The (never ending) Moby Dick Metaphor

A while back Melody wrote a great post entitled "The Moby Dick Metaphor". In this post she talks about looking at Moby Dick as a grand metaphor for undertaking the journey to become learned in the subject of Digital Culture. Consequently, I have been reading Moby Dick in this way.

In chapter 98, "Stowing Down and Clearing Up", the last couple paragraphs talk of catching a whale, cutting it up, and then cleaning the ship. Sometimes the break, this moment to indulge in a sparkling clean ship, is very short. Then it is on to the next whale, "and go through the whole weary thing again."

Now, I feel this can function as a metaphor for life in general but I want to talk about it in relation to Digital Culture. Indeed, later in the paragraph Melville connects the cyclical process to Life:

"Oh! my friends, but this is man-killing! Yet this is life. For hardly have we mortals by long toilings extracted from this world's vast bulk its small but valuable sperm; and then, with weary patience, cleansed ourselves from its defilements, and learned to live here in clean tabernacles of the soul; hardly is this done, when--There she blows!--the ghost is spouted up, and away we sail to fight some other world, and go through young life's old routine again."

This idea fits in rather snugly with digital culture. We are always chasing that new technology. And with the chase comes all the difficulties of trying to grasp new concepts. It takes time and effort, time perhaps being the most valuable of the two. But eventually, if we have the ability, we catch that whale, we learn how to operate google+, we become competent bloggers. And for a moment we are happy with that...

but sooner or later that sweet siren song comes drifting down from the crows nest--There she blows!--and it's on to The New we go...

a never ending cycle.

Thoughts on Finishing Moby Dick

So, I finally finished Moby Dick, and I was really excited when I did. Prof. Wickman told us that we would be thrilled by the last thirty pages, and I really did think that they delivered. I was surprised to find, that in the final battle I was rooting for Moby Dick. I think that is what Herman Melville intended, but you would think after spending all that time on the boat with the crew, I would have been rooting for them a little bit more.

http://butdoesitfloat.com/To-produce-a-mighty-book-you-must-choose-a-mighty-theme

I know we talked about this quite a bit in class, but I was thinking about all the different things that Moby Dick represents. Yes, he represents a lot of things in terms of the text, but I think where he becomes the most relatable to the reader is when you start to kind of think of what your "white whales" are. The things that you just obsess over. Projects? Relationships? Something that happend that you still can't get off your mind? Something you are certain is going to happen and you can't stop thinking about it? Really I should maybe be more sympathetic with Ahab. I am certainly not putting my life or anyone else's in danger, but we still all have those things that we dwell on a little too much. Or really we should probably be learning from Ahab. Learning to let go of "white whales." Cause well, now that I finished reading Moby Dick, I know that Moby Dick eventually wins.

Unplugging for a weekend

This weekend I went camping in Moab, Utah, with a group of other students in a wilderness writing class. We were gone from Thursday morning to Saturday evening, and I decided to leave my phone at home for the entire time.

I believe digital technologies, rather than being in opposition to nature, are part of nature. Evolutionary forces have shaped a natural human brain that has extended itself to digital devices. So I am not one to buy into the dichotomy of "nature vs. humans."

We see this dichotomy in the way wilderness is romanticized. Even in the way wilderness is protected, we can find the types of problems that persist that lead us to a place where nature needs to be protected: by designating one part of the earth as "sacred" we are automatically designating the rest of it as something we can kind of trash.

So when I turned off my phone for three days, I tried to avoid falling into the romantic frame of mind that said I was "escaping" from my digital connectedness. Instead, I used the opportunity to evaluate what areas of my life I may be distracted from in my abundance of use of my digital devices.

I was able to flex the muscle of patience for gratification by leaving my devices at home. I generally check my messages every few minutes, but the devices don't actually require that I use them that way. I can wait a few hours instead of a few minutes between usage. And since I've been back from my trip, I've used my phone much less. I've walked much more without headphones in, and while I truly believe there is nothing unnatural about technology, I am happy to remember that off buttons exist on technology as well.

As we think about the "overuse" of technology, I think it is important not to fall into the trap of vilifying it. We don't need to escape our devices, we just need to use them in constructive ways, and that means sometimes lovingly switching them off for a few days.

In Defence of the #Hashtag

Two of my blogging teammates, Sam and Melody, posted about hashtagging, and I decided I would weigh in on the debate too. I think that when used properly hashtags are excellent. I actually had a friend express annoyance with hashtags the other day, and I found myself defending to them and explaining how they can be very useful.
One of the things that I was explaining is how they can be helpful in grouping together pictures. For example, at a lot of weddings now they are selecting a specific hashtag for everyone to use on their pictures, like #smithwedding2013. This way the bride and groom can search for their hashtag, see, and save every picture that was taken at their wedding. I also use this method when I instagram pictures of my nephews and me. I always hashtag them #auntdani #babyjames or #babydaniel, that way I can quickly search through my pictures to see my cute nephews.
I did a little bit of research online to see some more reasons as to why an everyday user, not just someone trying to promote an event or brand would want to use hashtags. Well apparently there is a website called hashtags.org and they have an article on this very thing.
The reasons why this article explained it believes hashtags are useful to an everyday user are...

1. Gaining more followers

2. Engaging in conversations--As a humorous example, I had a friend start #mormonharrypotter and it created a hilarious thread imagining what it would be like if Harry Potter and his friends were Mormon.

3. Exchange content

4. Targeting users

5. Social analytics

The article gives some better descriptors of these and how they may be beneficial.

But, another thing that I found is how the Church is using hashtags to benefit its members, get topics trending, and increase interest in the Church. There is actually a Mormon Hashtag Recommendation page that was officially created by the Church. Who knew? It includes suggestions like #ldsconf (I'll be sure to use that one), #mormon, #PresMonson, #motab, and even #ldsage to be used when talking about the missionary age change.

So, yes, I know hashtags can get annoying, and a majority of the users are probably not using them to their greatest advantage. But, when you want to use them for good, they can be of great benefit.

irobot

I have been thinking about one of the big themes of our class. The theme of Man vs. Machine that we have talked about in various class meetings and blog posts, etc. I think this theme is archetypal and implanted within the human collective unconscious (to borrow some Jungian terminology). If the fear is so deeply implanted is it legitimate?

Since the beginning of time man has been at war with technology, afraid of it (I'm being melodramatic here on purpose). Just look at Hollywood, they love to exploit this theme. The movie iRobot is just one of many examples where we create machines capable of outsmarting and ultimately hurting us, which is at the core of why we fear technology. (I almost want the sequel to the facebook movie to be about how facebook becomes too smart and Will Smith must then correct that wrong).

So is something like this going to happen? Why are we so preoccupied with the harmful robot?

Why Hashtag?

Sam's post got me thinking about the usage of hashtags because he brought up the idea that there may be a sense of manipulation in hashtagging because it can guide the way we think when we see a certain image or hear a certain idea. There has been a video that has been going around that probably most of you have seen, but it shows how hashtagging can be a nuisance.

When taken to the extreme like this, it can be annoying, but it does also in a way show some human psychology and how the mind connects ideas to each other, as Sam mentioned in his post. But one of the reasons why I found this video so funny, is that Jimmy Fallon is poking fun at hashtagging, he also promotes it for other segments of his show. He tells viewers to tell funny stories, via Twitter, about things like parent fails, misheard lyrics, and others, and with each hashtag he starts, they get thousands of tweets with those hashtags.

This is a different kind of manipulation than what Sam talks about because when we see these hashtags, we purposefully try to connect it to something that we have seen or heard, but when I was thinking about these two different types of manipulation together, it made me think that there isn't really a way to make hashtagging original. However, it gives people something humanlike to hold on to in the digital world through connections of thought processes.

Is hashtagging supposed to provide a way for people to think that they can come up with something original, like Jimmy Fallon giving ideas, or is it simply meant to help people connect? Can there be other, deeper reasons for hashtagging, or is it simply superficial?

Hashtags

      It has recently occurred to me that Hashtags are almost an exact replica of the way our brains respond to an image or phrase. That is, the thoughts that jump into our minds in reaction to said image or phrase. For example, let's say somebody posts a picture of a little puppy on Facebook. Your gut reaction will most likely be to think the picture is cute, or cuddly. Now what hashtags are allowing the person who uploaded that photo to do is direct your attention to the associations they made when they took the picture or first saw it. For instance, they might describe the photo by simply putting "#cute", and "#cuddly". These hashtags will lead you, if you click on them, to a whole group of cute photos, or a treasure trove of cuddly photos. That mirrors our own psychology. When we think a picture is cute we automatically associate (or think of) other cute images or photos we have seen. Or other memories that have been labeled and stored under the "cute" section in our brains.

       I think this is a good thing in the sense that  we are gaining more control. We can direct the viewer to have a response more similar to the desired response when looking at the picture we posted or when reading the phrase we wrote. This goes back to the concept of identity, and how we create our identity, how we build an intricate mask in the digital world (and in life too I guess, for we do have control over that).

     But could it be bad? Is there something about not being told what to thing that fosters a more genuine reaction from the viewer? Is there a sense of manipulation here?

BYU and Technology

I came across a link that someone posted on facebook today, clicked to check it out, and was totally amazed by what I saw. 

http://gigapixel.panoramas.com/brighamyoung/football/20130921/

BYU created a gigapixel panorama image at the football game this weekend, but what is so cool about this is that you can zoom in and clearly see everyone in attendance at the game. I was able to find myself very quickly and was surprised at how clear the image is even once you zoom in. It's a little weird, but also amazing. I would love to know how an image like this is created. 

What this got me thinking about, was how amazingly BYU has integrating itself into the technical world. Prof. Burton was just discussing today in class  BYUs app that you can use for a wide variety of school resources. BYU has really made it a point to be on top of all the latest technology and to be keeping up. I think we are really lucky to be going to a school that is so aware of what is going on and that is making a conscious effort to be a part of up and coming ideas and innovations. 

Learning

As part of the Latter-Day Saint community, we are counseled to "seek learning" in both secular and religious things. The idea of learning is one that is very prevalent in my life right now, what with going to school, and it surfaced in me yet again as I was reading "Moby Dick" because there is a line in chapter 89 in which Melville/Ishmael is talking about "Loose-Fish" and "Fast-Fish". He describes a loose-fish as being something that is free for anyone who gets to it first, and at the very end of the chapter he says, "What all men's minds and opinions but Loose-Fish? . . . And what are you, reader, but a Loose-fish?" As human beings, we are born with a blank slate, and as we go throughout our lives we fill it with whatever we choose to learn about.

But what if we have to learn about something that we are scared of, or uncomfortable with?

I went through this when I had to take four semesters of French. I am going through it again as I am learning about the digital humanities. In both cases, I am thrown into a language that I am unfamiliar with, and I have to do my best to make my way through it.

This is all a sort of introduction to the video below. I have an obsession with TED Talks and I watch them quite often. In this particular talk, Tim Ferriss describes this same idea about learning something that is in unfamiliar territory. (There is some cursing from 11:45-11:50--just as a warning if that bothers you.)

He uses examples of how he learned how to swim, speak foreign languages, and ballroom dance to show that the learning process is more important than the actual product, and he mentions how in the process of learning, you should strive for being effective instead of efficient. This will immerse you deeper into what you are learning and you will come out on top. Understand the basics first, and then you will have a solid foundation for building something strong. "Fear is your friend" because it gives us a purpose in learning. When we are learning about something that we are uncomfortable with, it will automatically make us start with the basics. What do you think about learning? Should we stretch ourselves into the things that we fear, or should we continue in the things with which we already a solid foundation? What good does it do to stretch ourselves in that way?

What do you want to know about podcasting?

kuer.org/radiowest

Last week one of my favorite podcasts featured an hour on Moby Dick. It was a rebroadcast with historian Nathaniel Philbrick, who wrote a book called Why Read Moby-Dick? In the interview, Philbrick laid out an argument for why the novel is worth the time of modern readers, calling it an American Bible (a title I personally would set aside for the Book of Mormon, but I'm happy to see it go to Melville's achievement too).

I found the episode to be engaging and useful as I embark on the novel myself -- among other points, Philbrick reminded me that being too focused on the plot is a potentially hazardous distraction to appreciating the meandering genius of the novel.

It may be a bit old-fashioned now to call podcasting a new media (actually does the term "new media" sounds a little dated too, now?), but it's a format that is worth considering, that has certainly not lost its usefulness or significance, and that I would heartily recommend, as Philbrick does of Moby Dick, to everyone who has not been introduced to it.

Podcasts are made by amateur hosts, celebrities acting as amateur hosts, or professional radio programs. And it doesn't end there; this year I discovered Decode DC, a podcast made by someone who used to be a professional radio host but who dove right into the podcasting seas, taking her expertise into the realm of podcasts, instead of the other way around.

WNYC's Radiolab is a weekly radio program distributed on public radio, but all of their new hours launch first on their podcast feed, something I did not realize until I interned with them this summer.

I became an avid listener of podcasts many years ago, and then became a podcaster myself after that, which has led me, sometimes accidentally, to meaningful professional opportunities. I have written in the past about how I podcast, but I would be happy to write more. So -- how do you engage with podcasts, both as a consumer or a creator? I'd love to generate a conversation about the format, and to share whatever experiences or tricks of my own that would be useful.

BYU Tech Expo

I didn't get Professor Burton's e-mail about BYU's Tech Expo (check out the website, if only just to admire the cool parallax scrolling effect http://cougartechexpo.byu.edu/) till later in the day, so between class and work, I wasn't able to catch much. But, I did swing by for the very end to see the Technology Trends session. It wasn't like one of the more informational sessions like they had earlier in the day that I wish I could have gone to, but it was still very interesting.

In the Technology Trends session, a professor from BYUs IT Department presented us with various videos that showed interesting facts about internet usage and that displayed some cool innovations with technology. While viewing he discussed with us some of the cool things that are happening with technology now, and what effects this has one us (so it was like a mini session of Digital Culture with lots of YouTube videos).

One of the videos that we watched and discussed was this Google Glass trailer.

I think Google Glass is undeniably amazing and fascinating technology. But, could it really be something that is going to catch on? I don't really know much about this technology or what Google is planning, but I would be really curious to hear others opinions about it and the impact they think this kind of technology could have. 

Greatness

I thought our class lecture on Wednesday was so interesting because it was all about how we can be a part of something great! Especially when we were talking about launching the camera into space, or the virtual choir. I found another man, Elia Locardi, who decided to do a great project on his own as well in which he found something he wanted to do, and he did it. Check out that link to see the amazing photography he is able to do. He has gotten into the more professional side of it, but it he had to start somewhere. Just like we all have to start somewhere.

This video is the one that we watched in class, it is "Eric Whitacre's Virtual Choir --'Lux Aurumque'". Eric Whitacre is a professional musician, but most, if not all of the participants, are amateur singers/musicians. They sing well, but on their own but they are still simply singing in their basement. But when they had someone to guide them and put them all together, they were able to create something truly great.

I think that there are two ways we can be a part of "creating something great", and they actually form around each other. First, we are amateur singers sitting in our basement, and we decide to take a shot on something. We don't know if it will actually work out or lead to anything special, but we do it anyway. And maybe, just maybe, it will be a great experience. It may even become something great, like this virtual choir. All of these people created something great under the direction of Eric Whitacre who encouraged them to try it. But then you take it a step farther and try to create something on your own without as much direction, which is what Melody Myers did when she decided to do each of the parts of the music herself. Then it will evolve into trying to create something new, and you keep practicing and trying, and eventually you actually become the Eric Whitacre or Elia Locardi.

What you create doesn't have to be something in the digital world, but I am just focusing on those for the sake of the digital culture ideas we are studying this semester. I think that this is what we are going for in this class. We are trying to be a part of something great, and maybe even one day we will be able to create something great and help others to be a part of something great too. Eventually, if more and more people decide that they want to be great, our physical and virtual worlds will be filled with greatness.

Connecting or Disconnecting?

During our lecture on Wednesday about consuming, creating, and connecting through digital culture, and as I read through some of the posts that people put up in response, I kept thinking of a video that one of my friends had posted on Twitter a month or two back called "The Innovation of Loneliness."

We keep discussing how we use digital media to connect through mediums such as facebook, twitter, instagram, goodreads, online forums, etc. I think this video gives some very interesting commentary on the potential that this new way of connecting has to disconnect us while change how we view ourselves and others. When I am scrolling through my social medias I don't usually consider the emotional effect that this has on me. I am really embarrassed to admit that just this weekend I voiced annoyance to my roommate that my most recent instagram hadn't gotten enough "likes" (I was of course instantly horrified with myself for caring about this). But, I think it's very relevant to the point that this video brings up that we are starting to use social media and the digital world to define so many aspects of our life, even our social structures, and we are letting it effect us personally. I think I'm starting to question Melody's statement in her post that we are learning how to control the machine through innovation, and wondering if all this innovation isn't letting the machine control us.

Is this something that you see as an issue as we increasingly move our lives into the online world where we can carefully craft our personas and see a count of how many "friends" we have? Do you think that this is going to become more and more of an issue? 

The Moby Dick Metaphor

So this post is a little bit more simple-minded and probably really obvious for everyone, but it is sometimes the way my mind works. I'm just going to be "thinking out loud" about the comparison between "Moby Dick" and digital culture.

The outline of the novel, "Moby Dick" can be used as a sort of road map to how we can learn about, immerse ourselves in, and master digital culture. We all (or at least I have) started out knowing nothing about digital culture at some point in our lives, just as Ishmael signed on for the whaling voyage. Ishamel says that he will just learn as he goes, and I think that's what we all have to do in this ever-growing and ever-changing digital world. But eventually we have to really take a big step for learning more and diving in to what it really is. In "Moby Dick", this is like the Cetology and Specksnyder chapters. After this, we can get more into recognizing more "whales" especially if we have other people we can observe. Eventually we will have our own presence in the digital world, just as Ishmael was able to take his turn at the mast-head.

Reflecting on My Internet Persona: A Caution

Creative Commons license. Image by Eugene Zemlyanskiy.

Like most people these days, I have been sharing articles, ideas, and opinions on the Internet for several years. I'm on Facebook, which is where most of this sharing -- and the conversations that have sprung out of it -- have taken place. When I look back on these years of social media interaction, I have some regrets that are worth processing.

Without conscious intention, I developed a persona for my social media involvement: someone who engages in controversial conversations; who is politically liberal and socially progressive; and who is Mormon, but in an odd and contradictory way -- somewhat of a fringe Mormon, it would appear. I've posted a lot about gender issues, doubt, and homosexuality, all within the context of Mormonism. I'm male, straight, a feminist, and a Mormon. But I've openly expressed, on some occasions, disagreement with Church leaders and policies.

I don't mean this to be confessional, and those are not what I am referring to when I mention my regrets. I own all those elements of my Internet persona, and I feel like I have always been respectful in expressing my views and inviting people to consider ideas.

But allowing the more controversial aspects of my identity and perspective to take center stage on my personal social media account has taken its toll on me. Family members, acquaintances from my days as a missionary, and other friends and colleagues have reacted to my posts with a level of energy that I would otherwise just never expect them to expend on my behalf, without the Internet.

I will say this: their frustration with me is not painless on my end. Now, when I run into old friends from my mission or from my many years as an MTC teacher, I catch myself assuming, awkwardly, that they must think I have gone completely off the rails -- a rogue, not to be trusted, fallen Mormon. I have this image that they probably see me and think back to the sons of Mosiah, and think, oh man, Derrick is not my brother in the Lord anymore.

But here's where most of the pain comes in: in reality, from my perspective, I am every bit as Mormon as I ever have been, and I would describe the vast majority of my identity as a Mormon to be completely in line with standard expectations: I have always been active in my congregation, I have always carried in full faith and honesty a temple recommend, which certifies that I support leaders I may on occasion disagree with. Being Mormon -- a believing Mormon -- is, and always has been, a huge part of who I am. Not just culturally, but according to my behavior and beliefs.

In person, I think, there has always been very little controversy to who I am. I'm not combative or confrontational. I appear to enjoy church a lot (because I do). I don't press people to define or defend (or rethink) their views. But online, I have found myself doing just that.

Which leads me to these reflections. Was it worth it? If I could wind back the clock 3 or 4 years, would I censor myself more?

The answer, for me, despite my occasional sadness, is definitely no. It turns out having a public persona has allowed me to reach a new level of honesty with how I express myself. When I post something, I know that my audience is my family, my friends, and professional contacts that I have made. Some of them will agree with me when I express an opinion, and some will not. And knowing that has given me pause -- which I am ultimately grateful for -- before I phrase something the way I do.

I pine for the days when everybody saw my cheerful, faithful, in-person persona and never knew there was any other part of me. But at the end of the day, I'm grateful to be more exposed.

Who is Really in Control?

Derrick's post has an interesting point near the end. He suggests that we are always limited by the boundaries that are set in each form of communication or technology like SMS text messaging, Facebook, and Twitter. We are free to do and say what we want, but only if it fits within their set parameters.

Public domain

But is this something to "like" as we would on Facebook? Well, we would have to because there is no way to "dislike" it (which is another thing that Derrick brought up).

This got me thinking in terms of the Michael Wesch video,  "The Machine is Us/ing Us". Wesch brings up the idea that we need to "teach the machine" and by doing so, we become masters of the "machine." But what does it actually mean to become a master like this?

Derrick says that we are being "blindly led" by the people who create parameters through these digital tools, but at the same time, I think that we are being led to believe that we are mastering and teaching the machine. We are given the impression that we have control over our Twitter or Facebook accounts, but we are actually just going along with what people have done before and what they are allowing us to do.

Public domain

However, there are ways that we can master the machine. I think that as long as we extend beyond the usual updates, tagging, following, etc. and we push ourselves to create new ideas and share them in any way we can, we are able to show that we are masters. We become the masters as we learn to use these tools to our advantage.

Inseparably Inseparable

Creative Commons license, free to reproduce. Image by lumaxart.

Michael Wesch's beautifully crafted video on the changing landscape of web technology makes an important point about HTML -- that the content of websites used to be determined by the elements that the HTML language allowed, such as <li> (which allows lists), <p> (which makes new paragraphs), <b> (which makes things bold), and <i> (which makes things italic).

This brought me back to my high school days, which, pre-2005, fell squarely in the Web 1.0 paradigm, when I was tinkering around on my computer making websites using HTML. I had learned the coding language from a library book, and actually composed most of my website content upstairs in my bedroom computer, which had no access to the Internet. The fact that I was able to make a functional website without access to the Internet illustrates Wesch's point beautifully: the coding language limits what content is possible, or as he puts it, "form and content [are] inseparable in HTML."

But then he makes a surprising left turn. "Digital content can do better," he says. "Form and content can be separated."

To make his argument, he goes on to show how XML pushed the limitations of HTML, allowing for much greater flexibility for both content creators and consumers. People can read blogs on a website, or on their RSS readers. I remember being frustrated with wanting to make my websites more dynamic, only to find that even as the technology moved faster than my grasp of it, I was actually more capable of making more complex websites, using XML tools such as Blogger and Wordpress. Danielle's great post further explains the difference between XML and HTML.

But the idea that form and content can be separated -- even if their relationship does indeed become more flexible -- is wrong, and dangerous. Form will always limit and inspire content, and desire for content will always inspire new developments in "form technology." Form and content are, and will always be, inseparably inseparable.

One of the examples of this riffs off Wech's final and astute point that ethics will need to be rethought with dynamic tools. Companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, actually shape the content of human discourse, by creating -- and choosing not to create -- the tools they have. Why can I "like" something but not "dislike" it? Is it a technological impossibility? No -- the form of Facebook is limited because someone decided it should be that way, and it shapes how I behave and think. And if I want to communicate an idea on Twitter, I must craft it within the parameters of an SMS message. These technological limitations are, in a real way, shaping human behavior and thought. And despite how powerful theses tools are, they will always be limited, either by technological barrier or design.

Facebook's development shows, perhaps, the most dramatic shift. Going from a static "wall" to an autobiographical "timeline" has profound implications for how we can, and how they want us, to use that digital tool. Are we blindly led with every new update?

As we navigate the exciting tools of XML and dynamic content, we must never lose sight of the fact that content and form are always limited by each other, and that the reality of the Internet's limitations are often made not by technology, but by people. And the people are often not us.

XML and HTML: what does that even mean?

First of all, what a fascinating title. I was intrigued by this video, "The Machine is Us/ing Us" before I even watched it

But, what I wanted to address was the question posed about HTML vs. XML. Last winter, I took an Internet Publishing class were I learned how to code using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Really it is the coolest thing to be able to imagine, design, create, and display something on the web that you created from scratch. I could not have been more proud of myself when I coded an entire website all on my own. I actually really wish it was still up on the web so I could link to it and show it off more. 

Anyways, I understand HTML pretty well and what it does, but I didn't really grasp exactly what XML is from the video, so I went to the XML page for w3schools.com (a website that we frequently used in Internet Publishing) and checked the wikipedia page to try and figure it out. 

Here is the differentiation that w3schools gave me 

XML was designed to transport and store data.

HTML was designed to display data.

So really they are both equally important right? 

If I'm understanding correctly, when I post to something like this blog I am using XML, because it is in a pre-created format that inputs and stores my date, but what you are seeing is formated in HTML, because this is where the data (stored in XML) is being displayed (in HTML). 

XML doesn't make HTML useless, it just makes it more effective. XML means that every time I wanted to make a change to a website, I don't have to go in and edit all of the HTML code so that the display and layout will not be effected, but the data and content can be updated and changed regularly. This kind of feature is essential for websites like Wikipedia or Blogger where content is regularly added or changed by users who are unfamiliar with coding, but where HTML becomes essential is in the actual display of the data in an appealing and well layed out format, which makes a big difference for a webpage. 

Now, I am willing to admit that I could have just gotten all of that completely wrong. If I am wrong, I would love to have someone explain this all to me because I am really interested in understanding it. 

Niche dividends

The hyper-focus of the niche allows for great opportunities. Photo by Derrick Clements.

One element of digital culture that has rewarded me nicely is the potential for finding a niche. When I set out to create my podcast about Pixar animation, I had no idea that I would eventually find myself getting to interview Pixar employees, attract thousands of regular followers, or especially get invited to the studio myself. All that has happened because, it turns out, my own brand of crazy resonates with other people who otherwise, like me, would feel alone.

My reason for starting the podcast was simple: I loved this particular subject, and I noticed myself talking to everybody about it -- something that, fortunately for my friends, has diminished since I started the podcast, because now I have a more appropriate outlet. Four years after our first date, my girlfriend is glad she didn't run away (I think) after I spent a sizable amount of time on our first date telling her all about the founding and early years of Pixar. But I'm sure it was close.

Digital tools allow niche communities to develop because geographical limitations are blown away, and because content is searchable across wide databases. What was, in reality, one kid exuberantly celebrating Pixar into a microphone inside a closet surrounded by hanging clothes, became something that felt real.

Not everybody loves Pixar as much as I do. But enough people do to make my podcast a viable space for a community of listeners. And I have drawn upon my listeners' help many times. When it was time to create a new podcast intro based on a mash-up of favorite Pixar lines from movies, I reached out to them on Facebook and Twitter to offer suggestions for their favorite lines. Crowdsourcing the niche made my work easier, and I was sure to reach out to particular listeners whose suggestions ended up in the final piece.

Whatever the interest, digital tools provide an infrastructure for finding like-minded people, and can make hobbies and "likes" into something more constructive and real.

The Digital Age as an Illumination of the Humanities

I was interested, when reading Elise's post Digital Culture/Humanities, in her ideas on the evolving world of the humanities as we enter a more digitized world. I think she makes some very valid points in ways that our plugged in culture has possibly harmed how we view the humanities. but I think that she may have failed to see some of the ways that the humanities are being illuminated in ways that were never possible before. It amazes me how accessible all information is. It was only recently that you could be discussing a point with friends or family over lunch, come across a piece of disputed or unknown information and instantly have the answer. 

Another thing that really amazes me is how connected it has allowed everyone to be (sometimes for better, sometimes for worse). But particularly with the humanities, humanities is all about being able to connect through different mediums and communicate on a large scale through literature, art, etc. With the digital age there are so many incredible ways that we can share ideas. Maybe they are condensed through sites like twitter or blogs, but what matters is that people have the opportunity to share in ways that they never would have been able to when good ole' Herman Melville was writing Moby Dick. 

This isn't to say that there are not huge negatives to what is happening with the increasing prevalence of digital culture, but one would be cheating themselves to not realize the incredible possibilities that are there also. 

Storytelling, Podcasting, Film, Radio -- I love them all

I'm Derrick.

When I am not in school, I am running a storytelling show that I started a couple years ago, which has given me a chance to explore the art and value of narrative. I'd love to see you at a show this semester!

I've been a fan of Pixar since I was little, and a year before I started The Porch I also started a podcast about that. My interests are a little bit like tentacles, but when I suction onto something I like, I have a hard time letting go.

In general, film and radio are my two favorite media, and I spend a lot of my time consuming and thinking about both.

I am very much looking forward to diving into the digital seas this semester with all of you!

Changes in the Humanities

Elise brought up an interesting point in Digital Culture / Humanities as she was talking about how communication has developed into condensed and quicker forms of language and communication. Texting and  Social Media are prime examples of this. She also made the point that these condensed forms of language are becoming a detriment to the humanities. I agree in part with this, but I also just want to add a little bit more to it.

I agree that the art of writing and forms of deeper communication like it are giving way to forms that are not as complete in a way, as she talked about. But a different way of looking at it is that a new form of the humanities is emerging. The humanities are studying the changes in human culture and how we grow and develop in our methods of art, communication, writing, reading, etc. Humanities especially focuses, though, on the written word. In the humanities we are used to studying literature in its purest form, and most people think of the classics and how they  might compare to modern and contemporary culture. Digital Culture is creating new ideas to compare with the ideas in this classic literature, and as the contemporary ideas of communication change, we actually have more to talk about in trying to compare or even differentiate them with our traditional ideas of literature and the humanities.

Hello Everybody!

I'm Melody. I'm from Pleasant Grove, UT--I've lived there since I was 4 and I've never actually lived outside of Utah. Those are the basics to get things started off, and I guess you can't really get more basic than that.

To go a little bit more in depth, I have a very special relationship with ice cream. Specifically Tillamook Mudslide. It is probably one of the most heavenly things I have ever tasted, and I cannot get enough of it. I love food in general, but ice cream is my top choice. I especially love it at the end of a summer barbecue, after eating burgers and chips, chasing it down with some strawberry lemonade, I finish off with some ice cream and it becomes a perfect summer evening.

Besides the love of typical American summer evenings, I think I am British at heart. I did the Hiking and Literature study abroad in England, Scotland, and Wales two years ago, and it has forever left an imprint on my heart!

See what I mean? Also, as you can see from these pictures, I have a strange obsession with looking at clouds and sunsets. I just think they deserve to be admired!

I'm an English major just starting my VERY LAST SEMESTER! I'm more of a reader than a writer, but I still do my fair share of the latter. Maybe I'll share some of my short stories sometime.

I have to be honest with you: I have never actually blogged before. I have never really gotten into the virtual world aside from Facebook (and you are welcome to find me on there) but I am actually pretty dang excited to give it a shot! But please hang in there with me as I learn the ropes!

Hi!

I'll start out with the basics: I'm Danielle Cronquist from Atlanta, Georgia, and I am majoring in English and minoring in editing. Honestly, I had no idea what this class was when I signed up for it, but I'm psyched about it. And, it actually turns out that it is perfect for me because I have been an avid blogger for the past three years and recently became the senior editor of BYU's blog Stance for the Family. I've also been hoping to go into web based publishing and editing when I graduate, so I think I'm really going to get a lot out of this class.

I think the easiest way to sum me up outside of the basics would be to tell you about three things I am absolutely in love with...

1. foxes: 

This has been my favorite animal since I was little, and these darling creatures are very indicative of my personality. I mean, if I had a potronus, I can guarantee it would be a fox.