Perhaps the main thing that connects these two episodes of virtual revolution (The Cost of Free and Homo Interneticus) is that while episode 4 tackles how internet has turned us into somehow different beings adapting to a distinct set of characteristics which makes us see this new medium as all-powerful as it defies social, cultural and intellectual limitations and how we become blinded by this extraordinary power, Episode 3 features not only the Internet’s vast powers but also its being “free”. But as these two episodes revealed and eventually deconstructed these false notions we are blinded about, they both did not seem to expound or suggest any form of solution to the harm posed by this booming and relatively new capitalist chamber. As the episodes have provided, this medium is definitely not an escape route from reality which most people are hesitant to face and it most certainly is NOT free. It is, as Dr. Aleks Krotoski have put it, “a highly-targeted advertising.”
Each day, most people are not hesitant to share photos, videos, documentations and information about their personal lives and principles. Some do not care whoever sees or accesses the information they share while others religiously trust the privacy policies which assures the full confidentiality and efficacy of these settings. It is very apparent that we, as digital natives, consider this medium as a new form of self-expression and an opportunity for identity reconstruction. But while we provide and share anything which could be as petty as broadcasting that you’ve just farted or as serious as someone you love just died, the odds are about the same that somehow, somewhere, someone is earning money out of it – out of you. And just as some wee bit of digital natives are informed of this, an enormous majority, or disappointingly for some, do not care at all. I for one, honestly do not care at all until I have watched the Virtual Revolution series and became aware of how I am used not just one of all other people as commodities but as a single, unique type of commodity that is being sold online. For almost eight years now, I have been part of this multicultural cyberspace and what I would consider as the most dangerous thing I have put into risk is not just a single information but my whole being and most importantly the privacy I thought I had.
The younger generations who are considered to be the helpless victims of this medium are predicted to be self-involved in the future that their notion of social connection and relationship is highly dependent on the web. As the saying by Charles Wadsworth goes, “by the time a man realizes that maybe his father was right, he usually has a son who thinks he's wrong.” Not all of us will have to be wrong if someone, just one single person, will point out what should be right. The Internet is a vast medium that offers an enormous amount of opportunity for us and that opportunity will not be utilized until we actually realize it. The young people should not be deprived of this medium for it is undoubtedly a good form for them to express themselves. But what we, older, more informed and educated people must realize is that putting this medium into progressive and scholarly use is what could make it more useful and beneficial for all of us. Let us not wait for the time that different generations would blame each other for not being able to watch over the next. I’m not one to note every single step toward this goal but what I know for sure is that we first need to realize and accept that the web does not exist to be a medium of the unregulated free but should be a medium of the progressive sages.
In an interview by Dr. Krotoski with Stephen Fry regarding social media, he stressed the point that if we compare a teenager who lived during the time where the Internet was non-existent and a teenager who is part of the “generation web” there is not much difference. In fact, the one belonging to the generation web would “know more, understand more, is more socially confident, more aware of the rest of the world and more adept to research.” He pointed out that the very existence of the web opened opportunities for this certain generation to explore the world and learn more. And putting to context his assumption about the generation web, it clearly promotes the enforcement of the proper use of the web. Stephen Fry also compared the advent of the web to that of the automobile and the mobile phones where in conclusion he said: “there's a risk-reward ratio here and for us the reward is so great that whatever the risk is, we try to contain it and understand it at best but what we don't do is say the risk is too great.” Thus, pointing out that whatever the downsides, harms, and risks the Internet exposes us all in, these are overpowered by the rewarding feel we get from it.
Sources:
The young people should not be deprived of this medium for it is undoubtedly a good form for them to express themselves.
ReplyDeleteI'd have to agree. Parents think of the Internet nowadays as a distraction from the "things that matter". My tita for one, sees the internet as a gaming tool, for social-networking etc and she doesn't see its potential in learning, knowledge and social change. She's missing the whole point! This goes same with "traditional parents". I think it's not just kids who needs to be informed... wait they already are.
True. One thing for sure, it's not only the kids who need web literacy but also some adults who consider the internet as a "bad influence" to children. There's the big reward ratio, regarding Fry's assertion that the internet provides, and for me it's a long list of advantages that 30 or 40 years ago were unimaginable. And that includes the opportunity for creativity that it gives to each and every person.
ReplyDelete