?s 2,3,5 on pg 293

2. I think blogs shouldn't be able to reveal any secret information like military weapons, also they should be appropriate or have warnings for any blog with inappropriate content. I see how blogs can distribute power by allowing someones voice to be heard.

3.I normally don't but very much information online it normally my name and maybe my birthday or a hobby but nothing else, I don't have a Facebook so hardly any info is online. People might be able to find a little out about me but not very much I don't take steps to protect it I just don't put much up.

5.No I do not agree, I think the exact opposite, that everyone has a right to access internet. That is why they have computers in some libraries. I don't know what would take away someones right to use the internet. I think the internet is helpful so people should be able to use it.

Do you agree with Michal Powell that no one has a "right" to the Internet?

I disagree: I don't need permission to go online, nor do I need permission to express my freedom of speech.  I have the right to argue with someone in chat, the right to use language, the right to express my personal thoughts if I so choose, the right to reveal information on the internet (No matter how dumb it may be), the right to post, share, upload, or use information on the Internet; the list goes on and on.  So where do I not have a right to the Internet?  How do I not have a right to something that is open to everyone, open to the public.  What's the point of publicity if I don't have the right to use it?  I don't need permission by anyone to use the Internet, and I'm not going told by some pompous yoink tell me what rights I can or cannot have.  I have the right to call him that, too.  The amendment rights show us what we can do, whereas laws tell us what we can't do; we have the same laws and rights for the Internet as well, however broken or underused it may be.  We have rights, but we also have laws: Fix them, present them, and enforce them.  But don't ever... EVER... tell me that using the Internet is not a right. ~Collin

2, 3, 5 on pg 293

2.
The controls should be that they shouldn't allow swearing or any obscene pictures. They also should have a person who watches the blogs to make sure that there isn't anything frowned upon going on. It is a way to distribute power because you may become popular with blogs and that popularity will give you enough power to manipulate people.
3.
I do make some of my personal information available online. It's only available to my friends on Facebook though. There isn't really any important information on there. I'm pretty comfortable with my security because it's only like my name, birthday, and boyfriend. I don't take any steps to protect my information.
5.
I agree because internet is kind of our culture now. We grow up in a society where everyone who has internet access or top notch technology is "cool." So, therefore, nobody really has a "right" to the internet.

2. What controls should be placed on blogs? 3. do you ever make personal info available online? 5.

2. Though I feel that blogs have not gotten as much buzz as they used to due to other forum on the internet such as Facebook and Twitter. I don't think there should be too much restriction on blogs if none at all. blogs have gotten so many wide categories such as news, updates, cooking recipes, etc. Therefore in sense of censorship, I believe that there should be none. If you were to ask yourself what if it's not appropriate for younger audiences then just put a notice. With every incident people fail to accept the fact that at the end of the day its the user's fault if their offended.

3. Yes I have and it was a mistake. The Fact that I can be searched just by typing my name scares me. I have a system where people can't search me I can only search them.

5. I Disagree. The internet is a world wide forum that should be free, saying that something ultimately made for the public shouldn't be able to be accessed by public is wrong.

#s 2,3, & 5 on pg.293

2. There are many controls i believe should be put into place on blogs. On a blog i believe that there shouldn't be vulgarity. I believe that unless it is a 18+ blog there shouldn't be any graphic sexual stories or nudity of any sort. These are obvious guidelines that should be put into place

3. If i put personal information online i don't put it out for the public to see it is only shared with those I know and trust completely. I am very confident that it is secure seeing how i only give it to family members and very close friends. By doing this i rarely have to take steps to protect my privacy.

5. Yes I completely agree internet access is not a right it is a privilege to be able to use the internet. If you commit a internet related crime this privilege can easily be taken away or monitored. But, if you only use the internet for anything except crime then the privilege is all yours and it shouldn't be taken away from you.

Do you ever make personal information available online?

I have never revealed any information willingly on the internet.  I don't even own a Facebook or Twitter account, and if I had, I would still use a pen name rather than my real name.  Being anonymous on the internet is one of the number one things I consider; even something as simple as my age or state isn't shared.  That's not to say that I would NEVER use "personal information" for certain things, like registering for a website, but if I can sign up for a site while using as little PI as possible, I would.  The steps I take are as follows:
A. I will never reveal my age.
B. I will never reveal the location of my home, but if necessary, reveal only hints, such as the country or state I am in.
C. If I come into an argument/debate/conversation and explicit language is engaged, be mature and don't swear much and completely avoid personal attacks.  Block anyone who personally threatens you unless it is the most ridiculous, childish, and unrealistic threat you have ever seen or heard.
D. Don't break the rules above.  If you do... don't.

Questions 2,3, and 5

2. I don't think we should have any control over blogs. Blogs are ways where people express themselves. They are ways where we get our information from. They should be open to everyone to express themselves.It is a way to meet new people that share the same compassion as you. Now if a person is offending others by what they are posting, then that is a whole new story. At that point they could have guidelines. So yes it is a way of distributing power in the culture.

3.Yes,I have! When I shop online I give my credit card information. That is as far as I go. I am pretty confident about the security, because when I shop I make sure the web site is a good one. Make sure the web site is trust worthy. I take all the steps i need to protect myself.

5. No! Why would the internet be created if it wasn't met for people to access it? I think everyone has the right to access the internet. There shouldn't even be a question about that. Today everything we do is based on the internet. That is how we get our information, it is how we cook and eat, it is how we pick what college to go to or what clothe to wear. Without the internet i don't think we will be where we are today.

Do you agree with Michael Powell that no one has a "right" to Internet access?

No, I do not agree with him.  Everyone has the right to be on the internet.  Its a free place to find information so everyone should be able to access it.  Therefore I do not agree with him.

Questions p.293

2) I believe that controls that sort through comments and pictures and discards the inappropriate ones should be placed on blogs. Yes, a blog does give you more distribution power. The reason blogs give more power is that you can post a message whenever you want.

3) No I have not put my personal information; Birth Date, Address, and stuff; on the internet. If I have it has really only been like my name and email and usually it is for websites that I trust because I heard of it as a good reference from my family or the school.

5) No I do not agree. Internet was made to be used for research, to better man-kind. It is for everyone because it started like that.

Do you agree with Michael Powell that no one has the "right" to internet access?

          Yes I do agree with Michael Powell, because being on the internet is a privilege. If you mess up you won't be able to use it anymore. Some people just shouldn't be able to use the internet.

-Daniel Balcom

Do you agree with Michael Powell that no one has a "right" to Internet access?

Yes  I do agree with him. You can find anyone you want on Google. It's too much, you'll eventually find some sort of record on a person. If you look up yourself you'll still find information about yourself, even if you don't even stand out at all. It's not fair because if someone wanted to they could silently violate you without being tracked at all. It's also a violation of our rights because we have to deal with our personal information being out there regardless. In a sense then, you have to pray that no one will look you up and find your personal information.

Question #5

Yes I do agree that everyone has a right to internet access. People might use the internet to see photos of family that they don't see very often, or talk to friends that they don't see that much either. All people have a reason and a right to have internet access.

The only time I think that a person should not have internet access is if they have committed a crime on the internet. At that point I think that that person should not have the right. You never know if they would do that crime again and most people don't want to take that chance.

Do you ever make personal information available online?

       No I don't usually make my personal info available online, but if I do, I try make make sure that it is      "secure" so that only the people I allow to see it can see it.  I am partially confident that that the piece of information is private. I also take steps to ensure that my information is secure. 

-Daniel Balcom

2, 3, and 5 on Pg. 293

2.
I think controls should be placed on blogs for certain blogs if any. They should be placed on blogs run by kids under 13. Controls such as the language (cursing) or pictures they project. Blogs are more focused on the younger generation the generation that works on computers. Mainly because an older lady will not learn to use blogs just to see or view them.
3.
I do put myself out there, online I mean. The most personal info though, is my birthday. If I was to put my address online I probably wouldn't feel safe. I do take steps to protect myself from online predators, ECT. I feel like the info that is on facebook or twitter or other social media, is safe and that I don't put too much out there.
5.
Yes, no one necessarily had the "Right" to access. It is bought though so it makes me think, It is my right. No one has the right to do anything they want online but, it is to be used as a tool or entertainment or other things. Now if you stream Wi-Fi from your neighbors you don't have any right to use it. It all depends.

What controls should be placed on blogs, if any?

There should be a limited, yet efficient, amount of control for the Internet, or in this case, blogs.  There must be a way to control the Internet that does not involve the destruction of anonymity, abuse of the power over the Internet, or destroying privacy.  If the blog contains bad content, such as language or explicit images, then mark it and warn visitors before hand.  There is a reason that internet filters and monitors exist; to control what can or cannot be seen.  We have all the power to avoid these things, but who has the right or power to enforce it?  Family?  Government?  Website owners?  It's our choice to make if we want to put a large amount of monitoring or a minimal amount of monitoring.  If there is clearly cyberbullying on a blog and it is obviously affecting the victim, then the account should be flagged or shut down by the website admins or owner(s).  Make a better account system: people who are banned or shut down can simply create a new account, make sure that those kind of people can't create new accounts for a period of time.  We have this capability to prevent most of these things on the internet, we just need to have the willpower and avoid taking the easy way out, which at the end, affect more people negatively.  ~Collin Blasing

Question #3

Yes, on Facebook I will put in where I am going or what I am doing. I put posts on when I am going to my cabin for the weekend or when I get the house to myself tonight. Most teens, like me, don't think that bad things could happen by putting things like that online.

And when you create a Facebook, one of the things you get asked to enter is your phone number. I did put mine in but at first I didn't realize that other people could see it. Once I found that out I made it so only I could see my phone number on there. I didn't want people that I don't know texting me.

Do you ever make personal information available online?

Yes I do have information online.  I am completely confident with the security I often check if the security is actually working.  I put the privacy setting on on all of my info so that only my friends can see it.  I also only add people that I know.

media lit. 2,3,5 pg.293

2. People should be able to say what ever they want, but there are consequences to what you say.

3. Some times I put thinks online that i shouldn't of put on there and I'm not very confident about its security. 

5. I agree that not all people have a right to INTERNET access, because there could be people out there that are bad and have bad habit.

2,3, and 5 on Pg.293

Question 2:

        I think blogs are a great way to get the public's opinion on big matters or even small things. it gives you a second or multiple views instead of one; the media/governments. I definitely see how having blogs allows you to "distribute the power".

Question 3

        I never but personal information online. I know that anything you put online can be found and used in any way. i am very careful not to put any compromising things online. I do take steps to protect me. i always recheck what i want to say or put online before i do and if im not sure i get a second or third opinion.

Question 5

        I do not agree with micheal powell. i believe we all have the right to the internet. its a giant bank of intelligence even sites like facebook or twitter are a huge contributor into studying the ever evolving habits of humans. we all have a right to it even if not everyone or most are using it in the way it was made.

Those three questions on p.293

2: I don't think there should be any restrictions placed on blogs. Of course they are a way of distributing power in the culture between traditional media outlets and ordinary materials.

3: I only make basic personal information available online, never things like my address, phone number, or things like that.

5: No. Everyone has a right to access the internet because they make up a part of it.

Q.5

Everybody has the right to have internet access. Everyone uses internet. Many college students for homework, Parents for bills and things, Kids for games. We all use the internet for jobs and bills and homework stuff. We deserve to use the internet. No one should take that right away from us.

Do You Ever Make Personal Information Available Online?

Personally with that question, I don't. There are those people that you should never trust. If they do something that interferes about it, they never think twice about it. I have no faith in some security because what if the person the correct items for everything. Or what if they hacked into something and guessed your debt card numbers? You can't trust everyone and if you do there's always going to be that one little sneak.

What controls should be placed on blogs, if any?

        No I don't think there should be any controls or restrictions put on blogs, because there would be no way to figure out each and every blog that is doing something "wrong," and no way to determine if that something is morally or ethically wrong, but who would determine whats right or wrong. No this isn't a way of distributing power. Its just something where people can say and/or do almost anything they want.

-Daniel Balcom

questions 2,3 and 5

2) For blogs, I think there should be some restrictions depending on what kind of blog website it is. If it is a children kind of website, then there should be some kind of restrictions to language and be more "appropriate." If it like a blog like this one on here, then there shouldn't because everyone has the right of what they want to say. It is the freedom of speech and it should stay that way.

3)  I make like the information that is online is basically my name and the general area where I am so it is saying I live in a city and that is it. I'm not confident about if the online will make all "secure." If you ever searched yourself, you will probably going to find something that has something about you that is true. I really just pay attention to what the personal information the website is asking if it something too personal like my address, I would leave the website.

5) I kind of agree with the statement. I can understand that there is hackers and go into your profile and stuff. Sometimes if it that kind of person should not go on to the internet. If it is just a page that no one likes or anything. They should still have the right to access the internet because it is just saying their opinion, but if that person is just being mean for no reason and harassing everyone on the internet then s/he should not have the right to go on the internet. If it is a predator and does some creepy things then she shouldn't have the right as well.

Question #2

There should be no controls on blogs. Some people use blogs as a way to put what they feel down so they can get it out. Some people don't like talking to other people about their problems so they use blogs for that.

I don't think that there should be controls on blogs because people should be able to say what they want when they want to say it. It is their way of getting things out.

Question Five

I'm not really sure if I agree or not.

#5 do you agree with michael powell

Some what, because we have a right like the first amend. so we can post anything we want, but the government can monitor what we post. We are limited on what we can do. I don't agree with him all the way, because of these things that the government monitors like facebook and other popular sites.

What controls should be placed on blogs, if any? Do you see them as a way of distributing power in the culture between traditional media outlets and ordinary individuals? Why or why not?

I personally believe that there should be no controls on blogs.  A blog is a place where people can get stuff of of their chest.  Its there own little place where they can be in charge.  Who cares what people put on their blog, its their blog and if you don't like it go somewhere else you don't need to listen to them if you don't like what they are saying.

Personal Info, Question Three

I don' t have hardly any personal information online. I have a few movies and books that I like, but that's about it. I don't have my last name, address, or where I go to school at online because the people who I'm friends with already know or can ask me. I am not really confident in the privacy of the internet.

Question 3.

I don't really have anything online, and the things I do, I'm careful with what I post. I don't post my location or phone number or anything. Plus I have a very secure password. So nobody can figure it out. The steps to keep my privacy is that im private, and I don't say anything important.

Question 2: What control should be placed on blogs, if any?.....

I don't think we should have any control over blogs. Blogs is a way where people share their thoughts and events with others. It is a way some people express themselves. Not everything people write on blogs are true or real, but it is good to share our thoughts. It is a way to communicate and meet mew people. So yes they are a way of distributing power in the culture.

#3 do you ever make personal info..

I try to have as less personal information as I can online, because people can get into it. I'm only confident if the site is backed up by a .org or .gov. If it's not one of these, I try not to put things on it. If it asks for more than is needed, I forget about it. I try to make sure that what I put on is true.

Do people have the "right" to internet access?

I don't agree with Michael that no one has the right to internet access. Because it's such a common thing nowadays and to take it away from people would probably hinder them. If we did get our internet rights taken away then people would find even more sneakers ways to get on it, since we're so pron to it.

What controls should be placed on blogs? Question Two

Controls should be placed on blogs because people should be able to have their privacy. However, some people abuse privacy. People shouldn't be able to say whatever they want, using bad language and destructive ideas without first warning people what they will be reading. For instance, if a young kid were to accidentally stumble across a blog with profanity, his parents would not be thrilled about that. So, controls, to a certain degree are necessary and helpful, but not too many.

What Controls should be placed on blogs, if any?

What controls should be on blogs should be clean and moral ones. They shouldn't allow major swear words, they also shouldn't allow dirty talk, and they shouldn't allow dirty pictures. A lot of blogs have the pictures, but they should strive at the others too. It doesn't make it enjoyable for people to read something interesting and then hear a whole rant with the f bomb being used or just filthy talk. They have the power to make things enjoyable for everyone, but they should be for everyone, not just a small filthy group. People like to have pleasure and a lot of the language people use today, isn't enjoyable to listen to or read. It's going away from traditional media because it allows now whatever, and that's not always a good thing. Think about it from this illustration, if you let several dogs off a leash, are all of them going to stay or will some run?

#2 What controls should be placed on blogs...

I believe that controls should not be added to a blog, because it goes against the 1st amend. We have the power to freely put what we want to on the internet. They should allow the people to put what they want to online, but when it is a thing that can hurt someone, then there should be controls.

Do you ever make personal info online?

I do make some of my setting online personal. But not to the extent of putting my phone number out there for everyone to see. Just where I grew up and where I live and where I've been to school. But I guess I don't really believe in hackers until it actually happens to me. I don't think people really care to hack my account specifically because I don't have enough information to even get hacked into.

Question: 2

I think people should be allowed to say what they want, and that they shouldn't control what people blog. I think that blogging can distribute power. Depends on what you blog about. Everyone has the right to say what they think.

What controls should be placed on blogs...

I think having the setting of blocking certain people from seeing your posts. Such as blocking any people you're not friends with. I think it would add additional security to those who are constantly posting on blogs and social media.

question 5

i think that everyone should have the right to internet access, just like you have the right to most other things. it's not like it's necessary to have internet but i think everyone should have the right.

question #5

Well, I guess you should have a right, but then if you bully or steal identity's then you shouldn't even be on the internet. It depends on who you are but it is a free country so everyone should have a right to the internet.

question 3

yes i do make my information available on facebook, not all of it though. i'm pretty sure of my privacy because i don't post very important information or anything on there.

the steps i took to protect my privacy is basically just the privacy settings and don't post stupid stuff.

Question 5

No, we all need internet to do our jobs. We need Internet to play games and to talk to friends. We all have a right to the Internet and nobody should take it away from us.

Question #3

No I don't. If I did then it wouldn't be secure because everyone can see it , and they can use it and share it! No I don't have anything online, but if I did it wouldn't be to even put it online. If you put passwords, and usernames you shouldn't let anyone know it.

5 - JARED

I think everyone should have the right to use the internet because it is full of useful information. Even though there are not so good things on the internet the pros outweigh the cons for internet. In summery i do not agree with Michael Powell, i believe everyone should have the right to have access to the internet.

Question 5

No, I do not agree with Michael Powell that no one has a right to internet access. People have a right to have the internet because it's available and people should use it.

Question 3

I only have Facebook and that only tells my name and my profile picture. I don't really have any confident. I made my Instagram set to private.

question 2 Mathijs

question 2

i don't think there should not be any controls on blogs so people can do whatever they want. 

i do see blogs as a powerful tool for some people to distribute news, i don't think it has as much of an influence on society that it really is a problem though. 

question #2

I don't think they should have control when people blog, and they should have a right to say what they want. Yes, it does distribute power, between traditional out lets and individuals. Everyone has a right to say what they think, and that is distributed throughout all the media. 

Question 3

I do not ever make my personal information available online. But, I am very confident of its security when I do. I take many steps to protect my privacy by not putting very personal information online and not giving my email to websites.

3

Sometimes I do when im making an account on a website it asks for personal information. Other than that i dont give out my personal information online because that would not be a smart idea because i could have my identity stolen. yes, i take steps to protect my security by installing anti virus and looking up if things are reliable before signing up for it.

Question 2

No, I think blogs are just fine the way they are. I think blogs are dumb and only used for schools. I don't think they are a way of distributing power. Blogs are just a way of talking between people. Blogs are less popular compared to other ways of talking to people.

5

I do not completely agree with Michael Powell. I think everybody has a right to use the internet. The internet is a great resource and you can find lots of weird and fun things on it. But if some terrorist is trying to use it to hack into our national defense system i think he shouldn't be allowed to do that. The internet is not owned by anyone so how could any ones right to use it be taken away. No one has the right to take any ones right to use the internet away.

2 by jared

I dont think they should have any restrictions on blogging. It is a free country and we have freedom of speech. Blogs are a great way to distribute information to the general public as well as reporters and news sources. Although blogs may not always be reliable they can still be intresting and good for information gathering.

internet rights

yes i agree. Not everyone has the privelage or luxury of the internet. Therefore it is not a right, It is honestly something this world could go without, we don't need it.
-Landon k

Question 2

I do not think that any controls should be placed on blogs because they are fine how they are. I do not see them as a way of distributing power in the culture between traditional literature media outlets and ordinary individuals because blogs aren't read by enough people to be that influential with traditional media outlets and other people.

Question #5

I disagree with Michael Powell because as people of the United States, we have every right to the internet and anything it has to offer. I don't know what is going through his head, but he does not have very good views and he cannot effectively backup his reasoning.

personal info

Yes, i have. i only give it out to friends i know and have met in person though. not to random strangers i've met on the internet. I'm pretty confident of the security of my identity and my safety in itself. I honestly don't take measures to protect my security in anyway.
-Landon K

Question #3

Of course I do. Everyone does. It's impossible to create a social networking profile without having some sort of identity attached to it and available to the public. There's nothing wrong with it either. People are always saying that you could be looked for and kidnapped and all this weird stuff. It's gonna happen anyway cause that's just how messed up our culture is.
I do have some sort of privacy on my social networking like blocking specific people and not allowing people I don't know to post on my wall, but that's about it. If people are too worried about their identity getting out, then they should just not have a profile.

3

Yes, personal information about me is available online. But i would never put anything that important about me online. If it would put me in danger or tell people too much about me, i wouldn't put it out there. Apparently facebook says they keep your info safe, but you can't be too sure. So i always put in a few fake things about me, like my birthday or where i live. I would never put where i live exactly on any website or social media thing online.

Question #2

No controls should be placed on blogs. Blogs are a great way for ordinary people to voice their thoughts and ideas. Besides, putting restrictions on blogs would be against the amendment for Freedom of Speech. Blogs can be away to distribute power, but usually it's only famous people or people with an extraordinary cause that create power. Though, there have been some ordinary people that do have famous blogs that empower people.
There are so many ways for famous people to take control of people simply because they are famous. Blogs are a route for ordinary people to reach fame or to simply spread a cause. There should be more ways for people like us to spread ideas.

blog controlling

Blogs should not be controlled. Peoples ideas are to be expressed freely without interference from others. Opinion will no longer be an opinion if is filtered or blocked by the blog itself, the blog will then become useless and pointless.
-Landon

Controls on blogs

If people are going to have blogs that they create than they should be able to put whatever they want on there, except of course for very bad things. Blogs were created for people to put their ideas down and just kinda talk to people. If people don't like the blog then they shouldn't read it and they should just ignore it. If people chose to look at only what they want and not others, then there shouldn't need to be controlling of blogs. Blogs can be used to distribute news and media.

Checkbook Journalism Responce

I think checkbook journalism is wrong.  Checkbook Journalism is a news organization pays for the footage and interviews, considered unethical.  NBC did checkbook journalism to get the story on the two sky diving planes hit each other.  NBC payed the skydivers to get exclusive interviews with them.

This is not the only time NBC used checkbook journalism.  NBC actually did it Two times in one week.  They did it for the Skydiving story and the Hannah Anderson story two.

Check book journalism response

    I think checkbook Journalism is wrong. Check book Journalism is when you pay someone for their story and they don't want share it all. I think it is not the best idea because you shouldn't force someone to tell a story when they don't want to tell. Also it just a bad idea because they can easily lie about the story also and then they get all the money and while you are paying for a story that is not true and why post it if it isn't true?      For an example the plane crashing in the skydivers and how everyone made it alive. It is a great thing to have everyone safe after a horrific accident, but is it just what they want to hear? They just also wanted the videos from the incident and that no other news station could use those because they bought it. In my opinion, it so not worth the money at all.

plane crash

  NBC's coverage on the two skydiving planes head on collision was excellent. But it was extremely lucky that no one was injured, and even luckier that they were wear go pros and we can see exactly how this happened. I believe this is wrong in many ways and can ruin the news. This can, in many ways make the news bias, because after the people who have the news sell the information they cannot go to any other broadcasting station. I also think that NBC might get a lot of negative vibes from this plane crash, especially because they used checkbook journalism. 

NBC has bought 2 stories in 4 days. They paid $100,000 for their interviews and information. The second thing they bought was a story about Hannah Anderson because it's an ongoing investigation about a kidnapping and murders. Also, it prohibits other news casters' freedoms by not allowing the information, either about the skydiver incident or the Hannah Anderson case, to be released to their competition. It seems to me that they are trying to create the great war between news mediums all over again. First it was newspapers, now it looks like digital media.

Respond question NBC

I think that it was kind of wrong for NBC to purchase that story because it could cloud the judgment or warp the story that the people gave to them. And the people could go into more detail and make the story different then what actually happened. Plus, because the people knew this would be such a big story since a news company bought it the people could have hyped it up and just wanted more fame for themselves.
I think that even though it was wrong for them to purchase a story, it is their money and if they really wanted to buy it why should we care? if it doesn't affect me then I don't really care. I say let NBC purchase whatever they want and we can choose if we think the story is reliable or not.

NBC Plane Crash

           That was a very interesting topic. NBC reverting to checkbook journalism is a tragic thing to hear. Why would a big news company like NBC buy the rights to a video? To be honest its kinda stupid. They already had the interviews of the skydivers. It is completely unethical, and this isn't NBC's first time doing checkbook journalism.
-Daniel Balcom

Checkbook Journalism

NBC's coverage on the two skydiving planes head on collision was excellent. However. NBC paid the survived divers for exclusive rights to the videos is not acceptable. Use of Checkbook Journalism is unethical and considered Taboo.

Sadly, this wasn't NBC's only attempt at this poor use of journalism. they also paid the family of the 16 year old who survived a kidnapping and attempted murder.

Why was NBC's checkbook journalism wrong.

Not only was it irrational, it was also unfair and criminal-like: not good for their reputation at all.  Not a wise move on their part at all, especially if they are focused on keeping their rep in tact.  If I were NBC, rather than risk my ego for a small story about airplane survivors, I would focus on something else to grab the audiences attention that doesn't involve the un-honest way of getting stories.  Going all that way to get a story will only end up wrecking you and you will have to spend a large amount of time repairing that trust with the audience.  It also makes the survivors look greedy to the average viewer since they "sold" their story, so it affects more than just NBC news.

Plane crash response

The plane crash was really interesting. It is extremely lucky that no one was injured, and even luckier that they were wearing Go Pros and we can see exactly how this happened. In my opinion, I think it was wrong of NBC to pay them money for an interview as well as licencing the video for $100,000.

I also think that NBC might get a lot of negative vibes from this plane crash, especially because they used checkbook journalism. However, I can see what they were getting at with this whole thing. If NBC is the only company airing this extremely interesting story, they would get a lit more popular. But at the same time, they might be frowned upon for the purchasing of it.

Checkpoint journalism

 NBC payed the nine divers and two pilots  more than $100,000 for a video of the plane crash. They said  it was exclusive footage. This is considered unethical and called Checkpoint Journalism. Which means that they bought information from the original and then said it was there exclusive footage. Which is not ethical at all.

The nine survivers and two pilots agreed to take the money and let NBC take there footage. I feel like that is wrong because they put that it was by them, which it wasn't. Also when they payed Hannah to tell them what had gone on in her kiddnapping, it feels like they don't care what happened to her, they just want a good story for there tv station. Its like all they care about.

NBC scandal

NBC's buying of stories is not good because after money is involved, the stories get biased to the one who provides it. In the sky-jumping case, the sky-jumpers sold the video and interviews to NBC, but, if it would have been just the video, it would have been fine.

And, in the case of buying interviews from the kidnapee and her family, it could have changed their story a little. So, pocket journalism is bad and can alter the story.

2 Paragraph Responce

In my opinion NBC should not have done that stuff. If people want to come up front and give you the tings that go along with the story, that should be their choice, not a news channel buying it from them. If they want you to have that stuff they might give it to you, you should not buy it from them. Even though no one died in the crash, that would be a very scary thing to go through, some of those people could have died in that accident.

And with the Hannah Anderson story, that is another mess up on NBC's part in my opinion. That girl could have been killed by that man and it seems like all they care about is getting the whole story from her when they BUY it. Referencing back to the skydiving accident, if she wants to share that with a news station, she will, don't buy a story from people who go through bad things. In that case, don't buy any stories. It is unethical in my opinion.

NBC Scandal.

           I think what  did was selfish and unprofessional. If they think doing that will gain them more viewers or something, well they are not getting my vote. Not only that they violated the check book journalism rules, they also made them selves look so desperate that they  had to pay people to talk for them. If their is any punishment concerning what they did. I think they should be punished than.
          This is not the first time they are doing this. So I think they should be stopped or something. Now only them have information about the situation and other people don't get the privilege. They said that they also payed this girl called Hannah Anderson who was kidnapped to only talk to them and them only. I think that's rude because she lost her mom in the process and now they want her to tell every detail. In this situation they are just thinking about their business but not how it is going to affect the poor girl.

2 paragraph response

Two planes crashed while flying sky divers around to where they would be dropped off. The skydivers where wearing Go Pros to record the crash and their jump. Later NBC found out about it and payed the sky divers 100,000 to give them the footage, interviews , and for them to not be able to share footage or give interviews to anyone else.

I think it was very wrong of both NBC and the sky divers to have money involved in the news report. Now the report might be biased because money was involved. also not as many people will hear about it because no other stations will have interviews.

Plane Collision -2 Paragraph Response

NBC just bought footage two times, lately. This is called Checkbook Journalism and it can be problematic in some ways. I believe this is wrong in many ways and can ruin the news. This can, in many ways make the news bias, because after the people who have the news sell the information they cannot go to any other broadcasting station. This also allows certain news to get the juicer stories only because they have the money. They used this method for a plane collision recently, and they used it to buy go-pro video from the skydivers in the plane.

The possible reason for this is that the new producer of NBC is British. Why is this important? The reason is because for British News people this is the way their area operates. you may have one story get told over here -->. and be told one way and then have another story being told over <--- here, and be told in a way that may not be true. This leads to problems and it is wrong in the face of other news people.

-Grant Gapinski

NBC Response to video -Laura Aldrich

NBC had bought footage about the plane crash and the 11 people, they got this by some one who was just auctioning it off. This is called Checkbook Journalism. This is unethical because you don't know if they where paying them 100,000 to lie.  Or to sway them into saying other things.

It was also entirely wrong for NBC to only make it exclusive, meaning the 11 divers could not talk to other TV networks, or newspapers. That to me was upsetting, because they must be doing something that is either wrong, or being ignorant. One of the other reasons I think they wouldn't let them talk to other press is because of the month of November is Nielsen's Rating, and they are just trying to get high in the ratings, so this source is very unethical.

Video

I thought that the video was kind of boring but also I got some information out of it. I wish the video had some more interesting. Also, I wish there was actual video so I wasn't so bored.

I was really surprised by how the news media could buy a information about a story. I think that the media shouldn't get to buy story's. Also everyone can say the story and not to buy the story.

plane crash paragraphs

          I don't agree that what they did was right. The eleven people that lived from the plane crash were interviewed, because they were payed. NBC payed $100,000 for the video that was filmed from one of the skydiver's helmet. I don't agree with them doing this because they shouldn't have to pay them to get the facts. It's also their fault because they sold the film.
          I also don't agree with this because they only tell the story from one side and not the other. If this happens, they become bias and don't give the people all the facts, or the whole truth. NBC also put their logo right on the video to make it look like theirs. 

Unethical acts in NBC

I really believe that it is very unethical of NBC news to use checkbook journalism in order to make sure that no other news networks could get the story. I find it as abusing the freedom of press rights in the fact that it is prohibiting the rights of the interviewed.

Also, it prohibits other news casters' freedoms by not allowing the information, either about the skydiver incident or the Hannah Anderson case, to be released to their competition. It seems to me that they are trying to create the great war between news mediums all over again. First it was newspapers, now it looks like digital media.

Checkbook Journalism

NBC payed 100,00 dollars for the videos of the two skydiving planes crashing. This is called checkbook journalism, which is very unethical. They also payed for the footage of a kidnapping of a girl named Hannah Anderson. This is also checkbook journalism. 

I agree that paying for the videos / footages of a tragedy is very wrong and unethical. It doesn't just hurt the individuals who were in the accident, but it also hurts the families of those individuals. I believe that checkbook journalism should be illegal. 

Checkbook Journalism

NBC has just purchased a recent story about 11 skydivers. Their plane crashed and they all survived. NBC bought this story from them. This is called checkbook journalism and it is unethical.When NBC pays for stories they only get one side of the story and it insures that they won't interview with any other news station.

NBC has bought 2 stories in 4 days. They paid $100,000 for their interviews and information. The second thing they bought was a story about Hannah Anderson because it's an ongoing investigation about a kidnapping and murders.

Check book journalism

I honestly don't really care if they buy the story. Because if thats the only way they can get the story then go ahead, its a smart idea, it works for both the news station and the people included in the story. I really don't understand why the man in the radio show was so apaulled by the fact of buying a story to show to the american public.

On the other hand i can see how it would influence the story. Someone who is getting payed to be interviewed is usually going to be portraying whatever it is in a more positive manner. In conlusion, I am totally fine with buy stories. - Landon Kreber

Thoughts on Video

I never knew that the media payed people to own stories. They also seem to trick people into saying their story and then they put two stories up against each other. The public never gets a straight answer anymore. The media simply leaves us at their mercy and we never know what is true or false.

Also, the media will own stories so that only one station can report on it. The public has the right to get view points from all stations. The media is completely corrupted now and the common man would make a more trusting media. Internet news and newspapers are way more trustworthy, which is truly frightening.

Buying news stories

I really don't think it is that big a deal. I can see how people may not trust the story, or be able to hear it from any other side then, but i still can't see the big deal. The story is still getting out there and people will be learning about it.
The point of news is to inform people of what is going on in the world. If news companies buy the story, it doesn't mean that it can't be trusted. The story will still be true. Like the people falling out of the planes, sky diving. How can there be another side of the story, people fell out of planes that crashed, that's it.

What do you think of the impact of the blockbuster mentality on movies? Should profit always be the determining factor in producing movie content?

I believe the blockbuster mentality impacted the movie industry in a good way.   The movie industry is not taking as much risk as they were in the past, they are making more formulaic movies.  Instead they are using more special effects and looking to the future to make sequels.


I believe producing a movie should be based on profit.  I believe this because if a company puts money into a movie and get nothing out of it, it was a big waste.  Why would you make a movie that you know no one will watch it that just doesn't seem like a good idea.

Are you a fan of independent movies? When you are watching a movie, how can you tell that it's an independent? If you are an indie fan do you welcome the microcinema movement? Why or Why not?

Yes, I am a fan of independent movies. Even if you don't what an independent movie are or means. Sometimes you can tell the difference when you see one. But other times you can't. Usually their special effect are terrible, but sometimes they are good. The actors are not always famous people. But they sometimes become famous after the movie if it was a good movie.

I am fine with them using the microcinema movement. I think it would be good for them and make things move father. That doesn't me they need to stop thee old ways, they should still keep the old stuff.

Critical thinking #3

     I disagree with blockbuster mentality, movies should try to make movies to entertain people and come up with unique, creative movies instead of just trying to become rich. If everyone only made poor quality movies for money the audience would get bored. So I think studios should try to make creative, movies that help the technology for future movies become better.

     Profiting should not be the determining factor in making movie content. I think movies should be made to entertain people and help the technology for other movies become better because if movies were made just to make people rich and they stopped being creative people would stop watching them and then the movie industry would go way down.

Are you a fan of independent movies? When you are watching a movie, how can you tell that it's an independent film? If you are an indie fan, do you welcome the microcinema movement? why or why not?

I am a fan of independent movies. When I'm watching independent movies, I can tell it's an independent one because sometimes they're not as good or they don't have as much quality. I welcome the mircocinema movement because I like  to watch them and they can make movies how they want.

Are you a fan of independent movies?

Yes, I am a fan of independent films for these reasons. Independent companies such as Liongate have significantly less funding then those major studios such as Warner bros. and still make some surprisingly great films I was very surprised to find out the movies such as The Hunger Games & Twilight. To be honest I think that independent films are on the rise and could some day be part of those major companies.

It truly is amazing how many films are best sellers and are near or at the top of the movie charts.

#3

What do you think of the impact of the blockbuster mentality on movies? Should profit always be the determination factor in producing movie content? why why not?
i do because without money the film industries would be out of business. then we will not have movies and we would all die slowly

Hollywood suffered under strict content control and now has shed those restrictions: What restrictions do you think are reasonable for movies. Why?

Hollywood has gotten under large restrictions for some of the movies they make, and for good reason: Some movies are just to much for the public eye.  That does, however, limit the movies that can be made.  This is why we have movie ratings so that we can avoid such controversies among complaining parents sending their children to a movie with nudity and violence simply because of they're bad parents.

Now, I do believe that some movies need to be restricted.  Movies that may as well be sex tapes shouldn't be movies at all.  A movie needs to be something that an audience can enjoy.  Movies have a great potential of being an art, but filmmakers seem so focused on blowing things up and decapitating heads that movies are just becoming a thing of only violence; that however, is an entirely different matter.  

Movies with things like: To much nudity (Movies aren't sex tapes), Nonsensical violence (Violence with no meaning is nonsensical: There needs to be meaning behind what you do in a movie, not just blow things up for no apparent reason), or influencing a single point of view (Politics, religious, or otherwise) shouldn't be movies at all.

Hollywood suffered under strict content control and now has shed those restrictions. What restrictions do you think are reasonable for movies? Why?

     Hollywood went through this content control partly because it was an older time, and different things were considered "appropriate." Some things that were labeled as "inappropriate" ten years ago are considered normal today. 

     I believe that movies do need to have restrictions. If movie producers end up putting inappropriate content in movies, or television, it could affect how our generation, and younger ones to come, act and respond to certain situations. If we put inappropriate content in every movie,  our kids will start to act like their favorite characters do. This is something that we definitely do not want in our society. 

#2

One of its restrictions is probably the use of language and what the actors can show in movies. Language like swear words has been coming up more and more with this generation of people and if there is a movie that is rated PG-13 it can't have any to little swear words.

And the other is what actors can show. In movies that are rated PG-13 actors have to cover up everything labeled is "inappropriate" or they and the directors can get in trouble with the audience for showing too much.

Critical Thinking #5

     I agree that this will output better movies in the future. The reason being that a lot of movie makers today are worried more about distribution than anything. (other than their movie) Anyhow the point is that the producers will be able to make movies more creatively than before, because they have more time to worry about making their movie awesome than distributing the movie that will come in the future.

     Another thing it could change is the rate at which movies are made. For the reason that it becomes a simple process. Make the movie, distribute the movie, and buy the movie. This process leaves less hassle and worry on how they will distribute it. Digitalization is completely changing the way that movies are made and distributed. Digitalization is sure to speed up the process of the entire movie business let alone the distribution.

Hollywood's Content Restrictions

I do think that movies need restrictions. I think that because if you have too much in one movie, then it will become way too much and eventually bore the fans from the movie. If you put the perfect amount of parts that are supposed to be thrilling, it will excite the audience and have them long for more and look forward to the scenes, which then will really excite the crowd. The rating system helps with that. I think that the current rating system is good the way it is. It helps a movie decide what kind of audience it wants, if it has no restrictions, then a lot of the crowd won't see it due to their moral decisions or by their parents. To get a big audience, a movie must fit the needs of everyone, that's why movies are commonly rated PG-13, they show the content they wanted to with releasing the unrated version. To put it simply then, if you want a bigger audience, then you need some restrictions due to moral codes.

#3 Critical Thinking

I think the impact of blockbuster mentality on movies is overrated I think you should take risks if you don't you won't ever find anything new. Profit is always a good thing but it shouldn't be a major factor in whether or not you make a movie. For example the Lightning Thief made no money if lost over $50 million in the long run but there are still people who are in love with that movie. If they didn't make that movie they wouldn't know what to do with themselves.

Another example of a movie that didn't make a profit would be Forrest Gump. It is an amazing movie but still came up $31 million short. It made $667 million but yet there was no profit. Sometimes you just have to take a risk and you might find something new and exciting that you will never be able to live without again.

#5

I do agree that it will produce better movies. these advancements are making it easier to make movies so now they can focus on the quality of the movie(acting, special effects, ext.) rather than taking so much time to make a film.

   films have been getting progressively better in quality and i believe that is a direct correlation to the incline of how easy it is to make a movie. now they focus on the actors and the story that there telling. this makes it so we can watch a good movie that pleases the majority.

Most industry watchers see the new distribution...

       I believe that the distribution of movies through digitization will some-what makes better movies. There are benefits for making movies through digitization, such as; it's cheaper, easier to get to, and not worrying if the DVD will get scratched. They also are available to the people much faster than if it had to go to the theater first, then wait months before it came out on DVD. But there are some down sides to distributing through digitization.

      One reason it would not be a good idea is that it would not be in the best as if it was the original, because they have to copy the file. For DVDs, they would burn the original right on to it. I would say though, that they have brought in a lot more money to the studios, because they don't have to spend money on making DVDs any more, and they can start making more of a profit. They can make more, because they can make them cheaper, and more available to people. This is why I believe that they could make better movies

Are you a fan of independent movies?

I like certain independent movies. Most are okay, but I don't really notice what makes it an independent movie. They all look the same, unless they're noticeably bad. Like their special effects are horrible, or the background is clearly a green screen. But most are okay.

What restrictions do you think are reasonable for the movies? Why?

I think that there should be restrictions on the clothing that they are allowed to wear. Some of the clothes that actors wear are inappropriate and it puts images in the minds of children at an age to young.

Do you enjoy independent films?

I watch some independent films, but not as much as i watch other ones. I guess you could say that i enjoy them.

4) Are you a fan of independent movies?

I am not a fan of Independent films because they are usually underfunded and don't have a big spending budget which makes it so they cant get good actors, good visual effects, or good scenery or stage setups. Some of these movies have good story lines they just don't have the funds to make it good.

4. Are you a fan of independent movies?

I enjoy independent fils just as much as I do Corporate and Major film companies' films. I can tell thet it's independent usually by the quality of the special effects used, and how much "props" they have in their scenes (ex. star wars has a lot).

Are you a fan of independent movies?

Ive seen a couple independent movies, they are pretty good. I could be considered a fan.  When I usually watch a movie its a major film.

Do you enjoy Independent films? How can you tell they are Independent?

What do you think of the impact of the blockbuster mentality on movies? Should profit always be the determining factor in producing movie content? Why or why not?

Blockbuster mentality is very critical but true to the point. The point of a movie is to make profit. You will make profit if people like your movie. If producers have trouble making money from their movies, then they should find another job or pick a different topic for their movies.

Profit should be the main determining factor in movie content because popular movies make big profits. Good producers are known for making great movies that make a lot of money.

Critical Thinking Question

I guess I'm a fan of the independent movie. I really don't care if it's a independent movie or not. I can tell if the movie is a independent movie by what studio produced the movie. For example, Warner Brothers studio is a major studio because of how popular the movies are. 

I don't know what the microcinema movement is. I don't really care about it that much. All I care about is that there still making movies. Thats all I have to say on the topic of the microcinema movement. 

#2 -Laura Aldrich

They shouldn't have PDA or Sexual content in little children's shows/movies. This is because you don't want kids to learn about all that stuff until they grow up. Its inappropriate for young eyes. They also shouldn't have violence and such in kid movies because they would do that. Kind of like monkey see monkey do.
Another thing that should be ok for this question is swearing in kid movies. They shouldn't hear that and know about the bad words. Pretty much meaning that you shouldn't put PG-13 movie content in a PG/G movie.


-Laura Aldrich

critical thinking question #3

I dont think profit should always be the determining factor in  producing movie content because when you are trying to make something worth watching and something people will want to buy merch for. When companies just make movies to make money they usually dont spend much time putting thought and emotion into the story because they only have money on their minds.


so no profits should just be the rewards for making a good movie that makes you think and relate to the characters. there isnt a lot of good movies being produced anymore so when there is it was usually created for entertainment rather then profits.

2

I dont believe restrictions are really required for movies at all. If they put stuff in a movie who really cares, people will go see it and some people won't. If you don't like it then don't watch it. That's what i think.
Secondly. People pay to go see the movies they want. You know what the movie is about and what it is rated before you even go. So if people complain about the content they are just annoying because if they don't like it they don't need to go see it or read about it.

Where so you stand on the debate over chains? Are they or bad for the medium?

Chains will not be good for the medium because then we would only have one mans opinion. We need to learn facts from more than one source.

Have you ever used an online newspaper?

Yes I have. I didn't like it that much... ( needs more pictures).

Have You Ever Used an Online Nespaper?

Yes, I have personally used a newspaper online. It is a lot like a newschannel's website. It is actually very simple to use. It has everything you need for your news. The difference between it and a news channel's site is that it has more news and a little biased. It also is a little unsheltered, meaning it's more "right from the press" news. It also has gotten technological because they have weather radar and sometimes videos. It really illustrates how much visual people today need for their news.

Are newspaper chains good or bad for the medium?

I think newspaper chains are bad for the medium they make it easier to team up with the other company's and make it biased so there aren't as many opinions. I think we shouldn't have chains so that we can have many unbiased views.

Have you ever used online news paper? Explain your experience.

Yes, I have used online newspaper. People say how mush they enjoy having easy excess to it online. But I disagree, because they have a bunch of ads. It gets confused with the topic you should read. I just enjoy the published copies better.

Have you ever used an online newspaper? How would you describe your experience.

        Yes, I have used an online newpaper before. I didn't like it. I thought it was really distracting. When you are reading there is always all these adds that are poping out. It can get pretty annoying. It is hard to fucust on what you are reading because of the adds. I mean I understand that that's how they make some of their money, but it is really distracting. I would not recommend it.

What led to the development of the penny press?

The penny press was made for quicker faster printing. That happened because the literacy rates of the population was growing so there was a growing demand for books and newspapers.
What led to the yellow journalism?
yellow journalism was created because the people wanted a relief or some comedy in there newspapers. so naturally the companies obliged. comics were created. witch was soon called yellow journalism.

Have you ever used an online newspaper? How would you describe your experience?

I've used an online news paper maybe once or twice before. It was pretty much exactly like a normal newspaper, but on a screen. It was a lot easier to navigate through the newspaper though.
I enjoyed using an online newspaper much more than a normal newspaper.

Have you ever used an online newspaper?

I have never used an online newspaper. I am sitting next to Aaron who has read one, and he says that they are awesome. So I may have to try one.

Where do you stand on the debate over chains? Are they good or bad for the medium?

I do not agree with chains. I believe they are bad for the medium for the reason that they have all the power.

Have you ever used an online newspaper?

Yes, only in this class. My experience with this was I got to see what an online newspaper looks like because I have never seen one.  They look very different than paper newspapers.

Online Newspaper

I have had to use an online newspaper before, and for me I would rather just use a normal paper newspaper because it is easier to get through and it is hands on. A online newspaper comes in handy, but an actual one is a little easier for me to use. An online newspaper won't always load all the way , depending on the internet signal. So my experience is that it was nice and easy to use, but I would rather use the paper.

newspapers

I don't like newspapers but if I had to read one I would read the Elk River paper.  The syndicated feature that I would like would be one on hockey. I like the comic strip, "Garfield". Paper is a waste of space and you are killing trees.

Have you used an online newspaper before?

I have used an online paper before. It was not that bad, but I would rather read a normal newspaper. Sometimes online papers can be set up in a confusing way. However it is nice to be able to look at older papers and articles.

Have you ever used online newspaper?

Yes I have read an online news paper. It was a while ago since the last time I read one. Actually, One of the stories I had found interesting. Other than that it is like newspaper, but on the internet.

#4 Have you ever used an online newspaper? How was your experience?

I have used an online newspaper and it was very easy to use. It separates it into categories and you just pick one and its all there.

Have you ever used an online newspaper? How would you describe your experience?

I have used an online newspaper a few times before and I liked it better then a physical newspaper. I think that I like it better because it was in digital form and not paper. We are in the generation of technology based things.

Have you ever used an online newspaper?

Yes. They're very convienient. They make it easier to access when you don't have time to buy a newspaper.

Does your town have competing dailies?

My town does not have competing dailies. I think we need a second daily newspaper.

have you ever used an online news paper? how would you describe your experience?

No. I don't read newspapers. I don't find it interesting.

Where do you stand on the debate over chains?Are the good or bad for the medium?

I think chains are a bad idea because For one thing one person doesn't need all that money. Another reason, there needs to be more points of view.

Yes or no on chains and why?

I think that chains are good because. If you have chains you can control every thing. you are the highest power in the newspaper world. so i think that it is a good idea so we can have les papers i hate news papers.

Where do you stand on the debate over chains? Are they good or bad for the medium?

I think chains are good because they give a widespread view for the public. The public has every right and power to change that view. The people are the medium. The people will control what the columnists will write, especially now adays.

Have you ever used an online newspaper? How would you describe your experience?

I never read the normal newspaper. And i never read the online papers either.

I cant really describe an experience i haven't had.

I have never used an online paper, therefore i do not have an experience using one. Although i am sure it would be a nice experience.

How was your experience reading an online paper?

my experience was great, the layout made it easy for me to find what i was looking for without having to search.

have you ever used an online news paper? how would you describe your experience?

Yes, Not to enjoyable.

nick cage.



-Landon kreber

Have you ever used an online paper? How would you describe your experience? -Elizabeth

No, I have not used an online paper. Well, other than yesterday if that counts, then It was just like the regular paper, except on a web page.

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did in Revolutionary or antislavery times? Why or why not?

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did in Revolutionary or antislavery times? Why or why not?

No.
I know the book have a big power. Sometimes, smart people influence my opinion. So I think they can be part of the reson of revolution.
But I see another point.
At the past, the book was one of important and influential media. Book is cheap and primitive media.
But now, there are many types of media, like internet or facebook. So, people can communicate easily using these media. And this make a public opinion. Public opinion have a bigger power than little smart people's words.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? Why or why not? Who is Mark Twain?

I'm sort of proud of my reading habits, but I think I need to read more often then I am now. Mark Twain is a famous author. He wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

Future of Media Blog Post Response

I  think  the future of media is going to be more consumed  as  the  more  often  all of   the  people  use it.  The  people  should  cut  down  on  how  much  media  there  using like  the  other  people  around  them.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? Who is Mark Twain?

I am fairly proud of my book-reading habits.  I don't read a lot of books but when I do read a book its a really good book.  Mark Twain is a famous author that wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

How media literate do you think you are.

I am not even on the media that often goes on media.  My brother is a media freak that goes on the media like every day. When people use the media alot they usually freeget  about other stuff going on.

Are you proud of your book reading habbits?

No I am not proud of my book reading habits. I only read books when I have to. I never just sit down and read a book because I want to. I'm not a very good reader and I don't like reading. So I am not proud of my book reading habits.

Are You Pround of your book-reading habits?

Yes I think I read an adequate amount of books. I sometimes feel and I admit I could read a little more. I just get sometimes the feeling I need to read whenever and sometimes not. I do enjoy reading, but I am sometimes just to lazy to read. If I could I would read more believe me. with school in session though I feel as if reading is the last thing I need to worry about.
I do know who Mark Twain is. He is an American author born in Missouri. He died in 1910. He was the author of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. He is one of the greatest American authors of all time.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? Why or why not? Who is Mark Twain?

I'm fairly proud of my reading habits because I read quite a few books but I suppose I could read more. Mark Twain is a famous author. His real name is Samuel Langhorne Clemens. He wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and also the sequel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

What were the major developments in the modernization of the printing press?

The printing press made making and distributing books much easier, mostly because before that, books had to be copied by hand. Books were made available to a wider range of audiences, raising the countries literacy rate.

Question 1. I don't think people will go to books to make a big decision on something, for example, to go to war with another country. People will use technology to know something or make a decision. Books don't work anymore because people don't go to books anymore. They go to other people or the Internet. If the person they ask doesn't know they go to the Internet.

Where do you stand with over-commercialization of books? How far should publishers and booksellers get people to read? -Elizabeth

I don't think over doing it is a good idea because the constant "you should read." or "reading is good and you should read this much."  We get that we should read, and we get that we should do it. We were raised with it, with all the book fairs and such. If we want to read we will simply look for a book, not respond by "these people wont shut up so fine ill read." and all the posters with movie stars holding a random book written by someone else with the big words "read." I think they are overdoing it.

Under what circemsances is censorship permissable? Whom do you trust to make the decision? If you were a librarian, under what circumstances would cencorship be OK?

I strongly believe that all books must at least be shared.  If most of the readers of the said book had trouble reading it or found it offensive, then it would be a good idea to take it off the shelf.  However, it is not our duty as librarians to restrain information from people, despite our personal belief.  If someone wants to publish a book on homosexuality, then it is my duty, despite my thoughts on the issue, to have that information available to the public.  It's not the librarians place to censor books, nor is it the US Government, or anyone for that matter.  To ban books is to ban knowledge, therefor acknowledging the fact that ideas or the sharing of ideas is dangerous.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? why or why not? This chapter mentioned someone named Martin Twain. Who is this?

      I am not proud of my reading habits. Because I think if I put my self into it I could read more. I am just not interested in reading. I usually read books that capture my attention and they have to be really good books for me to be into them but you don't always find those kinds of books. So I think I could spend more time on reading.
      Martin  Twain is a popular american author. He wrote The adventures of Tom Sawyer and The adventures of Huckleberry Finn.
   

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did in Revolutionary or antislavery times? Why or why not?

I  think books can't move the nation like they did in the Revolutionary times. I think all the very popular books are mainly stories and couldn't move the nation besides getting a lot of fans. I think this because most people would look at it as just a story and not have it move the nation.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? Why or why not? Who is Mark Twain?

     I guess I would say that I'm fairly proud of my reading habits. I try to read as much as possible, which isn't nearly as much as I would like. I'm also pretty good with words.

     Mark Twain, also known as Samuel Langhorne Clemens, was an American Author. He wrote "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer" and later wrote "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn."

Are you proud of your book reading habits?

I am very happy with my book reading habits, on average I read a book a month and more if i get free time. Granted yes I could read more but never been much of a reader.

Are you proud of your book reading habits?

Yes, I am proud because I read very good books. I read very frequently and pretty fast, so I practically go through a book a day.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits? Why or why not? Who is Mark Twain?

I am very proud of my reading habits. I know words that others don't really know, I randomly imagine things that happened in one of the books I read, and I've read so many that I can hardly remember all of them.

Mark twain was an author who's real name is Samuel Clemens. One of his most famous books is The Adventures of Huckleberry Fin.

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation...?

Yes I do believe that books could. Just like the Bible through out history has made nations turn on nations. Books today can have the same results, like ones nation's thoughts are different from another because of what they read. This is why I think books can change the power of a nation.

Are you proud of your book reading habits?

I am proud of my reading habits. The reason why is that I read at times, but not too much. Yes, you can read too much. For me I think that you should read around a few times a week and that's what I do.
But that's my opinion.

-Grant Gapinski

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did in the Revolutionary or anti-slavery times? Why or who not? -Elizabeth

I don't really know because I don't know the future.  More than likely we might though because books have always been important to our culture.

Under what Circumstances is censorship permissible? Whom do you trust to make the right decision about what you should and should not read? If you were a librarian, under what circumstances would you pull a book?

Censorship should NOT be allowed. Everyone has the right to display their views. This is part of the first amendment.
If I were to trust anyone to tell me what I should and should not read, I would trust a literature teacher or my parents because both know a lot about peoples views in books. They also encourage me to read books in order to learn other people's or world views.
If I were a librarian, I would never pull any books because all authors have the right to display their views in books, without having them be hidden from the rest of the world.

Do you you see books having the same effect as they did in revolutionary times (i.e. communism, revolutionary war, anti-slavery, etc.)

I think that books have the power to shape how we view and even "the Craze" of how books are written and what they're about (ex. the hunger games, the ender games, etc.) but i dont think they will create that great of a movement.

Where do you stand in the debate on the over commercialization of the book?

i think it is quite neccessary or else the book could be lost forever. The book is becoming more and more obsolete therefore they need to commercialize it more in order to save it as a whole.

Are you proud of you book-reading habits? Why or why not? Who is Mark Twain? -Laura Aldrich

I am very proud, but sometimes a little scared. I read many books and tend to read 3 or 4 at a time. I read books fast, and I enjoy them a lot.
He was a writers who wrote "The Adventure of Huckle Berry Finn."
He also has many famous quotes.

Are you proud of your book-reading habits?

I'm proud of my reading habits because I read for an hour every night. Also I love to read and I don't really have a bad habit of reading. Mark Twain was a writer and he wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and  Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.  

Are you proud of your book reading habits? Why or why not? This is chapter mentioned someone named Mark Twain. Who is this? -Elizabeth

Not particularly.  I used to read a lot on my kindle on the internet...and now I cant vies my bookmarks so I don't read as much, but I am working on reading Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie. (its good you guys should read it because its good.) Mark Twain is an old writer who died in 1910. I think he was also a good poet.

Do you envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did in Revolutionary or antislavery times?

I do not envision books ever again having the power to move the nation as they did before because many people do not read books any more and I do not believe e-books will either.

Q for critical thinking #1

I dont think books will ever have the power to move the nation like in the Revolutionary and antislavery times. When books go to E-form i feel it loses some of its value. And as most people know books are going to E-form. Another reason that books wont have as much impact is because not as many people in my generation read as much as they used to.

proud of book reading habits

I am proud, I never read, except for when it's homework. I spend my time doing useful things like bonding with my friends, or spending time with my family, or petting my awesome dog. Mark Twain was a writer who wrote comedies and things of that nature.

how do you choose what program you watch?

I choose watever TV programs that i think are funny or cool.

Do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

No my culture does not inhibit me in any way. The dominant culture could inhibit me in some ways by forcing me to do things against my culture.

What is the future of mass media? How will we get our news? How will we get our entertainment? Answer in 2 solid paragraphs.

Who was your childhood hero?

When I was little my hero was my sister Missy. But now me and her don't get along and we don't talk.

How do you choose the televison shows you watch?

The way I choose is I think about if its appropriate for me and if my parents would want me to watch it.

How media literate do you think you are?

I think I'm pretty media literate.  My parents are very media literate.  My weakness is I don't watch the news a lot.

How do you choose which television programs to watch?

I don't really know how or why, i guess its just what my personal preference is.

How media literate are you?

I think me and the people around me are media literate.

How do you choose which television programs you watch?

I scroll through the channels and find something that looks good.  My choices are very thoughtful because i choose stuff educational most of the time.  I choose movies and videos by what I'm interested in.

how do you choose which television programs you watch

I usually watch whatever is on the tv but mostly watch Dutch shows on the internet. my choices are not that thoughtful as long as it keeps my attention it's alright. I choose videos and movies the same way I pick my television programs, they're not really thoughtful either

9. How do you choose which television programs you watch? How thoughtful are your choices? How do you choose videos? Movies? How thoughtful are you in choosing them?

I normally watch TV channels like History , and Discovery because I'm more interested in that then fictional tv episodes. I normally watch action movies because of the fast pace. I watch a lot of acoustic guitar or christian songs on YouTube because I love guitar and like christian music.

Do you feel inhabited by your bounded culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

Yes I do because i lived in a different culture before this culture and it is taking me a while to get use to this culture. It is hard to live in a culture where you were once a slave.  You are always afraid of discrimination.

Critique the definition of culture given in this chapter. What would you personally add? Subtract?

The chapter says culture: is the learned behavior of members of a given social group.
   I don't think culture is just that. I think culture is the way a group of people live there live. It how they dress, what they eat, what language language they speak, and what king of music or art they like. For me culture is basically what makes you you.

how media literate do you think you are?

I am pretty media literate in phones, ipods, and ipads. I do not know computers very well.

how media literate do you think you are? What about those around you--your parents, for example, or your best friend? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person?

I believe that my family, friends, and I are at least a little Media Literate. I have trouble paying attention to things, I don't do much Social Media, I don't read a lot of news.

Do you feel inhibited bounded culture? By the dominate culture? How so?

No I don't feel inhibited by my bound culture. I also don't feel bound by the dominate culture. People may give me a label because I came from a different cultures , but I may not be apart of it. Sometimes  if you are friends people others may think you are apart of that group or culture.

Consider the changes brought about by the shift from oral to literate cultures?

The change could be great but can also turn out bad. By writing down the stories the are being proserved the state they are and when they were being passed orally they got changed or altered along the way.

- How similar or different do you think the changes will be as we move to a more fully computer literate culture?
I don't think there will be such a jump. Its as if we are reading a book with light. i think it might change because there are possibilities people will lie and say there something and aren't. Anybody can be on the internet.

8. Can you take a piece of media content from your own experience and explain how you approach it from multiple points of access?

With the Haiti earthquake a lot of people who heared about it wanted to help and the people in Haiti needed the help.

Who were your childhood heroes or heroines?

Derek Beaugard from the Wild was my hero because he was a good hitter and encouraged me to be more aggressive in hockey. He taught me how to stand up in a fight, because if you don't it is a sign of weakness. When I was younger, I wanted to be like Derek Baugard because he was one of the biggest players on the team and on the ice.

How media literate do you think you are?

I am probably just as literate as most people.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines?

My childhood hero was the Hulk.  He is one of my childhood heroes because I wanted to be big and strong like the Hulk.  A culture lesson we can learn from this is that we are very into science.

Who were your childhood heroes?

One of my childhood heroes was Amy, a missionary who lived in India. She worked hard at what she did and helped a lot of people.

How do you choose which TV programs you watch? How thoughtful are your choices? How do you choose videos? Movies? How thoughtful are you in choosing them?

How I choose which TV shows I watch is what my conscience tells me how it is. Personally the shows I watch, are some of the cleanest out there. Personally, my standards never change when it comes to all electronic videos, including movies. I believe that I watch mainly clean TV shows, YouTube videos, an d movies. I guess I've also followed my parents standards too, so if it bothers them it bothers me too. 

How do I chose what television programs I watch? How thoughtful are my choices? How thoughtful I am in choosing them?

I like to watch action, adventure, drama, and comedy movie/ shows. I love a lot of mystery and fairytales. When I chose my movies/ Shows that I watch, I usually make sure they are appropriate for my age. I make sure it's something I like. To sum it all up I don't watch things I don't like or do not think they are appropriate.

How media literate do you think you are? What about those around you- your parents, for example, your best friend? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person?

I think that I am a pretty literate person.  I understand most kinds of media because our age is in the generation of technology. Almost all people these days have smart phones. My dad is very media literate, but my mom.... not so much. My best friend is extremely media literate. She is on her phone 24/7. As a media literate person, I don't have many weeknesses.

How Media Literate are you?

             I'm not very media literate, because I don't watch the news. I don't listen to talk radio, and I usually don't read the  newspaper. I choose not to listen or read them because I just don't have the interest to. I only watch some TV shows and I listen to music from my ipod and Spotify.  My mom is very media literate. She watches the news, read the newspaper, goes on her computer often, and listens to the radio.
My dad isn't media literate at all. He only uses his iphone and watches Netflix but thats it.

How media literate do you think you are? What about those around you- your parents, for example, your best friend? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person?

I think that I am a pretty literate person.  I understand most kinds of media because our age is in the generation of technology. Almost all people these days have smart phones. My dad is very media literate, but my mom.... not so much. My best friend is extremely media literate. She is on her phone 24/7. As a media literate person, I don't have many weeknesses.

How do you choose your tv programs???

I choose my tv and stuff by. i just flip till I find a funny or interesting show. So i do not really think I am a very good tv watcher. and i think that the more funny it is the more people watch it.

How media literate do you think you are?

I don't think i'm that media literate.. i could care less about what the media has to say.

Consider the changes brought about by the shift from oral to literate cultures. How similar or different do you think the changes will be as we move to a move fully computer literate cultures?

We actually write down our stories and the stories we tell travel everywhere. It will still be transfered to everyone. #swag

How do you choose which television programs you watch?

I don't watch television I do however watch Crackle, Netflix, and Youtube.

How media literate do you think you are?

Im not media literate. I don't even look at the media.

Have the events of 9/11 caused you to look at your own culture differently?

Because of the events of 9/11, I think of my culture differently because there are a lot of dangerous people.  You should trust no one except your very closest friends.  I think about 9/11 if I was going to go to New York or when the anniversary comes up.  I didn't realize it because I didn't understand 9/11 till I was about 9 years old, but I later realized we were a strong, fearless country that wasn't going to give up without a fight.

How do you choose the TV shows you watch?

I choose TV shows by how interesting it looks on their commercials. My choices are pretty thoughtful. I like TV shows that are more like documentaries. As for movies, I don't really watch movies, because there too long and boring!

How do you choose which t.v. programs to watch?

I choose t.v. programs through comparing what i've watched with other shows. i then watch three or four episodes and decide from there.

-how thoughtful are your choices?
I think carefully about what i watch so i'm not putting things that i don't want in my head.

-How do you choose videos/ movies?
i use the same product of elimination with videos. Or i see what mood i'm in for at the moment.

-how thoughtful are you in choosing them?
i think carefully about what i put in front of me so i'm not watching things i don't want to.

How do you choose what television programs you watch?

I don't watch television programs, thats what Netflix is for. My choices are thoughtful.

How do you choose which t.v. programs to watch?

I choose t.v. programs through comparing what i've watched with other shows. i then watch three or four episodes and decide from there.

-how thoughtful are your choices?
I think carefully about what i watch so i'm not putting things that i don't want in my head.

-How do you choose videos/ movies?
i use the same product of elimination with videos. Or i see what mood i'm in for at the moment.

-how thoughtful are you in choosing them?
i think carefully about what i put in front of me so i'm not watching things i don't want to.

9-11

    The event really didn't effect me because I was really young, but I did show me that people really separate them selfs from everyone. I never really heard of the muslim culture before this event. After this, its opened a lot more information about this culture. It shows how something like this can affect so many people, even ones that don't live close to the this. I caused me to look at this culture differently. I see this because of how people reacted.

Can you take a piece of media content from your own experience and explain how you approach it from multiple points of access?

When I read science magazines I try to understand what I am reading, usually it does makes sense. I also observe the pictures to fully get the gist of it.

Who were your childhood heros?????

My childhood hero had to be. BAT MAN. he always bet the bad guys and won the battle. he always saved the town and stuff like that:):):):)

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines?

My childhood hero was Kayla, my sister. She was my childhood hero, because i basically grew up living with her. When my parent's weren't there to take care of me and my sister, she was the mom in the house. From cooking, to cleaning, to buying groceries, she was always there. No matter what our family goes through she's the one that stays positive. My sister has been my hero and always will be!

Have the events of September 11, 2001, caused you to look at your own culture differently? Amid all the flags and patriotism, are we, as Americans, undergoing a reassessment of "American culture"? If so, can you predict the outcome of the reassessment? In addition, if you had no firsthand knowledge of "Muslim culture," what did you know of it before that fateful day? Where did that knowledge come from? Now that there is more information about that culture available, how different is your understanding of it?

THAT TOOK FOREVER TO TYPE!

The events of September 11, 2110 have definitely caused me to look at american culture differently. You can best understand this by witnessing the reactions american people have to a tragic event such as this one. I didn't have much firsthand knowledge of muslim culture before this, but this event hasn't cause my entire view of muslim culture to be negative, because you can't judge an entire culture based on 5 people.

-Jordan Keller

How do you choose which television programs you watch? How thoughtful are your choices?

I choose television programs by if they look interesting and if my friends or others tell me that it's really good. My choices are not very thoughtful. It is really a spur of the moment thing. I choose videos usually buy the cover and the people in it. I choose movies by the cover, actors, directors, authors, and others opinions on it. I'm more elaborate in my choosing for movies than television programs.

Consider the changes brought about by the shift from oral to literate cultures. How similar or different do you think the changes will be as we move to a more fully computer literate culture?

 I personally feel that we're moving way faster into the computer literate culture than anything else before. Right when the personal computer came out, the first thing anyone dumped was the typewriter due to the word application on the computers where you could easily fix mistakes. When the internet came out, one of the first to go on it was textbooks. People didn't like to carry heavy books around so they downloaded them onto the computer, unfortunately, that campaign isn't that popular. Ever since the tablets have come out, the things people are putting on there are books. That ship has taken off and has been a big boom. Now you don't have to go all the way to the bookstore and pay $13 for a book, you can get it from home instantly and read right on the spot for a little more than thought price of $6. But as we can see, the computer literacy has moved quicker than anything else and you can now pretty much do anything from a computer.

Who was your childhood hero?

My childhood hero would have to be my older sister, Brittnee. I chose her because her and I always had everything in common about one another. Cultural lessons she's taught me were to always be funny, and to never take things too seriously.

Do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture?

Sometimes culture can make you feel like there are only so many right answers or only so many right ways to live or talk. So, yes,  culture does inhibit because it does not always allow you to express your true opinions.

How media literate do you think you are??????

I do not think that i am very media literate because. I do not really keep up on media. i might see the news once a month.I usually get all my information from friends and family so yeah i am a media buzz kill. so i am not to media friendly i dont listen to the radio i dont watch tv and i dont watch the news.

How media literate do you think you are?

I consider myself to actually have next to zero knowledge about media literacy. Although my parents are extremely media literate. My weakness is celebrity news.

How do you chose television programs to watch?How thoughtful are your choices? How do you choose videos? Movies? How thoughtful are you in choosing them?

I Grant do not watch T.V because i realize what a waste it is. I choose videos because they look interesting or entertaining. I mostly just focus on Science type videos.

How media literate do you think you are?

I believe that I'm pretty Literate. Mostly around my family.

Do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

      1. No I don't feel inhibited by my bounded culture one bit. Because I don't feel like I'm missing the next best thing by not watching it or by watching it a little later. I don't event feel that way by the dominant culture in any way. I say that because, for instance, I don't really care for modern music. I personally prefer the old music from 60s, 70s, and 80s. In a way, I'm trying to say is that I like being different and not follow all the biggest trends.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines?

My childhood heroes and heroines were Firestar from Spiderman and Friends, Starfire from a kids tv show, and Superman.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines?

      I never really had a hero when I was little.  But if I had to, it would have to be my parents. The reason why I chose them was because they helped me and protected me. They really showed how I should live. Another hero of mine is Jules Verne. He is a great writer and shows the truth into human nature. These are the people that were my hero.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines? Why did you choose them? What cultural lessons did you learn from them?

My childhood heroes were Spider-man, Hulk, Hercules, and Mulan. I chose them because they always did what they felt was right and never cared for what others thought. I learned that you are who you are and no one can change that. Be yourself. I also learned that it doesn't matter where you're from. It only matters where you're going.

How do you choose what television programs you watch? Movies?

I usually choose them if I think they look interesting or humorous. I really don't watch very many movies, but when I do I usually watch comedies.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines? Why did you choose them? What cultural lessons did you learn from them?

My childhood heroes were Spiderman, Batman, and The Flash.

Spiderman has all these cool abilities, like spider sense. Batman has great gadgets and a great detective mind. The Flash can move so fast that he is invisible.

Spiderman taught that if you get something great use responsibly. Batman taught you to do what's right without putting others at risk. The Flash showed me how to react to hard situations.

7. How media literate do you think you are? What about those around you-your parents , for example, or your best friend? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person

I think I am not very media literate, my mom isn't either, but my dad and sister are into media literate. My weaknesses might be that since I don't watch the news or other medias I do not  know as much about the world as others might.

How media literate do you think you are?

I don't think i'm very media literate. Because I don't really pay attention to the media. 

I think my step-dad is very media literate. He's always interested in the media and what their doing.

Who were you childhood heroes/heroines?

Sonic the hedgehog! xD Because he's awesome. None.

How do you choose the television programs you watch?

I look to see what it is rated, then i see what it is about, and if it sounds okay, ill give it a try. Usually it is a pretty amazing show.

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines?

My childhood heroes were Batman, the Hulk, spiderman, and the flash. The reason I chose Batman, is because he was just a rich guy in a suit and a cool car. I chose the Hulk, because he is super strong and is just an experiment gone wrong. I chose Spiderman, because he got his powers from a spider bite which is very unique. I chose the Flash, because he runs really fast and I have always loved to run. I learned that you don't have to have super powers to be a hero and to always do what's right.

Who were your childhood heroes/heroines? Why did you choose them? What cultural lessons did you lean from them?

Me personally I had one hero and one hero only. His name was superman. I used to see the movie when i was 8 or so. I chose him cause he was the strongest man and fearless. I learned that you should do what feels right and be bold from your decisions. #YOLO 

Who was your childhood heroes and heroines?

My childhood hero was IronMan. But not this "new" Ironman but the old comic book Ironman. He was awesome.

- Why did you choose them?
I chose Ironman because he didn't have superpowers or super abilities but he was smart. i think thats really important to think about. it go's along with the saying " you can do anything you want."

-what cultural lessons did you learn from them?
If you're smart you'll be rich. And if you're smart and rich you'll be Ironman.

How do you choose which tv shows to watch?

I don't watch any television. However, I watch youtube frequently. -Jordan Keller

Who were your childhood heroes and heroines? Why do choose them?

One of my childhood heroes was He-Man. He was a pretty legit hero, and had magical powers. I chose him because he always defeats the evil guys and does what's right.

Do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

No, I do not feel inhibited by my bounded culture because it is not a strict culture where they tell you what to do and how to act. I do not feel inhibited by the dominant culture because I am part of the dominant culture.

How do you choose which TV shows to watch? How thoughtful are your choices? how do you choose videos? How thoughtful are you in choosing them?

For the TV no. i just kinda flip through channels most of the time. with movies i just watch whatever.

How media literate do you think you are? What about your parents, or best friend? what are your weaknesses as a media literate person? -LAURA ALDRICH

I think I am pretty literate. Yes, my mom is, and my best friends. Sometimes I don't think about the stuff that is being said and believe it.

How media literate do you think you are? What about those around you? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person?

I think I know about 40% of different kinds of media. My mom knows about 60% of media. My best friend know about 40%. I weakness of media is most horror.

Who were your childhood heros and heroines? Why did you choose them? What cultural lesson did you learn from them? -Elizabeth

When I was little I was pretty much obsessed with Sonic the Hedgehog. I liked him because I was always really slow, and he was super fast. So when I was running, as lame as it sounds, I would just think "if sonic can do it so can I," but remember I was little. I also liked him because he was always there when you needed him, and always defeated Dr. Eggman. Like I wanted to defeat bullies! So yeah, I pretty much learned to stand up for myself, and to never give up.

HOW MEDIA LITERATE DO YOU THINK YOU ARE? WHAT ABOUT THOSE AROUND YOU-YOUR PARENTS, FOR EXAMPLE, OR YOUR BEST FRIEND? WHAT ARE YOUR WEAKNESSES AS A MEDIA LITERATE PERSON?

1. IM DARN MEDIA LITERATE.
2. I DUNNO SO MUCH BOUT MY FRIENDS OR FAMILY.
3.NICHOLAS CAGE.

Do you feel inhibited by your culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

I feel like people will label or judge you for most of the things you do. I enjoy listening to EDM/Metal/dubstep music and people often label people who listen to those genres as "punks" or "delinquent." Dominant culture often says that anyone who doesn't act, talk, listen to there music or do what that do aren't "cool" so those are my thoughts, thanks.

who were your childhood heroes or heroines? why did you choose them? what cultural lesson did you learn from them?

my childhood hero is Ash Ketchum, i picked him because he just seemed so awesome to me when I was younger. the cultural lessen I learnt from him is that you always have to be nice to people and help our friends out. so after all that weird kids show taught me some good things

Critique the definition of Culture. What would you add? And subtract? -LAURA ALDRICH

Culture to me is your back ground, and the morals you were taught. Also the way you function in everyday life.

Do you feel inhibited by your bound culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

I don't live in a bound culture, so I wouldn't how I would feel if I did live in one.
The dominant culture of America is kind of irritating. It's full of drama and it seems impossible to get a completely reliable and truthful story or article. Even when people state their opinions, they never seem to give a good reason why they think what they do, because they are so focused on being "politically" or "socially" correct.

Do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture? By the dominant culture? How so?

I do not feel inhibited by bounded culture, nor the dominant culture, because I am not inhibited by culture.

CONSIDER THE CHANGES BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE SHIFT FROM ORAL TO LITERATE CULTURES. HOW SIMILAR OR DIFFERENT DO YOU THINK THE CHANGES WILL BE AS WE MOVE TO A MORE FULLY COMPUTER LITERATE CULTURE?

1. PEOPLE WERE SLOW TO LITERATURE.
2. PEOPLE WILL BECOME STUPIDER.


BY: LANDON KREBER

How do you choose which T.V. programs you watch? How thoughtful are your choices? How do you choose videos? Movies? How thoughtful are you in choosing them?

I choose T.V. shows that are really different and cool. I don't really think of what I'm watching tell I start to watch them. I choose videos and movies that sound really interring. I don't have a thought of them tell I start to watch them.

Critique the definition of culture states on your text book.

To me, culture is the the things the determine a category of people similar to you.

How media literate do you think you are? What about those around you? What are your weaknesses as a media literate person? -Elizabeth

I think Im in the middle. My friends seem to be very literate though. They know about all the new albums that are coming out, the new video gams, and t.v. shows. While I find out from them, and my weaknesses are probably music, or T.V. shows. Like ones on cartoon network not things like Jersey Shore.

How do you choose which TV programs you watch? how thoughtful are your choices? How do you choose videos? Movies? How thoughttful

I choose them by what I find interesting, like I would rather watch CSI then some reality show. I find this very thoughtful. I go by if its good, and how other people liked it. But I also take many different perspectives. Yes it is thoughtful.

do you feel inhibited by your bounded culture? by the dominant culture? how so?

i don't feel like i'm inhibited by my bounded culture that much but there is a difference in the way of thinking that I have and that 'Americans' have. Sometimes I feel inhibited by the dominant culture in a way of people reacting in a certain way or doing the stuff they do which sometimes just doesn't make sense to me. That is because the way Dutch people are raised is just totally different from an American way of growing up, it's not better or worse or anything it's just different.

critical thinking question #9

I choose the tv shows i watch by watching them at first, then i decide if it was stupid or not, or if it made me laugh or not. My choices are probably thoughtful but i don't really think about it at the time. i choose videos by the name and the picture of the video, if it looks interesting and sounds interesting i'll watch it. I chose movies usually by seeing the trailer for it, if it looks good then i will see it. Those choices are kinda thoughtful too i guess.