Social Networks banned, get to work…but don’t promote!

A blog from says that 54% of companies do not allow social networks use while at work.  They claim that Twitter and Facebook cause employees to loose focus on their work.  A small 10% do allow social networking, since they can promote business.  A study last summer reasons “that social networking use can hurt the bottom line”.  This blog wants to debate the pros and cons of social networking, and shows the statistics of work productivity with use of Facebook.  There is barely a mention of how these networks are promotional tools for business and focuses on how they deter people from their job.  With this logic, there should be a ban on email use and business cards.  This blog basically wants people to work without advancement.  By working only the minimum hours and producing the statistics that look good quarterly will not bring change nor progress.  Looking at just the “bottom line” will never allow the horizons to expand.  We must change and allow for change in the business place with full access to social networks.  Denying people the freedom to express themselves with rules only hurts the company’s profit in the end, which I thought was the top (line) priority of a company.  This blog neglects to show the statistics of how social networking has promoted and benefited the company, of course this number needs more analysis.


Disney’s Copyright Right

This is a mash up of Disney movies cut to define and explain copyright laws.


The mash up begins with Disney characters defining copyright law as a permanent marker on some form of work that is seen or heard.  Only the owner has the right to yield their work.  We can copyright books, plays. music. dance. movies & pictures.  You can only copyright the form an idea takes, not the actually idea.  Fourteen years limited the time a copyright could last, but now it lasts a lifetime plus 70 years.

Fair use also limits a copyright as a legal defense.  Small amounts of a work are permissible if used to teach, report news, make a parody or make critical comment.  These certain rules include also the nature of the work, amount of work used and it can not change the value of the work.  Disney intimidates anyone that uses their material against these limitations.

This video may tip the scale for the amount of work borrowed.

3-30-2010:  Thanks to Chris L., I have another upload for your viewing pleasure.  Somone does not like the content, cough cough…Disney. 


Big Brother’s Panopticon



My favorite fiction novel I studied in grade school has become a possibility for me in college now.  George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four portrays today’s reality of being under surveillance.   Big Brother watches us through our computers, GPS devices, cell phones, credit card transactions and numerous cameras throughout the city.  In my EMAC class we discussed Jeremy Benthem’s theory of a Panopticon.  Living in a panopticon society, escape from the ever watchful eye is impossible.  People govern themselves as perfect citizens, or atleast portray one.  The design controls people with little effort of true enforcement from an authority.

The Panopticon prison holds the idea that the cells surround one gaurd in a circle, without letting the prisoner know if they are being observed.  This is how I feel walking into any public estabilshment now.  My campus has a camera that is viewable to anyone here. Almost every parking lot is recorded, any gas station, numerous stop lights and tollways and even busy streets in major cities are recorded 24/7.  Having this “security” for the price of my privacy does not come cheap.

For example, Dallas did a survey to test the effectiveness of the red light cameras installed to prevent accidents and fine offenders.  People notice the cameras and the consequences they bring with heavy fines.  The city removed the cameras because they fail to bring in the money from the tickets because people are driving safe.  Therefore, safety comes after revenue for Dallas lawmakers.

While the Panopticon concept successfully structures people into a uniform, it does not always generate revenue for Big Brother.  I am ashamed of my goverment for choosing money over safety.  The cameras do control people’s actions to drive safe.  Unfortunately this means less money for the city, but also there will be a significant decrease in accidents.

Why should our government abandon a concept that is working?  If the intention of the cameras were to make money rather than prevent people from running lights, why would they install cameras that are going to paranoy people into being perfect citizens at the intersection?  Big Brother needs to get paid too apparently.

Negative Net Neutralilty

The FCC proposed Monday Sept. 21st 2009 a need to regulate bandwidth to ensure net neutrality.  Many large internet providers do not think the government should control the networks.  The FCC wants to prevent internet providers from limiting consumers to an open access.  This means that the internet bandwidth will not be blocked or limited.

Here are the rules:

  • Consumers are entitled to access any legal Internet content
  • Consumers are entitled to use any Internet applications or services
  • Consumers are entitled to connect to any devices that won’t harm the network
  • The same rules apply to cable/DSL and wireless Internet
  • Internet providers can’t block or slow competitors’ online services

A quote from the creator of the world wide web:  “The neutral communications medium is essential to our society. It is the basis of a fair competitive market economy. It is the basis of democracy, by which a community should decide what to do. It is the basis of science, by which humankind should decide what is true. Let us protect the neutrality of the net.”  Tim Berners-Lee inventor of the World Wide Web.

The importance of an open access internet provides users with the freedom of expression, economic growth and possible evolution.  The main concern I have deals with the increase of service failure this could cause.  I am not a computer technician, but I can forsee this creating more problems than solutions.  Also, the idea of our government regulating our freedom of expression is a concept I can not trust.

When Democracy met Internet

Wikipedia defined “E-democracy is a combination of the words ‘electronic’ and democracy.’  E-democracy represents the use of information and communication technologies and strategies by democratic actors within political governance processes of local communities, nations and on the international stage.”  This site lists the benefits and disadvantages of democracy online.  The New York Times article I found explains how politics are being changed online.  Click here for a link to the article.  Candidates now have to adjust just as many other industries have to the new pace the internet is offering society.  Mostly young users find the internet appealing, while those over 65 years old do not show up as often online.

Death by Web 2.0

For an EMAC assignment, we were asked to list 3 things the internet is killing…

1.  Publications

2.  Time 

3.  Effort

Networking Articles from

The Human Condition contructs the difference between online friends and real life friends on FaceBook.  It depends how you utilize the site that will make FaceBook a valuble social networking tool.

Schmooze Nation discusses Brazilian online social networks that are being used and created.  The most popular instant messengers are MSN because of their “expressiveness”.