Vector Image

Here are a few images I have chosen for the illustrator project as my vector logo:

Keen / Rushkoff Two Questions

1.     How does Keen define Democratized media, and what are his main issues with this trend? Use examples from the web in the form of links. Include this idea of "disintermediation".

-       Andrew Keen’s definition of Democratized media is that new innovations brought along with Web 2.0 such as new knowledge and information may be misleading on the basis of amateur content. According to Keen, Web 2.0 was supposed to enhance our abilities to learn and improve our knowledge as a result of new technologies in the computer science field. Instead, Keen views this modern day innovation as a setback for society, and its ability to learn and enhance itself. Andrew Keen goes as far as saying that Democratized media is undermining the truths in society, and is destroying the professional fields in modern day media. His basic explanation to this is that amateur content being posted on the Internet may be very unreliable sources to trust. These misleading sources are ubiquitous in today’s modern media as a result of all the search engines such as Google, and it’s very hard to determine what is a true source in comparison to untruthful information. Its difficult to define the education level of these people posting on the Internet, where as professionals are truly trained in the field that they are speaking or educating about. This new revolution to Keen known as Democratized media has destroyed and setback the information and knowledge in today’s media.

2.     Compare and Contrast Keens take on Social Media with Douglas Rushkoff's. What are these differences in opinion? Which one speaks to you and your own experiences and why? You may include the ideas of such utopian technophiles as Larry Lessig, Chris Anderson, and Jimmy Wales (who are these guys!?)

-       In my personal opinion, Douglas Rushkoff’s take on social media definitely speaks to me more than Andrew Keens. While I do understand Keen’s take on how Democratized media is hurting the information and knowledge we get from today’s Internet sources, I feel like Web 2.0 has done much more to benefit us rather than hurt us. In comparison, Rushkoff and Keen have somewhat of conflicting yet different views on modern day social media While Rushkoff believes that it has enhanced our abilities to extend ourselves, Keen believe that social media today is purely hurting society and its ability to move forward with knowledge/information. I think parts of Web 2.0 that far succeeds any setbacks that modern day media has presented us, has to be the development of social networks. It has transformed the way people communicate and utilize the Internet, and although certain misleading information comes along with Web 2.0, the good far outweighs the bad.  

Web 2.0 Comments

I commented on Corey March and Mike Florio's Web 2.0 responses, and supported both their arguments that social networking and how Web 2.0 is definitely an extension of our identity, and it creates new opportunities for communication.