Evolution of Communication Tech: The First iPod

iPod's iconic silhouette ad campaign was a staple of the mid-to-late 2000s

The iPod.
One of the most (if not THE most) influential, innovative, and significant tech creations from the past 20 years is the creation of iPod. This device single-handedly took over the MP3 player industry. I remember how desperately I wanted one when I was  growing up. It was EVERYTHING! I always jumped at a chance or excuse to use my sister's iPod silver iPod nano. For whatever reason, I was incredibly fascinated by the smooth clickwheel and the way the album art switched from one to another with each song.

The 1st Generation iPod

Released in November 2001, the first generation iPod only came in two configurations: 5 GB & 10 GB. That's about 1000 and 2000 songs, respectively. Prices starting from $399-$499, there were several factors that led to the mammoth rise and prominence of the iPod. It was smaller, had more storage, and more battery life than existing mp3 players. It's unique interface also made significantly easier to use. The convenience of the iPod was further increased with the launch of iTunes in 2003.

The impact of this first iPod has been monumental in the world of technology and communication. It quickly revolutionized the way we consume music. Ever since 2008, Apple has controlled AT LEAST 70% of the market share on digital music players. The iPod was also Apple's first major product, spurring 15 other iPod models (Classic, Mini, Nano, Shuffle, Touch, etc) as well as the iPhone.

It also helped open the door to a whole new industry of tech accessories. The abundance of cell phone cases and covers, screen protectors, charging docks, and other such products that we see so often today largely have the launch of the iPod to thank.

My Online Footprint

This week we were prompted to perform an audit of our online presence. I hadn't tried googling myself in a long time so I was excited (and slightly nervous) to see what I would find. Once I got my first smartphone as a freshmen in high school, I quickly became enthralled with the seemingly endless possibilities and infinite world of the social media. Nowadays, I'd like to think that I'm pretty responsible online as it pertains to the information I allow about myself but we'll see...

So it turns out, its not very easy to find me information about me via simple Google search. I guess the name "Kiara Johnson" is JUST common enough to hide me among the masses. The few things I found about me were usually related to my high school lacrosse career, a few local news articles here and there but even that was pretty hidden in the search. I was pleasantly surprised to find so little about myself and breathed a sigh of relief.
Next, I decided to take a look at my Instagram as an outsider looking in to see what a stranger could possibly learn about me. Here's some of the things a stranger could learn about me from my Instagram (my posts and posts I'm tagged in) at this moment:
- My age and birthday
- I have two older sisters and a brother
- My parents' faces
- Where I went to high school
- Where I go to college
- When I graduate from college
- That I played lacrosse in high school (more specifically, that I played goalie)
- That I was nationally ranked goalie at one time
- That I sing in a gospel choir here on campus

Granted, its not a lot of super personal information since I don't post on Instagram that often but there is a lot of things relating to my personality, hobbies, and close friends and family as well.
I always thought I was comfortable with how my social media/online presence reflects me, but I definitely think its wise to review it every once and a while.

Penn State Football Letter & Internet Proximity

If there's one thing Americans love...it's sports.

More specifically, football.

We view our athletes as these larger-than-life figures that exist to do our bidding and nothing more or less. We tell them to "Shut Up and Dribble" and expect them to fit whatever mold we cast on them This misguided sense of entitlement combined with the increased access and connections we have through social media and the internet can lead to incidents such as what occurred back in October when Jonathan Sutherland, star safety for Penn State's football team, received a letter criticizing his dreadlocks.  **See Below**

Aside from the blatant racism contained within the letter, the thing that really intrigued me about this entire fiasco is the boldness behind the letter. Regardless of whether the letter actually came from an alumni, the problem lies in the writer's assumption that they are somehow entitled to some kind of input regarding Sutherland's appearance simply because he plays for Penn State.

Because of the internet and social media platforms, people have a totally new level of access to their favorite actors, singers, and celebrities.

Echo Chambers: Lost in a Personal Abyss

CLICK HERE

One of the great things about social media platforms is that they allow the users to have control the kinds of content they do/do not want to see. Functions like "mute", "unfollow", "block", "unfriend", give users to curate their own newsfeeds and timelines. Of course this is helpful when you're trying avoid seeing your ex's posts on your timeline or when you're sick of seeing that one viral meme, but it can also have some pretty damaging results.

Do you find that you only obtain news from the same news source? Do you simply read the headlines as opposed researching the stories? Do you see the same kinds of information from the same sources? Does the information you see bolster or strengthen your own preexisting views?
If you answered yes to one or more of these, you could be caught in an echo chamber.

An echo chamber is an environment where a person only encounters information or opinions that reflect and reinforce their own. These most commonly occur within the digital walls of social media platforms and are often influence through confirmation bias, which is tendency to favor information that reinforces existing beliefs. The personalization of our timelines means that we tend to like, share, repost, and follow content that aligns with our beliefs and values, whether that's religious, social, political, etc.

There are several dangers in echo chambers, one of them being that we may begin to accept information that isn't necessarily accurate simply because it LOOKS like something we'd want to be true. On the reciprocal, when we ARE presented with facts and legitimate evidence, we can be more likely to dismiss it , simply because we may not like it. It can also become difficult to distinguish fact from opinion within the confines of an echo chamber. When everyone is only receiving news and information that they agree with, we become less informed and more divided as a society.

The first step in breaking out of an echo chamber is to first acknowledge that you've fallen into one. Once you have recognized that, the rest of the process is much easier. Next, diversify your news sources and outlets. The chart below shows dozens of news outlets and arranges them on a spectrum of political bias. Taking a minute to locate which news sources you view and where they fall on the spectrum can make a huge difference. The final step to breaking an echo chamber is to check your news against other sources. Seeing how other news outlets are covering a story you're interested in helps ensure the validity of the information you're receiving.

Diffusion of Innovations: Twitter

I'd like to think of myself as somewhat of a social media aficionado, especially as it pertains to Twitter. It is how I receive most- if not all- of my news and it is the medium through which I stay connected with many people I know. I thought it apropos to apply Roger's Diffusion of Innovation theory to this extremely popular platform and its history.

• Experimental
• 2006 - Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey originally develops Twitter as an SMS-based communications platform where friends could post status updates and keep tabs on one another. On March 21, 2006, Dorsey sent the first tweet.

⇓⇓⇓

• Take Off 
• April 2009 - A Twitter feud between Ashton Kutcher and CNN over who would be the first to reach one million followers (Kutcher won) followed by Evan Williams (co-founder and then-CEO of Twitter) appearing on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" to set up her account leads to record-setting rates of new user sign ups.
• September 2011 - Twitter reaches 100 million users

Tipping Point ⇉ October 2012 - Twitter acquires Vine

• Saturation
• December 2012 - Twitter passes 200 million monthly ACTIVE users
• February 2013 - I joined Twitter

• Maturation
• 2014-ish

The growth of Twitter has been very interesting to see and experience. Twitter was the first social media account I ever made, way back in 2013 and I believe that, more than other platforms, it has really taken on a mind of its own.

Twitter currently has more than 330 million active users

Eight Values of Free Expression: Stable Change

Unlike many parents with three daughters, my parents didn't encounter much teen angst, defiance, and insolence out of my older sisters and I. We would always hear and see things about children rebelling against parental authority, but we didn't quite understand where it came from. I remember asking my mom why she this was so common. Both in regards to children and their parents as well as people and authority figures. What she told me was something that's stuck with me. She said when dealing with children there's a pretty simple formula one can adhere to:

Rules/Restrictions - Relationship = Rebellion

She said that a lot of the rules and boundaries we give to children, they may not understand. But if you have developed a trusting relationship with the child outside of just telling them what to do, they are more likely to abide by the rules because they trust that the restrictions stem from a place of love, care, and well-being. Another important part of that is making sure the child feels heard. Many of the grievances of a child may seem frivolous to an adult, but merely casting aside their feelings does little to alleviate their hurt or bring about any kind of solution.

A similar sentiment can be applied to the general public, especially as it pertains to governing a people. Suppression of the people's voice and frustrations is a sure-fire way to breed feelings of  resentment, animosity, and indignation toward those in power.
This is why I believe Stable Change is the most critical of the 8 values of Free Expression.
Stable Change is the idea that a society in which disgruntled and alienated citizens are allowed to vent and voice their frustrations is ultimately more stable because people will be less likely to resort to violence or other clandestine methods of rebellion. The idea of public dissent was a key principle in the founding of America and historically speaking, many coups and rebellions around the world were ignited through the suppression of the voice of the people.

The Highest Court in the Land

Taken by me on my trip to Washington D.C. in 2015

Like most of government institutions in this country, the Supreme Court has grown and changed since its conception. Although I previously had a standard knowledge of the Supreme Court and its workings, there were still new things I learned while researching for this blog. For example, learning of the initial limited and ambiguous nature of the Supreme Court intrigued me. I had assumed that the nature and function of the Supreme Court and its rulings had remained constant since its establishment.

The principal function of the Supreme Court as we understand it today is to decide whether laws or lower court rulings are constitutional. I always assumed that this was the intent from the beginning, but although it was outlined at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, what we now know as "judicial review" wasn't fully cemented until 1803. It was here when Chief Justice John Marshall used the case of Marbury v. Madison to establish judicial review as the right of the court to review all facets of government and deem them constitutional or not. This court also established another crucial aspect of the Supreme Court- legal precedence. 

Precedence is the first court case to establish a rule or legal doctrine. Such as the Plessy v. Ferguson case in 1896 which ruled that separate but equal facilities in public spaces WAS constitutional, however this ruling was later overturned in 1954 by Brown v. Board of Education.

Since then, the Supreme Court's role in our government has been pretty straightforward and consistent: Hear important cases that have been appealed through the district and appellate courts, and make a ruling on their constitutionality. Same applies to any legislation passed through Congress.

A People of Protest: Hong Kong

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."                                                        -First Amendment 

Peaceful or otherwise, protest has been a part of the United States since before the nation actually began.

The Boston Tea Party.
The Greensboro Sit-Ins.
The Montgomery Bus Boycott.
The Anti-Vietnam War Protest.

The Million Woman March.
And the list goes on...

Hong Kong protesters brandish American flags through the streets

For both our nation and the world, anytime a major change is needed public dissent must grow into protest. In most cases, we Americans take pride in our right to protest how we choose...in some cases...See: Black Lives Matter, national anthem protest, etc. Nevertheless, freedom of expression and protest is known globally as a hallmark tenant of American ideology.

Over the past few months, I've scrolled past many headlines containing words such as "Hong Kong", "violence", "protesters", "police", "Chinese government", "tensions rise" and "teargas" among other things. It didn't take long for me to catch the gist of it all: Chinese citizens in Hong Kong are protesting the government, police, or both and things are getting pretty intense. Despite their repeated appearances on my timelines, I realized I don't actually know why these protests are happening and why they've garnered so much international attention.

So I decided to do some research and give you guys a rundown of what's been going on:

• The protests began in opposition to an extradition bill that would have allowed for criminal suspects to be extradited to mainland China under circumstances.
• Critics argue that this bill would give China greater influence over Hong Kong, could be used to target activists and journalists, and could expose Hong Kong citizens to unfair trials and violent treatment.
• Hong Kong police have used tear gas, rubber bullets, water cannons, and other aggressive methods to control protesters.
• Many protesters adopted a motto: "Five demands, not one less!"
1. For the protests to not be characterized as a "riot"
2. Amnesty for arrested protesters
3. An independent inquiry into alleged police brutality
4. Implementation of complete universal suffrage
5. Withdrawal of the extradition bill
• Since the protests began, over 2000 protesters have suffered injuries and many more were arrested.

On October 23, Hong Kong authorities finally withdrew the controversial extradition bill that sparked the violence that has ensued for months. Although protests are still continuing in various forms, it is interesting to see how these events will progress and possibly extend into 2020.

“Every man of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest.”  

 - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Build-A-Breaking News Story

Over the past couple of years, our nation has been subject to many rather, um...unfortunate political and pop culture headlines caused by our current Presidential administration. Most notably, the concept of "Fake News".

It is here.

It is there.

It is EVERYWHERE.

It sees us when we're sleeping. It knows when we're awake. You get the gist.

According to some individuals, fake news is an epidemic that has poisoned nearly every facet of modern mainstream news media. Others believe it be nothing more than a scare tactic towards journalism via national propaganda. Now, regardless of how the term began or what it has spiraled into, fake news and misinformation in the news has become a growing concern for many Americans. Especially considering the current state of our nation's leadership and the upcoming 2020 election.
Since many people (including myself) receive most, if not all, of their news through social media platforms, people have called upon these companies (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) to take vigilant action against the cyber-terrorists bent on deceiving the public...and Facebook has actually done it!!!!

Kinda. Sorta. Well...

Basically, back in 2017, Facebook made an announcement about a change they were implementing that would keep users from editing article headlines, pictures and other link data before posting the link on Facebook, thus limiting users from being able to post inaccurate and deceitful information under the guise of legitimate news.

Sounds pretty great, right? But, OF COURSE, some users have discovered a loophole around this, which is always a possibility in this sea of technology and innovation we live in. However, Facebook doesn't really seem to care too much. As evident in the article, Facebook has dealt with a lot of criticism since the 2016 presidential election regarding egregious amounts of misinformation on its platform- which has spurred all of their recent efforts towards integrity and honesty within their platform. However, the loophole mentioned in the article was reported multiple times to Facebook with no avail, so the question remains:

Is Facebook doing enough to curb fake news or enough to make it LOOK like it is???

From Twitter Fingers to Constitution Fingers

In 2019, we have embraced the plethora of social networking platforms and utilized them to their nearly limitless potential. We use them to connect to distant loved ones, meet new people, advertise our businesses, sell our products, promote our cousin's abysmal SoundCloud. 

However, with most things meant for good, there's always gonna be people who have nothing better to do than use their Cheeto™ dust-covered fingers to spread hate, lies and negativity. The great thing about about social media is that we have the option to block these internet trolls when we come across them and simply move on...well, most of us can.

According to several First Amendment groups, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is violating the Constitution by choosing to block certain trolls and harassers on her personal Twitter account, @AOC. These groups claim that as a government official, Cortez's twitter is a public forum and blocking people infringes on their First Amendment right to free speech...

To me that sounds pretty unreasonable. The Twitter account in question is her PERSONAL account, not her official government account. Obviously public officials are allowed to be criticized publicly, however...having the right to do something doesn't mean it is without consequence. There's a difference between criticism and harassment and I don't blame her for wanting to clear a small portion of that weight from her life.

AOC Blocks Twitter Trolls