blog if it were not a requirement for school? Why or why not? Has blogging through school changed your mind at all?
According to several statistics, there are well over 100 million blogs, not counting China's near 73 million figure. That's a lot of blogs. CyberJournalist reports that there are approximately 18.6 posts per second. So who reads all this? I watched a video on Youtube about blogs, and one of the most interesting things that came up was "Blogs make the news a 2-way street." People comment on other people's blogs, of course, but why? Another point that came up in the informative video, aimed at people who were not aware of what a blog was, claimed that blogs give you "the Power of the Media." (I feel like this deserves capitalization, as it sounded decidedly profound). But how many people out there are actually posting news stories? And are these stories credible in anyway? Having skimmed through the "Next Blog" button on a classmate's blog, I have come to realize that there are several main types of blogs: People tracking someone with an illness, sports, celebrities, and those few people who think everyone needs to know absolutely everything about their lives.
While searching for statistics on the numbers of blogs, I came across this great article, written very much in the style of anAmericanStudies. Specifically, the article deals with the maturity of blogs. Blogs are relatively recent, and only lately have they reached any sort of legitimacy. There are also some great quotes from a Wall Street Journal writer, making an excellent point about blogs
"First, let’s step back and consider why we’re counting blogs at all. You no longer see articles that attempt to demonstrate the legitimacy of the Web by stating how many Web pages there are. But blogs are still in the process of entering mainstream consciousness, so numerical credibility is important; bloggers themselves cite the statistics a lot."
I, through anamericanstudies, have decided blogging isn't so bad, but I still think that people are starting to overestimate their importance and how much people want to know about them .
So, fellow bloggers-- would you blog if it were not a requirement for school? Why or why not? Has blogging through school changed your mind at all?
Media in real life.
Bolos and O'Connor have mentioned many times how they read the newspaper on a daily basis, which always makes me feel a little guilty. Unlike them, I do not read the newspaper. Worse, I don't even use the little button on my iGoogle that shows top headlines. On occasion, I half-listen to the radio on my way to school, but I am definately not functioning at that hour of the day. So where do I get my news?
The answer is pretty vague: I rely on my friends and mom to let me know when anything note-worthy is occuring. Even as I type this, I am aware of how bad this sounds. I should become more proactive, and go search for information--but, as the whiney and obnoxious voice in my head says, why?
State of the Media.org declares that the percent of people who read newspapers on a daily basis is dropping significantly, as is the number of newspapers in the country. This came up in class--newspapers are now buying each other, making the same stories appear in several newspapers, with the same spin on things.
If you scroll down on the State of the Media link, you'll see a chart with the ages of the audiences that read a newspaper. (My blogger isn't letting me post the image, but it's a little more than half-way down the page) The data only goes to 2003, but it's clear that my generation sucks at reading the paper, Sunday or weekday.
Is this bad? Of course, for anyone pursuing a journalism career it's not the best news. But are there enough media "outlets" where the nation no longer needs to rely on newspapers? And how informed do we have to be?
The answer is pretty vague: I rely on my friends and mom to let me know when anything note-worthy is occuring. Even as I type this, I am aware of how bad this sounds. I should become more proactive, and go search for information--but, as the whiney and obnoxious voice in my head says, why?
State of the Media.org declares that the percent of people who read newspapers on a daily basis is dropping significantly, as is the number of newspapers in the country. This came up in class--newspapers are now buying each other, making the same stories appear in several newspapers, with the same spin on things.
If you scroll down on the State of the Media link, you'll see a chart with the ages of the audiences that read a newspaper. (My blogger isn't letting me post the image, but it's a little more than half-way down the page) The data only goes to 2003, but it's clear that my generation sucks at reading the paper, Sunday or weekday.
Is this bad? Of course, for anyone pursuing a journalism career it's not the best news. But are there enough media "outlets" where the nation no longer needs to rely on newspapers? And how informed do we have to be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)