http://www.siliconvalley.com/ci_17718564?source=most_viewed&nclick_check=1
This article describes the efforts of two brothers to give money to the Red Cross using an online campaign. So far, they have raised nearly $1 million to be donated to the Red Cross.
The rise of donating online could be attributed to Barack Obama’s campaign to become the president of the U.S. In 2008, Obama used social media, websites, e-mail and SMS as a means to raise money for his campaign. Since then, we have seen mass campaigns supported by thousands of people using the same platform the Obama campaign used.
The same platform was used after the earthquake in Haiti a year ago, in which cell phone subscribers could text message a certain number in order to donate $10 to the Red Cross. The same thing is being done in Japan as we speak.
What this article summarizes is the efforts of Marcus and Andrew Ogawa to raise money for the relief fund in Japan. These two men have been involved in numerous Internet campaigns in the past few years to raise money for certain causes. This is just another interesting story on how they are using their time and energy to help others in need.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Social media and natural disasters
The report on the role of information and social networks in emergencies and conflicts shows that vast progress has been made in communicating information on disasters to the masses.
When the tsunami occurred in Indonesia in 2004, there was no way to spread the information that an earthquake had just happened and now a massive wave was headed in everyone’s direction. There was no alert system available for those living around the Indian Ocean, unlike one that already existed for the Pacific Ocean. The people in control of developing emergency alert systems decided that there needed to be a more people-centered approach when it cam to disaster warnings. These warnings needed to be extended down to the local level so that everyone in danger would know of what was about to happen.
The idea that mass information on disasters could be sent using e-mail, social networks and cell phones. While this form of communication could apply to most of the developed world, only 39 percent of people in developing countries have access to cell phones. And many of the people in developing countries do not have access to a laptop, so therefore they will be using mobile phones to access the Internet and receive e-mail and SMS updates.
Therefore, it is not reasonable enough right now to say that we have the disaster alert warnings exactly right. For the people who do not have access to means to get the information, they will be left out in the dark when they shouldn’t be. Communication technologies will be the lifeline for communities in crisis, and the way they get their information is extremely important. Like any form of mass communication, the issue of the validation of the information always come into question. But even if the people in the tsunami in 2004 had known that there was a possible threat of a tsunami, everything would have changed. Even if that information proved to be incorrect, just the fact that they were on the lookout for a disaster would mean that disaster preparedness was having an effect.
While the deployment of the Ushahidi platform to cover political unrest, ethnic violence and other sorts of disasters has had a significant effect on how humans present the information gathered, none of this matters if the means is not available for people. That is why extending new communication technologies to those in developing countries is one of the main goals for those developing disaster preparedness.
When the tsunami occurred in Indonesia in 2004, there was no way to spread the information that an earthquake had just happened and now a massive wave was headed in everyone’s direction. There was no alert system available for those living around the Indian Ocean, unlike one that already existed for the Pacific Ocean. The people in control of developing emergency alert systems decided that there needed to be a more people-centered approach when it cam to disaster warnings. These warnings needed to be extended down to the local level so that everyone in danger would know of what was about to happen.
The idea that mass information on disasters could be sent using e-mail, social networks and cell phones. While this form of communication could apply to most of the developed world, only 39 percent of people in developing countries have access to cell phones. And many of the people in developing countries do not have access to a laptop, so therefore they will be using mobile phones to access the Internet and receive e-mail and SMS updates.
Therefore, it is not reasonable enough right now to say that we have the disaster alert warnings exactly right. For the people who do not have access to means to get the information, they will be left out in the dark when they shouldn’t be. Communication technologies will be the lifeline for communities in crisis, and the way they get their information is extremely important. Like any form of mass communication, the issue of the validation of the information always come into question. But even if the people in the tsunami in 2004 had known that there was a possible threat of a tsunami, everything would have changed. Even if that information proved to be incorrect, just the fact that they were on the lookout for a disaster would mean that disaster preparedness was having an effect.
While the deployment of the Ushahidi platform to cover political unrest, ethnic violence and other sorts of disasters has had a significant effect on how humans present the information gathered, none of this matters if the means is not available for people. That is why extending new communication technologies to those in developing countries is one of the main goals for those developing disaster preparedness.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Jim Disrude
When Jim Disrude visited our class March 16, I was intrigued to hear about what kind of original research he had done.
The first thing I learned from him is that when you are trying to come up with a topic for original research, you must first come up with a question. That is the most important part. The question Jim came up with his research is how much does appearance and openness on Facebook go toward developing a perception of a person.
He decided he was going to show students across the campus, from the age ranges of 18-26, two different people's Facebook profiles, and have them decide which person would make a better professor.
The results he found were very surprising to me at first. He found that participants thought that the professor who disclosed more on social media sites and seemed more "fun" was more trusted and respected as a professor than the person who didn't disclose as much on social media sites.
At first I thought it was surprising because many of the professors I normally see are the kind who would have the Facebook profile of the boring and uninteresting guy. In fact, most of the professors I've had here at UW-Whitewater don't even have Facebook profiles.
The question comes down to, and this is what research participants had to ask themselves, do you want a professor is formal or informal? I'll answer that question and say that I would rather have a professor who is very disclosing on social media sites. It builds the trust I would have in them. Instead of being a person who is very guarded, they are a person who puts themselves out there. I feel as though they are willing to get to know their students on Facebook and outside of the classroom if they are willing to put information about their personal lives on display for everyone to see.
The first thing I learned from him is that when you are trying to come up with a topic for original research, you must first come up with a question. That is the most important part. The question Jim came up with his research is how much does appearance and openness on Facebook go toward developing a perception of a person.
He decided he was going to show students across the campus, from the age ranges of 18-26, two different people's Facebook profiles, and have them decide which person would make a better professor.
The results he found were very surprising to me at first. He found that participants thought that the professor who disclosed more on social media sites and seemed more "fun" was more trusted and respected as a professor than the person who didn't disclose as much on social media sites.
At first I thought it was surprising because many of the professors I normally see are the kind who would have the Facebook profile of the boring and uninteresting guy. In fact, most of the professors I've had here at UW-Whitewater don't even have Facebook profiles.
The question comes down to, and this is what research participants had to ask themselves, do you want a professor is formal or informal? I'll answer that question and say that I would rather have a professor who is very disclosing on social media sites. It builds the trust I would have in them. Instead of being a person who is very guarded, they are a person who puts themselves out there. I feel as though they are willing to get to know their students on Facebook and outside of the classroom if they are willing to put information about their personal lives on display for everyone to see.
Future of Journalism
This is somthing interesting I ran into the other day when I was doing some research on my research topic. This website is called The Future of Journalism, a website that gives its viewers a look into how the journalism process has changed and what is different about it today as compared to the past.
The topic I am researching is how the Internet has affected traditional new sources (i.e. TV, newspaper) among the younger generation. I think this website is a good guideline into how one can be successful as a journalist in a changing world.
The topic I am researching is how the Internet has affected traditional new sources (i.e. TV, newspaper) among the younger generation. I think this website is a good guideline into how one can be successful as a journalist in a changing world.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
The Political Power of Social Media
The article by Shirky, "The political power of social media," only better enhances the proof of the effect new media has on the way we organize into groups in order to accomplish tasks. Like Shirky brought up in his essay about the Sidekick, his response to Gladwell was a reiteration of the essays we have been reading from Shirky all semester.
The addition of new media to any citizens life drastically changes the framework of our governments and society. We have all seen or heard about social media having a dramatic effect on the manner in which people organize. This is especially true with the younger generation. The younger generation was one of the main reasons Mubarak was ousted in Egypt. If not for the younger generation organizing through social and new media, the Madison protests would probably not have been as great as they were and may still continue to be. I was at the first week the protests occurred and of the people there, at least 40 percent of them were under 25.
Like Shirky, I do not agree with Gladwell's response. He is citing wrong examples when trying to prove that new media hasn't had a great effect on companies such as Land's End. Something Shirky didn't bring up is now these companies have to deal with retailers all over the world selling their product at a reduced price. While new media doesn't greatly alter the way companies like Land's End communicate with their customers, competition has now been increased.
The question Shirky asks is what should U.S. policy be regarding social media? My say is this: embrace it. It's another way for your citizens to exercise their first amendment rights and allows for them to peacefully assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. New media has become one of the best ways for U.S. citizens to organize on a massive scale in order to accomplish things. Current president Barack Obama embraced social media and headed one the largest Internet political campaigns in this nation's history. He used his campaign as a way for citizens to discuss issues that were important to them and allowed them to make contributions to the campaign online.
The addition of new media to any citizens life drastically changes the framework of our governments and society. We have all seen or heard about social media having a dramatic effect on the manner in which people organize. This is especially true with the younger generation. The younger generation was one of the main reasons Mubarak was ousted in Egypt. If not for the younger generation organizing through social and new media, the Madison protests would probably not have been as great as they were and may still continue to be. I was at the first week the protests occurred and of the people there, at least 40 percent of them were under 25.
Like Shirky, I do not agree with Gladwell's response. He is citing wrong examples when trying to prove that new media hasn't had a great effect on companies such as Land's End. Something Shirky didn't bring up is now these companies have to deal with retailers all over the world selling their product at a reduced price. While new media doesn't greatly alter the way companies like Land's End communicate with their customers, competition has now been increased.
The question Shirky asks is what should U.S. policy be regarding social media? My say is this: embrace it. It's another way for your citizens to exercise their first amendment rights and allows for them to peacefully assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. New media has become one of the best ways for U.S. citizens to organize on a massive scale in order to accomplish things. Current president Barack Obama embraced social media and headed one the largest Internet political campaigns in this nation's history. He used his campaign as a way for citizens to discuss issues that were important to them and allowed them to make contributions to the campaign online.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)