The first section in chapter two really is examining our use of online vs offline date, and when is appropriate to do so. The two main questions asked were:
Can we need offline information to adequately account for online meaning and experiences. and If we consider the internet to simply be a means of communication that is used in every day social context, can it be studied as such, with no online information?
Maria Bakardjieva further insisted that online vs offline data cannot be determined until you know what or who is being studied, and what research questions arise.
Radhika Gajjala was more concerned with Ograd’s descriptions of online vs offline was assuming that both states were physical. Examining how we define online and offline makes it difficult to see it any other way. But Gajjala believes that they are each state of beings. Do we every truly leave online, and do we leave the entire offline world behind when we log on?
Being invested in the online world, i don’t have to be convinced twice the two are undoubtedly connected. While the second question in this book examines the why vs when, i am much more interested in the “what?” What type of media is closing the gap between online vs offline. Furthermore, i am concerned that there was always a one-way communication model used that our offline live impacted our online lives, whereas i am under the firm impression that our online lives are going to set the conditions and context of how we engage offine. Its not that the text argues against, but i empathize with Gajjala in thinking that the verbiage that we use, no matter how widely accepted it is, will start to define how we research and perceive the internet. ftf-cmc (face to face computer mediated communication) is the new lens that is demolishing online vs offline. (based on my informal research)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTZsYumUYUw
I’m currently looking for more links outside of YouTube....apologies
No comments:
Post a Comment