Sunday, August 25, 2013

Next up on TLC... Digital Hoarding: How much is too much?

I think we've all seen a pointless website; websites set up as jokes or blogs long forgotten. Most people, especially in the current age of 'share anything and everything as often and as instantly as possible' web usage, don't give a second thought to content left for dead on the inter-webs. An estimated 95% of blogs are abandoned; never to be visited again. Why should it matter? Cost. Most abandoned blogs aren't deactivated. The same is the case for most abandoned web domains. Data storage like that costs money. Lots of money. The size of the internet as a whole is estimated to double about every five years. Can you imagine? From millions of cat memes to tens of millions of cat memes! (I can't be the only sucker for cat memes right?)

Increases that vast require drastic improvements to servers. Larger servers and more employees cost more money. Some think the added clutter is just something that comes with the territory. The internet is a powerful tool that can get you noticed at little to no cost at all, all from the comfort of your mom's basement in your Simpson's pajamas. It takes out the middle man. Many people who's success originated  on a simple online forum or blog probably started over a few times, and likely didn't erase their prior attempts (how about a holler for Blogger eh?). Just like the thousands (probably hundreds of thousands) of photos of my kids that were duds (you know, you take 20 in a row to get the one Facebook worthy photo) that I just can't bring myself to delete, I believe most of the internet is being clung to in sad hopes that it will one day be useful or relevant again. Maybe we'll need it some day. Maybe I'll use it in 10 years. In the meantime what is it costing? For me it's a few expensive external hard drives, full of course, that will probably never be accessed again. On a grander scale, it's probably costing businesses (like Blogger) millions in storage for dormant and now irrelevant data. I believe that just like our landfills, we're going to eventually see this form of digital hoarding become an issue. It should be cleaned up before it's too late. Do you have useless information on the internet? Do you feel it will have a negative effect at some point? Have you ever had old information come back to bite you in your later life or maybe in relation to a job? (a good read on social media and job searching! http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/yes-for-the-last-time-your-potential-employers-are-judging-you-by-what-you-put-on-facebook/)



Resources:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/11/release-us-from-burden-of-internet-clutter
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/fashion/07blogs.html?_r=0
http://www.labnol.org/internet/internet-size-to-double-every-5-years/6569/

Photos retrieved from:
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m59h8iU2QG1rr4faco1_400.jpg
http://www.viceland.com/blogs/de/files/2010/09/computer_dump_large.jpg

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Scissors beat paper...

...every time! Ok, so I'm using 'scissors' in a metaphorical sense here but in reality the cutting edge of digital media is becoming a much preferred source over printed paper media in almost every facet of news.  In a time when at least 61% of people get at least part of their news from online sources (and really, that statistic is from 2010, I think it's very conservative) it comes as no surprise that the business of printed media is scrambling to stay relevant. Breaking news is accessible instantly. Long are the days of card catalogs and spending hours browsing through library databases to find an old article. With booming search engines like Google and Bing a plethora of information and databases can be accessed in one click from any computer, tablet, or cellular phone (cellular... even that word sounds outdated!). Craig Newmark (the 'craig' in craigslist) has been quoted as suggesting that papers create a culture of participation. I think Mr. Newmark should probably post an ISO (in search of, for those not particularly savvy in the lingo of online abbreviations) ad to try and buy a new perspective. Online news has the population involved in their news like never before.

It's taken some time, but even the older generation in my family is getting on board with the social media trend. Want to see fun? Introduce Grandma to Facebook and see how many times she accidentally posts a PM (personal message) as her status! Through social media I can share and receive links to interesting articles and take place in a discussion about them right there underneath the shared link with people of all varieties and locations. When has a newspaper ever brought together people from 3 generations, living in 3 different states, and all discussing simultaneously about something that interests or pertains to them? Short of a three-way call (do people still do that?) I can't think of an example. In the days when newspapers were thriving you had to write in with a question or comment about an article and wait for it to be published or responded to by letter. With today's emerging media I can access an article directly on CNN moments after it's been published and comment on the article with my views or concerns directly in an interactive platform with other readers from around the globe. Newspapers are only alive because the generation that lived for them is still kicking. With the largest viewership of newspapers being those aged 55 and up, printed newspapers and magazines are sure to continue to die off making way for a generation of instant gratification and global communication. So what say you? Are paper publications dying out? Are you sad to see them go? Where do you get YOUR news?










Resources: http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/keeping-newspapers-alive_b8046
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/01/social.network.news/index.html
http://www.naa.org/Trends-and-Numbers/Readership/Age-and-Gender.aspx