Google Is Not An Academic Data Base

Vaidyhyanathan suggests, in his book The Googlization of Everything (And Why We Should Worry) that knowledge is confrontation of the “new and different”. He believes that Google filters each individual’s searches, and therefor they cannot gain insightful knowledge, but simply confirm what they already know, preventing them from “higher education”.

The Googlization of students, Vaidyhyanathan argues is that students especially, those in post-secondary education, are using Google as a primary source for information.  The arguments in The Googlization of Everything fear that Google is shaping the minds and expectations of students when it comes to any search engine. This is troublesome for academic searches, because if students are confused at the lack of immense simplicity they will ultimately retreat to Google.

Research is a vital part of education, and learning how to properly conduct research, through academic sources, is critical for students independency. Google is a tool that should be used for basic searches, to rely on this tool for depth into academic inquiries is unrealistic. The fact is that there are certain features which Google, neither has, nor should attempt to conceive.  To think of Google as shopping plaza or mall is similar to think of academic searches as a library; these are separate locations, and convey separate messages. The library is place for knowledge, to grasp meaning and plunge the depth of something new and mindfully intriguing, where the mall or plaza is an activity partaken in to rest the mind, to pursue less significant actions such as shopping, eating and chatting.

It is important that we keep in mind that academic institutions are accessible and driven to cater to the students as their dominant research tool. At the University of Guelph-Humber for example, they take the library and online data bases extremely serious and ensure the students are able to grasp a full understanding of every aspect related to these outlets. Librarians are assigned to each program, and present their knowledge to each class with the hopes of establishing a proper relationship between the students and their research assignments.

Because books are not the dominant resource for today’s students, the online data bases are designed to be accessible and informative. Students are able to access these research tools from anywhere on campus. With this being said, books should not be overlooked as they have been, and still are an incredibly reliable source. The reason students are overlooking these books and scanning the Google search results is laziness; it is difficult for our minds to immerse into a book, for a long period. Our attention span is dwindling because of the amount of other activity surrounding us; it is difficult to focus completely on one subject for any amount of time. This is not to say reading is dying, it is to say we are less disciplinary when it comes to books, newspapers, and magazines.

Even Google books are attempting to maintain literature in people’s lives, although it is online, perhaps Google will attract the readers that already use it as a search tool. I can agree with most of Vaidyhyanathan’s skeptical outlooks on the Googlization of everything, I agree that Google is a tool for secondary cognitive inquiries such as song lyrics, directions, or restaurant reviews, but not for primary academic research. Libraries and data bases have a purpose that cannot be overthrown by Googles intent to constantly absorb people’s minds.  

Google: the One Stop Shop for…EVERYTHING

Google is. Google just is, it is everything we want. We want shoes – Google, we want housing – Google, we want weather, news, directions – Google. It has become a part of our lives, it may just be a search engine to us, but in reality it is the search engine, and it is a massive company as well.

Google is consistently rated the highest used search engine (ebizma.com and seoconsultant.com) and it’s no surprise, it’s the easiest source to ask simple, to unthinkable/embarrassing questions. Yet, in this society this innovation is feared, and thought of as a threat, really? Well here is how I view this search engine in respect to the reason why people are fearful:

·         It caters to us we, use Google to find things that interest us on the web.

·         Google then uses web searches to find the exact article/picture/site that  we want

·         Google takes the information about ourselves (I call this our online profile) and stores it, using it as a reference to specify our proceeding searches eventually following a pattern created personally for us.

Isn’t this exactly what we enjoy about the internet? The fact that it is a tool catered to us, for our needs, our desires – retrieving this information lightning fast. Our society moves and grows at a quick pace, and this is just what Google has been formed to assist.

Some of the reasons why people are not impressed by Google is due to the feeling of their privacy being invaded. They also feel like it is threatening their extension of knowledge. By continually searching the same terms, pages, and areas they are missing out on the depth of information available. We cannot take full advantage of this tool (and that is exactly what Goolge is) without first being able to master it. In Siva Vaidhyanathan’s book The Googlization of Everything (and why we should worry) the author states that “Google is thus dangerous as the airplane and the automobile have proved dangerous in ways their pioneers did not anticipate in the 1920s. These technologies of mobility and discovery are dangerous not just because they physically endanger their users but because we use them recklessly, use them too much, and design daily life around them”. (19, Vaidhyanathan) After reading 100 pages of this book, I don’t think I have come across a more meaningful, perfect quotation to describe what Google is doing to our society.

We use this tool so recklessly with respect to careless inquiries, and idiotic/pointless searches for pure amusement. Google is a tool that should be used to enhance an understanding, to gain something meaningful, or insightful; instead because we rely on Google so heavily we have allowed it to slowly creep its way through every inch of the internet. There are no boundaries for Google, no corner of the World Wide Web left untouched by Googles caressing fingers.

The fact is that Google was created for searches but has since expanded to, email, RSS, blogger, youtube, calander, shopping, directions etc. and now it is being used as a social networking organization? Facebook is the place for social networking in my mind, of course there is also twitter but now a social network entitled “Google plus” is about to break new ground… well if you are as confused as I was watch this video and then try to imagine the future of our Google (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC_M6PzXS9g)

 Airplanes are still around, and so is the automobile, both come with their downfalls: pollution, cost, not everyone can use/operate them, there is limitations (age, speed etc.) but they have up as well: convenience, safety, connectivity, and style. They are always changing and being enhanced, and perfected, this is exactly how I see Google, with ups and downs, but ultimately here to stay and attempt to create a lasting impression on our world.  

Making New Media Make Sense

*I’m going to backtrack now, from my last entry, to the first chapter of the book Making Connections in the Digital Age*

Whether we like it or not, there is always going to be a new source of connectivity. From the wheel, to the telephone, to the internet; as a species we are always evolving, and therefore our surroundings must evolve with us. Our society has turned into a balancing act between culture and media.  

I don’t believe one (culture nor media) can really change without affecting the other. This can relate to a theory in Nancy Bayms book Making Connections in the Digital Age that is called “technological determinism”. Broken down, technological determinism is: technology driving the development of our society, and our cultural values.       

The internet has changed culture so much already, one huge example I can think of is dating. There are online dating sites all over the place, and why not take advantage of these tools. No more wasting time getting to know each other, instead you just view a profile and see if you have anything in common, or if this person would just be a waste of time. I guess this is an upside to the internet, but on the same spectra what about false profiling? There are all kinds of pedophiles and people who lie on these sites, and doesn’t this just defeat the purpose? It’s putting many legitimate people at risk, and not only for a heart break but for safety as well. One of Nancy Bayms readers was quoted in her book Personal Connections in the Digital Age say this: “I am deeply in love with a man who is handsome, smart, and loving. We are engaged and happy together. The problem? We met on the Internet. Abby, he thinks I’m 26, but I’m not. Everything I’ve said has been a lie. I’m really 12.” (34, Baym) This is just the reality of how our culture has progressed and been shaped by media. Although dating has always been a part of life, never before has been this veiled. It allows the mind to wander and contemplate the future of relationships.

…The future of anything for that matter, I remember watching a video entitled Did You Know? 3.0 – Shift Happens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygMPyP7qIkU) I was completely blown away by the statistics thrown at me in under five minutes. What stood out though was the fact that because of the ever changing media, and the attempts to continually adjust and adapt; the information being taught to students in media programs in the first year, will be outdated by their third year. I am part of that statistic and it’s a bit intimidating, but I realize that it makes sense and that this program - this field,  thingswill always be changing and that’s the beauty of it - it's inevitable to expand our knowledge.

New media is evolving today, and we should not be scared or shocked because it has been this way since humans began roaming the earth. Their caves have turned into our penthouse suits, their oral entertainment has turned into our televisions oripods, and so on. If we fail to accept this process, we challenge society and insult the brilliant minds that have brought us to the 21^st century with such amazing contributions to our world. There will be downfalls, as there always is in life but all we can hope is that the up rise is that much greater.

Is Media Effecting Careers?

In the conclusion of Nancy K. Baym’s book “Personal Connections in The Digital Age” she suggests a thought that crosses everyone’s mind when introduced to new technology: “what they do to us, and whether it is good or bad”.(109, Baym) Of course this question is necessary. We are always searching for things that will improve our generation, and I wonder if this desire is pushing our acceleration into overdrive. Nancy also touches on a similar comment I made in my last blog about us being socially incompetent in reality, therefore making us socially powerful online. She foreshadows the concerns we have now, for lack of face to face conversations, and impersonal relationships with even our families. I fear that these concerns are so obvious today that we are about to struggle in many aspects of our lives, especially in our careers.
This class is part of the Media Studies program at Guelph-Humber, and although social networking has been a vastly expanding tool for our future jobs, I believe it is also damaging our field. Part of the course is journalism; this entails social skills, the ability to act comfortably around people, and perform interviews. Public relations suffer similarly in respect to event planning, and public speaking. If we cannot maintain the skills of personal communication (talking, striking up conversations, asking questioning etc.) where can we expect to gain the insight needed for news coverage? I don’t think journalism in drowning, in fact I think it’s thriving, language, and conversation will never die regardless of the medium. The issue I can see is that print media is declining. The internet has no doubt taken control of the majority of news coverage, it is fast and easily changed which coincides well with the fast paced, ever changing world we live in. When something newsworthy happens we are no longer hearing about days later, but with digital media it is instantaneous.
Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase "the medium is the message" under a century ago. His quote still holds true today, I think what he meant was the medium is more significant then the content it provides. If we compare that view to the internet then that means people have expectations of this medium: to have endless amounts of information and to have it all immediately.




Seven Ky Concepts


Baym also strikes a discussion worthy topic about seven aspects of affordances which digital media offer. Which is the most important of the seven key concepts (interactivity, temporal structure, social cues, storage, replicability, reach, or mobility) in shaping our communication in a positive, negative, or mutual way?
Interactivity is an interesting topic, it is the way in which all aspects of media work, and how they have multiple abilities. When the telephone was introduced for example it was one machine, created for one purpose. No wonder we are hesitant at the thought of a “cell” phone that will allow us to not only make the calls as a usual telephone but to also text, check Facebook, get directions, etc. The challenge with interactivity is that it may not be influencing us a positive direction. There are multiple usages for multiple technologies, but we are taking for granted the connectivity, something such as the internet, is providing us with and instead using it for (as Baym suggests) shopping for shoes. This is where the topic gets tough, are we advancing in technology for the greater knowledge? Or are we rather advancing for the greater leisure experience?

Web 2.0

" our devices extend us, and we extend them " (8, O'Rielly) Web 2.0 article .... Interesting thought, it's very true that the internet would be impossible without us (humans) but I never thoroughly explored the relationship. It's very dependent of one another, I know I feel distant without my cellphone, but what would be that cellphones purpose without me? There truely would not be one, we create these devices and outlets as if they are commodities for us, but we are a commodity to them as well. The internet and cellphones are there for us to take advantage, but they also take advantage of us. Through marketing, advertising, and reliance upon these items an ongoing relationship has been formed. It has become less of a material object and more of a necessity - or that is how we should feel about them. We rely on them, for many everyday activities. A system as been created of giving and taking on both ends of the scale.        I have never really considered the term “Web 2.0” and that’s a bit scary considering the fact that I am writing this blog for a media studies course. Web 2.0 is simply the second generation of the World Wide Web. The web is a huge place, and is evolution is going to repeatedly assist me and frustrate me during my schooling, my career, and my social life. It’s a tool for those not only in the media field but for every person who has access to a computer. It enables collaboration between many people in any given area, and allows them to interact and share information online. Contributions of Web 2.0 are blogs, wikis, and facebook. I’m already being exposed to blogs (for the first time), as well as wikis through this course. I look forward to pursuing my knowledge of Web 2.0 and watching it change and evolve.

 



Book or computer? I hope that’s not a serious question…

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy reading as much as the next nineteen year old, but as I gaze at the screens illuminating light I realize that this question is being launched into a seventeen year old boys mind. Vishal, a student at Woodside High School was the perfect subject for the article “Growing up Digital, Wired for Distraction” by Micheal Zimmer. The article focuses on our youth generation, depicting how we spend our time -online. The world seems to be extremely hypocritical when it comes to media. Media is our world, it is advertisement, entertainment, communication, knowledge, and it’s always evolving. To me the article wanted to suggest that as children and teenagers we are using media too heavily in our everyday lives. Yet, at the same time, insisting that bringing media into the classroom is a new, and efficient way to get the students attention. A little contradictory, right? Well I get the feeling that even though, media (internet) is our societies norm there will always be people who are going to challenge this revolutionary tool.  

I’m curious to investigate the reasoning behind the current students mind set and brain activity. We are the generation of multitasking. Homework, facebook, television, all open at the same time and still getting things accomplished, or are we? It’s one thing to have a desktop computer, but as Web 2.0 discusses, it is a fact that smartphones have given us full wireless connectivity. Does this make us a socially incompetent society? With no real use for personal, one-on-one conversations, and social outings that involve your partner constantly checking their phone, updating statuses and “liking” wall posts…but wait then why is it called social networking if the true socialization of personal interaction is being shut out and undesired? With the enormous amount of apps already in existence, and many more to be announced, are we too busy trying to keep up with technology that we are leaving our old social interactional roots to dry up and eventually perish completely?

The conclusion I have made in my own mind is that, our hierarchy has changed, once again. We are now involved more deeply in peoples personal lives and our social status is based on the amount of followers, or friends we acquire. This works both for and against us. The good thing is, that we no longer need to be fascinating people in order to be social butterflies, it is easier to find friends, and make new friends online when we are not trying so hard to impress these people with upbeat conversations. At the same time this media tool is a distraction from work, school, and meaningful human relationships.

I hope that this class can help me answer some of these questions, and perhaps confirm whether this generation, hyped on media is speeding on a course for self-destruction, or revolutionary impact.

Hey everyone! I'm so excited to be sitting here creating this blog, it's something I have never done and I admit I'm a bit nervous. After the first class I think it's a feeling I should get used to. I'm looking forward to being put into uncomfortable and challenging situations because I really have no idea what to expect from this course.

A bit about myself: I like pina coladas, getting caught in the rain, long walks on the beach...just kidding...

I'm a first year media student, I wanted to pursue media and eventually follow the PR stream but after the first semester I realized I'm completely undecided. I live in res, and came from a tiny town three hours north-east of Toronto. The city is definitely a huge change, but I love everything about it.

Movies are huge part of my life, especially superhero movies (I cannot wait for Batman to come out in the summer!) I played rugby in high school, but was far too terrified to tryout this year, I like to think of myself as environmentally conscious person, I worked at Tim Hortons for three years, when I come to an obstacle in life, I usually find myself asking what my sister would do in the same situation, as much as I love Canada I also hope to have the opportunity to do quite a bit of traveling.

It's going to be a fun, but intense semester, I can't wait to read everyone’s blogs and get to know you all better :)

∞