American History X dotcom/weblog (response #3)

More than a decade ago, I remember having to go to my town’s public library to research the country of Venezuela for a sixth grade report. With the help of the librarian, I was able to find a number of books and articles quite easily. I remember having access to a computer at school and at the library for research but it was not as user friendly as today. Looking back on that now, I am envious of the sixth graders today. Venezuela can easily be “googled” and pages after page on the country is a click away. One article can lead to another and the cycle is endless. In the beginning, authors of these websites containing all the information are created by credible individuals with years of experience and expertise on the subject matter. Years later, the growing popularity of weblogs enables a fourteen year old, who has access to a computer and the internet, to log on and become an author of an article. The emergence of weblogs generated new authors with very distinctive voices that do not always focus on facts but mostly on opinions. Since weblogs tend to be opinionated, its linking capabilities facilitate democracy and generate a development in interactive communication.

Donald Matheson writes, “Many webloggers also present a more radical communitarian view, drawing on idealizations of the Internet as a democratic space in which all social actors’ voices may be heard, and where audiences can become active publics” (452). While journalists aim to publish stories that include no partiality; facts are generally presented. With the materialization of weblogs, a person who had just read all the facts, and who also formed his or her opinions, can freely state them online for the public to read. The next step in interactive communication that weblogging makes possible proves to be a significant development because it stimulates different opinions and make them easily accessible for the public.

The purpose of interactive communication is to enable people to easily send and receive information with the use of a machine. There is no better way to send information than making it public or searchable on the Internet, and there is no easier way to receive information than clicking a hypertext. Both features are the frameworks of weblogs. Matheson writes, “ The weblog is a form of writing that is unique to the web, reliant on what is arguably its key characteristic: the hyperlink. It thus allows us to explore the adaptation of journalism to a new context, at some distance from the heavily print-dependent styles of much online news” (445). With the intention of comparing a weblog and a news article online, I searched for Mel Gibson’s recent trouble with the law. I was prompted to either purchase a news article or subscribe to an online newspaper. On the other hand, the weblog I found already had a link to a news article within the body of the log. The news article stated all the facts and contained no hypertexts while the weblog had a very opinionated tone with links to her sources and what I think had contributed to her anger.

As Cass R. Sunstein suggests that:

“As a result of the Internet and other technological developments, many people are increasingly engaged in the process of personalization, limiting their exposure to topics and points of view of their own choosing. They filter in, and out, with unprecedented powers of precision. These developments make life much more convenient and in some ways much better; we all seek to reduce our exposure to uninvited noise, and many of us like to read opinions we find congenial” (58).

Though personalization is a common trend on the Internet and other technological developments, I don’t believe that personalization is a cause of limiting exposures of points of views and I certainly do not agree that people only enjoy reading opinions that they agree with. I believe quite the opposite. In my opinion, personalization creates the unique voice usually stimulated by antagonistic views of those opposing their beliefs. Some people may “filter” but even these people will run out of things to say about their views if they are not reading what their rivals have to say. Despite the fact that some people may side with one faction and intensely oppose another, it should not be assumed that one group is filtering out the other just because their opinions differ.

The growth in popularity of weblogs as a way to interactively communicate information with its content usually based more on opinions than facts, may cause a possible hindrance to democracy by, as Sunstein suggests, polarization . For instance, in the film American History X, the story of a young reformed neo-Nazi advocate, Derek, played by actor Edward Norton confronts his mentor, Cameron, played by Stacey Keach, who tells him of the advancements on their organization while he was in jail. Cameron tells Derek of how things have changed. He says, “You talk about organization, wait ‘till you see what we’ve done to the Internet. We’ve got every gang from Seattle to San Diego working together now. They’re not competing anymore, they’ve consolidated.” The power of the Internet and the user’s potential to manipulate its content are directly connected, therefore the cause and outcome, whether it be a positive or negative development in interactive communication, depends heavily on the users. The Internet should be taken as what it is; an information provider and receiver. While the neo-Nazi’s are able to express their opinions, the opposing faction are also free to express their opinions. If they are curious as to what the other group is up to, they can easily find a link to their weblog.

---