Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video (Response)

This is a great read and has given me some ideas for mashups. I've been researching a bit about the Outrun and Vaporwave aesthetics, so this was a timely read for inspiration. While the piece was specifically about fair use, it also got me thinking about public domain stuff.

Here is summary of the best practices. These are all critical for having meaningful discussions in our society, particularly discussions that critique the media, politics, religion, corporations and popular culture. As the article notes, they are also critical for maintaining free speech; otherwise a copyright holder could silence someone's speech through enforcement of their copyright.

One: commenting on or critiquing of copyrighted material

Two: using copyrighted material for illustration or example

Three: capturing copyrighted material incidentally or accidentally

Four: reproducing, reposting, or quoting in order to memorialize, preserve, or rescue an experience, an event, or a cultural phenomenon

Five: copying, reposting, and recirculating a work or part of a work for purposes of launching a discussion

Six: quoting in order to recombine elements to make a new work that depends for its meaning on (often unlikely) relationships between the elements

I'll admit that I was a victim of some of the myths about fair use, specifically the one that says "If I’m not making any money off it, it’s fair use." I do think, however, you're less likely to be the target of legal threats, but automated algorithms like YouTube uses can catch a lot that would've previously gone unnoticed and automatically restrict them, which is also a concern.

http://sites.uci.edu/elad/files/2012/03/video_fair_use.pdf

Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide by Mark Warschauer (Response)

I agree with the author that historical references to the "Digital Divide" overly simplify the issue and may lead to a weak response to address root causes. As referenced in other readings, it is not simply a technology access issue; that alone is one symptom, and its treatment in isolation is not sufficient to alleviate the damage it causes to our society and the individuals affected.

Even when resources are available to provide access, unintended consequences must be considered. These include disruption to existing social frameworks and practices. Examples in the reading include a public kiosk in India, a technology lottery in Ireland, and a university lab in Egypt. In each of these cases, the technology was disruptive, and not in a good way. It contributed to lower grades for poor Indian school kids, more isolation for Irish villagers, and political infighting and project delays at the Egyptian university. Lack of planning for implementation, education, and sustainability could have prevented these problems and resulted in better success for the initiatives.

Sustainability is greatly overlooked in general; technology is viewed as a magic bullet, without considering the entirety in a holistic manner. Additionally, every situation is unique and may have different challenges than other implementations. Those impacted by the digital divide must not be viewed as a monolith, or as the reading phrases it, a "binary divide."

https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/967/888

Mind the Gap: The Digital Divide as the civil Rights Issue of the New Millennium (Response)

Reading about the 500 channels of content reminded me of cable TV, which for years has been a wasteland. Many of the channels are non-stop advertising, religious pandering, or simply reruns of old shows. Hardly quality content. For a time, USENET provided a wide variety of quality content, but the last time I checked it was all phishing and spam. Honestly, the best current analog we have that is represented by quality of any kind is probably Reddit. There is likely a forum that aligns with your specific interests.

As with the previous reading on the digital divide, I see a prime concern being the ability to critically use the resources available. I have friends and relatives with good internet access, yet they lack the ability to critically source information and make logical decisions, and are instead taken in by targeted propaganda and echo chamber group-think.

I'm really curious to learn how the demographics and associated access discussed in "Mind the Gap" have changed over the past 20 years. Sure, mobile has improved access, but I suspect that the quality of information obtained or acted on may not have improved. Even so, in the rural communities where some of my family members live, internet access is still slow and expensive, and even cell signal is not ubiquitous. This also makes me think about marginalized folks, specifically the LGBT community in small towns. The internet makes this community less isolated, yet poor internet access leaves folks cut off, and I suspect the desire to move to larger towns or cities continues.

The focus on the five pieces of this puzzle, "access, content, literacy, pedagogy and community" sums up the challenge very well. I especially appreciate this passage: "no computer lab or training room should sit idly during evening and weekend hours." I think we should focus on multi-use and off-business hours use of all public spaces and buildings. We should maximize the return on our investment and make the best use of those spaces for everyone. 

http://www.infotoday.com/mmschools/jan00/carvin.htm

Mossberber and Tolbert, Redefining the Digital Divide (Response)

This article is helpful in understanding the digital divide, in that it doesn't treat folks without access as a monolith. Specifically, it considers "the needs, attitudes, and experiences of the low-income and minority communities that have been the focus of current initiatives" (p. 101). Access to technology is only one barrier; individuals must also have the skills to make effective use of that technology. The authors also examine economic opportunity and the democratic divide as part of the problem. There is a notable gap in skills development programs, and a significant barrier includes not only how to use the technology, but also how to "locate and evaluate information on the web" (p. 104).
This skill set is not isolated to folks without regular, reliable internet access; it is a weak spot that was well-targeted in the last presidential election, and it continues to be exploited by the Russians and Fox News. A reason for hope: UW has a class called "Calling Bullshit: Data Reasoning in a Digital World," and the content is available for free online: https://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html

Notably, technology and its proper use don't just impact the have-nots, they are "tools for participation in the economy and the political area" (p. 105) and provide "positive externalities associated with economic growth and democratic governance" (p. 105). Essentially, internet access, paired with educated use, is a rising tide that lifts all boats. Further, the market is unlikely to provide these resources, and given their public good, it falls to "public subsidy or public provision" to "act in the public interest and to realize the additional social benefits" (p. 105). My cynical take: a more informed and critically engaged citizenry, while great for the country and communities, is a real problem for those who historically attempt to disenfranchise the poor and minority communities, either through voter suppression, poll taxes, disenrollment, or gerrymandering. I'm looking at you, Republicans.

"The Power of Sharing," "Are We There Yet," "We Are What You Share" by Deanna Zandt (Response)

The discussion of power law distributions is very interesting (p. 56). It's interesting to note that while there is huge variety of information and opinions shared online, sometimes it's difficult to locate them and many of them aren't shared widely. Because of this, it's difficult to discover a wide variety of quality opinions via serendipity. One has to consciously seek out diverse opinions to encounter them. The echo chamber that many folks exist in reinforces existing beliefs, and this certainly extends beyond social media to the web in general and especially broadcast media.

I also appreciate the discussion of digital inequality. The author makes the point that "Addressing digital inequality must take into account larger systemic and cultural divides that both create the inequality and reinforce it" (p. 58). This is a common theme in addressing any type of inequality. Many folks try to fix it by treating the symptoms, i.e. giving disadvantaged people computers or internet access, but they ignore or are unable to address the root causes that denied those things to that population in the first place. Yes, one can make the world a better place by address symptoms, but unless root causes of poverty and other forms of inequality are addressed systemically, other forms of inequality will continue to stem from those same sources, whether in the education system, transportation access, job market, intergenerational wealth distribution, or computers and internet access.

Interesting point about information access at the library; <geek warning!>

The author notes that 'content available' may be limited at the library (p. 59). I was reading reviews online of the Richland Public Library, and there were criticisms about Urban Dictionary being blocked. This review was from some time ago. Curious, I tried accessing Urban Dictionary from a RPL computer, and while it was not blocked, I noticed that the HTTPS certificate did not come from Urban Dictionary. I opened up the certificate settings and it was registered to Richland Public Library, which indicates that the library could see all the internet traffic to and from Urban Dictionary. Other secure sites that I tried did not show this kind of tampering.

"The ABC of Tactical Media" by David Garcia & Geert Lovink (Response)

Tactical media is a way for people to find their voice. Affordable consumer electronics and nearly ubiquitous wireless and wired broadband helped democratize the sharing of information and disparate points of view. Tactical media falls into the category of bottom up or grassroots resistance, and it is within the power of almost anyone to exercise. In tactical media, "the weak make use of the strong" (p. 82). Even so, people and organizations with money can drown out these independent voices with paid ads, like Trump is doing right now on Facebook. The author quotes Peter Lamborn Wilson, who describes tactical media as a "useful antidote" to "the unopposed rule of money over human beings" (pg 81), but this does require a concerted effort, and it is helpful to have numbers on your side (either in the creation or support of tactical media) to gain the inertia to make it effective.

I do think tactical media is a necessary response to mainstream media. Even media that purports to be balanced ignores some of the meta-analysis of the larger role it plays in perpetuating hype or lies (repeated interviews with known liars like Kellyanne Conway for example). This is the problem with media that is not self-reflective, what the authors note as a "continual process of questioning the premises of the channels they work with" (p. 82).

I appreciate the authors' zen-like focus on "temporary connections you are able to make" (p. 82). "Here and now" (p. 82) is all we have.

"Relational artifacts with children and elder" by Sherry Turkle, et al (Response)

What is the role for these objects?
These objects have a definite role in nursing homes. In addition to being a potential emotional outlet for very lonely patients, they can fulfill a role that supplements the physical element that caregivers provide. Two examples in the reading include giving reminders to take medications and calling a nurse (pg. 98). Robots that can recognize patients and address them by name would also lead to a more rewarding emotional connection.

Using the robots to automate and augment both emotional and physical care would lead to happier residents and less stressed staffed in overworked facilities. In any event, the precarious position these objects occupy between machine and seeming sentience must be managed thoughtfully. In fact, Turkle, et al note that detailed studies are necessary to increase "the opportunities for the social sciences to inform the design of robots in ways that will enhance human experience" (pg. 87). While these objects may serve as tools that improve peoples' circumstances, I think they can also be used to more thoroughly discover what peoples' emotional needs are and to find better ways for people to communicate and relate to one another. There are fundamental questions about what it means to be human, and while these devices can shed light on that question, and perhaps make someone's life easier, the essential issue of personhood should never be forgotten.

This reading reinforced for me the realization that art is a kind of philosophy and psychology. As the author writes, "the Rorschach response gives priority to the psychological; attention to the evocative power of objects puts the emphasis on philosophy" (pg. 87).