Monday, March 16, 2015
Ch. 25 (discussion post for 3/3)
I found Ch. 25 to be interesting and informative. The difference between interactivity and interpassivity was a lot different than what I originally thought. The quality of interactivity is interesting to me. Depending on how much the user or consumer puts in, is how much they get out of the mass media/ social media. One can uncritically and passively read the same articles and social media posts as someone who is reading them critically and actively, allowing the information to raise questions and bring out a specific opinion, which they will later add to the argument. This is when social media and mass media is most helpful. Interpassivity seems like mindlessness to me. The loss of autonomy in interpassivity also sparked interest within me. I find it interesting, and true that as one reads passively, and does not make their own opinions, they get shuffled along with a mass group of people and is passively known to accept whatever they are passive about, until stated otherwise. Its pretty much shallow use of the tools the media gives you. This especially can be seen in political issues, where there are many ways one can assert their opinions and find out information, but many do not do this simply due to lack of interest, or simple laziness. I find Hactivists and Hackers to be some of the most active, critical users of media. Though they give power to capitalism, and "the establishment," the actively rebel against it using multiple mediums and purposely do things within the internet. It gives empowerment to the people. Though people may not be inter-passive within the media, does not mean they are active within the actual societal structures they are being active within on the web. Meaning, they may show great support and contribute to arguments and information online, but do nothing outside of this in reality. This can be a problem in the future if people stop acting out and just use social media to fight against or fight for causes.