Technology Autobiography

The technological medium I would use to tell the story of my life would be movies because they have played a big role in my life. They are a very popular and influential technological medium in this time, and they have influenced many people, including me. Many things have influenced what type of movies I watch and how many movies I watch, including both my age and the convenience of obtaining movies.

The medium of the film fits in very well with David Nye’s definition of technology in Technology Matters – Questions To Live With because it is an agent of social change. Many films have been used to influence society, most notably in the genre of documentaries. While this is not my favorite genre, I do have documentaries that I have watched and enjoyed, such as Food Inc., which deals with big food companies and their bad practices. Not only have movies been used for social evolution, but they have also been used as a signal for the social evolution that is happening at the time. Popular movies are a reflection of what the people are interested at the time, which means popular movies are a window in which to look through to understand the current social status at the time. Movies are a way to live out something that would normally not be plausible, so popular movies are a reflection on the types of lives people would like to live if this type of life is realistic.

I grew up in an era where Disney cartoons were huge, especially for younger children. I remember when I was young that I used to sit down at least once every weekend and watch a Disney movie. My favorites were The Fox and The Hound and Bambi. Despite the fact that many people assert that these movies subliminally teach bad lessons, such as anti-Semitism, to children, the movies taught me many good values. This is what I think was the main point in the Disney cartoons, to both provide entertainment to children and to teach lessons such as: the importance of family, empathy, hard work, and many more. I did not even realize the bad reputation of the movies until many years after this period in my life, and I do not think this has changed my understanding of the films very much, in large part because I do not really believe Walt Disney intentionally taught anti-Semitism to children using these films, and this is more of a conspiracy theory. I believe that these movies have set a good example for me, and they served to entertain me for many hours as a kid; in fact, I probably spent too much time watching these and other similar movies as a kid, but I enjoyed them very much.

As I grew up, I began to progress to more “mature” movies. I still love the old cartoons, but I have transitioned to watch non g-rated movies, or, in other words, more inappropriate movies. I began watching violent action movies. My favorite movie in this genre during this period in my life was SWAT. This perfectly displays the type of movie that I watched at this time. This is most likely due to the fact that I thought the action in these types of movies was really cool, and watching movies with this type of action was the best way to experience it, since it is not realistic to experience this type of action in my life. These movies served as a sort of vicarious thrill in that sense.

Most recently, my tastes in movies have changed from action movies to more mature comedies. My favorite movie in this genre is Super Troopers, a comedy about state troopers in Vermont that bust a drug ring. The trend from action movies to comedies seems to be a pretty popular one in males, and it is reflected in the movie industry’s practice of making many comedies geared towards the young adult generation. This is one example of how the movie industry is a reflection on culture. This definitely points to movies being predictable. In some sense movies are predictable, in that the general trends of the industry match social change. This may be true, but specific movies are not predictable, so the movie industry is not completely predictable, but it is mostly predictable. Directors still have influence over what they want people to see, and they can block people from seeing certain things, not to mention movies can also influence culture in some ways. One area in which the movie industry has a big influence is in fashion. I do not think it is appropriate to say the industry is deterministic, but it is appropriate to say it is partially determined by culture and partially determined by the directors and the big production companies in the industry. One can determine what the popular movies are going to be in the near future because the popular movies will be about subjects in which people are interested, but there are some surprisingly popular movies that initiate social and cultural changes, so not all of the aspects of this industry are predictable.

David Nye’s article addresses an interesting point: if technology controls our lives. This begs the question: have movies controlled my life, at least thus far? Certainly directors assert a large amount of control over their viewers, controlling exactly what content and, perhaps more importantly, viewpoints they see. This can have a large effect on many of our views, such as political, economic and, social views. I would say that movies do not control me personally, as my movie viewing has been more a reflection of my interests prior to watching the movies than watching movies to learn new information and apply it in my life. Movies can be powerful, and documentaries can certainly change people’s views and even control many people’s opinions, but in my case, watching movies primarily for entertainment, not primarily for education, movies have not exerted enough influence on my political or social views to control them.

The other thing that changed about movies in my lifetime that has affected their influence on me is the way they are displayed. When I was a little kid movies were played at home with a VCR and a tape. These tapes were cumbersome, large and not so easy to obtain. With the advent of DVDs and Netflix, movies are now much easier to obtain and watch, not to mention the quality is much better. This has led me to watch more movies, and this has become one of my go to activities to do with people when we are bored, since it is much more convenient and cheaper to look on Netflix than to go out and buy a movie. The emergence of Netflix has also influenced the types of movies I watch. Now I tend to watch movies that have been out of theatres for longer periods of time since these are the movies that Netflix usually has online. This has led me to be somewhat behind the time in this respect, but it has also led me to appreciate slightly older, classic movies. I still keep up with the newest movies by going out to a theatre with my friends, but I don’t do this quite as much as I used to.

Movies are a very influential technological medium in my life, as in the lives of many others. They have influenced me, teaching me many things and providing me with a lot of entertainment, but they have not changed my fundamental views on society, like they have for other people. My age and the ways of obtaining movies at that particular time have been the primary factors in the kinds of movies I watch, and in how much I watch them. Therefore, these two factors have been the most influential in determining the effect movies have had on me throughout my life. In some respects the movie industry is deterministic, as it is a reflection of culture, but in some ways the industry actually helps to shape culture, both in good ways and in bad ways. In this case, the answer to the question “does culture shape technology, or does technology shape culture?” is not so clear, and in fact both answers to this question would prove to be right.

Presentation Guide:

First we will talk about how the medium of radio has changed throughout its history. This will trace the history of radio as both a medium of information and entertainment. It will also include the struggle to transition with the advent of the television. Finally, this will include the future and internet radio.

Next, we will talk about internet "trash talking." This will include the effects of the microphone, integration of speaking into online networks, and the demographic shift of internet trash talking to gamers.
Another topic we will talk about is presidential debates, specifically televised presidential debates. We will talk about the effect television had on these debates, and how they influenced the American people.

The next subject we will talk about will be a very influential speaker, but not in a good way, Adolf Hitler. We will talk about how Hitler was able to influence people, and how he was able to use speech to rally behind him.

Finally we will talk about political speeches in general in America since the advent of the television. We will address how these speeches have changed, and the influence of the speeches, as well as how they have influenced the political culture of today.

After we have talked about these topics, we will do a group activity showing both the importance of oral communication and how the other types of communication affect it. This will involve all of the elements in WOVEN.

Resources:

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-presidential-speech-on-tv - This article details the history and affects of the first televised presidential speech.

http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/content/53/1/58.abstract - This site details the abstract of an argument involving the effects televised speeches have had on public opinion.

http://earlyradiohistory.us/ - This site describes the history of the radio in relation to the history of the United States. It's basically a timeline for the radio.

http://inventors.about.com/od/rstartinventions/a/radio.htm - It details the inventions and technological progression of the radio.

http://www.walkie-talkies.com/walkie-talkie-history.html - An article that talks about the history revolving around the invention of the walkie-talkie.

Dunlap, Orrin Elmer. Radio and Television Almanac. New York: Harper, 1951.

http://cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/debates/history/ - Article that details presidential debate history, and talks about early presidential debates.

http://themobilelearner.wordpress.com/2010/02/27/modern-technology-and-the-return-of-oral-

communication/ - Article that talks about how technology has brought back oral communication.

Thoughts on Scientific and Technological Writing

Wyatt Gouldthorpe

Who exactly should science and technology be written for? Should it be written for everyone to understand, or should it be written only for experts in a particular field? This question obviously does not have one correct answer. If I asked three different people about this I am sure I would get three different responses. With this being said, I believe that science and technology should be written for both the experts and common people. This means that there should be writing meant for experts, that only experts can understand, but there should also be “dumbed down” writing for the common people. I believe that articles in peer review journals and for use in high level classes should be written for experts to understand, because in this case the material needs to be complicated to show all the complexities of the topic. However, writing for the general public should be for everyone to understand. The reason for this is that writing for everyone to understand will increase the knowledge of the general public, which will have a positive effect on society.

I think it is important to strike a balance between scientific writings being detailed enough to facilitate expert knowledge and general enough for public consumption. The main reason for this is that there should be resources both for many people to have basic knowledge on the subject, and for a select group of people to have expert knowledge on the subject. However, for each individual writing, the style is determined by the intent of the author. If the author intends for his writing to be reviewed by other scientists, or for it to be read by people in college campuses that are interested in studying the topic in question, then the writing should be the typical paper with complicated concepts and vocabulary that is hard for the average person to understand. On the other hand, if the author intends to teach people that have no idea about this topic, the writing should probably omit the complicated concepts and vocabulary, and replace them with concepts most people can understand. Therefore, when looking at a writing on science and technology, it is important to keep both the purpose of the writing and the intended audience in mind in order to determine if the writing is effective.

Science and Technology Writing

Science and technology can be a quite hard topic to write about. If one was to write about science and technology, one must make sure to not bore individual readers to death. It's a thin line between interesting facts and factual boredom. I honestly prefer authors to write about science and technology in a more narrative fashion that is easy to read. Basically I feel as if informal scientific writings are an overall better read than formal ones.
Scientists are not the only niche that science and technology writings can appeal towards. There are many different sorts of people 0ut in the world that appreciate science and find scientific writings very interesting. It is for this reason that scientific writings should not be so factual that ordinary people not in scientific fields of studies can not understand them. This isn't to say that these writings still can't have facts, but these facts should be introduced in moderation and carefully elaborated upon. This is how scientific and technological writings should be made.

Formality in Scientific Writing

I think there is room for a broad range of writing styles focusing on science and technology. On the one hand, professional writers or journalists produce some of the most pleasant reading about science. For example, Bill Bryson’s conversational tone and informal language make reading his work easy and enjoyable, while still conveying accurate information. For anyone without extensive background knowledge or intense interest in the subject, I would argue that this is the best form of writing. Writers, while making sure their facts are correct, should not fear the scorn of professional scientists when providing easily digestible scientific knowledge. It may only give a shallow explanation of things, but for most people, that is all they care to learn, and if the piece is well written, they will actually learn it.

At the same time, there is need for technical writing about science, by scientists for other scientists. In order to fully understand a lot of science (to the point where you could design new experiments and spot links between occurrences without any direction), a technical vocabulary is necessary. For the sake of clarity, the simple analogies and even the colloquial discussions may need to be abandoned. The result should be a clean and clear (to the scientific community) piece of writing, which would be the most effective in giving the target audience what it needs for full comprehension. This type of writing may seem excruciatingly dense to non-scientists, but for those actually working with the technologies involved, the first type of writing I discussed would be hopelessly inadequate. I don’t think that there is a ‘right’ way of writing about science and technology, or a ‘right’ audience to be writing to. However, it is absolutely essential that the author of any specific work knows his or her audience, and writes accordingly. Similarly, readers should understand the limitations of whatever it is they are reading, and acknowledge that there is much they will not learn from it. 

Scientific Writing vs Public Comprehension

 Writings that have a main focus of science and technology should not be limited to one particular group.  Although scientists will have better understanding of the topics and be able to include more precise details either from experimentation or experience, when writing to people other than scientists, the author should be someone else.  Scientific discoveries and technologies need to be spread to other scientists but must also be shown to the public.
 Scientific writings need to be more generalized for the average reader and give an easily comprehendable writing style.  Without a science background, the general public would not be able to fully understand the writings that are published by sceintists.  I believe that the writings should be done by more of a "reporter" who is able to speak directly to the scientists and convert what they say into a more public friendly wording.  This will allow for the public to be able to read AND understand what breakthroughs are occuring in the scientific and technological community.  

Writing on Science and Technology

Science and technology are not by any means restricted to one way of writing or the other. Instead, depending on the audience it should be written formally or informally. Not all scientific writings are written formally. Sometimes writing an explanation or detailed report informally helps translate meanings and results easier than if they were to be written formally. On the other hand, writing formally has its benefits as well.
With that being said, there are certain audience types your write to formally and certain audience types you write to informally. For instance, if you were writing about science and technology to a professor, writing formally is probably in your best interest. Likewise, generally speaking, when writing to a broad audience it is always better to be safe and write formally. Writing formally does not include writing to your friends or family. In this instance, you would probably want to write informally. Writing informally to someone you know and understand can be advantageous. You can say and do things with words that normally you would not be able to do formally. Regardless, I feel as though writing formally or informally is based on the audience you are writing to; there is no “set –in-stone” way to write to everyone.