What doth thy future hold?

eCulture has already grown so quickly and there are no signs of it slowing down. Everyday new and better technological advancements are created, rapidly expanding the already immense internet. With blogging being the most popular form of communication on the net there is no doubt that soon almost everyone with access to the internet will have their own blog. In the future I would imagine there would be a new craze for a different online community every few months (currently mySpace). People would constantly be re-making their profiles and getting their friends on-board the newest community website. Although we make think the online communities are bringing us all closer together, so we can remain in contact with new and old friends, if too many communities are created we will soon lose track of one another. An important question to consider in the future of the internet is whether it is infinite? Can the internet become completely clogged up with boundless numbers of websites? Imagine one day when the internet has reached its full point and it crashes, the world would be left without the internet for perhaps a day or more. It would be chaos, thousands of businesses rely heavily on communication through the net, it has become a device that is highly depended on. This is a frightening thought that much of the world relies on technology, humans create technological devices but the devices end up ruling us.

Technology undeniably has so much power in the world. It can be used to benefit society but can also be very detrimental. Thanks to technology we can reach and help those in need across continents so much more quickly, but with the aid of technology we can also wipe out an entire country. The internet in the distant future may become a world of its own, people may live in a purely virtual world. Friends, communities, political groups even countries can develop on the internet; everything we need is at the click of a button. Reality may become something of a myth to those living in this virtual second world, people would enter a state of the hyper-hyper-real, where the hyper-real wipes out reality. The internet is most definitely a dominating force in the electronic world. The use of the internet may become so powerful that it will need to be governed, but imagine the problems we face in deciding who should control it. We should be careful and not let the new generations forget about reality, we don’t want to live our eLives in an eUniverse.

If we think of the internet in a Star Wars sense, I would state:

"Use the force".... but don't let it become you.

War reporting and technology

It could be argued that war coverage has become as much a part of eCulture as other forms of ‘entertainment'. The State and Media have a close alignment in managing what is reported on war. “Reality” television has become one of the most popular forms of entertainment, so programmers and networks play on the consumer’s desire for this entertainment by presenting war as a part of ‘reality television/news’.

Network news stations give their audience a small snippet of what is going on in the war, it is an edited and mediated presentation. Audiences never see the full picture; images are taken from a camera to a TV set, so the reporting of war becomes a reality viewed through small moments in time. Sometimes the footage is live or perceived to be live but taken hours before. Embedded journalists have been sent to report on the war in Iraq, but everything they see and hear cannot be shown in the space of a half hour news program and much of the information is highly confidential. What programmers tend to do is cut filming in a particular way to show support for the American soldiers and hide the ‘reality’ of what is actually going on at the army camps in Iraq. The media limit what information they choose to show to raise interest in the population, to give people a ‘taste’ of what is going on in a packaged form of entertainment.

The reporting of war has become a form of entertainment; we have no true idea of what war is until we are actually there on the battlefield. Baudrillard’s theory of hyper-reality can be applied to this reportage. According to Baudrillard we start feeding off the hyper-real, what we see through the footage of the war becomes our hyper-real idea of what the war is. People see images of death, decay and destruction from the war and claim it to be like “something from the movies”. For the majority of western society our only encounters and knowledge of war is drawn from Hollywood films and the occasional edited news report. Without ever having a true encounter of war, what we know war to be is a hyper-reality.

By using reality style media it becomes re-embodied; because the genre is reportage we understand it to be real, but we also know that it is made from technology so it is therefore hyper-real, disembodied. There is no longer a human behind the camera it is now cameras attached to technology. Instead of it being something we can represent it becomes something we can structure to represent. For example the introduction of the Predator in the Gulf war meant that man no longer needed to be at the scene for combat to take place. The predator is a windowless airplane that is constantly streaming footage of the areas it flies over back to its base (Nevada), it is also equipped with hellfire missiles. This means that the assassination of a suspected Iraqi terrorist could be completed with the touch of a button million miles away. The killer could literally walk away without a drop of blood on their hands. For an account of the Predators hits and misses look at Jordan Crandall’s Unmanned: embedded reporters, predator drones and armed perception. Technology in war has given man a complete separation from being in the field, yet their control and command over technology is still needed.

eCulture and Diaspora

With Australia being a ‘young’ country it has not had the years behind it to really define its own cultural identity. It is made up of a mix of cultures, those who have migrated here from other countries have brought with them traditions, religions, foods and cultural practices. It is beneficial for these people to keep in touch with their homelands, for the sake of remaining close with family and keeping a sense of their own culture identity. With the aid of new technologies such as: email, internet, sms, mms, mobiles, video linking and blogging it has become simple for almost everyone (with access) to keep in contact with those across continents. The internet has made cultures far more accessible for not just those of that particular culture, but also those who wish to be enlightened and informed of other religions or cultural groups. Online access means an individual can learn more about various social issues such as war and globalisation. Individuals can express their cultural beliefs online and engage in discussions and debates with others of the same or different cultures.

As suggested by Emily Ignacio (in Silver & Massanari, 2006) with new technology we can e-scape geographical boundaries and even biological boundaries. Online you can explore other cultures and learn about their traditions and practices; you can be free of racial bigotry because you can assume another identity, one that has no accent, no colour, just an opinion. You can break geographical boundaries by becoming part of another culture online, even though you may never go to the country the culture originates from. Online cultures and communities can bee seen as a form of e-diaspora, online they can create a website or a blog that gains followers in their created culture, separate from socially constructed boundaries. Through the internet cultures can become closer but they can also widen because some cultures have no online access and no way to express their culture on a global scale. Also there are language boundaries on the internet, where only to a degree can translation sites help. Not all languages have translations on the internet and communicating with people from other cultures can become very difficult.

Silver, D. & Massanari, A. (eds) (2006) Critical Cyberculture studies, New York University Press

Cyber-sex

I had a read of Marnie Ferree’s report on women and their cyber-sex activities and implications on the web. In short, Ferree believes that women are often omitted from discussions of cyber-sex activity and addiction. The failure for clinicians to recognise this will put women’s compulsions at risk of being unresolved and detrimental for their health. Ferree reports a study by Cooper et al (2000) that found that although women are less frequent uses of the internet then men (14% to 86% respectively) they accounted for one fifth of cyber-sex addicts. Women are involved in a number of online sexual activities that men also participate in. They include solitary activity (eg. viewing or distributing porn, reading erotica) and interactive activity (eg. Exchanging emails, sexual chat rooms or cyber-sex). Ferree goes on to say that women mostly follow these interactive activities, namely emails and chat rooms, because they want romance and love in their sexual activities. It’s annoying that the vibe in Ferree’s paper is that women are looking for ‘love’ and are addicted to the relationship factor of the net. The internet for women becomes romanticised, I feel that it isn’t this way at all. It’s a way for women to feel empowered and take control of their sexual nature. It’s like a women looking for a one night stand, it’s less heard off but nonetheless women are out their wanting it.

Ferree writes in a way that makes women seem amateurs in the world of the internet and sex. Women are just attuned in the cyber-sex world as men are and for some it has been a way to act out their sexual desires. Also, there are far more porn stars that are creating their business and profile on the net, who are women. Displaying their bodies through pornography for women can be an empowering thing. Housewives sitting at home with the internet can participate in such a display and feel empowered, or even just a little naughty. The endorphins that make us feel good by doing something risqué is all part of life and healthy thing to be addicted to, until it overcomes you and becomes something you can’t live without. Women just like men can get addicted to this feeling, it’s the same as gambling or skydiving. It’s an addiction to a feeling not to the images. Some Christian groups believe that pornography should be taken off the net completely, but like everything you get addicted to you choose to use it. You can stop when you want to; it’s about personal will power not the internet’s dominance. Online adult pornography is a healthy release for people and women can be just as involved as men.
Check out this article Internet Porn: Worse than Crack?
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2004/11/65772

Marnie Ferree's article is titled Women and the Web: Cyber-sex activities and implications in Sexual & Relationship Therapy; Aug2003, Vol. 18 Issue 3, p385, 9p

Xtreme knowledge

Extremism is the actions or ideologies of a group that see society and politics to violate their beliefs. Extremist’s ideas are most often expressed violently with the formation of hate groups. Such drives of groups include: anti government, racial purity and anti-semitism. With the advancement of technology and the global accessibility of the internet extremist groups have found an easier way to drive their opinion. This has its good and bad points. Such groups that have spread their propaganda on the net are WAR (White Aryan Resistance), the neo-nazi group (Hammerskins) and a mix of KKK influenced sites. Oddly I can’t list any black supremacy groups on the internet, none could be found??

A benefit of eExtremism is that it keeps the expression of hate groups off the streets and out of our faces. To find the extremist’s sites you have to have an interest or knowledge of the group’s beliefs to be able to track them down and search their sites. Most of the sites have internal linking’s to one another and therefore remain in this circle of interests, that can’t be stumbled across if you don’t go looking for them. It’s a safer way for the group to express their extreme ideas and beliefs without harming those who have no desire to hear it. A disadvantage is the worldwide access of the net, because of the internets ability to reach across a global network; these “hate-groups” can increase their membership and quickly form an international protest or initiate extreme activity against their group/race of hate.

As I’m sure I’ve said many times before, with information comes greater knowledge and open-mindedness for an individual to make their own decisions on how they view society and poltics. Allowing extremists sites to remain online means it is out in the open and not a secretive, taboo thing. Making the sites un-accessible could increase the intrigue and desire to search them out.
While researching this area I’ve read quite a bit of information about the extremist groups, their website’s provide information explaining who they are and what they stand for. Some groups I found to be not as aggressive in their beliefs as I had predicted (unless the aggressive points had been censored?), reading about them gave me a stronger idea of why I don’t agree with them, it reinforced my own beliefs by investigating others. The internet is about freedom of access,m it is a public domain, so ideas and thoughts online should not be regulated, extremist groups have every right to be on there as I do to write this blog.

revolution/evolution

Children in every decade have looked for a way to be different, a way to define themselves as their own youth culture. They make gangs, colour their hair, create a fashion statement and get piercings, as a way of expressing who they are and what they stand for. There were the hippies of the 60’s, men who grew their hair long, women who could taken the pill, which meant sexual freedom and drugs became a sign of the times. In the 70’s punks, rockers and skinheads were taking their place as a dominant youth culture. These youth cultures stream from a need to create something new and rebel against the laws enforced by their parent’s generation. I would claim it to be a type of evolution, necessary to keep the world moving and to keep ideas and beliefs out in the open, free to be expressed.

Some would disagree, such as David Kupelian an American Judeo-Christian who is the vice president of World Net Daily, check out his piece “Why today’s youth culture has gone insane” http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36599
David Kupelian holds the extreme belief that the only way to regain our lost youth from the devil like practises of the world (tattoos, piercings) is to create your own sub-culture, because those are the ones that sneak up and rise to succeed. The best way to do this, he claims:
“is to homeschool your children, and network with other like-minded parents in your area…. You can literally pick and choose the "culture" in which your children grow up, and can actively participate in its creation. I believe homeschooling today represents the single most important and promising avenue for the true rebirth of American Judeo-Christian culture. In families where children are raised with real understanding and insight, and protected from the insanity of the popular culture until they're big enough and strong enough in their convictions to go out in the world and kick butt in the name of righteousness – the real America is now being reborn. May it grow.”
He believes if you want to save your child you must shelter them from the real world. This notion is ridiculous, a person with wide knowledge is much stronger then one without. To restrict a child from the real world is inhumane; if you don’t want your child to rebel the best way to do it is to not be an authoritarian parent. A child needs to experience the world and be exposed to its dangers to become the individual they were meant to be, not who their parents want them to. Placing rules on a child and holding them back from the world can be more destructive and hurtful in the long run then letting them get their nose pierced! Does David Kupelian honestly believe that the expression of oneself is not what god would want? I find his arguments, typically Christian and very much outdated. Without youth culture and its affects in society, I believe change and revolution will cease.

jammer's ey?

Advertising, am i immune to it? Well i'd like to think yes, but when i hear an ad on the radio that ends in "the burgers are better at hungry jacks" i say outloud "yes, yes they are" im agreeing to an ad for heavens sake, i must be influenced by it somehow. Advertising truly is unescapable, which is bloody annoying, i was on the train the other day and every 3 seconds another billboard flew past the window, it was so refreshing to see a stretch of land for a minute as i got further from the city. Everyday our visual space is being bombarded by advertisements and what is our defense? Its here we welcome the powers of culture jammers! everyday folk who are standing up and altering ads to better our world (cue theme music :D). Culture jammers main goals are to make us stop and think about the ads we so passively consume. check out some of their creative ways: http://www.adbusters.org/home/

Although they are clever and artistic are they effective? Some of us look at advertisements but do we take them in? Are we seeing the culture jammers work but not actively reading it? all important points but all answerable only by the individual. I find the small acts of jamming like the stickers on posters in the train and graffiti over ads just annoying, an advertisement is someones art, is defacing it to get ur message out the right idea? a temporary billboard alteration i can appreciate more, it will be noticed, a point will be made and the original ad remains intact. I'd like to see less advertisements on the street and on our public transport, but i dont mind ads in magazines. I would rather look to find an ad then just see it all around. Culture jammers are effective in making us stop and think about what the company is actually selling us but is it going to stop me from buying it....NO. If i want a burger that has been made from foreign import, then heck i'll have my burger! Not many like myself are happy to alter their way of thought or purchasing because of a culture jammers point. Like most passer-bys we will stop, notice the jamming act, perhaps smile at its cleverness and keep on walking. Culture jamming effective? to make you stop and think then yes, to make you stop and not shop, no.