Thursday, February 26, 2015

Bullying in Online Games

Tex Playing Video Games, Wikimedia Commons
Did you know that people who insult other in video games are most likely to be younger people? There are many different kinds of online gaming bullying. For example, insulting someone else in a game is the most popular way to bully somebody. Groups of users gang up to insult their victim in a game to have fun. One professional StarCraft player used the word “rape” against an amateur female player at a game tournament and got disqualified from the tournament. Later, he explained that he did not know that it was very insulting, He was from Ukraine and did not understand how serious it was, but still he got disqualified from the tournament and had to apologize to the female player. This incident is only the beginning of a larger situation, because e-sports, where you watch professional players play like other sports, are on the rise, and people must address this before bigger and more serious incidents happen.

In response, gaming companies have started to limit players who insult others in their games. On the one hand censorship might make people feel safer because they don't have to get insulted. On the other hand censorship might upset people who want to say controversial things. Censorship is bad because people lose their freedom of speech.

Censorship is bad because freedom of speech is most important. People in online video games are thinking that someone should censor insults and punish players who are toxic to others, but they don't want them to censor everything they say Because if they have to censor everything that people says online, People will feel like their privacy is being reduced, because the company will see your private messages and censor words before somebody receives it. Game companies have been developing reporting systems to punish players who disturb others from playing games and also they have been developing censorship too since insults in game was the biggest problem that they had. Riot Games who made League of legends started this system since beginning and became good model for controlling their users. Result, of that 70 percent of users who have been punished for bad behavior fixed their behavior and never got punished agian. Most games censor only recognizable insults, but some games censors even non-insult words. According to a survey, most players felt like they lost freedom of speech about censoring non-insulting words. Censorship won't make people feel safer. People who want to insult will figure out the various ways to dodge censorship. In fact, some game companies have a problem with people who keep figuring out new ways to insult. Also, players who insult make new words to insult other players, so the game doesn’t recognize the words and can’t censor them. In Multiplayer online battle arena like League of Legends and DOTA where players team up together and fight against another team, there are conflicts between teammates and players who are unskilled that are targeted by insulting. The new words like “noob” and “feeder,” which refer to unskilled players, are not being censored, but even if they censor it some toxic player will eventually figure out new words to insult in gaming.

There are people who disagree that censorship is bad. For example, many websites like Wikipedia are submitted, edited and published by community are some users who share false or insulting information, but it is fixed quickly. This is one kind of censorship words of community it is different from censorship by machine in gaming which searched and censors insulting words. People might disagree with me because they might have been cyber bullied before and experienced emotional trauma. In severe cases, that can be the main reason of suicide. I think that con argument is not always right because censorship not always right and there are companies like Riot Games who made league of legends which give rewards to players who are examples of good behavior and there are systems in games where you can either report or honor players. As honor points go up you have a higher chance of getting rewarded and at the end of the game all players type "GG" which means good game. This makes all players enjoy the game. So, instead of censoring or banning , encouraging players to be players with good behavior is better.

Insulting others in online games is a huge problem today and there are many ways of dealing with it. Censorship is one way, but it cannot catch all insulting language. Also, censorship does not encourage people to fix their behavior, it makes them figure out how to dodge censorship. A better solution to fix this problem of insulting is to encourage players to have better behavior with rewards or education. This method has worked in many games.




If online games censor everything that people say online, do people feel like privacy is getting watched? While I read through the comments there were no comments that changed my mind, but it certainly made me to think again. One comment asked me why do I think bullying occurs mostly in online games that is part of esports. I didn’t think why it occurs mostly in online competitive games. The reason is that competitive online games require teamwork, but sometimes teamwork breaks because of some toxic people who blame other players, use insulting words, and make a whole team act negatively to each other which makes them lose. I got lots of good comments that asked me questions that helped me clarify my opinion. One question wanted to know specifically about the rewarding and honoring system of some companies. It clarified my opinion that talks about how it is more valuable to encourage players to be good players than just keep punishing them. One comment showed me an article about more information that I can find about bullying in online games. As I read through it, it gave me tons of information about how the government tries to solve cyber bullying and where to start. I chose this topic because as a gamer I was interested in things going on in the online game society and wanted to find out by my self. I think the blog project provided me a chance to research further about it and helped me to find out about online game bullying.

Friday, February 6, 2015

Macho-Man Masculinity

We’ve all heard of the unrealistic standards given to women in society, right? Not to say that those standards are not an issue or are not significant in any way, because they are, but have you ever stopped and thought about how there are many stereotypes and standards that are applied to men, as well? It’s a very overlooked issue that has not been considered much until somewhat recently. Gender inequality, while is an issue for women as well, is a massive issue that branches off into many other issues within our society.

(Taken from here, I do NOT own this photo)
First off, did you know that men statistically take more dangerous jobs due to the fact that they are expected to choose more dangerous lines of work, such as military, firefighting, construction, logging, law enforcement, and many other jobs, and die more often because of it? According to a 2010-2011 study, of the 2,266,883 military members, over 80% of them are men (see source here). Men are told that in order to be this perfect, healthy, strong, courageous man, you have to be so many ideologies at once, that it’s almost impossible to achieve. You have to be independent. You have to feel, or at the very least show, little to no emotion. You have to be physically strong, and a lot of times physically attractive, too.

These things are merely scratching the surface of the realm of expectations that are put on young men starting at a fairly young age. Throughout their childhood, young men will adapt and accept the idea of stoic, heroic, strong, brave macho-man warrior that will swoop in and save the day and be loved by everybody, and this reflects later on in their lives. Most young men are confused and unsure of who they should be, when they look at themselves and then what a “perfect” man is, and they see just how big of a difference there really is between the two.

Throughout school lives, even as early as middle school, a large number of boys will compare themselves to that stereotype and wonder what went wrong, when really, nothing was wrong to begin with. Boys are shown less compassion than girls at early ages, because you have to “be a man”. Another part of this problem is the fact that there are countless double standards that apply to men. Men will usually receive much harsher sentences than women, the guys will usually be the ones to hold doors open for women, women can hit men, but men can’t hit men, etc, etc (not that chivalry as a whole, or being respectful is a bad thing).

One very prominent issue is the fact that men are often the instigators of violence, specifically violence in which a woman is the victim. The most probable cause for this is due to the fact that young men, especially in this day and age, are born and raised with the false pretext that men are the Macho Man Randy Savage of the household and have to be dominant over others in a way that can end up being harmful to others.

Starting from a very young age, as was said before, young men will often be taught to be the powerful figure that will be the enforcer of rules and be aggressive and assertive while doing so. This can clearly be connected to acts of violence that are often instigated by men, and also often on women.

Again, as i stated before, and would like to state again, i do not believe that women in our day and age, specifically in this society, do not face sexism as a whole, discrimination, or any other harsh treatment; because they do. I’m simply stating that young men are often put through similar stereotypes and told to act a certain way and be a certain person growing up with that kind of mindset, and growing up with people telling you what you should be as a man can be very confusing and can cause a lot of problems later down the road in life and often can lead to direct and indirect consequences including a warped view on people and the world as you grow older. Some people have experienced these kinds of expectations that people will try to have you grow used to, including the many things a “man” is supposed to be. Thanks for taking the time to read and hopefully consider these arguments.

See my bibliography here


(Updated 3/5/2015)

Post reflection, I feel like I still am in agreement with myself as far as the blog’s topic is concerned, and I still believe that the portrayal of men in the media and in any other fashion is just as important of a problem as it is for women. Both are very troubling topics and I feel like both need extra attention in our society. The reason I felt as if this kind of topic was worth writing an essay on in a digital citizenship class is mainly due to the fact that this topic is of importance to me and the fact that the media has a very, very prominent, influential role in this. The blogging process as a whole was very interesting and it’s not often that I feel like you are able to write an essay or blog post on a topic of your choosing like I was in this class. I feel like I got a chance to open my ideas to the rest of the world and I think that’s really neat. Thank you to all who participated in the discussion and everyone who took the time to read it.

Stereotypes on Middle-Eastern Ethnic Groups

Image from Sir Ronald Sanders
Middle-Eastern people are often judged by the actions committed by the Islamic extremists. Recently, the Western media have been depicting Middle-Easterners negatively especially as it covered many stories of journalists who have been victimized.  In Charlie Hebdo Attack, the article mentioned that the Islamic religion has the tendency to cause fanatics. Although Muslims are no more violent than other religions, media is creating and increasing negative stereotypes about them and should stop.
Muslim prayer beads

Normal American citizens have been relying on the western media. The western news reports Muslims as violent. “In the big picture,” Muslims are normal people. However, people may go against my argument for various reasons that includes stereotypical reasons. For, example, due to the incident of the Charlie Hebdo attack, the news companies reported the details of the catastrophe. The majority of the American media portrays the news regarding the Muslims in unnecessarily inflammatory ways with its use of language and tones. For example, an article about the attack on Charlie Hebdo was written in biased way that built more stereotypes on the Islamic community. According to the Charlie Hebdo article, one quoted that the Islamic religion “has the tendency to cause fanatics.” According to a Muslim author, we shouldn't forget that the two victims in Paris were Muslims. I personally, see an irony there because this fact about the Charlie Hebdo attack shows that the terrorists organizations only support people who share the same philosophy and ideology with them. Words that creates stereotypes of Middle-Eastern people can be terrorists and extremists.

Floyd Abrams, a civil right lawyer, described the situation that opposes  Muslims and the western news companies. He has said it is ''the most threatening assault on journalism in living memory." This quote can build consequences because his statement stays between freedom of speech or anti-freedom of speech in order to prevent multiple stereotypes build up. However, I believe that some procedures from the media should stop. For example, governor Jindal of Louisiana said that Islam has a problem. Although he understands the initial situation, his word choice built stereotypes on middle-eastern people.

Some other articles cover the general Muslim population in a negative way by reporting the terrorists actions or what is bad about Muslims. This directly influences the lives of normal Muslim people in United States. For example, research tells us that half of Muslim-American students in California are being bullied because of their religious faith and beliefs. I believe that this fanatical events are occurring within the United States because the media depiction makes Muslims' daily lives extremely difficult.

Some TV channels talks about issues that affect the life of Muslim-Americans in United States. The Bill Maher “Show”, was emphasizing stereotyping the Muslim people. Bill Maher is definitely creating stereotypes and bigotry that goes against the Muslims in general. He states that they all hold radical views. In truth, there are fundamentally huge amount of Muslims around the world and some hold the view that people deserve death for leaving islam. Based on the 2013 Pew Research Center report,  88% of Muslims in Egypt and 62% of Muslims in Pakistan favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion. However, despite those people, there are Americans that hold the view that the Muslim people aren’t radical. According to the PewForum research, it tells us that in August of 2010, about 30% of Americans view the Muslims in a favorable way. Maher mentions that Islam religion holds radical view that influence the people to hold certain ideas about their religion. The example was given by Maher, stating that the Muslim people do not have as much volition to show much of their religion because other extremists will come and kill them like a crazy mafia. However, I believe that it isn’t true at all because Maher basically linked the entire religion of Islam to a form of extremism. When Maher said about the “ugly things”, it is what makes the Muslims victimized with racism. Affleck added "How about the more than a billion people, who aren't fanatical, who don't punish women, who just want to go to school, have some sandwiches, pray five times a day, and don't do any of the things that you're saying all Muslims do,” Not all Muslims are the Mafia like people.

The majority of scholars and faithful Muslim people will say that their religion is no more violent than any other faiths and religions. However, some Muslims like the president of Egypt argued that “the contemporary understanding of Islamic religion is infected with violence, requiring the government and its official clerics to correct the teaching of Islam”. However, he’s also saying that because there are some violent contents in the Qu’ran, religious leaders need to speak out and reasuure people that this is not representative of all Muslims. It is also true that not the majority of the Muslim will inherently fall into the idea of extremism. Just like when we look at different religions like Christianity, there are certain books that might make the religion as bad (like the book of Revelations that emphasize the strictness of faiths).

Throughout the research, I have learned that the American media have vilified the reputation of the Islamic society. Articles use overly toned languages to describe the Islamic people. Despite articles, TV also makes lives harder for Muslims as well. I think the media should stop these actions toward Muslims in order to prevent them from having harder lives. The priority comes to stopping the negative works from the media that vilifies normal Muslims. Despite the actual extremists, media should stop creating negative stereotypes about Middle-Easterners like describing them as people who are violent and wrong.

Nothing In This Title Was Plagiarized: Or Was It?™

Lawrence Lessig
By Joi CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
The idea of copying “someone else’s” work (and in turn “violating” copyright law) has been around since the dawn of creativity. “To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism, to steal ideas from many is research.” says Wilson Mizner “Copy from one, it's plagiarism; copy from two, it's research.” John Milton. Cool, so pretty much this is research. This is an example of the problem that was created along with the birth child of Robert E. and Kahn Vint Cerf, who were the fathers of the internet. The internet has made it possible to very easily and efficiently pirate almost any literary, visual, and most predominantly, auditory pieces of art in the world. The problem is created when a new factor is introduced to an old system, simply because it was not designed to handle it in the first place. That is exactly what has happened to copyright law because of the internet and other new forms of media distribution. This problem is no where more apparent than in the realm of music and musicians. Copyright law today in incapable of protecting certain ownership rights while still allowing for growing creativity. Problem, great, what can be done to solve it? Answer, free culture.

The inefficiency of today’s copyright law is made apparent by the way it is being exploited and used. We live in a society where property is valued, both physical and intellectual. This is what makes our society tick. Intellectual property, like music, arguably even more so than physical. Music is an asset worth protecting. Often times with monetary value ranging into the millions of dollars. However it becomes problematic and restrictive when artists and large production companies take this protection too far and begin to claim rights on specificities of musical creation, which is often times allowed because of copyright law’s inability to cope with it. An example of this is the White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co. In this case there was claims to copyright on the “Reproduction of the sounds of musical instruments playing music for which copyright granted not a violation of the copyright.” In other words the deeper technical ideas found in music.

Copyright law is incapable of protecting creative rights in the same way that patent law can be abused. As illustrated in the following example. In 1933 patents were issued to Edwin Howard Armstrong for his invention of the FM radio device. There was a very strong push back on this by the large corporation RCA who held rights on AM radio. This was because FM radio was created specifically to overcome some of the problems that AM radio had. RCA had a monopoly over all of radio until the creation of this new technology. So to protect their product they took control of the FM technology and made his patents void by incorporating it into their television sets. Armstrong tried to fight these efforts by RCA within the judicial system, and ultimately failed. When the patents expired RCA offered Armstrong a settlement that was not even enough to pay his lawyer debts. In 1954 Armstrong, one of America’s great inventors, committed suicide because of the effects of a large corporation acting in their own interests for monetary gain. (Full story in Lessig’s book Free Culture 4-7) This same principle can be applied to copyright law and music. There are large companies using it to their advantage to hold creativity back for the purpose of monetary gain.

Another very glaring flaw is in the way copyright law is so inconsistently applied, even with known fallacy. If you take a look at “10 Famous Cases of Alleged Music Plagiarism” (this is not saying that any of the stories in this report are false or inaccurate) you will find this kind of inconsistency. In some cases artists are fined for “lifting” too much from someone else’s work, But in other cases they settle their differences out of court. And sometimes, artists don’t mind their work being copied...until they do. A recent example of this problem can be seen in the current legal dispute between artists Tom Petty and Sam Smith. Tom Petty took legal actions against Sam Smith’s “Stay With Me” because of its similarities with his “I Won’t Back Down.” The result of this was that Tom Petty began to earn 12.5 percent credit on the royalties for “Stay With Me.”

This is a normal occurrence in the musical world, but what make this case particularly confusing is that this is not the first time Petty had been plagiarised. In fact, there had been two other cases in which an artist had copied Petty’s music, once with his “American Girl” and once with his “Mary Jane’s Last Dance.” In those cases though, Petty simply disregarded them saying that he didn’t “believe in lawsuits much”. Why did he change his mind with Sam Smith? His formaly lenient attitude could influence many amature artists and creators to believe that it is okay to copy someone else’s music if you can just get away with it. Further complicating the situation is whether or not an artist even then has the right to dictate whether or not legal action is pursued in the event of obvious plagiarism, as there are not only his own interests at stake but also sometimes a record label or individual creator’s. This frustration is further reiterated by an artist who says that “As a creator, it’s frustrating having to stick to some parameters which are fifty years old” (Lessig 27) when the full consequences and boundaries of today’s copyright law are so complicated and often unclear.

This leaves room for the argument that copyright law was first created to protect the artist/publisher from the misuse and recreation of their work for economic gain and recognition of another. And that this is exactly what copyright law has done by extending copyright protection so that proper time can be allowed for the artist/publisher to turn a profit on the work.

In reality copyright law has been influenced by large publishers to be extended 70 years past even the length of the artist’s life span in order for the company to turn the largest profit possible on the work. So, instead of promoting the creation of new works, copyright law in fact very directly stunts the growth of artistic culture. An example of this (in an artist) is in the way Taylor Swift claimed a trademark on phrases from some of her music such as, "This Sick Beat" and "Party Like Its 1989" simply to comand control over the profit the phrases were getting in her music.

In conclusion copyright law is incapable of handling plagiarism, musical plagiarism in particular, because instead of promoting creativity, large companies have taken it under control and used it to further their own profit.


The problems in copyright today are very far reaching, and have many a large effect on many people. Going too far to protect copyright can lead to a destruction of creativity, while leaving it wide open with no restrictions would have much the same effect. But one thing is clear, if it is left how it is now, the future of creativity will be in the hands of a few large companies whose only goals are their own enrichment. Researching this subject has been very enlightening, and has opened up portals into amazing subjects and ideas I had never heard of before. This was especially helpful to me being an amature to learn of what is in the future of the music industry, and what I can do to aid in liberating music. I still firmly believe that each and every one of us, either as consumers or creators, a very big part in making copyright better for the modern world. This is especially apparent in the music industry where it is so hard to tell the difference in what is right and wrong. Feedback such as the “Ice Ice Baby” and the “Under Pressure” comparison were very helpful in aiding me to understand more about other perspectives on the situation, about how much of a problem this truly is, and also gave me other ideas to research while trying to navigate this complex maze. And a maze it truly is, going as far as morals, politics, fundamental ideas of fairness, and many other profound byproducts. The blogging process itself has been very helpful in understanding this as it offers the freedom of communal discussion, thereby allowing for diversity of opinion. So this leaves us with an ongoing discussion that I truly hope with be brought to light before creativity is consumed. This is a responsibility of all to make sure art is forever for the people.

Drawing Women’s Body Image Outside the Lines of Society

Throughout media’s history, women have been repeatedly viewed only for their bodies. From James Bond movies to perfume ads, the ideal and perfect body is constantly being shown everywhere in our daily lives. Advertisements are distributed not only to women but are seen by young girls too, and it is forming a misconception that we are only beautiful if we use certain products to meet social standards. According to The Representation Project statistics, eighty-one percent of 10 year olds are afraid of being fat, and fifty three percent of girls as young as thirteen are not confident with their bodies. “Just as with cigarette ads in the past, fashion ads portray a twisted, ideal image for young women. And they’re vulnerable. As sales go up, body image and confidence drops” says Democratic Representative Lois Capps, a sponsor for the Truth in Advertising Act. The world is constantly changing, especially through the power of media. Trends are spreading, words of encouragement and empowerment of women’s bodies are beginning to become common, and news can be posted in an instant. Fortunately, this means more and more people can use media to promote more positive images. However, the setback is that we still mainly see the negative or discouraging articles about women because that is what gets our attention the most. The question I ask to the millions of users in the media is, are we focusing on the wrong side of things? Are things completely unfair for women and their bodies, or are we simply not emphasizing the good parts to women’s representation in the media? Media today is promoting new ideas and ways to encourage positive feedback for women by beauty products creating campaigns, celebrities’ opinions on perfection in society, and companies taking a stand toward dishonesty in photoshopping.

If you walk in to a convenience store or drive by a billboard or a poster throughout your day, photoshopped images are everywhere! Images are enhanced and made to look captivating and flawless so it catches our attention. Advertisements want you to pay attention to their products by creating this image of perfection. It is man's (and a woman’s) instinct to strive to fit in. Many girls fear that they are not living up to these expectations put out in the word, when in reality the goals they’re striving for are artificially made. The United Kingdom enforces advertising standards prohibiting overly photoshopped advertisements.
Famous actress Julia Roberts was featured on a LancĂ´me makeup ad and all her of natural lines and wrinkles were removed. British Advertising Standard Authority pulled this ad down along with others from Maybelline and L’Oreal. A member from the British Parliament Jo Swinson thinks, “we should have some honesty in advertising … There’s a problem out there with body image and confidence. The way excessive retouching has become pervasive in our society is contributing to that problem.”

Photoshopping, thankfully, is no longer the only issue commonly seen in women’s media. More companies are trying to sell their "brand" by empowering girls and women instead of holding up impossible beauty standards. Gillette Venus created the “Use Your And” global campaign and a video encouraging girls to step outside the one label boxes that society puts us in. “If you’re smart, say yes, and..” is one of the multiple empowering lines in the poem featured in their advertisement video. “We created this campaign based on what we were hearing from women. They feel that beauty brands tend to focus only on singular dimensions of women - either Super Model or Super Mom- when, in fact, most women are a fabulous mix of everything in between,” says Global Franchise Leader for Gillette Charlene Patten. “Women are limited by one-dimensional labels from a very young age, which leads to significant loss of potential. For example, if she’s labelled pretty, it is assumed she can’t be smart so she behaves accordingly. At Gillette Venus, we believe that all women have the right to achieve their full potential by embracing their ‘ANDs’ and not be limited by any ‘ORs’.” Several other empowering advertisements have been created by companies like Dove, Always, or Pantene and has become a trending thing to talk about throughout media. Always’ video “Like a Girl” featured a multitude of men and women of all ages describing what “Like a Girl” usually means and what it really should represent. This video has gone viral especially after the airing in the Superbowl, and has received both positive and negative responses. This ad is not only is beneficial and supportive of the consumer, it is advantageous to the advertisers.

People may disagree with my statement that women’s representation in media is not getting better, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that. As teens grow older, their bodies are changing and may not follow these ideas of skinny and perfect skin. The percentage of teenage girls who are not confident with their bodies goes from fifteen to seventy eight percent at the age of seventeen. Women have been trying to gain this perfection at earlier and earlier years. Rates of plastic surgery for girls under the age of 19 has tripled in just ten years. Victoria Secret, a clothing brand with models of unrealistic and unhealthy weight, fashion underwear for young female teens. They released a campaign slogan for their new underwear. “The Perfect Body” featured multiple models who all were very small and thin. Critics later called out Victoria Secret for this campaign and called it ‘damaging to women’ and 26,000 people signed a petition to take down the ad and apologize. The lingerie company soon took it down, but placed it back up with the replaced words, “A perfect body for everybody”. Victoria Secret did not apologize and did not agree to stop the campaign. What does this new message then tell women? It says the perfect body, as shown in this advertisement, is the perfect body for everyone while in reality it is not reasonable for every woman's body.

Despite the discouraging images featured in the media we see today, however, more and more companies are creating an alternative to a lot of these intimidating ads. The personal care brand, Dove, decided to take a step further from the Victoria Secret’s Beauty campaign. Several women who were not models and not all one size took the same photoshoot and titled it “The Real Beauty Campaign”. This was greatly celebrated because it showed women who weren’t ashamed of their size or shape. Dove Beauty Campaign’s intentions were to tell girls that you don’t have to be one size or be this idea of perfect to have beauty. An additional underwear company Dear Kate created a picture in response to this campaign recreating the ‘Perfect Body Campaign’ but with diverse women who aren’t all the same shape and size.

Whether we are seeing advertisements or reading magazines, media has been telling girls that their appearance isn’t good enough. However, women’s representation in the media is rapidly changing. Nowadays we see women taking a stand against dress codes, sending messages of confidence and creating a world of media where girls don’t have to be afraid to put themselves out there for who they are. Women can share positive images on Pinterest, at #MediaWeLike, with posts and boards of articles that will empower girls’ confidence. Negativity tends to speak louder than positivity, but with more companies coming together to lift up the all women and girls in our society, the brighter our media world becomes.



Conclusion [Updated 3/5/15]

From positive campaigns to photoshop regulations, our media is slowly changing to recognize women outside of gender stereotypes. Writing about this subject has shown me that there are new and different ways we can find positive messages dealing with issues like body image or perfection. It is groundbreaking that we are now forming actual laws concerning photoshop and false interpretations of beauty. All these ideas of being the perfect size and having the perfect skin or makeup, is lowering the self esteem of many women. I think girls today use different social media apps and see the attention you can get by posting ‘the perfect selfie’ and become self conscious of their own appearance in the media. Looking back on my blog comments, I've learned that people feel the same way about the change in advertisements. Many believe there has been a significant change in our view of women. I discovered some different resources that furthered my opinion on positive changes in the media. A comment helped me clarify my view on supporting companies like Dove who may have different intentions of their campaigns. I had to do further research to read about it and also learned that companies can be separate from parent companies and should not be taken harshly for their relations but mostly for their intentions. Through a recommended source about Target, I found out about users of the media actually speaking up toward companies. This changed my view on how negative media is not entirely bad. I learned that negative media can be a good thing if the person does something to change that negative issue into something better for our community. The whole experience of blogging was very helpful. I was at first very nervous to post so much of my own opinion, but looking back I’m glad I put my words out for the world to see. I’m glad that I got to find more positive messages out there in the media, and I hope that this blog post becomes one that people find helpful.

Domestic Violence Caused by Media

Over the years domestic violence has shrunk at an increasing rate(CSMonitor). However, one in four women will be abused sometime in their lives(CaringUnlimited). Domestic violence is classified as, “A pattern of intimidating, controlling behavior in an intimate or familial relationship that compels the victim to submit to the abuser’s wishes.” The media has created social stigmas and stereotypes that lead the people of today to grow indifferent towards abuse. One in four women report that they have been abused or had violent actions taken against them. How does social media affect the rate of domestic violence by perpetuating gender stereotypes, and should there be restrictions on what is allowed to be posted? Social media showing how the "perfect" man and woman should be has a great impact, especially on children, because boys feel the need to be the strong one while girls are told to be quiet and listen to their spouse. Restrictions should be put in place because if a child stumbles upon inappropriate content, or content that perpetuates harmful stereotypes, they will be influenced negatively and the cycle of violence will continue.

Image Credit to RamboWiki
Exposure to social media, and a lack of education, cause youth to be more accepting of violence. There is a stereotype which the media spreads that shows men being strong and aggressive. When there is violence between two males; therefore, their aggression is natural because of their higher levels of testosterone. Young teen boys are receiving the message that they need "man up." This stereotype also carries on to the abuse of men by women. When a teen is given these messages, the teen begins to believe that they can never be weak or open up. They keep their injuries and beatings to themselves.(EastTNNews. This link also has a movie about the story of a man beat by his wife and how he deals with it.) People often assume that the man is the abuser and the woman is the victim; however, men are the victim of every 2 out of 5 domestic violence cases. Many more cases are unreported because the men are so scared of being ridiculed that they would rather make up lies about fights with other men. So where do young men and women get these messages about “being a man” or “being a girl”? One platform that has a great impact because its reach is so vast is social media.
A couple years ago there was a Facebook page dedicated to jokes about rape and domestic violence. This caused a huge uproar and a massive petition to get these pages taken down. Women, Action, and Media,(A.K.A. WAM!) was the main organization that opposed these pages and anyone who believed domestic violence to be a joking matter. These posts were allowed until May 2013 when Facebook edited its policies to restrict hate speech, particularly gender based hate speech. These jokes were on Facebook publicly, so any person could have seen them. A domestic abuser could see this and think, “Oh, it’s ok. It’s funny when I beat women!” The posts were encouraging them as well as teenagers who could view this. The teens would think that domestic violence is not serious and not an issue. On the other hand, there is also the issue of restricting the freedom of speech.
Image Credit to Glen Canning

The owners of the Facebook pages were frustrated that their pages could be taken down in a matter of weeks because some people did not enjoy their content. First, the content was not forced onto the women’s activist group. They did not have to view the content if they did not want to. If a member of the Facebook page is your friend then you can just unfriend them or have a serious conversation with them.Regarding children, a parent can easily apply a filter that does not allow certain content, such as the jokes, to be viewed. This also felt like a major violation of the freedom of speech. The jokes were not physically harming anyone, and the owners were not condoning violence. This argument can be refuted by another right of US citizens and the world.

Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everybody on earth is entitled to a life free of violence and security of person. Freedom of speech cannot and does not override this right. If a person feels as if they are being subject to speech that threatens them then they are fully entitled to try and have that material removed. Really, these Facebook rape jokes were not the object of WAM!’s fight. WAM! is really fighting against the social norm of gender based hate speech, and trying to raise awareness that domestic violence is not okay. Today, children have an amazing grasp of technology that no generation has ever had before. Children are using iPads at the age of three and learning to type in the second grade. These children will have no problem going into a browser’s or website’s settings and changing the filter to allow everything. It is reported that children begin watching porn as early as six years old(CharismaNews.) The teens of today are exposed to so much media. There is a new study that says teens are exposed to 31 hours a week(TheTelegraph.) This prolonged screen time will affect a teen greatly by influencing much of the way they think.

When a teen grows up with almost all free time consumed by technology then there is a huge impact on them from social media. If one teen grows up to abuse their spouse, then their children will witness the fighting. According to CaringUnlimited, whenever a teen witnesses an act of abuse then they begin to absorb that into their mind. They begin to show increased signs of aggression, lack of feeling, and replaying the act of violence along with many other problems. Restricting what is posted on the internet can decrease the amount of stigmas that teens receive; therefore, lowering the amount of domestic violence. There are many organizations out there that are dedicated to preventing domestic violence, but the question I propose to you is, what are you doing to prevent the spread of harmful stereotypes and domestic violence?

Conclusion, updated March 5, 2014

Social media showing how the "perfect" man and woman should be has a great impact, especially on children, because boys feel the need to be the strong one while girls are told to be quiet and listen to their spouse. Restrictions should be put in place because if a child stumbles upon inappropriate content, or content that perpetuates harmful stereotypes, they will be influenced negatively and the cycle of violence will continue. The companies that create these gender stereotypes need to seriously consider taking a class like digital citizenship in order to learn how to be a good citizen online. Most of the comments left on my blog were not that helpful, but there were a couple that seemed to be written with thought and intelligence. Jim Raynor helped to clarify my point, when he explained how technology has evolved to become the primary link to the outside world. Unfortunately, the stereotypes and negative messages within the media therefore become more accepted and less shocking to those who are frequently exposed to it. He also showed how it is human nature to want to follow the group, no matter what the consequences might be. However, this can be used for good by having more and more people standing up to help bring more and more popularity against these stereotypes and jokes about causing harm to another individual because of their gender, race, religion, or ethnicity. Blogging is a very interesting way to share news and current events, and I feel like it is much more personal and intimate. Blogging allows you to respond to your readers and interact in ways you normally can’t. Overall, blogging has been a great experience.

Webcam Hackers Screen shot curtsy of Screen shot curtsy from
-2824960/Creepy-website-allows -people-watch-live-stream-900-surveillance-cameras-country.html
How can someone hack their way into your webcam, with security cam, or baby monitor and watch you and your loved ones without you even knowing about it? In 2013, a cyber creep took over a baby monitor to spy on a 2-year-old Texas girl using Insecam to get the baby monitors feed. The father of the daughter whose camera was hacked checked his cameras and router where password protected and the firewall was enabled which means someone had to hack their way into the camera. Insecam and other websites that feature live feed cameras should be investigated for their legality with and whether or not they should be shut down. Insecam has been under review in Australia for its big use their and in England for its use there and is now being looked at in the US where there are currently over 11 thousand camera feeds available.

I think that websites like this is should be shut down because they have to hack into the cameras to display their feeds in the first place, which is a breach of security and violates laws of hacking and computer fraud. As I said before they are violating hacking laws pointed out by a US lower. Jay Leiderman another US lawyer said that websites like this are violating abuse acts and computer fraud acts. As I have said this site shows the IP address of the cameras but it also shows the exact longitude and latitude of the camera and can be seen on google maps by anyone who desires to find the camera. On the site they show different videos In one of my sources the writer watched footage from the site and they shows kids playing, Babies in cribs, a boy sleeping, a elderly woman in a arm chair, and a video feed to the changing room of a church.

The man who made the site exchanged emails with motherboard and the creator of the site made it clear that his website has had no clear violations of the law they claim that no hacking was used to find the cameras and get in. The creator of the site has made it clear that the site uses weak cameras passwords to get into the cameras. I disagree with what the creator of the site said because as one of something said by Jay Leiderman that it is not a crime to have a weak password but it is illegal for someone to guess their way into the password. As I looked into my article’s I saw that a top security expert in Australia said that the website is good because it shows the dark side of the internet and by doing so it is ok to display 100’s of live CCTV feeds. The same security expert says that the internet is all about access unless you have a strong password which almost sounds like they are trying to blame the fact that these cameras are being hacked on the owner of the camera instead of the owner of the site.

Insecam and other websites that live feed cameras should be looked at how legal their websites are and whether or not they should be shut down. I think that sites like this should be shut down because they clearly violate abuse acts, computer fraud, and computer hacking laws. The hole idea that sites like this a even justified to be up and running is very surprising to me I think that sites like this should not be allowed to even be up for a short period of time because of the acts that this site has to do just to get to a webcam feed . The site does not only spy on people without their knowledge they also advertise cameras and other goods on their site which give the cite a commercial motive. Although there have been many sites like this that have been shut down not all have been and the hackers who use these sites are still out there and the police have been working to put the hackers away. 16 computer hackers were arrested for hacking their ways into cameras using a emailed picture as a decoy file that uploads the RAT into the system and let the hackers control the computer. This is good news because hackers were put away and the public is being made aware of the dangers involved with weak passwords and having a webcam, baby monitor, or security camera.

Bibliography Screen shot curtsy


5 March 15
In my blog I used this thesis to show the dangers of webcam hackings. How can someone hack their way into your webcam, security cam, or baby monitor and watch you and your loved ones without you even knowing about it? My blog got a very good range of comments from students at CWA to strangers, and many had the same questions. Many of the people wanted to know how the hackers got their way into the feeds. Others wanted to know why people could even hack into a camera and what the hackers were doing with the film. Many of the people commenting also left articles on how hackers did this or news of websites that hack cameras. I enjoyed the blogging process and I think it has taught me a lot of how to display my opinion in a factual way. I think the blogging process was harder than what I expected, especially showing facts in a way that does not display too much bias. One of my favorite parts of the blogging process was to read the comments left by people. There is a thrill to reading what others have to say about your opinion and whether or not they agree or disagree. It’s a very fun process. Another fun part of the blogging process was replying to those who comment, having a conversation with someone over your own work and seeing what they think of it and how they react. I really enjoyed this class and I think it has opened up my eyes to the media and the stereotypes that people don't feel comfortable talking about.

Using or Profiting? Danger of Privacy

Security researchers said a Russian crime ring has amassed the largest known collection of stolen Internet credentials around the world, including 1.2 billion username and password combinations and more than 500 million email addresses. Does this really surprise you? Here are some statistics about the digital privacy issue. 11% have had important personal information stolen such as their Social Security Number, credit card, or bank account information. 21% of internet users have had an email or social networking account compromised, or taken over by someone else without permission.

I found that privacy and security are serious issues in the digital world. Lots of programs were created to steal information from users. CoffeeCup is one of the example that steals users' passwords using stolen FTP credentials. As a result, people can easily get some private information through the Internet. My research question is to find out whether websites are using people's private information in ways that are more advantageous to the user or in ways that are more detrimental to the user. Our private Information is in danger as we connect with the Internet. In my opinion, the availability of people's private information causes more disadvantages than advantages to the user. There are two reasons as I say that. First, using personal information is illegal and morally bad. Second, this action can make users' data public, that will make the user feel embarrassed. However, we have to admit incidents of private information being used without our acknowledgement.

First, digital privacy is destroyed when people steal personal information, and this is illegal and morally bad. Humans have the right to protect their privacy. This is also true in the digital world. An article titled "Microsoft Digs in on Digital Privacy" from the Internet reports that the software giant, Microsoft, was storing users' data abroad, in Ireland. This is a huge and serious issue, because Microsoft not only controls the data arbitrarily, but transport it abroad. This is really not a normal level of destroying the digital privacy but a really serious one that needs the involvement of the government. Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and former Justice Department official, said "This is the first round in an ongoing debate on where are the limits of privacy abroad." In this passage, not only the author, but many experts mentioned that digital privacy issues need to be resolved by Congress, which means stealing private information is against the law.

Second, when users' private information is published and shared without their permission, they may be embarrassed. Statistics from Georgia Tech show that many famous companies like Facebook publish the user's data in the public area for business profits. An article titled "It's Not Just You: Terms of Service Agreements Really Are Confusing, Study Finds" says that most people are skipping the terms of security and granting the rights to companies without realizing the consequences. The article also says that the terms are too long and hard to understand, and that people hardly pay attention to them. Georgia Tech said that we're giving up freedoms when agreeing to these documents. As the Terms of Service said, companies can publish users' words to the public area. If one day, a citizen found his chatting record or digital diary were published in the public area, how embarrassed can he be? People do not want others to look at their secrets. So using information can be a really bad thing.

However, some people may have other opinions about acquiring user data that can have positive advantages. They may say that some companies can view your data, but they also provide the chance for you to manage and erase the data. An article titled "6 Links That Will Show You What Google Knows about You" by Cloud Fender pointed out that 6 links from Google will make it possible for users to manage their personal data used on Google. Although this means Google already has your personal data, including your Google searching data, many people still think that this is a huge advantage that protects the users' digital security. In other words, Google can back up your information automatically, which you can use as you need. And within the links, you can control your private information by yourself, which seems better than some programs that steal your information but you cannot control it.

Another opinion that people may come up with is that companies might use the data to make a better environment for the benefits of the users. Companies may use the user data to judge their actions so far and make improvements based on that information. They believe that the stealing is all about improving the products. An article written by Munson Lee, "Twitter to Start Snooping at Which Apps You Have Installed - Here's How to Opt out" says that Twitter starts to peek on users’ digital devices in order to to see what apps they have downloaded so that it can make better recommendations. Twitter also promised that it will only record the list of apps you have installed, not how they are used. Further, Twitter promised to alert users when the new feature is turned on. This makes more people believe that peeking at data on users' devices can sometimes be a positive thing.

Many reports show that personal privacy and digital security are threatened and compromised frequently online. I firmly believe that these actions do not benefit citizens based on two reasons, being against the law and making people embarrassed. Although people may say that use of private information is not completely bad thing because it may help companies to know what we think and sometimes we can manage our information, I still agree that those actions need to be forbidden. However, we have to say that we cannot prevent the sharing of personal information from happening all around the world,so we as a digital citizen should at least learn some ways to protect our privacy.

The new math: social media+teens=drugs

Imagine scrolling through Instagram and seeing a picture posted by your favorite celebrity. The picture she/he has posted shows that they are obviously high, because she/he is holding a joint in their hand. In the background of the picture you notice other drugs like ecstasy, for example , or shrooms. You might look at that picture and think “Wow. How is someone that famous doing drugs, posting it on social media and getting away with it? Are they really that cool? I wonder what would happen if I did something like that.” We’ve all thought that haven't we? Teens all around the world are surrounded by more and more social media and societal pressure to “fit in.” Today’s teens spend up to 44.5 hours per week consuming social media . What does being a teenager online mean exactly? There are many answers to this question, but one thing is clear. You need to become more aware of the society you live in and what type of messages you take away from the social media around you.

A popular myth is that drugs are sold in back alleys, or under shady bridges in the ghetto, but did you know that drugs are now being sold on Instagram? According to Tim Rebori “Dealers have the freedom to upload actual pictures of drugs that they want to sell, and they are getting away with it.” Teens, or kids can basically type up any “slang word” for weed and the accounts of these drug dealers will show up. These drugs dealers are selling all different kinds of drugs and no one has tried to put a stop to it, because sadly police haven't made it to the internet yet. Joel Eisenbaum, author of article Teens Finding, Obtaining Drugs through Instagram interviewed a 17 year old student who said, "It's just a lot easier. You've got a picture of it right there, you just hit them up." Teens who are being not only influenced by drugs can now go and buy them online with easy access. Teens are prone to being interested in drugs, or coming across them on social media, because of the type of society we living today with so many electronics.

But teens do not just encounter drugs on Instagram, but on many other social media sites.Twitter is a place where you can “tweet” about things that are happening in your life, but apparently this social media site is not just used for that. Jim Dryden contacted Washington University School of Medicine and they told him about a Twitter account that was sending out pro-marijuana tweets to teens who were following the account. Washington University School of Medicine commented “The tweets are cause for concern, they said, because young people are thought to be especially responsive to social media influences.” This is true Addicted Professional ran a survey of how kids on social media would be more likely to use drugs than kids who don’t use social media. They found that teens who spend time on social networking sites in a typical day, are:
  • Five times likelier to use tobacco;
  • Three times likelier to use alcohol; and
  • Twice as likely to use marijuana.
Some might say that using marijuana is no big deal, in fact they might say that marijuana is “creative” for you. In this article “Does Marijuana Make You More Creative?” NIDA Blog Team says “Many studies over the years have found that marijuana indeed makes users perceive themselves as having more creative thoughts and ideas—which would help explain why so many artists and musicians tout its benefits.” Other drugs are also thought to make you more creative like for example shrooms. A lot of people do not agree with these thoughts and I am one of them.

Marijuana is not going to make you more creative, in fact it will make you less creative than you already were. Sure you might have hallucinations while you are high making you have new ideas, but taking marijuana is also killing your brain cells, so you are technically losing all your logic therefore losing your creativity. Other drugs like shrooms, or LSD will not make you creative either it will only make you hallucinate or have “Bad Trips” or bad hallucinations.

Drugs (especially marijuana) make an appearance on social media everyday, but what matters is becoming more aware of the society you live in and what type of messages you take away from the social media around you. Teens are becoming more and more prone to drugs, because of social media everyday, and soon seeing drugs being sold on Instagram, and looking at pro-marijuana tweets is going to become the normality of our generation and society.

Conclusion: Updated March 5, 2015

My blog post is very important to the concept of Digital Citizenship. It shows how teens are being influenced into doing drugs through social media. My blog comments did not change my mind. All my commenters agreed with me, for the most part. One commenter had me check out some videos that taught me more about how different drugs can affect you, so I had a little more insight on what teens were buying online, or what certain drugs accounts were posting about. This act of the commenter helped clarify my thinking about the issue, because it made me realize how the drugs were affecting kids offline, also there was another comment made that helped me clarify. I was informed that there were drugs being sold by the black market online. This changed my whole outlook, because I had an epiphany and realized that drugs are not just on popular social media sites like Instagram and Twitter. They are in other secret spots on the internet. I did have to do further research to reply to my comments, like watching videos, and reading articles about drugs. My process with blogging really let me express my true feelings out about drugs being sold on the internet and how I feel about the whole situation. It was a personal topic for me, because since 7th grade my brother has been a drug addict, and I’ve had to learn how to deal with not only that, but seeing drugs being sold on social media. Overall blogging felt like a great way to let my feelings out to the online world.

When Trolling is a Good Thing

The concept of "trolling" has gotten a bad reputation, but it is widely misunderstood. Trolling, which is "the art of deliberately, cleverly, and secretly pissing people off…trolling does not mean just making rude remarks”, gets associated with bullying because there are some similarities, but the main reason is because some people can't take social pressure. These people deal with it by demonizing those who are putting pressure on them. However, it is important that individuals learn to fix their problems without getting society to help because using other people to fight your battles is defeating the point. How is trolling different from bullying? Trolling is different from bullying because trolling is not supposed to be targeting one person. Trolling is generally targeting some group or team. This does not mean a single person can't be trolled. When trolling becomes bullying is when it is continuous and only at a single person.

There are many good elements of trolling. For one thing, if the world didn’t have trolls, imagine how boring it would be. Could you imagine how boring the internet would be without trolls to spice things up? Trolling entertains us and gives us something to read that is usually against the opinion of the material you are reading. The reason trolling is not bullying is because bullying is usually a continuous thing that specifically targets a person or small group of people. Trolling is not used to target and follow a person around and make them hate themselves. According to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, ”Examples of cyberbullying include mean text messages or emails, rumors sent by email or posted on social networking sites, and embarrassing pictures, videos, websites, or fake profiles.” Trolling is not the same as cyberbullying because trolling is not meant to harass people like cyberbullying does.

Before I trolled him. (I took this picture)
After I trolled him. (I took this picture)
What most people don’t realize is that trolling is a term that originated from the video game world. “Trolls” have recently migrated from video games to comments on web pages, and in some cases, face to face. But does that mean they’re evil? No, they just moved their trolling somewhere else. As Mike Rougeau, a professional freelance journalist in Los Angeles, said, “The term itself, "trolling," has become worryingly mainstream, its definition growing nebulous through overuse, and most gamers have forgotten what it even means to get truly, honestly trolled.” Let’s take a survival game for instance. DayZ is a post apocalyptic survival game where there are zombies all over the game and randomly spawned loot. When you die in this game, the disadvantage is that you lose all of the virtual things you have spent time collecting. DayZ is a game where players are trolling half the time. For example, one way of trolling people in DayZ is to handcuff them, strip them of all of their stuff, and walk away with the key. When handcuffed, a person cannot exit out of the game and start over, so they have to wait hours to die of starvation or dehydration and respawn so that they can continue playing. If you can’t take this as a joke, then find a different game. From my experience, I have had this happen to me before. Yes it makes me mad, but a week after that it is something funny to look back at and talk about because it is just a video game. This is what it really means to be trolled. Also, the chances of running into the same people who trolled you in this way is very slim. That is why trolling is different than bullying, they are targeting random people and their goal is not to follow a specific person and target them. Trolling, being applied in the video game world, is the perfect setting because no harm can come from losing something inside of a video game. There is no loss in real life. Trolling is about making people momentarily angry through funny entertaining ways, but it is not about leaving permanent damage like bullying.

People tend to confuse trolling and bullying because there are bullies who call themselves trolls when they are really just being bullies. This gives trolls a bad name because bullies act continuously aggressive toward another person in the name of trolling. There are a couple kinds of bullying. The first is physical bullying. You don’t really see physical bullying happen though, because it is immediately reported as assault. If someone physically hit another person with the intent of hurting them, that would be considered bullying. The second kind of bullying is verbal, and when it happens online, it is called cyberbullying. The most common form of verbal abuse online is being called offensive names. According to Maeve Duggan from Pew Research Center, 4 out of 10 internet users have experienced bullying. Also talked about in the Pew Research article, most people choose to confront their bullies online and, “30% reported it was a little upsetting, 22% found it not at all upsetting.” We hear about bullying all the time, and it sounds like such a terrible thing, but over the half who have been bullied (not trolled) don’t even care. Since trolling is less aggressive than bullying, then that means even more than 50% of people will take trolling as a joke. To me this shows that people using the internet don't really care about online harassment even if it happens to them, because it is not going to affect the average person that much. Trolling is an extremely lesser form of harassment, so if people are generally not affected by harassment, then trolling definitely won’t affect them either. Trolling is different from bullying because it is simply about about having fun and making people laugh as a joke, not about bullying people or attacking them in any way. Even though people confuse bullying and trolling, trolling is actually just for the purpose of entertainment. Los Angeles writer Mike Rougeau put it perfectly: "We'll make you rage. We'll make you cry. You'll throw your hands in the air in frustration. And afterward, if we've trolled you right, you'll laugh."


Conclusion: Updated March 5, 2015

Participating in online games and chat rooms,your experience is based almost solely upon the actions of others, and you should expect to be "trolled" in some form or another, because that's what happens. If you go to a chatroom or video game at a very young age, for example, you're absolutely going to be poked at by at least one person. The whole concept of trolling is a good learning tool for the real-world and for growing up because a lot of the same concepts are things you're going to have to deal with as you grow older and have new responsibilities. If you feel as if you're being attacked personally or emotionally on any kind of technology, the answer to that is to just turn it off. Being in person you can't turn off a person. Some people would hate to be trolled and have been trolled many a times in all sorts of games. They might not find it funny. If this happens too much at a scale of like 3 hours like DayZ it might get out of hand and cause a real problem. This might lead to other personal problems that it may cause distress or something. In my life I find that I don't get worked up about getting teased, trolled, etc. I can understand that other people will get hurt feelings about getting teased but I don't have any personal connection to this.

Thursday, February 5, 2015

Digital "drugs"? Video games boost aggression

Children playing video games
 Video games boost aggression

For me, I started my game life when I was in grade 5 and now I am still playing. Adults are always concerned about teenagers who play video games which is the reason I opened this topic and would to like find out if video games boost aggression or not. In 20th century, with the development of technology, video games become a part of daily life , Research which is posted by Lisa Galarneau shows 58% of Americans play video games now which is a huge group of people and a big population of game players. Video games produced a huge profit for game companies.The world-wide video game industry grew 9% in 2013 and now exceeds $76 billion with projections it will reach over $86 billion by 2016. The more popular video games become, the more concerned parents are because Research and study shows that violent video games boost players’ aggression in behavior.

When people consider violent video games are simply benign entertainment, they don’t realize that playing video games has a physical or biological effect in your brain because the effects are subtle and the effects don’t necessary have an effect on players’ behavior immediately , they don’t have effect on players’ behavior immediately. Dr. Douglas A. Gentile of the Dana Foundation and his study group expected that according to the increasing time of players spend on the video games, their risk of performing poorly in school, becoming overweight or obese, and developing specific negative physical health outcomes (such as carpal tunnel syndrome and other repetitive stress injuries) would increase. The effect of video games on brain to cause aggressive behavior is gamers who often play violent games may be desensitized to aggression and violence. Study shows when players are watching high-violence video, the CT picture shows low activity in some parts of the brain , which can explain the intensity of the things they watch, but when players are watching low-violence video, they have a high activity. This difference explains how computer games boosts gamers’ aggression behavior. When gamers are usually watching or playing violent video games, their low activity in their brain explains the gamers are getting used to the violent elements.

Also in the psychology field, violent games boost players’ aggression."Research shows that playing violent video games for long periods of time can hold back the "moral maturity" of teenagers." (Lee) When the violent elements in the game continued to repeat through the game, the gamers will behave aggressively both mentally and physically. A study shows when a group of girls and boys were put to play video games for 6 months , individuals who were labeled as pathological gamers (those whose gaming had a negative impact on their personal and school lives), were more likely to have violent behavior. This shows again the time gamers were exposed under the game, the more effect games will have on the gamers. Also when the gamers want to reach the top of the game, for example: gamers usually want to become the best player in the game they are playing, so they will become aggressive whether the game they are playing right now is violent or not.

Although Video games can boost aggression, they still bring some positive effect on gamers. The latest research shows playing video games and teaches gamers social skills like communicating. Gamers learn how to communicate in the game because when players are playing online games, they need to talk with each other and fight together which helps them to have the ability to communicate, but the negative effect still works on the gamers. A well-designed video game can be a neutral teacher; video games provide feedback to gamers’ on the gamers’ success in the game by giving the reinforcements and punishment to the gamers. Video games usually assist in learning at a different rate, video games can offer opportunities to practice , since gamers are always repeating their actions in their games. The surprising research shows kids who played first-person shooters showed “faster and more accurate attention allocation.

Video games as a way of relaxing, it will have effect on the players. From the research and study, we can conclude that video games boost gamers’ aggression both mentally and physically. Although the effect video games work on the gamers are not gonna occur immediately, but the effect is still unavoidable and existed. Despite violent games. games without any violent elements will also cause the aggressive behavior. Also there is positive effect which helps gamers’ reaction and attention to moving things, but parents still need to be able to control their children avoid them from being addicted to the video games. People should have a proper time to play video games which minimum the negative effect.

Conclusion posted May 6

Video games boost aggression of the gamers and the effect is unavoidable, this piece of information is related to Digital Citizenship on the health and technology field. After posting the blog, I got 5 comments which are helpful and thoughtful. One of them gives the example of army using violent video games to help training the soldier which inspires me and let me collect more detail and information about the effect of violent video games. There is also one comment which is left by a gamer, his opinion is different from mine and as a gamer he said he doesn’t have any actions which are violent or aggressive. I mentioned the effect is not working necessarily, but I didn’t clarify the meaning which make my readers confused.

When I was reading other people’s blogs. There is one blog which is about colorism. It is really impressive because the detail and facts are strong and they support the statement well. I learned how to use plenty of facts and details to support the statement. Also the article is not really technical and hard for readers to understand. I realize that my article is too technical for readers to read and my argument isn’t deep enough to engage my readers. When I was reading the comments left by my readers, I found some further new sources which are helpful such as not all the gamers will behave violently.

Video Games Inside the Classroom

Civilization V
Video games are becoming the future of education. Many teachers are now using video games as an inexpensive way to enhance the learning of thousands of students worldwide. Video games applied to education can be used to create a fun and interactive learning environment to experiment, understand, and expand off of the material that students are taught.

Imagine a world where your history teacher demonstrates to your class why World War 3 never happened by making everyone in the class play against each other in a scenario of Civilization V  in which the Cold War gets really hot, your science quiz is to make a fully functioning nuclear reactor in a very realistic Minecraft modpack, and your physics homework is to complete a custom-made level in Portal 2  made by your teacher. Believe it or not, this is actually happening in several schools around the world in which the teachers not only use video games to help students understand the context, but have them interact with each other as they do it. For example, teachers at one Norwegian high school use video games like Civilization, Portal 2, The Walking Dead, Skyrim, and The Last of Us to simulate the context of their lessons. They are using these games, many of which have a surprising amount of educational capabilities, to teach multiple subjects, including history, physics, religion, Norwegian romantic nationalism, and literature. Another game, known as Minecraft, is also being used as an educational tool due to its large potential
Portal 2
for teaching. Because it is a building game with worlds made out of blocks and hundreds of mods and mod packs to modify the game, Minecraft makes it very easy for teachers to make a limitless variety of lesson related tasks, environments, and goals that promote a fun, engaging, and interactive atmosphere for their students. Minecraft's three-dimensional blocky worlds force players to cooperate and think in three dimensions in order to survive, thrive, and accomplish amazing things. There is even an educational version of Minecraft called Minecraft Edu, which is used by over 20,000 students worldwide. Minecraft is an inexpensive game that does not require a very expensive computer to run, is appropriate for all ages, and like all games, creates a sense of friendly competition between the students, making the experience even more fun and interactive.

Video games not only help students learn and understand the context of the lessons, they make it easier for teachers to teach a larger variety of students and improve their overall curriculum.  Many teachers use video games to teach classes with students of many nationalities and educational backgrounds. One teacher in New York, Scott Jackson, says that video games are "a real good kind of leveler for all students” and that “Everyone can access it, it doesn't put anyone in a certain position, it's an easy jumping off point for the content, for the topic." Outside of the classroom, video games are being used by many teachers and researchers to research and improve school curriculum in a manner that is just as effective and saves tremendous amounts of time and money. Rich Lamb, a professor at Washington State University, does research on science curriculum in the classroom by giving students science related tasks within video games and has a computer examine their behavior. The computer then mimics the way students think and learns to solve new problems, allowing the research team to test multiple different changes in the curriculum and calculate the probability on whether or not a certain model will work. This saves millions of dollars by running software off a computer instead of going through the long, expensive process of distributing, processing, and researching the tests of 100,000 students.

Yes, that is a 1 to 1 scale of Kings Landing that some guys made in Minecraft
Some people might disagree that video games can be effectively used for educational purposes. When NBC’s Education Nation summit highlighted gamified education and online learning, some teachers and educators did not support the use of video games within classrooms. According to the Huffington Post, they argued that children ages 8-18 already spend an average of 7.5 hours a day using entertainment media, students who seem to master skills within educational games have trouble applying those skills to their assessments, it can be difficult to monitor all students using devices, educational games can be expensive when used on a large scale, teachers aren't trained sufficiently enough to use video games in classrooms, and that there is little evidence that video games have a positive impact on student achievement.

X-Box 360 remote
I disagree with these opposing arguments because almost all of them are false, mistaken, or are use examples from only one specific age group. The statement that there is little evidence that video games have a positive impact on student achievement is a misunderstanding of the difference between an educational video game and an “online education program,” the term that was actually used in the report. An educational video game is a game solely created for teaching students, however, an online education program is an online school like K-12 that students use on computers at home. Also, the only examples they use for students having trouble applying skills from video games to assessments and the difficulty to monitor all of them are from first grade classes. Even though educational video games are typically appropriate for all ages, it does take a certain level of maturity and responsibility to use them within classrooms and a teacher should not simply have a first-grade class play a video game and then make them take a test on the educational factors of it. Another opposing argument was that many teachers are not adequately trained enough to start using video games in classes. However, as video games are being seen in classes more often as time goes on, teachers become more and more prepared to apply such technology to student curriculum. What they are right about is the cost of educational games, as it can be very expensive to buy an individual copy for a large amount of students and are rarely used for any subjects other than math and English. Where they are wrong is the actual use of educational games. The technology of educational video games is years behind that of normal video games. Valve even has a contract that allows schools to use its hundreds of video games for free.

Video games can be used for educational purposes to create a fun and interactive atmosphere that lets students experiment with the material they are taught to help them understand it more deeply and advance further into the curriculum. Many of teachers around the world are using video games not specifically made for education to demonstrate the context of their lessons in a fun, interactive way that supports a deep understanding of the topic for their students. Many video games that are made to have limitless possibilities for improvisation and modification, like Minecraft, are ideal for use within the classroom. Video games also make it easier for teachers to teach a wider variety of students and improve the overall curriculum. As video games become more and more advanced, so shall the technology at our disposal to teach future generations to come.

In my blog, I emphasized that video games, when applied to education, can be used to create a fun and interactive learning environment for students to experiment, understand, and expand the material of which they are taught and make it easier for teachers to educate a larger variety of students as well as improve their learning curriculum in a more economically-efficient manner. The comments I received did not change my mind, but made me even more confident about my position. Most comments were curious about how video games could be used in our school and helped me clarify my thinking on this topic by making me consider more ways video games could be used within the classroom. A few comments required me to do further research to reply effectively and persuasively by asking if there are any proven statistical benefits of using video games in school compared to not using video games in school, such as SAT score comparisons. Even though I was not able to find any studies or SAT score comparisons, as the unconventional use of video games for educational purposes has gotten more attention than ever for only a few years, I found even more evidence showing that it is very beneficial. In the process of writing this blog, my intrigue and understanding of this topic grew more and more. As a blogger and digital citizen, the outcome of the process of researching, writing, and reading, thinking about, and responding to comments has been a great experience for me.