Facebook vs. Google

The other day in class we discussed the types of news that people actually paid attention to. We were asked four different questions and based on what people's answers were determined the type of news that appeals more to people in our generation. The questions were:

1. What is the difference between the new health care bill that was passed and medicaid?

2. What criminal charges has Tiger Woods been accused of?

3. Why is Pakistan the most dangerous country in the world?

4. Why is Sarah Palin's daughter famous?

You might think these questions are fairly easy, but depending on your age, your interests might be different. Our class has the most correct answers for the last question about Bristol Palin. Some might say that's not a surprise and some would agree that that is pretty sad and pathetic. The reason for this can be best understood from this article from Techtree.com titled "Facebook Most Visited Site in US, beats Google".

According to this article that was written March 18, 2010, Facebook is the most visited site in the United States. "In 2010, the world's largest social networking website Facebook has managed to do what no other website has ever done. It actually managed to topple Google and become the most visited website in U.S. last week! This helps understand why more people knew about Sarah Palin's daughter than why Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world. Aside from the fact that entertainment news is much more appealing then "real" news, but more people search on facebook and use that as a source for news than they actually search websites that offer news.

I know this much is true because i can personally relate. I remember I first found out about Michael Jackson's death from someone's newsfeed on Facebook. I saw that it said "RIP MJ" and I continued to search on facebook to see if anyone else had it written on their status. I saw a few others with similar status' so I decided to do some research. I went to Google and typed in "Michael Jackson" and saw a couple news stories. Only some of the sites I could potentially trust, but not all. I waited until a reliable news source could confirm, such as CNN or NBC.

It is just amazing to see how much our world has changed in terms of technology and social medias, but also to see that our generation's interest in news has completely changed. Luckily my parents and I knew all the answers to each of the four questions, but that is only because I try and pay close attention to all types of news, not just entertainment.

"Duck the Puck"...Literally

Mark today's date in your calender as the first day to broadcast something in 3D to televisions that are able to receive 3D pictures. According to CBS, in an article titled "Duck the Puck: Hockey in 3D Makes TV Debut" published today, March 24, an NHL hockey game between the NY Rangers and the NY Islanders at Madison Square Garden will be broadcast live in 3D. However, only "to customers who subscribe to the local MSG sports network and have television sets that can receive a 3D picture". They are not expecting a big audience because not many people have these television sets that allow for 3D pictures, but just as CBS News and CNET technology analyst Larry Magid says "every new technology has to start somewhere - and this is one of those products that may have strong appeal for some people".

While this sounds like it is going to be a great idea and seems like it will be really cool, I don't see myself or many others running off to buy 3D televisions. At this point, the technology is not 100% and its hard to invest in something so new that hasn't be exposed to everyone. This was something we discussed in class a few weeks ago about 3D televisions. The idea sounds exciting, but how is it going to work? Are we going to have to wear glasses when we watch TV? And what happens when we have guests over to watch a show, whether its the Academy Awards, the Superbowl, or even an episode of Glee, are the homeowners expected to provide glasses for everyone?

I saw Avatar in 3D and absolutely LOVED it. I thought the technology was unlike anything else I have ever seen or experienced and it really set itself apart from any other kind of movie, not even including the story line of Avatar. Wearing the glasses during the three hour movie wasn't really that bad, but I cannot imagine having to sit with them every time I watch TV. Unless, wearing glasses is not even an option and all you need is a specific television that broadcasts pictures in 3D, but even then, is it going to be a clear picture or just look weird? Like during the MTV Music Awards they had a 3D segment during the Michael Jackson dedication that only some people actually got to enjoy because they had 3D glasses, but for those of us at home, the screen just looked fuzzy and it was somewhat dizzy on the screen. If that is how 3D television pictures are going to look if you don't have the proper glasses, then count me out.

The New Form of Advertising

I am not even sure when social medias became the latest trend, but it has, and not only have social medias attracted younger generations, it has spread to adults, as well as businesses. One in particular that I automatically think of is Facebook. Facebook is an extremely well-known social media that companies are using as advertising tools. Oh, Twitter can also be included in that, because between Twitter and Facebook almost every company, corporation, restaurant, or store has a Facebook page or a Twitter page. It is somewhat disturbing.

I joined Facebook before coming to college as a way to meet new freshman that were attending Indiana University the same time as me. So what started as a social networking site to me, has turned into people asking me to become fans of their products or company. According to Direct Traffic Media, "The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) are widening their net of influence to include promotions through new media sources like Twitter and Facebook as social networks become a more prominent advertising tool for businesses". The original idea of Facebook has completety shifted in the last couple of years since I started using the site. What started as being a social networking site has now become a promotional social site.

There is so much one can do on Twitter and Facebook that can promote a product or company, of course businesses are willing to adapt to the new and improved technology. Slowly less and less papers and magazines are being published because more stuff is being produced and updated online, no one has time to sit and read the paper. People are catching up on CNN.com while sitting on the bus going to class. As I've mentioned before, technology has really taken a turn, and I can only imagine what will become of these social medias. Businesses have every intention of making online promoting through social medias an important job, in fact, this might be the ideal position for a young college graduate who spent more time on Facebook or Twitter than they did studying for a test, well, assuming that is the case for some.

It will be very interesting to see the kind of advertising that comes through this social medias and how they were learn to advertise specifically to each individual. This was something we started discussing in class, the idea of specialization and to what extent will businesses use Facebook and Twitter as a way to map your likes and dislikes and use your "information" to cater advertisments special for each individual. Kind of scary to think about.

Lost in Technology

I have been awful. I have no idea what has gotten into me, but it seems that I have not blogged in weeks, which is absolutely unacceptable. I realize that with a few days left before spring break I am going to have to do an excessive amount of blogging on topics that have already been put in the past, however, I am going to revisit them anyways.

For starters, I would like to discuss this new Mobile TV thing technicians have developed. I think that it is absolutely crazy. I did not even have to read an article online to tell you how I feel about this new advancement. I think its absolutely ridiculous that people are able to watch television on their cell phones. This topic has come up a lot in class and I still do not understand how people are enjoying this. I think television is meant to be watched at home, in a comfortable "family room" like setting, preferably with others. Does not matter really the situation, I just do not believe TV should be watched from one's cell phone.

I think people have gotten so caught up in technology that they have forgotten the hidden meanings of entertainment. They are supposed to provide a sense of togetherness, a shared experience, as we discussed in class, however, walking around with your cell phone as you watch the MTV Music Awards does not give you that same shared experience as it would if you sat and watched that program with your friends. No more are people getting together to watch a movie or TV shows, however times are different and people's schedules are much more hectic, but still, TV is a time of relaxing and bonding. Instead, watching TV has become routine for some, especially during their forty-five minute commute to work everyday on the train.

I do not see myself watching television on my cell phone anytime soon, in fact, I hope that such an offer is not even available on my phone. I refuse subject myself to becoming one of those people who would rather watch TV on the go than sit and enjoy the opportunity to watch a favorite show with friends or family.

Lazy Lazy Lazy

So there is this new Vizio TV that allows you to have VIA (Vizio Interactive Applications) at the bottom of your screen. This is something we just discussed in class and I am still having a hard time adjusting to our new technology. This TV allows you to have applications on your screen like you would an iPhone or iPad. For example, you can access Twitter, Facebook, Ebay, Pandora, or even Amazon just from your TV screen, while still being able to watch your program.

My initial reaction was extremely negative. I mean, come on! Is this really necessary? Like I said in class, soon enough people will be able to prepare dinner through your television, its is absolutely insane. And I am not one for new technology, I think things to remain somewhat simple and not chaotic, but that is not the kind of future that lies ahead and it is frustrating.

However, after discussing this topic in class, I started to appreciate the idea more, because someone raised a good point. If you are sitting watching a movie with your parents and you want to know where that actor is from or what other movies he has been in before this one, all you have to do is click on your application and there your answer is right there in front of you, literally. So there is definite convience for this new type of television, however, it could create some sort of problem in other areas. For example, if I am sitting and watching a show with a friend and a commercial comes on, she could easily go on her facebook account and look at new posts while I am trying to watch tv. No one wants to see someone else's facebook wall while I am trying to watch a show. No chance! So in that sense, this new tv could easily pose some problems within the sharing community.

Not to mention, the TV which is something that people sit and watch to avoid a hectic life and to just sit back and relax, will not be able to avoid such things. Facebook, twitter, amazon, and whatever else you have an application for will be taking over your tv screen and will interfere when you least would like it to. I am having such mixed feelings about this new tv, but I wanted to vent about it. I think this new technology is somewhat cool, but I have no interest in being apart of it. It just seems like another thing to make our society more lazy. You never have to get up off the couch to do something. Aside from making dinner, the tv is going to excersize for you too. UGH. I am overwhelmed with new technology and while it is extremely cool and exciting to see what comes out next, it is also really intense and is making us all robotic and I am not a fan.

2010 Olympics

The 2010 Winter Olympics have taken off to a great start. With 15 total metals so far, we are in first place, go USA! Since the Olympics have started, I have watched a good amount it and have enjoyed seeing all the participants win the Gold metals, but apparently I am one of the only ones who felt that I was watching it all for the first time. To some, they had already heard who won the metals without even being able to see the actually sport, but why is that? According to Michael Rosenberg from SI.com, "Lindsey Vonn had won gold in the women's downhill hours before NBC primetime coverage began". Well, that's not good.

Apparently, NBC has been delaying coverage from the Winter Olympics which is upsetting many fans. This is I get. I know for me when I'm watching a favorite show and even when it is delayed or I have TIVOed it and everyone else already knew what happened, it can be really frustrating and annoying when I have to hear what everyone else says about it. However, the Olympics are a live sporting event, so to hear the results without actually seeing the sport can be really upsetting and frustrating to serious fans. In fact, it really sucks when you find out the ending result without actually watching it, but why is this happening? It is 2010 and there should not be problems of delay time with the way technology is today.

"The U.S. just had its best night in Winter Olympic history, which should have been awesome entertainment, and it was pretty cool, except ... it wasn't really the best night the U.S. ever had", said Rosenberg. Unfortunately, for some they already knew of the outcome without actually having seen the event, and with it being a live event, that makes it even more upsetting. I just don't get it because like Rosenberg says, with media now we can learn of an actor's thoughts on Twitter, everyone's family member is on Facebook, but somehow we cannot seem to get the Olympics to be aired live without having such a delay. If we are always making technology advances then why is it that events and programs are still delayed?

Another Host Takes Over

For those who watch the show "The View", this might pertain more to you, especially if you are a fan of Barbara Walters. I am for one not a huge fan, however I do enjoy watching her interviews when it comes to celebrities. For example, her yearly interview of "The 10 Most Fascinating People" and "The Barbara Walter's Special" where famous people are interviewed, I sit and watch. There was new news that was brought to my attention and that was that Barbara Walter's is doing her last Oscar night edition of "The Barbara Walter's Special" show this year in March. At first I didn't really care, but then I realized, this is her show. She cannot be replaced. That's when I decided to look more into it and find out what was going on.

According to Barbara Walters, she is "sick of doing them" and feels like 29 years is enough. Which all makes sense but its upsetting to those who really enjoy watching her interviews. Some have suggested that Oprah might be taking her spot and creating some sort of new special in place of the one's Barbara Walters has done, but to me, that is just not the same.

Her co-host Whoopi Goldberg said on the View today that Barbara Walters might reconsider her decision to retire the Oscar-night special, however, Walters was not in accordance.

"You cannot," Walters said. "I remember Frank Sinatra, whom I loved. He retired. Then he sang. Then he retired. Then he sang. When you say it, you're going to do it."

Walters does make a valid point and even though its a little upsetting for those of us who enjoyed watching her specials. I just hope no one takes over and tries to make it their own. I hate when new hosts try to come in and change the vibe of the show. I know it won't be the same show without her, considering the show is called "The Barbara Walters Special". But twenty-nine years later I can understand how she is ready to be done with the show and do other things.