(12) Societyʻs Relationship With Technology and Technologyʻs Relationship With Us

As I think about today's society and the benefits technology has given to us as individuals, we take advantage of our resources and potentially ruin our reputation in the long run. Personally, I think my relationship with technology is half and half. I am on social media a lot, and it tends to take up most of my time, but it also is helping me and catering to my future goals of being on the digital communications/marketing team for a real estate company.

I do know that I try to lessen the amount of time I'm on technology. But as a college student, everything from homework to tests is on digital platforms. In some ways, I think that technology has ruined my life because of the activities that are going on around me. Not allowing myself to walk in nature or hang out with my friends because i'm on some sort of technological device is sometimes depressing, I focused on this in one of my blogs where I talked about screen time and how it affects teenagers and especially people who are dependent on technology in today's society it takes away from their social engagement. Stated in an article by Andrew Perrin, "31% of U.S. adults now report that they go online "almost constantly," up from 21% in 2015." Now that's crazy to think about because this article was published in 2021, and that was during COVID when everybody was scared/unemployed. With the effects of COVID, our social engagement declined, and screen time increased, causing that number to increase even more.

Especially in today's society, we take advantage of AI through technology. I know that I use a lot of AI to help me with ideas, and then I put it into my own words, but in some cases, people use AI to fully plagiarize their work. As we talked about in class, not all information is accurate, and it's up to us to find those sources that prove it's correct and not just us copying and pasting when we need to get an assignment done fast. I think about it all the time when it comes to information I use online, because anybody can put something up and call it a day. False news goes up every day, and people just bypass where the source came from or if the source is opinionated in one way.

Everywhere, plagiarizing is a big crime but especially at High Point University, with our honor code, we take it seriously. I see students every day using ChatGPT or other AI sources. I think it's a good source to use, but it also depends on you going that extra step to find out where that information came from instead of fully pasting and not worrying about whether you're going to plagiarize someone or if it's false information. I worry about the integrity of our society when it comes to technology because there are a lot of people in the world who rely on technological structures to share the news, but not all news is correct.

My online footprint is limited, but if you search deeper, there is a lot on me. When searching for my name on Google,  primarily volleyball profiles popped up because of the recruiting process I’ve done during my senior year of high school. I do have a LinkedIn account, but it is limited, and the basic things are accessible to the public. As I finish up my first year in college, I plan on enhancing my LinkedIn profile for recruitment. Hopefully, this summer, I will be successful with my internship and can use it to get a good job in the digital industry. This class and blog has helped me to know the laws and explore the literacy of media which is very beneficial for my future career.

(11) EOTO Terms and Concepts Reflection

 In today's society, gate-keeping and agenda-setting are the most important topics that are keeping society from prospering. In this evolving world, everything changes in seconds, and holding onto information that can eventually positively impact the world can hinder how our children live in future generations. I really liked it when Makaylah introduced what they meant and the theory itself with models, because it shows how we think and the actual process of how information is transferred.

Writing Under Oath

The media is forced to encourage majority bias while it suppresses minority voices. With that, not everyone is heard. This limits the information being spread. Why may this be bad, you ask? Well, with only one side being told, people's beliefs are tested and may result in a biased result. 

Although gatekeeping has a lot of cons, there are also some pros. Only focusing on one side allows the media to have a higher chance of content quality and a lower chance of misinformation being spread. Pursuading individuals to choose their side. This also allows us to maintain the values and rules of the community. Whether it's cultural standards, if it's appropriate or not, or just content saturation in general. This limits the amount of news that is being spread throughout the web.

Some examples that Makaylah shared with us for gatekeeping are listed below:

- major news sources (CNN,  CNBC, Band News, BBC World News, etc.)

- social media platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter/X, etc.)

- newspapers, radio channels, and journalists

Now, with these individuals, we see the information being run through this theory in the diagram. Interviewers get majorers around information from primary sources, it is run through the channels, and then is stopped at the first gate. Will the interviewer publish what they found, or are they going to alter it to make it sound different? After that, it goes through the channels again and hits the audience. From the audience's part, it is the audience's choice to alter their beliefs or contradict what is being said and publish a new statement opposing what has been said in the first place.

Let Me See

While we think "WE want to watch" whatever is on the screen, behind the scenes, the media influences what people think and what should be seen live. Now that is what agenda setting means. This theory shapes public perception and public opinions drastically. Especially during the political season, you can see agenda setting in campaigns, ads, and even posters around your community. One key thing about enforcing agenda setting is the enforcement of policies  it must take when it action.
To counter that, agenda setting has a wide range of cons to it. First, it is similar to gatekeeping, and it can potentially end in biased results. Another problem is that sometimes individuals can be influenced by oversimplified media and can be distracted by the main problem or news that is being produced. This encourages arguments that can possibly end in deadly matters. Stereotyping groups of people is highly relevant in agenda setting because of today's politics and how the world is evolving. 

Below are examples of agenda-setting movements that Makaylah discussed:
-  #MeToo: Giving a voice to those who were survivors of sexual violence and to build a robust community of advocates and allies.
- #BlackLivesMatter: Advocating against violence inflicted on those from Black communities by those with power.

While these are more of the popular ones, these movements are examples of agenda setting. After more individuals shared their stories, the #MeToo movement started to gain more media coverage, and eventually, major celebrities and media outlets played a big role in bringing these stories to the forefront. With #BlackLivesMatter, agenda setting was both beneficial and counterproductive. Some media sources highlighted the peaceful protests and the need to reform, while others focused on instances of violence and rioting, influencing public opinion on the black communities and this movement.

Influence

In our society, gatekeeping impacts media narratives and how people receive and interpret information. Meanwhile, according to Media Theory, agenda setting influences priorities, perceptions, the severity of issues, people, and the media. These theories impact social hierarchies, discrimination, exclusion, and make education and information difficult to obtain. Hopefully, this blog and Makaylah's presentation will bring awareness to gatekeeping and agenda setting.

(10) Living in the Age of AI

Written Script

Just like agenda-setting, AI plays a big part in what is being put in front of you. This brings so many benefits, but what is the government not telling you? What do they have on you that affects your daily life? Are they watching you right now? In the Age of AI by Frontline, they warn us that they are watching and they have so much data on us, it is CRAZY.  

Increasing Inequality 

One example they talk about is that cashier roles in Washington,  D.C., are one of the most common jobs, but they are highly vulnerable to automation. Other jobs like clerical work, HR, and finance are primarily run by women, but in future generations, these jobs will be replaced by robots and AI. Along with that, Molly Kinder highlights that many Americans lack financial stability and cannot afford higher education or the time to take off, which results in minimum wage jobs being the ideal source of income. But even these minimum wage jobs are being replaced by automation. This economic insecurity, plus automation, is at the forefront of the crash of society.

As larger tech companies use AI to personalize services and increase revenue as a whole, this is at the expense of our privacy. Shoshana Zuboff, an American author, professor, and philosopher at Harvard Business School, describes how tech companies are profiting by exploiting private human experiences and turning them into predictive data. Known as "surveillance capitalism," our data is basically raw material for profit, raising concerns about the privacy we thought we had when signing up for these sites. Although this can be bad, Google has used it to adapt to its consumers and track their behavior, giving them the ads they "want to see" rather than random ads that they are not interested in. This increases market dominance and the rise of surveillance capitalism.

Privacy Matters

The new privacy law, written by Alastair Mactaggart, that was passed in 2018 gave California residents the right to ask any company what they have collected on an individual in the past 12 months, as "a right to know." Also, with a click of a button, this sends third-party sites a notification to not sell any information, which honors the third-party opt-out rule that correlates with this law. 

There were three types of groups that were involved in this decision. The ones who agreed with no skepticism on this idea. The ones that had skepticism but knew it was right to raise it, and the ones that denounced this idea and said they don't want regulations, which were mostly the large tech companies, that didn't want to obey this law. In the end, Mactaggart's campaign led to a significant change, marking a milestone in data privacy rights. 

Idea of "Power"

In the video, they talk about how the auto, pharmaceutical, and food industries are better than AI because of their lack of regulations. Lobbyists for big tech companies are pushing for more lenient national privacy standards, which could possibly override stricter regulations like the one in California. AI is integrated into our everyday life. However, its presence often goes unnoticed, and people are unaware of how their data is being transmitted to make decisions for them. 

In China, AI technology is being used 24/7 extensively. Particularly in Xinjiang for the Uyghur Muslim minority, according to the video. Project Sharp Eyes involves cameras at every intersection, train station, and even places that are equipped to show you being analyzed through face recognition right in front of you. This helped everything from human rights abuses to car accidents be resolved.

In Kai-Fu Lee's perspective, he advocates for responsible AI development. He believes that AI could foster democracy, but only if it is carefully managed. He emphasizes the need for global collaboration, ensuring that AI serves the greater good rather than breaking basic human rights.

Reflection

Personally, this hits close to home because in my major, everything is about social media and what we post, focusing on laws and regulations. So when watching this video, I thought about what I have put on the web or searched for in the past years that could possibly be sold to third parties to make a profit out of me. When you think about people watching your every move and listening to what you say or how you say it, it scares me, and I feel like going back to traditional ways with pen and paper could possibly lessen the amount of data they are selling or using for AI improvements.

(9) EOTO #2: Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias, according to Britannica, is "people's tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with their existing beliefs. So when you are in a battle between two people, you tend to only look for information that will back up your side and contradict the opposing side. Not looking for other sources, your judgment can sometimes be affected by this.

Pros and Cons of Confirmation Bias

While mostly viewed negatively, confirmation bias offers several psychological benefits. For example, it eases psychological stress by minimizing the discomfort that comes from confronting conflicting beliefs or information. By reinforcing our beliefs, we tend to boost our self-esteem because it provides a sense of being right or in control. The feeling of understanding your environment aids in making quicker choices when you are in desperate times. This mental shortcut allows us to process information faster because it is associated with our beliefs we've already held. 

Despite its psychological benefits, confirmation bias comes with a multitude of disadvantages. When confirmation bias is involved, one key issue that you can't hide is the misjudgment that 50% of the people make.  Rather than objectively considering all sides of an issue,  people prioritize information that aligns with their beliefs. This habit can narrow our worldviews and make engaging with diverse perspectives or adapting to new information harder. In group settings, confirmation bias contributes to the topic of groupthink. Groupthink is the desire for harmony and conformity that overrides critical thinking, ending in poor decision-making. In the medical setting, confirmation bias can lead to inaccurate or even unethical conclusions by prioritizing evidence that backs up your decision, potentially harming your crew or even the patient.

Flawed decisions due to confirmation bias have been found in a wide range of political, organizational, financial, and scientific contexts. These biases can sustain or reinforce views in the midst of opposing information and lead to an overconfidence in one's own views. In the case study focusing on misinformation being spread through technology from Frontiers in Public Health, confirmation bias demonstrated reduced susceptibility to misinformation and increased ability to determine if something is true or false.

Rich v. Poor

People often underestimate how much wealth is held by the top 1%, a bias influenced by "scope insensitivity," which makes them less responsive to extreme numbers and downplays inequality. Additionally, people who mistakenly believe they're better off may support redistribution policies, while system justification theory explains how societies with high inequality can normalize large income gaps to preserve the status quo.

Men v. Women

Men tend to overestimate their abilities due to overconfidence, often rating their performance much higher than it actually was, and defend their views more strongly in independent decisions. In contrast, women show less confirmation bias in decision-making and are more focused on accuracy, though societal stereotypes can still influence how they interpret feedback and opportunities. For example, research indicates that men consistently rate their past performance about 30% higher than it actually was, whereas women rate theirs about 15% higher.

Young v. Old

Teenagers are more susceptible to false memory formation due to a more liberal response bias, linked to the ongoing development of brain regions responsible for decision-making and memory. Adults, especially older ones, show a stronger correspondence bias, often attributing behaviors to internal traits rather than situational factors, influenced by their beliefs about the consistency between attitudes and behaviors.

Majority v. Minority

Members of majority groups often experience a "false uniqueness effect," underestimating the prevalence of their own group's behaviors and beliefs, which can lead to an inflated sense of superiority. The minority group members are more likely to exhibit a "false consensus effect," overestimating how many others share their beliefs, fostering group solidarity but potentially leading to misperceptions about broader societal views

Effects on Me

This leads to me looking at information that supports my beliefs, and in return, I may dismiss helpful information that can back up my claims more. For family, it can reinforce generational beliefs/traditional beliefs. By following traditional beliefs in the health aspect, we usually dismiss scientific diagnoses and return to what they did in the past to help people. In friend groups, it causes an echo chamber effect, which reinforces my beliefs in a group setting, but it prevents us from having honest conversations because no one wants to be the odd man out.

(8) Diffusion of Innovation

 The Innovation of the Sharing/"Gig" Economy Tailored to Ride Shares 

From the worries of getting into a taxi to today's society with ride-share apps, there has been an enormous change in trust and reliability through the diffusion theory. Before COVID, you would be scared to be in someone's car in a city, but now you see young teenagers hopping in the back of a car on their way to the next destination. 

What is the sharing/"gig" economy? 

A labor market for individuals who are able to work anytime, anywhere, as a temporary job to make extra income. With the rise of the gig economy, many young adults and the boomer generation are using this market as a way to start making income instead of getting a 9-5 job. Along with that, they can have a flexible schedule and be independent. 

Diffusion of Innovation Theory

As we discussed in class, the theory involves five main groups. Pioneers, early adopters, early majority, late adopters, and the laggards. With each group, they work together to build today's society. 

Wave of Innovation

Pioneers: They are the critical thinkers who innovate and are the beginning of the experience phase. They are usually the risk takers.

Early Adopters: The bridge between the general population and the risk takers is the early adopters. The "word-of-mouth" opinion-based leaders who draw attention to the innovation and spark the uptake phase in this innovation wave.

Early Majority: Careful decision makers who are open to new innovations but are highly concerned about the early adopters' decisions. This starts the tipping point in the innovation wave.

Late Adopters: People who want to be like everybody else. Followers. They usually adapt to what is good or a "trending" product on social media.  This is the maturation aspect of the innovation wave. 

Laggards: These individuals are usually boomers adapting to Gen-Z innovations like the online web. They are more traditional and don't really care about the latest product or top-tier products.

The Diffusion of Innovation Theory in action

Ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft are highly adopted by the diffusion of innovation theory. By exploring the different stages from pioneers to laggards, we establish a better understanding of how ride-sharing spread widely through different demographics and cultures. It provides us with key information like why individuals adapted to ride-sharing or resisted it after COVID.

Pioneers & Early Adopters: With the small percentage of individuals in this category, we often categorize them as tech-savvy, and mostly in the younger generations, they crave the "new" innovations leader position.  

Early majority: As early adopters, their focus was to see if ride-sharing was reliable, cost-effective, and socially acceptable. With COVID interfering with social interactions, ride-sharing was one of the solutions for people to reinteract with others in their community. Health and safety standards were still there, but it gave a sense of comfort to see other people after the COVID restrictions. This also grew trust in user ratings and safety protocols.

Late majority: In this circumstance, with the increase of social interactions, ride-sharing gained popularity and resulted in the overwhelming adoption of ride-sharing. Whether it was being the driver or the passenger, ride-sharing brought job opportunities. It was the mass influence that drove customers from taxis to apps like Uber and Lyft. The cost of each ride decreased with the use of these apps. From a taxi service paying it in cash and worrying about availability to getting the nearest driver on Uber, the rates and reviews skyrocketed. 

Laggards & Non-Adapters: With Laggards and non-adapters, it is a choice/opinion that involves trust issues, privacy breaches, cultural and demographic barriers, and/or personal preference. Everybody has trust issues, and trusting a random stranger you just met could be worrisome. For data privacy and app permissions, people are being vulnerable without knowing where their information is going. As older generations try to stay away from technology, this can create a barrier that restrains them from being able to use these apps.

Advantages vs. Disadvantages

From the driver's point of view, ride-sharing is convenient when it comes to schedules. You can work when you want and where you want to go with each ride. The apps are very accessible to use and are very flexible when it comes to operating hours. Not like a 9-5 job, Uber, Lyft, and other ride-sharing apps are available 24/7 with drivers from all around the world. One thing I like about these apps is the great communication that is incorporated within the app. You can message, locate, and call your driver to see how far they are, and if they need further instructions, you can give them.

From a passenger's point of view, there is the financial benefit and the convenience of finding a ride promptly. According to Robert Farrington's case study, it showed that he spent $200.36 per month on transportation. If you continue to ride Uber, you could eventually save a lot to put a down payment on a car. It was convenient for him to ride Uber instead of owning a car because of the car's deterioration and the constant fixes/parts he needed to buy to keep his vehicle in check and safe for his family.

Some downsides of ride-sharing include labor concerns, market distribution, environmental concerns, and technology dependence. When working with Uber as a driver, you do not qualify for unemployment insurance benefits or workers' compensation. You also must pay a self-employment tax to cover full social security and medicare taxes of 15.3% per worker, whereas W-2 workers pay half the price and their employers pay the rest. Creating these apps also disturbed traditional taxi services. Uber's flexible labor supply model and surge pricing more closely match supply with demand throughout the day, while taxi services couldn't match Uber's efficiency. According to T&E, Ride-hailing trips now result in an estimated 69% more climate pollution, on average, than the trips they displace.

Cost-benefit analysis with new technology like the gig economy on the rise

These ride-sharing services address a real problem—poor public transportation and, in some areas, a lack of transportation as a whole. However, using these services comes with doubts, including the cost of time and money, and the potential loss of your privacy. While it may offer a short-term convenience, relying on it too much can lead to long-term dependency, which causes side effects like a lack of physical activity, poor connection with your community, and an increase in screen time. Before fully committing to these services, it is worth considering alternatives like carpooling with friends, biking, or taking other types of public transportation.

Reflection

All in all, the adoption of new technology isn't just about innovation, but it's about values, lifestyle, and timing. Ride-sharing is a prime example of how innovation spreads, but also the effects it has on society from both perspectives. Whether it's an app for transportation or social interaction, technology comes with risks. Each individual's choice to be a part of this innovation or not is shaped by more than its convenience.

(7) The Progressive Era

Why does the Government hide Anti-War Voices?

When doing a quick search on Google Scholar, "Why does the government hide anti-war voices from the public?", my search was filled with PDFs that referenced the same thing. They want to HIDE the reality. Why should important things like anti-war movements be hidden from the public? We see it every day with our local news broadcasts. They are very one-dimensional and always seem to look past important details from multiple sources.

With a world constantly evolving around political conflict, these voices that support peace and diplomacy often get pushed aside. Before this class, I never knew there were websites like Antiwar.com and The American Conservative that called for non-intervention, diplomacy, and peace movements in these harsh times. If these websites were published more, I feel like there wouldn't be as much conflict with politics, and hopefully, it would be for the better when it comes to making new ties.

Founded in 1995 by Eric Garris and Justin Raimondo, Antiwar.com's mission was to challenge U.S. foreign policy and advocate for a non-interventionist approach to international relations. Their publishers, interviewers, and analysts critique military intervention, questioning the key details that conflict with American taxpayers. Their focus is not to say that war is wrong but to emphasize the economic and strategic implications it has on us as Americans.

With The American Conservative website standing as another platform for antiwar content, it is known for the broader critique of U.S. foreign policy. Founded in 2002 by Patrick Joseph Buchanan and a group of conservatives, the site was made as an outlet for more restrained, non-interventionist foreign policy. Similar to Antiwar.com, The American Conservative website focuses on the interventions primarily serving the elite and not the American people.

In Pat's book "Will America Survive to 2025? Suicide of a Power," he warns us that the U.S. is on a dangerous path to political mishaps, economic instability, and moral decay. He argues that without our foundation of values and principles that are established, the country risks a catastrophic decline by 2025. Now being in 2025, in my opinion, I can agree with him. Our president isn't doing what he says, and in return, he is harming individuals and future generations.

Why is it Hard to Mainstream?

Both cultural and institutional reasons affect why these websites aren't widely known. The first major reason is mainstream media bias. Major news networks and newspaper companies often rely on government officials, military leaders, and defense contractors to aid their reports. In return, we get narratives that are in favor of military interventionism. Along with that, these mainstream media companies build their customer base by fueling corporate interests and what is popular in the industry, often hiding antiwar voices.

It's annoying to see how politically polarized the discussion has become as a college student trying to understand U.S. foreign policy. Sometimes it seems like you have to choose between being a dove, who is viewed as idealistic or naive, or a hawk, who favors military actions. This bipolar mentality restricts real discussions and oversimplifies complicated global challenges. Despite the historical existence of antiwar voices on both sides, both main political parties tend to support interventionist measures, which is depressing. Americans like me find it more difficult to hear other viewpoints that place a higher priority on diplomacy, diligence, and lasting peace when polarization grows because such complex, antiwar viewpoints are covered behind big headlines.

Final Thoughts

It is prevalent that these two websites provide a valuable source of antiwar activists, helping us gain another perspective on how we should consider foreign policies. But its issue relies on the lack of prominence in mainstream media. Until the public demands more diversity in the stories we hear and the policies we support, voices calling for peace and diplomacy will be hidden and silenced. It is up to us as Americans to seek justice and change the narrative, supporting those voices who offer different perspectives on foreign policies.