Luke provided an personal example that went something like this: His trip back to UK for the first time after the London Bombing, he realized there are more armed officers with their finger on the trigger and he found that disturbing and it's purpose was to provide surveillance to make people feel save and Luke pointed out that he didn't feel save under that kind of situation.
The issue i want to talk about relating to this idea is the "social experiences"
New media technology allows us to access news and information globally, trying to present the most updated information, event that are most relevant and interesting to the consumer. but global news are not as important to us compared to local news. We are more interested in the events that occur around us, event that we have experiences to. Not suggesting that global events aren't important, it's just that its not as relevant as local news, as local new have a direct influence.
When the twin towers got hit, the news broadcast the event worldwide, it was massive! everyone knew about it. But this event had more influence on the US than people say in New Zealand. To New Zealanders this was a tragic event, we still donate money and share their loss but it's still a event that happened ages away! We would not consider that the sky tower would be the target of the next attack. Because New Zealand is different from America, we have similar yet different ways of living. It's an event that happened ages away from New Zealand the sort of experience shared among Americans are different to people in New Zealand. American's would have a closer interaction with the media in relation to this event, where New Zealanders might not have the access to this sort of information hence not interact with the event as much as Americans. After this event many images of the twin towers with in the movie have been edit out to avoid reminding the viewers of the event during their interaction with the movie. But to New Zealanders when we watching films such as spider man the presentation of the twin towers would not really influence our engagement with the film it self.
Going back to Luke's example, his trip back to UK, the experience in the airport to him have made him feels less save as he's being staying in New Zealand too long, aware of the event but can not relate to the social context. I'm pretty sure Luke knows that the armed guards are set up due to the London bombing but he doesn't feels save as hearing about it and experiencing are two totally different things.The fact that he hasn't personally experience the crisis hence he can't relate to the experiences of the people who have personally experience the situation. To them by having armed officers standing guard gives the a sense of protection, a system set up to prevent a similar event from happening. It makes London People feel safe!!
Another ideas that arose when i wrote this post is that by submitting someone else personal experience (the lecturer and the tutor) on a blog post which could be used as apart of an formal assessment for the uni, can that be consider as invading a persons privacy? even though this was mentions to the whole tutorial class and Luke stated it's ok to use material mentioned in the lecture and tutorial in blogs. Than again this information can be consider a personal and it's mentioned with in a small group, a group he has utter trust in sharing his secrets with and by updating this post...have I invaded his privacy?
New media technology allows us to access news and information globally, trying to present the most updated information, event that are most relevant and interesting to the consumer. but global news are not as important to us compared to local news. We are more interested in the events that occur around us, event that we have experiences to. Not suggesting that global events aren't important, it's just that its not as relevant as local news, as local new have a direct influence.
When the twin towers got hit, the news broadcast the event worldwide, it was massive! everyone knew about it. But this event had more influence on the US than people say in New Zealand. To New Zealanders this was a tragic event, we still donate money and share their loss but it's still a event that happened ages away! We would not consider that the sky tower would be the target of the next attack. Because New Zealand is different from America, we have similar yet different ways of living. It's an event that happened ages away from New Zealand the sort of experience shared among Americans are different to people in New Zealand. American's would have a closer interaction with the media in relation to this event, where New Zealanders might not have the access to this sort of information hence not interact with the event as much as Americans. After this event many images of the twin towers with in the movie have been edit out to avoid reminding the viewers of the event during their interaction with the movie. But to New Zealanders when we watching films such as spider man the presentation of the twin towers would not really influence our engagement with the film it self.
Going back to Luke's example, his trip back to UK, the experience in the airport to him have made him feels less save as he's being staying in New Zealand too long, aware of the event but can not relate to the social context. I'm pretty sure Luke knows that the armed guards are set up due to the London bombing but he doesn't feels save as hearing about it and experiencing are two totally different things.The fact that he hasn't personally experience the crisis hence he can't relate to the experiences of the people who have personally experience the situation. To them by having armed officers standing guard gives the a sense of protection, a system set up to prevent a similar event from happening. It makes London People feel safe!!
Another ideas that arose when i wrote this post is that by submitting someone else personal experience (the lecturer and the tutor) on a blog post which could be used as apart of an formal assessment for the uni, can that be consider as invading a persons privacy? even though this was mentions to the whole tutorial class and Luke stated it's ok to use material mentioned in the lecture and tutorial in blogs. Than again this information can be consider a personal and it's mentioned with in a small group, a group he has utter trust in sharing his secrets with and by updating this post...have I invaded his privacy?
No, you haven't invaded my privacy. In relating a personal anecdote in a public forum such as a classroom, I'm quite aware that it may be relayed (if not necessarily accurately or with due context) in other forums, such as this blog. Though obviously it's a bit depressing if you feel you can't say anything spontaneous, provocative or controversial in a tutorial for fear that a student will blog it out of context: such a fear will turn us ever more into bland robots! Anyway, your claim that "It makes London People feel safe!!", suggests that you feel able to speak on behalf of 8 million+ Londoners, which I think is a bit odd (unless you've carried out careful surveys). I was merely relaying a subjective response that the visible presence of large numbers of armed police at the airport took me by surprise and made me feel uneasy. That doesn't constitute a critique of the policy but just a subjective response which I'm quite aware will vary greatly between individuals.
ReplyDelete