AOL.com uses the given-new non-linear model design element. As the book states, "the given information is presented as though it is already known to the audience, and therefore unproblematic," (Martinec and Leeuwen, p.15). On this website the given information is placed on the left side of the screen. It is all the typical headings and information one would expect to find. For example, sports, travel, yellow pages, games, etc. As the user moves their eyes across the page towards the right, the information given is current and specific. "New information is presented as though it is not yet known to the audience, and therefore in need of their attention," (Martinec and Leeuwen, p. 15). This information is presented with pictures, text and titles all to grab the user’s attention and draw them in.

The book, The Language of New Media Design, also discusses the structure visually. The page, or screen in this case, can be divided vertically in two with the given elements on the left, and the new on the right. This is exactly how AOL.com executed their layout. An actual vertical line separates the two categories. I personally like this type of design. I feel it is easy for the eye to follow and also easy to figure out. It is a convenient way to organize information when you want to include both background content and current information.

Facebook

As one of the most popular websites online, the Facebook network generates over hundreds of users daily. The website of Facebook offers many great features from interacting with friends to statues updates. Additionally, one of the great features Facebook also offers is how easily users can navigate around the website without complication. In non-linear models, Facebook uses the given and the new models. On the left, Facebook offers the given through the navigation buttons. Other navigation buttons can be found on the top as well. However, when moving across the page to the right, the new is shown. The new would be considered the status updates from friends and links leading to meeting new people in the network. Using any of the navigation buttons or links, users can see that Facebook is consistent in using the given and new model. On the profile page, given information is still on the left, while the new is on the left. Users have all their friends on the left along with their profile information. The other half consists of news feed and links leading to other websites, not entirely linked to Facebook.
On the other hand, Facebook can also be viewed as ideal and real. As stated earlier, there are also navigation buttons at the top. This views the importance of the top of the page leading down the page in more depth view of details. This allows users to find what they're looking for more easily. Overall, the website of Facebook shows the use of the Given and New along with the Ideal and real models.

Woot.com Design

Woot.com is a website that normally has one deal each day, however, some days Woot has something called a "Woot-off". A Woot-off is when Woot sells out of products and then posts a new product. Woot's design can be thought of as an ideal and real design because the ideal, or abstract, is the item and its price that they are selling that day. Further down the page the product's specifications are listed going to the real or particular/practical information. Woot also uses the the given new form as well. The given information is the product, everyone knows that Woot sells a new product for cheap everyday, the new information are the reader comments. Woot can also be thought of as a network simply because the main site Woot.com connects to four other sites: kids.woot.com, shirt.woot.com, wine.woot.com, and sellout.woot.com. From each of these additional sites, with the exception of sellout.woot.com, you can get back to woot.com. Sellout.woot.com is a little different because that site redirects you to the page where the product is that is being sold for a good price. All in all, woot.com and all of its offshoots follow the real and ideal, given and new, and the network designs.

Twitter
Downloading is illegal and virtually impossible to regulate, but oh so useful. Fueled by the users and their faith in it, P2P=here to stay!

Essays, Twitter, Blogging, and Power Points...oh my!
Having written essays, blogs, tweets and created a Power Point so far this semester, I find it a little hard to compare these four mediums for the simple fact that they are so different. But here goes!

It's natural for me to feel the most comfortable writing an essay simply because I've been doing it for so long. I know how to express myself the best writing an essay, possibly because it's often very structured. Of the four mediums mentioned above, an essay seems to be the one taken the most seriously in the professional world because it's been around the longest and is the most “old fashioned”.

Twittering is a completely new experience for me. I actually find it the most fascinating because it just seems so surreal to cram a thought process into 140 characters. On one hand, it allows the reader to read one or two sentences and get the main point of the tweet. But in some instances, it might not be enough information to inform the reader of an event, thought, opinion, etc.

After reading my classmates' blog posts, it seems pretty apparent that Power Point is definitely not the preferred medium to use for writing/presenting. I have very little experience with it, having made literally 4 or 5 in my entire life. To be honest, it scares me a little bit and I don't really mind keeping my experiences with Power Point to a minimum. It tends to become very redundant because teachers or other students often read right off the slides and don't add any information. Many people also take advantage of Power Point's features a little bit too much and make presentations really flashy and intricate.

Blogging is beginning to grow on me. I like it because it allows the writer to expand on their thoughts, unlike Twitter, but is still much more informal than a typical essay. It seems like some of the conventional rules of writing go out the window when blogging. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing because it allows some people to get into their groove a little bit more and express themselves more effectively.

Twitter example
Downloading is illegal but that does not seem to stop the general population from stealing the songs, movies and t.v. shows that they want.

Comparing Essays, Blogs and Twittering

So far this semester we have experienced writing in a few different mediums. In doing so it is easy to see how each type of writing influences the way in which one handles the assignment. Take the essay we wrote for example. I noticed that while writing that, I felt more careful to use proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. When given an essay assignment, the school mode automatically kicks in. Essays are, in my mind, associated with school and grades and using everything that I have learned in English class starting with grade school, in it. After writing it I proofread it multiple times and made many corrections. Essays have definite standard of doing everything correctly.

While comparing essays to the blogs we have written, there is a definite difference seen. I have never written a blog before this class, but I find them to be more laid back. They are an opportunity to write your opinions, thoughts and ideas down in not necessarily such a structured format. There are no rules to writing a blog. Transitions, topic sentences, a thesis and other essay type criteria do not seem necessary. They are a way to get your mind cleared and for those who are interested to read and even respond. I find them to be more casual and conversation like.

Twittering is an even more foreign experience for me. I found it difficult to summarize one of the topics in class within 140 characters. While twittering, I noticed the length of what you write becomes more important that what is actually written. I found myself editing and chopping more and more off just to make sure it fit within the requirement. While I do not think twitter will ever become a valuable part of the education system, I do see how it can be entertaining. It is an easy way to keep track of people or let others know what you are doing. I do not think it is an effective way to summarize an article, but it is an easy way to keep in touch and up to date on your friends and family members.

What is Best?

Twitter, Essays, Blogs, and PowerPoints? Where is a person to begin with all of the options that are open to us today to communicate? Twitter is short & sweet and generally about what the owner is doing and/or writing. Essays are formal and used to disseminate large amounts of information. Blogs can be informational or simply about the writer's point of view. PowerPoints are meant to convey information to audiences quickly. Which is the best one to use?

I have never used Twitter simply because to me it implies that I am self-absorbed. Not to say that what I say is true. I have seen people use Twitter to let people know about events, posts on blogs, breaking news and more. I simply prefer not to be limited to 140 characters when I can have as many as I want using other forms of media.

Essays are more where my interests lie. Essays can be any length needed. They can be full of pictures, too much information (at times), and complex ideas that Twitter cannot support. Essays can get long-winded and disorganized Twitter cannot become long-winded--there is not enough space to! The happy medium for me are Blogs.

Blogs allow writers to write as much as they need as well as embed video, pictures, audio, etc. Blogs can link ("I link therefore I am") to outside websites to make things clearer or expand on a point. Blogs can get to a lot of people like Twitter. Blogs can be as long as necessary like an essay. These things make the blog a favorite of mine: large audience and however long I want.

PowerPoint, oh PowerPoint...what can I say. PowerPoints force users to follow a format in some ways. .PPT can be uploaded to the internet and even embedded in webpages to play on demand. PowerPoint is a love and a bane of mine. When I use PowerPoint I get caught up in the design details, what to put on the slide, how I want the slide to look, the order that the slides appear. The list goes on. PowerPoint forces a form like Twitter, but it also lets the writer go on and on (if need be) like an Essay. When people use PowerPoint they tend to read from the slides rather than expanding on the information on the slides. We all saw this in class recently. Many people, my own group included, read right from the slides and only deviated when we got to the final part of each presentation: questions and discussion.

In the long run people are drawn to the types of media that allow them to do what they need to do. In my case, I like to make sure that I am clear so I prefer blogs or essays. Others want quick--short communication that Twitter provides. Businesses want everyone to get necessary information so they use PowerPoint. Others still prefer Essays to explain complicated information.

Virtual Tweet!

Future of P2P: Who Really Controls Digital Media? Can the RIAA stop people from downloading their favorite TV shows, video-games, and music?

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, written by Walter Benjamin, is a very interesting article focused on the reproduction of different art forms. The article first looks at different processes used to reproduce art, including founding and stamping by the Greeks. This allowed them to reproduce bronzes, terra cottas, and coins. The woodcut allowed graphic art to be mechanically reproducible. Engraving, etching, and lithography were also added to the list. Lithography was quickly replaced by photography. As Benjamin says, “...photography freed the hand of the most important artistic functions which henceforth devolved only upon the eye looking into a lens. Since the eye perceives more swiftly than the hand can draw, the process of pictorial reproduction was accelerated so enormously that it could keep pace with speech” (98). Photography essentially foreshadowed the sound film. The refining of one art form led to the creation of another. The article then looks at the repercussions the reproduction of works of art and the art of film have had on art in its traditional sense.

Benjamin writes that, “Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be” (98). Anyone looking at a reproduction or duplicate of a work of art is viewing it in a totally different time and space from the artist and the original viewers. Its meaning could be changed drastically as a result. For example, the statue of Venus was made an object of veneration by the Greeks, but viewed as an ominous idol by the clerics of the Middle Ages. It was the same statue, but it faced two very opposing interpretations. As a musician, this is an intriguing thought to me. Because I am a classically trained pianist and dabble into the world of composition very rarely, I play others' works ninety nine percent of the time. While pieces generally contain instruction left to little interpretation, like tempo and dynamics, much of the piece can be interpreted and played many different ways by many different pianists. Playing the Children's Corner suite in the year 2009 is putting the piece in a very different time than when it was composed in 1908. It means something different to me than it did to Claude Debussy.

Benjamin notes that, “During longs periods of history, the mode of human sense perception changes with humanity's entire mode of existence” (99). Both historical circumstances and nature determine how a medium is perceived by humans. I think this notion is particularly relevant in today’s society. While it may be a stretch, children today are born practically knowing how to use a computer and an iPod. It’s simply human nature to use technology to perceive different art forms. As it is commonly said, one can find anything on the internet. You might not be able to make it the Louvre in your lifetime, but you will certainly be able to Google the exhibits in the Louvre and see them a foot away from your face. I can say with almost one hundred percent certainty that the artist of a painting never intended for the viewer to see their work via a million pixels on a screen. The work loses its authenticity when it’s not viewed in real life. Benjamin might say it loses its aura. Aura is defined as “the unique phenomenon of a distance, however close it may be” (100). Mass reproduction of art forms gradually puts distance between the original work and its intent and the reproduction.

On one hand, I like mass reproduction of many art forms because it allows them to be seen, heard, and felt by many people across the globe. Ultimately though, I agree with Benjamin’s belief that the uniqueness of art is lost through reproduction of a particular work. It can be compared to the childhood game of telephone. As the message gets passed from person to person, it slowly changes. By the end, it’s often very different from when it started.

Concerning Human Understanding...

John Locke's piece of "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding" emphasizes the ideology that everyone is born with everything there is to know. In addition, it's just about being able to trigger those views and ideas within us.

I found Locke's piece quite fascinating because in so many ways, we do gain our knowledge through personal experiences and how we are able to reflect upon ourselves. In this essay, Locke revolves around two primarily points: sensation and reflection. To begin, Locke draws on the illusion of the mind as a white piece of paper. As we go through life, this white piece of paper clings onto the knowledge that is triggered and created from personal experiences. I personally agree with Locke on this matter. Experiences, I would have to say are very essential to the development of life because it helps define who we are and develops our views and thinking. I'm sure that on some level, we were all able to gain at least a one or two things from life experiences. Experiences allows us to see things and perceive things on a different level we would not have seen, thus ideas and views are found. Quite similarly, Locke then focuses on how perception is gain from sensible items such as how something would look to how it tastes. For example, if a little kid were to touch a hot stove and have a bad experience, the kid will consider the next encounter with a stove. The hot stove triggers the kid's understanding, therefore, the kid's is able to draw a new idea.These perception of these direct senses also help trigger our understandings and views within us.

On the other hand, Locke focuses on how we are able to reflect upon ourselves, hence our ideas and understandings are also created. The ideology that we are already born with everything we need to know draws upon the bases of reflection. Locke use reflection in the sense that everyone has the ability to reason and reflect within themselves, and if done correctly, ideas will be generated. In sense, that also means that we are able to doubt, believe, have the will, and observe within ourselves. I particularly find this interesting because of the constant inner-struggle everyone has inside of them as well as other things. In our minds, we all have common understand of what is right or wrong, therefore, there is always a constant battle between ourselves to do what we feel is right. These constant battles, to which we can refer to Locke's term of reflection, at the same time create more understandings and views just from these simple or complex operation within our minds.

In the end, Locke fully shows believes that ideas are generated from these two points. Sensation that holds as a gateway opening idea flowing from inside of us. From there, our abilities to think within these sensation leads to being able to reflect within our own thoughts, therefore, triggering more locked ideas and views. Locke's essay doesn't believe that ideas are created outside of us, but really inside of us. It's just a matter of being able to trigger those ideas and views inside of us.

I found David Hume’s fascination to find the scientific understanding of man to be quite interesting in his Of the Standard of Taste. His idea that everything man knows comes from one of two things, experience or observation, strikes up much thought within me. While I never considered this to be an option of how we know and learn the things we do, I can relate to what he is saying and understand where he is coming from. He actually reminds me of John Locke in the respect that Locke also felt that what we know comes from experience. Locke takes it a step farther though and explains that whatever it is that one experiences is experienced through senses. This is our most immediate way to interact with the world around us. Whatever it is that one senses, it is the most immediate and direct aspect of that object. Lock then argues that after the sensation, inner thoughts occur as one steps back to think about it and learn from that experience.

Hume on the other hand takes his ideas in a different direction and begins discussing taste and whether there is something as objective taste. He writes, “Men of the most confined knowledge are able to remark a difference of taste in the narrow circle of their acquaintance, even where the persons have been educated under the same government…” In this quote I understand Hume to be saying that at first glance it seems there is a great variety of taste. He then goes on to make an interesting point that we all seem to use the same words, like beautiful for example, but when asked why whatever is being discussed is beautiful, people do not agree on what beautiful means. This can be seen in his quote, “As this variety of taste is obvious to the most careless enquirer; so will it be found on examination, to be still greater in reality than in appearance. The sentiments of men often differ with regard to beauty and deformity of all kinds, even while their general discourse is the same.”

Hume continues on to say how there is a science world and an art world. The science world is of fact and “judgment,” as he puts it, and the art world is of emotions, personal opinion and “sentiment.” While science can sometimes be wrong, sentiment is always right because it is only how one feels. I can agree with Hume on this level. How can someone be wrong about how they feel? Feelings are personal and something that moves someone in one direction may not move others that same way. For this reason, sentiment is never a matter of truth, but a matter of personal feeling. Hume wrote “ a thousand different sentiments, excited by the same object, are all right.” I agree whole heartedly with that statement.

Hume then touches base on how the human race is somewhat contradictory of themselves when looking as something artistic. Once again, I can relate to Hume on this idea because on one hand we want to believe that taste and beauty are private and personal but on the other hand people want to agree on what is beautiful together. How is that possible? It is simply not. If we say that something is one’s own opinion, then there is no need to make sure that others agree with you, because they are entitled to their own opinion as well. What is objective about art though, is the fact that people can be moved by it. Take a painting for example, maybe the picture portrayed is not even real, but yet there is something about the picture that moves those who look at it. The audience is not all moved in the same direction, some may find it beautiful while others repulsive, but the fact that all are moved is objective. There is something in that piece that can move the audience is such a way that it is not arguable, their is something objective and universal to all good art.

Social Hierarchy

Karl Marx, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor Adorno share similar ideas, although Marx was writing more about the economy and Horkheimer and Adorno were writing about culture. In Marx’s A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy he speaks about how the forces of production dictate the structure of society. Similarly Horkheimer and Adorno write about how culture has become standardized because people will not accept anything other than the status quo as “good”. Therefore, Marx, Horkheimer, and Adorno agree that the means of production create society.

Marx’s ideas are about the economy because he is writing during a time when the economy in Europe was terrible because there was a strangle-hold control on the economies of the majority of European nations. Marx advocated for the release of these holds and letting the market determine prices and operate on the basis of supply and demand. According to Marx, “the totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness”(20). This means that the path to production creates the superstructure of society. Horkheimer and Adorno apply this same idea to culture.

Horkheimer and Adorno believe that the media dictates to people in a specific culture the definition of good and bad music, films, photography, drawing, painting etc. However, they also explain that the media uses the technology of the culture industry to standardize and influence social systems. Horkheimer and Adorno say that the culture industry is what shapes a society just as the means of production shape a society in the eyes of Marx. This culture industry caters to the public with a range of pass-produced products of varying quality in order to quantify culture (1038). Simply, the media shape culture into whatever they want it to be and society laps up the ideals that the industry says are right. For example, smoking was extremely popular on television, in books, etc. because it was made to look sexy, mysterious, and just cool in general. However, once smoking was found to be harmful smoking has appeared less and less in movies, on T.V., in books, etc. As a result of this lower profile fewer people start smoking today because it is not as glamorous as it once was. Once again, the media has and is changing the culture.

Now we come full-circle that the media is the means. Marx said that the means of production drives social hierarchy. Horkheimer and Adorno say that media, the machine of culture, now drives our social hierarchy. Different levels of society are marketed to differently. Culture however, does impose its own stamp on society by detailing exactly what is and is not acceptable and good or bad.