What Are The Consequences?

Do we ever stop and think of the consequences of the internet? it allows for the good the bad and the ugly but more importantly it connects a lot of minds. These minds create, store and disseminate information therefore how could the idea of information overload on the "information superhighway" (which like any highway has traffic) be overlooked? In the physical form this phenomenon existed in  our  mail boxes as junk mail or as excess memos on our desks. The progression of them into a digital medium allow for quicker dissemination or as i like to point out-removal. The quick acquisition and release of vast amounts of information are the only consequences i can see to allowing these "minds " to be connected and effect it neither positively or negatively. What use, i ask then, is does the existence of such amounts of information have if we are only going to acquire then remove what we don't want? i cannot answer this because i believe it can only be seen through the progression of our use of this technology. How will we utalize, access, and stire information in the future and will it affect us for the better or worse? the generation of today will write this chapter in our history of digital evolution and what an interesting chapter it will be.     

In The Name Of Success

An article by Paul Hemp in Harvard business titled “What’s So Bad About Information Overload?” addresses an argument on why we should put up with the overload and what it gives us. He asks an employee of the Xerox Corporation about her biggest information overload source and she quickly responded, her email. He paints the picture of receiving numerous often uncountable emails a day and the futile attempts at responding to them, even only to people we know. He argues that although these things usually overwhelm us they also lend to our success by being tools, which in theory allow us to be more efficient and thus more successful. He concludes by saying we should just go with it and use it to the best of our abilities because creating success is the measuring stick of usefulness of anything. I politely disagree with his argument.  First off using the emotional satisfaction of accomplishment relevant to societies expectations of you or success as a measuring stick is illogical. The standards for which success is judged are constantly changing, therefore anything measured by it would constantly be changing also. It follows that his argument can be completely useless once the definition of success changes say to maybe mastery of ones own domain versus monetary excess.

Do you consider increased monetary success and its associations as an acceptable trade of dealing with vast amount of information on a daily basis?

The Big Question

I touched on a concept in a previous post about the loss of critical thought due to the personalization of our online environments dually affecting our exposure to different information. I believe with the specialization of the jobs contained within our society with the addition of the ability to create our own little worlds online we will see a trend of people with extreme viewpoints. In part  because they have lost the ability to critically analyze information as it is filtered for them according to their "preferences".  If it is not already apparent the key linking factor here is information and its delivery. The freedom that allows for information overload or filtration of it  also lends itself to helping the end user (me and you) access all types of information. Be it overloading or not, we still have that opportunity to access it and by personalizing the way we go about viewing the information we are negating that freedom and ignoring our right to it. Are people then giving up their rights to freedom for a simpler, easier, more personal world that satisfys their emotional needs and therefore limiting their potential? i believe the answer is yes and can be seen throughout Facebook, Myspace, role playing games, or any avenue that allows for the creator to be in complete control. We as a civilization and a society have not mastered our emotions let alone our physical environment therefore muddling in creation and existence can only turn out as those have inconclusive and full of mistakes.        

No Kids You Cant Play In That

This picture pertaining to information overload is relating the experience of extracting information from the Internet and its comparison to a deluge of water that is overpowering. The visual catch of this medium is the bright yellow hydrant contrasted against the black background. The bright yellow color draws the observer’s attention and relates a sense of urgency or caution about this phenomenon. The clarification of the pictures meaning with the inclusion of a quote allows the reader to understand fully the meaning the creator was trying to convey. The picture also acts as a visual enhancement for the quote. The contrast used to emphasize the quote dually shows the progression of the idea starting at the bright yellow hydrant and bursting forth from it into the quote lending the observer to think possibly that it is the product of information overload. The inclusion of the fire hydrant as the main visual element and antagonist of the action allows the reader to relate to something that they understand very well the purpose of. Thus allowing, the rhetorical accomplishment of the idea that information overload is quite forceful and overwhelming much like water flowing from a hydrant. Overall, the rhetoric of the image and the quote accomplish the desired affect of passing onto the observer the creators opinion about information overload and its behavior.  

Humans have become GOD

As society progresses and becomes extensively complex and multifaceted, the same must be true for problems and solutions existing within its sphere of influence. People however cannot evolve or progress as swiftly as society, leaving a fundamental gap between what people can deal with and extensiveness of the problems confronting them. These assumptions are with the understanding that these are not the front running people progressing society, but the ones that exist in what they have scrupulously or haphazardly created (usually the latter). I believe a haphazard creation of the previous generations was the Internet. I liken its creation to the stories told in the Bible and other religious texts of creation of this world from a blank space. Correct me if I am wrong but did humanity not just create a NEW world from empty space between your computers?  I understand the argument that man was playing god in the seventies concerning science and cloning, but I believe it has evolved into full on emulation today. Continuing the progression we have subsequently, in this blank space, created (although its actually copying) our own social mechanisms (although more efficient, they posses less substance).  The next logical step would be to create a being existent only in this realm.  Enter what all-social sites are calling your “avatar” or something you put your consciousness into and control.  So now we have a new space, a social mechanism within it, and a vehicle to work these social mechanisms. Sounds like a new world to me.  Compound that information with the concept of “personalization” and we can subsequently create around us a world relevant only to our person and no one else (unless they share values, interests, etc).   It follows that if we personalize the information surrounding us we would rarely be challenged with information that threatens our viewpoints or forces us to think critically. The loss of critical thought produces mediocrity no matter what else happens. So I beseech thee to never lose your critical thinking skills for you will fall behind in the progression and exist in mediocrity. Definition: Mediocrity-ordinariness as a consequence of being average and not outstanding. In the end though what you want is up to you!

Watch What I Do not What I Say

According to Cory at craphound.com information overload is solved through trusting redundancy. However Nicole at TechRepublic.com believes that thorough a moderation of our use of these avenues associated with information overload can help us cope with the growing amount of barraging information( do you ever take a break form technology?). I notice the first article keeps a very loose tone, quite conversational, and includes a lot of personal examples.  He begins the article by mentioning all the information was from an article he wrote for a newspaper, obviously appealing to the readers ethos so we will trust what he has to say. Personal examples can reinforce this by helping the reader identify with him and begin to trust his way of thinking. Nicoles article shares this attribute. Her tone is more professional and more restrained but she is also appealing to the readers sense of ethos but in a different way. In her article uses a book about building a good life in the digital age and she references the author and substantiates with quotes to build report with the reader. In this way the author of the book is not providing fact merely a observation relateable to a mass, meaning that she is going to seem more believable because shes not the only one thinking this way.  I would say then that albeit devoid of any real useful information Corys article effectively communicates his rhetorical message of "chill out its all redundant info" by maintaining a chill manner towards research and tone.  On the other hand Nicoles article full of quotes and paraphrases  conveys adequately that we should approach this medium with moderation just like anything else.

Breaking News...

Whats a newspaper? In the near future this may be the reality faced by the older generations that have seen their fair share of bygone obsolete technology. ever since the start of industrialization and progressing into the digital age technology will cause new things to emerge and old ways to be buried, sometimes forever. A victim of this technological progression mechanism is the way we, as growing individuals, learn using the information available to us online. Schools around the country are recognizing this and taking action. Some have gone all digital with online grades, projection boards, even laptops for all students, on the other hand many do lack the capital to advance and explore these new methods of inspiring young minds.  The other big component of learning is not only the medium but the individual participating also. According to the book born digital the way kids are learning nowadays, especially through the media, is a process  of grazing followed by a deep dive into the information then a feed back loop. Online news stories often show only a head line or a picture and these grazing individuals if interested can dive deeper into the article then read comments or give their own feedback. Albeit quite different from conventional form of information acquisition born digital retains that it may be a different form but its effective and the only side effect could be a shorter attention span...wait, what were you saying?

Are you the master of your computer?

The technology we hold in our hand, carry in our book bags, sit down in front of at night all provide us with one thing...information. Information overload is commonly associated today with overexposure to technology and i have found a scholarly journal article that lends a few tips reducing your stress online. I located the article using EBSCO in the library database and after reading and engaging it with critical though and scrutiny,  I googled it just to make sure it was not a bogus. Turns out they are based in Michigan, what a quaint place. The article articulates that the onslaught of information over the years is relatively useless to the end user unless they can find a successful way to navigate the river of information facing oneself.  Due to the growth of the quantity of information nearly, 30% every year, there have been organizations brought about to study the repercussions of allowing such an onslaught upon the human animal. These groups like the Information Overload Research Group (www.iorgforum.org) have put together tips on dealing with this problem such as set aside time to check your email, turn off phone notifications,and  make messages clear for the recipient.  After expressing these recomendations they go on to assert that the way we deal with the information all around us can be to a great extent the determinant of you personal or professional success. Overall this article made a very good rhetorical impression. The use of descriptive language informed the reader and painted a vivid image for them while the recommendations allowed for the reader to take a personal interest in the message and possible to have a greater rhetorical affect.

Google said what?

Information access and dissemination on the internet is a relatively new concept for people, seeing that its only in its fifteenth year of life, we have quite a long future exploiting yet another machine to make our lives that we live, whether real or in a digital scene, easier and more productive (although you could argue the latter).  Its quite common for a typical internet user to search for say, a new video game, and wind up with results for new videos, or a video of me playing my favorite games to a number of unrelated topics. The question of quality of internet sources and general information is not a new one and some of the bigger companies like Britannica online encyclopedia represent a transition of old school to new technology while new companies like Wikipedia represent a free market balance way of information quality control. According to Born Digital the way it works is it is reliant upon the other users of the information or maybe a team of reviewers to spot and eliminate or verify information that may be incorrect.  So, if everyone with different thoughts and ideas just started deciding what is right and what is wrong and what the fact really are, it begs the question who decides what is right and what is wrong, relevant to information. after reading the chapter of born digital i felt like the ambiguity of the internet is the perfect place for this problem to persist and i look forward to seeing how the people of the world deal with this problem. 

Thank you Suddenlink and 5-Hour Energy

Guilty? yes, I am. I admit, i watch between three to four hours of TV a day. Add in the internet, homework, and face book and that brings me to a good solid eight hours of media exposure, bombardment, manipulation, well you get the idea. First off, I've been told I'm a rather observant individual, so its not unfathomable that i could observe the mechanism of advertisement through saturation. if you watch any TV, its possible you have seen a Suddenlink commercial telling you how great they are with the "largest fiber optic network in south Texas" or 5-Hour energy saying how much better they are than a cup of coffee. I just wrote that sentence from memory...ya, advertising doesn't work(sarcasm)....well these are two companies I have observed within the last week that practice saturation of the media or "information overload". I find this an abhorred fact of modern capitalistic society that they feel the need to manipulate people, through (by way of information) the basic emotions they experience, to achieve there own desires no matter how irrelevant or inconsequential. All be it though a necessary evil, I do believe there are responsible ways to approach this topic. However, I will delve into more detail when I return. Until next time, I'm Ron Burgundy, you stay classy San Diego.