Digital Media, Helpful or Hurtful?

Digital media continues to intercede with everyone's daily lives and is continuing to become more prevalent with every new advance in technology. Whether it's checking your cellphone every morning when you wake up to instantly get a weather forecast of your day or the more subtle effects such as the work and design that goes into the websites you browse while bored at work. It may seem to be helpful to everyone involved, but when are the lines pushed too far on what you can and can't share with people on the internet? A prime example of this that i'll be talking about mainly in this blog post is that of the recent controversy over Julian Assange and his site WikiLeaks. For a little background information before I get into what all this about, i'll just quote the best summary of it from it's inspiration for the website, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks

"WikiLeaks is an international new media non-profit organisation that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous news sources and news leaks. Its website, launched in 2006, is run by The Sunshine Press.[2] Within a year of its launch, the site claimed a database that had grown to more than 1.2 million documents.[6] The organisation has described itself as having been founded by Chinese dissidents, as well as journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa.[2] Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its director.[7]

WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including the 2008 Economist magazine New Media Award.[8] In June 2009, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange won Amnesty International's UK Media Award (in the category "New Media") for the 2008 publication of "Kenya: The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances",[9] a report by the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights about police killings in Kenya.[10] In May 2010, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks first in a ranking of "websites that could totally change the news".[11] Russia extended its support to WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange by issuing a statement which suggested that Assange should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, in the aftermath of the United States diplomatic cables leak.[12]

In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from a 2007 incident in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by U.S. forces, on a website called Collateral Murder. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary, a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan not previously available for public review.[13] In October, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organisations. In November 2010, WikiLeaks began releasing U.S. State department diplomatic cables.

WikiLeaks was originally launched as a user-editable wiki site, but has progressively moved towards a more traditional publication model, and no longer accepts either user comments or edits. The site is available on multiple servers and different domain names following a number of denial-of-service attacks and its severance from different Domain Name System (DNS) providers.[14][15]"

WikiLeaks is a site that has been much debated over, and has been all the buzz in the news lately with the release of over 251,287 documented reports of diplomatic communications between said diplomats and the U.S. State Department. While in the past I've agreed with the actions and ideas of the WikiLeaks site, I can't help but wonder if they're pushing the line between what people have the right to know about what they're government is doing behind the scenes, and what should be kept from the public eye for the good of the nation. Personally, I see the recent publication of the diplomatic cables as having no effect but to damage relations between the U.S. and it's allies while hiding behind Assange's claim of Free Speech over the internet. Topics that have been revealed in the past by the site such as the 2007 murder of innocent civilians by armed U.S. air forces even including video of the act were in my eyes, while horrible and perfect examples of the horrors and collateral that come with war, well within the right of people knowing what could come of recklessness and ignorance when trained professionals in the armed forces do not take the proper actions to keep events like that from happening so such events can be avoided in the future. The diplomatic cable leaks have no endgame, no positive purpose in the future other than to discredit and cause controversy between America and it's Allies. Julian Assange seems to be under the impression that the U.S. is wrong for keeping these documents classified because they're keeping tabs on other countries without us knowing of such background activity. While I can see his point of free speech and the right to express it over the internet and it's various forms of media, I can also agree with our country wanting to know what everyone else is doing in the world. Not to sound too paranoid and the typical U.S. of A. fanatic, but it's not like other countries do it to us too, right?

Art without limits: is digital better than traditional?

When thinking of art most people think of a painting or drawing, however art is really limitless. The traditional forms of art are no longer the only forms of art. Digital media has now shown just how wide a topic art can be.

Now the world of digital art can take forms no on e would have ever thought. What you can do with a computer is unbelievable. But does its ease make it less of an art?

Some argue this very topic. Is digital art considered a fine art?

In the past who defined art were museums, schools and other prestige artists. We were told what is and what art isn’t. However with the internet and the unbelievable rate information travels, now new ideas are being thrown at the public from all sides. People are finally able to have a mind of their own when considering art.

When it comes to the ease of digital art, this is a myth. It is not a click away from a masterpiece. True in a way it is less stressful because mistakes can sometimes be resolved but that is sometimes. There is skill involved in digital art just like traditional art. Without a creative, skilled hand the work you do will just be a bunch of scribbles.

Some people seek to send the message that digital art is ruining traditional art. Do to so many people being attracted to digital art the traditional art forms are becoming extinct, according to some traditional artist. They also believe that people do not look at traditional art the same way. When you see a painting hanging in a gallery you are seeing a person sweat, tears, maybe blood, and time all on a canvas. When you see a digital work you could possibly be seeing just a copy. It is true that a digital artist may have gone through the same thing as the traditional one; sweat, blood, tears, time, the whole bit, but you cannot see this in his piece. Maybe his computer would show the signs. A digital piece of art can have multiple copies when a traditional piece has one original piece which copies can only mimic.

When it comes down to it most artist use a little of both digital and traditional steps to get the masterpiece they desire. I don’t think digital art should be looked at negatively. I think it should be looked at with an open mind. Isn’t that what artist strive for? Creativity. It shouldn’t be the medium in which the masterpiece is created it should be what the work is saying and what is stands for, the content. If you are a traditional artist look up some programs and try a digital work. If you are a digital artist bring out the easel and paint brush and try an oil painting. Before you judge another person (or their work) walk a mile in their shoes.

A Very Useful Digital Device ….

What is a digital media device that can do just about anything that most of us use on a daily basis and would not what to do without? If you guessed a cell phone your right at least in my opinion. I know that if I forget my phone at the house I normally turn around to get the phone because I do use my phone daily. But cell phones are just not used to make calls anymore now they are called smart phones because of all the technology that has been put into the device that fits in the palm of your hand. We have just about every tool on are iPhones, blackberry’s and android model phones today. We have the ability to make calls ,send text messages ,picture messages, record video ,watch TV ,play music ,check emails ,send emails, surf the web ,twitter ,updating social media sites, check the weather, use navigation, and play video games . That is just some of the things the phones of today are doing. I use my phone everyday not just with those features but my address book, calendar, and even my alarm clock all of which I use my handy phone for .The phones of today have made a vast improvement from the phones we had just a few years ago. There are more companies that are offering better plans that include everything you need to use all the features that your phones come with and also with prepaid cell phone companies are giving more people the ability to be able to use and get cell phones. With the technology of smart phones I can only imagine what the next few years how the cell phone of today will change and develop to an even more advanced technology. Look at the iPhone and android phones now with all the thousands of different apps you have an app for just about anything. For example they have an app that gives the phone ability to scan a bar code right from the phone and get details like reviews on the products and details with items to apps that will allow to you to play the latest games. I am excited to see the technology that will come with future cell phones and see what else will be on the device that I find to be a very useful tool for all my digital needs.

Advanced Technology the Future at GCCC

Im excited about the groundbreaking and construction of the advanced technology center at GCCC. My mind is host to visions of advanced computerlabs, robotics, digital media, audio/video and solar energy instructional classrooms providing professional quality education to students while preparing them for careers in the workforce. The building design and artist rendering is featured on the homepage of the Gulf Coast College website and details overhead and moving video shots of the entire space dedicated to this project.

Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act

Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act

Over the past few days the U.S. Justice Department seized 82 domain names of websites that they accuse were actively enrolled in the sale and circulation of counterfeit goods and illegal copyrighted works. This is just the beginning of the kind of forceful enforcement we may see if the Congress passes the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA). The bill, which was recently approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Nov 18, 2010, gives the government remarkable new copyright enforcement powers. In specific the government would theoretically have the ability to make entire websites disappear from the Internet if infringement, links to infringement, or illegal sharing are judged to be "the primary" purpose of the site. The approach by the COICA is quite drastic if you ask me. Simply instead of targeting files that break copyright infringement laws, they go for the destructive option of completely blacklisting entire sites out of the domain name system. The fact of the matter is that “yes” it does provide to be a reliable weapon in the fight against copyright infringement but it is overkill and in the process can undermine Internet infrastructure and quite possibly censor legitimate online speech. If this bill had been passed five or ten years ago many sites such as YouTube might not even have existed today.

The next point this brings me too is how the COICA is a false hope for a way to stop internet piracy. In reality mere hours later a majority of the seized sites were available online again thru other domain names. As pressure is increased on sites and the blacklist continues to grow you will most likely see a large percentage of the Internet will shift to alternative DNS mechanisms that are located outside the US. Sites such as Pirate Bay have been ordered to cease and desist numerous times and have even been seized but within no time they are up and running at the normal rate with a slight change of the domain name. It is very hard to believe that this the best use of our Department of Homeland Security manpower. The mockery in this whole deal is that the U.S. government has recently made a great campaign of fighting Internet DNS blocking and censorship in countries like China. What kind of picture does that represent for America when we are actively speaking out about governments controlling its inhabitants, yet we are engaged in similar procedures here at home? There has got to be a better way to protect artists’ copyrights other than dismantling the fundamental building blocks of the Internet. As Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the Web once said "We all use the web now for all kinds of parts our lives, some trivial, and some critical to our life as part of a social world.”

Where Did the Oil Go II?

In my last blog, I talked a lot about the spill and the fact that there is so little coverage out there in the media. Several studies have been conducted by universities and civilian agencies alike.  However, their findings have not been seen in much of the media coverage.  I know that Florida's tourism is one of the main sources of revenue and we don't want to scare our money away, but that does not mean we need to be sheltered from the truth.  I know I would like to know what my children are out there swimming in when they go to the beach.  I myself am skeptical of letting them get into the water at all. You have the White House advisors saying over 3/4 of the oil is gone.  University of Georgia scientists say that 80% of the oil in the gulf still remains lurking beneath the surface.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/18/national/main6783833.shtml They are saying the data has obviously been misinterpreted for them to say most of the oil is gone, dispersed, or dissolved.   The scientists say these percentages they keep coming up with are practically made up because there is no data to back any of it up. Then they start spraying all this dispersant on the surface water.  The dispersant is supposed to break up the oil so that it will not bunch up and in turn dissolve and be further broken down by the ocean.  It turns out that all it is doing is breaking the oil up and sinking to the bottom. The University of Southern Florida's scientists say, which is also on the link provided. Why has the government not conducted any studies of their own and if they had why have they not shared any of their findings with the public?  USF scientists have found plankton which are at the bottom of the food chain, coated in the dispersant Corexit.  Eventually this stuff is going to make it all the way up the food chain and onto our plates and we have conducted very few studies on the long term affects of the oil or the Corexit.  So we don't know what the future may hold for those that depend on sea life for a living and for food.  The Environmental Protection Agency eventually came in and told British Petroleum to switch dispersents but do you really think they listened?contentMahttp://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0520/EPA-scolds-BP-in-Gulf-oil-spill-dispersant-is-too-toxic-change-it According to this link the volumes BP used of the Corexit far exceeded any previous use.  I wonder if in any of these previous uses any studies were conducted to tell the impact of this poison in those areas. To me it is just as if they swept the oil under the rug, not worrying about the future of the Gulf Coast or any of the life from plankton to humans.  The media isn't covering it anymore and in order to learn about it we must do research ourselves.  BP it seems to me is going to get away just paying the people in the region enough to shut them up for a bit, while our government does nothing to make them due what they promised.  One thing is for sure if we depend on BP or the government to let us know what the truth is we will never know it.