Will Privacy Ever Be An Option?

I will talking about Nick Dyer-Witheford’s, “Mobile” and Micah Lee’s, “Edward Snowden Explains how to Reclaim your Privacy”. Nick Dyer-Withedord’s article “Mobile” is asking why do we pay six hundred dollars or more for an iphone, why are they so expensive? What are we actually paying for? Depending on which cell phone carrier you have, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint or any of the other ones the phone is pretty expensive yet Iphones are the top selling phone even if you’re part of a low-income community. The article says “As a Salvadoran saying has it, ‘En El Salvador hasta los perros andan celular’ (‘In El Salvador even dogs have cell phones’) (Alarcón 2014: 11). Some 30 to 40 per cent of the population live below the official poverty line, but there are 123 cell phone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants.” Why are cellphones so addicting? What if our cell phones did not have access to internet, would it still be as popular? Probably not, cell phones make life a lot easier, we can look up pretty much anything with the click of a couple buttons or using Siri. Cell phones have made people read books online, buy music online, and even watch movies on your phone, what’s a newspaper? What’s a CD? What’s even a movie theatre? Cell phones have taken over a lot of companies and just put any information we need at our fingertips.

Micah Lee’s, “Edward Snowden Explains how to Reclaim your Privacy” is about a interview with a man named Edward Snowden who “is an American computer professional, former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee, and former contractor for the United States government who copied and leaked classified information from the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2013 without authorization. His disclosures revealed numerous global surveillance programs, many run by the NSA and the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments.” Edward was talking about how the government takes our privacy away from us and monitors everything we do, he is giving us tips and advice on how to have a more private life, he says in the article “We should armor ourselves using systems we can rely on every day. This doesn’t need to be an extraordinary lifestyle change. It doesn’t have to be something that is disruptive. It should be invisible, it should be atmospheric, it should be something that happens painlessly, effortlessly. This is why I like apps like Signal, because they’re low friction. It doesn’t require you to re-order your life. It doesn’t require you to change your method of communications. You can use it right now to talk to your friends.”

Both article don’t really have any correlation but the first article is asking what we pay for when buying a cellphone, why is it so expensive? The second article is about how to have more privacy from the government. My conclusion for the correlation of the two articles is if we buy the phone why doesn’t privacy come with it? That is because the government doesn’t want us to truly be free and they document everything we do on the internet, is that fair? I don’t really think that is, if we pay for the phone and pay for the bill every month we deserve a little bit of privacy, will we ever get this privacy? Probably not but that’s the government for you.


Word count: 565


Dyer-Witheford, Nick. “Dyer-Witheford_Mobile.pdf.” Google Drive. Google, n.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2017.

Theintercept. “Edward Snowden Explains How To Reclaim Your Privacy.” The Intercept. N.p., 12 Nov. 2015. Web. 21 Apr. 2017.

“Edward Snowden.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Apr. 2017. Web. 21 Apr. 2017.


Ethics vs Humanity

I will be talking about Clay Shirky’s , “Everyone Is a Media Outlet” and *Rebecca Blood, “Weblog Ethics”. In “Everyone Is a Media Outlet” Clay is basically talking about how everybody is a media outlet, even Facebook and blog sites are media outlets that regular people post their opinion on and share products for free, in other words people are doing free labor for companies and they don’t even know they are doing it. The article defines a professional and why we need them, it says, “A profession exists to solve a hard problem, one that requires some sort of specialization. Driving a race car requires special training-race car drivers are professionals. Driving an ordinary car, though, doesn’t require the driver to belong to a particular profession, because it’s easy enough that most adults can do it with a modicum of training. Most professions exist because there is a scarce resource that requires ongoing management.” Professionals are simply here to give us the facts and sell something for a current event for the public.  

“Rebecca Blood’s, “Weblog Ethics” is a very surprising article to me, it talks about how journalist are not suppose to interfere with their subjects life no matter what is going on. This article defines journalist that says “Journalists — the people who actually report the news — are acutely aware of the potential for abuse that is inherent in their system, which relies on support from businesses and power brokers, each with an agenda to promote. Their ethical standards are designed to delineate the journalist’s responsibilities and provide a clear code of conduct that will ensure the integrity of the news.” in other words it is saying if you’re a journalist during a war and you see someone get shot you can just take a picture of them and not help them because you’re not suppose to take a picture for something in return, you’re suppose to be take the picture with no strings attached because that is not your job to help them, it also says “Weblogs, produced by nonprofessionals, have no such code, and individual webloggers seem almost proud of their amateur status. “We don’t need no stinkin’ fact checkers” seems to be the prevailing attitude, as if inaccuracy were a virtue.” in other words it is saying if you’re just a average citizen and you’re taking pictures of someone getting shot you can help them and still post the picture.  

These two articles correlate because the first article is talking about what a professional journalist is and the second article is about the ethics of a journalist, these two articles go hand and hand. The first article and the second article puts ethics before humanity, which is sad but it’s life. 


Shirky, Clay. “Shirky_Everyone Is a Media Outlet.pdf.” Google Docs. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.

Blood, Rebecca. “Webblog Ethics.” Rebecca’s Pocket. N.p., n.d. Web.

“Us” and “Them”; Equity Among Natives

I will be analyzing Danah Boyd’s “Literacy: Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?” and Jurgen Habermas’s “The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article”. In Danah Boyd’s “Literacy: Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?” a digital native is a person who grew up in a world where internet already exist, in other words digital natives are kids and digital immigrants a people that were not born during the “tech” time, or in other words adults or “old people”. Teens grew up with the internet and technology so many adults assume that that youth automatically understand and can comprehend new technology. John Perry Barlow said that “adults should be afraid of fear children’s supposedly natural-born knowledge” and Douglas Rushkaff says that “children should be recognized for their ingenuity”. This document is all about the youth being “native” to the digital language of computers, video games and the internet, it also states that native immigrants become fascinated by many aspects of the new technology and adapt to it. This document also explains that not all the youth know how to use the new technology, few teens have basic understanding of how the computer system they use actually works. It also talks about two specific search engines, Google and Wikipedia. Google is a monetized through advertising and it is changed by your preference. Wikipedia is a crowd sourced encyclopedia with moderators, in other words it can be edited but not as easy as you think, most teachers and parents say Wikipedia is unreliable because it can be edited but in order for it to be edited you have a give a reason why.

Jurgen Habermas’s “The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article” is about the access of the internet and how it is given to all citizens. It says “information access’s inequalities and media literacy compromise the representations of the virtual sphere.” Some people do not have access without a concrete commitment to universal access at affordable rates, the internet merely harbors the illusion of “openness.”” This document also talks about how “when there is no face-to-face action were less likely to see the impact and social value of our words.” “Most information online is fragmented, our political system suffers from a lack of citizen involvement and the internet technology may offer new tools for connecting, motivating, and organizing dissent but the cannot single-handedly transform political culture.”

Tying these two documents together is the “Literacy: Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?” is talking about how the youth is suppose to be feared for their natural born knowledge of new technology and that they are native to it and adults are immigrants because they weren’t born in the “tech age” but they adapt to it and the article “The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article” is talking about how everybody does not have the access to the internet, so my question is how can somebody be native to something that they do not have access to? The digital natives article kind of proves the public sphere article wrong because not all teens are “hip” to the new technology and not all adults are immigrants to the new technology, that article is only looking at the people that have access to the new technology.


Boyd, Danah. “Digital Natives.pdf.” Google Docs. It’s Complicated, 15 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Feb. 2017.


Habermas, Jurgen, Sara Lennox, and Frank Lennox. “Habermas_Public Sphere.pdf.” Google Docs. New German Critique, 15 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Feb. 2017.
Copy & paste citation