Annotated Bibliography & Abstract

Annotation

Bennet, Shea. "Is Social Media Making Us Antisocial? [INFOGRAPHIC]." SocialTimes. N.p., 15 June 2012. Web. 11 Feb. 2015. <http://www.adweek.com/socialtimes/antisocial-media/465663>.

Bilton, Nick. "Reclaiming Our (Real) Lives From Social Media." The New York Times. The New York Times, 16 July 2014. Web. 22 Feb. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/fashion/reclaiming-our-real-lives-from-social-media.html>.

Dockterman, Eliana. "Kim Stolz: How Social Media Is Ruining Our Relationships." Time. Time, 24 June 2014. Web. 11 Feb. 2015. <http://time.com/2917916/kim-stolz-how-social-media-is-ruining-our-relationships/>.

Griswold, Alison. "Are Smartphones Ruining the Restaurant Experience?" Slate. The Slate Group, 14 July 2014. Web. 22 Feb. 2015. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/07/viral_craigslist_post_on_smartphones_in_restaurants_is_tech_ruining_the.html>.

• This piece concerns the restaurant business and how, with the addition of social media/increase in smartphone usage, restaurants are becoming less efficient.

Keller, Maura. "Social Media and Interpersonal Communication." Social Media and Interpersonal Communication. Great Valley Publishing Co., Inc., June 2013. Web. 22 Feb. 2015. <http://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/051313p10.shtml>.

"Social Media and Its Impact on Families." Macleighob. N.p., 24 Apr. 2012. Web. 23 Feb. 2015. <https://macleighob.wordpress.com/social-media-and-its-impact-on-families/>.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNyN2lAszWs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl0JojWH1rQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2V9-3ZwnIU -this video had a deep effect on me

Abstract

In my video, I want to show how unaware we have grown of our surroundings in society due to smartphones and technology. How at dinners people are simply staring at their phones instead of engaging in conversations, how relationships are kept together from texting rather than face to face conversation, even talking on the phone. I also want to show how they're making us anti-social. I imagine filming a bus ride in the morning, or people walking through Turlington plaza. I know people look at their phones or act like they're on the phone to avoid awkward interaction with people (even though it's not awkward at all), especially those who are trying to throw brochures in our faces. Furthermore, I've been thinking about showing a relationship dynamic between two people and the typical day-to-day conversation a relationship holds through texting/social media. Because I want to show so many aspects, I think it might be wise for me to use the people in the relationship as examples in each situation I want to show. I have thought of even filming myself as I go about my day and how often I use my smartphone, and periodically showing my surroundings. I believe I can get very creative with this idea and I'll definitely mold my strategy as I begin filming.

"END7: How to Shock a Celebrity"

This video was moving. From the start, the title catches your eye. The content of the video could be unknown to many, but the idea that 'celebrities' are in it draws a lot of curiosity. As it shows the faces of multiple celebrities watching a video, making the viewer want to know what it is exactly that these celebrities are watching.

It's evident that what they're watching is disturbing. I'm not sure what it is in our brains, but humans always want to see something, especially if they know it could be disturbing, for we want to know if we will have the same reaction as others (more so if they're celebrities).
I felt the tone was rather somber and depressing throughout most of the video, but at the end a large feeling of hope came over me. Something was different about this video compared to the normal TV ads throwing Sarah Mclachlan music at you and want you to donate money. This video seemed more REAL. Real in that you could visibly see the effects that the video had on the celebrities faces as they watched it. There weren't any special camera angles used to show sad children or dogs that needed money, but REAL diseases and their REAL effects on people.

Another improvement to typical charity ads, all they're asking for is 50 cents, compared to the monthly payments and membership subscriptions many of the other charities and support groups require.

The flow of this piece was, I thought, pretty flawless. It wasn't too long of a video, it brought you in immediately, and finished with a feeling of reasonable hope. Each disease was shown briefly, but long enough to have a lasting impact on my memory. The music rhythm was spot on. At the beginning it was more slow and quiet, quiet enough to hear the breathing of the celebrities watching the footage. Towards the end, though, it picked up pace and volume that had a hopeful and more positive feeling.

I would say for my Screen Story I should use the same type of style. I like informational videos that change often, that keep the viewer intrigued with new things and not the same footage being shown. The way the music was used in this piece is also something I definitely will pay attention to when making my Screen Story.

Sorry, but Robots can't be Humans

My curiosity endured when I first saw the movie Interstellar. The robots portrayed in the film contained the technology to fully communicate with humans, even as far as humor and sarcasm. This type of potential technology seems realistic to me beacause humans still have full control over them—being able to change settings simply with the command of their voice (robots are unable to resist authority). 

 

Robot "Lars" assisting on a mission in Interstellar

Up until recently I had thought basically anything was potentially possible for robots, as long as their main function was to serve humans. When seeing a movie recently, I saw a preview that intrigued me. The movie with the title Chappie, about a robot that is born with the ability to have feelings, to have a human conscience. He is able to learn, adapt, and form relationships with other humans, even love them.

"Chappie" displayed in the upcoming film Chappie

The preview shows the robot learning as a child, clumsily walking around, spilling drinks and knocking into objects. He's shown as shy and nervous of the new world he now resides in, just as a human would. His 'brain' is able to grow in all aspects, from artistic ability to style and music preference. He is programmed to be a potentially gifted 'person', as a child prodigy would be, and will be influenced in positive as well as negative ways as all of us are when we are young. Different from past films, Chappie has a soul, the first of any robot to have been shown to the world.

But is it really a soul? or simply programmed to represent certain emotions? For example, siri is a software developed by Apple to assist users in finding directions, knowing the weather, etc. The software has the ability to react to questions with humorous responses, almost an attempt to connect with us emotionally. A recent story came out about an autistic boy that became 'best friends' with siri.

The article describes how the boy took the programmed responses from siri as a deeper psychological connection. He connects with the software as Chappie is portrayed in the film: they have feelings that are recognized by humans.

After watching the preview, one simple question stuck out to me: Could this even be possible?

To able to replicate the human brain so effectively and produce something like the robot, Chappie, seems like an impossible feat to me. Our minds are so complex that we're still discovering new things every day about our brains.

R2D2 & C3PO of the Star Wars series

Technology already exists that allows machines to respond to humans with speech, follow directions and carry out tasks at the command of a voice, but how much further can we develop? The idea of artificially manufacturing a human being out of metal and wire is a bit ridiculous. Keep in mind, I do believe robots will be able to do a phenomenal amount for mankind in the future. We're on track for robots such as Lars to be a reality in the coming years. The game-changing factor for me is the ON/OFF switch. How can we manufacture something that makes independent decisions?  How can we develop a technology that allows a robot to think on its own, to make ethical decisions or appreciate life the same way humans do?

We've seen similar technology in movies before. The technology shown in Her is up to par with social interaction and comprehensiveness as seen in the robots of Interstellar. He is able to speak and converse with this digital response system as he would with another human, but still has the power to turn the system off. The machine doesn't function COMPLETELY independently, it's always at the mercy of the human being.

So, even if this technology WAS someday possible? Would it be wise to create machines such as Chappie?

The idea of NOT being able to turn off a robot is frightening to me. For something to be excessively more powerful and with the mind capacity and unpredictability of a human makes it a potential threat to society. With no OFF switch, we risk the unknown.





There have been plenty of movies about robots taking over the world or extinguishing mankind. This idea of fear has fueled countless movies, and why not? Society is intrigued by this idea. The future is everyone's own imagination, and many of us enjoy watching these 'possibilities' unfold on the big screen. I mean seriously, do we really need ANOTHER Terminator? But hey, I know when it comes out the movie will make millions, so I guess I really can't make any fun.


Would it be smart for us to make emotional connections with these robots and machines? Even in the movie Interstellar, humans are hurt emotionally when one of the human-like robots is sacrificed. It seems extreme to think that we would ever consider saving the 'life' of a robot rather than another human, but with these technologies becoming so lifelike it allows people to make these connections, and actually feel an emotional attachment of sorts.

At the end of the day, all of these movies are meant to do one thing: MAKE MONEY. So when I think of Chappie and this revolutionary technology that's being brought forth in this film, I think it is solely a gimmick. It's intriguing to society—the idea of a robot that's one of us? both emotionally and mentally? The idea has been thought of before, but not as in depth as Chappie is shown. It appears to be the most relatable to humans as we've seen yet, almost TOO similar, with the only difference seeming to be skin and organs replaced with metal and wires.

Some may believe it's a realistic view of what the future may hold, but I'm not as quick to agree as others are. I think it's a 'cool' idea for a film, and will gain attention from people solely on its futuristic theme, for all of us are interested in what the future has in store.

Some may believe it's a realistic view of what the future may hold, but I'm not as quick to agree as others are. Could technology advance so much as to make robots lifelike enough to have rights in society? Will they have powers similar to those of humans to vote, work, etc? Humans are already losing millions of jobs to robots that can do it for free, so I'd begin to worry if any of this software and technology does come to be. As for now, I think it's a 'cool' idea for a film, and will gain attention from people solely on its futuristic theme, for all of us are interested in what the coming years have in store.

From 1 to 1,000

Television. Something that has revolutionized our society in how we view and obtain information, not only locally but worldwide. Whether it be politics, sports, news, or even the most popular youtube videos, the television network is capable of bringing us anything we could ever want to watch.

Before television existed, the morning routine consisted of breakfast, a cup of coffee and the morning newspaper, and to be honest, I wish this was still a common routine. We have moved away from reading as a whole. We want our information spoon fed to us while laying comfortably on the sofa (which I admit is sometimes the best way).


Many people blame our generation for being the reason for the common laziness that lies among society today, but I don't entirely believe we are to blame. It's not our fault we were born into an already thriving technological environment. We simply took it and ran with it, going above and beyond what anyone could have imagined when television first became a reality.

The screens are only getting bigger while the sides are getting thinner. Thousands of channels are available on satellite TV...Who the hell needs a thousand channels? When this technology was first introduced, one channel was more than enough to amaze people. It was a privilege to own a television, not to have one in every room as many of us do today.


As these technologies become better and better, we drift further and further away from our old ways of learning, which unfortunately I believe is hurting us. I'm as guilty as the next person, for I haven't read a book for fun in years (something that is a New Year's resolution of mine). Information has become so readily available to us, we have to go out of our way to enrich our minds the old fashioned way, which I think is the most efficient way as well.

With all of this negative talk about television, I do think there are many positives that it brings to society.

1) Political campaigns/races are able to be viewed by all
2) Sporting events are aired across the country, allowing fans to keep up with teams even thousands of miles away
3) Breaking news and weather reports
4) Your favorite shows at the press of a button

Television is an amazing technology. We can learn, laugh, and experience things we never could have before. Yes, there may be too much 'fluff' or random nonsense scattered through the network, but therein lie many shows, programs and news casts that are of great value to all of us. If you can find a good balance, television can be a wonderful resource of information and recreation.

Apple iWatch, useful or simply a fad?

At first when the idea of the iWatch came out, I wasn't on the bandwagon. I didn't see the usefulness in a watch you can use as your phone. Our smartphones already do the same functions and have screens that are only increasing in size, so why make a touch screen even smaller and more difficult to use?

I thought they were simply the "next cool thing" to have, not a tool that would further increase our use of technology than the smartphone already has done for us. We have so many gadgets and tools in our world today that this seemed to be just another one to add with no true purpose besides being "cool".


I will admit, the phone/watch combo is indeed intriguing, as shown in all secret agent movies. I think it is a cool idea, but I don't ever seeing myself owning one.

As more and more news has come out about these iWatches, I've grown more attracted to them. For one, the amount of different styles is impressive. I never imagined the variety from sport to luxury, and from what the website shows, these watches look up to par with any other luxury brand out there.

To add on, the new fitness apps are changing the game. More and more people are wearing Nike fuel bands and other similar products that track mileage, heart rate, etc. These iWatches in fact have similar technology in them which would knock all similar products significantly down once it's released. The entire combo of smartphone, luxury/sport watch, fitness band and even more technological advances makes this product a high demand for society.

My curiosity in these iWatches has definitely heightened with more and more information that has been let out, so I think that eventually I'll fully come around and, just maybe, wear one for myself.