Life in the Digital Age

Life in the Digital Age

There are a lot of wacky and wonderful things about living in a Digital Age. For this assignment, we were asked to choose three, so in no particular order:

1.) Blogs about TV shows

I don't know when this happened exactly, but watching my favorite shows has become a truly communal experience. I used to watch TV at home and then maybe if it was a season finale with a great cliffhanger, talk about it the next day with friends.

But now, for my very favorite shows (LOST, Friday Night Lights, Project Runway, The Office, 30 Rock), the experience is not complete unless I read BLOGS and RECAPS with viewer comments the next morning. I don't really understand why this is so important to me since recaps tell me what I already know because I watched it myself (!!!) but honestly I can't concentrate the next day if I don't check the blogs to see if other people were as angry/shocked/confused/amused as I was.

My favorite TV blogs are What's Alan Watching... TV Watch on EW.com.... and the uber-snarky and hilarious Television Without Pity. When I read these blogs, I giggle and snort or get misty-eyed and emotional all over again. Perhaps weird, but true.


2.) Digital junk mail

My least favorite thing about living in a digital age is the way I get bombarded with junk mail about erectile dysfunction.

I don't understand how websites like Google can track my buying habits and favorite stores, but they can't figure out that I don't want or need Viagra.


3.) The ability to spell

Basically, it's gone. I used to take pride in my p-r-e-t-e-r-n-a-t-u-r-a-l spelling ability, but in this digital age, spelling skill is like an
a-p-p-e-n-d-i-x. You don't need it! Thanks to spell-check on the computer, no one knows that I am a champion speller unless I tell them. It's very unseemly to brag, but really, now you have to because it's not immediately apparent :)

Spelling should be stressful, like this:

A Digitally Illiterate Jing

I must warn you... You should only watch my Jing video if you have the power to withstand being hypnotized into buying $600 shoes... I'd love to see the HTML code for this!

A Digitally Illiterate Reflection

Well, for starters, I think I'm ALMOST ready to change my name. I'm not 100 percent there, but I'm also not 100 percent Digitally Illiterate either.

I have to say, I'm pretty impressed with myself (and I suppose by proxy, Prof. Peele) because I've come a lot farther than I expected. I'm still reluctant to "expose" myself like so many others in the online universe, but at least now I can say I tried it and it wasn't as scary as it seemed.

So much of my problem with gaining digital literacy has been the intimidation factor. I think I'd convinced myself that Twitter, blogging and laptop video editing were for people younger, cooler and more tech-savvy than myself. Because I am a journalist, I probably do use more technology than the average person, but I honestly thought I was "at capacity" and would not be able to get the hang of the newer stuff that seems to be launched every second.

I'm the kind of person who has moved from a beeper...

...to a pager to a giant cell phone...

...to a sleek cell phone to a Blackberry... yet I'm guessing I won't get an iPhone until it's 5th or 6th generation! I think that is a perfect metaphor for my digital literacy learning curve. I'm OK up to a point, but then there's a bit of a plateau before I jump into the next arena.

But as I said, the good thing is that this class forced me to jump right in... and for that, I am thankful. Aside from trying all the different applications we experimented with, it was interesting to think about how society is grappling with the digital revolution from a more academic and less pop culture point of view. Reading about how educational curricula are changing from kindergarten right up to university as a result of the need for digital literacy was enlightening.

At heart, I am a traditionalist with Luddite tendencies.

.

I like hardcover books, handwritten notes, talking in person over texting. But I'm also a realist and for that reason, I believe this revolution is undeniable and probably irreversible. And after taking this class and challenging myself to be more open, I think maybe it's not SO terrible after all!

A Digitally Illiterate Production...

On Writing for a Web Audience

This is actually not the article from today's reading assignments that I originally intended to write about but the more I thought about it, I realized that this simple, seemingly obvious article is the one that I have been thinking about most.

Truth be told, I tend to think of myself as smarter, more savvy and more sophisticated than the "average" person. I love to read, I read A LOT of different sources, I travel frequently and I work in media, so like most of my colleagues, I can be a bit of a know-it-all. Anytime I hear or read something about "typical" this or "average" that, I assume it doesn't apply to me because...ahem... I'm not "average."

So imagine my shock and chagrin when I read the article "Writing for a Web Audience" by Constance J. Petersen and saw myself in nearly every single point! Yes, I love to read, but when it comes to the web, there I am scanning away, bouncing between multiple open windows, gravitating towards photos and graphics and checking for one or two key concepts before moving on.

While I may spend an hour or more with a paper copy of the New York Times, I probably spend, oh, 10-15 minutes max clicking through the online version every morning. I would guess that I spend an average of one minute (two max) on any article that grabs my interest. With everything else it's a headline, first two sentences and then maybe I'll make a mental note of what I want to come back to and read more fully at the end of the day. (I also e-mail myself copies of articles I want to read later.)

Some of the points Petersen made that resonated the most were:

-Headlines: In a web headline, I want a short, quick phrase that gives me the entire story without reading it. In print, snappy puns work fine. I remember when the Tiger Woods infidelity scandal broke, the NY Post front page said "CHEETAH" with a photo. But the online version said "Woods admits to extramarital affairs". With the Post front page, it could have been cheating at golf OR his marriage, but online there was no question.

-Lists: I love them! I want a web author to give me quick talking points/key concepts that I can take it on my Blackberry or on my computer screen. It's much easier to read five short bullet points than five full paragraphs.

-Inverted pyramid: This makes perfect sense in the context of web writing. Give me the conclusion, the meat and potatoes of the argument or article right at the top just in case I don't scroll down and just want a taste of what the day's conversation will be about. This is the exact opposite of academic writing where I can only appreciate the conclusion after I've been introduced to all the facts and the reasoning process that was used to reach the conclusion.

-Accuracy and grammar: If a website is full of typos, factual inaccuracies and poor grammar, I won't visit a second time. Enough said.

-Link wisely and be current: This was one of the most true points Petersen made. I love "mouseovers" and will most likely read information that pops up in one, but I will rarely if ever click on an embedded link that causes me to navigate away mid-sentence or mid-article. Even though I usually have multiple windows open, I do not take the time to stop, click away, read the background info and then come back to where I left off. Once I leave, I'm probably gone for good!

I appreciate when authors list "related articles" or other articles in a series at the end. Then I have the option of getting more information in a convenient, unobtrusive way.

The crazy irony of this being Petersen's last point, and such a valid one, is that at the end of her article, she provides 8 links and only THREE of them work!!!!

After reading the article and thinking how interesting and true it was, I decided to click on the resources and references she provided and I was stymied by "dead" and outdated links which she so clearly warned against in her article. It was very disappointing and cast a pall over the entire reading experience. Petersen made some great points, but what I will most remember now is that this article ended up being not a great "how-to" but a cautionary tale!


Related links:
This is a link to a blog post and a chart from the New York TImes about the top-50 vocabulary words whose definitions stump readers. These are the words (from the first half of 2010) NY Times readers most often double-click on to get to hyperlinks for definitions:

http://topics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/50-fancy-words/?scp=1&sq=readers%20definitions&st=cse

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/topics/topic/2010afterdeadlineblog.pdf

Kenya's newest superhero!