My online presence has gone up in recent years, especially with my new position as head of social media and media coordinator of our Club Esports Team. I had to create social media accounts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to post updates on our team and various things that we are doing as a club, including a charity live-stream over the weekend of November 22-23. Especially since I have to monitor those accounts as well as my own, my online footprint has greatly increased. I do not have a personal website, but I do have control over social media accounts of a club sport for my school.
For my personal accounts, I intentionally have not linked my phone account to my accounts as I do not want that information to be discovered and potentially get several scam calls a day. The only exception is Snapchat due to it being a contact app first, social media site second. My sites all have my name, email, and sometimes my phone number, but that is pretty much it because I do not want too much getting out there. Just by glancing at my Instagram account, as it is the account I most frequently use, they know what school I go to, who my closest friends are, and where I have been and love to go. They know the social media accounts of anyone I include in my posts as well, from my graduating high school class to my college roommate.
I have several sites that I use on a regular basis that have my email address, such as YouTube, Twitch, Fantasy ESPN, Discord, Hulu, Reddit, LinkedIn, my banking app, and Uber. Uber also has my phone number to text me alerts and Twitch has my number to enable Dual Factor Authentication, which I think is the best and only reason why one should give their phone number to a website. The app I am most nervous about is Venmo, as it automatically transfers money from my checking account to pay someone else and vice versa.
I believe that not just Facebook but social media as a whole manipulates its users and their emotions. News that is presented to the consumer of social media can greatly affect one's emotions, especially if the news is mostly negative and full of suspicion. The study conducted by data scientists of Facebook headed by Adam D. I. Kramer did reveal that not only did the news stories affect the emotions of their users, but also affected what they posted. I tend to stay away from news in general, but inevitably the news will creep into my feed and affect me in some way.
I definitely need to be careful with what I put on social media and what I allow sites to know about me. In today's world, it is so easy for hackers to take whatever they want, so what is stopping them from hacking me? Everyone should be aware of this, no matter what kind of an online presence they have.
Source:
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/everything-we-know-about-facebooks-secret-mood-manipulation-experiment/373648/
Friday, November 29, 2019
Alternative Media
Alternative Media
When one turns on the news, most of the time the channels that come up are the larger, more prominent channels, like CNN, FOX, and MSNBC. However, after some digging into the Internet, one can easily find alternative media. Alternative media is any media that is outside the dominant, established media. These companies come in many forms, such as blogs, prints, podcasts, or shows. They can take any form of the media and spread their ideas to anyone who listens. Two particularly influential alternative media sites are South Front and Signs of the Times, two news outlets that communicate with the community that supports them. South Front writes about their own takes on big news stories of the week, and Signs of the Times is a magazine and program for people who want to spread their ideas but have no experience or platform for them to do.
In many situations, one can easily determine if a media source is alternative media. If the company is corporate owned, they are not alternative media, as a corporate owned publication or news company gets its money from the corporation and not from its supporters. If it is produced and distributed independently and without the oversight of a parent company, the source is alternative media. Finally, the context and the purpose of the media is the most important factor to weigh, as an alternative media company will try to distribute the media for people that believe the same things as they do and to people that they thing will believe them.
On the plus side, alternative media sources often look at the full story when discussing an issue and do not take much stuff out of context since they have the time and effort to do so. They are not hindered by tight schedules like larger corporate bodies and also want to read into every source they have at their disposal. There is also less censorship when it comes to alternative media as there is no governing company that can silence them when and how they want. However, the lack of censorship can be a disadvantage as it is easy for those alternative media sources to be taken out of context themselves. Additionally, there tents to be a lot more personal bias on the part of the authors, reporters, and hosts of the alternative media sources since they have a lot more power than those in a larger company. In short, it is beneficial to get some news from an alternative media company, but it should not be the only sources one gets their news from. There is a lot more information but also some bias and lack of censorship, so it is suggested that one treads lightly when listening to alternative media.
Sources:
https://southfront.org/
https://www.signsofthetimes.com/
When one turns on the news, most of the time the channels that come up are the larger, more prominent channels, like CNN, FOX, and MSNBC. However, after some digging into the Internet, one can easily find alternative media. Alternative media is any media that is outside the dominant, established media. These companies come in many forms, such as blogs, prints, podcasts, or shows. They can take any form of the media and spread their ideas to anyone who listens. Two particularly influential alternative media sites are South Front and Signs of the Times, two news outlets that communicate with the community that supports them. South Front writes about their own takes on big news stories of the week, and Signs of the Times is a magazine and program for people who want to spread their ideas but have no experience or platform for them to do.
In many situations, one can easily determine if a media source is alternative media. If the company is corporate owned, they are not alternative media, as a corporate owned publication or news company gets its money from the corporation and not from its supporters. If it is produced and distributed independently and without the oversight of a parent company, the source is alternative media. Finally, the context and the purpose of the media is the most important factor to weigh, as an alternative media company will try to distribute the media for people that believe the same things as they do and to people that they thing will believe them.
On the plus side, alternative media sources often look at the full story when discussing an issue and do not take much stuff out of context since they have the time and effort to do so. They are not hindered by tight schedules like larger corporate bodies and also want to read into every source they have at their disposal. There is also less censorship when it comes to alternative media as there is no governing company that can silence them when and how they want. However, the lack of censorship can be a disadvantage as it is easy for those alternative media sources to be taken out of context themselves. Additionally, there tents to be a lot more personal bias on the part of the authors, reporters, and hosts of the alternative media sources since they have a lot more power than those in a larger company. In short, it is beneficial to get some news from an alternative media company, but it should not be the only sources one gets their news from. There is a lot more information but also some bias and lack of censorship, so it is suggested that one treads lightly when listening to alternative media.
Sources:
https://southfront.org/
https://www.signsofthetimes.com/
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act
The Sherman Antitrust Act
The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was proposed by Senator John Sherman of Ohio to present a solution for companies trying to monopolize production and trade between nations. This act included two major provisions: first, to restrict and outlaw all combinations that restrain trade between states or foreign nations, and second, to determine all attempts to monopolize any part of trade or commerce illegal. These new restrictions allow for smaller companies to stay afloat and not worry about being acquired or driven to irrelevance due to companies taking too great of a share on production or trade. If a company were to violate this act, the people who oversaw the violation could face jail time and fines. In principle, this was a good act to be passed and a good principle to present to Congress, but despite its success, it is still flawed in its reasoning and phrasing.
Many companies found that the wording of the Act and the lack of definitions allowed for some loopholes to be exploited, and that is what ended up bringing the Act down. In 1895 the Act was dismantled briefly in the case United States v. E. C. Knight Company, as it was determined that a company's control on manufacturing did not constitute a monopoly on trade. The Act has had some success, such as in the case State of Minnesota v. Northern Securities Company when the company was dissolved when it was found that they did have a monopoly on state trade. The Act has been used several times since then, with a notable accusation in 1999 against Microsoft when it was discovered that they were attempting to create a monopoly on internet browsing software, but a court ordered breakup was overturned by an appeals court two years later.
The Sherman Antitrust Act has been successful in its regulation on large companies while allowing smaller companies to have a presence in their markets. Though the regulations of the Act are constraining for large companies to do trade overseas and can hinder the progression of the companies to be a presence in the market, it does ensure that the consumers stay in a free market without any prejudice, favoritism, and predatory pricing in trade.
Sources:
The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was proposed by Senator John Sherman of Ohio to present a solution for companies trying to monopolize production and trade between nations. This act included two major provisions: first, to restrict and outlaw all combinations that restrain trade between states or foreign nations, and second, to determine all attempts to monopolize any part of trade or commerce illegal. These new restrictions allow for smaller companies to stay afloat and not worry about being acquired or driven to irrelevance due to companies taking too great of a share on production or trade. If a company were to violate this act, the people who oversaw the violation could face jail time and fines. In principle, this was a good act to be passed and a good principle to present to Congress, but despite its success, it is still flawed in its reasoning and phrasing.
Many companies found that the wording of the Act and the lack of definitions allowed for some loopholes to be exploited, and that is what ended up bringing the Act down. In 1895 the Act was dismantled briefly in the case United States v. E. C. Knight Company, as it was determined that a company's control on manufacturing did not constitute a monopoly on trade. The Act has had some success, such as in the case State of Minnesota v. Northern Securities Company when the company was dissolved when it was found that they did have a monopoly on state trade. The Act has been used several times since then, with a notable accusation in 1999 against Microsoft when it was discovered that they were attempting to create a monopoly on internet browsing software, but a court ordered breakup was overturned by an appeals court two years later.
The Sherman Antitrust Act has been successful in its regulation on large companies while allowing smaller companies to have a presence in their markets. Though the regulations of the Act are constraining for large companies to do trade overseas and can hinder the progression of the companies to be a presence in the market, it does ensure that the consumers stay in a free market without any prejudice, favoritism, and predatory pricing in trade.
Sources:
Thursday, November 21, 2019
Speech Theories
In this age, it seems that people can get offended by pretty much anything said against them. People can be offended if someone says something against their race, religion, sexual orientation, social class, or childhood. This has inspired the movement for making everything "politically correct," otherwise known as rewording everything to make it as inoffensive as possible. This movement has made speech much more difficult to use, especially because people will immediately call you out if you say anything that is not politically correct. This concept of correctness is the primary reason why Promoting Tolerance is the most important speech theory of the eight.
As Lee Bollinger says in The Tolerant Society: Freedom of Speech and Extremist Speech: a tolerant society is a better society. If people can tolerate speech made against them and take a minute to listen and form their own conclusions instead of lashing out at the speaker, society will be more receptive to criticism and more introspective on their own character. Friendships are formed based on common interests and common dislikes, so when someone inevitably disagrees with an opinion that one holds dear to them, they assume that they are in the right and the opposing opinion is immediately in the wrong. Ethical and political questions that have divided the United States are all opinions, such as the arguments of gun control, abortion, and marijuana. People should definitely be entitled to their opinions, but not to the point where people outright ostracize or attack people who have differing opinions than them.
It makes sense for hate speech to be protected by the First Amendment, as people have to understand that they are in the wrong not because of their opinions, but because of their actions towards people they disagree with. If I meet someone who hates Trump and I like Trump, we would have a discussion about it and agree to disagree. Additionally, if someone openly slanders Trump and roasts him on a comedy show - which is how Stephen Colbert gets his paycheck - people should understand that he can say that without punishment. It is Colbert expressing his opinion through comedy for a specific audience, and if you don't like it, turn it off. Hate speech, though people do not like to hear it, makes sense to be protected due to its ability for people to hear other's opinions and views. Therefore, tolerance should be promoted in the First Amendment for people to learn how to accept opinions and have civilized discussions about important topics in society.
Sunday, November 3, 2019
Evolution of E-Sports
The Evolution of E-sports
At first, e-sports was met with confusion and laughter. Many people criticized people who became professional e-sports players, laughing at their choice to play video games for a living and claiming that it was a waste of time. In e-sports' early years, there was reason to think so, as there was not a lot of interest in the scene in its early stages. However, with releases of new games since Halo 2 such as League of Legends, Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Rocket League, e-sports have new competitive games with a variety of genres for every video game fan. E-sports have also gained a massive audience, with the 2018 League of Legends World Championship gaining a peak of 200 million viewers worldwide, surpassing that of the Super Bowl. E-sports is adapting fast, and it cannot be ignored or laughed away any more. People make millions of dollars from tournaments, such as Kyle "Bugha" Giersdorf, who won 3 million dollars from the Fortnite World Cup this year. It is a growing industry with people who can make sustainable income and win massive prize money, hosting an audience who is invested in the games, and will be a major staple of worldwide culture for years to come.
https://esportsbetting.ninja/esports-wiki/esports-history-major-league-gaming-mlg-organization/
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_League_of_Legends_World_Championship
The concept of competition has existed as long as humanity knew how to do anything well. There would always be someone who felt like they could do it better. People wanted to build houses taller, be the strongest ruler, or simply be the fastest runner. However, competition has evolved greatly beyond just feats of physical ability or competitions of status and recognition. In today's ever-changing world, a new competition has risen to mainstream popularity and, in some countries, overshadow traditional sports. This new phenomenon is e-sports, or electronic sports.
Simply put, e-sports is competitive video gaming. There are many video games that are made for competitive online play, so various companies have embraced the idea of creating teams of the best players and competing for a prize pool of money. Video games have always encouraged competition with the only difference being that the competition itself is on a screen instead of a field. The first people to take advantage of this was Major League Gaming, or MLG, which was founded in 2002. MLG saw the local tournaments that were happening over the United States and decided to bring it to a national audience, broadcasting the first televised video gaming tournament in the United States. The game on broadcast was Halo 2, a competitive first-person shooter genre game developed by Bungie where two teams would compete to complete a similar objective, such as capture the flag or king of the hill. The game was made for online competitive play, so it was easy to suppose that people could get good enough to play competitively for prize money, and it took MLG to broadcast it on a nationwide scale. Once people realized that this was a good idea, investors and innovators created teams such as OpTic Gaming, Cloud9, and FaZe Clan, all of which are still very well established professional e-sports teams with a variety of games represented by their players.
Pictured: League of Legends Worlds arena.
At first, e-sports was met with confusion and laughter. Many people criticized people who became professional e-sports players, laughing at their choice to play video games for a living and claiming that it was a waste of time. In e-sports' early years, there was reason to think so, as there was not a lot of interest in the scene in its early stages. However, with releases of new games since Halo 2 such as League of Legends, Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Rocket League, e-sports have new competitive games with a variety of genres for every video game fan. E-sports have also gained a massive audience, with the 2018 League of Legends World Championship gaining a peak of 200 million viewers worldwide, surpassing that of the Super Bowl. E-sports is adapting fast, and it cannot be ignored or laughed away any more. People make millions of dollars from tournaments, such as Kyle "Bugha" Giersdorf, who won 3 million dollars from the Fortnite World Cup this year. It is a growing industry with people who can make sustainable income and win massive prize money, hosting an audience who is invested in the games, and will be a major staple of worldwide culture for years to come.
https://esportsbetting.ninja/esports-wiki/esports-history-major-league-gaming-mlg-organization/
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_League_of_Legends_World_Championship
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)