Comments on: Week 5- Blogs Seminar

By: Alvin Teo

Alvin Teo — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 04:52:14 +0000

Benedikte, I think i said “I feel that it should NOT become a ”preferred” mode for interaction (over physical interaction) just because it can technically be more ‘efficient’”. So…yeah…

Anyway, news agencies / journalists these days do have their own blogs (albeit sanctioned by their companies). It could be an effective way of communication – particularly to gather information on places or activities far away.

I’m probably gonna start a ”flame war” here…but I feel that text just seem to lack emotions (regardless of the emoticons, etc). Maybe some people just prefer it that way.

By: ramfelsean

ramfelsean — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:14:32 +0000

well, well, well! though i am a non-stop internet surfer, surfing the net for 4-6 hours nonstop sometimes it doesn’t mean that I am anti social in fact i still prefer to have a face-to-face communication because emotions, personality and physicality is still an important factor to know someone and a society. Most people act differently online and in person example is people on blogs they are very outspoken with their opinions and words but in person they are exactly the opposite ‘coz blogs are where we can actually loose ourselves whether we want to be recognized or anonymous.

By: rouli

rouli — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:54:26 +0000

I think, in some sense, communicating online it is easier than face to face communication. But talking about if it better or worse than face to face communication, it’s totally depend to the person or in another words, highly subjective. And I think online communication also involve so much effort, i.e. reading a lot of text (especially for non English speaking person, since most of the text in internet is English). This opinion just want to say the other perspective to Benedikte comment

By: Benedikte

Benedikte — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:54:12 +0000

Alvin, how can you argue that communicating online is better than face to face communication just because it is easier….that is dangerous man..;)

I see your point that blogs are a great media for people with a special interest who might not be able to find anyone with the same interest in their local community but to choose blogging over face to face communication just because it is easier and does not involve much effort…that seems a bit lazy to me…

By: annaw77

annaw77 — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:14:04 +0000

I guess Rhiengold hit the nail on the head when he decribed how virtual communities are created when people for connections online with ’sufficient human feeling’. Using the term ’sufficient’ is neatly ambigious, and quite appropriate given that defining ‘human feeling’ in an inherently subjective and nebulous task.

By: ramfelsean

ramfelsean — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:12:41 +0000

Blogs relate information and truly a way citizens can be journalists of their own rights. One example is this blog on how it relates information on first hand account of an event that will be changing a society.
http://blogs.inquirer.net/blogaddicts/2008/08/29/where-are-the-citizen-journalists-of-mindanao/

By: tang12

tang12 — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 06:16:03 +0000

(Sorry I got logout of my session)
Anyway, I agree with Alvin that blogs allow us to carry out online discussions about movies, topics and issues in the comfort of our individual homes or location. But there is still the missing element of the human touch such as a smile, laughter or other emotions which may be displayed. We have to verbalise everything in words which will not be the issue if we are having a face to face conversation.

There is also the aspect of the identity of the person who is doing the posting. It could be someone else who is not the original account id who is having the online conversation. How could we be sure unless we suspect some discrepency in the conversation. Even then, the party may not admit that he or she is someone else other than the owner of the account.

By: tang12

tang12 — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 05:59:31 +0000

I just want to add that blogging is indeed a very technologically suvy thing to participate in these days. And as many of you had pointed out, it is what the youngsters do to occupy their time with. But I still have this nagging feeling that it has taken too much piority in our lives if we let it be.

By: Alvin

Alvin — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:31:25 +0000

I tend to agree with rouli that engaging in active online social activities may expand our communication experience. But does it complement actual physical interaction or does it operate independantly? (i.e one can be super duper active in online circles but in the real world, an introvert) While blogs can be an alternative avenue to ‘aid’ such situations, I feel that it should not become a ”preferred” mode for interaction (over physical interaction) just because it can technically be more ‘efficient’. Having said that, I do find that it is easier to find ‘like-minded’ circles online (instead of going around asking each and every friend whether they like something). For example, instead of going into class and ask each student whether they’ve watched ‘The Dark Knight’ and whether they like it, I could just post it on my blog (provided my blog actually has such levels of viewership) or some other blogs and seek comments. Easy!

However, we should keep in mind the ‘constraints’ that online communities also face. Some countries do have rather strict laws regarding online discussions about certain topics – particularly politics, etc. Also, internet usage in the world is not evenly distributed (see: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm). Some countries are rather ‘backward’ in the internet penetration rate. Is the hype over online use side-lining them?

P.S. I think the phrase “blogs start out as primarily textual but now it is trivial to include images, audio and video within a blog” is taken from one of the readings for this week. Need to reference?

By: rouli

rouli — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:17:08 +0000

When we see how our communication pattern through online media, I think this is the best example to what Marshal McLuhan described that we live in the “global village”. And when we participate through this media, we became part of global community where national and geographical boundaries are not something that can limit our possibility to communication to other people.

Maybe my approach little bit different (or maybe more optimistic) from Benedik’s toward this feature. I think online community is one of the ways we can expand our communication experience beyond our local and physical society. Think about how discussion with other person in another part of the world will also can enrich our discussion with our friend in uni or our peers in our neighbourhood. Yes, this condition somehow will alter our communication and social interaction in the physical environment, but it also can enhance it in the same time. I see both our local interaction and global communication can be managed fitting to each other. So, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will make us became anti social and withdrawn from our local community. It can open the possibility for more engaging local community as well.
How do you think?