Blog Post #10 - EOTO 2 Key Post

The Third Person Effect (TPE) is a psychological phenomenon positing that individuals tend to believe media messages affect others more than themselves. This belief can have extensive implications in various domains, influencing societal attitudes, media regulation, and interpersonal relationships. 

TPE can lead to a heightened awareness of media influence, prompting individuals to advocate for social change and media literacy initiatives. Those who perceive themselves as less susceptible may feel a moral obligation to protect others, especially vulnerable populations, from harmful media content. 

However, the TPE can also breed misconceptions about the effects of media. 

Individuals may underestimate their own susceptibility while overestimating the vulnerability of others, leading to risky behaviors. This false sense of immunity can result in ill-informed decisions or reckless behavior, perpetuating societal issues rather than addressing them.

In the context of society as a whole, the TPE can contribute to polarization. As individuals believe that specific media influences certain demographic groups more than others, societal divisions may deepen. 

One group's media consumption may be viewed as either reinforced or vilified based on the perceived vulnerability of another, creating an environment rife with misunderstanding and subsequent conflict.

The positive aspects of the TPE include the potential for heightened media literacy. 

When individuals recognize the influence of media on others, they may advocate for educational programs aimed at promoting critical thinking, thereby fostering a more informed public. 

These programs can empower individuals to engage with media responsibly, understanding its complexities and nuances.

TPE affects every demographic differently. 

- Socioeconomic Status: Wealthier individuals might may have more access to resources that promote media literacy, leading to a greater immunity to percieved negative media effect. While, poorer groups may have less access to such resources. 

- Age: Younger individuals recognize that media shapes the social norms and also underestimate their susceptibility due to the TPE because they have grown up with digital media.  Older genderations typically adopt a perspective that fears media influences the youth without them recognizing it. 

- Gender: Gender dynamics also play a role. Women, for instance, may perceive media representations more acutely, especially surrounding body image messages, while men may be less concerned about these specific issues. This discrepancy could shape community discussions on media's effects

- Sexual Orientation: LGBTQ+ individuals in particular might feel sensitive to negative media portrayals, leading them to actively challenge harmful narratives and advocate for equitable representation

- Majority vs. Minority: Minority groups often perceive media narratives as negative to their identity and may feel an ethical imperative to respond by advocating for change, thereby actively engaging in media scrutiny.

The Third Person Effect theory provides valuable insight into the societal dynamics of media perception. While there are clear benefits to heightened awareness and advocacy for vulnerable populations, there are also notable risks of misunderstanding media influence and overreach in censorship. 

The TPE affects everyone.

Blog Post #9 - Antiwar

The ongoing struggles surrounding war and dissent in America are as relevant today as they were during the Progressive Era.

The three videos provided introduce a rich variety of opinions on the topic, illuminating the often-muted voices of those who oppose U.S. military engagements. 

The first video dives into the persecution of antiwar activists during World War I, highlighting how the First Amendment was undermined when dissenters were silenced and even imprisoned for expressing their beliefs. This act of repression stands as a stark reminder of the fragile nature of civil liberties during times of conflict.

The second video articulates the tensions between governmental power and the citizen's right to voice opposition, particularly surrounding military actions taken abroad. 

Currently, those who oppose the war do not experience the same degree of overt persecution, but they frequently encounter a media narrative that can diminish or entirely overlook antiwar viewpoints.

The question arises: Why is it that strong antiwar voices seem relegated to less mainstream platforms like Antiwar.com and The American Conservative?

As one ventures to these websites, it becomes obvious that they summarize thought-provoking ideas, yet, they are never featured in mainstream media outlets. 

This prompts significant questions regarding the scope of the discussions we engage in as a society. Are we genuinely informed, or are we just repeating the prevailing narratives that fill the media?

The relegation of antiwar viewpoints to specialized websites can be linked to systemic biases within mainstream media, which often favor narratives that align with national interests or political agendas.

This absence of representation carries a significant risk: stifling dissent may result in a limited comprehension of the global implications of military actions. By pushing antiwar voices out of the media, critical assessments of U.S. intervention policies are overlooked, hindering a more comprehensive discussion about the consequences of war and the associated human costs.

Overall, the First Amendment's safeguarding of dissent is fundamental to democracy, but its principles can be easily challenged. 

The current media landscape underscores the necessity of actively pursuing a variety of viewpoints to ensure that discussions about war are thorough and inclusive, thereby validating the voices of dissenters. 

Only by doing so can we aspire to develop a full understanding of modern warfare's significant, and often tragic, complexities.

Blog Post #8 - Diffusion of Innovations

 The Boston University describes The Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) Theory in great detail. The theory was developed by E.M. Rogers in 1962 and the purpose of it is to "explain how, over time, an idea or product gains momentum and diffuses through a specific population or societal system." 

The whole idea behind DOI is to see the process of adoption of an idea or product, which will not happen overnight. The adoption by a large population will take time because some individuals will love the idea and hop on it right away, others may wait till it's trending, and some may never adopt it. 

There are five established adopter categories: 

1. Innovators - These are people who want to be the first to try the innovation because they like to take risks and are adventuresome. 

2. Early Adopters - These are people who enjoy leadership roles and embrace change, they see that this innovation is the future and they are ready to be a part of it. 

3. Early Majority - These are people who are not leaders, but are willing to adopt the innovation as long as it has worked for other people. 

4. Late Majority - These are people who will only adopt the innovation after it has successfully worked for the early majority. 

5. Laggards - These are people bound by tradition, conservative, and very stubborn when it comes to change.  

With each category of individuals, you have to tailor your promotional strategy to them as well as consider factors that influence the adoption of innovation. These factors can be relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, triability, and observability. 

Applying the Diffusion of Innovation Theory can be challenging, but eye-opening. The example we will be using is the U.S. Postal Service. 

The innovators of the U.S. Postal Service would include figures such as Benjamin Franklin who was appointed the First Postmaster General in 1775. 

Franklin recognized the value of an organized postal system and worked on creating protocols for mail delivery and fostering unity among colonies. The other innovators would be the Continental Congress that appointed Benjamin Franklin, they saw the need and knew the man for the job. 

Early adopters of the U.S. Postal Service innovation would likely be the merchants, political leaders, and other influential figures in the U.S. at the time. 

These individuals would have understood the importance of community, reliable communication, and trade networks. These important figures most likely communicated with each other about the trade and political aspects of the U.S.

The early majority of the U.S. Postal Service innovation is represented by the population of colonists who were slow to shift from informal methods of communication to the established postal system. 

Once they understood the reliability and benefits of using the postal system they joined pretty quickly. The leaders in the early adopters section were the ones to convince them to adopt the postal service innovation. 

Click here to watch the US Post Office spread over time, 1700-1900

The late majority would include all of the colonists who were hesitant to use the postal service because of reasons like lack of familiarity, attachments to traditional ways, or just skepticism about the new innovation.

When the postal service started being incorporated into everyday living, this group came around and began to use it as well. 

Laggards would include individuals who were strongly rooted in their traditional ways and saw no beneficial reason for the postal service. 

They may not want to communicate with people outside of their local community, prefer face-to-face communication, or do not understand the purpose of the postal service. They most likely adopted the innovation for matters such as legal or official importance. 

In the 21st century, the vast majority of people use the U.S. Postal Service. Although there may be a few holdouts, after 250 years of service, it seems that only a tiny fraction of the population would be considered as such today.

Blog Post #7 - EOTO 1 Reax

Everyone is familiar with one of the top 6 streaming services whether it be Netflix, Hulu, Peakcock, Disney+, Paramount+, or HBO Max. There are  Everyone knows and loves Netflix, however, not many know the history of it. 

Before steaming services, there were Blockbuster and Redbox where you could rent DVDs, watch movies, and return them for a fee. This was a fine concept. 

Blockbuster and Redbox had new releases, some older films, and more popular ones. However, a big downside was that each location only had so many copies of a DVD, so you were out of luck if they did not have the movie you wanted. Another downside was the late fees you would receive if you did not return the movie right on time. 

The founders of Netflix, Marc Randolph, and Reed Hastings, saw these downsides of DVD rentals and decided to turn them into positive reasons. They started their first version of Netflix, where individuals could order a movie, and it would be shipped to them on DVD. Then, the customer would mail it back once they were finished. This was very popular and made just under $42 million in a year. 

Later, in 2007, Netflix, as we know it now, was launched and was even more popular since they did not have to wait for the DVD and it had past shows, old movies, and popular movies all on one platform. 

Currently, Netflix has 84.11 million paid subscribers, its own line of "Netflix Shows", and an app. It has truly grown and changed the film industry forever. 

Netflix is currently ranked first in subscribers and revenue with Hulu second in revenue, and Disney + second in subscribers. With more than 200+ streaming platforms worldwide, this is a huge accomplishment and shows how far Netflix has really come. 

Learning about the history of On-Demand TV Programming: Netflix gave me a new appreciation for how far our technology and world have come. 

Shout out to Bria Ciocca, she did a fantastic job presenting her EOTO on "The Rise of On-Demand TV Programming: NETFLIX" to the class and was super engaging. 

Blog Post #6 - EOTO 1 Key Post

 When it comes to communication, few inventions have had as profound an impact on society as the U.S. Postal Service. With its roots tracing back to 1775, the Postal Service has evolved dramatically over the past 250 years, shaped by the ever-changing needs of the American population. 

The U.S. Postal Service as we know it owes its start to Benjamin Franklin, who was appointed by the Continental Congress as the first Postmaster General in 1775. 

Franklin's past in the mailing business, spanning over 40 years under British rule, provided him with invaluable insights into efficient mail delivery. Against the backdrop of opposition to British rule, Franklin and his colleagues aimed to create an independent mailing system that would connect the growing nation.

 USPS's aim was to create an efficient means of delivering mail across grand distances; a connector for a nation eager for communication and commerce.

The Postal Service has undergone more than 32 innovations, each one tailored to meet the evolving demands of society. 

In the beginning, daily communication relied on horseback riders, the very first postal carriers. These individuals traveled the American wilderness, delivering letters with dedication and speed! As the population expanded westward, the system adapted, introducing stagecoaches to transport mail along newly established routes. 

Fast forward to the early 19th century, and we see the advent of steamboats, which revolutionized mail delivery, making it possible to traverse the East Coast and beyond at unprecedented speed.

The Pony Express made headlines for its flashiness, but it was the railroads that ultimately became the backbone of the Postal Service. By 1860, trains were already handling 93% of the non-local mail delivery, culminating in the transcontinental railroad’s completion, which truly transformed the process of communication across the nation.

As technological advancements continued, the U.S. Postal Service embraced innovations like automobiles, motorcycles, and eventually airmail. Each one allowed for faster and farther reach. 

This relentless pursuit of improvement has meant that today, almost every American has access to speedy communication, rural areas are connected, and a variety of services are utilized, from ballot information to packages. 

The Postal Service stands as a unifying force, bridging gaps and connecting people from all parts of the country.

Yet, this remarkable journey has not been without its challenges. 

In a digital age where instant communication reigns supreme, the Postal Service faces increasing competition. Younger generations often turn to digital platforms for their communication needs, leading to a decline in traditional mail usage. Besides online package delivery (i.e. Amazon) and in 2020-2022 when COVID-19 kits were being mailed around the world. 

Moreover, issues like mail theft and lost packages also cast shadows on its reputation. With mail often sitting alone at doorsteps, it becomes a target, and the inconvenience of lost mail or deliveries can be a bitter disappointment. Lost mail is also a issue that has sparked some negative feelings by all who were impacted. 

The USPS began 250 years ago with horses, Benjamin Franklin, and local mail. Despite these hurdles, the Postal Service remains a vital institution in the American landscape. It is here to stay and will continue to adapt to our changing America.

The USPS history reflects not only the evolution of communication but also the character of a nation determined to stay connected. 

Blog Post #5 - Age of AI

 Artificial intelligence (AI) is speedily changing the world as we know it. From the way we work to how we interact with one another and process information. FRONTLINE did a two-hour long video on, "In the Age of AI" which provided an in-depth look at this new technology. Watching this documentary was enlightening but also extremely frightening. 

 There are a handful of positive aspects that AI has provided us with. AI has great potential to boost productivity and efficiency in a variety of industries. Automation in manufacturing has streamlined operations, enabling companies to produce goods at an unprecedented scale.

In healthcare, AI has revolutionized treatment plans and diagnoses leading to better patient outcomes through tailored healthcare solutions. 

AI systems can analyze vast amounts of data to identify patterns and trends that would be impossible for humans to detect. This tool helps businesses in making more informed decisions and enables breakthroughs in scientific research. 

AI is like a double-edged sword. A lot of privacy concerns were raised in the documentary. With every click, share, and online interaction personal data is being collected and analyzed. 

This often happens without the user's consent. The data on personal information leads to invasive surveillance statistics that compromise people's privacy on a huge scale. 

While privacy can be compromised by AI, AI can also enhance privacy through better security measures. Advanced machine learning algorithms can identify and fend off threats before they escalate. 

The video also talks about the implications of AI for national security. Governments are investing heavily in AI-related technology for the citizen's safety and crime prevention. However, the use of AI technology for national security can lead to authoritarian governance when unchecked. 

However, AI-driven technologies can potentially enhance national security by predicting threats and allowing us to respond to emergencies more effectively.

Cybercriminals increasingly use AI tools to exploit vulnerable systems which makes identity theft widespread. Once again, AI can also be used to defend against cybercriminals. There can be systems, formulas, and tools to prevent breaches. 

"In the Age of AI" presents an essential conversation about the benefits and negatives of artificial intelligence. Navigating AI requires a balanced approach to embracing its transformative benefits while addressing critical ethical, privacy, and security concerns. AI is not going anywhere so we need to learn how to use it but not allow others to use it in a bad way. 

Blog Post #4 - Privacy TED Talk

Catherine Crump sheds light on a disturbing fact, in "The Small and Surprisingly Dangerous Detail the Police Track About You". The title instantly grabbed my attention so I will be focusing on this video and Catherine's message. 

Catherine gave a 5-minute TedTalk about how the police, their power, and how they have been tracking you without your knowledge. High-end weaponry that is military grade and designed for the battlefield is making its way into small police departments across the US. The same thing is happening with surveillance equipment. 

The Automatic License Plate Readers, stop-light cameras, and other surveillance cameras mounted on roads or police cars have been tracking everyone, not just criminals. The camera's reasoning for being in these positions is to catch criminals and see patterns of threats. However, they are also keeping tabs on you and your everyday life. 

One of the main issues is that the police stations are keeping mass data about where your car has traveled so that they have information on you, just in case they need it in the future. They also use this tracking information to draw conclusions about what type of person you are based on your habits. 

The second issue is that the police are not the only culprits, the government takes all the information from all police departments to see where Americans have traveled. They see our private day-to-day lives, can see our habits, and can make their own data off of us without us even knowing they are doing this. 

This is a breach of our privacy and we must be aware of this so we can stop it. 

"History has shown that once the police have massive quantities of data, tracking information, and privacy it gets abused, maybe for blackmail, for political advantage.", states Catherine Crump.

There are solutions to this problem. Local police departments can be governed by the city councils which can pass laws requiring the police to get rid of all data tracking after 6 months it has been taken. This is a step in the right direction. 

I believe the government should not have access to this data and that the police should not keep it unless there is an actual suspicion that an individual poses a threat. The only thing the government needs to do is to STOP what they are currently doing. 

At a minimum, the police should inform the public that they are tracking them and keeping their data for 6 months to years and have an option where the public can opt out of it if they prefer. 

Overall, the government should not have this data and the police should ask for permission first.

Call of Action: We, citizens, need to push back and have our city councils pass laws that make the local police departments get rid of ALL their data tracking.  

Blog Post #3 - Values

 A society thrives on innovation, experimentation, and growth. The seventh of the eight values of free expression addresses this. 

Promote Innovation 

Jack Balkin in Living Originalism conveys that... "A community in which free speech is valued and protected is likely to be a more energized, creative, interesting society as its citizens actively fulfill themselves in many diverse and interesting ways."

This sentence immediately made me think of social media and how fun, crazy, weird, and creepy individuals can get online. Memes and Vines have always been a hit with this new generation and it is creeping up into the millennials and boomers as they slowly come across them. 

Here is an example of a meme your grandmother might come across while scrolling on Facebook. 

It is cute, funny, silly, and does not cause any controversy. This is the spark of creative energy that Jack Balkin was referring to. Maybe he was talking about more sophisticated innovations such as technology, higher education, NASA, etc. This falls under the category because all citizens have the right to be creative and fulfilling themselves in diverse and interesting ways. 

As more apps have been released the more unhinged people have started being with their content. X was a big change with this. 

 

Twitter, now known as X, is where users can share 280-character thoughts, jokes, news, pictures, polls, and almost anything else. You can also "retweet" the post if you agree with it or want others to see it. The more retweets, the more times it is shared, and the higher chance it will get more attention. Twitter was all fun and innocent until people started commenting mean things, celebrities had open arguments using tweets, people would make insulting memes of celebrities of presidents, and so many other things. 

While X's purpose is to promote conversation and networking, that privilege can be taken away. Donald Trump, for example, had his Twitter account permanently suspended for posting three tweets that promoted conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. Twitter claimed it was due to the "risk of further incitement of violence" in this article.

Taking away Donald Trump's account was taking away his freedom of speech. If his tweets truly were a risk of violence, then by all means. However many people did not agree that that was the correct way to go about things. Elon Musk was actually so moved by instances like this that he was inspired to purchase Twitter and turn it into X. 

Everyone asked him if it was for profitable gain, and he simply replied that he was doing it to give people more freedom of speech. Elon had seen how people like to be honest and constantly express themselves on Twitter, so they should be allowed to without the threat of getting banned (with some exceptions).

Elon was Promoting Innovation with this action. He is also promoting Individual Self-fulfillment. Edwin Baker talks about how free speech enables individuals to express themselves and create their own identities. Social Media is a great outlet for individuals being able to express themselves. that is why it is comforting that people like Elon Musk are working to protect our Freedom of Speech across Social Media. 

Blog Post #2 - Supreme Court

My previous understanding of the Supreme Court was largely shaped by the information presented in my 11th-grade civics class. Recently, however, I have had the opportunity to engage with a series of enlightening videos that deepened my appreciation for this vital institution.

I now recognize that the Supreme Court is not only the highest federal court in the United States but also an essential component of our judicial system.

One of the concepts that particularly resonated with me was Justice Kennedy's "three arguments" framework: the argument you planned to present, the argument you actually presented, and the argument you wish you had presented. This idea was highlighted in Part 2 of the video series, where it was emphasized that attorneys stand before the nine justices to advocate for their cases. 

This situation can be daunting, similar to performing before a critical audience. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Drew S. Days III, and Burt Neuborne all recounted their initial worry in addressing the Court, but they ultimately came to appreciate the importance and gravity of that experience.

What struck me most was the inherent humanity within the Court. Each justice brings a unique perspective to the discussion, illustrating that even within this high-ranking institution, there is a recognition of diverse viewpoints. This capacity for dialogue, active listening, and understanding is a significant asset for the Supreme Court and showcases a more nuanced portrayal of its operations.

Previously, I perceived the Supreme Court as an imposing entity—distant and overly serious in its functions. This was a perspective shaped by media portrayals rather than a full understanding of the justices themselves. 

After watching these informative videos, I now see the justices as highly educated individuals who possess a profound knowledge of the Constitution and are dedicated to the pursuit of justice. They approach their responsibilities with the utmost seriousness, meticulously preparing for cases and engaging in rigorous discussions to select the approximately 100 cases they will hear from the thousands submitted each year.

The honor and responsibility of serving as one of the nine justices cannot be overstated. It is noteworthy that since the establishment of the Constitution over 200 years ago, there have been just about 100 justices. Many of these individuals serve lengthy terms, averaging 16 years, with some remaining in their positions for over three decades. 

This long-standing commitment to public service is truly inspiring.