Week 11 - 'Twitter suspends 'alt-right' Donald Trump backers'

'Twitter suspends 'alt-right' Donald Trump backers'
http://news.sky.com/story/twitter-suspends-alt-right-donald-trump-backers-10659876

• Twitter has suspended accounts of 'alt-right' figures who championed Donald Trump's bid for the White House 
• Richard Spencer, director of a white nationalist think tank, accused the social media site of "corporate Stalinism" after his personal account was terminated
• Twitter would expand its "mute" option in a bid to combat cyberbullying.
• Spencer said "I think Twitter, Facebook and others are deeply triggered by this election and that social media helped elect Trump."
• USA Today reports -  a non-profit organisation asked Twitter to remove more than 100 accounts of white supremacists
• In February, Twitter suspended more than 125,000 accounts, most of them linked to Islamic State, as part of efforts to eradicate "terrorist content"

This story is interesting due to the idea of censorship; the issues with social networking are that liberation and freedom of speech is what they revolve around, therefore how can we essentially ban accounts for reflecting their own opinion. The problem here is what different people account for as being'extremist' views and what should and should not be allowed to be published online because surely a number of people will share the same views and values, therefore it becomes a more difficult task to crack down on censorship. 

Week 11 - 'Deals on drugs, weapons and stolen data - Black Friday comes to the dark web'

'Deals on drugs, weapons and stolen data - Black Friday comes to the dark web'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/25/deals-drugs-weapons-stolen-data-black-friday-comes-dark-web/

• The dark web is not immune to the forces of capitalism 
• Underground marketplace - reduced prices for black friday, illegal items, weapons, stolen items 
• Stolen credit card details and account numbers for sale 
• "Once again we can see how professional the cybercriminal underworld is in their operations," said James Chappell, chief technology officer and co-founder of Digital Shadows.
• "The days of amateurs showing off their computing skills have long gone, today criminal gangs control the majority of cybercrime. They deploy professional tactics to compromise our computers and networks, and utilize ‘best’ retail practice to monetize their gains."

This story is interesting due to the fact that illegal activity can go undetected for so long and the issues with the internet as a dark force and the negatives of this. In terms of news, this story clearly breaks laws and defeats the idea of capitalism and therefore makes us question the safety of our data and our information online. Cyber-criminality is an overriding issue that emphasises the negative aspect of the internet and reveals how difficult it is to essentially monitor the internet and the dark web in particular. This idea of censorship and privacy is explored through this as the access to the dark web is easy enough for anyone to discover, revealing the negative impacts and the potential dangers of the internet. 

Marxism & Pluralism: Alain de Botton on the news

To what extent do you agree with Alain de Botton's views on the News?

I agree a great deal with Alain de Botton's views; I agree with the fact that the architecture of news is changing and how the idea of important news and popular news should go hand in hand. I think that the news is something that should priorities the important news as being the most popular as something that is simply a confirmed idea by all consumers. However this is not the case and unimportant news becomes more popular, making it worrying that we are not interested in good quality news journalism. I also agree with the idea that we are unable to care or empathise with incidents that we were unaware about initially, for example a natural disaster in a small third world country would not really appeal to us as we did not understand their current state before the tragedy. One thing that I didn't agree with, however, is de Botton's views about the BBC and how the best news has to be biased. The reason I do not agree with this is because I think that news should be impartial in order for the consumer to make their own judgement on certain situations, for example with the recent incidents of brexit, I personally turned to the BBC for my news because I wanted to be aware of both arguments and understand all of the information impartially. I agree that being biased helps to share your own political ideologies, however with particular news stories it makes it difficult to actually have a confirmed view about it, therefore the BBC acts as this impartial source to help form our own opinion.

How can you link Marxism and Hegemony to de Botton's criticisms of the News?

de Botton criticises the news through the idea that consumers are too passive and do not question the idea of the news or where it comes from as it is conventionally seen as an important and required. This links to the idea of hegemony and how the ruling classes dominate the news, the government and the institutions dominate the news and consumers are simply passive to this news. We, as consumers, do not question where we get our news from and who is reporting, therefore this Marxist idea of Hegemony and the more superior classes being the controllers of this highlights how we are simply submissive in terms of the news agenda. 

How could you use Pluralism and new technology to challenge de Botton's views on the News?

The idea of Pluralism is based around coexisting governments, therefore several ideologies being presented; this would challenge de Botton's views as we can essentially choose what we want to read. New technology is a great example of a way that we can do this and especially social media as we are able to read certain news articles that resonate with us as consumers, therefore we become users and consumers rather than simply being submissive to the news.

Choose two news stories from the last six months - one that supports de Botton's views and one that challenges his belief that the News is used for social control.

The news story of the cryogenically frozen 14 year old girl highlights de Botton's views as it focuses on the element of death and being afraid of death. It also focuses on the fact that we like stories that involve some sort of element of hope or a moral panic rather than simply news that will benefit us; this story is one that emphasises life and death issues and as it is technology that is far from being developed and fully functioning, it shows the potential irrelevance of the story and how it should be kept as a mere private family matter rather than a public news story. Essentially, this story is trying to brag about the new technology being created and how science is evolving but in theory this project is far from being accessible, revealing false hope. 

The US elections challenged de Botton's views as it is important news that is also very popular even in the UK as it is something that effects a large portion of the world and therefore adds interest for all. The coverage of the elections also reveals several various political ideologies about the issue and therefore challenges the idea of hegemony and challenged de Botton's views as he believes that unimportant news is more popular. 

NDM News index

Institution: the impact of Google on the newspaper industry
Ofcom report: how news consumption has changed
The future of newspapers: Build The Wall analysis
The decline of newspapers: the effect of online technology
The future of journalism: John Oliver and Clay Shirky
The decline of newspapers: Media Magazine case studies
Citizen journalism and hyper-reality: Media Magazine article and questions
News Values: theory and updating them for digital media landcape
Marxism & Pluralism: Media Magazine article and questions
Alain de Botton on the News: lecture and questions
Full NDM essay including paragraphs on Marxism and Pluralism
Globalisation and news: cultural imperialism
Globalisation: taking it further (Google Glass case study and capitalism)
Fake news and globalisation - Guardian and New York Times articles
News on the Tweet

NDM: Marxism, Pluralism and Hegemony

Research the Ian Tomlinson case. What would the traditional, hegemonic view of the police be in a case like this? How did new and digital media create a different story? What does the police officer's subsequent acquittal suggest about the power of new and digital media?

Ian Tomlinson died in London after being struck by a police officer during the 2009 G-20 summit protests. Lewis 2009 statement described "attempts by police medics and an ambulance crew to save his life after he collapsed – efforts they said were marred by protesters throwing missiles as first aid was administered." However, the video that was captured by a New York lawyer revealed the real incidents and how the police force had been misleading audiences and essentially lying to them. The traditional hegemonic view of the police force would be that they are trusted as they have the power in societies, therefore there would not be much speculation around the incident if no other sources to challenge it would be found; however due to the impact of new and digital media, it has formulated a discussion around the idea of who is to trust and how valid is the news we receive. The fact that the police officer was acquitted due to the power of the video shows the effects of new and digital media and how this has a huge dominance in society and therefore bases power in the audiences hands and not only the professionals. It also reveals how audiences become powerful and therefore can challenge professionals and high-ruling professionals, such as the police force, it highlights how the citizen journalism can be used as evidence and can essentially bring about justice. 

What does the author argue regarding whether hegemony is being challenged by Web 2.0? 

Through the example of the Ian Tomlinson case, The Guardian posted the video on their website, which is user-generated content, emphasises how audiences can challenge the traditional media and therefore challenges the idea of hegemony. The internet has a liberating political function due to user-generated content because "Technology empowers the people, who, oppressed by years of authoritarian rule, will inevitably rebel, mobilizing themselves through text messages, Facebook, Twitter..." Morozov 2011. Although audiences have power to challenge governments and ruling forces, governments are able to exert a large amount control over the internet and an example of this is in countries such as China and Iran, whereby they have successfully controlled the general population's access to media and prevented the circulation of information so that the ruling classes, the government, are in control. Therefore the power of Web 2.0 alone cannot be successful when against the ruling government as they have the over ruling dominance and power as 'We Media' is not strong enough alone to allow 'people power' to succeed.

In your opinion, does new and digital media reinforce dominant hegemonic views or give the audience a platform to challenge them?

I think new and digital media allows audiences to challenge hegemonic views due to the idea of user generated content, however I also believe that above all else, the ruling classes hold the dominant power over societies and audiences. The new and digital media is essentially able to do both reinforce and challenge hegemonic views as organisations are able to voice their opinions online to then get challenged by an audience and go viral, to the point where a huge phenomenon would break through, challenging the ruling classes and institutions; however the power still belongs to the ruling class as they are able to make the final judgement and create the change, whilst the audience are unable to do so. The audience can only have so much say to the point where governments can exert their power and essentially flip this control almost instantly. So whilst new and digital media offer a platform to challenge dominant hegemonic views, there is also the counter argument to suggest that institutions are similarly able to reinforce dominant hegemonic views through new and digital media and the higher, ruling classes are the ones to hold the dominant control within a society, regardless of new and digital media and it's impact amongst a controlling government.

Do recent world events such as Brexit or Donald Trump's election in the US suggest dominant hegemonic ideologies are being challenged or reinforced? There are arguments for both sides here - explain your opinion and why.
Donald Trump's election is a great example of dominant hegemonic ideologies being challenged and how hegemony is essentially fading when it comes to the US and the UK, through Brexit. The rise of far-right, fascistic movements both in the US and across the EU reveals an anomaly in terms of the shift in global order. For example, Saudi Arabia invaded Yemen against the wishes of the US and therefore challenges a powerful and dominant country's forces and emphasises how hegemony is fading. In terms of the election and UK coverage of it, comedy broadcasting institutions such as 'South Park' spoofed the US elections, creating humour out of the event before taking place and therefore slating Trump, revealing a negative light on him already. In addition to this, Comedy Central also hosted The Roast of Donald Trump and therefore publicly announced the negative effects of him as a ruling power and his ideologies as being immoral and completely self-aggrandised. The fact that comedy broadcaster institutions exposed the coverage of the elections and highlighted the negatives of Trump reveals the true impact of institutions and how dominant hegemonic ideologies are being challenged. Through dominant media coverage being focused on the negatives of Trump, it puts into perspective the actual influence of new and digital media; through user-generated content and social networking sites like Twitter, discussions are able to be held about an individual's political ideologies, which simply causes a moral panic online rather than within society. Through these moral panics being exposed, through the media, it is interesting that Trump was still elected and therefore it reveals how the dominant hegemonic views are being challenged and moreover, how new and digital media has become something that may not be as influential as we all initially believed. 

Week 10 - 'China's Xi urges cooperation among nations in governance of global internet'

'China's Xi urges cooperation among nations in governance of global internet'
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china-internet-idUKKBN13B1FF

• The Chinese president Xi Jinping called for greater cooperation among nations in developing and governing the internet - needing to respect so called 'cyber-sovereignty'
• Xi said "The development of the internet knows no international boundaries. The sound use, development and governance of the internet thus calls for closer cooperation"
• The communist party led by Xi, has censored and controlled the flow of information online 
• China infamously operated the 'Great Firewall' - world's most sophisticated online censorship system 
• China hopes to cooperate with other countries to develop international rules and standards for the internet
• "There can't be national security for one country while there is insecurity in another."

China is a communist led country, therefore the information that audiences receive in China differ heavily from the information we receive in the UK, therefore the idea of censorship is something that could potentially be seen as both a positive and negative thing. The liberation we are allowed within the UK, and with the content we receive, allows us to access a range of sources and therefore be exposed to a lot more valid and reliable sources too, however the government in China filter everything they believe their audience should see and not see, therefore have a controlled exposure, which would therefore completely control the country and their ideologies. I think there needs to be an acceptable balance between censorship and content being controlled as this will essentially help audiences receive content that is more valid and not misleading; however the power of the Chinese government reveals how there is no liberation within their society. Censoring certain content online, such as false news or invalid sources is something that would benefit a society, however controlling the whole internet within a country, would destroy the liberation of an individual. 

Week 10 - 'Facebook’s failure: did fake news and polarized politics get Trump elected?'

'Facebook’s failure: did fake news and polarized politics get Trump elected?'
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/10/facebook-fake-news-election-conspiracy-theories

• Company accused of abdicating responsibility to clamp down on fake news stories and counter echo chamber that defined the election
• Facebook could be dividing world instead of bringing it together
• Truth of a piece of content is less important than whether it is shared, liked and monetized. "These 'engagement' metrics distort the media landscape, allowing clickbait, hyperbole and misinformation to proliferate"
• The Pew Research Center found that 44% of Americans get their news from Facebook
• 'Yet fake news is not a uniquely Republican problem. An analysis by BuzzFeed found that 38% of posts shared from three large rightwing politics pages on Facebook included “false or misleading information” and that three large leftwing pages did the same 19% of the time'
• Trump himself has routinely repeated false news and identifying conspiracy theories 
• "There is a cottage industry of websites that just fabricate fake news designed to make one group or another group particularly riled up,” said Fil Menczer, a professor at Indiana University who studies the spread of misinformation.
According to Menczer’s research there’s a lag of around 13 hours between the publication of a false report and the subsequent debunking.

This article reveals the problems with social networking and the manipulation of the media. Facebook is a digital echo chamber, therefore when we as users resonate with a particular ideology or piece of content online, we find it difficult to ignore it as we share the same ideologies; this confirmation bias therefore reveals the issues with new and digital media as we are unable to filter what is valid or not. This therefore means that the news we receive on sites such as Facebook, cannot be trusted even if we want to trust the source and the content - however the biggest problem with this is the fact that this would be globally shared if a large amount of people share similar views and values; this creates a chain of false news being spread all over the internet in a matter of seconds, making it misleading and invalid.