Category: MCO 425

The cultural resource I’ve chosen that is representative of the Civic Imagination Project theory is the play/musical Hamilton. Hamilton tells the story of Alexander Hamilton’s life in the late 1700s. The play details Hamilton and the other Founding Fathers as the United States’ early political history is being formed. Themes such as love, loss, ambition, forgiveness, friendship, and family are explored.

As the Founding Fathers were white men, this is the lens through which this story has always been taught to us. We think of a time of immense oppression for people of color and women. For African Americans, the mid-1700s saw “new laws and societal norms which linked Africans to perpetual labor, and the American colonies made formal distinctions among its people based on appearance, place of origin, and heredity.”

In the 1700s, particularly in the context of the United States’ early history, the part played by people of color and women was often diminished or not told at all. But in Hamilton, the story of the Founding Fathers is reimagined with a diverse cast. The characters in the play are historically white but they are portrayed by people of color. In this reimagining, people of color are a part of the story and can see themselves in it. The Civic Imagination Project has created a space “where we can explore the political consequences of cultural representations and the cultural roots of political participation,” which is what Hamilton does.

There is also a modern twist as the music combines traditional show tunes with R&B, rap, soul, and hip-hop. This music brings these familiar characters to life in a new way for audiences to witness their humanity. Women also play an active role in the play, such as Hamilton’s wife, Eliza. The final song of the play is called, Who Lives, Who Dies, Who Tells Your Story? In this song, Eliza takes pride in her own story and lists the things she’s accomplished since her husband’s death. She is “at last taking ownership of her story and contributions to a country that largely forgot her.”

The Civic Imagination Project states, “Many minority groups are struggling for inclusion and representation within popular media or to overcome decades of negative stereotyping.” The point of this reimagining is that the story of the United States history belongs to everyone, even those whom America has often forgotten or sidelined. This imagined alternative shows us that systemic change is required to include everyone in America’s story.

We must allow people of color and women the opportunity to tell their stories. A new kind of education should take place where we are told of the roles that people of color and women played in American history. Their perspectives should be heard and valued. We must let them tell their stories and listen when they do so.

There are elements of this reimagining that are reflected in today’s current culture. The diversity of the cast represents the diversity seen in the United States today. Hamilton’s creator, Lin-Manuel Miranda says, “It’s a story of America then told by America now.”  The play also reflects current conditions in the political climate. Hamilton’s rise in popularity came at a time when immigration was a hotly debated issue and President Trump made disparaging remarks about minorities and immigration. Hamilton’s line, “Immigrants, we get the job done,” reflects the history of immigrants in the United States.

Hamilton encourages greater diversity, shows that America’s story belongs to everyone, and reminds us of our immigrant past. It is a cultural resource that’s representative of the Civic Imagination Project.

Hello blog readers! For this blog, I’d like you to think about your personal privacy and security online. When you’ve visited a website has a pop-up ever appeared asking you if you agree to the website’s privacy terms? If you’re like me, you’ve probably clicked on ‘agree’ to get rid of the pop-up and get on with reading an article, watching a video, etc. But do you know what you’re agreeing to when you click that ‘agree’ button?

When you create a social media account, you must check a little box saying that you read and agree to the terms and conditions. Again, if you’re like me, you probably clicked that you read it even though you didn’t. Do you know what you agreed to? Even if you do, the information you provide isn’t the only information that’s collected.

Threats You Should Be Concerned About:

Data Brokers: One threat to personal privacy and security online is data brokers. “Data brokers are entities that collect information about consumers, and then sell that data (or analytic scores, or classifications made based on that data) to other data brokers, companies, and/or individuals.” They are usually split into three categories such as people search sites, marketing-focused data brokers (which create dossiers on individuals to tailor marketing to them), and ID Analytics.

Data brokers collect data from public records and collect or purchase people’s data from commercial sources such as search and purchase histories. Data brokers also collect information from social media such as browsing activity and when users take a quiz.

Data brokers exchange and purchase information from one another, merging the data they already have to create individual profiles. This is concerning because oftentimes, people don’t know who is collecting data about them, what they’re collecting, what they’re using it for, and who they’re selling/giving it to. The entities that collect this data have and are prone to security breaches, putting your information at risk of being obtained by bad actors.

Surveillance Capitalism: Shoshana Zuboff describes how companies such as Google and Facebook retrieve information from digital traces we unknowingly leave behind. This residual data has predictive capabilities and is used to create training models that show patterns of human behavior that provide predictive streams which are called behavioral surplus. These predictive capabilities that come from this data are concerning as they can be intrusive.

An example of this is how Target’s algorithm was able to tell that a woman was pregnant based on her browsing and purchasing less fragrant shampoo. Target was then able to recommend baby products and discounts to the woman and even her father. Zuboff also describes how these companies’ algorithms have so much data that they can predict our mood shifts. This is often used to send a timely targeted ad to us when we need a confidence boost.

No Encryption/Weak Encryption: Another important threat is that without strong encryption, most of your internet web traffic can be seen by anyone who can access the computers that your message passes through to its destination. When you have strong encryption, messages are turned into an unreadable form while in transit. Your message only becomes readable to the person at your destination.

Recommendations For Increasing Privacy and Security:

1. Avoiding quiz apps and setting your social media accounts to private can prevent data brokers from collecting as much data. But an even better way is to not have social media at all, which will prevent that information from being collected.

2. When it comes to surveillance capitalism, Shoshana Zuboff says that a person foregoing Google isn’t going to help because it’s a collective problem that requires collective action.

3. It is generally best to go with a service that supports end-to-end encryption, which will protect your message in transit from when you send it to when it’s received.

4. To reduce the amount of data collected and shared by trackers you can change the settings on your phone, install a tracker-blocking extension, use the Tor browser, and uninstall third-party apps. It should be noted that no tracker blocker is perfect.

5. Use unique and strong passwords for every account. Use a password manager such as Bitwarden or 1Password. Password managers help create strong passwords and store them in one place. This can protect your security from hackers and attacks.

6. Use a VPN instead of Wi-Fi that you don’t own, such as free Wi-Fi at a restaurant. The owner of the hotspot or someone else on the network could steal or look through data and files sent from your device. Using a VPN will encrypt your internet traffic and hide your IP address. This can also be used to mitigate the surveillance capitalism conducted by companies like Google and Facebook.

As someone who is an introvert, I’ve seen various stereotypes and generalizations about it that are present throughout different media. Depending on the introvert you ask, these interpretations can be realistic, over the top, or even a little bit of both. Merriam-Webster defines the word Introvert as, “a person whose personality is characterized by introversion: a typically reserved or quiet person who tends to be introspective and enjoys spending time alone.”

Common stereotypes about introverts are that introverts don’t like to be around other people (are anti-social), are innately shy, have negative personalities, and are lazy, or unhappy. The stereotype that I think has the most potential for harm is that introverts are depressed and/or deal with mental illness. Many media depictions of introverts are usually poking fun in a humorous way that is usually meant to be relatable, but some go over the top. I don’t mind being around and interacting with others. But as an introvert, I’m happiest when I can have my quiet alone time. I don’t think of myself as lazy or unhappy.

Below is a piece of media that conveys a lot of stereotypes and generalizations about introverts. This is a satirical video from Funny or Die on YouTube. It is a satirical commercial for a perfume that is specifically for introverts. The ad describes how this is a perfume for when you decide not to go to a party and instead sit on your couch with your dog watching TV, wearing the same dirty sweatshirt you wear every night. It features imagery such as a girl in her unkempt bedroom bingeing on junk food.

I find this specific media construction to be accurate and relatable in some ways. Most of the time, I would rather watch TV on the couch with my dog instead of going to a party. Using NAMLE’s KEY Questions, specifically, “What information/biases/etc. are overt? Implied?” The satirical video implies that introverts don’t take care of themselves. An introverted person is seen wearing the same dirty sweatshirt every day while they eat junk food in their messy bedroom. I think this aspect of the video is harmful because introversion and the inability to care for oneself are not synonymous. Being an introvert doesn’t make a person lazy, dirty, or unhealthy.

Even though this is a satirical video and meant to be funny and over the top, it’s missing the perspective of introverts who take care of themselves. Extroverted people could benefit from this media construction as they are the opposite of introverts. Based on this video, extroverts can be seen as happy, the life of the party, and have a better ability to care for themselves than introverts do.

Another media construction that perpetuates these stereotypes is the character Squidward on SpongeBob SquarePants. Squidward represents an introvert, while SpongeBob is the stereotypical extrovert, he’s boisterous and happy. SpongeBob is often the foil to Squidward just wanting peace, quiet, and solitude. Squidward is generally depicted as grumpy, self-pitying, and generally unhappy. Below is a collection of some of Squidward’s scenes which is a good representation of his personality throughout most of the show. The first scene in the video has a dark reference to suicide.

Using NAMLE’s, “Is someone’s perspective or story missing?” We’re missing the perspective of a happy introvert. We’re also missing context as to Squidward’s character and motivations. Does his unhappiness stem from being an introvert or something else? The information implied is that introversion is synonymous with depression and/or mental health struggles. This is harmful because it is entirely possible for an introvert to be happy and to like who they are. This could send a negative message to children (the target audience of the show) that wanting solitude, peace, and quiet, must mean that someone is inherently unhappy. I don’t think anyone benefits from that construction.

I believe that media should include an array of perspectives from different introverts. Not every introvert has the same personality and outlook on life. Mykola Bilokonsky described the slogan, “Nothing About Us Without Us.” I think this statement can be applied here because the media should consider many introverts and not just stereotypes and generalizations. Being an introvert doesn’t automatically make a person unhappy, depressed, or lazy. Introverts can have multifaceted lives and personalities.

For this week’s blog post about controversies, conspiracies, and movements, I’ve chosen to discuss vaccines and autism. The idea that vaccines cause autism dates to a study conducted in 1998. Although this study has been heavily debunked, it has spurred the anti-vax movement that we know today.

Vaccines, especially for young children, are vital to providing immunity to potentially harmful and deadly diseases. The supposed connection between vaccines and autism has caused some parents to not vaccinate their children which has led to outbreaks of illnesses that were once eradicated due to vaccines. This supposed association also harms the autism community.

The notion that vaccines cause autism originated in 1998 when former doctor and researcher Andrew Wakefield released the results of his study in The Lancet, a prestigious medical journal. In this study, Wakefield concluded that the MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccine was linked to autism. In 2010, the study was retracted and heavily debunked. Although Wakefield was stripped of his medical license, he is still cited and regarded as an ‘expert’ in the anti-vax movement.

Social media influencers have helped spread this false claim and have furthered the anti-vax movement. 65% of vaccine disinformation on social media comes from just 12 people, referred to as the ‘Disinformation Dozen.’ This includes the Bollingers, a couple who have created a profitable empire from their vaccine disinformation and often tout the dubious claim that vaccines cause autism.

I decided to do some research on Twitter/X to see what kinds of anti-vax and autism propaganda I could find. I found this on the Bollinger’s Twitter page called, The Truth About Vaccines. The Twitter posts use the persuasion tactic of fear, which the New Mexico Media Literacy Project describes as “It uses something disliked or feared by the intended audience…Politicians and advocacy groups stoke our fears to get elected or gain support.” Parents want to protect their children and make sure that anything put in their bodies is safe, and anti-vax influencers stoke this fear. They also demonize autism and frame it as something that must be avoided.

In the Twitter post below from The Truth About Vaccines, fear is used as a tactic to persuade the intended audience that autism is a vaccine injury. The statement, “And every time we refer to our kids as autistic, we are playing right into their hands.” The medical community is framed as ‘bad’ and children must be protected from ‘them’. This is propaganda that fits with Jacques Ellul’s definition, “Propaganda is a form of information that panders to our insecurities and anxieties.”

The Twitter post below also from the same account, infers that data shows that autism rates have risen over the decades due to vaccines. This uses the persuasion tactic the New Mexico Literacy Project calls ‘scientific evidence,’ which is described as “It uses the paraphernalia of science (charts, graphs, statistics, lab coats, etc.) to “prove” something. It often works because many people trust science and scientists. It’s important to look closely at the “evidence,” however because it can be misleading.” In this Tweet, the Bollingers frame data to try to convince their audience that vaccines cause autism.

The Tweet below, again from the Bollingers, cites how Andrew Wakefield was ‘right.’ Even though his claims have been debunked, he is still cited and regarded as an expert in the anti-vax community. This uses the persuasion tactic the New Mexico Media Literacy Project calls ‘experts.” This is described as “We rely on experts to advise us about things we don’t know ourselves. Scientists, doctors, professors, and other professionals often appear in ads and advocacy messages, lending their credibility to the product, service, or idea being sold.”

An excerpt of an article from Simon Baron-Cohen, a clinical psychologist, is framed as being proof that Andrew Wakefield’s claims about vaccines causing autism were correct. It is unknown if Baron-Cohen consented to his message being used in this way.

The overwhelming majority of scientists and doctors conclude that vaccines do not cause autism, but the public is another matter. A Pew Research study from 2023 shows that Americans hold largely positive views about vaccines. The study finds that “88% of Americans say the benefits of childhood vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) outweigh the risks, compared with just 10% who say the risks outweigh the benefits.”

But there is some cause for concern as, “The share who say parents should be able to decide not to vaccinate their children now stands at 28%, up 12 points from four years ago.”

Most Americans hold positive views of vaccines, and that number has remained steady over the past four years. This could be attributed to the debunking of Andrew Wakefield’s claim that vaccines cause autism. But the anti-vax movement is gaining momentum with influencers that spread misinformation.

Reuters Fact Check: ‘Disease X’ is a preparedness scenario, not a real disease by WEF

‘Disease X’ is a term used by the WEF and WHO. It has been the subject of conspiracy theories pushed by right-wing figures and organizations that it is a real disease. One of the main conspiracy theories is that ‘Disease X’ is a new bioweapon created by globalists to wield ultimate power. Alex Jones has dubbed ‘Disease X’ as a “genocidal kill weapon.” On the far-right news organization, Newsmax, Conservative Political Action Conference chairman Matt Schlapp claimed that the globalists created ‘Disease X’ to kill off excess population and to assemble a global power grab.

Reuters is debunking the claim that ‘Disease X’ is a real disease being planned by the World Economic Forum (WEF). The annual WEF meeting took place at Davos from January 15-19, 2024. Reuters found a Facebook post that showed that at this annual WEF meeting, they would be discussing something called ‘Disease X.’

The Facebook post read, “Tomorrow, the 17^th of January the WEF will be discussing the yet-to-be-released disease x in their annual planning session at Davos.” The post included a screenshot of the planned discussion. The screenshot claimed that the World Health Organization (WHO) warned that an unknown disease called ‘Disease X’ could result in twenty times greater fatalities than COVID-19.

As part of their fact-checking process, Reuters found a recording of this meeting on the WEF website. This recording showed that the discussion surrounding ‘Disease X’ is that it is a hypothetical epidemic used as part of a preparedness plan. It is a placeholder name where ‘X’ refers to ‘unexpected’. Reuters researched the origins of ‘Disease X’ and found an article on the WEF website that showed that it’s a term used by the World Health Organization dating back to 2018. It was a term used to plan for an unexpected future epidemic and how to be sufficiently prepared for it.

Reuters obtained the 2018 Annual Review of Diseases by the World Health Organization which listed ‘Disease X’ as a priority. It said, “Disease X represents the knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease.”  A WEF representative confirmed to Reuters that ‘Disease X’ is a hypothetical scenario researched by the World Health Organization where an unknown pathogen could cause a worldwide epidemic.

The conclusion that Reuters came to is that the Facebook post and screenshot were missing context. The verdict is that ‘Disease X’ is essentially a preparedness plan conducted by the WEF and WHO for an international epidemic caused by a hypothetical pathogen. It is not an actual disease created by globalists.

Two Additional Sources:

For a factual news report on Disease X, I’ve chosen USA Today’s Disease X: What to Know about the Hypothetical Pandemic World Leaders Hope to Prevent. USA Today is a reputable news organization. I believe this article is credible news coverage because it relies on much of the same information that Reuters used to conduct its fact check, such as the 2018 Annual Review and priority list of diseases. The article also cites statistics of the Ebola outbreak which is what prompted the World Health Organization to create a preparedness plan for future epidemics.

Pew Research categorized a factual statement as whether you think it’s accurate or not. Can the statement be proved or disproved based on objective evidence? The statements in the USA Today article can be backed up with evidence by the World Health Organization.

For an opinion/analysis piece, I’ve chosen Breitbart’s ‘Disease X’ Ranks Among the Highest Potential Threats for 2024 in the U.S. Breitbart is a right-wing news organization. This is an example of an Echo Chamber, where our confirmation bias leads us to become segregated into communities where the information, we seek out confirms our beliefs and ignores or discredits information that doesn’t.

Unlike the Toronto Star which features enhanced labels for news and opinion articles, this Breitbart article features no such labels. The only label shows that this is a sponsored article from The Wellness Company. The article has some fear-mongering statements that don’t provide any objective evidence to back them up. One is, “The last pandemic swept the nation in a matter of weeks. Whether the next one ends up being a “lab accident” or full-blown bioweapon, you can’t afford to be caught off guard like before.”

Fearmongering is used to get readers to purchase a ‘Contagion Emergency Kit’ from The Wellness Company (hence why they sponsored the article). When the article discusses the Contagion Emergency Kit, it provides no objective scientific evidence as to whether it’s effective. This is why I don’t think this article is credible.

Thursday January 25^th, 2024

9:00 AM- As I’m waking up, I grab my iPhone and tap the screen, where it activates FaceID. My face is scanned to unlock my phone. Admittedly, I have never taken the time to read Apple’s Privacy Policy and my phone is set to automatically update when there’s a new software update available. It usually does this during the night.

After viewing the VPRO documentary with Shoshana Zuboff, I feel uneasy about how I allowed FaceID on my phone without reading any of the privacy policies or terms and conditions. As the documentary described, facial recognition data is being sold to third parties and in other countries such as China, it has been used to suppress people, like the Uyghurs.

9:10 AM- I check my personal AOL email and my ASU email to see if there’s anything that needs my immediate attention. I don’t know the privacy or security settings of these sites. On my ASU email, I read an announcement from my MCO 425 class and read another email notifying me that one of my assignments had been graded.

9:30 AM- I log onto Twitter/X and first look at what’s trending. Like Apple, I have never read Twitter’s privacy policy or terms. My Twitter feed mostly reflects my interests such as music, animals, art, etc. It’s just like the content I’ve liked or retweeted on Twitter before. I saw a tweet from a page I’ve regularly engaged with called @CatWorkers. It’s a tweet of a black cat at his office job and I click the heart button.

Then I saw and liked a tweet about the Beatles from another page I’ve engaged with before called @crockpics. These tweets are on my feed because Twitter’s algorithm knows that my interests are music, animals, etc. The algorithm has even more specific details such as that I’m more of a cat person and my favorite band is the Beatles. Based on my interests and previous engagement, Twitter’s algorithm pushes this type of content on my feed, such as positive posts about the Beatles and cats.

10:00 AM- I go downstairs and while I’m eating breakfast, I hop on my laptop to look at the headlines on The New York Times. One of the articles I read is about the planned execution of an inmate in Alabama, done by means that have not been done before. By clicking on and reading this article, The New York Times’ algorithm denotes this as a topic I could be interested in, and it may perhaps recommend pro-death penalty articles.

I was not aware of The New York Times settings and terms. Upon some research, The New York Times help page states, “Often, our algorithms note common topics in your reading history and recommended articles about similar topics or articles read by others with similar reading histories.”

11:00 AM- I log onto the Peacock streaming service on my smart TV and watch four episodes of The Office. The home screen shows me recommendations of shows and movies I might be interested in. Since I usually watch The Office on Peacock, I’m given recommendations for similar comedies such as Parks & Recreation and Night Court.

Their algorithm is feeding me comedies because of my previous watch history. This also causes the algorithm to not recommend things I don’t watch such as sports. I don’t know Peacock’s privacy policy or terms of service. Sometimes I watch what’s recommended to me, but I didn’t today.

1:00 PM- After watching TV, I check what’s trending on Twitter/X. Then I browsed the Temu shopping app on my phone. My homepage is filled with similar products and brands that I’ve looked at before. Based on my previously searched and viewed items, and even tracking my activity across other apps and sites, Temu’s algorithm knows I like crafts and Sanrio items. The algorithm feeds my homepage products that I will be interested in. I always click on some of the recommendations. The app even pre-typed in “diamond painting kits,” as I’ve purchased this before. I don’t know Temu’s privacy policies and terms.

1:20 PM- On my phone, I search for some recipes on Google Search to get an idea of what I’d like to make for lunch. I click on air fryer recipes on allrecipes.com. While scrolling, I came across an ad for Temu. Interesting…I was just on the app. The ad shows me products like what I’ve looked at in the past and tells me I can save up to 90%. This shows me that the Temu app is tracking my other activity so I can see ads for things I might be interested in. I didn’t click the ad.

1:40 PM- I’ve prepared lunch and as I’m eating, I hop back onto my laptop to watch some YouTube videos. I watch one of my favorite YouTubers, Nerdecrafter. They make videos of craft tutorials and product reviews. This YouTuber and similar videos are recommended to me on my homepage and the side of the screen when I’m watching a video. I click on some of the recommendations when I search “Nerdecrafter,” which feeds the algorithm.

YouTube’s algorithm knows my interests based on my search and watch history. I also noticed I get location-specific ads for restaurants and stores in my area, so the YouTube algorithm must know where I live and businesses near me probably pay for that. I don’t know YouTube’s privacy policy or what information I’ve agreed to share.

3:00 PM: I work on finishing my discussion board assignment and the next assignment for my MCO 425 class.

7:00 PM- Sitting down to eat dinner, I log onto Disney+ on my smart TV. Since I just watched The Mandalorian a few days ago, my home screen shows recommendations for other Star Wars-themed shows and movies the algorithm thinks I’ll like. I chose to watch one of their recommendations, feeding the algorithm. Once again, the algorithm has kept track of the brands and genres of content I’ve previously watched. I don’t know the details of the privacy and terms I’ve agreed to on Disney+.

10:00 PM- I listen to some music on my IHeartRadio app. I’m recommended an 80s pop station. The algorithm knows I’ve listened to this station before. As I’m listening, I notice I hear songs that I have liked on the app, so the algorithm knows to play these songs more often. Like YouTube, I’m also given location specific ads. The algorithm knows where I live and knows my musical interests. Again, I don’t know the details of the privacy and terms I’ve consented to.

11:00 PM- Before going to sleep, I read two chapters of Harry Potter and The Sorcerer’s Stone.

The theme of how I use media throughout the day is either to stay informed, be entertained and/or pass the time. I am embarrassed to admit that I don’t know the privacy policies or terms of service for any of the media content and platforms that I use and have consented to.

Honestly, I don’t know what information I’ve agreed to share with these companies. When I sign up for a service, I click that I’ve read the terms even though I haven’t. Previously, I was nonchalant as to what information these companies collected about me. I didn’t take the time to research the privacy policies of these companies.

I am reconsidering how I use media and how my information and consent are being used because I need to be aware of what these companies are collecting about me. My general likes and dislikes are one thing, but knowing where I live is a little creepy.

On top of that, these companies are selling my data to third parties. I don’t know who they are, what they’re collecting, and what they’re using it for. I intend to take the time to educate myself, such as researching companies’ privacy policies and terms before I give my consent and use the service.

One of the key aspects of media literacy as defined by NAMLE is Access. “Access is how, when, where, and how often people have access to the tools, technology, and digital skills necessary to thrive.”  Net Neutrality is the principle that internet providers should not give preferential treatment to certain content over others and that all web traffic should be treated equally to ensure the network is open and fair.

Without Net Neutrality, telecoms would have the ability to determine the speed at which we access websites, and they could favor their sites and content over their competitors. Net Neutrality goes hand in hand with people’s ability to access information. Without Net Neutrality, telecoms can charge consumers more for faster service.

One of NAMLE’s aspects of Access is that how consumers access information may determine what information they receive. Without Net Neutrality, people would have to pay extra fees to have faster access (or to access at all) reputable news sites. This could lead to people having to rely on less reputable news sites for information such as social media, where content is determined by an algorithm where they would have less exposure to diverse or differing viewpoints.

Another of NAMLE’s aspects of Access is that media literacy requires access to all information and ideas without censorship. Procon.org states that Net Neutrality is essential to preserving free speech and that it prevents internet companies from slowing down or blocking ISPs that differ from the companies’ monetary interests and/or political beliefs.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said in 2017 that removing Net Neutrality would allow ISPs to censor content online. Consumers can’t become media literate or have the information necessary to participate in civic society without Net Neutrality.

An additional aspect of Access by NAMLE is that participation in society, including the ability to receive and convey information, is a global human right. As stated by freepress.net, high-speed internet is essential in allowing to access to necessary information such as employment, health-care services, education, voting information, and emergency alerts. This information is necessary to function in everyday society.

People from marginalized communities are disproportionately affected by limited or no access and this problem worsens without Net Neutrality. Their access to essential information is impacted by paywalls as they are often at an economic disadvantage. Forbes.com describes how the internet has been essential for black entrepreneurs, particularly black women. Due to internet restrictions without Net Neutrality, it has become more difficult for black entrepreneurs to compete with wealthier companies.

Without Net Neutrality, lack of access and increased restrictions can also influence job searching where access to the internet is essential. Pew Research found that African Americans are more likely than whites to engage in online job searching. NAMLE states, “Access to information necessary for civic engagement/participation and economic growth are most needed by those from marginalized communities whose economic situation would benefit most from this information and whose voices are often underrepresented in civic life.”

Without Net Neutrality, media consumers’ access to technology, information, and ideas is put at risk. It is affected by slow speeds, paywalls and extra fees, censorship, and lack of access to vital information.

My 24-Hour Media Diary:

Tuesday January 9^th, 2024

9:00 AM- Upon waking up, I check my personal e-mail on AOL and my ASU email. I like to check if there’s anything urgent that needs my attention, and it helps me to wake up in the morning.

9:15 AM- While eating my breakfast, my family and I watch the local morning news broadcast on 3 TV. Watching this newscast helps me know what’s going on in my state and in my community.

10:00 AM- After breakfast, I hop on my laptop and peruse the headlines of the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal. I read an article about the continuing conflict between Israel and Palestine. I then read an article about the winter weather that most of the US is dealing with.

11:00 AM- I log into Twitter/X and look at what’s trending. Nothing catches my eye, so I go to my feed and like some tweets showing videos of cats doing cute things.

11:45 AM- While doing laundry and cleaning around the house, I listen to my IHeartRadio app. I listen to an 80s pop music station and then a 60s British pop music station.

1:00 PM- I go on Google search and search for a recipe I remember seeing for chicken salad so I can make it for lunch. I found the recipe and made lunch.

1:40 PM- Sitting down to eat my lunch, I pull up the Peacock streaming service on my TV and watch two episodes of The Office.

2:30 PM- I log onto Twitter/X and look at my feed and what’s trending.

2:50 PM- I decided to watch an episode of Dateline on Peacock as I’m a sucker for true crime documentaries.

4:00 PM- I log onto Canvas and check if there are any announcements for my Digital Media Literacy class that just started the day prior. Then I get started looking at this week’s learning materials, reading the articles, and watching the assigned videos.

7:00 PM- While eating dinner, my family and I watch Coco on Disney+. I purposely stay off my phone while watching a TV show/movie so that I can stay focused on it and be present when I spend time with my family.

8:50 PM- After the movie’s over, I log onto Twitter/X and scroll through some tweets on my feed.

9:20 PM- I decided to watch another two episodes of The Office on Peacock.

10:20 PM- Before going to bed, I read two chapters of Circe by Madeline Miller.

I don’t think I realized just how much media I consume in a day. My entire day was consumed by different kinds of media, if I’m not sleeping then I’m consuming some kind of media. Something I discovered about my media usage is how often I log into Twitter and how much time I spend on there. It’s something that I do when I’m bored and to pass the time. It also gives me a sense of what’s going on and if there’s anything urgent happening.

The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and my local news broadcast on 3 TV are the most credible media sources to me. The New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal aren’t perfect, but I appreciate that they will usually have a note at the bottom of the article if a correction is made. I also feel that because these are such large legacy news sources, I have a level of trust in them. Their coverage helps me feel connected to what’s going on nationally and internationally.

My local morning news broadcast on 3 TV is also a credible source for me because it helps me connect with my community and be informed about what’s going on right outside my door.

Links:

• New York Times
• Wall Street Journal
• Washington Post
• Twitter/X
• Az Family 3 TV (This is the website for the local news broadcast I watch)