“Sorting myths and cyperbole”

Summary: The article begins with the discussion of endism, the idea that new developments come from the ending of others and its limitations as an absolute. It then discusses the role of virtual reality in cyberspace and the differing views; positively as an information pathway and negatively as turning children into delinquents. Culture and fantasy play an important role and the article discusses the beginnings of virtual reality and the ideologies behind it. It then talks about online presence and its relationship to imagined communities. Next the article analyzes a study about Facebook and finds that people combine the virtual and real world. It then gives the idea that mediated communication can be better than face to face using the examples of the sisters opening up to one another and the associate dean staying in contact with family. Next the article discusses the disappearing computer as time goes on and we become more accustomed to the changing technology. Along with communication networks these are ubiquitous and always on but are becoming physically and psychologically invisible. Next it claims that media is immaterial and discusses two conceptual shifts. The first being the wide variety of media forms transforming the word media to the content instead of form and the second being inscription. It then discusses Hayles construction of the “posthuman”, Listers idea of media being dematerialized, and Manovichs “post-media”. Next the article talks about marketers using buzz and social media and its limitations with robots.

Outside Example: When reading the section about face to face communication and the freedom the internet brings, I disagreed with some of the statements. Based on my experience with a friend and their online habits, I would argue this section. My friend is very big on social media and when she started going through a rough time, she could not talk to anyone in person about her problems. I understand it made her more comfortable, but after reading this article it makes me think, how long will it be until face to face communication is the outcast or viewed as the oversharers. Also, it makes me feel like there is a disconnect with this friend because I’m not there in person when she shares those vulnerable moments. I might just be old school but I think there is a lot of value to face to face communication.

Reading Connection: On page 136, it says “the internet frees people to explore themselves and their potentialities”. I can see how this would help some, but at the same time with my generation and younger, it can also be considered hiding not freedom. People want to express themselves and can do so in many ways online as multiple personalities, but if they do this online, how does it carry over to real interaction face to face. While this section does acknowledge that they aren’t discounting face to face communication, I believe that by undermining it, it will change those views. Like the example of Susan and Gillian on page 135, I am glad my friend has access to the internet to express her thoughts and keep in contact and in the loop, especially since we are both busy all the time, however, how far is too far on this?