As the lecture is on Monday and the seminars Tuesday/Wednesday it is unlikely that you will have access to the reading (Winston, B. (1998), Media, Technology and Society: a history from the telegraph to the internet London: Routledge, pp321-336.). If you would like to read something else you could take a look at some of the articles in a special issue of the journal New Media and Society edited by Jankowski et al (2004) 'What’s Changed About New Media?' 6(1).

Targeted adverts: Phorm is a tea cup?

One of the top ways that websites make money these days is that they target their adverts depending on your personal details - e.g. Facebook ads. When you create an account, you give over lots of personal details that can be used to ensure that you receive adverts relative to your hobbies. If you say you like cooking..... Phorm is slightly different - it is used by ISPs (BT did it without customer knowledge apparently) who have access to what websites you look at and what you do online this. This metadata is hugely valuable (think nectar card) and can be exploited for commercial profit - but some people are very concerned that this is a huge invasion of privacy....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7619297.stm

Who Should decide who can advertise on google?

Google has been forced to backdown from its position of banning adverts about "abortion and religion-related content". I wasn't even aware that such a practice existed. You can understand that they have to stick within the law, but how do they go about deciding what they think is ok, and what isn't. Is this a moral issue or a business issue?

Is online gaming bad for your health?

Not says a new survey of the game EverQuest II. Some interesting comments by Professor Mark Griffiths that challenge some people's assumptions: "A lot of people talk about 'excessive gaming' as if it is always bad to take part in gaming, but the context can make a big difference. I can think of two case studies of people who both spend 12 hours a day playing EverQuest, but while one is clearly obsessional, the other one is perfectly normal. Genuine addicts are few and far between." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7621412.stm

You Tube - should it censor videos?

This is always a hot topic - You Tube, under pressure from the UK governments, has said that they will censor some vidoes where people use weapons to threaten people. The interesting aspect is that it's country-specific censorship. It's not a new thing (e.g. they ban Nazi related footage in Germany - where it is illegal) but it is an example of "glocalisation".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7621013.stm

managing content (control?)

Very interesting development - like so many websites, facebook is now allowing users to rank application (software/widgets etc) and their developers. It's designed to build an element of the trust into the system and takes the pressure (and negative aspects) off centralised control. Similar systems include eBay (see Colin Rule's book on this) or Amazon seller ratings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7522691.stm

Are people in favour of this or does it just allow a small group to dominate apps development?

web interfaces: the new facebook

Web interfaces can shape user experiences. They can, for example, influence the nature of debate that takes place - say in an online forum (see Wright and Street in New Media and Society). When a familiar website changes its web page design it can have a big impact - and confuse people. What do you think to the new facebook design? A lot of people have joined a group to say they hate it and they want to be able to choose whether they use the old or the new design. When I set this blog up I chose blogger. In hindsight, Word press is IMO a better software tool: it is aesthetically nicer and have more functionality built in (e.g. stats tracker). I don't change because, for now, the negatives outweight the positives. And that's the danger for Facebook. Will it stay the dominant social networking tool or is becoming too annoying?