A very long time ago back when I was in middle school, I used to listen to two main local stations that can be picked up in eastern Mass, which were Kiss 107.9 and Country 102.5. As I’ve changed, so have the stuff I listen to. The way I am with trying to become one from where my parents come from, Japan, has practically made radio unnecessary in my life as everything airing is local to the area.

By the time I have gotten my own laptop and phone, I have completely ditched listening to radio. These enabled me to listen to whatever music, talk show, etc I want, and watch whatever video I want without the need of watching things of my interest. Podcasts are more recent to me, as I started listening to them on an unregular basis, downloading them and listening to them whenever I recall its existence. I watch videos much more often than podcasts; on YouTube, on NicoNico Douga, etc. As with podcasts, I can consume its contents, download, subscribe.

What is neat about podcasts and videos are that it is possible to create my own. I plan on doing it and will only do that when I make the time and effort to do so. As for others who already do this for a living, video and podcasting enable normal people over most of the globe to say whatever they want to say sometimes about their own lives, usually with minimal help from others and not necessarily with high-end, expensive equipment, whereas the professionals’s words on words are scripted by others, necessary for high-end gear.

Video and podcasts sure have increased popularity over radio and TV, mainly because, its a matters of someone talking about someone’s mistake versus someone talking about what happened.

In our last class, we were shown an article that pointed out another aspect of Google’s vast knowledge of each of its users (http://www.fastcodesign.com/3058943/the-ux-of-ethics-should-google-tell-you-if-you-have-cancer). Every Google search you have that’s linked to you IP address, or your google account, every word you enter in any of Google’s apps, every move you make on their Chrome books or when using Google Chrome browser…all of that information is available to the computers and therefore the people that keep Google running.

In a new question, Google wants to know if it should advise certain users to see a doctor. It was pointed out that with specific algorithms, Google could piece together your searches of medical symptoms and determine if you were suffering from a potentially harmful condition. With this information, they could advise you to see a doctor, and thus potentially save the health or even the lives of some of their users. While this idea seems great in principle by adding an extra safety measure to our lives, there are also many issues it call into play.

Number one, where exactly does our privacy begin? Not only does Google collect every miniscule bit of data packed into our computers and browsers, now it wants to use that data to discover something potentially quite invasive about me? While I find myself wary enough at the information Google collects about me as it is, the idea that they want to use this information to determine things about my private life and health unnerves me quite a bit more. That would be where I draw the line. I trust my doctors to inform me if anything’s wrong with me, not an equation on a computer.

And that brings me to my second point. How accurate would this algorithm be? I could have looked up these symptoms for other people. I’m going to do it the same way I’ll search for symptoms I’m feeling myself. Earlier this year, I did a research project in which I explored atrial fibrillation and other heart conditions. It was necessary for me to look up many conditions so I could explain them adequately. While I do have a very real risk of developing any number of heart conditions, only two of my searches contained something I’m diagnosed with, and they were the most mundane. A few years ago, I looked up child development of young babies, the progression of a pregnancy, and I’ve looked up baby names many times. But I am not pregnant and never have been. Any conclusions Google could make about me based on any of these searches would be false. Even now, is Google collecting this data and coming to conclusions about us that are possibly false?

To drive home my point, perhaps I should point out more concretely that Google doesn’t know everything. I have a Google+ account that I’ve accessed less than a handful of times. Occasionally I get emails about it, even though I don’t use it. Even with all of the information Google has collected about me, in this particular instance the important portion of it would be that the last time I accessed Google+ was more than two years ago, I still received an email that asked “Do you know Molly Fitzpatrick?” While I understand the premise—it’s trying to point out people that I could add on Google+ and thus increase my use of the site—the fact that this email asking if I knew my sister came on the heels of a class where we discussed just how much Google knows about each of us made it appear absurd.

Bottom line, I don’t want google anywhere near my medical file. It’s a browser, a producer of digital media, and a collection of tools—not a doctor. I think I’ll stick to my cardiologist.

As media has changed and developed, new platforms have been introduced and one thing that has changed drastically is how we find and acquire music. Way back when, there were records, or albums. They played on a turn-table and the little needle transcribed the music from the surface of the record. You had to be really careful with them, because they scratched really easily. Then came cassette tapes, CDs, and then MP3 players and iPods. Music for these players could be uploaded from CDs you owned or bought from places like iTunes. Now, media has evolved so much that my dad is converting his records to MP3’s and selling them—and that’s saying something because he used to own hundreds.

I’ve always been partial to CDs, of which my dad also has hundreds, so I think I’ve been duly influenced, and even though iTunes has taken over, I prefer buying CD’s to buying individual songs. I’ve found lately that I’m of the mindset to find an artist I like and listen to all of their music as well as music like theirs. This is where newer music sites like Pandora and Spotify come in. I have accounts to these sites as well as YouTube. One huge thing I love about YouTube and Spotify is that you can pick songs you like and create playlists. While the ads suck, it’s not much different from the actual radio, and I like listening to a set of music that I’ve chosen, although oftentimes I just get carried away and don’t split up the music very well. I’ve got a huge playlist of basically everything on each platform. Because I listen to all different kinds of music, this is sometimes annoying.

It is when these mixed up playlists are getting on my nerves that I turn to Pandora or Spotify artists. On Pandora, I can pick an artist and they will play music that is similar to that of that artist as well as music by that artist. Spotify artists will play all of the music by that particular artist. Both are cool because you can either stay with someone you know you like, or you could break out and explore new artists. Pandora also has the like and dislike feature. You can thumbs up or thumbs down songs according to your preferences, and Pandora takes this data into account when it searches for new songs to play you.

The one tough thing about using these internet radios and playlists as opposed to buying your own music is that it’s less accessible if you don’t have a smartphone or Wi-Fi. Also, the only way to get it without ads is to pay a monthly fee. Another huge issue is that these free radio and playlist programs are taking away profit from those who sell their music on iTunes. Once you sign up for Spotify premium, you have no ads, can play any song any time you want, and can access your playlists offline—it’s similar to an iPod or MP3 player, and cheaper because you only pay an access fee instead of paying for each individual song. So who do you want to support?

I’m a huge reader—I read every free moment I have, to be honest, so I decided to take a look at how new media is affecting literature. Marshall McLuhan, author of “The Medium is the Message,” spoke about how different modes of media are affected by the ever changing world that introduces new digital steps forward very often. In this instance, media is defined as “various material ways information can be communicated.” In the instance of literature, methods for creating and presenting it are changing, and along with these methods, the ways by which we consume this media changes also.

As McLuhan says “the media through which literature is communicated is no longer considered secondary to the literary content or form, but deserving attention in its own right.” Literary content and forms are influenced by the media of their transmission. Suddenly, both the kind of literature and how it’s read or accessed are equally important.

To start with, we have regular books. Made of paper, some have illustrations, others have pop-ups, but they’re all pretty simple. Then came eReaders. eReaders allowed us to access books on different media platforms; we had the option of buying books from the websites of the companies that produced the eReaders, but eventually, libraries catered to eReaders as well with their overdrive system that is basically a digital library. I, of course, still think you should be able to scan the barcode of any book you own and access it on these eReaders, and while you can’t do that, the steps we’ve taken allow us to work with books in the same way over the internet as we do in real life. We’ve been given venues to both buy and rent them. As far as the media platform being just as important as the material itself, while eReaders have gotten more sophisticated to the point where they are basically tablets, so too have eBooks. Books exist that you can interact with, some have little videos in them, and they all change and evolve as their platform does.

eReaders have also made magazines more accessible, Time Magazine in particular has windows you can scroll through, videos you can play, and interactive diagrams—very similar to the new concept of the online interactive textbook. As media changes, it also becomes more prevalent in schools. These interactive textbooks are coming on the heels of bringing iPads into classrooms and ensuring all students have access to their own computer.

But it’s not just eReaders and iPads that are changing the way we see literature, but the internet and social media itself. There is the concept of blogging novels; where authors post novels piece by piece. One such blogging author reports liking it, but also being aware that in order to blog her novel, she had to rewrite her work from its original story. In order for it to fit within word count limits, she had to shorten her work. While this makes things a little more accessible, it also means the story could lose some of its meaning. Another type of literature that’s gaining popularity is “Twitterature,” which is basically flash fiction on Twitter. In particular, people have taken to “rewriting” classic novels to fit the character count of a tweet. Twitterature is an interesting concept because writers receive immediate feedback, as well as gain followers and fans, however the platform limits viewers. Those who are not as tech savvy are excluded from the audience. It’s also not as coherent because the character limit of 240 characters limits the use of the English language. There is also the increase in the possibility of plagiarism.

While these new media types of literature are interesting, and I might be interested in trying “Twitterature,” I think for the most part, I’ll stick to books.

I’m an avid Netflix user and I’ve watched almost all the Netflix Originals because, you guessed it, they do everything better. I’ve watched Netflix crime shows, historical dramas,  political dramas, comedies, primetime like shows, action, adventure etc… And they have gotten it right every single time. The only thing I’m waiting for is a Game of Thrones like show as I’m sure they’re working on one right now.

The amount of content they release and the consistency and speed is really commendable. And they have acquired such a widespread audience in such a short time that one really has to comment that they know more about consumers than the large cable companies. They have been able to make shows for children, teenagers, adults – everyone. And they deliver in a quality that is perfect.

They consistently get great actors, some unknown and some very famous (Kevin Spacey) to perform landmark performances. And they do this in a way that’s very conducive to their population (binge watching). Where all the episodes are released at once and the viewer can set their own personal pace. I think this is a great system that allows people to view shows at their own pace without the addition of a DVR. Additionally, a Netflix subscription is much cheaper than a cable subscription. And maintains the same level of diversity as traditional cable subscriptions.

I think what really makes Netflix stand out is that they not only understand viewers on a great level. They have transformed their business into that of a trendsetter. They offer Japanese anime and shows with adult animation – two things most Americans have never viewed in their entire lives. They also offer foreign movies overall and, obscure British shows many people have never heard of. But they are quality and people get hooked. They have really brought a revolution in the amount of TV shows people can watch simultaneously. It is a genius business and I hope they continue to grow and introduce new TV shows to me.

My likely unsubstantiated concern for Netflix is that their quality will go down. I have a main issue with primetime shows because they show diversity in very non-geniune ways. I think many of those shows realized that viewers complained about a lack of diversity in TV so they accomodated women, black, LGBT, Asian etc… characters to balance the diversity of the cast. But I’ve noticed that a lot of those diverse characters are given either cliche roles or their characters are corny and directly the opposite of what stereotypes would put them as. It doesn’t seem geniune. I can just imagine a bunch of executives in a board room saying “we need a black woman, but not a lazy one, one who is powerful and rules”. Then people watching eat it up because of what it suggests. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that a black woman doesn’t belong in power. But it just feels so phony when it is done on mainstream popular shows. That’s why I didn’t watch Orange is the New Black or Super 8 on Netflix. The few episodes I watched felt phony and appealed to the diverse crowd. It didn’t feel like good TV and I think it’s because the creators were trying so hard to be politically correct.

I hope one day Netflix is able to create more great shows and naturally involve diverse characters like they did House of Cards (many diversities are subtly represented there).

I was reading this article and I’m pretty shocked there are people who wouldn’t want Google to inform them that they should go get a check up for Cancer. Cancer is a very unpredictable disease and can affect anyone for no reason and if caught early it can be treated much easier than if let go. I think the potential for Google to be able to trace that early is almost equatable to finding the cure of cancer. It’s really appalling that people wouldn’t want to know that they have caught it early.

I’ve always imagined in the future when/if robots existed that this would be a similar function of them. Possibly I’ve seen this in a robot movie – but the ability to scan a humans body and discover minute issues like heightened heart rates, viral infections or even a tumor. This would be incredibly beneficial. With the assumption that we all want to live as long as possible – a complementary system to your primary care physician would absolutely accomplish this. Mainly I find this relevant because the majority of people are irresponsibly with their health – they would benefit from this because many won’t go to the doctor when they feel a slight pain – they claim “it’ll go away”. I still doubt that many people would actually go if Google found something. But having it there would only help. I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want this.

I guess I should say that I understand that people feel like it might be a violation of privacy. And that is an attitude shared about most things Google does and similarly with other Internet giants like Amazon. Although I mainly believe that privacy is still an easy choice in this country. The reason we use Google is because it is free and convenient. But we still live in a world where you can find all the same information in the library or a newspaper. People just choose to get it from a company with private interests. Then people complain they are acting on their private interests and profiting while simultaneously helping you. I don’t find complaints against giant corporations and their data mining valid or sound. What else would you expect them to do with the opportunities in front of them.

Overall, I would be more than happy to get an alert if my body is dying. I would love to know and prevent that.

As a closer – if some divine force told you that you would get in a car accident later in the day – wouldn’t you want to know that so you could avoid cars? Or would you prefer the ignorance

Twitch is a very interesting social media and gaming platform. It helps connect users all over the world and allows for passionate gamers to monetize and capitalize from something they really enjoy. It has been blowing up and some of the most popular streamers can get up to 20,000+ people livestreaming them playing a game and giving money to them at once. It has become a subtle social phenomenon and will likely only grow with the younger generation.

As a non-gamer I approach it with an air of skepticism. I’ve always found that personally I can only play video games for an hour at most until I get bored or my brain feels like it’s being wasted. This might be personal because I find the same thing with most social media platforms unless I’m directly engaging with someone. My issues with Twitch lies with my foundational dislike for video games and, the concern for people who decide to make video games a full time profession.

As a business student, I understand that your career doesn’t necessarily have to contribute to society. If you’d like to make money and that’s what keeps you satisfied then that it is fine. Capitalism allows for that. My issue lies with video games – I think long term association with an alternate reality has to lead to some problem. I don’t know how to define it, I’m not a psychologist. But similar, I’ve noticed that a lot of the people who spend too much time on the internet find themselves more sensitive to trolls. Reasonable people end up fighting in Internet comment sections. I just think dedicating your career to video games takes away from potential. And that might be reflecting on myself and how I couldn’t imagine doing that. But I find it hard to respect it/value it as a career choice particularly because of the danger I associate with it.

And while this might be viewed as hostile and unappreciative of gamers – I think one must view the stereotypical gamer. Living in their mothers basement, unhygienic, unhealthy, single and socially anxious. I know many people like this. And while this doesn’t encompass all video gamers or twitch streamers, I know many people who coincide with these characteristics. And many twitch streamers I’ve watched also fall under these categories.

One of my nightmares is Twitch getting big in Japan if it hasn’t already. There is a large population of Japanese youths who live in small apartments in the city who live off vending machine food and stay in their apartments all day. Many of them have severe social anxiety. If this platform were to extend there, they would extend these habits but be able to monetize and they would have less reason to leave.

Now before my issues with video games cloud my thoughts on Twitch – I don’t think that makes Twitch all bad. I think it’s a nice/fun way to watch people. But I think using it as an extension of playing the video game for hours and/or playing on Twitch full time can be very unhealthy. Otherwise I really like the platform and respect moderate gamers.

Podcasting has been something that I had never considered deeply as a form on media consumption. In the past, I had listened to general radio and I never much enjoyed the commentary between songs. I always found myself irritated with advertisements and the commenters. Mainly because I felt they were wasting my time with garbage talk about celebrities and opinions on things that I didn’t value – this was mainly prevalent on the mainstream radio channels. But I never had XM radio or listened to any of the older radio channels. It wasn’t until my older brother started driving in about 2010 and he always had this show called “Opie + Anthony” was I introduced podcasts.

Opie + Anthony probably isn’t the best podcast to mention in this class but it is relevant in it that it was how I found out about podcasting. Why I define them as inappropriate for this class is because one of the main broadcasters on the show was frequently criticized for his racist comments and ignorant attitudes & tweets. He was eventually fired for making a comment that crossed the line.

But the show overall was a very important show for comedians. It was like “Sway in the Morning” or “The Breakfast Club” for hip hop + rap artists. It was an honor and a priviledge to be on Opie & Anthony and it make or break a comedians career depending on their performance there. So it frequently had all these great comedians: Chris Rock, Kevin Hart, Louis CK, Patrice O’Neal, etc… And they would talk for two hours about whatever social/philosophical topic they had been thinking about. They would also frequently have writers, artists, models – the most random people call into the show and debate with the comedians. It was really a great show and there’s still many podcasts I have to go through because there is so much content.

This also introduced me to the Monday Morning Podcast by Bill Burr, one of my favorite comedians and podcasts. Every monday, Bill Burr similarly discusses/rants about relevant topics going on in the world. At times he introduces his wife into the mix and they argue and discuss. What I really like about Bill Burrs is he typically has an advice podcast where people write to him about issues with their love life. Bill Burr then reads the letter and shares his advice with the audience. He infuses his humor as that’s what he’s best at but he generally gives good advice.

Overall, I really like Podcasts as done by comedians. I haven’t much listened to any podcasts by non-comedians but I really enjoy the ones I’ve listened to so far. And I’m looking to adding podcasts to my work commute + shift if I have the flexibility.