Think.Blog.Repeat.
Freedom at Emory is a movement I myself have gotten involved in recently by supporting their events and helping to create their support network. Spurred on by a students that have a general and concise goal to promote education for undocumented students at Emory and those that wish to attend Emory, but can't because of the tuition policies.
http://www.emorywheel.com/tuition-policies-harm-undocumented-students/ The article listed above discusses this issue, and its one I myself added to with the illustration I made for it. For me this topic hits home, as I personally have friends and have gotten to know individuals that experience the issue of not being able to gain financial aid for school because they are treated as international students. For most undocumented students, the price of Emory is too high. Its a strange thing, that these students have been in this country, getting educated to a highschool level, and then there is nothing. University is not an option for these intelligent teens, but they are the ones that want it most. Andy Kim, the author of this editorial, mentions that Emory, as a private institution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_gtJK2EgZo&feature=youtu.be
I propose to create an ethnographic documentary about Latino Students and their creation of media on Emory’s campus. I would analyze the dancers from groups on campus like DALE, the Salsa Club, the Latin Sorority on Campus: Lambda Theta Alpha Latin Sorority, Inc., the coordinators of programs on campus like La Sala, the creators of Latinas and Latinos at Emory, members of LSO, and hopefully students and professors in the Latin and Caribbean Studies department. My main questions to them will be varying depending on the media they make but will follow the rough skeleton of the following:
What is your identity? What does that mean for you as a member of this campus? What do you make? ( dance, art, etc.) How does that reflect you? How does that reflect your Latino Identity? Do you feel supported by the campus as a whole when making your media? Do you feel like you have to create this identity on campus, or that it naturally shines in this campus? These questions focus on a more personal level in order to grasp the different experiences of the individuals being interviewed. The format of the interview will be conversational, and hopefully natural, concentrating fully on the interviewee’s point of view and not the interviewer to emphasize the individual. My proposal for the upcoming hyper essay is an analysis of Internet segregation. I've noticed that there is a lot of social media out there that is specifically geared to appeal to certain groups. I will be comparing site's and the content posted on them that are meant to appeal to individuals of specific backgrounds. This means that I'll be analyzing sites like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Vine and how certain users post that appeal to groups, like Spanish only Vine's that try to appeal to Latinos, and certain make-up tutorials for people of a darker complexion. This hyper essay will focus on the composition of these sub divisions on the web and why they might be our own form of internet segregation. It's important to ask if the division is blatant, if this specific audience is open to opening up. Of course content is visible to anyone, but how much crossover happens? Is there a possibility that self identification has gone on overload here?
My proposal for the upcoming hyper essay is an analysis of Internet segregation. I've noticed that there is a lot of social media out there that is specifically geared to appeal to certain groups. Take for example Pintrest, its site mostly geared towards women. How ? Well it's content has to do with mostly "traditionally feminine" things like arts and crafts as well as cooking. Twitter on the other hand is geared to a diverse group of people, but is sectioned off by specific tags that sub groups use on twitter.
The same goes for Facebook and Instagram. My main questions will be: Do group specific tags further separate us? Is there a difference with identification online and offline, and how does it impact our grouping online? Have some sites become members only? (Vine) I do think that this hyper essay has the potential to be vague, but some personal experience, as well as endless hours of searching tags and scrolling can lead to a solid set of evidence to provide material for this analysis. Reading “Does That Face-'Book' Come in Braille: Social Networking Sites and Disability” I instantly became interested in hearing about the ways social media have worked on accessibility for a variety of users with different levels of ability. I was slightly disappointed, as the article itself wasn’t really about the interesting technology or methods, but rather the process that Facebook had to go through to do so. It was interesting however, that originally Facebook had little to no accessibility for the disabled.
Comparing MySpace and Facebook under this context of accessibility, it was obvious after reading the article that the author was pushing the point that this choice to include all was also connected to the rise of Facebook. MySpace, once a titan of social media, fell and for the disabled it wasn’t a big deal, as those who could not access it later had the option of other social media sites. Still, despite this , the article only talked about the change in the Captcha technology, and not any oral readers or even read back features that the site may have developed for actually using the site. I understand that the article was concentrating specifically on accessibility, so the point made through this emphasis, that the walls stopping visually disabled individuals form even obtaining membership, was important; however he glosses over the accessibility that was obtained through other means, and how actually using the site is a thing that disabled individuals should be able to do as they please. What is interesting is that the article does go over the ruse of Facebook, explaining it to us and in the process showing its age. Most people now a days know exactly how Facebook came about, and the information in the article was not necessary to the point of it, despite that one point that accessibility wasn’t a priority for young Zuckerberg as he created Facebook. A little update is that Facebook now has assistive technology, including VoiceOver technology, alternative keyboards, and the ability to view the newsfeed and page with different fonts and word size. Comparing this to New Voices on the Web, an article that talks about minorities and accessibility, its interesting to talk about a marginalized group who’s accessibility isn’t a matter of economic standing or even geographical location, but rather physical or mental ability. This type of accessibility issue is technically easier to handle than the others. For social media and technology creators, they can program and create the bridge across the accessibility gap. They can create oral readers, larger fonts and readable text, all for individuals with disabilities. It seems easier. But I wonder what happens to those that are deaf and blind, or paralyzed? For them, the connections and groups on social media are almost non-existent without a second person to help them. So even though there is a lot of technology out there, I believe accessibility is not a thing that can happen totally, at least not with our current technology. Reading Sterne’s article was an interesting experience, not only for the standpoint of technology access from the past, but also for similarities the issues then have to the issues today. Sterne adamantly pushes the point that technology is primarily offered to those that already have access to it, or need it least. In example, when he writes about H.R. 5573, Sterne dives into a reveal that despite Apple’s push for more technology in classrooms, their bill only ended up improving the lot of already privileged schools. Interestingly enough, he does mention the change of Apple’s marketing in that sector, as the company began to help those who actually needed the technology. Sterne as a whole was not wrong, the Internet and technology are influenced greatly by race and class, though access to it is much easier to obtain now. I believe that the rise of the smartphone and the fact that almost all youth have had access to or have access to these technologies, whether it be through school, a library or a personal computer. However, the amount of access to this technology could still uphold Sterne’s point today, as it would seem that lower class minorities have the least access to the internet and they would not be able to pay for internet service or even a device to access the internet. This may again support Sterne’s point that the Internet is still a primarily white space. Yet, the demographics of today’s internet is much more mixed that before, as social media made access to the world infinitely easier for impoverished minorities. These sites are much more accessible to a young person than anything else, making the Internet more diverse than ever. It allows the formation of a place where race is evident, and wanted.
On another note, Sterne concentrates some of his argument on the focus of technology companies, and the shift in attitude towards under privileged minorities has continued in large companies like Google, which offers free coding classes to women and minorities in order to diversify the sector. This however is a movement still adhering to the argument of Sterne, that despite the creating of technology that could help those who need it most, the technology is still inaccessible, as the lower income children who need these lessons, these classes and access to computers in order to get the opportunities to improve their lot are all depending on a student’s or school’s ability to buy a computer or smart device. So yes, the Internet may perhaps be primarily white, though there would be many that argue against that, what with the global nature of technology now a days. However, I would argue that race has a defined and powerful presence on the internet, as access to it is made easier and more children get access to technology at an early age.
photo credited to
In this chapter of Race After the Internet, Christian Sandvig describes and discusses the issues that many Native Americans living on reservations have when trying to access the internet. Sandvig also informs us that young people like Joseph, a youth from the Santa Ysabel Indian Reservation, are working to change that with what little materials they have. Sandvig claims that this inaccessibility's root cause is that "Both in Southern California and elsewhere in the US, almost all Indian reservations were chosen as prisons... the ;and was selected in order to isolate Native populations..." (Race After the Internet, Chapter 8, p. 172) He calls this being "Offline by Design". He has a point, mentioning that these areas even lack basic infrastructure as well. Understandably, the multiple difficulties and low economic strength in these reservations. along with the difficult terrain and small demographic does not attract large telecommunications companies. Sandvig so far makes valid points through his description.
The issue I found to be most interesting was Sandvig's explanation that for some Native American peoples, the internet is not necessarily a positive thing, " from a Native perspective the interconnection of knowledge is not read as neutral-- it is read as extraction of valuable knowledge for use by others without compensation or control." (Race After the Internet, Ch 8, p. 178) Here my personal experience with a state-recognized Native American tribes tells me a different story, that perhaps this point is not necessarily true for all Native peoples, but rather a few. In the past, I have worked with a North Carolina tribe called the Waccamaw Siouan Tribe, a tribe with a growing elderly population and a diminishing youth population. While there, we specifically worked to set up their technology and work on their website so that they could grow and educate people about them. Here, perhaps because I saw differently I can't wholly accept that idea. I do agree, initially these communities can be weary of outsiders, they do not know their full intentions and they are close-knit and strong. However, when it came to promoting their traditions, they seemed to be accepting and enthusiastic about educating us and others. Because of this it is important to note that these perspectives are wholly concentrated on the Native communities located in reservations, which may make these views slightly skewed when making general statements about all Native Americans. Sandvig's point on how many nations control their internet access and regulate what is found there ( RAtI, Ch 8,p. 179) does not dissuade my disagreement. I acknowledge however that perspectives on and off reservations can vary greatly. Still, perhaps the internet is not seen as a taking away of consent in sharing knowledge, but rather a means to educate people about the conditions of the reservations, the real traditions of Native peoples, and more. In fact Sandvig speaks about this, stating that " concerns about assimilation are most often held bu the cultural elite, while non-elites can be enthusiastic about new connections and the chance to use tools or see media that are common elsewhere. " (RAtI Ch.8 p.180) TDV, or the Tribal Digital village is obviously a program that has various takes on it, my own alignment and perspective of privilege being that it is a good thing. I am happy to see that Sandvig acknowledges both sides however. He discusses the concept of appropriation and how "The TDV story shows us that there is a danger in cherishing the adaptability of the oppressed, who must adapt by necessity because they have no other choice." (RAtI Ch.8 p.193) This issue in important to note, that the work on this program is for self preservation, and even my own experience with the tribe, with their enthusiasm to expand their online presence confirms that. |