An Acceptable Level of Invasion and Censorship?

           I myself have always been of the mind I was proud in the lack of censorship this country has imposed on the Internet, in direct contrast to countries like Iran, China and Cuba it was one of the things that really made me proud to be American. It wasn't I until I realized the potential threat to the democracy that I love, that I received my call to action. This blog will not presume to have a solution to the problem of privacy in the 21st Century, lack of Freedom of the Press online, or even the unconstitutional control of content online in (but not limited to) such popular forums as Google, Facebook and Twitter. The only purpose is to draw attention to the misconceptions in hopes that in defining the problem a solution can be found. 

          

           Contrary to popular belief, there is no “Right to Privacy’ specified in the Constitution of the United States of America just as there is no famed “Internet Privacy Act” as many suspect web sites would have you believe. However, a century of case law has established that rights of privacy are indeed implicit in the Bill of Rights as well as in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Therein lies half of the problem, all of our supposed protections are implied. There is no freedom of the press limitations for all of these social media sites (SMS) in which we share all of our private information. Facebook and Twitter have the rights to censor any content they don’t wish to promote, or promote any content they deem important. With the power of circulation that they possess, far greater than any newspaper, they propose a very clear and present danger to our democracy. I never even considered the fact that these SMS that we put so much faith in and attribute so much to in regards to unity and the progress we have made as an online community to be a potential dagger in the back of the democracy that had given them their wings. These SMS have a responsibility as a vehicle of conversation to remain fair and impartial and simply be a medium of discussion similar to a fax machine or telephone. As powerful mediums of communication in the 21st century they should not be allowed a voice of their own, sounds callous I know but they are far too powerful as entities to be allowed to have and/or promote their own political agenda, their responsibility begins and ends with their users.

             The Candidates of the upcoming election for the 45th President of the United States both attempt to harness the unparalleled capacity of SMS though neither has actually grasped the true nature of the beast. They both compete for the same audience but neither has understood that likes don't get you elected, if you want to try to come to our sandbox you have to learn the rules. You can't just post content, and buy ads and expect us to be engaged, you must engage us. Obama's camp tweets 4-6 times daily, posts in Facebook on their many pages on average 3-5 times a day and in both instances are literally twice what the Romney camp does. Obama's Facebook has 31 million "likes" while Romney has only 10 million. At first glance its obvious that Obama is doing more in SMS to gain advantage in this election, right? Do the numbers still seem in Obama's favor when you factor in he has been running his campaign for re-election since being elected in 2008 and Romney has been at it for little over a year? More than 80% of the content Obama posts is never delivered to his 31 million followers because most are old and lost their appeal when it comes to the "Edge Rank Algorithm"(Affinity x Wight x Time Decay = Edge Rank), while Romney's 10 million are "fresh" and hold more weight in the formula hence the content reaches its desired audience a lot more efficiently. Another example of how even the professionals truly can not grasp the magnitude of this new medium, Romney is delivering his message that much more efficiently but only out of default.

        In this past week the second of three debates was held and Republican Challenger Mitt Romney mentioned that in his proposed budget he considers cutting funding for the Public Broadcast Service (PBS) and in a quip says, "Sorry Big Bird." Before the 45 min long debate was even over there was a Facebook Page with 100,000 fans was created as well as a Twitter account with the handle @firedbigbird sprang up and immediately had 25,000 followers. Should you care that within hours that Twitter handle was terminated by Twitter? Absolutely! Just like the journalist Guy Adams who was suspended from Twitter for his criticism of the NBC coverage of the 2012 Olympics with #NBCfail, it was a clear violation of his rights of Freedom of Speech. Allowing SMS to abridge our rights is the definition of censorship. Where does it end? What if there was a political agenda for SMS corporations in which one candidate was favored over the other? What if one candidate was proposing some type of statute or legislation that would restrict SMS or worse, hinder their profits? Does it not scare you that it is 100% within their rights to silence advocates that don't share their interests, like Guy Adams? Does it not make you quiver at the thought they could use their Edge Rank Algorithms to censor content that promotes such legislation or the candidate that advocates it? That is the clear and present danger that keeps me up at night.

            While there are federal agencies that have made a valid attempt to protect such implied liberties, i.e. the privacy audits of Facebook, Twitter and Google imposed by the Federal Trade Commission. Even if one such law or amendment were to be drawn up in the United States that is where its jurisdiction would end, there is no international regulatory board or committee that could mandate SMS to limit censorship and at the same time protect our privacy.

           Should we and if so how do we regulate SMS specifically without infringing on the rights of the users? Is it really even possible?

           When I brought this issue up to one of my professors at Fordham University, he of course astounded me with insight I had not even considered but realized was crucial to my point. Professor Lance Strate, PhD is Professor of Communication and Media Studies at Fordham as well as author of "On the Binding Biases of Time and Other Essays on General Semantics andMedia Ecology." His contention is that the loss of privacy is not only necessary but inevitable and proposes a destined shift of the social dynamic from a desire for privacy into the desire for an audience.

Prof. Lance Strate 

Author, Editor & Professor

Fordham University

"The First Amendment provides protection against government censorship of speech and the press, which was meant to allow private citizens and companies to say and print whatever they want to.  This in turns means that the owners of the press can publish whatever they want to, and not publish whatever they want to. In this sense, when Facebook, Google, or more traditional outlets decide to block content, cancel programs, not publish items, etc., this is not considered censorship, at least not as far as the First Amendment is concerned. There is precedent for requiring media that use public resources, such as the airwaves, cables run over public land, etc., to include a certain amount of public service content and to be otherwise regulated regarding commercial and political material, and perhaps it could be argued that the Internet that was set up by the government and uses some public resources is in the same category, but then again anyone can create a website with whatever content they want. Facebook, Twitter, etc., are private corporations, and they certainly allow for plenty of public service content anyway.  As for privacy, while there are some legal and policy issues, and Google, Facebook, and other Internet companies are involved in various controversies regarding privacy, the general bias of the electronic media is against privacy, which McLuhan correctly identified as a creation of literacy and print. Privacy was unknown before writing was invented, the ancient Greek term for privacy was synonymous with idiot, Hannah Arendt points out that the root meaning of privacy is the same as deprived, as in one deprived of a public role and identity, and the constitution has no such guarantee because the emphasis on privacy was only gradually developing in the 18th century. With new media, privacy is dying, and I don't see any way to stop it. I've said this many times, in a generation or two they won't even understand what we were concerned about, and where we were concerned about loss of privacy, their concern will be loss of an audience."

                Professor Strate also directed me to the works of David Brin, Author of "The Transparent Society". Not only had David Brin eerily predicted the demolition of the World Trade Centers by acts of terrorism in 1998 (3 years before 9/11) but also the ensuing legislation known as The Patriot Act. His Predictions were based on the prior failed attempt at the WTC in 1996 so he is not exactly a prophet but his ability to anticipate the reactions of the public and how the government would use their fear to create the act shows his incredible sagaciousness. Mr. Brin's View on transparent society are similar to Professor Strate's in that the loss of privacy is inevitable, the human race must contend with the evolution of media and communication and make the choice between freedom and privacy. His argument, very simply, is that the loss of privacy will go both ways. Eventually we will sacrifice our own privacy but at the same time so will the "elites" and in that lies the transparency, the loss of privacy will be reciprocated. He describes it as the return of "the Village", the reunification of the human race into one society. 
      
              While in theory a transparent society may be the next step in this communication revolution, I do not see the full transparency a possibility therefore it will simply be a rouse. "Big Brother" will never allow it, there will always be a means of control and there will always be people at the helm. My opinion, fight for your privacy. Fight for your right to freedom of speech. Fight for your liberty. As of January 1, 2013 employers in the state of Illinois will no longer be allowed to demand Facebook passwords from their employees. You don't think the request is infringing on the applicant's liberty? Why should it be tolerated anywhere in this country? We the people must fight and continue to fight just as our fathers and forefathers before us for all of the rights and liberties that we take for granted each day.  There will always be someone trying to trample our liberties for their own gain, in the 21st century they won't be in red coats, they'll in 3 piece suits instead.  

Is Evolving Media ≤ MediaEvolving?

               Ever heard the terms “Global village” or “Cyberspace”, perhaps the phrase the “medium is the message”? They all obviously refer the medium that we have all come to know and understand as the internet, right? Wrong- on both counts, all three quotes are nearly 65 years old, predating the internet as think we know and understand it by nearly 50 years, so how could they have anything to do with the internet? And as much as it pains me to say 99% of us do not truly understand the internet. Many believe that media and the internet are two separate concepts when in actuality Internet is media, an incredible over simplification it may seem but no, the internet is simply the most contemporary medium of communication, a complicated medium-but of media nonetheless. To truly understand the internet you must realize its foundation, not just from a series of networked 8 bit supercomputers in the desert somewhere you would begin at the inception of all media 100,000 years ago with the beginnings of verbal and symbolic communication, through the innovation of the automated printing press into the revolution from analog into the digital age of iPad and everything in between. Communication is media and media is evolving.

             
The Oracle of the Electronic Age
               Marshall McLuhan is considered by many as “the oracle of the electronic age” coined the term “Global Village” in the 1950’s, 40 years before it is used again to describe the internet so why is it such an incredible designation when discussing it more than 60 years later? McLuhan understood the power of media better than anyone in his time, realizing early on that media was evolving he was coined a prophet instead on someone who understood the power of communication as well as history’s penchant for repeating itself. When he initially coined the term “Global Village” he was initially referring to television, as that was simply the most contemporary and effective form of communication and media. McLuhan recognized the value of the medium simply in terms of the communication and sharing of information- such blasphemy led him to be ostracized by many in the academic community because they did not consider it to have any value as an “appropriate object of scholarly or pedagogical attention” (Strate, p. 175). Just as it was true 100,000 years ago, it was true in McLuhan’s time and it is true today, communication is the binding force of community; whether it be symbolic communication, cave drawings, language, or email the mediums or means we use to communicate influence how we view the world (Sapir-Whorf Principle of Linguistic Relativity) therefore the ease of communication thru technological means has created this “Global Village” removing the hindrance of physical distance. The early evidence of communities known as the “Creative Explosion” begins c. 30-20,000 years BCE with the first known appearance of communication; cave paintings demonstrated to later generations hunting tactics and farming methods, tally systems (notches in rope or sticks) demonstrated the first recordings of numerical data physical information. This provided the civilizations of the time to transverse time itself by communicating knowledge through the generations evolving the hunter/gather systems into the Agricultural Revolution 10,000 years ago. That major revolution took 10-20,000 years, the next took approximately 4,500 years in Mesopotamia (8,000 BCE) between the Sumerian writing originally consisting of pictographs and made up of hundreds of characters was incredibly hard to learn therefore only a few scribes were apprenticed to learn to record for administration, religious, literary, and scientific purposes, it wasn’t until a bilingual society was created between the Sumerians and Akkadia that cuneiform was invented c. 3,500. The bilingual nature of the society was the vehicle of inception of cuneiform, the ease of communication between one civilization to the next resulted in one of the greatest literary revolutions in history; the evolution from Old Assyrian cuneiform into the much simpler Semitic alphabet of only 22 characters occurred c. 1,500 BCE taking only approximately 2,000 years. It is also worth noting that the Semitic alphabet also included the concept of positional notation as well as the concept of 0 (zero) invented in India c. 3,000 BCE.

Communication: Sociocultural Evolution Stimulant

You surely noticed that as the boundaries of communication dwindle so do the time spans between the innovations, which is and will be the case for any medium in any century. The Semitic alphabet became the basis of Greek then Latin within another 1,500 years leading to the next great revolution, The Renaissance Era. The Renaissance which spanned a little more than 300 years from the 14^th to the 17^th centuries highlighted education, art and innovation- one of which was the mechanical clock invented by monks to keep track of prayer time for their disciples started the automated and mechanical revolution and another equally astonishing historically unparalleled innovation- the precursor for virtually every one that followed; metal movable type. Metal movable type as you would imagine accelerated the time tables of communication even more, no longer do books need to be hand written on parchment (made of the prepared skin of an animal) which made them much more affordable to the masses, education then changes the archetype of government leading to countless revolutions that never could have taken place otherwise and closing the poverty gap more with every passing generation.  Guttenberg’s automated type printing press came less than 200 years later, the steam engine and the industrial revolution less than 150 years after that.

The Industrial Revolution from 1750 to 1850 led to where changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, transportation, and technology had a profound effect on the social, economic and cultural conditions of the times. The discovery of electricity by Benjamin Franklin in 1750 was virtually useless at first, only true use was the telegraph which wasn’t invented for almost 50 years and until the revelations of Thomas Edison of the light bulb was the “power of electricity” (pun intended) truly realized. Samuel Morse invents Morse Code, the true precursor to mass communication and the first appearance of the code that is the foundation for every computer device known to man, Binary. Binary code is a series of offs and ons separated by short lengths of time communicated via a current of electricity from one point to the next. Soon after, thanks to Reginald Fesseden, Gugliemo Marconi and Edwin Armstrong radio broadcasting begins the era of mass communication. No longer are stories told one to one, one to many is now the means of communication, McLuhan once said “It is the device that creates the revolution, not the medium,” “mass society” is coined to define how man is now connected at a level never once realized in human history. Factories begin popping up around large cities and decentralization begins; mass production leads to mass consumption, mass transportation is developed to transport the workforce. High voltage power lines sprung up connecting coast to coast and it wasn’t too long after that Alexander Graham Bell had invented the telephone and the telephone lines followed. The next great innovation that truly completed this vision on the “Mass Man” and “Mass Culture” was the television, in 80% of all households within 20 years of its demonstration at the World’s Fair in 1939. This is the inception of Mass Media, information is now shared through multiple platforms of media; books, newspaper, telegraph, radio, television and the natural evolution of the next great medium is simple, if  the natural progression from one to one communication is one to many then the next obvious progression is from many to many.

“New Media” is another term coined by our prophet Marshall McLuhan, defined as different from mass media because it is not interpersonal such as the telephone or handwritten letter while still interactive and somewhat participatory. Some scholars would argue that “break point” came much later with the invention of the computer and the internet, Professor of Communications and Media Studies Lance Strate of Fordham University would disagree, he argues “they are secondary developments, an that, more ofthen than not, the characteristics of the new media environment are derived from the characteristics of electricity, electric technology, and the electronic media in general.” 

Setting up a YouTube channel for your business

               So you have a small business and think a website alone is sufficient to reach your clients? Not anymore! If you don’t have your business on the major social networks then you are not maximizing your potential. Major Social Networks include but are not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Pinterest and YouTube… YES the major social networks absolutely include YouTube!  You can find a list of the other major networks HERE  along with their ranks as determined by each website's Alexa Global Traffic Rank, and U.S. Traffic Rank from both Compete and Quantcast. While you should absolutely be sure to get your brand on as many as these sites as you can IF YOU CAN NOT MANAGE AND MAINTAIN IT DO NOT DO IT! One of the biggest mistakes a business owner can make online is reaching a client and ignoring him/her whether intentionally or not. You also want to make sure you update content and maintain your site regularly but I will go over all of that in a later blog, The Social Network Steroid for Small Business!

What does YouTube offer your small business?

Why should your small business be on YouTube? The goal is to reach as many potential clients as possible, your demographic is absolutely surfing the web so put your brand EVERYWHERE! You already have a website I’m sure, that should be enough right? WRONG! One of the most impactful things about YouTube is it allows an alternative access for ADDITIONAL CONTENT in the most popular medium, video! Not only that, creating and maintaining a YouTube Channel allows you to keep the attention of your clients. Simply posting a video on the site is not good enough because your video will be listed with every other similar video which means it’s right there next to your competition! You don’t want to get a customer all revved up on an idea then let them click a competitor so funnel them all into your product or service with a channel specific to your company! INSIGHT AND INFORMATION breed trust, upload videos of not only your products and services but behind the scenes stuff like how your products are made, how your office staff gets along and you create a happy work environment- Things that will give your company a “face”. CONNECTIONS are the most powerful tool on the web, whether its through social networks or reciprocal linking on your website (a valuable traffic tool for web traffic which cannot be understated! Read This!) Connecting with your clients by simply allowing them to comment & ask questions on your videos has the potential to create not only a valued client but a champion for your product just because you found your video on YouTube and saw it as informative. How about CREDIBILITY? Anyone can upload a video, but taking the time to create a channel marketed directly to your clientele tells your audience you’re for real and the more official it looks the more official your company will look!

Now let’s get your small business on YouTube!

After scouring YouTube for the most informative and simple to follow videos I came across a Channel created by Local Pulse Marketing which is by far the best and will get you started in no time! They are broken up into stages so not to overwhelm the beginner and points out the most critical areas to focus on at each stage of development. The first is very simply “How to create your account and update your YouTube Channel Information as well as what the purpose of important information like the channel description and tags, which enables your video to be found in search.

Update YouTube Business Channel: Updating YouTube Channel Information

The Second provides insights on how to personalize the design of the background so to be more identifiable with your clients. 

Change YouTube Background: Changing YouTube Channel Background Design

**Remember you want to make sure you keep a uniform look across all forms of marketing so try to use the same color scheme and style as you already used on your website.

               The last one I will feature will be how to link the Channel to your website and assuming you have already created your Social Network business pages, linking them as well. 

YouTube Tricks: Social Media & Website Links in YouTube Channel How To Video

**Remember best thing you can do for a potential client is educate them as to why you’re the best for the job, linking all of these networks together is the best way to do this because it allows a seamless gateway throughout all of your forums.

You will also find on Local Pulse Marketing's Channel that they have several other videos that would be incredibly helpful for any beginner marketeer like helpful hints on Linkedin, Google+ , Facebook. I will no doubt be referring back to their channel because I found it so informative...SEE HOW THAT WORKS???!!!