More Sources for Final website

• Glass, Ira. Audio blog post. This American Life. WBEZ, 28 Nov. 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.thisamericanlife.org/>.
• Drudge, Matt. Audio blog post. Drudge Podcast. The Drudge Report, 30 Sept. 2007. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/drudge-podcast/id188578550>.
• Rudin, Ken, and Ron Elving. Audio blog post. NPR: It's All Politics Podcast. National Public Radio, 25 Nov. 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <feed://www.npr.org/rss/podcast.php? id=510068>.
• Huffington, Arriana, Tony Blankley, Matt Miller, and Robert Scheer. Audio blog post. Left, Right & Center. National Public Radio, 26 Nov. 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/lr>.
• Alpern, David M., and Isaac D. Aronson. Audio blog post. For Your Ears Only. Radio America and Newsweek Incorporated, 28 Nov. 2010. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://feeds.newsweek.com/podcasts/onair>.
• Food Inc.. Dir. Robert Kenner." Perf. Schlosser, Eric. Magnolia Pictures: 2008, Film.

Immersion Presentation Prezi

An Investigation into the Commercialization of Podcasts on Prezi

Rhetorical Analysis

Gary Weiser

Engl 278Z

Section 0201

Geary

Rhetorical Analysis of Two Sources

As technology improves, so too does the technology associated with popular media. Increasingly, the internet has become the source of information for the majority of people. This shift in the major source for information has resulted in new requirements for entrance into the parlor room of ideas. This means that the requirements for discussing new ideas in a forum that contributes to the zeitgeist of the people has changed to a necessity to both access and contribute to the content on the internet. When we look to the previous preferred sources of media and information such as the radio and television there is a disconnect between those contributing to the discussions and those receiving content from them. In more general terms, more people watch television or listen to radio that contribute content to them. As a result there is an uneven amount of power content producers have in the parlor room of ideas in determining the discussions and opinions expressed. While researching this phenomenon, two sources were discovered, both explaining the necessity of keeping an open forum on the internet not limited by a disproportionate power wielded by content producers over noncontributing viewers. Though these two sources express this sentiment in different ways both in terms of mode of expression and in the form the argument takes. While the video of Al Gore introducing his book The Assault on Reason (source 1) make use of oratorical rhetoric to prove its point, the second source is and academic paper that makes use of mathematical proofs and logic to show the sociological benefits of net neutrality.

One of the most obvious differences between these two sources is technologic mode theses two sources take. The video of a presentation by Al Gore is quite different from the scholarly paper that makes up the second source. This results in different rhetorical effect when viewing or reading these sources. Notably is the difference in the method that ethos of the speakers is generated. The ethos of the video is intrinsic, as there is an arete, or excellence, associated with Al Gore that gives whatever is said by him (of a serious nature) even in generally considered popular modes. Meanwhile, the credibility of the scholarly article is context specific, were the same content in a less scholarly location, the article would have a different rhetorical feel despite having the same content. Furthermore, inherent in the use of a paper rather than a video is a very different message suggesting that the scholarly nature of the piece. However there is a similarity in the two modes as well. That lies in the decision of what mode would be used to create that argument by Al Gore and the two economists, Economides and Tåg, who created the second source. As a well known orator, Gore’s use of video and speech reflects an understanding of the mode within which he carries the most credibility. This meaning that if the two sources were to have their modes reversed, the rhetorical power generated by the two arguments would be lessened. Thus, both sources are similar in mode reflecting the limitations of the credibility of the speaker and authors.

A more in depth analysis of the rhetorical approaches taken by the two sources reveals another level of differences between the two regarding to the form the arguments take within their respective modes. As a video, Al Gore makes use of the spoken word to discuss the need for everyone to take part in the political discussion of ideas within the parlor room of ideas. Meanwhile, the scholarly article makes use of mathematical proofs and equations generated from economics to discuss the need to maintain net neutrality. This has a decided effect on the rhetorical result of the two sources. For example, as a video, Gore’s use of pathos by harkening back to the time immediately preceding our invasion of Iraq in 2003. This use of pathos within a video reflects a clear understanding of the benefits and limitations of using a video, or more specifically a speech, to express an opinion where well spoken pathos can have a powerful effect while numbers and data that may be difficult to take the time to explain likely falls short. Conversely, the scholarly nature of the second source allows for the use of such data and as a result a strong logos argument in lieu of emotional appeals. Thus, though the two sources make use of differing methods to generate their argument within their respective mode, both make use of methods well suited to the modes chosen. As a result, both a have a similar rhetorical effect in their ability to strengthen the effect of their argument through effect choices in the method used in their arguments.

Though both works present the benefit of net neutrality and more generally the benefits both economically and socially of having an open forum (or Parlor room if you will) for which to provide and discuss content, these arguments are achieved while discussing different topic in a more specific sense. In his speech, Al Gore discusses the inequality in the power content providers of television and the media have on the marketplace of ideas. This is achieved by discussing how people were misinformed about the pretense of the Iraq War due to the misleading information presented by the media who did so as a result of pressure from the White House. Meanwhile, the scholarly article discusses that it is in the economic best interest of a society that does not want its power vested in a sole individual or corporation to maintain net neutrality. This comes from mathematical logic that reveals that a two way pay system in which both content providers and content viewers must pay for access to each other is less ideal than a one way system in which only the viewers most pay for access to content. Though these two conclusions seem different, their points are similar in the general view that society benefits when  there are as many content producers as possible (stemming from the ease and inexpensive nature of producing content in the internet) which prevents anyone group of content producers from having disproportionate amount of discussion altering power in the parlor room of ideas.
   
 Though sources may be different, that does not mean they cannot be used to strengthen the same argument. These two sources are drastically different both in the technologic mode in which they are presented as well as method within that mode used by the author or speaker to present their argument. Though this may be the case, both sources make a similar argument in the benefit for society that is an open source for discussion among society. This is accomplished by use of emotional appeals by Gore in his video and a clear understanding of their perspective audience as exemplified by method choice on the part of the creators of both sources. These conscious choices not only help connect the argument with its audience but also reflect an excellence and credibility gained by the speaker for showing that they understand the audience to whom they are speaking.

Annotation for Source 6

Source:
Vogele, Colette. "Net Neutrality." Rules for the Revolution: the Podcast.
WordPress, 02 Oct 2007. Web. 25 Oct 2010.
http://www.rulesfortherevolution.com/wp-content/uploads/audio/R4R_020_071002.mp3.

Unlike previous documents, this source is a podcast produced by a group that advocates for open source features on the internet as well as the maintenance if net neutrality. In this podcast, the speaker, Collette Vogel, explains to her audience the details regarding governmental net neutrality policies as well as the possible consequences of such policies. Vogel also interviews a lobbyist for net neutrality on how Washington currently views net neutrality. This interview also investigates the history of similar neutrality policies on television, radio, and the telephone. This interview also serves to explain the role of net neutrality for both content producers and content viewers. The main question discussed in this interview and this podcast is the degree to which an ISP provider is able to determine the amount of traffic allowed to view each site. In a more applicable sense, what might happen if a content provider must pay a premium for an ISP to maintain a premium level of traffic on their site.
This source can be applied to my inquiry because if content producers must pay a premium on traffic maintentance, then two groups suddenly have disproportionate power in the parlor room of ideas. The ISP providers have disproportionate power because they are able to influence content viewers to see only the sites that have paid to support the largest amount of traffic. In this situation, the other group that has disproportionate power are those who can afford to pay that premium, such as large corporations, because they force people into viewing only their content while the content produced by lesser budgeted groups falls by the wayside.

Annotation for source 5

Source:
"Front Groups." Source Watch. 28 June 2010. Web.
 <http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Portal:Front_groups>.


This source is an open source wiki whose intention is to expose the sources of special interest groups particularly front groups. These front groups are organizations who act as if they originate from grassroots initiative when in reality they are funded by corporations to advocate their interests in politics. SourceWatch make use of information provided by all people to keep track of the actions of these groups as well as their claims made while simultaneously exposing the true funders of these organizations. In this way, SourceWatch is able to provide a means for educating people as to the underlying intentions of special interest groups that claim to be acting in the interest of common people. This service allows further understanding of commercials that may advocate the passage or negation of a certain legislature that may be for or against the funding corporation.


In my inquiry, SourceWatch provides key examples of how corporations may use underhanded tactic to advance their political interest by subverting the beliefs of innocent people through rhetoric and television commercials. Furthermore, SourceWatch, being a website, gives an example of how the internet can prevent corporations from gaining too much power in the parlor room of ideas. This also leads to an example of the possible consequences of allowing corporations to control the internet such as the inability to know the front groups acting in the interest of solely profit interested corporations.

Annotation for source 4

Source:
AL GORE: The Assault on Reason - 5.29.07 Full Speech." Web. 24 Oct 2010. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jdPcwwK5DII>.


This video was a presentation made by Al Gore introducing his new book at the time The Assault on Reason. In this presentation, Gore presents the central theme of the work as well as some specific evidence to introduce the subject. Specifically, Gore describes how despite the fact that the truth ran counter to the belief, when the US went to war with Iraq over 60% of American believed Saddam Hussein to be directly related to the September 11th attacks. Gore goes on to criticize the media for being pressured into presenting misleading evidence so as to show the action of government leading to war in a positive light as he explains that they were threatened with potential loss not only in viewership but also in advertising revenue. As a result, news stations continued to broadcast misleading information while caring only about their bottom-line. In general, Gore explains that the current for of media in which people consume the information provided by others without generating any themselves mean that the few have greater power in the marketplace of ideas than the many. This allows the interests of the few to be advanced at the expense of the many any is by so counter to ideal of democracy. As such, Gore explains the necessity for people to actively participate in their government and in the marketplace of ideas so that specific groups are not able to hold undue power over a disproportionate group of people. Such activity, Gore claims is conducive of political decisions that benefit all of society instead of lining the pockets of the wealthy and continuing their hawkish agenda.


This source can easily be used in my inquiry because the market place of ideas is really a capitalistic view of the Burkean Parlor Room where groups inside are making academic, social, political, and economic decisions based on the number of people who agree with them. In this way ideas flourish because they are the most popular. However if corporations have too much power in the parlor room, they are able to make ideas popular despite the fact that they are counter to the interests of the people popularizing it.

Video Blog

I reviewed the remix of Sander's digital remix available here

Thesis and outline for Rhetorical analysis

My rhetorical analysis will compare and contrast both the claims and method of presentation of the Al Gore Video and the Second Annotated source seen below.

Thesis: While both Al Gore is his video discussing the subject of his book The Assault on Reason and the economists Economides and Tåg make use of different methods for presenting their claims both in the context of modality and in topic, both works present the benefit of net neutrality and more generally the benefits both economically and socially of having an open forum (or Parlor room if you will) for which to provide and discuss content.


Paragraph 1: Introduction of topic and sources
Paragraph 2: Compare and Contrast using video versus a scholarly article
Paragraph 3: Compare and contrast using oratorical argument to make a point versus mathematical proofs
Paragraph 4: Compare the points of the works
Paragraph 5: Tie in points to inquiry
Paragraph 6: Conclude and introduce further reading on the subject

Annotation for source 3

Source:
United States. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF   COLUMBIA. , 1994. Web. 20 Oct 2010. <http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5334675097720961353&q=net+neutrality&hl=en&as_sdt=20000002>.
This document is the case file of the 1994 Supreme Court case of Turner Broadcasting System Inc. versus the Federal Communications Commission which resulted over TBS suing over their belief that the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 was unconstitutional. The induction to the case serves to describe both the differences between network and cable television while the B section notes on the increasing popularity of cable networks as the primary source of televised content. These factors noted in the case pose several parallels both to the current system of the Internet and the consequences of not taking action to maintain net neutrality. Notable among these consequences is the difficulty associated with attempting to enact maintenance legislation after allowing providing corporations to act freely as seen in a lawsuit by TBS to prevent the CTCPCA. The case further explains how cable networks who generate revenue through paid subscriptions rather than through advertisement based revenue as free broadcast networks are. The parallel with the inquiry comes when the document in section C explains that increasing vertical integration resulted in cable networks forcing broadcast networks off the air resulting in large conglomerates being the sole content providers. Thus, the consequences of allowing content to be provided by the few is that it forces other voices off the air. In this way, large corporations are able to maintain their role as the powerhouse in the parlor room by prevent other content providers from entering.
Thus I could use this document to note that if we allow what has happened to television to happen to the Internet, in which there become few content providers (possibly as a result of the end of net neutrality and the introduction of two-sided pricing) then corporations who can pay a premium for access to consumers can force out smaller budgeted voices from the parlor room.

Annotation for source 2

Source:
Economides, Nicholas, and Joacim Tåg. "Net Neutrality on the Internet: A Two-sided Market Analysis." (2009): 1-10. Web. 20 Oct 2010. <http://www.stern.nyu.edu/networks/Economides_Tag_Net_Neutrality.pdf>.

This document is a scholarly paper on the role of economic factors on political decisions regarding the maintenance of Net Neutrality. Not only does this document serve to describe why net neutrality is an important issues, bit it also notes the advantages and draw-backs of acting both for and against net neutrality. Thus, in relation to my inquiry, the document helps apply the issue of the maintenance of net neutrality to the inquiry regarding the role of corporations on the marketplace of ideas. This is because the end of net neutrality would mean that ISP providers could not only charge for access to the Internet but also for providing content via a website. If this were to happen, the groups with the greatest funds(notably, large corporations) would be able to provide the most amount of content of the greatest quality the fastest while smaller donation funded sites(such as wikipedia) would be rendered incapacitated by slower network speeds. In addition to exposing the consequences off the end of net neutrality, the work also shows the other side of the argument by suggesting several advantages to the end of net neutral policy such as increased speed for many popular sites such as YouTube who can pay for premium access to its consumers.
Thus, I could use this document in my inquiry to directly tying how the shift from net neutral one-sided pricing (where only the consumer pays) to two-sided pricing (where both consumers and content providers pay for access) affects the ability of different content providers and consumers have to enter the parlor room ideas.

Annotation for source 1

Source:
United States. Consent Judgement in the Case of the Federal Election Commission v. Citizen's Club for Growth Inc.. , 2007. Web. 20 Oct 2010. <http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/club_for_growth_consent_judgment.pdf>.

This document is the ruling of the U.S. District court made by the the judge ruling on the case of the Federal Election Commission versus The Club for Growth, a conservative political action committee that funds campaigns of candIdates who are in favor of Laissez-faire economic policies. In this case, the FEC, a governmental body that regulates campaign funding restrictions and regulations sued the Club for Growth over their failure to properly identify themselves as a political action committee when donating money to the Republican party during the 2000, 2002, and 2004 election year cycles. This allowed the Club for Growth to exceed the donor limits placed on Political action committees in their support of specific candidates and also to exceed limit on how much a corporation could donate to the club (See order 3.). In relation to my inquiry, the document is an example of corporations attempting to effect the outcome of elections by donating not only to campaigns but also to groups who produce television advertisements advocating the election of a specific candidate. In addition to revelaing the ability of corporations to affect political discussion via the primary media, the television, this document reveals that if given the opportunity, companies are willing to spend an illegal amount of funds to in any way promote candidates who are in their favor.
In my inquiry, I would use this document to further point out the necessity for action to be taken to diminish the role of corporations in the parlor room of ideas. Given this example of the willingness of corporations to take any advantage possible to further their own interests, I would argue on the need to keep the Internet, where corporations hold the least disproportionate power safe from perversion from groups attempting to have a disproportionally greater role in the Burkean parlor.

Sources for the Inquiry

• http://jcle.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/3/399.abstract
• http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5334675097720961353&q=net+neutrality&hl=en&as_sdt=20000002
• http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/duqu45&div=37&g_sent=1&collection=journals
• http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14549889380988989480&q=club+for+growth&hl=en&as_sdt=20000002
• http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/7.1/reviews/monroe/index.htm
• http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/7.3/coverweb/LaFond/

A video related to my topic

Embeded is a video of Al Gore Discussing his book The Assault on Reason whose topic is closely related to my inquiry:

Digital Remix of Inquiry Essay: Final Draft

Big Corporations and the Parlor Room of Ideas on Prezi

Peer Review

I reviewed by partner's website: http://www.wix.com/u06535/crime

Conceptual core: The project is well adjusted to the use of a website to present an idea however, at the moment the limited features to not yet present the inquiry discussed in the essay.

Research Competence: There is not a great deal of evidence suggesting research done for the shift from the essay to a website however there is evidence that the essay itself involved research.

Form and Content: The is obvious evidence that specific design decisions and careful thought went into the design of the website. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of this website as a transduction of the inquiry is inhibited by the limited features of the site and various technical issues.

Creative Realization: The website does a good job of realizing the expected characteristics of the final product except for some uncompleted features such as the news section and the Cyberterrorism section.

Audience: Assuming the site is meant for its fake audience, that being hackers, then the site does not do a great job representing its audience. However, since the site is meant to be a characterture of a site for hackers, its does a good job of hitting its scholarly audience.

Digital Remix Rough Draft

Big Corporations and the Parlor Room of Ideas on Prezi

Digital Remix Rubric: Prezi

Prezis should be graded based not only on the information contained by the presentation but also on the way this information is displayed. By combining multiple modes (audio, video, images, and words) in an effective and creative way, a good Prezi is effective in displaying its containing information. Furthermore, by combining modes, the audience remains interested in the point the creater is attemping to make. Thus, a Prezi shoul be graded on how creative it is, the information it conains, and how well it delivers its point to the viewer.

An example of an excellent Prezi is this on from Kairos:
http://prezi.com/ficdxdwg6aem/notes-on-notes-on-the-film/

An example of a middling Prezi is this one below:
http://prezi.com/aww2hjfyil0u/math-is-not-linear/
     though the diffences in font sizes attracts some interest to the presentation, the lack of creativity when it comes to hue or other modes results in a relatively uninteresting presentation and therefore, one that does not effectively provide its information

A poor Prezi, one that contains very few different forms of information and little information in general is:
http://prezi.com/qicwwc1z_vxj/types-of-graphs/
     here the lack of actual information about its subject other than few words and a couple of pictures limits the effectiveness of this Prezi

  

On the use of twitter in class

For class we frequently make use of Twitter to discuss both concepts from homework readings as well as to discuss ideas for various assignments. Not only does the use of Twitter allows for an easy way to connect to both other students as well as the instructor when questions arise from the readings which are often complex and require some clarification so that complete understanding is possible. Furthermore, our use of twitter in which coherent thoughts are necessary while being consistent with a limit on the number of characters within the message helps us practice use of concise language to convey complex but coherent ideas. This helps us most as Twitter becomes more ingrained in all branches of society resulting in a need to use twitter while still conveying and ability to use proper english when the appropriate time arrises.

Would Cicero Podcast?

Cicero, famous not only for his own orations but also for his discussions on what is necessary to be a good orator might have had to change his views on the necessities of being a good orator if he were alive to see the podcasting platform. Cicero's belief that certain innate abilities were required to even qualify for public speaking does not hold the same ground as it once did. A podcaster's ability to edit his/her audio recording of their speech allows anyone to overcome certain  failures that may arise from speaking in a public setting such as mumbling, swaying, or timing emphasises poorly. Furthermore, the ability for the podcaster to go unseen means that they can speak directly from a prewritten script and never off the cuff so that a natural ability to pick the right words as you say them is no longer necessary. Thus, all the innate abilities required to be a good orator are no longer necessary and only taught abilities become relevant. In this way everyone has the ability to become a great orator which is the same as saying no one does.

The Podacast I am following

Check out the podcast by the people who brought you Freakonomics:

http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/freakonomics-radio/id354668519

I forgot the heading to my essay

here is the essay heading

Gary Weiser
Engl278Z
Section 0201
Geary

Inquiry Essay Bibliography

• Chipotle company website. (2010, September 19). Retrieved from http://www.chipotle.com/en-US/Default.aspx?type=default
• Center for Union Facts. (2010). Source watch. Retrieved September 19, 2010, from http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Union_Facts
• Death and taxes. (2006, June 06). Washington Post, Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/05/AR2006060501360.html
• Chipotle nutrition facts calculator. (2009, Febuary 01). Retrieved from http://www.chipotlefan.com/index.php?id=nutrition_calculator
• Aaron, C. (2010, August 09). Google-verizon pact: it gets worse. Huffington Post, Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/google-verizon-pact-it-ge_b_676194.html

Inquiry Essay

A Room with No View

              We call it the Parlor Room of Ideas, an open forum where people can learn new ideas and contribute their opinions and knowledge to help evolve our knowledge of everything. In the Parlor Room, we all have an opportunity to influence ideas and contribute to any issue being discussed. However there’s only one problem, the Parlor Room does not exist. At least, not in the idealized way we believe it should be. This is because as technology changes, so too do the requirements for entering. Before Gutenberg created the movable-type printing press, most people, save the very wealthy and the clergy, were illiterate. This meant that the only requirement for entering the parlor room was an idea. However as books became the common media of the time, the ability to read and write became a criterion for contributing ideas. Each time the technology of the media develops, so too does the necessities of participating in the discussion. While such constraints were not amazingly limiting while the print media reigned supreme, as anyone could contribute their ideas by writing about them, as radio became the media with those who spoke on the radio had a disproportionate say both in which issues should be discussed and which opinions were expressed. The number of people holding disproportionate say in the parlor continued to increase as television became the preferred source of information with the power of many radio station consolidated into comparatively few television channels. Thus we come to crossroads as the internet becomes the new media of the times. With even fewer providers of the internet than there were television station owners, has power been consolidated even more into the hand of corporations with their own interests? Furthermore, if greater payment is required for greater quality of access to the digital technology that has become the major media, then has the digital divide become a socioeconomic divide?

There are plenty of examples of the disproportionate influence of those who can afford entrance into the parlor room most obviously when it comes to political issues. Since it costs money to send a message on television, only those who can afford the cost can make their message heard. Thus the issues that affect those who can afford entrance frequently take precedent over the issues that affect those who cannot. We can see this in the role estate taxes can play in the voting decisions of the people unaffected by such taxation. Despite the fact that such taxes only apply to inheritances of greater than 3.5 million dollars, it is an issue that many across the nation, even those in the lower class consider when making voting decisions. When corporations are able to contribute money to political action committees to present their a political issue then these corporations have a disproportionate role in the parlor room. This can be seen when groups such as the Center for Union Facts that are funded by companies such as Wal-Mart which pay for commercials attacking labor unions. These companies are able to pervert the parlor room by using their fund to have greater say both on what should be talked about and which side of an issue should be taken.

Our technological switch to digital media in place of television has the possibility to perpetuate the current separation or to close it. The existence of open forums in which everyone is able to provide their take on an issue important to them allows them to play their important role in the parlor room. However, when companies are able to pay to have preferential treatment -- as seen by the sponsored links shown at the top of any Google search -- then companies can continue to have disproportionate power. Furthermore, the ability of large companies to spend large sums of money to present specific sides of issues while funding for opposing or fact-checking sites is often limited allows falsehood and bias to denigrate the parlor room. We can see this in sites such as that of Chipotle, a tex-mex fast food company owned by McDonalds, that hides this association with claims of healthy and organic food while failing to note that a standard burrito (about 850 calories) sold by this company has more calories than a Big Mac (about 540 calories). As long as companies are able spend large sums presenting their side of an issue or stressing specific issues over that of others then the technologic era we are entering will only serve to perpetuate the uneven distribution of say that deep pocketed corporations have in the parlor room of ideas.

If access to the internet is cheap and fast, then everyone can have an opportunity to express their opinion and have a role in the parlor room of ideas. However, when the fastest, highest quality internet service is available only to those willing to pay a premium for such access, then those with the most are able to play a greater role in the parlor room of ideas. Thus we find that the digital divide has become a socioeconomic divide in which the wealthy are more likely to be both technologically savvy and have access to the medium that has become the current home to the parlor room of ideas. This chasm between availability and quality of internet access for the upper classes compared to that of those in lower socioeconomic standing is perpetuated by mergers such as that between Verizon and Google in which users are able to pay a premium on faster internet for users or greater site traffic for specific websites. In this way, the wealthy are able to have the greatest access to the internet and are able to direct more people to their websites. Because payment is required for quality internet

Let us imagine a situation in which speech is limited and only the wealthy can afford to have a say both in the issues discussed and in the decisions made by society. In this plutocracy, not only are the poor unable to have a say in the decisions made by their government, but they are also helpless as the wealthy are able to propagate their wealth at the expense of the lower classes. When only the wealthiest can enter the parlor room of ideas, the interests of the rest of America and the world are at best ignored and at worst completely opposite to the actions of the plutocracy. However, if we imagine the converse, a situation in which we all can fill our role in the parlor room of ideas then the result is quite different. When everyone is able to make their views heard, then the interests of the many rather than the interests of the few is the determining factor in political decisions. Furthermore, because the many are able to have a voice to speak out against injustices, no course of action can take place in which such rights to entry to the parlor room can be removed. In both situations, events conspire in a cascading effect, the rate of people gaining entrance to the parlor room increases when more people already are allowed to take part.  Conversely, the more people are barred from their role in the parlor room of ideas, the faster power is shift from the hand of the majority into the hands of the select few.

Thus, we are at a crossroads. As we make a shift to an internet focused media we perpetuate the short comings of the medium. By shifting our focus even further to a medium in which money greatly determines ones role in the parlor room of ideas, we give disproportionate power to the haves at the expense of the have-nots. Even more so, these short comings allow large corporations with virtually unlimited funds to determine the issues discussed in the parlor room while simultaneously blocking the opinions of those who contradict their claims. As long as we maintain a laissez-faire attitude towards internet policy letting the profit motive rule the practices of the internet then the digital divide will become equivalent to the socioeconomic divide and corporations will continue to have a disproportionate say parlor room of ideas.

Inquiry Essay Transduction

This picture representing the merger between verizon and google is also representative of my inquiry essay topic

Inquiry Essay Topic

For my inquiry in essay form, I would discuss how corporate influence of tecnology has changed our individual roles in the parlor room or more recently the market place of ideas.

What is Literacy?

Literacy is the ability to both read and write a language. This represents the ability to convert the various alphanumeric symbols into the syllabic sounds they represent as well as the total word they create and its associative definition. Furthermore, literacy is the ability to record these words to a written medium in a way that maintains the intent and idea these words convey. Thus, in order to be literate, one must be able to understand the meaning of the sound or sights representing specific word, put them together into a cogent idea, and then shift between the various media of transmitting this idea without losing the original meaning.

 Addendum: While literacy in its literal form may solely represent such skills in print media. Literacy can also be an umbrella term for the ability to understand and participate in other fields. For example,"research literacy" represents the ability to research, present your research and your sources, and understand the research and presented sources of others.

New twitter account

check twitter at @gweiser1992