Shirky: Chapters 7-11

There were quite a few things to take away from the last portion of this book.

I found it very interesting when Shirky talked about group networks and how the connections of people within small groups affected larger groups. When Shirky talked about the "Power Law" in terms of these group members "recognizing" each other through certain powerholders within each group, it made things more conceivable in terms people "knowing" each other through affiliation. It also made a great deal of sense when Shirky appropriated these powerholders as critical to connectivity and how the structure of the group dissipates as these powerholders aren't available or leave a group(s). An example of this holds true when dealing with corporate America and professional sports.

When key figures or powerholders within the corporation or professional sports team leave or become disabled the networking or collaboration is affected negatively. This impact comes in various forms, but in a nutshell, the overall degradation of the corporate or professional team is usually obvious.

Before reading Shirky I believed that the Internet, or rather e-mail was a superior method of relaying important political messages. Shirky's seems to foster this idea through much of the book, but conversely displays the downfall of many political messages within chapter 11. It was eye opening to see that many of the messages that I thought would have some effect in the political arena may be nothing more than "useless" as Shirky states.

Overall, what I took away from this book and what I believe to be Shirky's main points center on the cost association with sharing information, the affects of group formation, and how the cost transaction associated with both sharing and group formations has been dramatically cut; altering the way that technologically advanced operate and communicate. Much of what Shirky describes holds relevance in most of our lives and deserves recognition as much more than opinionated rhetoric.

Shirky (Ch. 4-6)

Chapter five in this book was awesome!! The example that Shirky uses (Wikipedia)shows us quite a few things about the ability of individuals to come together as a group (albeit an unorganized one or one that is only organized through the conglomeration of people visiting the site) and initiate a compilation of knowledgeable factoids to help create a site that relies completely upon user input.

The ability for anyone to help write the Wiki articles created a "sense" of community and enabled those without credentials to put forth information that could be valuable to the Wikipedia community and system.

The most intriguing part of the book so far revolved around the power law that was described in chapter five. Chapter four held some key points which I will discuss. Chapter six fell flat with nothing to offer but a rehashed version of the beginning of the book utilizing an example of the Catholic church and the VOTF.

Chapter four seemed to coincide with some of what Tapscott was saying in Grown up Digital. Chapter four discussed the capabilities that new technology brings to the table for groups to be able to communicate. Shirky shows how communication is "instant, global, and nearly permanent." Shirky goes on to discuss how meetings are now able to be formed instantly when utilizing the internet. The concept of fame on the internet is also noteworthy. It's interesting to note that fame is exactly similar both on the web and in real life....People of fame simply aren't able to interact with their audience in either setting.

Curiously Shirky describes web pages as a latent community. Often web communities are centers for people to communicate and share ideas and resolve issues. To consider a website to be a latent community seems to be somewhat overstating the context of what community is. A web page is nothing more than a viewpoint or selectable site in which people can scan information and direct that information to reach a determined destination or conclusion. There are many paths that a user may take when visiting a website. The path that they choose may not reflect an interest in chatting or interacting with the community while they are on the site, even if they hold a common interest there.


The profound nature of chapter five contains a substance that should be given specific academic attention. The imbalance that drives large social systems instead of damaging them makes for a reviewable read. When Shirky states, "On the contrary, most large social experiments are engines for harnessing inequality rather than limiting it" and "large social systems cannot be understood as a simple aggregation of the behavior of some nonexistent "average" user" he sets the tone for the power law distribution.

As Shirky frames the context of the power law into a visible graph, the reader is easily able to recognize the impact factor that the "few" have on many. It shows how the "few" are achieving a large amount compared to those that are "average" and contributing for the masses more so than the "average user". It was also brilliant to note that power law distributions "describe systems of interacting element rather than just collections of variable elements." I have always questioned the conditions of statistical analysis and it's skewed view of a small sample compared with that of a much larger scope. Shirky's brilliant demonstration of the power law helped me to solidify my assertions regarding the statistical analysis process by describing how the analysis can be changed by only a few people in a sample. While it's possible that some of those who read this may disagree with my assertions, the skeptic viability regarding statistical analysis's can be referenced in correlation with Shirky's published work.

It should be interesting to see what transpires in the last few chapters of this book.

Here Comes Everybody (Ch. 1-3)

Reading Shirky was an eye opener. I had never really given thought, at least in depth, to the profound effect that ephemeral grouping and structures had on the world. The scenarios Shirkey gives definitely drive home the importance that these ephemeral groups play in the role of information delivery and their ability to take action in a given situation. It was interesting to note that this wasn't even possible ten years ago. The ability to quickly generate the amount of attention to any given situation is really mind boggling. To be able to change the "verdict" of a police department over a "lost" cell phone is amazing as well. What Shirky so distinctly points out is the ability to take action or recourse both swiftly and effectively utilizing a mass communication and action system full of individuals. The individuals that get involved may offer different skill sets and be able to offer assistance and services that may not have been available before a viral spread of a particular piece of information. As we see later in the reading, these self-constructed groups can do much more than help get back a cell phone.

In Shirky's Flikr example we are able to see that a file sharing platform was able to be an organizer of sorts, bringing together a united "tag-line" of photographs with relative ease. By tagging the photographs and linking them together they were able to create a "collage" of peoples works regarding an event and enable users of the platform a way in which communication and sharing were possible with minimal expenditures.

Also important is the current ability to relay information so quickly. The tactile trait of information sharing instantaneously is obvious in most of Shirky's scenario's but was definitely prominent in his example of Trent Lott's comment on Strom Thurmond's birthday.

While Lott's comment too many seemed innocuous, the ability to stream the content of his comment was contextualized by the media and regarded by many to be of great consequence. The stream of information enabled people to become intimately familiar with something that they may have never known about otherwise. So is this a good thing or a bad thing? How do we perceive the notion that immediacy plays in our own lives?

It's unnerving to think that an innocent comment regarding a situation could have an impact that could conceivably end your career. This may show the negative impact that this information flow can have on people in general, but what about the important aspects of information flow? Shirky shows a positive spin on information flow by utilizing the example of Ivanna and her lost cell phone. It's important to realize however, that Shirky comments on the negative side effects of information flow aside from the positive outcome regarding Ivanna's (and Evan's) triumph.

How do we win? There doesn't seem to be any real finite answer to this question. It seems as though we must weigh our actions with that of unintended consequences and hope for the best outcome. But as the saying goes, "What goes around, comes around" or "What's good for the goose isn't always good for the gander."

Consumerism - Tapscott

I found this part of Tapscott's book to be especially beneficial. Tapscott addresses the foundational change that's occurring in that way that the Net Generation is purchasing goods. This isn't only relevant to the way that I purchase goods but relevant to the business structure that I need to pursue in the consumer market.

It's interesting to see how the Net Generation is tired of being fed one-way information and is more interested in interacting with the information. It was also beneficial to note how short the attention span is of this younger generation and how important it is to "reel them in" immediately if you want your advertising point to drive home. While this has always been an important part of marketing it seems as though it may be of the utmost importance in today's fast paced markets.

Tapscott also points out the information sharing tactic that Net Gener's utilize in order to make purchases. I have found myself doing this more in the last two years than ever before. I like to rely on people that have actually experienced a product and will be able to deliver real information both good and bad. The reviews aren't sales pitches to show you how great product X is, they are "real world environments" that allow for critiques and evaluations of product X. I find that this type of feedback is valuable not only for me, but for companies that produce product X. This allows them instant feedback top produce fixes or make better products in the future.

I also notice that I find myself wanting information faster than ever before. I get impatient if my online connection isn't immediate or web pages don't load fast enough. This seems to ring true for most Net Gener's as well. This points back to my point earlier. Net Gener's want the latest, fastest, and newest products. It's interesting to see that this is the new trend for popularity. It used to be who had the coolest cars, now it's who has the best laptop's, cell phones, and I-pod's.

Overall this would be a great read for anyone wanting to participate in marketing, advertising, and business. It's necessary to understand the trends and how to effectively communicate your message and activate your product within communities.

Tapscott Part 2

Tapscott is definately an optomist at heart. In the second part of the book it was good to see him take a turn back towards reality. He relays to us how the Net Generation learns and absorbs information differently than previous generations.

I do admire Tapscott in his attempts at making everything seem as positive as possible. There were several passages that stood out to me throughout the reading, but one talked specifically about the educational system being the downfall of students, not the Internet. In some ways what Tapscott is saying makes sense. It may not be the teachers fault, the schools fault, or technologies fault, but the underlying issue deals with the way in which youth are being taught.

I see Tapscott's connection between the way that the Net Generation is being wired and how the arcaic way of teaching doesn't seem applicable to them. I agree that there needs to be some sort of reform, not only in the way that we are teaching but in the way that we utilize the technology that has been given to us. We can't expect people to walk up to a computer and start utilizing it without any guidance. As Tapscott states in earlier chapters, many teachers are being taught by the students. We need to have instructors who not only are technologically savvy, but instructors that know how to reach the people through interactive participation.

Tapscott's insight into the video game realm and its abilities to help generate new brain growth seemed to be promising. I have heard that this technique was already being used in places to help kids learn more effectively and that it helped to strengthen the learning process. The statement, "Where traditional learning is based on the execution of carefully graded challenges, accidental learning relies on failure. Virtual environments are safe platforms for trial and error. The chance of failure is high, but the cost is low and lessons learned are immediate" really made me think about how the learning process is changing so much. In my own life I see this happen when I install new software, or play a new video game. I just jump right in and start learning, rather than reading through a bunch of manuals. I suppose that I want "instant gratification". I get pissed if an internet connection takes more than a couple of seconds to start loading a page. Funny enough I'm from the 1200 baud modem days too. My perception of how things should operate has changed over the course of the last few years. That's not to say that I still don't read manuals for things or follow directions, but it does elucidate upon the fact that I am impatient at times and want things to "grab me" immediately.

My brother is currently working for a company who is implementing many of the ideals and ideas that Tapscott is talking about. They have a break room with foosball tables, pool tables, video games, etc... for their employees. The company takes one day (most of the time a half-day) out the week to do something fun with all of it's employees. They use collaboration to work on projects and use these "fun times" as team building exercises. The idea of a fun work environment and positive atmosphere changes the employees perception of work. They are motivated to do a good job because they are constantly rewarded for their efforts. While they still have to work, work seems fun and enjoyable, not boring and sacraficial.

The only thing that I could wish for is that more companies would start taking this approach. Perhaps they would see less turn over, more profits, fewer sick employees, and an overall atmosphere of determination and satisfied employees.

Growing up Digital (Part 1)

Tapscott's book, Grown up Digital has so far proved to be one of the best books that I've read while attending W.S.U.

Before I go any further though, I might say that Tapscott opinionates some of his research based upon his own children. Although it appears that he does have some statistical data to relay his notions, I found that he often utilized examples from his own offspring, thus possibly skewing his viewpoint in a manner that he may not have otherwised experienced if he had utilized other examples...Just a thought.

Ironically I found myself attracted to the book's message because of my own children. Tapscott's message was very easy to follow and I found myself agreeing with many of the points he was making in the book. While I found it very interesting when relating his points to my own children, I found it to be of great benefit to myself as well.

Tapscott's statement on pg. 29: "The successful companies will be those that recognize that networked structures work more effectively than old-fashioned hierarchies. Peer collaboration drives innovation and new approaches to management and government."

This particular statemet really resounded with me. It's not only important to understand why my own children act or have behave differently than I may have at their given ages, but relevant in the job markets as well. Tapscott points out that large businesses (especially the high-tech industry) are already starting to shift their perspectives and adopting this new business model. While I haven't personally seen this model in any of my work environments I wonder how long it will be until this is more of a mainstream philosophy in most business models.

I found Tapscott's "Eight Net-Generation Norms" to be very benefical as well. It really relates to my field of study in a remarkable way. By seeing these norms I was able to understand what this generation wants and is looking for in products and business practices. It is echoed in the statement, "Businesses targeting the Net Gen should expect and welcome intense scrutiny of its products, promotional efforts, and corporate practices. The Net Gen knows that their market power allows them to demand more of companies, which goes for employers as well." The first thing that I thought of when I read this was the new Dominoe's Pizza advertising campaign. see link :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH5R56jILag

This small documentary was turned into an advertising campaign and hits what Tapscott is saying square on the head!! A great example.
This shows how Dominoe's is trying to gain confidence from the Net Generation. They are showing that they have LISTENED to what people are saying, ADMITTED their failures, AND HAVE DONE SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!

I really appreciated Tapscott's insight into how the Net Gen is so unabashed in their privacy issues. It shows how I may be able to help protect my kids to a greater degree in the future.

Another very relevant issue that is addressed in the first portion of the book is that of broadcasting. It was insightful because it showed how the effects of one way communication were diminishing and before long may completely fade away. It definately rings another bell for businesses trying to compete for future consumers. As the cell phone is currently one of the leading information tools currently I see consumerism heading in that direction. I feel that if companies are to stay afloat that they must embrace a strategy that utilzes this current medium and be on the lookout for the next big wave in an interactive communication medium.

All in all, I'm very excited to read the rest of this book. I think that it will help lay a ground foundation and understanding for me personally into how the Net Gen will purchase and consume/dictate information. It's exciting to think about how these changes will directly impact my kids and I.

Review on "A better Pencil" (Chapter 7-12)

A great read. Barron finished the book well. There were a few things that I found throughout the text that left me asking myself some questions.

First, he notes on pg. 133 that there were an "estimated twenty-four thousand variations in so standard a text as the King James Bible-also called the "Authorized Version", a name which itself all but guarantees some uniformity-between its initial publication in 1611 and 1830 (Johns 1998, 91)."

The interesting thing here is that he doesn't specify what those variations are. Are they variations in translation? Are they variations in spelling? Are they variations in dialect? Barron leaves us grasping a bit here. Without being somewhat specific about the variations, he leaves the sentence open as a possible undertoned statement.

I found his statement on pg. 134, "So prevalent is online shopping, trading, banking, and bill paying today that the signature, the long-trusted validator of documents ranging in import from declarations of independence to greeting cards and personal checks, and the one last survivor of the decline in handwriting, may soon go the way of the clay tablets and quill pens." to be very profound.

It's amazing to think that in many way Barron may be right. I think about how often I electronically sign something. I'm constantly doing this and so are millions of others throughout the world.

Barron says, "The impending death of the signature is just one of the new wrinkles that the computer has brought to the process of creating and evaluating the written word..."

The signature however, is something that I believe will never go away entirely. It is something that is too personal and has too much significance within our culture. That's why we have hand writing experts....We can't put them out of a job. :-)

Barron's section regarding blogs and their consequences was fascinating. It not only entertained but informed me tremendously. I was unaware of the "Supreme Court's ruling which states that students may lose their First Amendment rights if their speech is potentially disruptive" within the discourse of their blogs. I had always thought of the First Amendment as solid and unbreakable, not something that was malleable and changeable. To learn that their were consequences due to free speech seemed socialistic and communistic, rather than democratic.

The reading also tied in with my DTC 475 class when it talked about the way of language and its destination in technology, past, present, and future. Barron succinctly embodies his book when he talks candidly about how our languages and interactions are directly affected by our technologies and ephemeral social landscapes. His fluid style takes us through these ephemeral social spaces and lets us see first hand how they have a direct impact in our own lives and on the lives of others.

His closing words in the book definately resonated with me. The classes that I'm in now, currently talk about things of the past and possible things of the future, but who really knows what we'll be talking about tomorrow. Who knows how we'll be communicating with one another in a few more years. Who will we be communicating with? Will our interactions with others be different or will they be the same? Will we live in a virtual environment? Will we have a communication breakdown? Will things just fall apart?

Review on "A Better Pencil" (Ch. 1, 3, & 5)

I really appreciate Baron's writing style. His tone and historic examples (which are also very relevant) give the reader a context that is easily received and understandable.

It was enjoyable to read about Henry Thoreau's graphite and pencil industry. I was unaware that he was a business man and entrepreneur. My limited knowledge of the man had always made me think of him as "just a poet".

The real meat and potatoes in our reading assignment came in chapter five. Utilizing clay as a writing medium, Barron relayed a great deal of importance and significance when he asked his students to consider the following:

- "how writing-whether on clay or on computers-forces them to deal with the technology at the same time that they are trying to get the writing done;

- "how technology affects the content of their writing as well as the writing process;

- "how the type of writing they are doing influences the technology they are using;

- "and finally, how the technology affects the way that they read a document or text."


Reading through these considerations forced me to look at the points he was trying to make. There were many aspects in his points that I hadn't thought of before.

I had never thought of myself "dealing with the technology" as I used it. Once I learned how to use a certain technology or technologies, I would have said that I assimilated to it.

Barron's second point is one that I felt that I was already familiar with. I have utilized a caligraphy pen and inkwell, pencil, pen, typwriter, and computer. I have even written with a quill and inkwell. I definately relate to how each technology differs and the effect that it has on your style and speed during the writing process.

The third point was one that I hadn't thought of before. Perhaps the reason that I hadn't thought about it before was because I felt that the technology "assimilated" to me and I to it; a balancing act if you will. There are boundaries on all of our writing surfaces both physical and virtual. There are lines on paper, margins in word processors, finite amounts of space on hard drives, sheets of paper that only fit so much on them, etc.... What it really boils down to here is how you craft your writing into the technology. An example would be, how you space letters (linearly and lateraly) or how you punctuate. I feel that we as writers are the ones that determine how the information is constructed, but there still remains a limiting boundary that we stay within.

The last point is one that I've learned more about since I've been attending W.S.U. It seems to relate to Marshall McLuhan's "The medium is the message." You can have the same content in different mediums and it will present itself differently each time within the differing mediums. A billboard may contain a message that says, "Slow down!", however if I were to read the same thing on a sheet of paper that someone handed me, it wouldn't have the same relevance or intitiate the same response from me.

All in all I would say that I gathered more from these specific ideas and considerations than I did through the combined three chapters. These considerations or viewpoints enabled me to critically think about my own writing experiences and really tied together what he was trying to get at in the rest of the reading.

Review on "Things fall apart"

This was an interesting read. Did anyone else pick up the error in the book on pg. 83? I'm surprised that the editor's of the book didn't. "When Ekwefi brought the hoe, he had already put aside his goatskin bag and his big cloth and was in his underwear...etc..... uh hello, Ekwefi is a woman according the the rest of the book....Just my two cents to the editors!! :-)

While I see that it was a fictional book, I would pose a question as to how much of it is authentic material.

When I say authentic, I'm referring to it as Achebe's personal experiences or authentic events. I would like to know how much of this book was actually predicated on Achebe's own life experiences. Are the events that happened in this fictional book based on events that occurred in real life?

That being said....It was interesting to note the cultural attributes the tribes and individuals displayed within the book. From what I gathered, the purpose of the book seemed to be racially evident. Achebe builds momentum in the book by describing many things about the tribes beliefs, customs, rituals, etc... so that we are able to identify and relate to their world. Achebe concludes through an evident racial undertone, unequivically lending the destruction of the tribe to the white man.

It may be arbitrary for me to take a suppositional approach to Achebe's book, however I as the reader am interpreting it's meaning as described. The descriptions of the tribes brutalities seem to equal that of the white man's brutalities, irrespective of customs or beliefs as described in the book. In some ways the tribe may even take the drivers seat with regard to brutality. The way in which beatings were regularly handed down and children were killed is not akin to the brutalities between men.

I'm not really sure what else I was supposed to take away from the reading. Cultural differences were really the only thing to cite.

Review on "Orality and Literacy" (Second Half - Ch. 4 priority)

After reading Ong’s “Orality and Literacy” , I must admit, that while technically challenging and at times dry, he collaborates his information into a well rounded view of his subject.

I was awe struck as he laid out the foundation of orality, language, writing, grammar, and context. It was fascinating to gain introspect on the subject and learn about the process in which we transcend from a primitively oral being into a literate one when given the necessary tools.

From the beginning of Chapter four, Ong’s borrowed quote “Writing establishes what has been called ‘context –free’ language (Hirsch 1977, pp. 21-3, 26) or ‘autonomous’ discourse (Olson 1980a)”, reveals a truth about writing that I’d never given any thought to. It’s relatively easy not to give any thought to this, because typically, we as the reader are putting into context what the writing is “saying” to us.

While parts of Ong’s book are redundant, he does lend some brilliant statements and ideas to us. Some of these statements are as follows and should protract our thoughts as readers in retrospect.

- “Writing heightens consciousness.”

- “With writing or script in this full sense, encoded visible markings engage words fully so that the exquisitely intricate structures and references evolved in sound can be visibly recorded exactly in their specific complexity and, because visibly recorded, can implement production of still more exquisite structures and references, far surpassing the potentials of oral utterance. Writing, in this ordinary sense, was and is the most momentous of all human technological inventions.”

- “Writing develops codes in a language different from oral codes in the same language.”

- “…orality relegates meaning largely to context whereas writing concentrates meaning in language itself.”


One of the most brilliant quotes in Ong’s book, “The condition of words in a text is quite different from their condition in spoken discourse. Although they refer to sounds and are meaningless unless they can be related – externally or in the imagination – to the sounds or, more precisely, the phonemes they encode, written words are isolated from the fuller context in which spoken words come into being.”

What is really amazing however is that we as individuals, process and put into context what we are reading differently from one another. While I’ve long known that individuals are different from one another, the idea of interpreting written language differently is something that I had given little thought to.

Ong does bring up a couple of things in his book that I found questionable. First, described on pg. 88, “The most remarkable fact about the alphabet no doubt is that it was invented only once.” I’m wondering how he came to this conclusion. Was it because someone else stated that in their book?

Secondly, on pg. 95, “A present-day literate usually assumes that written records have more force than spoken words as evidence of a long-past state of affairs, especially in court. Earlier cultures that knew literacy but had not so fully interiorized it, have often assumed quite the opposite.”

Interestingly, I find myself asking who is right? Both are assuming that they have more force than the other. An assumption has a small amount of credibility over a fact and leaves me pondering the situation. According to Ong, written words far surpass oral utterance. Contrary to the prior notion, Ong writes about Plato describing how written words are unresponsive and therefore indefensible. So who’s more credible?

Review on "Orality and Literacy" (Ch. 1-3)

Wow, what a read. I never thought I'd finish. The pure depth and complexity in Ong's writing style notably shows why he's written a book on orality and literacy.

Maybe I'm naive here, but there seemed to be quite a few words that I (and possibly many others) was unable to comprehend or define. In my opinion, Ong's writing style is one that is definitely suited for the scholarly field. It was by all means, a very un-enjoyable read.

That aside.....I did comprehend a fair amount of what he was persuading the reader to endure. Interestingly noted, was the way Ong writes about the differences in oral cultures and literate cultures repeatedly. He seems to illustrate the same point regarding the cultural differences over and over, utilizing three chapters, when it may have been more appropriate to summarize it in one. Maybe that's his culturally literate side appropriating his oral character? :-)

To start chapter one, Ferdinand de Saussure, "the father of modern linguistics", brings up a generic, yet satisfying definition of oral speech's implications on writing as the basic form of language.

Digging deeper in the chapter, we find orality is really, in its own right the basic form of language. We also learn that orality existed and still exists without writing. Conversely, writing doesn't exist without orality (Maybe just me, but I believe any intellectual being could have figured this one out.)

By the end of chapter one we are able to "see" (all pun's intended) that "text" (pg. 13) enables us as literary beings to visualize meaning associated with written language.

Chapter two was a complete sleeper for me. It seemed like filler for the book. The most useful portion of this chapter was Marshall McLuhan's brilliant saying - "The medium is the message", which seemingly resounds among all of the D.T.C. courses at Washington State University.

Chapter three was definitely the most useful and inspiring conceptually. While Ong continually perpetuates the differences in the oral and literate cultures, he clearly illustrates some key points.

- Fully literate people have great difficulty imagining what a primary oral culture is like.

- Primary oral cultures depend on mnemonic patterns, where as literary cultures depend on linguistic structure.

- Fully literate cultures often denature "human things" in favor of making them more abstract. Primary oral cultures verbalize their knowledge based on life experiences, making abstract items fit or relate to human beings.

Ong makes an interesting statement (pg. 50), when he says, "it takes only a moderate degree of literacy to make a tremendous difference in thought process." This statement leads into the most interesting portion of the chapter (pg. 50-51) and describes the differences in thought process among somewhat literate and primary oral people. It is invaluable to evaluate the responses among the people interviewed (pg. 51) in direct correlation with Ong's statement regarding literacy and thought process. The thought process the primary oral culture utilizes is one that very few of us will experience here in the United States and should be worth noting as a highlight in Ong's book.