Activist Project

I have joined the fight to raise awareness of net neutrality. First, it is important to spread awareness. Writing this issue on my blog is the first step to spread awareness. Second I have signed the petition at saveournet.ca and neutrality.ca. These petitions are important to sign because they are being sent to the CRTC and government officials. I encourage everyone to sign these petitions by clicking on the links below. Finally, I will be sending the following letter to my local member of parliament, David Tilson. I will also send a copy of the letter to the CRTC chair Konrad W. Von Finckenstein.

I also encourage you to send letters to your local government officials and to the CRTC chairman. You can fax letters to the CRTC at 819-994-0218.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. David Tilson,

Net neutrality is a serious issue. Today, the internet is a space where we are allowed to publish information and ideas and in turn, we can search for information or ideas. If cable and telephone companies gain control over the websites we view, then the internet will become another tool for companies to use for marketing and advertising. The public should have total control over the websites that we surf. Each internet user has the right to have the same degree of service. Cable and internet companies should not be allowed to slow down or block access to certain websites.

Today, if you have an internet connection you are allowed to freely access any website on the internet. All websites are given the same speed and quality. Net neutrality is the principle that allows people to view the internet without disruption because it prevents internet providers from blocking your access to any websites. Internet service providers are not allowed to mess with what information is traveling through the internet. However, cable and telephone companies, who own the lines that the internet travels through, want to choose the content we see and use on the internet.

It is important that we raise awareness of net neutrality. The public should be aware that the internet that they use and enjoy today could easily be controlled if we do not protect net neutrality. Internet service providers should not be allowed to control our access to the internet.

Thank you for taking time to read this letter. It is very important that the government takes action on this very serious matter. Our elected leaders must take a stand and protect the internet from being controlled by internet service providers.

Sincerely,

Robert Simeon

Participatory Culture

In 2004, the popular social networking website Facebook was created. I am constantly on Facebook and go on the website every day. I have shortcuts on my computer to the website and my homepage. When I open the internet it is automatically set to open Facebook. “Since January 2007, the average number of new registrations per day has grown to 250,000 and there are over 57 million users on the website” (computer.howstuffworks.com). Facebook is a participatory culture because users not only use the services it offers, they also submit their content.

There are many benefits to having a Facebook account. It is a huge communication tool! You can instantly interact with friends and family all over the world or connect with old friends. You can easily communicate through the instant message feature, a wall post, or a message to an inbox. Facebook also has thousands of groups that you can join. Although some groups are pointless and made for humorous purposes, there are more meaningful groups found on the website. You can join a not for profit group like the Salvation Army , or an activist group like Green peace, or a political group, like the NDP Party of Canada. Facebook groups are also created in times of crisis and support. When Brandon Crisp, a Barrie Ontario boy, ran away from home, Facebook groups were created to support the family.

The reason that Facebook is a participatory culture is because users take advantage of the services offered while submitting their own content. On Facebook, you can submit photos, videos, and personal information. You can tell stories, write ideas, and write opinions. You can also comment on items that other people have posted. Furthermore, you can create and form groups about anything you like! You can also download applications, to add to the Facebook experience, or create your own application and share it with others. In a keynote address delivered at the Inaugural Media Ecology Association Convention, Neil Postman explained how “a medium is a technology within which a culture grows; that is to say, it gives form to a culture’s politics, social organization, and habitual ways of thinking” (Postman). Facebook has done just that. A whole culture has grown inside the application of Facebook.

Facebook is a participatory culture because not only do I take advantage of the service, I also submit a lot of my own content. Facebook allows users to submit content and this further develops the culture within the program.

Work Cited

Postman, Neil. Keynote Address. Inaugural Media Ecology Association Convention. Fordham University, New York, NY. 16June 2000.

“How Facebook Works”. How Stuff Works Inc. 9 November 2008.
< http://computer.howstuffworks.com/facebook5.htm>.

Culture Jamming

Culture jamming can be described as an art movement that takes advantage of different forms of the media to raise awareness of a particular issue.“Culture jamming presents a variety of interesting communication strategies that play with the branded images and icons of consumer culture to make consumers aware of surrounding problems and diverse cultural experiences that warrant their attention” (www.depts.washington.edu). It manipulates current advertisements to send a different message that was originally intended by the advertiser. Culture jamming usually has a humorous component and is intended to entertain.

Culture jamming is also very effective to help raise an important issue and gain awareness. Advertisements are a very effective way to communicate a message. Every day we are surrounded by advertisements on television, on the internet, through the radio, on billboards, on posters, etc. Companies spend billions of dollars in advertising each year. “In 2006 alone, The Coca-Cola Company spent more than $2.5 billion on advertising” (www.reportonbusiness.com). Companies are aware that in order to sell a product and communicate a message, they need the help of advertisements. This is why culture jamming is so effective and brilliant. Culture jamming has taken advantage of the fact that advertisements are a great way to communicate a message.

The above ads are examples of culture jamming. The first ad is a parody of an Apple IPod advertisement. The ad reads “Iraq: 10000 Iraqis killed, 773 US soldiers dead”. Although the advertisement is a parody and may be funny to some viewers, the advertisement has a deeper meaning. It is attempting to raise awareness of the huge amount of people who are dying in Iraq because of the war. The second advertisement reads “Slavery, If the Shoe Fits!” Also, this is a parody and is intended to have some sort of humorous element however, the advertisement is also bringing awareness to the issue of Nike and the human rights concerns that faced their company.

By making a parody of an advertisement and using a billboard, poster, or the internet, culture jamming is very effective in communicating a particular message. Culture jamming can be humorous however, there are important messages and issues that are raised through the advertisements that are created.

Work Cited

Liedtke, Michael. “Google Skimps on its own Advertising.” Report on Business. 15 October 2007.


Culture Jamming. Center for Communication and Civic Engagement. 25 November 2008. [http://depts.washington.edu/ccce/polcommcampaigns/CultureJamming.htm].

Can You Buy Nothing for One Day?

(www.hustlerofculture.com)

The media has a huge influence on overconsumption. Everyday, millions of people buy products that we do not need. Why would we waste money on a product that is useless to us? Everyday we are bombarded by advertisements. We constantly view internet ads and popups, radio ads, television commercials, print ads, billboards, posters, etc. It is impossible to live a day without seeing an advertisement. The media continually advertises products that influence us to spend our money. We are constantly persuaded to buy products through the media.

Buy Nothing Day was started by the Canadian not-for-profit magazine Adbusters, who explains that they are “concerned about the erosion of our physical and cultural environments by commercial forces” (adbusters.com). The event raises awareness of overconsumption and challenges people to buy nothing for 24 hours. The website explains, “As the planet starts heating up, maybe it’s time to finally go cold turkey. Take the personal challenge by locking up your debit card, your credit cards, your money clip, and see what it feels like to opt out of consumer culture completely, even if only for 24 hours. Like the millions of people who have done this fast before you, you may be rewarded with a life-changing epiphany” (adbusters.org).

Over consumption is hurting our planet. In 1995, the United Nations Development Program found that “today’s consumption is undermining the environmental resource base. If the trends continue without change — not redistributing from high-income to low-income consumers, not shifting from polluting to cleaner goods and production technologies, not promoting goods that empower poor producers, not shifting priority from consumption for conspicuous display to meeting basic needs — today’s problems of consumption and human development will worsen” (www.globalissues.org). Overconsumption causes pollution and is depleting our earth’s resources. The earth can not keep up with the demand for products.

A recent video has been circulating the internet called Buy Nothing Day, Black Friday Protest. The video explains that “in 2007 over 65 million Americans shopped on Black Friday” (www.youtube.com). The video encourages you to reduce unnecessary spending, reinvest your time and money, rethink your lifestyle, reach out to those in need, recycle and promote sustainability, and recapture the essence of giving, not getting.

On November 28th, 2008, try something different. Try to buy nothing! Make that morning coffee at home, instead of buying it on the way to work. Bring a sandwich to work, instead of buying a lunch. Don’t be tempted, for at least one day, to buy a product when you see it in an ad. You have everything you need at home, you can easily go a day without buying anything. Even try something to help the environment. Take a quick shower and use less water, recycle that newspaper you read, or take public transit to work. On November 28th, 2008, my money, debit card, and credit card will be left at home. I pledge to buy nothing.

Work Cited

Buy Nothing Day: Black Friday Protest. 5 November 2008. Youtube. 25 November 2008.
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zNwWrtVoCI]

Buy Nothing Day. 2008. Adbusters. 25 November 2008. [http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/bnd].

Consumption and Consumerism. 3 September 2008. Global Issues. 25 November 2008
[http://www.globalissues.org/issue/235/consumption-and-consumerism]

The Future of the Internet

(blogs.techrepublic.com)

Imagine an internet where you can only access certain websites, an internet where only companies can afford to publish a website or an internet where certain cable and telephone companies can control the website you access. This is the reality that we will be faced with as cable and internet companies attempt to end net neutrality.

Today, if you have an internet connection you are allowed to freely access any website on the internet. All websites are given the same speed and quality. Net neutrality is the principle that allows people to view the internet without disruption because it prevents internet providers from blocking your access to any websites. Internet service providers are not allowed to mess with what information is traveling through the internet. However, cable and telephone companies, who own the lines that the internet travels through, want to choose the content you see and use on the internet. “The companies want to set up a restricted fast lane on the internet but only for their partners and services. Only sites that pay them a huge fee would be allowed to use it, making them gatekeepers”. (www.youtube.com). Their argument is that because they provide the service, they should be able to regulate the service.

The internet plays a huge part in our daily lives. In a previous post, I explained how our entire culture has changed and grown through the internet. In a keynote address delivered at the Inaugural Media Ecology Association Convention, Neil Postman explained how “a medium is a technology within which a culture grows; that is to say, it gives form to a culture’s politics, social organization, and habitual ways of thinking” (Postman). The internet is an amazing tool. It can be used as a library: finding information, gathering facts, and researching topics. It can be used for leisure: playing games, listening to music, and watching movies. Companies take advantage of the internet for marketing. The internet is a quick and easy way to introduce a company or product. Just recently, social networking sites, such as Facebook and Myspace, have created a form of interaction within the internet. You can chat with friends, e-mail others, share files. The uses for the internet are endless and new innovations are introduced every day. However, telephone and cable companies, such as Comcast, AT&T, and Version are attempting to radically change our experience on the internet.

The public should have total control over the websites that we surf. Each internet user has the right to have the same degree of service and cable and internet companies should not be allowed to slow down or block access to certain websites.

Here in Canada, there has already been evidence that internet providers have the tools to control the internet and what we view. “On July 25, 2005, Canadian Internet Service Provider, Telus, blocked subscribers' access to a web site set up by an employee labour union intended to publicize the union's views about its dispute with Telus. In addition, the decision to block traffic to the Internet Protocol address of the site caused collateral filtering of at least 766 additional, unrelated Web sites. Telus later restored access to the websites, while appearing to maintain an option to block any sites it chooses” (www.opennet.net). Internet service providers clearly already have the technology to control the internet.

So why have we not heard about this issue? Net neutrality is not gaining media attention because many of the companies that want to eliminate net neutrality are also associated with the media. However, websites like savethenet.ca and neutrality.ca are attempting to raise the issue and bring awareness to the Canadian public.

Net neutrality is a serious issue. Today, the internet is a space where we are allowed to publish information and ideas and in turn, we can search for information or ideas. If cable and telephone companies gain control over the websites we view, then the internet will become another tool for companies to use for marketing and advertising. The public should have total control over the websites that we surf. Each internet user has the right to have the same degree of service and cable and internet companies should not be allowed to slow down or block access to certain websites.

Work Cited
Postman, Neil. Keynote Address. Inaugural Media Ecology Association Convention. Fordham University,New York, NY. 16June 2000.

Save The Internet!. 18 December 2006. Youtube. 25 November 2008.
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWt0XUocViE]

Telus Blocks Consumer Access to Labour Union Web Site and Filters an Additional 766 Unrelated Sites. 2 August 2005. OpenNet Initiative. 25 November 2008. [http://opennet.net/bulletins/010].

The Little Station that Could (Until the Major Media Companies Came Along)

(www.next.thesuperspade.com)

Citytv was always known as the little station that could. It was founded in 1972 in the city of Toronto. Citytv, which was once owned by Chum Media, has always been known to broadcast local news and information. Chum owned stations in Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, Vancouver, and Winnipeg as well as the A-Channel stations in Victoria, Barrie, Ottawa, London, Windsor and Wingham. These stations were always known to spotlight day to day life in local communities.

Chum Media and Citytv newscasts provided an alternative to the national newscasts that were produced by CBC and CTV. Citytv was a place to find local news and learn more about your community. However, on June 8, 2007, Chum Media was torn apart. The local Citytv stations were sold to Rogers Communications, while the smaller A Channel stations were sold to CTV Globemedia. The Chum name disappeared and the local Citytv station that could now belonged to a major Canadian media company.

Rogers Communications is a major media company in Canada. Rogers owns 13 magazines, including Maclean’s Canadian Business, and Chatelaine. They own 11 specialty channels including CPAC, the Biography Channel, and the Shopping Channel. They run 19 television stations that include Citytv and Omni as well as 36 local Rogers stations. They have 52 radio stations that include 98.1 CHFI, 92.5 Jack Fm, and 680 News. Furthermore, Rogers also owns, Fido, Rogers Wireless, Rogers Center, Toronto Blue Jays, and Rogers Internet.

Rogers is one of Canada’s biggest communications companies. However, because it owns so many media properties, the issue of cross media ownership begins to arise. Imagine the influence that Rogers could have on our country. For example, lets say that the president of Rogers supports a radical idea. He could promote his ideas easily through the over 100 media properties that Rogers owns. The media controls a huge part of our lives. Every day, millions of people watch television, read the news, listen to the radio, and browses the internet. Rogers owns many of the television stations you watch, the news you read, the radio station you listen to, and the internet you browse. The impact that Rogers could have, through their media properties, is alarming.

The number of companies that run the United States media has decreased in number over the years. In the article, The New Global Media, Robert W. McChesney explains how “the global media market has come to be dominated by the same eight transnational corporations that rule US media: General Electric, AT&T/Liberty Media, Disney, Time Warner, Sony, News Corporation, Viacom and Seagram” (www.thenation.com). The number of companies that run the US media will continue to decrease. What would happen in a world run by one media company? Cross media ownership only allows a certain number of opinions and voices to be heard. If the media was only run by one company, then their would be one voice and opinion on the news, television, radio, newspaper, magazines, and internet.

Cross media ownership is extremely damaging. It allows a handful of companies to choose what you view. Only a certain number of voices and opinions would be heard and everything that was distributed would be biased.

Work Cited
McChesney, Robert W. “It’s a Small World of Big Conglomerates.” 11 Nov. 1999. The Nation. 6 Nov. 2008. [ http://www.thenation.com/doc/19991129/mcchesney].

The Truth About The News

Every night, nearly “4.6 million Canadians” (www.ctv.ca) turn to CTV to hear the news for the day. As the newscast starts, we are greeted by Lloyd Robertson, the chief anchor and senior editor for CTV News. “Robertson has been broadcasting for over 50 years and has won prestigious awards that include the order of Canada, numerous Gemini awards, and the Canada Walk of Fame” (www.ctv.ca). By now, Canadians have grown to admire and trust Lloyd Robertson and the CTV News team. We believe that the news we hear is the truth and that the goal of CTV News is to report unbiased and accurate news to the Canadian public. However, a new trend in the news business is crushing this principle. Corporate businesses and public relation firms are now creating video news releases (VNR) that are hurting the accuracy of the news we view.

Video news releases are created by corporations, public relations firms, and marketing agencies in order to promote and sell a product. Essentially, it is a news release, in the form of a video that is given to news stations. Although very effective in selling and promoting a product, video news releases are damaging to the integrity of our television news stations. In the book, Toxic Sludge is Good for You, the authors John Strauber and Sheldon Rampton effectively describe a VNR, “Video news releases are designed to be indistinguishable from genuine news, and are typically used as story segments on TV news shows without any attribution or disclaimer indicating that they are in fact subtle paid advertisements” (Stauber and Rampton 13). The following clip shows an example of a VNR:


This VNR was created for AdSpace Networks, who are the creators of SmartScreen, the product shown in the clip. The main goal of the video is to gain attention and sell the product. By throwing in some interesting facts and interviewing a few shoppers, the VNR is created to look like a news report. Television news stations use the VNR in their newscasts. The following clip shows the VNR being played by a CBS affiliate station.


In the news report, as stated in Toxic Sludge is Good For You, viewers were not told that it was in fact a paid advertisement or a VNR. If there is no disclaimer that it is a VNR, then we no longer will need television news reporters. In the example, the news station played the VNR unedited. All they did was add their own reporter’s voice in the video. Alarmingly, in some newscasts that play VNRs, the publicist that was shown in the news release was labelled as a reporter.

This example raises some alarming issues. The foundation of the news business is to relate factual news to the public. Their job is to dig deep, find out what is really happening in the world, and help expose companies, individuals, and governments who are harming the public. Without the news, companies, individuals, and the government could get away with anything. The news helps bring people to justice.

We turn to the television and newscasts every day to learn the news. Many citizens trust that the news that they watch is truthful and factual. The television is an impressive technology that has a huge impact on its viewers. Marshall McLuhan describes the television as, “the most significant of the electric media because it permeates nearly every home in the country, extending the central nervous system of every viewer as it works over and moulds the entire sensorium with the ultimate message” (www.columbia.edu). However, video news releases are causing huge damage. The state of our newscasts are changing as news reports change from hard hitting factual news to canned public relations products that are created to sell a product.

Work Cited

The Playboy Interview. March 1969. Columbia University. 23 Nov 2008.
[http://www.columbia.edu/~log2/mediablogs/McLuhanPBinterview.htm]

Stauber, John and Rampton, Sheldon. Toxic Sludge is Good For You Monroe: Common Courage Press, 1995.

Lloyd Robertson. 2008. CTV Globemedia. 23 Nov 2008. [http://www.ctv.ca/robertson]