TGIF!

Bloggers and Power

I know we have discussed blogger's power many times. There is not a consensus on how much political and social power do they have, but bloggers are putting weight in poilitical decisions. Today I read a washingtonpost article about Roberts nominations being in the eye of the bloggers swarm. As soon as President Bush announced Roberts as the nominee, liberal and conservative bloggers were ready to discuss the nomination. Fifty top liberal bloggers held a conference on Tuesday discussing the new nomination.

The article raises a very interesting point. This is the first Supreme Court nomination in the Internet era. We can read immediate responses from liberal and conservative bloggers sharing facts, opinion, agreeing and disagreeing. This is what democracy is all about. Also with the help of the Internet, bloggers are rallying to influence the mainstream media and direct the journalistic coverage. Is that possible? Well, we are reading, seeing and listening in the news how bloggers react to Roberts nomination, so I should say that bloggers have earned a position in the mainstream media. The positive thing I see about bloggers having influence in the mainstream media, is that many of them do not have a particular political interest.

It has been a great experience attending Phil's and Emi's class, because I have learned so much about the blogsphere and the impact they have on the media and public opinion. As I see it, good things should be copied and developing countries should start heading the path to have other voices.
A quick fact, just to let you know, while here in the United States the Senate will be approving or dissaproving Roberts nominations to the Supreme Court, in Ecuador we are trying to constitue a new Supreme Court. Ecuador has not had a Supreme Court since last April!

No post for today

Internet Misuse

According to this article in Info World, Internet misuse costs business $178 billion annually. This means that employees, during working hours, are using the Internet more for personal reasons than for their actual jobs. Fifty percent of the surveyed workers admitted that they used the Internet more for personal matters at work. Among workers who reported using the Web for personal reasons the most popular activities were reading the news, checking personal e-mail, online banking, travel and shopping.

After reading this article I once remembered some business article discussing Internet filters. The article discussed that Internet filters were getting very popular in the market. Companies were buying them to prevent their employees wasting time and money at their workplaces. Are Internet filters threatening the Web's freedom?
On the other hand, internet filters are very useful for parents, who are using them in their home computers to keep their children away form pornographic and violent sites. I do not know how do these filters work, but as I go over so many Internet filters advertised on the Web, I am thinking is this a kind of censorship?

Busy Monday!

Big brother is watching you!

There is a thin line between regulations and prohibitions, especially with the Internet. I just finished reading the report: Internet filtering in China, and I was very surprised to discover that there are societies where they see the Internet as a threat. I believe that the only explanation why governments (like China and Cuba) have filters for the media, is because they feel threatened by the information.

It reminds me of the book, 1984, by George Orwell, where everything was controlled by Big Brother. They controlled what you read, said, watched and talked. They even knew what were you thinking! I am not saying it is the same case in China, but by reading the report I realized that societies without free access to information are in great danger. These types of societies are confined to ignorance, poverty and abuses.

I do not want to compare China to a totalitarian government, but if the government is filtering information on the Internet, because it is "sensitive" then there is a problem . It is true that China is liberalizing the economy , but that is not enough for democracy. In order to have a solid democracy people have to be informed, people have to have free access to information (not to filtered information). My theory is that in developing countries, the rich class and many politicians prefer to have an ignorant working middle class. Then the government will always be able to control them. Even though this might sound as a very primitive world, it still happens in many countries.

Starvation on the Web

A recent article from Time magazine exposes a terrible truth. Pro-anorexia web sites that share tips with young readers. I was scared at first when I tried accessing www.ceruleanbutterfly.com. It warns you about visiting it. But do not worry (first read the article) and you will encounter with testimonies and tips approving anorexia and explaining why it is great to be thin!! I could not believe it.

According to TIME there are approximateky 500 websites giving advices to lose weight and become anorexic. The creators are young people between 18 and 28 years old. The creator of the website that the article talks about is a 19 year old woman. In this websites you can find blogs, forums where people with eating disorders gather for support.

I know I might be out of topic, but I wanted to share this article with you all. This is one of the times when I ask myself how free does the Internet should be? I am not saying anything about censorship, but I just feel the Internet sometimes (as in this case) might be harming people. I just wanted to share this with you and read your comments.

Targeting the message

About the discussion in class, on translating web sites from English to Spanish, I totally agree with Emi's view. You cannot translate literally from English to Spanish, especially when you want to target the Latino community. Spanish web sites cannot be an identical copy of an English website, the menu bar has to be changed, pictures have to different and issues have to be addressed in different ways.

It goes beyond language, it has to do with how people identify with messages. To target lesbians and gays in the U.S. probably the candidate wouldn't have to change the language in the web site, but the message should targeted to that specific community.
Even in a small country like Ecuador, with 13 million people, and 10% of the population is indigenous and speak Qechua, there is a news program that targets indigenous communities. The news program has topics that are more appealing to indigenous quechua communities. News anchor are indigenous people and the whole news program is in their language. There is nothing bad about changing languages. Indeed if you want to attract an specific audience candidates, news producers, marketing firms have to translate their messages and modify it. If not, they will fail to deliver their ideas.

How disable users access the Internet

I found a very interesting article, that describes users' disabilities, which do not permit them to use the Internet. The article also explains how does web sites and computers should help users with specific disabilities. For example, Internet users who have no sight at all may use a screen reader, which reads the content of the web page. Users with partial or poor sight should be able to enlarge text on the web sites. This is a tool that should be included on web sites to make them usable for disable users.

The article demands from web sites more attention on users with disabilities. On a regular basis web sites lack tools to help disable users navigate through their pages. One might think that deaf web users are often able to access the Internet in much the same way as able-bodied people, but the article raises a very important point. What about websites that have podcasting, and audio messages? Well websites should provide subtitles or written transcripts.

There is diversity in the world. If the Internet really wants to be a blessing for democracy, then web engineers and web consultants, should look at the necessities of all users. This will make the Internet not only accessible but also usable.

Teenagers!

They are always surprising me! I would have though that teenagers were experts with the Internet. I would have thought that they did not had any problems reading, scrolling, and searching. Nielsen's article raises very interesting points , especially in the analysis of why teenagers have poor performance with the Internet. According to Nielsen "teens' poor performance is caused by three factors: insufficient reading skills, less sophisticated research strategies, and a dramatically lower patience level.

I would blame the first two on the education system. Schools have indeed change their teaching procedures because of the Internet. But if teenagers are experimenting problems with reading skills and research strategies, teachers should start enforcing teenagers to develop this abilities. The third reason (patience level) I believe is innate in most of teenagers. It is very difficult to keep their attention and to keep them focus for a long period of time. Psychologists talk about "attention disorders" and "hyperactive teenagers". I believe it has to do with making web sites interesting to them.

Every group in society has to be targeted in different ways. Individuals and groups react differently to stimulus. That is why the marketing industry is changing the whole conception on targeting consumers. The Internet should not be an exception. Teenagers have their own interest and they visit certain web sites to fulfill those interests. Teens also need the Internet for school activities and they should be able to find usable, attractive web sites that will encourage them to use the Internet not only for entertainment but also as a learning tool.

Digital Divide

As we have read in the Economist article and the Jenkins article, the digital divide affects race, poverty, education, and even gender. Citizens all around the world can get a computer and navigate in the WWW. However, access to the Internet is strongly correlated with income and education.

Even though we talk about the Internet being a blessing for democracy, there are many people around the world who never have had the chance to use a computer, and would not want to think that the government is discriminating against certain areas of the country by not investing in their education and technology.

For poor countries, it is not only a matter of discrimination but also a matter of funding. Unfortunately, they go together. The private sector and the government invest in areas where they know they will have some profit. They want to see profit as in money. They do not see that the most valuable profit they will have is education for their people.

I sometimes think that in some developing countries, governments are not interested in educating their people. They prefer an ignorant society, who will continue voting for whomever offers them a house, food and clothing. Some governments do not see education as an investment, so they do not bother on making the Internet accessible to everyone.

There is also another factor for digital division. I read in a recent study from Vanderbilt University, that new Internet users tend to face psychological barriers. They feel less comfortable using the Internet, less satisfaction with their Internet skills, and greater stress when navigating online. This frustrates them and makes them reject the Internet as an important tool for their daily life.

Studies assure us that the gender gap in Internet users is closing over time, but the perception persists that the gap for race is not decreasing. In Latin America, the race gap includes both black people and indigenous people. But, again, I believe it has to do with economic status and education.

In Ecuador, there are several indigenous Representatives in Congress who had the opportunity to study abroad and they are very well acquainted with the Internet. Those who did not have the same opportunity are still in their fields working the land, and not having any access to the internet. Is discrimination the only factor for the race digital gap, or does the economy of a country also play an important role?

Technology and Developing Countries

The Economist article raises some important and interesting issues, that are indeed happening nowadays in developing countries. I agree that without technology, especially without the access to the Internet, poor populations cannot develop. The Internet is the window to a new world of learning, doing business and communication. Few public schools in developing countries have a computer lab, not even a pair of computers for their students (this is the case mostly in rural areas). There is the other case, where there are schools that do have computers, but there are not enough for all the students. Kids are not able to get a whole understanding of the Internet and what is even worst, teachers in public schools usually do not know how the Internet works. So it is a vicious circle.

For example in Ecuador, only 4% of the population are Internet users, from a population of 13 million people. Even though, things have started to change because of international aid and government funding, there is still a lot of work to do. I think the creation of rural telecenters is a very helpful tool for developing countries. I wouldn't agree on the premise that the creation of these telecenters is "treating the symptoms, rather than the underlying causes." It is true that illiteracy affects our countries, but I think the Internet might also be use as a tool for people to learn to read and write.

On the other hand, I do think the author has a point that promoting the spread of mobile phones is helping developing nations. I have seen that mobile movement in many countries in Latin America, where there are more than 40 million people using mobile phones. There are still many poor people that are unable to buy a mobile because they have more importance things to take care of (health, food, shelter). But mobile phones have helped in the development of Latin America. Many people who are not able to read and write and who never ended high school are using mobile phones. They use it for work, to communicate with their family in other cities and overall to be expose to technology.

The most importance point which I think the article raises is the liberation of the telecom markets. Whenever there is competition consumers are the winners. In Ecuador the liberation of the market is just starting. But that starting point has been a bless to the whole Ecuadorian population, because we were able to decide between prices, plans and phones that best suit our necessities. We have three companies that offer mobile phone services and they are battling to win the market.

Run against Bush!

As we have been talking in class about Bush's campaign and how it was based on grassroots efforts, I found this website, made by a movement to defeat George Bush in 2004 elections.
I thought it was interesting because it has to do with recruiting volunteers and knocking door to door to find out who was against George Bush's reelection. They encourage citizens to start their own local "Run against Bush" campaign. They have a main headquarter and anyone who has interest can donate money and they will receive a t shirt with the logo "Running against Bush".

Maybe you all have heard about it, but it grabbed my attention because it is a way for recruiting voters for the Democrats side. Even though this movement shows that in a way a lot of people voted against Bush and not for Kerry. I just found interesting that these movement was using many strategies that Republicans used in their campaign. They encourage citizens to mobilize people in their area, and organize events in which people can jog, ride bicycles, or walk wearing the organization's t- shirts to support the movement.