I'm back! Sort of!

Hello all!  I know I haven't updated the blog in a while, and I request your forgiveness.  This blog was my posting ground for my New Media class, which ended earlier this year.  Today, I sat in school, reading about the corporate woes of America and decided that I should make a comeback.  Now, this blog will not merely focus on social media (though it may still appear).  And beware: if all goes as planned (as it usually does), then this blog will be updated with the sporadic nature of broken windshield wipers.  I will be back...

Third Avenue Chocolate Shoppe Business Plan Project

Note- this was an assignment for class.

Approximately 6 months prior, the Third Avenue Chocolate Shoppe requested my assistance in designing a plan to create a social media presence for their business.  My plan involved Facebook, Twitter, Yelp and Foursquare.  

Here are their current rankings on these social media sites: 

• 30 Yelp reviews
• 20 Likes on Facebook
• 0 Twitter followers, 0 Twitter favorites, 0 Re-Tweets
• 60 Foursquare check-ins.  

The Third Avenue Chocolate Shoppe gladly accepted my ideas and followed them perfectly in regards to Foursquare and Yelp, and far surpassed the goals that I had set.  However, their Facebook and Twitter efforts were not as strong as I had hoped.  Here is what I would do differently- they can still turn this around: 

1. UPDATE YOUR FACEBOOK PAGE AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK!  The Facebook page is rarely updated, and there were virtually no changes made since I submitted my final plan.  
2. Change your cover photos and profile photos on Facebook- show what you are doing to everyone else!  
3. GET A TWITTER ACCOUNT ALREADY!  In my plan, I suggested that the company create a Twitter page- this would make your business so much more popular and recognized.  I really can't do much for your business if you don't listen to my suggestions.  

In summation, I have to say congratulations on your Yelp and Foursquare progress, but if you don't make any other changes, you are never going to have as much success as you could.  That is all.  

Chris and Ailsa Make a Collabo

Hey literate people; this is a collabo-blog coming from my friend Chris in Times New Roman...

...And my associate and good friend Ailsa Thiel in Comic Sans.  Our topic on which we will be conversing is a podcast assignment presented by our classmates, Jake and Evan.

...and we were also discussing what would happen if we became the same person

AILSA!  WE AGREED TO NEVER TALK ABOUT THAT!

You didn’t sign the contract.

WHAT CONTRACT?!

Forget about that, it’s a secret.

-______-

Don’t we have to blog about something?  

I suppose so.  Our class has been recording podcasts regarding books about social media (nonfiction or otherwise).  The most recent involves the book Monkey Wrench by P.J. Tracy.  Since Ailsa HAD to talk about the one involving video games, I will allow her to start.  

Thanks for putting me in the spotlight there. For those of you who weren’t present for the discussion, the book was a fiction novel basically about murders based on a video game. I wasn’t the one who read it, so that’s the best summary you will get from me.

A mentally unstable “individual” (read the book or listen to the podcast) is inspired to kill people based on a video game from their husband’s company.  The book implicates video games as the reason for public shootings- that these people mistake the plots from these games for real life and think that they can do anything they want.

I didn’t get a vibe that the book necessarily blamed video games for the violence from the review, but I do know that a lot of people do blame video games.
Because the idea of violence in entertainment is an entirely new concept invented by the evil video games, and definitely not persistent in human nature in any way.

Not
At
All

I couldn’t sarcastically agree more.  Video games are the only reason that violence is present in our world today.  Nothing bad ever happened in the world before they were created.  Nothing.  

On a slightly less sarcastic note...

I don’t think that video games are the reason for our society’s woes.  There is, however, a little sound reasoning here.  Video games are definitely becoming more and more realistic.  And it is possible that a mentally unstable person could confuse a game with reality.  However, they aren’t going to cause a mentally sound individual to go and blow up a country simply because they are “too violent”.  

Which is the problem. You can’t ban every game just because a few people will react badly to it. The initial solution to this is a rating system, such as the ESRB. However, it often goes ignored; 8-year-olds play Call of Duty, 8 years earlier than the suggested age.  Hopefully the government won’t end up regulating these games like drugs and including warnings from the surgeon general- though they have already been listening into conversations online.  

It’s terrifying how realistic video games have become. Life-like graphics, physics, ballistics, gore and shallow dialogue (Oops, that still needs work.)

For example; Take Desert Bus. It’s disturbing how realistic this game is.

I can practically feel that sand grazing my face.

Desert Bus is a driving simulator. According to Wikipedia; “The objective of the game is to drive a bus from Tucson, Arizona to Las Vegas, Nevada in real time at a maximum speed of 45 mph. The feat requires 8 hours of continuous play to complete, since the game cannot be paused.”

It’s simply oozing reality.
To add to this edgy, raw experience, the trip include an extremely minimal change in scenery. A few rocks and signs, no traffic, and a slowly darkening desert sky. The bus veers just slightly off to the side if you try to leave the game to play itself.  The bus will get stuck in the sand, get towed, and you’ll have to start all over again. (The stakes are high!)
The climax of this game is a shockingly realistic bug that gets squashed on the window approximately 5 hours in.

So why did I bring this up? I have no idea.  Let’s consult Wikipedia again.

“Penn Jillette commented in his radio show that the overly realistic nature of the game was in response to Janet Reno's comments in support of the moral panic about violent video games at the time”Desert Bus may actually be an awful example, because I think I’d go ballistic playing that game much sooner than Grand Theft Auto.

Does a video game being realistic threaten our perception of life?
I admit, sometimes, after watching a particularly realistic documentary on cheetah, I try to run down gazelle in the savannah.

Personally, I just spend the evening sitting on the couch devouring whatever innocent leftovers I find roaming around the refrigerator.  OH I FEEL LIKE SUCH A HEEL!

Middens, by John Clowder. The game gives you a moral choice; You can play through the game as a pacifist, not killing any enemies - or give into the bloodthirst of the protagonist’s talking gun. Also notable for the fact the game is trippier than Salvador Dali on drugs. It’s also one of my absolute favorites.

In all seriousness; the perceived threat is that the role-playing aspect of games, being able control the character and “live out” their situations, can affect someone who doesn’t have as strong as grip on reality. This becomes an argument on mental illness, which isn’t a topic I want to approach while still typing in Comic Sans. But I’ll summarize my point briefly: So why is the fear of someone with a mental illness becoming too engrossed in a video game and threatening the lives of others a video game issue, and not a human one?

This is where the podcast sums it up well: It’s easier to blame it on video games. It’s too difficult to talk about mental illness and treating it, so let’s blame Call of Duty and Assassin’s Creed.
Just like we blamed rock music, and Dungeons and Dragons and film.

And forcing video games to be less violent, or banning them, is the worst solution.
I’d argue that it’s censorship, in the same way that banning books and changing words is censorship. As in; awful artistic censorship. And artists hate being censored.
While I do see that games try to sell violence (I was shocked when I found out Borderlands 2 had the option to turn the blood and gore off), games like LISA and Yume Nikki use controversial topics and disturbing imagery to make a point and to make the player feel uncomfortable - in the way the best artists do.
There’s a difference between making sure the game is reaching its intended audience/age group, and preventing everyone from any audience/age group from playing them how they’re meant to be experienced.

Bioshock 1 - if you haven’t played this….go do so right now! Go! Forget this article!

Even Video Games are self-aware, they’re made by people after all. Many games make use of the roleplaying aspect to make players feel responsibility for the events of the game.Bioshock gives players the choice to either save or kill Little Sisters; the result of a morbid experiment. Killing them awards the player with more materials, but in the end, will negatively affect the protagonist character. Videos featuring the crueler option on youtube tend to...garner a lot of upset reactions - so it’s clear that the choice affected many emotionally.

Off, by Mortis Ghost, is an even more extreme example but I won’t spoil it here. Instead I’ll mention that you will feel like a complete jerk by the end.

0_o

Well...I guess that just about sums it up.  *Note: THIS BLOG IS NOT RATED BY THE ESRB- DO NOT VIEW IF YOU ARE EASILY OFFENDED BY OPINIONATED TEENAGERS*.  Thank you.  

Here is the podcast: Ellipses

You can find more of Ailsa’s thoughtful musings at her blog- www.ailsajet.blogspot.com.  Go follow her blog.  FOLLOW IT!

This message has been approved by Ailsa Thiel and her associates.  

Grandma Got Run Over By a Router- Is Technology Destroying the Holidays?

In a word, no.  At least, not yet.

Maybe I should explain more...
The advent of new technology such as the smartphone, tablet, and even laptop has made our lives as human beings much easier.  We can order food.  We can buy gifts.  We can check where our relatives have checked in so that we can avoid them easier.  Technology is great!  Isn't it?

I agree!  Technology makes our lives so much easier!  However, it does bring with it some "glitches".  An unseen side effect of technology that we don't always consider is lurking in the corner at your holiday gatherings.  No need to worry...yet.  The side effect in question is the simple fact that technology is distracting.  Sometimes, it is distracting to an extent that it takes away from the time you spend with actual people (face-to-face, not facetime-to-facetime).

I am almost certain that you have been to some sort of holiday gathering in which at least 1 person sat and watched TV (or used their phone) for most of the time they were there.  Personally, whenever my family has a gathering, quite a few people are sitting in the TV room watching some type of sporting event.  What I am considering is if there will ever be a time when everyone just sits around and uses their electronic devices.  Will technology lead to the end of the holiday gathering as we know it?

Though it doesn't pose a definite threat to holidays in the immediate future, technology may very well decrease face-to-face interaction.  I think that it is very possible that technology will be the end of the traditional holiday gathering.  Savor the turkey.  Devour the stuffing.  While it lasts.

Saying Sayonara to Sassy Slogans- is it Curtains for Comedic Catchphrases?

2 alliterations in a title.  I'm on a roll!

But in all seriousness.  Ever take a minute to consider the catchphrase of your favorite deodorant or the slogan of your favorite ice cream?  No?  Just about 2 seconds of consideration?  According to the New York Times, this is a growing trend in advertising- catchy slogans are going away.  Sure there are some iconic sayings or characters from popular commercials, but their recognition doesn't compare to that of commercials from the good old days.  Here's why I think this is happening:

• Video streaming
• Gimme a D!  Gimme a V!  Gimme an R!  
• Computerz

Section 1: Video streaming.  If you've heard of Netflix, you know what it is.  You don't have to sit through commercials anymore if you really don't want to.  How are you going to get to know a slogan or character if you never see or hear them?  Rhetorical question.  

Section 2: What does that spell?  DVR(I hope you figured that one out)!  Modern technology allows us to be lazy on our own time.  If you have work to do, you can set your DVR to record your shows and then go watch them at your leisure.  Another added feature of DVR- you can skip commercials.  Again, if you don't see the commercials, how can you know the commercials?  

Section 3: Computerz.  You know, those things with screens and keyboards.  If you don't, then how are you reading this (unless your brain has a wifi link; that would be cool)?  This is my thought on the subject of said magical devices: If you are still watching TV the old fashioned way, you can just get out your laptop, tablet, or other computerized device and again pay no attention to the TV ads.  Guess what I'm doing as I type this?  Nope, wrong.  I'm watching Chelsea Lately and drinking green tea.  Though I'm watching it on DVR.  So I don't have an opportunity to not focus on the commercials.  

I'm going to stop this train before it derails-wait...I'm going to dig this train out of the bottom of the ocean and drop it in a ditch.  I believe, that no matter how catchy of a slogan a commercial or company has, they aren't going to gain recognition today because people don't watch commercials any more?  That's it.  

Movements in the Millennial Militia- Moral Monsters, Meaningful Masters, or Money Misers?

The Millenial Generation. Wait, misspelled it again.

The MILLENNIAL Generation. My people. Born during the mid to late 90s. Vastly different from our predecessors. This is a phenomena that has been explored greatly since our existence began. However, one article from the New York Times clearly shows that the Baby Boomers have no idea what the heck they're talking about. Allow me to elaborate...

Emily Esfahani Smith and Jennifer L. Aaker's article entitled "Millennial Searchers"makes numerous claims about the supposed mindset of the Millennial generation. This extremely erroneous article states that "Millennials appear to be more interested in living lives defined by meaning than by what some would call happiness. They report being less focused on financial success than they are on making a difference."

Where do I even start?

Firstly, you claim that millennials are more interested in a meaningful life, rather than a happy life. Isn't it possible that both could occur simultaneously? You then claim that they are "less focused on financial success than they are on making a difference." Which of these ideas are you arguing? Are you claiming that financial success is the same as happiness? Clearly you need to organize your thoughts. While you do that, I will analyze each of your main points.

The first: millennials are more concerned with having a meaningful life rather than a happy life. To me, meaningful means that it is something that helps others (or other things) in some way. Who is to say that one couldn't be happy in doing so? Personally, I enjoy helping others, and would probably enjoy a job doing so.

The second: millennials are more focused on making a difference than on financial success. I'm not sure where this is coming from. I, personally, love making a difference, but you know what I love just as much (and sometimes more)? Gettin' that ca$h money. This article assumes that all millennials are not in it for the cash, and aren't all selfish brats like myself. I like stuff. I want things constantly. Money does that. I don't think of money as a way to happiness, I just like buying stuff.

The third: money=happiness. Did you really mean to say this? Money ≠ happiness. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't. Money can be fun, but it isn't the key to living a happy life. That's fact.

In conclusion...millennials aren't the magnanimous, kind-hearted, civic-minded people that you baby boomers think. We are selfish brats, and proud of it. Plain and simple. Now go make me a sandwich and pay my bills, please.

Is Facebook Fading Fast? My Findings about the Formerly Famous Facet.

Facebook.  Possibly the most recognizable of the social networking sites.  However, as of currently, it is slowly sliding away from the social network spotlight.  At its beginning, everyone was always checking what their friends were posting, and posting everything they could imagine.  Now, I rarely find myself lost in the world of everythingness that constitutes Facebook. I do have a theory on the reasons for Facebook's demise:

• Lack of new-ness/The fact that the public has the attention span of a cocker spaniel
• Other networking sites
• Older demographics

The first: Lack of new-ness.  Facebook has been in existence since February 4, 2004.  As time passes, people get tired of the same old thing (example- the mad rush for every new apple product, even if it is no better than anything else).  Because Facebook doesn't release a new version of itself featuring a fingerprint scan every year, people start to wander away.
The second: people realize that there are other social networking sites.  At its advent, Twitter had some recognition, but was still in the shadow of Facebook.  However, as people lost interest in Facebook, they moved to other sites.  Twitter's recognition started to grow, and is now becoming a more popular site with the younger generation.
The last, and possibly biggest: older demographics.  Originally, Facebook was something associated with teenagers and 20-something year olds posting everything they could think of.  Now, everyones mother, grandparent, and crazy aunt are on Facebook.  This poses a major problem for Facebook.  Teenagers are always trying to get away from their parents, and for good reason.  They clearly know everything they will ever need to know, and parents are simply annoying obstacles that must be surpassed to achieve happiness (which is a very sound and correct argument).  Furthermore, parents need to get out of the way, since their blurred knowledge of the modern world poses no help to the next generation (also very true).  However, this movement of the parental generation is yet another block that parents have set in front of their children.  This migration of the older generation to the realm of the online has caused the young ones to look for bigger and better things (and ones not smeared with their parents' comments).

One can not deny that Facebook was a widely successful system once upon a time.  However, it is inevitable that this online society will eventually dwindle and fade.  The public requires everything to be updated, upscale, and extremely shiny, and Facebook is slowly slipping away.  Goodbye Facebook, it is time to go.


Don't forget to like this post!  

The Twitter Bio- An Anomaly Wrapped in an Enigma

The Twitter Bio.  An often overlooked art form.  It can be some sort of pointless tribulation, or some sort of thoughtful masterpiece.  As a test for the intelligence of my Twitter bio, I asked myself a series of questions.  Here are the results: 

• Do you have a Twitter account? Why or why not?  
• I do have a Twitter account.  I created the account simply because it was (and still is) a popular site, and I wanted in on the excitement.  
• If you have a Twitter account, do you follow celebrities? If you don’t have an account, would the ability to do so entice you to create a Twitter account.  
• I don't follow any major celebrities on my Twitter, though I do follow some Youtube figures.  
• The goal of concise writing is to use the most effective words to convey your thinking, yet it’s not easy to sum up your bio in 140 characters. Mr. Wayne highlights a few different types of these Twitter bios. According to him, what are some of the standard components? Have you noticed these types of bios if you have a Twitter account? Would these types of bios discourage you from following someone?  
• According to Mr. Wayne, some of the standard components of an effective blog are statuses and interests, with the occasional parental status.  While on Twitter myself, I haven't really paid much attention to bios.  However, the bio of a person might be indicative of their character, and could discourage me from following someone.  
• After the standard bio, many Twitter bios include addenda. What is your favorite example of addenda from the article? 
• My favorite example of addenda from this article would be "accountantista" or something similar.  
• After reading the article, check out the Twitter bio of some famous people who interest you (actors, writers, artists, etc.). Why do these appeal/not appeal to you? What does the author manage to convey in just 140 characters?  
• In going through a list of celebrities from various areas of fame, I have come across bios that contain hardly any words, and others with whole sentences.  The ones that appeal to me are the ones that have some sort of deeper meaning, or some sort of joke- not just specific information about the person.  
• What would your Twitter bio say? Remember, Twitter bio “lets the famous and not-so show how special they are” and can take on any tone the author chooses.
• My Twitter bio would include some of my interests, and some sort of deeper meaning (or random thought) that makes sense in a strange, out-there way.  
• Create a sentence or list of phrases that could be used as your bio. Remember to keep it 140 characters or less!
• Student driver, part-time side mirror remover, print enthusiast.  
• I like computers.  
• It is within these tweets that I unravel for you the mysteries of our time.  
• When I'm at school, I wish I was at work.  When I'm at work, I wish that I could stay longer to get more money.  When I'm at home, I eat.  
• Intelligent, kind, and modest.  

Here is my finished bio: 

A student at driving and at life, I enjoy the occasional joke and insight.  And I like to eat.