Friday, December 5, 2008

With a 100 million videos watched a day YouTube is rightfully dubbed the world’s fastest growing website. In fact, out of all the video’s watched on the internet today 60% of them are watched on YouTube. All of this is what makes YouTube such a great Web 2.0 medium, before its creation in 2005 there was no video site as easy to use as YouTube. Even though YouTube has a lot of other competing video sites today, it is still the most favored by the most users. YouTube basically allows users to watch many different kinds of videos and also allows users to comment, rate and share them. Making it a great example of how far Web 2.0 technologies have come, and how revolutionary they can be.



Chances are that anyone who is reading this has heard of or has used YouTube before, YouTube is a website that users can watch many different kinds of videos or even create their own and upload it on to the site. Once you create an account it becomes very easy for users to upload their own videos on to YouTube, with a few simple clicks of a mouse your content is online for millions of people to see. Although YouTube today has many competitors such as Yahoo Video, MySpace Video, AOL Uncut, Mega Video and Hulu, YouTube still is watched by the most people on the internet watching videos online.



Now anyone can become a producer of online content, by uploading their own videos and probably why so many people are using YouTube. This is also why there is a reported 70,000 video s uploaded per day by YouTube users, people want to produce and create their own media and uploading videos is easy on YouTube. Data also suggests that user generated content is over 80% of what makes up YouTube. But there is still plenty of other great things to watch on YouTube also, even if you’re not making your own videos. (Digital Ethnography Statistics)



From movie trailers to music videos and instructional videos, YouTube has tons of content for anyone’s enjoyment. Mathematically as of March of 2008 YouTube had 412.3 years of content on it, meaning if you were to sit down and watch every video you would be there for 412 years. So there is definitely something on YouTube for everybody to watch. The most current statistic suggests that on YouTube as of March of 2008 there were 78.3 million videos, which is an astonishing amount. Broken down by video category, the two most popular are music and entertainment which is the bulk of what users are watching the data suggests. Although there are many other video categories some examples are science, travel, pets, how to’s, news, films, autos, education, sports, comedy can all be watched with a few simple clicks of a mouse. Current demographics on YouTube suggest that the all ages of people view the site, from 12 years old to over 65 years old. The majority of users though is between the ages of 18-25 and is usually a male that uses the site regularly statistics show (chart from my presentation)



The inventors of YouTube Steven Chen, Chad Hurley and Jawed Karim all of which were PayPal employees at the time came up with the idea of creating the site at a dinner party in Silicon Valley in 2004. The reason they came up with the site is because they were all very familiar with how hard it was to share videos with your friends across the internet. Then they created a the first version of YouTube, but it was still unclear of how well the site would perform and what people would be using the site for. Then suddenly people started uploading all kinds of videos to the site such as stand up routines, police brutality videos and many more interesting things. Users began uploading breaking news stories and eyewitness footage of many conflicts around the world. YouTube as we know it had been created where a 100 million videos are streamed every day. YouTube became happiest accident to the creators ever. The sites unintentional take off and popularity of being the fastest growing site on the internet today was an instant success to the creators who then sold the site to Google for 1.65 billion dollars in stock. Then the company moved out of its 30 person office over a pizzeria in San Mateo, California to a huge headquarters in San Bruno California.



Now YouTube has become much more professional with partnerships with NBC, Sony BMG, Universal Music, CBS and Warner Music. This allows users to watch much more content on YouTube legally and serves as great advertising. YouTube users are now able to watch full movie trailers, listen to pre-released music albums and watch selected television shows , through these partnerships YouTube has with many other companies. The advertising is great for these companies on YouTube, who makes also makes a profit from this. (Time 2006)



There are many implications of YouTube on society and individuals, specifically issues of copyright materials being on the site. Secondly, the blocking of YouTube in specific countries and finally issues of user’s privacy when using the website all seem to have a large social impact. Issues of copyright have been plaguing YouTube, companies such as Viacom and English Premier League have filed lawsuits against YouTube in court. (Wikipedia). Viacom sued YouTube for an astonishing amount of 1 billion dollars, YouTube was allegedly guilty of hosting 150,000 clips of copyrighted materials that had been viewed over 1.5 billion times already. Viacom is a Media conglomerate based here in the United States and owns various television networks and deals also with movie production and distribution, specifically Paramount Pictures and Dream works Studios. The companies Viacom and YouTube finally reached a deal over the whole issue of all these copyrighted materials being present on YouTube.



“Viacom has agreed to let Google strip identifying information from YouTube viewers' data before complying with a judge's order to hand over the records as part of a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Viacom and other parties to the litigation agreed to allow YouTube to remove user names and computer Internet protocol (IP) addresses from the data to ensure protection of users' privacy, YouTube said in a blog posting late Monday night. YouTube is a Google subsidiary.

We remain committed to protecting your privacy and we'll continue to fight for your right to share and broadcast your work on YouTube," reads the posting.

In addition to seeking damages, Viacom said it wants an injunction prohibiting Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) and YouTube from further copyright infringement.”(Frayter 2008)




In this court case YouTube was ordered to turn over all these records to Viacom, but the data contained sensitive material, like user IP addresses. So in turn Viacom could see what users watched which videos, which is an enormous invasion of privacy. Users should not have to worry if it will ever be known if they watched a copyrighted video clip online, now it seems though that you have to be more careful of what you watch. You never know when a website might have their records of users accounts and information subpoenaed and you might be at risk for a law suit. Users activities online, especially on a site like YouTube should be only know to the user but today it seems that everything we do online is be tracked more.



In the end Viacom filed for an injunction preventing this kind of thing from happening again, and now YouTube employs software that checks for copyright infringement on everything users upload. I think Chad Hurley put it best when had this to say on copyright issues--



"The real challenge old media face isn't protecting their precious copyrighted material. It's figuring out what to do when the rest of us make something better. As Hurley puts it, "How do you stay relevant when people can entertain themselves?" He and his partners may have started YouTube, but the rest of us, in our basements and bedrooms, with our broadband and our webcams, invented it."(Time 2008)


Hurley obviously realizes that copyrighted matieral is not the problem on YouTube, its keeping up with all the various kinds of content people put up on the site and their ideas of whats entertaining and funny and what's not, which is always changing.


Also the issue of YouTube being blocked in certain countries seems to have a social impact, that says maybe some cultures don’t want our fancy new technologies or for their people to protest. Specifically, the instance in Tibet where the government blocked online news coverage on multiple websites and blocked out YouTube completely.



“Reporters Without Borders on Monday said that YouTube has been censored since March 16, after videos of street demonstrations in Lhasa were posted on the site. The press advocacy group also said that the BBC, CNN, andYahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) News have been inaccessible over the past few days.

Reporters Without Borders also decried Chinese authorities' refusal to allow foreign correspondents into the country and the expulsion of some 25 journalists already there.

"The freedom of movement for foreign journalists had been one of the few positive developments ahead of the Olympic Games, but this is now being flouted by the Chinese government facing Tibetan protests," the press freedom group said. "Yet again the Chinese government is trampling on the promises it made linked to the Olympics and has [been] preparing the ground to crack down on the Tibetan revolt in the absence of witnesses."

YouTube has been blocked before by countries like Burma, Brazil, China, Iran, Morocco, Thailand, and Turkey. Last month, Pakistan's effort to censor the site for showing allegedly anti-Islamic material inadvertently disrupted access to the site around the globe” (Claburn 2008)



Everyone should have the right to view YouTube, these countries that are blocking access to the site are trying to suppress their own people. The site in its own way is making a major impact around the world on people, unfortunately some negative impact is associated with YouTube in these instances. Not everyone wants to see our great American way of life, some foreign governments are trying to suppress this as much as possible. Blocking access to news sites and coverage by the government is wrong and attempts to spread government domination. People should be allowed to view whatever they want, and not have to worry about the government blocking out sites, that is pure Communism. YouTube is a great new technology and people from all around the world are already enjoying it. YouTube has its own sites in 20 different countries, including France, Spain, Japan, Russia, Mexico, Italy, Spain, India and many more. Unfortunately, not everyone sees YouTube as a great and here it has had a big impact and made some people angry with the site. Differnet culutres expect differnt things and our way of culture is very open to a web site like YouTube. In these middle eastearn cultures, they dont have the same sense of humor we have here in America so YouTube would not be very funny to them. There is a shift in news coverage latley, people want raw unfiltered or censored news and information from people who actually live there instead of news jouranalists. Thats why these sites are becoming so popular because people can make their own content.



YouTube is a great example to a new and exciting Web 2.0 technology, and it just shows how if you have a good website people are going to use it. YouTube in a sense revolutionized the way we watch videos online and how we share them, making both so easy to do. When you think of all the great things YouTube has to offer us in its full 412 hours comprehensive library the possibilities are endless. With the revolution of many more Web 2.0 technologies we will see many more amazing things in the years to come.




Sources



Clayburn, T (2008 March ). YouTube Blocked by China. Information Week, Retrieved Dec 2, 2008, from http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/ebusiness/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206904218

Digital Ethnography YouTube Statistics. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from Digital Ethnography Web site: http://ksudigg.wetpaint.com/page/YouTube+Statistics?t=anon

Frayter, T (2008 March ). Google, Viacom Reach Data Deal. CNN Money, Retrieved Dec 2, 2008, from http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/15/technology/google_youtube/index.htm

Grossman, l (2006). Best Inventions 2006. Time Magazine, Retrieved Dec 2, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/2006/techguide/bestinventions/inventions/youtube2.html

Wikipedia. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from YouTube Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube

Monday, November 24, 2008

C.9 Dodgeball and Social Organizing

Today we were assigned to read Clay Shirky's Here comes everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations in chapter 9. This reading deals with the "Small World Network" which was a theory by Ducan Watts and Steve Strogatz founded in 1998. Shirky gives the example of someone sitting on a plane talking with the passenger next to him or her, only to find out that he or she knows the same person. This example demonstrates the "Small World Network," and Shirky shows evidence of the chances of this happening are quite good because of something called "Homophily" which means "grouping of like with like" (Shirky p. 213.) This means that you are grouped with others who ride airplanes and that you share with your fellow passengers living in the same city along with sharing the same arrival destination. All of this makes the likelihood of knowing the same people, all that much greater. Shirky also points out that the chances of you knowing the same "highly connected people" as your seatmate are high. (Shirky P. 214) This all leads to evidence of the "Small World Network" existing in everyday communication interactions and the real world applicability of the "Six degrees of separation", which means basically "any two people are connected together by only a few links" (Shirky p. 214), which all the more makes it a much smaller world.

Watts and Strogatz "Small World Network" is illustrated well in the example Shirky gave, but he also notes that this theory has two main characteristics. Firstly, small groups must maintain a pattern of communication in which "everyone connects with everyone" and must be "densely connected" (Shirky p. 215) in order tohave free flowing communication. Also, even if one of the links disappears, the other communication links within that group are unaffected. Shirky also points out that a second characteristic is "Large groups are sparsely connected" and have a lot more connections as a whole (Shirky p. 215.) He notes that if the network's size grew too large it would be unusable and communication would not work well. Shirky finally reaches the conclusion that both of these characteristics must be employed -- having a tightly connected small group is the foundation, and then you can connect all these different various groups.

Shirky gives the example of him going to a bar, and using the social networking site "Dodgeball" which is designed for use with cellular phones. Just by sending a simple text message he informs all his friends of his arrival at the bar, so they all are aware of where he is. "Dodgeball" is a very advanced networking site and like Facebook it uses "friend of a friend networking" which means that it has the ability to show mutual friends that people share. This networking then shows Shirky that there is a shared friend at the bar he is presently at, only minutes later. Sending a digital photo to Shirky's phone of this friend, this example further illustrates the "Small World Patter" made possible with the assitance of the latest technology. This all comes back to Shirky's theory of understanding that "Larger network is a sparsely linked group of more densely linked subnetworks" you can apply it to many real world situations today. (Shirky p. 220)

He also gives examples of protest's being organized in California by students through the use of Myspace and text messaging, through communication chains of friends of friends that share interest of similar topics. A demonstration was born, the people that would be interested in the protest found out about through contacts while other did not. This all surprised the school officials who had no idea of this protest forming. The ability of these new technologies were finally realized, this also illustrates the "Small World Network" because it can spread information or exclude it.


Shirky's reading seems all very interesting to me, it happens to me sometimes that I meet people and we know the same people. Even up here in Albany, I met someone who claimed to know my cousin 200 miles away from here and it turned out they were from the same town and went to the same highschool. In fact they did know each other. I like to look at it as a mystery or a ill-odded coincidence, but this reading explains this phenomena in a way that I can understand it better in some situations. Shirky's gives the same evidence in the reading, because they were from the same town and went to the same school the chances of them knowing eachother is not that unlikely. Which is supported in the reading with examples of it happening. This makes this situation not so much of an mystery anymore, which is what this reading has helped me realize.

Shirky, Clay. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations (chapter 9). New York: Penguin.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Essay #4

Gizmodo is a technology blog that has many various posts of new and up-and-coming technologies in the U.S. and other countries. Over seven days I have observed various articles on cars, Mars rovers, speed cameras, robots, supercomputers and NASA rockets, along with many other interesting topics. Gizmodo is the blog to go to for any new technology that you would want to read about. It offers little bits of information and only highlights the important parts, leaving you with a clear understanding of what the post was about, without reading 10 pages. Once you are granted approval by the administrators on this website, you can comment and post your blogs.

I found it interesting that in blogosphere and in various other sites such as Digg, Gizmodo and other blogs, that it is the users that create the content and make the posts, and not some other editor or writer for the website. I think that users creating posts on topics that they find interesting, without any sort of influence from the mass media, is what makes these types of blogs good. The user does not have to be an expert to make a post on any of these sites, but as long as there is some documentation of sources that is adequate enough. Barlow states that "the ability to create at the same time "station" where one receives changes both perception and interaction, bringing the web into a new realm of mass media where resources extend to all of the one-separate media and more, where the user can manipulate the multiplying available items in ever-increasing fashion." (Barlow 45 C.2) Barlow gives the example of "fan fiction" which is when people take parts of Television commercials or situations and create their own productions or episodes based on them, and upload them to the Web. This, Barlow states, shows "people acting on media creations rather then simply absorbing them." (Barlow 45)

I believe this is the same with blogs -- the ability that we all have to create web content from all these different sources on the Internet allows any of us to become producers of our "own" content. Anyone can now take a story that they read on a news website or that they heard on the news, and go to Gizmodo and consolidate the information down to the important facts. This ability that we all have is important because now instead of simply just absorbing what all these different media outlets are telling us (becoming passive), we now become active and can create our own responses to this information. By creating our own posts with opinions and thoughts on various content we are becoming an active audience. As I have observed on Gizmodo, a user read an article on a new type of car coming to our country and got some basic information. This user then had the ability to create his or her own post and consolidate the information in a way that they saw more informative or interesting. I think the ability to do this is exactly what Barlow was talking about -- as an audience, we are becoming much more "active" by creating our own content and commenting on others, as well as editing existing posts, as opposed to a passive audience that just absorbs whatever the media gives them. The best part about blogs is that the information cannot really have any bias or mass media influence. It's the users creating the posts -- not some newspaper editor that is writing for a job or political influence.

Becoming a producer of content also comes with great responsibility of obeying legal constraints and avoiding plagiarism at all costs. The question of ownership on the Internet, as Barlow states, is one of the biggest controversies today. As I have observed, many posts on Gizmodo incorporated videos from YouTube and other video sites, audio clips, and various images from all over the Internet. I feel that this is what makes all these posts interesting, and by using pictures and video it really enhances the blogs for everyone. I believe that credit for copyrighted materials must be given when it's due and that more authors must utilize the concept of the Fair Use Act. This act stipulates a four proponent test to determine if use of the copyrighted material is legal without consent of the author. This is important for users to understand if they want to become producers of online content.

Observation # 5

Today on Gizmodo there was a post on the Mars rover called Spirit, that may become in-operable soon. The rover had been on Mars for about five years and has collected a vast amount of information for NASA. The scientist say that a bad sand storm messed with the solar panels on the Mars rover and might make it in -operable from now on. The comments on this blog were pretty funny, alot of people felt that NASA should have known about this problem and took actions against it. The user "Navvywayy"comments pretty much spoke for everyone when he/she said

"What would we have discovered if the thing still worked?

Nasa Scientist 1: So, is mars still red today?
Nasa Scientist 2: Let me check the rover. Dammit - it's shut down! HOW ARE WE GOING TO TELL IF MARS IS STILL RED?!"

Althought this obviously is not the case, its still funny and shows how much they like to joke around on this blog and make fun of things.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Observation # 4

Today on Gizmodo I read an article about Speed Trap cameras in many other countires, and how they are just coming here to the U.S. In this post they talked about how all these cameras are placed around the country already are catching a large number of people speeding. A lot of people on the blog felt that this new type of technology was an invasion of privacy, and offerd advice and stories of ways to beat these new camears. The user "Sortafast" had this to say

"If speed limits were about safety, cars would be electronically limited to 55mph.

Speed limits are about REVENUE. It's all about catching you speeding so the local municipality can make money off the tickets.

I call it what it really is. The "Highway Tax"."

And alot of the other people on this blog agreed with him, although one user " Alchemistmerlin " was in opposition to what the majority of people were saying stating that "

"Wow.

"I should only follow the law if someone who might punish me can see me. Otherwise I should do whatever I want."

Your parents have taught you fantastically, and I'm glad you have such consideration for the safety of others on the road."

And took basically a vigilant approach on this topic, that others did not seem to wholly agree with. Some users felt stongly against this technology, although a few others felt it was justified and were criticizing others.

Observation # 3

Today on Gizmodo I observed a post on a posture correcting device, which basically gives the user a small shock when perfect posture is not being used. This product just came to the United States and people on the blog are skeptical about it. A lot of users where basically saying it was a waste of money, although many did acknowledge that poor posture is a problem affecting many American today. Some of the users brought up issues of the products high price, of 90 U.S. dollars. Saying it was way to much money for this product.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Obseravtion # 2

Today I looked at a post on Gizmodo about Dell computers deals on black friday and I left comment on how every year they do the same thing and offer great savings to customers. This year is better then ever in the specials they are offering, specifically due to people are not going to be spending as much on the holidays this year. Still waiting to be approved for comments on the Gizmodo Blog, I might have to choose another blog to obeserve because for whatever reason I am not able to the right to comment yet.

Observation #1

I have been observing the Blog Gizmodo and was looking at a post on the new Nissan GTR,
in the discussions I found that a few people posting on these message boards were pretty knowledgable about cars for a technology blog.With this blog you need to be approved by the administrators to comment, so I am awaiting approval still. The blog conversations seem friendly and everyone seems to get along on this blog. There are a lot of interesting posts on Gizmodo about a lot of new technologies.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Barlow C2

In Barlow's disccusion in chapter 2 he states how the number of blogs on the Internet is constantly growing, even though only half may be legitimate or accurate. People can find blogs on all sorts of topics, ranging from sports, news, technology, entertainment, education, science,gossip and many other variations of blogs. So many blogs exist on the Internet that most people know somebody who owns a blog, or may even own one themselves.

Anyone has the ability to create a blog and publish it onto the Internet. Barlow stated that one of the common criticisms of blogs is that they are too easy, because anyone can create one. I don’t think that owning a blog is too easy because although everybody can create a blog, not everybody can create a good blog that is worth reading and attract a number of viewers to it. Owning a blog that has a large audience is not easy because not only is the creator responsible for updating on a daily basis, but he or she also must make sure each post has good quality and is accurate information. The most widely-read blogs on the Internet are the ones that the bloggers put the most time and effort into and it becomes a familar routine of blogging. Bloggers spend a number of hours a day working on their blogs to maintain a large audience, which is definitely not easy to do and takes hard work and dedication. Actually creating a blog is the easy part, but keeping it at a quality that will gain an audience is what makes blogging difficult and should be aprreciated.

“Community, that is what lies at the heart of the blog – though that is not how the blogs have often been seen, too many envisioning them as a force weakening the very real world-communities they can – and often do – help strengthen.” (Barlow, pg 37) Community is what makes blogs what they are today because without readers, the blogs would be useless, what other use would the have? The community reads content on the blogs and interacts by commenting on each post, and discuss with eachother. Barlow also says that bloggers want to be “taken seriously within the greater society,”(Barlow C.2) which is why many of them post content that they feel will attract an audience. Bloggers need to do a lot of research to find out what topics the public is most interested in, so they can write about them to gain the audeinces attention.


Barlow, Aaron. Blogging America. (2008). The Blogs in Society (Chapter 2).

Monday, October 20, 2008

Essay #3

YouTube is an example of a great Web 2.0 technology for sharing videos and music. When it was first created in 2005, it was unclear how well the website would perform, or who would use it and what they would use it for. Today, YouTube has a huge headquarters in San Bruno, California and a massive online following across many different countries becoming, a cultural center for all kinds of videos. YouTube today is a place for all kinds of people who want to become producers of online content, they can upload anything they want without the issues of censoring. With the additions of the Fair Use Act, this gives the producers of online media even more freedom and flexibility in producing content.

The search engines used for research were LexisNexis, Google, Yahoo. Each of these returned a lot of information, but some of these returned better and more useful results then others. On LexisNexis, a general search of the word "YouTube" yielded over 3000 results. Among the first of these results were major news papers such as The Boston Globe and New York Times. LexisNexis is a great academic search, and that is why it was selected because it encompasses so many different results with great reliability information credibility as opposed to other search engines. This search engine had the best information with the most credibility because you have to pay to use it. The Tensen reading outlined six areas for evaluating academic research on the Internet, "Purpose, Source, Intended Audience, Date of Publication, Appearance and Reputation."

One search result through LexisNexis that I found was an article from The Boston Globe, titled "Google to buy YouTube in $1.65b deal Video website also cut content deals." This article provided information on Google's acquisition of Youtube and exclusive content deals YouTube had with Sony BMG and Warner Music and outlined basically that YouTube was going to get big on the internet. Purpose in this case is to inform people of new acquisition by Google. This newspaper is a credible source, and its intended audience is anyone who reads this paper's business section. Publication is fairly recent, 2006.

Next on LexisNexis an article came up on how YouTube has its own country specific site in France, Netherlands, Spain, Japan, Poland, Italy and Ireland and has become multilingual. This article also talks about how YouTube streams 200 million videos a day. This information is from website called chinadaily.com and its purpose is to inform people of the many different countries YouTube is accessed in. Its publication is also fairly recent, in 2007.

Third on LexisNexis is an article about how YouTube has launched nine new international versions of the website, and each site is completely translated and has local news of that country. Giving the experiences of that specific country through video and other channels. Countries include Brazil, France, Italy and the UK. This article was written by Telecom Worldwide and published in June of 2007. As far as reputation, Telecom seems credible.

The fourth article I found on LexisNexis discussed how YouTube launched its own Canadian-content site. As a result of YouTube's popularity, this site aims to cater towards specifically Canadians. When users search for videos on this site, the results tailor more towards Canadians than the results do on the original YouTube site. This article was written by The Gazette, a newspaper in montreal. I would consider this a credible source because I have heard of this newspaper on many occasions, and the article itself was recently published in November of 2007.

Next, general search queries on Google of "Youtube history" or "YouTube Awards" yielded many more results, a lot of information was found on various awards YouTube has received and the past history of this website. Just searching YouTube on Google would not yield any results oriented towards research besides many different videos and links to the website. You have to use a specific search query on this search engine otherwise you will not get the results you want, something like "YouTube Statistics" or the like.

The first article that appeared in Google's search engine after typing "YouTube History" was written on Wikipedia. The History of YouTube provided thorough information on the founders of YouTube, Chad Hurley, Steve Chen and Jawed Karim, and how they created YouTube into the success that it is known as today. Although I don't know if I will use this in my research project, I found that this article provided a lot of information. This source is not credible, and I would have to further investigate this information before using it in my final research paper.

When I typed "YouTube Awards" into Google's search engine, I found an article published by Time Magazine that discussed the award that YouTube received for, the Best Invention of 2006. Time Magazine is a very popular magazine read by many people across the country, and I would consider it a credible source. The article was written in 2006, which is not only fairly recent but right after YouTube received the award that is discussed in the article.

Typing "YouTube Statistics" into Google's search engine brought me to an article written by Digital Enthrography at Kansas State University. The article provides statistics that could be very useful in my research paper, such as the amount of videos uploaded per day, videos uploaded by category, and average age of each uploader. I found this to be a credible source because Kansas State University is a highly reputable university, so I highly doubt that they would provide false information without checking the facts first. The article was recently published in March of 2008.

Lastly Yahoo, the last search engine the search query used here was "YouTube Information" yielded 295,000,000 results. One result was an article provided by About.com, which was about the ability that users now have to view full length TV shows on YouTube. About.com is a credible source because it is used by people nationwide to find information on various topics so I would trust the site enough to use it for my research paper. The article was recently published in October of 2008.

Another search result I found by typing "YouTube Information" in Yahoo's search information was titled "Viacom, YouTube reach data deal." The article discussed how Viacom has allowed YouTube to remove user names and IP addresses from data in order to ensure protection of privacy. CNN Money published this article, so I would consider it to be a credible source and the information valid enough to use in my research paper. The article was recently published in July of 2008.

I also found the article, "YouTube Debuts Viewer Analytics Tool," by typing "YouTube Information" in Yahoo's search engine. This article discussed a new service that helps video producers determine where their viewers are and how their videos were found. The article was published on Information Week, which is a credible source. It was recently published in March of 2007.

In each of the search engines I used, I found a lot of information on many different aspects of my topic. Although I did not find each article to be completely useful and credible in terms of writing a research paper, a more thorough investigation could easily provide me with the validity I need.

Bibliography:
Tensen, Bonnie L. (2004). Research strategies for a digital age.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

The Externalities of Search 2.0

Today's reading "The Externalities of Search 2.0: The Emerging Privacy Threats when the Drive for the Perfect Search Engine meets Web 2.0" focused mainly on how search engines on the Internet are becoming much more advanced and are more in tune with users search queries then ever before. Today's Web users enjoy the benefit of a wide variety of information easily accessed through many popular search engines such as Google and Yahoo. Now more then ever users search results are much more accurate and relevant to their original search queries. This is partly due to advancements in indexing and collection of past search queries using Web 2.0 technologies. The merging of "Google’s suite of information-seeking products with Web 2.0 infrastructures" has lead the author to coin the phrase "Search 2.0". (Zimmer p.1) All of these factors have contributed to advancements in search engine technology. Web 2.0 includes many new websites such as MySpace and YouTube and these new technologies allow Internet users access to a "wide variety of new services and communities" (Zimmer p.1) that were not available before. In 2005 Yahoo "claimed to have indexed over 20 billion items, including 19.2 billion web documents, 1.6 billion images, and over 50 million audio and video files." (Zimmer p.2) All of this is great and can benefit Internet users immensely, but the main focus of the article is aimed at the negative connotations of Web 2.0.

The main reason Web 2.0 is viewed negatively is while search engine companies are trying to create the "Perfect Search Engine" (Zimmer p.2) This means that search engines are being created with the idea that search results will be "intuitive and results based on users past searches and general browsing history" (Zimmer p.2) Some companies are abusing this new technology and its power and are conducting "dataveillance" which is "aggregation of one's online information-seeking activities inflaming a growing environment of discipline and social control."(Zimmer p.2) These companies are collecting alot of information on browsing history of users for better or worse, something called "perfect recall" (Zimmer p.3) is enhancing users search results by attempting to understand Internet users wants and needs for searching originally. This is done by keeping logs of previous searches and a record of pages visited in the past. Google in the past has had to turn records over to the U.S. Government of past users search history. Alot of information about our Internet history is readily available stored away somewhere, for many people to have access to such as Police Investigators or potential employers.

Web 2.0 technologies are no doubt beneficial to the Internet today, they provide us with many cool new websites and faster more accurate search engines then ever before. Like anything else there has to be limits set up on what kinds of information these search engine companies can collect and how much of it and who can access it. Its not far that alot of people have lost employment or where never hired because of something lurking in cyberspace. There should be some degree of privacy, but on the other hand if a criminal is caught by an investigation conducted by the police on the Internet due to incriminating evidence, that is perfectly legal. There has to be clear cut rules of what information is allowed to collected and what is not and then everything will balance out.


Zimmer, Michael. (2008). The externalities of search 2.0: The emerging privacy threats when the drive for perfect search engine meets Web 2.0. First Monday 13.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Essay # 2

After observing this USENET group for five days, I now can finally form an opinion of this type of message board. alt.sportbikes was a pretty active group with a little over 400 members, and a wide variety of topics was discussed there. The real problem though is that there is no real experts on the board, or anyone who exhibited way more knowledge than anyone else. There was also very little background information of who you are actually talking to on this message board -- Do they even own a bike? If so, what gives them the authority that they are knowledgeable enough to give advice out? It also seemed like there was a good amount of off topic postings, and I also observed some instances of spamming on this message board, and what I thought to be "free riding".

First, like any other forum there should be a place for off topic posting, if anyone wishes to make a post that is not of regular discussion. On the message board I observed, there was no place for off topic posts, so members would post many random things, but mostly I observed instances of spamming and advertisement. On this message board there were many off topic posts, and random advertisements for things that have nothing to do with bikes, such as porno advertisements. Kollock and Smith advise us to just ignore these types of actions on message boards and they will disappear eventually. (Kollock and Smith p.124)

As with many other online forums that I have seen, this message board has the constant issue of "free riders." It was apparent to me on this message board that a lot of the time people would post questions and never respond after they receive an initial answer from another user. So in this message board, you have a lot of people asking questions, but never following up or posting any replies after the initial post. I believe that is a form of "free riding", Kollock and Smith state "interacting work that is necessary to keep a conversation going is a kind of public good in the sense that it is possible to free-ride on others efforts using and abusing the conversation without contributing to its maintenance" (Kollock and Smith p. 115) This was happening frequently -- if people are barley replying to other users posts, those users who are replying are only answering half of the posts question because they feel that the initial poster is not paying attention anyway. This creates a cycle of "free riding", and the message board will never reach its full potential without dedicated users working toward a collective good.

The other issue is the apparent lack of knowledge observed on these message boards. You have a lot of users giving out advice, and you have no idea if they have ever even owned or rode a motorcycle in their lives. What gives them the confidence to be advising other members what type of oil is correct for your brand of bike? A motorcycle is a performance machine, much like a race car and needs to be taken care of properly to insure that the operator does not get injured or killed. If a user on one of these message boards advised me on how to put my components of my front brake calipers back together, who's to say it's 100% correct? You're taking your life in your own hands.

I would never use this type of message board because I barley trust the information I receive on a regular forum. I feel the users of this forum lack a lot of knowledge about sport bikes in general and they don't really care about helping other users figure out their problems. This is the kind of message board to just talk generally about motorcycles and pass some time. Over these past few days I really learned a lot about these USENET groups and how many different types of groups there are out there.


Bibliography: Kollock, Peter & Smith, Marc. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities.