What could be improved?

It is time for my final blog post!
Although I thoroughly enjoyed the Digital Culture course, there are a few things I personally would have preferred to have learnt.

As I am learning to become a magazine journalist, I was hoping that the course would involve more things that include how a journalist would use the internet and technology in order to do their jobs. 

Although I did find the majority of the topics we learnt about quite interesting, I think it would of been better if the topics were explained more as some of us (a.k.a me) didn't understand some of the technology talk, and it felt like we had most of the lesson time to just research on computers. Although this was helpful, I feel that I personally would of benefitted more from getting explanations from the lecturer. I think it would of been good if we were to learn about piracy in particular, as this really relates to journalism.

I also think it would of been a good idea to get feedback on my blog more regularly. For example the only time I really got feedback for my work was after it was given in (and then it was too late to change anything). This way it would mean that I would of got higher then a C for my first load of blog posts (sigh...)

My favourite blog posts that I enjoyed writing about were the digital democracy about Kony, as I really had an interest in the campaign back in the day. As well as this one I enjoyed writing about the google glasses. Although I think it's a stupid idea it does look quite fun and I'm looking forward to the day they are released!

Overall, I have really enjoyed my digital culture lessons and writing this blog. Thank you if you have read this blog (if anyone), and thanks for a great first year at university.

How I found Digital Culture

I am so close to the end of my first year at University, and thus that means I am coming to the end of these blog posts and my digital culture classes. (Sad face).

I chose to study digital culture before I even began university, and I'm very glad I did. I picked it because it sounded very technologically based, and technology is such a big part of everyones lives now, especially as I am training to become a magazine journalist. 

I did think that the class would be more based among journalists, i.e. news websites, new applications, how to blog etc. And although we did learn about these things, I do wish more of the topics we focussed on were more journalism based. However, most of the things we learnt about I found very interesting and I am glad that I took this class.

I really enjoyed that we were assessed via blog posts. This is because as I am training to become a magazine journalist I think it is really useful that I know how to blog properly, and this is the perfect way for me to learn what and what not to do. As well as this, the blogs were done weekly, which made for less work at the end of the year (ha! We still had loads.) However doing a blog post per week really meant that I could keep up with my work. 

Whilst doing my blog posts, I found it very useful reading other students blog posts in order to understand how to write to a 'blogger' audience. I think I got the gist of it in the end! I think it will really help me with my future career and I would love to blog for a magazine company one day!

In conclusion, I really enjoyed my class time in Digital Culture lessons. Especially work shops over lectures. Some things we learnt about were not particularly 'my thing', however I do feel I have more of a knowledge in the latest technology now, and I think that's important when you want to continue in a career that will always involve it.

Thanks Gavin, it's been a blast. 

Wikileaks Effects On Our Society

Last week, I made THIS post about wikileaks in general and I gave some examples of why they have often been highly criticised by the media. Even so, wikileaks has definitely made a name for itself as a website, and there are few people who know there way around a computer and don't know what wikileaks is.

Wikileaks has mainly been condemned for the large amount of hacking that they are known for doing. (Again, if you don't know what hacking is, THIS website explains all.) It is a widely known fact that hacking is mostly illegal. Hacking can be done by anyone that learns the skill. Whether this be the government, school pupils, normal adults or journalists. Yes, journalists have been known to do some hacking. And no hacking story made by journalists has been in the public eye more then the Milly Dowler Story. Dowler went missing back in March 2002 and was subsequently murdered. Her mobile phone was hacked by journalists at former newspaper, News of the World in order to obtain news stories.
When this was published in the public eye, there was a huge outcry from the British public which eventually led to the closure of the newspaper.

If News of the World can get shut down for hacking, why has there been nothing done about wikileaks?

Bradley Manning is still very much in the public eye and if you type his named into google over 70 million results come up. In fact, a post was made on him just one hour ago (29/04/13, 18:25 GMT).
This just goes to show how society is still very much interested in this wikileaks story. It does seem that if hacking, or leaking information as Manning did, is done with the right deliberateness it can be acknowledged.
As well as this, the fact that hacking was made on a murder victims mobile phone for no reason other then to obtain breaking news is disgusting and shocking. However it does seem that Leveson inquiry has made sure that this is extremely unlikely to ever happen again.

Whether or not hacking is acceptable will always be down to the motives of the hacker, as well as the principles of society at that moment in time.


http://whatishacking.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Milly_Dowler
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22278947

Wikileaks...

Wikileaks, is a non-profit, international organisation of which publishes secret information ("leaks") and classified media from sources that do not wish to reveal themselves.

I would say that wikileaks is probably most known for when they leaked US political stories. And it didn't seem like it was for good reasons... Julian Assange, creator of wikileaks has come under much criticism for creating the website.

Wikileaks

Wikileaks aims to, in their words, "bring important news and information out to the public". However, I have done a lot of work on news websites this year, and it does seem that that is the main aim for most of them.

So why is wikileaks any different?

Well, a very select number of people rely on wikileaks to find out the latest news. Also unlike most news websites, wikileaks has faced one hell of a lot of criticism from the media. 

This could be because U.S. army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning was accused of letting out extremely confidential information and footage of an Apache helicopter that killed 12 people in Baghdad back in 2007. 

When Manning was asked why he thought it would be a good idea to leak this, he said that he believed his American people had the right to know what the "true cost of war" was. In some ways, I really do agree with Bradley Manning; we should have the right to know what happens in our own armies. But then again, some things are definitely better off left unsaid. And I think this applies. 

As well as this, wikileaks has been accused of hacking into multiple computers in order to find out secret information. However this is highly denied by the wikileaks London attorney who said it was  "completely false". (To find out what hacking is, click HERE)

Overall, what I understand is that wikileaks wants their voice to be heard for the public without there being any bad outcomes. However from what I can see is that this really isn't very effective when you compare how many times they have been criticised for doing the wrong thing. 

Only time will tell how long wikileaks is kept open.. 

http://whatishacking.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/30/wikileaks-cables-bradley-manning

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_07/b4215046290051.htm

Augmented reality

This week we had a cover lesson. We learnt about a new application for smartphones, which once it had reacted with a 'scanner' on newspaper, the images would come to life right before your eyes on your mobile phone. This is called 'augmented reality'.
Augmented reality is a type of virtual reality that somewhat duplicates the worlds environment in a computer. Or in this case, it duplicates the newspaper and creates a virtual scene that is generated by the computer. It is designed to enhance the users sensory perception of the virtual world of which they are reacting with.

Augmented reality is currently being used for entertainment, military training, engineering design, robotics, manufacturing and multiple other industries.
So even if you haven't heard of it or used it, yet, it is definitely out there!

What augmented reality could look like

The mobile reacts with the icon and then automatically changed the 2D image into 3D, also including sound in order to really help portray the image.
I really believe that augmented reality is very likely to catch on. I also think that it could work extremely well in schools and colleges. It is extremely low cost to involve in school curriculums. All that needs to be done is the icon needs to be printed on paper in order for the app to scan it. The icon looks like this:

What your smart phone would scan

 Augmented reality apps could even work outside schools. Even just for fun. The app we looked at was sort of like a comic book coming to life and I think it could really sell well.

Augmented reality could work so well when it comes to journalism. Newspapers could print icons, like the one to the left, and it could bring the breaking news stories to life.
The apps are still in the early stages of being created and we were lucky to get a first look, so it is a long time before these icons will feature in newspapers, magazines and schools. However I do believe it will catch on one day in the future.



I previously wrote this post on the new 'Google glasses' that are set to be released in the near future. These glasses are somewhat like augmented reality, although I don't think the glasses will catch on quite as much!

Either way, augmented reality will be present in the future, I am sure of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/augmented-reality

So how does it affect me...?

Last week I spoke about the public sphere theory and about what democracy is. This week, I'll be telling you how it all affects your life. (That sounded very morbid, it's not that bad.)

Throughout the years, technology has advanced enormously. Because this has happened, technology is almost with us whenever and wherever. Therefore, technology has the capability to have an impact on our decisions without us even having a clue.

One example of something that affected my age group (I am 19 years) and made them really get involved was the Kony 2012 project. Even I got involved and signed up for the newsletters. I was this close to buying the 'survival kit' or whatever it was called. The fact is, is it is completely unheard of now. However it is still gaining millions of views on youtube (over 97 million!?!) But back in 2012, it was quite the phenomenon....



The above video is 30 minutes long so I totally get it if you don't want to watch. I don't think I even watched it half of the way through (I am very impatient.)

In short, the video explains the campaign that tried to get Joseph Kony arrested for raising an army of children and killing thousands of people along the way.
I don't think he got arrested.
So it didn't work that well.

Even so, it did get people involved. Millions of people signed up to help the campaign, offering thousands of pounds in order to capture Kony. There were even multiple 'paint the night' events which would involve people plastering posters of the campaign all over cities. There was one in London. I considered going. (But I didn't).

The fact of the matter is, it definitely harassed the worlds leaders, i.e. David Cameron and Barack Obama to do something about what was going on.

So....

Digital democracy does affect us. Maybe not in ways you would realise. And quite possibly without you even realising it at all. But it does. And although it may be extremely annoying to see the same old Kony video 10 times on your Facebook news feed, and although the Kony campaign did turn out to be a bit of a flop, it is a way to get your voice heard. And by getting your voice heard, stuff gets done. 

http://invisiblechildren.com/kony/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kony_2012

This has been a long blog post, goodnight.

Public Sphere

Jurgen Habermas is probably best known for his theory of the Public Sphere.

Before I go into explaining what the public sphere theory is, it is best to know about democracy first.

There are multiple different types of democracy. The earliest form of democracy is called 'Direct Democracy' which was used a very long time ago by the ancient Greeks, however it has mainly died out now except for the use of it in Switzerland. It is the most plain and simple form of decision making. This is because things would get decided by a huge group of people getting together and figuring things out. Evidently this quickly died out because it is simply impossible to get everyone together- even in a tiny country like the UK. 

There is then representative democracy, which we use here in the UK. It is also used by the germans, americans and australians to name but a few. Representative democracy works by people electing a representative to make decisions for them (this is where the voting in politics comes in). Although it seems like a good idea, it isn't always. 

So the public sphere?

Jurgen Habermas

The public sphere was the theory of Jurgen Habermas who was a philosopher and sociologist. He explains that a public sphere is a certain group of people who get together in order to create the "public". This could be all the people who watch The Only Way Is Essex. Although, back in the day when it was the 18th century, the public sphere would have been made up of people who were very well educated or had a lot of money. 

Jurgen Habermas argues that this is the best way to sort out democracy. It allows if not all, but some, of the public to represent a country when making decisions, rather then the one representative who doesn't always get it right. 

What do you think of Habermas' "public sphere" idea?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jürgen_Habermas

http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/j-rgen-habermas