Online Interactions

In both the lectures on Monday, there seemed to be an overarching theme of the internet and the ways we interact with people while using it.  In Andrea’s lecture, she talked about how we use the internet to help us adapt to an uncomfortable setting.  More specifically, she talked about how people who study abroad use the internet to help them deal with homesickness and the challenges that come with adapting to a new culture.  As much as I would love to have a personal experience with this specific topic, I have never actually been out of the country or in a setting where culture shock set in so much that it made me feel uncomfortable.  That being said, I do believe that her research is going to show that people who have access to their friends/family back home while studying abroad are going to experience less culture shock.  I say this because even though most everything around you is going to be different, you will retain some form of normalcy by checking your Facebook every day, or talking to your parents, etc.  Just being able to talk to someone you know and trust can be very reassuring. 

                Now, in Mastorone’s presentation, she covered quite a few topics, but the one thing that she said that stuck with me was about how people view how we interact over the internet.  She stated that there are really two main arguments when it comes to communicating over the web, the first being that communicating online really hinders the communication process because you don’t get the non-verbal cues and the like when talking over the net.  They feel that the non-verbal aspects of communicating, or in this case lack thereof, can keep a stable relationship from forming.  On the other hand, the main argument for interacting over the internet is it gives you a chance to meet people you never would have met otherwise, which can help you become more acquainted with other cultures/ways of life.  Personally, I tend to agree a lot more with the latter of the two arguments.  As a person who spends a lot of time on the computer and online, I have met a lot of people across not only this country, but across the world.  I have friends who live in Ireland, Sweden, Canada, Great Britain, and Australia that I never would have met without the internet.  I’ve learned things about their culture, about the way they live their lives, and about how they view Americans that have really benefited me.  Until we finally met up a few weeks ago, we had never all had a face to face, in person conversation before, but we all still managed to maintain stable relationships with each other, despite the fact that we had never met face to face, which disagrees with the argument against online communication. 

As for the argument against online interactions, although it is true, there are ways to get as close to actual face to face communication as possible without actually having it.  Things like Skype, Oovoo, and basically any other program that lets you video/voice chat really helps close the gap between online communications and face to face communications.  Obviously, as of right now, there is nothing that can simulate ALL the aspects of face to face communications on a computer, but strides are being made and I wouldn’t be surprised if in the near future a program comes along that changes everything.  

Power of Persuasion

In the beginning of Professor McCloskey’s lecture, she goes over the most basic form of information.  She uses the metaphor of the tubes at a bank, a conduit that is used to take information from one place and sends it to another.  In regards to communication, this information is not sent over a tube, but rather through verbal or non-verbal messages, but the general idea remains the same.  Now that being said, no one would study communications if it were that simple, it isn’t just about the information being passed on, but rather the intentions of the messenger.  She states that the most important part of communication is the information, but rather the act of persuasion.  It’s the type of persuasion, not to change someone’s mind, but rather, to have them see it as you see it.  The intent is to make everyone happy.  The receiver has gotten new information, and the messenger has passed on the information that they had in a way that seems reasonable to the receiver.  However, this persuasion is not forcing anyone to do anything, instead, it is used in a way to present the information is such a way that the receiver makes the choice to accept it. 

                She gives a great example of this information by persuasion idea.  She, as a teacher, is doing it every time she steps in front of a room of students.  She is presenting you with information, and persuading you that this information is important and should be known.  She is in no way forcing you to memorize the things she’s teaching, but rather, leaving it up to you to decide it it’s worthwhile.  If you do take notes, and learn the material, then she has successfully persuaded you that the information presented was important.  The word she likes to use to describe successfully persuading someone is “sweet talk”. 

                About half way through the lecture, she brings up a very interesting point.  She says that what communication majors learn is something that will never “get cheaper”.  What she means is that everything around us is getting cheaper and cheaper, cell phones, lap tops, technology in general, but the ability to “sweet talk” someone, or persuade them to think as you do, or do what you want them to, is something that won’t lose value over time.  I whole heartedly agree with that.  I believe that one of the most important qualities a person can have is the ability to get a message across as clear as possible.  A person who can do that will rarely have any problems in the business world because there won’t that constant misunderstanding that comes with someone who does not possess that ability. The power of persuasion is something that, no matter how much technology improves, will always be needed when communicating with others.  

Storytelling with Barnhurst

In professor Barnhurst’s lecture, he has the students do a little activity where they pair up and tell each other stories about events that have happened to them recently.  While the first person tells the story, the second person takes notes on the story being told, and then they switch roles.  After all this is done, he has the pairs of two join into groups of four.  In these groups of four he asks them to look for patterns in the notes.  He likens this activity to what it’s like looking at research, trying to find the patterns in the “stories” that make up the research, something that has been plaguing theorists for a long time. 

He also mentions the abstract, something that we talked about in class when looking at how research articles are put together.  The abstract is basically the annunciation that you are about to tell a story, this way you let the person you’re communicating with know what you’re about to do.  We talked about in class how you can defy social expectations by doing things that don’t exactly follow the “way” things are supposed to be done.  In the case of the abstract, you would defy someone’s expectations if by telling them a story without first preparing them with a statement such as “oh here’s a funny story” or “I remember this one time”.  If you just started telling the story without giving them proper preparation, it would confuse them, and possibly cause a misunderstanding.  In terms of research, this is important because without the abstract, you’re not adequately prepping your audience for the information you’re about to give them. 

He goes on further to say that to have a successful story, one most not only have a setting (whether it be time or place), but also a complicating action, a response, and finally an interpretation.  These are all things that are not only important in research, but are needed to convey stories from one individual to another.  Putting together a setting for the story helps the listener get a better feel for the situation as a whole.  If they can picture themselves in the setting, then they have a better chance of understanding the story.  The complicating action, in laymen’s terms, is the conflict that happens in the story, the thing that people prefix with “you wouldn’t believe what happened next”.  The response is how the story teller responded to the complicating action, and finally the interpretation is how the listener of the story reacts to the story as a whole. 

Now if you look at these different aspects of storytelling that Barnhurst introduces, they’re really not that different from the ones we covered in class.  Now, we didn’t specifically talk about storytelling in class, but when we looked at the way a research article is presented, it certainly looks similar to what Barnhurst is saying.  The abstract is something that is mentioned in both, and serves the same purpose in both.  The complicating action is much like the introduction in a research article, it tells us what the problem is that the story (or article) is about.  The response, on the other hand, would be like the method, it tells us what we did about the problem that the introduction introduced us to.  Finally, the interpretation is a lot like the discussion at the end of an article.  It gives us a chance, as a reader, to soak in all the information that was presented before us.  Overall I thought it was a rather interesting lecture, even though the video cuts out about half way through.       

Thoughts on Meraz

In professor Meraz’s lecture, she talks about the declining number of females in the computer science field.  Although she has the data to back it up, and it is very obvious that she is correct, she failed to mention that there’s a lack of interest in the field as a whole.  It’s not just women that are losing interest in the field, but its men too.  The fact is people in general are losing interest in the field, as for a reason why, I couldn’t tell you.  If you look at the graph she presents showing the percentage of men and women in the field of computer science, it’s obvious that there was a spike in both 1982 and 1999, for both men and women.  But besides those two points, and the relative time in between, the interest in computer science really hasn’t been that high to begin with.  While I agree that computer science is a male dominated field, I think instead of trying to look at why females are losing interest in the field, I think they should look at why everyone is losing interest in it. 

                About 15 or so minutes in she mentions the game Diner Dash, and pokes at the idea of females in video games.  She states that most women in video games are stuck doing what some would consider womanish activities (such as cooking, multi-tasking, serving, etc..).  And while she is correct, that there a handful of games that fit her statement, there are just as many, if not more, that feature a prevalent, strong, and confident female character either as the lead or secondary.  I think the best example of this would be the Metroid series.  Samus Aran, the games protagonist, is a bounty hunter who is given missions to take down high profile targets.  She is a strong willed, confident, and brave character who is widely considered to be one of Nintendo’s pride and joy.  She’s not alone in this role either, there are quite a few other female characters that break the “damsel in distress “model that is generally reserved for them (I.E Lara Croft (Tomb Raider Series), Alyx Vance (Half Life Series), Chell (Portal Series)).  As a person who has had quite a bit of experience with video games, I understand that women aren’t always presented in the most appropriate ways.  That being said, I think it’s a bit outrageous to assume that all women in all video games are misrepresented. 

                The latter half of her lecture focuses more on the blogging and how women are associated with it.  There seems to be a rather large argument between male bloggers and female bloggers about who really has it harder in the blogosphere.  Many women feel that it is almost impossible for them to be taken seriously in the blogosphere because anything intelligent or thoughtful they write is ignored, but the instant they post a suggestive photo of themselves, they become popular almost instantly.  Men, on the other hand, feel that it’s unfair that a woman can gain such popularity so quickly with just the act of posting suggestive pictures.  As a man myself, I can certainly see why men are getting so upset about this. I think anyone would be upset if something they put a lot of time and effort into was upstaged by someone posting racy pictures of themselves online.  That being said, I do feel that women have an uphill battle in the blogosphere because of the amount of males on the internet.  Women certainly are the minority, so I can understand why they would use what they have to offer to gain popularity.  I don’t think it’s the right way to do it, but until things change, it may be the most effective way.