TomsTechBlog.com

It's hard to say these days

Lets talk about Culture and Technology for a Second

clock July 26, 2008 09:30 by author Tom

A few years back I made the decision to take a month off for a vacation that would "exercise my mind" if you will.  I wanted to soak up some culture and my friends in San Francisco assured me there was no more diverse place than there so I went out to spend the month.

After a couple weeks though I began to realize that not only was the place not diverse  but it seemed to be the home of more uniformity of thought than I'd ever seen (which was impressive in that sense).  In fact, to quote hard facts, in the 2004 election (which was close at the time) the nation was split right down the middle as far as party support but San Francisco only had a 15% Republican vote. 

Bottom Line: People there agree with each other on just about everything, for better or worse.

This experience taught me a very important lesson which is that everyone wants to think they are accepting and open minded but most people aren't.  In fact, actually being open minded is very hard.  Sort of like bending your elbow backwards in that you are trying to force yourself to do something you were simply not designed to do.

Think about it, close mindedness is as much a product of evolution as your elbow.  In a land where humans haven't developed high level thinking yet compromise is impossible.  Which means the only way to survive is by having a group mentality.  Because if you think like your tribe than you'll be willing to fight for your tribe and if you're willing to fight for your tribe than your tribe remains defended which ensures your continued survival. 

The problem is that thousands of years later we are stuck with brains that are designed to form impressions early and then remain entrenched in those positions no matter what.

Which brings me to my quote.  Cyndy Aleo-Carreira wrote an article yesterday entitled "Misuse of Social Media: Social Implies Human Interaction, People!" in which she gave a few examples of what she feels is "misuse".  One example was this passage written by Charlie Demerjiana in regards to the suicide of Eddie Davidson, a spammer who killed his wife and child before taking his own life. 

While it is hard not to feel bad for his brutally murdered wife and child, not to mention his wounded daughter, Eddie's suicide itself is the stuff of happy thoughts. Every deceased spammer is a million fewer in-box-clogging, malware-infested mails a day, so lets tip one back for liberal gun laws.

To which Ms. Alea-Carreira responded...

Yes, by all means, let's tip one back for liberal gun laws that seriously wounded a teenager, killed a three-year-old little girl, and left a 7-month-old baby in a hot truck, dehydrated. I've often suggested stringing spammers up by their toes and letting anyone with an email account play piñata, but I don't recall ever even suggesting that it involve an innocent toddler. Eddie Davidson's death isnt anything that should be celebrated, even if you do consider spammers to be wasting the oxygen they breathe.

What she's missing here is that not everyone expresses themselves in exactly the same way she does.  It's not really acceptable for a man to speak emotionally about a tragedy in many cultures.  So when the author in the quote says "While it is hard not to feel bad for his brutally murdered wife and child" that person is expressing shock and sadness in as deep a way as his cultural upbringing will probably allow. 

In that way the person is expressing the exact same thought as Ms. Aleo-Carreira but they are doing it in a way that is acceptable to a different culture.

As far as "Celebrating Eddie Davidson's death" some cultures believe that is justified.  It's a basic tenet of almost every religion that bad people are put to death for some crimes and while I would agree that Mr. Davidson's crime doesn't warrant death in my eyes I understand there are cultures in which they would feel it was.  Further I understand that those cultures have a right to the Internet just as anyone else does. 

Which is what gets me to my point.  Ms. Aleo-Carreira's point is essentially "I strongly disagree with how these people think so that makes their expression of those thoughts a misuse of Social Media" which in turn is actually saying "People who aren't like me in thought, action and expression are undesirables." 

Essentially its closed mindedness masquerading as tolerance. 

As the Internet becomes more and more widespread you are going to see more and more culture clashes like this.  That fact is both a blessing and a curse.  The curse is that it means people with delicate sensibilities are going to need to either isolate themselves or develop much thicker skin. 

But the blessing is that it gives us all a chance to influence cultures we don't agree with.

What people like Ms Alea-Carreira need to realize is that condemning others culture doesn't do any good.  If you want to influence other cultures you have to accept them on their terms and then try to show them why your way is better.  Not call them bad and denounce them. 

No one ever changed their opinion after being denounced by a total stranger.



What Kind Of Day Has It Been?

clock July 13, 2008 08:42 by author Tom

*** Please Note: I wanted one post that I could point people to in regards to the whole Loren Feldman/Techn****/Free Speech situation so that is the purpose of this post.  For anyone who lived through the whole ordeal there's nothing new to see here ***

So, if you were living under a rock last week you might have missed this story. 

Loren Feldman is an online comedian who is known for his boundary pushing videos.  About a  year ago he produced a video that asked the question "Where are all the black tech bloggers?" and then went on to answer that question with a pretty risque portrayal of an imaginary black tech blogger and said imaginary blogger's favorite imaginary site "ho-trackr.com". 

It did not go over well with the black community and the fallout led to podtech and The Huntington Post severing their relationship with him.

Fast Forward a year later and he has again found corporate sponsorship this time with Verizon Wireless and their vcast service.  After that deal was announced several groups became aware of the video from a year ago and threatened a boycott of Verizon which led them to severe their relationship with him.

This brought up a lot of issues in the blogosphere. Some felt the video was racist which led to a debate on race.  Others felt the issue was media bias which led to a discussion on that.  and so on...

For me though, the issue was Freedom of Speech.  I don't think for one second that Loren Feldman is a racist or that there was any negative intent on his part.  So from my perspective this is an issue of people taking what he said and vowing to destroy his career because they simply felt it was in poor taste.  My point to those people was that vowing to destroy someone for what they say is the same thing as denying them free speech.  That's the case I try to make below.

The Primary Stuff

These are the blog posts I made on the issue.  These contain the most coherent expression of my thoughts on the issue.

The Iron Fist of Political Correctness: This was my initial reaction to the whole thing and is the post least dedicated to the topic of free speech.  The gist of the post is to say that while I didn't really find the video funny either Loren Feldman is a performer who pushes boundaries and that kind of entertainment is going to miss its mark on occasion and is going to offend on occasion.  That doesn't mean he deserves to be silenced.

A Little Clarification Before Putting This To Bed: I can't help but laugh at the title of this one.  This is where I start to turn my attention to the topic of free speech as opposed to just the immediate incident with Loren Feldman.  The general point to this post was that intimidating someone to the point that they don't use their freedom of speech is essentially the same thing as denying their right to free speech in the first place. 

Of all the posts outlined here this  is probably the most on point in regards to the free speech issue.

Bringing The Censorship Issue Back To Tech: This is a companion post to the last one (though half of it ends up restating the point from the "clarification" post that preceded it).  The point of this post is two fold in that I try to (a) get people to realize its wrong to want to get rid of even the most repugnant of ideas and (b) try to specifically make people in Tech realize how dangerous self righteousness can be in the creation of technology products.

 The Struggle To Understand Racism: Amazingly this rounds out the series of posts (the emotional toll they took made it seem like there was a lot more).  This post was largely inspired by Blogger Hank Williams' post on racism and was basically the story of why I felt ill equipped to address the issue of racism one way or the other (up to this point I had not addressed any issues of racism except to say that I didn't think Loren Feldman intended his video to be racist). 

Other Stuff

Beyond those posts there were a couple of other places where I posted ideas and I thought I should put those down as well.  All of these were written quickly and sometimes heatedly so the writing can be pretty bad.  Be advised...

The TechCrunch Post: This predates all the posts above and is largely just me defending Loren Feldman.  The gist here is that I didn't really like the video either but its clearly not intended as a racist attack.  I only participated for about the first 40 comments (I think it topped out at about 230)

Hank Williams Blog: My comments here are largely just repackaged versions of the above blog posts but there's about three pages of repackaged thoughts so I felt the need to include it.

Jeneane Sessum's Blog: I only made one comment here and didn't get a reply but I felt the need to post this because its the one place where I included a thought that I wish I'd included in my own blog posts.  That thought was to compare the protesters who worked to get Loren Feldman's Verizon contract canceled to the people who created the Hollywood Blacklist in the 40s.  A large part of the argument from those who defend the protesting has been "censorship is only wrong if its Government censorship".  The Hollywood Blacklist is pretty universally considered wrong in today's society and it was done completely privately so I think the point is a powerful one.



About Me

Not really relevant right now. This blog is on hiatus. I really haven't decided if it is an indefinite hiatus yet

For the record if you've tried to e-mail me over the last 4 to 6 months I didn't mean to ignore you. The e-mail forwarding isn't working and I didn't realize that until months worth of e-mails had been deleted on forward. The tom@tomstechblog.com address still won't forward to the postmaster account and I don't know why because it's provided by the webhost. But if you're one of my old blog pen pals I would always welcome an e-mail from you at the postmaster@tomstechblog.com address

Contact

- E-Mail Tom

Search

Subscribe

- Subscribe to this Blog

Calendar

<<  June 2013  >>
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2627282930311
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30123456

Archive

Tags

Categories


Blogroll

    Disclaimer

    The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in anyway.

    © Copyright 2013

    Sign in