"In an electric information environment, minority groups can no longer be contained-- ignored. Too many people know too much about each other. our new environment compels commitment and participation. we have become irrevocably involved with, and responsible for, each other."
In the news, we hear about the digital divide, or the situation in third world countries where there is no access to the internet and this worldwide web of information. Living in this society where we are INCREDIBLY aware of the world around us via the internet. I can't count how many times I learned of a celebrity's death because of someone's R.I.P. status on Facebook. I can't imagine living in a society where there is no internet access, or for that matter, no type of digital literacy whatsoever. How ignorant of the greater world we would all be. Or there's always the countries that have internet access, but the internet is SEVERELY censored, like in China. Just the idea that SOPA/PIPA/ACTA may pass and turn the U.S. into one of those countries makes my skin crawl. I don't even know how such bills get this far, as completely UNCONSTITUTIONAL as they are. If bills like that were to pass, minority groups that McLuhan spoke of could be quelled, no voice, no way to express their opinion. The purpose of these digital literacies would be made completely moot.
- Carie McMichael
A great example of how important The Internet is to society is the revolutions that began with the Arab Spring. It was social networking that helped spread the revolutions there, and it was social networking that caused Occupy Wall Street to snowball into a global movement. Legislation like SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA--A global treaty much more dangerous than the other two--threaten the sixth amendment by constant moderation and surveillance of our uploads and downloads. Even though it is meant to prevent piracy, who is to say that the government won't use the information we download and post against us?
ReplyDeleteSorry, I'm getting my amendments mixed around. That would be the fourth amendment:
Delete"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
It's interesting that he talks about minorities, when we've been reading in class about how the gap is widening with the spread of technology because some minorities don't have as readily available access to the internet as others. This is especially true on a bigger scale of third world countries that don't have access to internet like we do.
DeleteFrom that point of view, would it really be considered "looking out for one another"? For other third world countries, it is almost like we are spying on them (although, granted in many cases it is for a good cause, like raising money for disasters) A more accurate term would be "looking out for those who don't have technology yet."
This isn't to say that we are superior, but I can see where the gap is continuing to widen due to technology. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily, but we need to help get other countries on their feet and going. For the skeptics who oppose technology, it's a valuable resource that can offer important information (such as medical advice even if they can't afford or do not have access to a real doctor).