PLN 7 Redo

In his video “Web 2.0 … The Machine is Using Us”, Michael Wesch introduces the idea that society will have to rethink many controversial areas such as ethics, authorship, and love. Wesch says that the way society currently uses the Web and the development there of will shape the way we think of many key points of our society. What is a good deed on the Web? Who gets credit for publishing? Are people on the Web really who they say they are? These are all things that Michael Wesch claims will need to be changed in his video “Web 2.0 … The Machine is Using Us”.

In his video “Web 2.0 … The Machine is Using Us”, Michael Wesch correctly portrays the idea of rethinking controversial points like ethics, authorship, and love because of the ever changing Web-scape. On the Web many things go out the window. Societies view of ethics, authorship, love and family all have to change. And fast. If one meets someone else online, can they fall in love? Do they even know each other? There is more moldability. Common views on authorship and simply signing one’s name at the end of the page aren’t going to cut it anymore. The things that are ethically correct or seen as “right” have to be different on the web, because frankly, the web is different than reality. Take this for example, a recent PopSci article talking about Google’s purchase of an Artificial Intelligence lab says that “Google create an ‘ethics board’ for the project”(Lecher). Google and the AI startup called DeepMind are both making good decisions on taking care of the ethics section and putting someone who knows what they’re talking about ahead of the project. But, it is it really that big of a problem? People have had free speech orally for hundreds of years. There have been minor problems, but nothing revolutionary to change it forever. The same thing can happen online. A quick Google search on Web ethics will reveal a term called “Netiquette”(Webroot.com), which is a set of rules to follow online. But, the Web is different. Everything is permanent on the Web. Everything is moldable. Therefore, some major changes need to be made. It is now evident, years after the creation of this video, that Wesch was right. Controversies in society today like privacy and Web ethics like cyber-bullying and spying have their roots online. Authorship issues online have repercussions in classrooms all around the world. But these issues are just the tip of the iceberg. Wesch says that basically every part of our society needs to change when it reaches the Web. In his video “Web 2.0 … The Machine is Using Us”, Dr. Michael Wesch entertains the thought that several major societal changes will need to be made to contain Web issues such as ethics, authorship, and love.

PLN 6 Redo

In her article, “The Case Against High-School Sports”, Amanda Ripley examines the pros and cons of high schools dropping sports. Ripley says that dropping sports will significantly improve students focus in and around school. Ripley bases her argument off of the situation in other countries like Korea as well as some exclusive schools here in the U.S. School’s without athletics score higher on international tests. Ripley argues that American schools should drop athletics to make up for sub-par academics.

In Amanda Ripley’s “The Case Against High-School Sports”, Ripley correctly portrays the idea of American schools dropping athletics to pursue better academics because in other more progressive countries, where athletics are held outside of the school, test scores and student participation are skyrocketing. There are many benefits to this plan. Safety concerns would go down. Less students would be injured. Schools can save hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding and spending. Gear would not need to be purchased, fields would not need to be constructed, referees and coaches would not need to be hired, “$27,000 for athletic supplies, $15,000 for insurance, $13,000 for referees, $12,000 for bus drivers”(Ripley). The money spent on football alone could pay for countless other things in the school to boost academic prowess. However, sports have been a major part of American culture for over 100 years. The removal of these sports from schools would become an uproar. Sports are rooted in tradition,"In life, as in a football game," Theodore Roosevelt wrote in an essay on "The American Boy" in 1900"(Ripley). If Teddy Roosevelt, the 26th president, who was in office over 100 years ago writes about sports effect on American society then sports has to have left a lasting effect in the last 115 years. But America needs to make room for change. As a nation, society need to stand up for academic shortfalls and drop athletics to focus on academics. America ranks 31st in the world on international tests on youth. If this trend of focus on athletics gains more of a following, then this country will have another lost generation, but this time lost in the dream of playing professional sports. That dream has clouded their eyes during school and now leaves them with a poor, if existent, high school education. In Amanda Ripley's article "The Case Against High-School Sports", Ripley demonstrates the idea of booting out American athletics in schools to help with bad academic performances.

PLN 5 Redo

In “Footprints in a Digital Age”, Will Richardson discusses the necessity to be “Googled” well in this technological age. Everybody can see everything one posts, blogs, tweets, snapchats. To be googled well is to have a good digital footprint. Everybody, from employers, universities, family, and friends. Will Richardson reviews the need to be googled well in his blog “Footprints in a Digital Age”.

In “Footprints in a Digital Age”, Will Richardson correctly portrays the idea of being googled well in a technological time because the information about a person is available to anyone that wishes to see it. So, what exactly does it mean to leave a good "digital footprint"? It is what people will see when they look up ones name on the internet. To feel like one is justified with what he or she sees on that webpage, “Your digital footprint… is most likely being written without you, thanks to the billions of Web users worldwide”(Richardson). Richardson is explaining that these footprints are out of one's control, that one's reputations impact what others will say, which then affect people. However, there are many bad and untrustworthy things on the internet anyways. Why would somebody listen to the internet about another person? On open web forums and pages, anybody can edit the content. Think of it as a giant game of telephone, or gossip in middle school. In Dr. Michael Wesch's "Web 2.0 ... The Machine is Using Us", Wesch claims that society will have to "rethink authorship" (Wesch). After a few years, weeks, or even hours on the web, stories can be distorted much like phrases in the childish game. Society has to ask: is this true? Who should society trust on the internet? But the internet is not the Wild West, with outlaws and desperadoes. It has regulations, rules. People aren't necessarily out to get one another. If one puts a little work into online community service, and doesn’t make stupid decisions, then he or she should be alright. In his blog, “Footprints in a Digital Age”, Will Richardson correctly portrays the idea of being googled well in today’s technological time.