After today’s class I was now also thinking about another survey I could create to discuss the students’ perception of social networks like “Facebook” or the German “StudiVZ” as a second possibility to write a paper about. Possible useful literature would be the book “The Stories of Facebook, Youtube and Myspace: The People, the Hype and the Deals Behind the Giants of Web 2.0”by Sarah Lacy or the book “Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies” by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff.
By the way, this is my new Twitter account: http://twitter.com/ChrisDortmund go and watch it!!! ;)
Monday, July 13, 2009
A very short response to Joe Trippi’s Afterword
After reading Joe Trippi’s “the Revolution will not be televised” and his entertaining Afterword I still find it very interesting how important Joe Trippi’s Howard Dean campaign became because of his innovative use of the World Wide Web. For the very first time Joe Trippi created an official campaign blog and moreover, he used different social networks on the Internet to connect Dean’s political supporters. Today these techniques are used by many other social and political campaigns and show how innovative Joe Trippi as campaign worker was.
The mentioned fact in the Afterword that Joe Trippi fell ill after the Dean campaign and that Howard Dean replaced him as campaign manager after consecutively losing the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary seemed to be a tragedy and a lucky chance for him at once. After all, Trippi finally signed on as a commentator for MSNBC and started his own consultancy, Trippi & Associates.
The mentioned fact in the Afterword that Joe Trippi fell ill after the Dean campaign and that Howard Dean replaced him as campaign manager after consecutively losing the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary seemed to be a tragedy and a lucky chance for him at once. After all, Trippi finally signed on as a commentator for MSNBC and started his own consultancy, Trippi & Associates.
Moment of Zen 06/30/09
When I saw today’s Internet research study
on the worldwide use of the Internet where they for example compared Germany and their users to the US American users I was thinking about a first idea of writing a paper in this course. I am still not convinced of what exactly I should write about, but I am now thinking about a survey I could create to see how young German students in school use the Internet today and to compare my results to the interesting study on the Internet I already mentioned above. Furthermore, I could analyze them to finally see what this could mean for the German society among the other great nations. I could hand in this survey in the German school classes/years 5 and 6 because I am already working at a school with these age groups.
http://www.forrester.com/Groundswell/profile_tool.html
on the worldwide use of the Internet where they for example compared Germany and their users to the US American users I was thinking about a first idea of writing a paper in this course. I am still not convinced of what exactly I should write about, but I am now thinking about a survey I could create to see how young German students in school use the Internet today and to compare my results to the interesting study on the Internet I already mentioned above. Furthermore, I could analyze them to finally see what this could mean for the German society among the other great nations. I could hand in this survey in the German school classes/years 5 and 6 because I am already working at a school with these age groups.
http://www.forrester.com/Groundswell/profile_tool.html
Monday, June 22, 2009
Why is he US voting/electoral system so difficult and apparently disused?
Last Tuesday we talked about the US voting system and I am still confused how this system today works and why they still have such an old and disused indirect electoral system in the United States. Congressional elections in the United States take place every two years and the US Congress has two different chambers.
First of all, the House of Representatives in the US has 435 members. They are elected for a two year term in single-seat constituencies, therefore the elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years.
Secondly, the US Senate has 100 members. The Senate elections also take place every two years, but the members will be elected for a six year term in dual-seat constituencies/two members from each state/ with only one-third being renewed every two years.
Furthermore, the most important US Presidential elections only take place every four years. The year the US Presidential elections take place must be divisible by four; therefore the last election we all should still remember was in 2008. US President Barack Obama and his Vice President Joe Biden were elected together in this Presidential election. Today’s Presidential elections are still indirect in the United States and Congressional elections which do not take place together with these Presidential elections are called mid-term elections.
As I already said in my initial paragraph the US Presidential elections are still indirect today. The winner and therefore the new US President will be determined by electors of the so-called United States Electoral College. This means that the voters in each State of the United States select a slate of electors from a list of several slates designated by different parties or candidates. These electors have to promise in advance to vote for the candidates of their party. The winner of the election will be the one with at least 270 Electoral votes.
Today the US Electoral College consists of 538 electors. 435 of them come from the 50 different US States, depending on the number of districts they have, therefore depending on the population of each State. California for example, as one of the biggest States has 53 different districts, which means 53 representatives/electors. There is also the group of 100 Senators as electors, two from each State plus 3 Delegates directly from Washington. Altogether a number of 538 electors finally elect the new US President.
The indirect US electoral system is often criticized for being undemocratic by definition because of its already mentioned indirectness on the one hand and for several other reasons on the other hand. There is for example the problem with the so-called swing States, like Florida. These States are States in which no candidate has overwhelming support; therefore any of the major candidates have a reasonable chance of winning the Electoral College votes of the State. Therefore, the voters in these swing States often determine the outcome of the US Presidential election and the majority of Americans, who do not live in these States, are largely ignored by most of the political campaigns. Moreover, a lot of very small US States is better represented by the Electoral College than other much bigger and much more important States. These smaller States seem to be overrepresented compared with voters from larger States like California.
All these above mentioned facts finally show the necessity to abolish the old indirect US electoral system and to replace it with a modern national direct system. The US electoral system is criticized so often and I think it is time to replace it in order to still provide a role model (voting system) for other countries worldwide, like Iran. ;)
First of all, the House of Representatives in the US has 435 members. They are elected for a two year term in single-seat constituencies, therefore the elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years.
Secondly, the US Senate has 100 members. The Senate elections also take place every two years, but the members will be elected for a six year term in dual-seat constituencies/two members from each state/ with only one-third being renewed every two years.
Furthermore, the most important US Presidential elections only take place every four years. The year the US Presidential elections take place must be divisible by four; therefore the last election we all should still remember was in 2008. US President Barack Obama and his Vice President Joe Biden were elected together in this Presidential election. Today’s Presidential elections are still indirect in the United States and Congressional elections which do not take place together with these Presidential elections are called mid-term elections.
As I already said in my initial paragraph the US Presidential elections are still indirect today. The winner and therefore the new US President will be determined by electors of the so-called United States Electoral College. This means that the voters in each State of the United States select a slate of electors from a list of several slates designated by different parties or candidates. These electors have to promise in advance to vote for the candidates of their party. The winner of the election will be the one with at least 270 Electoral votes.
Today the US Electoral College consists of 538 electors. 435 of them come from the 50 different US States, depending on the number of districts they have, therefore depending on the population of each State. California for example, as one of the biggest States has 53 different districts, which means 53 representatives/electors. There is also the group of 100 Senators as electors, two from each State plus 3 Delegates directly from Washington. Altogether a number of 538 electors finally elect the new US President.
The indirect US electoral system is often criticized for being undemocratic by definition because of its already mentioned indirectness on the one hand and for several other reasons on the other hand. There is for example the problem with the so-called swing States, like Florida. These States are States in which no candidate has overwhelming support; therefore any of the major candidates have a reasonable chance of winning the Electoral College votes of the State. Therefore, the voters in these swing States often determine the outcome of the US Presidential election and the majority of Americans, who do not live in these States, are largely ignored by most of the political campaigns. Moreover, a lot of very small US States is better represented by the Electoral College than other much bigger and much more important States. These smaller States seem to be overrepresented compared with voters from larger States like California.
All these above mentioned facts finally show the necessity to abolish the old indirect US electoral system and to replace it with a modern national direct system. The US electoral system is criticized so often and I think it is time to replace it in order to still provide a role model (voting system) for other countries worldwide, like Iran. ;)
Moment of Zen 06/16/09
I am still wondering why the United States of America always criticize other countries worldwide for example for their voting systems. For sure, the indirect electoral system they have is a democratic voting system, but it is not that democratic like a much more direct voting system would be. The United States should still provide a role model for countries like Iran to show how a democratic voting system works and with such an old system they still have I think it is not the best way to support the thought of democracy in America or in other countries worldwide.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Moment of Zen 06/02/09
Is a conversation on a web based social network much more impersonal than a face-to-face conversation in reality and are we all today pushed to be part of such “web based” social networks? These were two different questions I am still thinking about after class.
Although I think it definitely depends on anyone’s personal opinion to decide either to prefer a personal conversation or to use one of many ways for web based social network members to interact, in my opinion a web based social network conversation is much more impersonal because you do not see your opponent and you cannot use any facial expression to clarify what you mean or how you mean it.
For sure, you could also use some “smileys” on the Internet to somehow “substitute” such facial expressions, but such a conversation still remains much more impersonal FOR ME. As long as I am an open-minded person I would prefer personal conversations instead of hiding behind an Internet profile or character. Even though this definitely provides a great opportunity for a lot of people to pretend a person they do not really are.
Furthermore, I think it is really difficult to say whether today we all are pushed to be part of a “web based” social network or not. As I already said in the fishbowl conversation in class, my best friend does not participate in any of these new media or social network tools, such as Facebook or MySpace. Although he is really computer literate and interested in the Internet as such, he never registered himself on any social network and he is definitely still alive. ;) He has got a girlfriend and he lives a normal life with friends like me and a good job.
I do not know why it is such a necessity today to join a social network. Although my best friend never did it, millions of other Internet users like me already participate on Facebook or StudiVZ and could not imagine a life without such social networks any more. I like the idea of searching for former class mates from school, but I do not use these social networks to simply “collect” friends or contacts to “put on the dog”. A handful of such friends are real friends of mine and I still have the opportunity to meet them in real life and a lot of these called “friends” are people I had to confirm to add to my “contact list” to be polite, but I do not want to meet them ever again in reality.
So, why do we register on such social networks on the Internet? All these above mentioned facts clearly show that we do not have to and that we are not really pushed to be part of such online communities. Is it just the curiosity to join in a conversation about Facebook or MySpace or what else? I can not give a precise answer at the moment, but I will keep on thinking about it to hopefully find an answer for me in the future.
Although I think it definitely depends on anyone’s personal opinion to decide either to prefer a personal conversation or to use one of many ways for web based social network members to interact, in my opinion a web based social network conversation is much more impersonal because you do not see your opponent and you cannot use any facial expression to clarify what you mean or how you mean it.
For sure, you could also use some “smileys” on the Internet to somehow “substitute” such facial expressions, but such a conversation still remains much more impersonal FOR ME. As long as I am an open-minded person I would prefer personal conversations instead of hiding behind an Internet profile or character. Even though this definitely provides a great opportunity for a lot of people to pretend a person they do not really are.
Furthermore, I think it is really difficult to say whether today we all are pushed to be part of a “web based” social network or not. As I already said in the fishbowl conversation in class, my best friend does not participate in any of these new media or social network tools, such as Facebook or MySpace. Although he is really computer literate and interested in the Internet as such, he never registered himself on any social network and he is definitely still alive. ;) He has got a girlfriend and he lives a normal life with friends like me and a good job.
I do not know why it is such a necessity today to join a social network. Although my best friend never did it, millions of other Internet users like me already participate on Facebook or StudiVZ and could not imagine a life without such social networks any more. I like the idea of searching for former class mates from school, but I do not use these social networks to simply “collect” friends or contacts to “put on the dog”. A handful of such friends are real friends of mine and I still have the opportunity to meet them in real life and a lot of these called “friends” are people I had to confirm to add to my “contact list” to be polite, but I do not want to meet them ever again in reality.
So, why do we register on such social networks on the Internet? All these above mentioned facts clearly show that we do not have to and that we are not really pushed to be part of such online communities. Is it just the curiosity to join in a conversation about Facebook or MySpace or what else? I can not give a precise answer at the moment, but I will keep on thinking about it to hopefully find an answer for me in the future.
What is a social network?
On Tuesday we had another great Fishbowl conversation which was much more interesting than it was last time. We had a discussion on social networks. What is a social network in general?
First of all, it was and still is really hard to give a precise definition of what a social network is because there are always two different meanings we all directly associate with the term social network.
On the one hand, the term social network defines a “new” network today we all know from the Internet. I mean social network websites like Facebook, MySpace or the German version of Facebook called StudiVZ/MeinVZ which are being used regularly by millions of people worldwide. These are all different types of social networks which focus on building online communities of people who for example share interests or other activities or who are interested in “spying on” someone’s interests or activities. ;)
These social networks are web based; they provide a variety of ways for users to interact, such as e-mail and instant messaging services and they of course have encouraged new ways to communicate and share information. These social networks provide lots of different advantages as well as disadvantages and people do not necessarily share opinions.
On the other hand, we came up with the term “biological network” which we defined to distinguish between the two “ideas” of the already above mentioned web based social network and the traditional social network based on social relationships which I am going to explain a bit more now.
Such a “biological” social network is something we could also call a social structure and it is based on social relationships in our “real lives”, for instance a friendship, a sports club or the simple relation in a neighborhood.
Interestingly, the creators of Facebook and MySpace or other Internet users invented the term social network to name a type of new media and thereby used a term we already had in our lives before, moreover they used an ambiguity, maybe to simplify the usage of such new tools or to familiarize the Internet users with them.
Incidentally, we compared such “biological” social networks to our biological fathers and furthermore, we compared the “web based” social network to a possible stepfather what I found very strange as well as funny and interesting.
Finally, we also said that a conversation on a web based social network is much more impersonal than a face-to-face conversation in reality and we came up with the thesis that today we all are pushed to be part of such a social network on the Internet. These are two points I will focus on in my “Moment of Zen” now.
First of all, it was and still is really hard to give a precise definition of what a social network is because there are always two different meanings we all directly associate with the term social network.
On the one hand, the term social network defines a “new” network today we all know from the Internet. I mean social network websites like Facebook, MySpace or the German version of Facebook called StudiVZ/MeinVZ which are being used regularly by millions of people worldwide. These are all different types of social networks which focus on building online communities of people who for example share interests or other activities or who are interested in “spying on” someone’s interests or activities. ;)
These social networks are web based; they provide a variety of ways for users to interact, such as e-mail and instant messaging services and they of course have encouraged new ways to communicate and share information. These social networks provide lots of different advantages as well as disadvantages and people do not necessarily share opinions.
On the other hand, we came up with the term “biological network” which we defined to distinguish between the two “ideas” of the already above mentioned web based social network and the traditional social network based on social relationships which I am going to explain a bit more now.
Such a “biological” social network is something we could also call a social structure and it is based on social relationships in our “real lives”, for instance a friendship, a sports club or the simple relation in a neighborhood.
Interestingly, the creators of Facebook and MySpace or other Internet users invented the term social network to name a type of new media and thereby used a term we already had in our lives before, moreover they used an ambiguity, maybe to simplify the usage of such new tools or to familiarize the Internet users with them.
Incidentally, we compared such “biological” social networks to our biological fathers and furthermore, we compared the “web based” social network to a possible stepfather what I found very strange as well as funny and interesting.
Finally, we also said that a conversation on a web based social network is much more impersonal than a face-to-face conversation in reality and we came up with the thesis that today we all are pushed to be part of such a social network on the Internet. These are two points I will focus on in my “Moment of Zen” now.
Monday, June 1, 2009
New Media: Helpful or dangerous?
Today we had a discussion about new media. Are new media only a kind of a new useful tool or technical device which helps us to live an easier life, therefore a life we never had before or are new media dangerous as well?
We started this discussion in our Fishbowl exercise which I attended and I found the idea of the danger of new media very interesting. Of course, I asked myself very often before about the danger of new media, but I never had such an interesting and versatile discussion containing such a variety of different arguments/pros and cons/ concerning new media before.
On the one hand, today there are many different types of “useful” new media, such as: Internet, E-Mail, DVD, Blu-ray, CD-ROM, MP3 and so on. These are all new digital “tools”, but definitely very useful to make our lives easier.
On the other hand new media also turned out to be very dangerous as well. There are millions of Internet users who misuse the World Wide Web every day by for example uploading and downloading Child pornography materials. Moreover, new media and especially the Internet provide a platform for pedophiles as well as for other criminals. So, what about the fast growing numbers of cybercrimes like Child pornography or cyber bullying on Facebook for example?
There is also the point of cyber addiction when people for example live a second life on the Internet (e.g. World of Warcraft) and are not able to handle their usual lives any more.
All these above mentioned facts are just some examples, but clearly show the danger of new media in our today’s society. Although there are various advantages of new media on the one hand there are also several disadvantages of new media on the other hand as well. New media are still so very young in our today’s world and the future will hopefully show how useful or how dangerous new media really are.
We started this discussion in our Fishbowl exercise which I attended and I found the idea of the danger of new media very interesting. Of course, I asked myself very often before about the danger of new media, but I never had such an interesting and versatile discussion containing such a variety of different arguments/pros and cons/ concerning new media before.
On the one hand, today there are many different types of “useful” new media, such as: Internet, E-Mail, DVD, Blu-ray, CD-ROM, MP3 and so on. These are all new digital “tools”, but definitely very useful to make our lives easier.
On the other hand new media also turned out to be very dangerous as well. There are millions of Internet users who misuse the World Wide Web every day by for example uploading and downloading Child pornography materials. Moreover, new media and especially the Internet provide a platform for pedophiles as well as for other criminals. So, what about the fast growing numbers of cybercrimes like Child pornography or cyber bullying on Facebook for example?
There is also the point of cyber addiction when people for example live a second life on the Internet (e.g. World of Warcraft) and are not able to handle their usual lives any more.
All these above mentioned facts are just some examples, but clearly show the danger of new media in our today’s society. Although there are various advantages of new media on the one hand there are also several disadvantages of new media on the other hand as well. New media are still so very young in our today’s world and the future will hopefully show how useful or how dangerous new media really are.
Moment of Zen 05/26/09
This time I am going to write about something I enjoyed this week in our seminar session:
What I definitely liked today was the introduction of a new method I never heard about before. The Fishbowl exercise/method was completely new for me, but it was very interesting and helpful at once. Although I was one of the “volunteers” ;) who had to participate in the Fishbowl exercise I found it very informative and it also was very easy to take an active part in the discussion because the topic “new media” was and still is that important and interesting for me. In conclusion, today I came across a new method which I will definitely use in future as prospective teacher as well. As part of the Fishbowl exercise I had the great opportunity to practice my English and it also provided me some good ideas to sum up some of the last sessions we had before. I am really looking forward to learning more about such useful methods. Thumbs up! :)
What I definitely liked today was the introduction of a new method I never heard about before. The Fishbowl exercise/method was completely new for me, but it was very interesting and helpful at once. Although I was one of the “volunteers” ;) who had to participate in the Fishbowl exercise I found it very informative and it also was very easy to take an active part in the discussion because the topic “new media” was and still is that important and interesting for me. In conclusion, today I came across a new method which I will definitely use in future as prospective teacher as well. As part of the Fishbowl exercise I had the great opportunity to practice my English and it also provided me some good ideas to sum up some of the last sessions we had before. I am really looking forward to learning more about such useful methods. Thumbs up! :)
Yahoo! Buzz
A social content website
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
• “On February 26th 2008 “Yahoo!” created a community-based news article website called “Yahoo! Buzz” where it is free to register on
• The website combines the two features of social bookmarking and syndication through a user interface that allows editorial control, Yahoo! Buzz allows the user to modify their submission
• Users can publish own news stories, they can also link to their own or another one’s website which then links to a full story of this given information
• Yahoo! Buzz is creating a larger market for sites that research and publish their own news articles and stories, such as CNN or other much smaller websites”
Potential basic idea:
• “Yahoo! itself wanted to drive larger traffic to their own “yahoo.com” website and hoped that it would give them an advantage over larger online media competitor companies like Google, the well-known largest website in terms of search engines”
How to use Yahoo! Buzz:
Buzzing is pretty easy. First of all, you have to register yourself on http://buzz.yahoo.com/. Secondly, you will find the “Submit a story” link on the right hand of the website. You will have to click on this link and then you will find a new web form to fill out. On this web form you will have to link your story, you will have to give the title of your story, a description, you will have to choose the category of your story and finally you will have to name the sort of your new article, which means if it is a text, a picture or a video. In the end you will get the opportunity to preview your article or story, now you only have to click on submit to put your story online.
Any unknown terms and definitions?
Social bookmarking: “a method for Internet users to store, organize, search, and manage their bookmarks of web pages on the Internet with the help of metadata”
Metadata: “information about data. It is comparable to the traditional “bibliographical data” of books and articles in the sphere of print media”
Syndication: “to publish or broadcast simultaneously in a number of media”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_buzz 10/05/2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_buzz 10/05/2009
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewUnsolvedquery.php?idThread=666997&idForum=2&lp=ende&lang=de 10/05/2009
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewWrongentry.php?idThread=50920&idForum=3&lp=ende&lang=de 10/05/2009
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/syndicate?view=uk 10/05/2009
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
• “On February 26th 2008 “Yahoo!” created a community-based news article website called “Yahoo! Buzz” where it is free to register on
• The website combines the two features of social bookmarking and syndication through a user interface that allows editorial control, Yahoo! Buzz allows the user to modify their submission
• Users can publish own news stories, they can also link to their own or another one’s website which then links to a full story of this given information
• Yahoo! Buzz is creating a larger market for sites that research and publish their own news articles and stories, such as CNN or other much smaller websites”
Potential basic idea:
• “Yahoo! itself wanted to drive larger traffic to their own “yahoo.com” website and hoped that it would give them an advantage over larger online media competitor companies like Google, the well-known largest website in terms of search engines”
How to use Yahoo! Buzz:
Buzzing is pretty easy. First of all, you have to register yourself on http://buzz.yahoo.com/. Secondly, you will find the “Submit a story” link on the right hand of the website. You will have to click on this link and then you will find a new web form to fill out. On this web form you will have to link your story, you will have to give the title of your story, a description, you will have to choose the category of your story and finally you will have to name the sort of your new article, which means if it is a text, a picture or a video. In the end you will get the opportunity to preview your article or story, now you only have to click on submit to put your story online.
Any unknown terms and definitions?
Social bookmarking: “a method for Internet users to store, organize, search, and manage their bookmarks of web pages on the Internet with the help of metadata”
Metadata: “information about data. It is comparable to the traditional “bibliographical data” of books and articles in the sphere of print media”
Syndication: “to publish or broadcast simultaneously in a number of media”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_buzz 10/05/2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_buzz 10/05/2009
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewUnsolvedquery.php?idThread=666997&idForum=2&lp=ende&lang=de 10/05/2009
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewWrongentry.php?idThread=50920&idForum=3&lp=ende&lang=de 10/05/2009
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/syndicate?view=uk 10/05/2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
Angels and Demons (film)
Last Saturday I and my girlfriend went to the cinema to watch the new film adaption of Dan Brown’s famous novel “Angels and Demons”. Although the film was thrilling and eventful at once, it was too long and sometimes too “modified” on the other hand. I read the book a few months ago and it is still one of my favourites. The fact that I liked the book that much was one of the reasons why I was really looking forward to watching the new film version in the cinema.
Now, after watching it I have to say that I am really disappointed of the result. I found it very disappointing to compare this new film to Dan Brown’s famous novel. The novel was not only much more interesting and thrilling than the film was, unfortunately and much more important was the fact that the film version sometimes was completely different from the great novel.
For example, there was no Leonardo Vetra in the film. The killed person in the beginning of the film was not the famous scholar and father of Vittoria Vetra; it was “just” a colleague of her whose name I cannot remember. Moreover, one of the four kidnapped and later on killed “preferred” Cardinals in the novel was Cardinal Baggia from Italy who interestingly survived the assassinator in the film and finally became pope. In the film there was also no fight in the fountain where Cardinal Baggia was rescued now. In contrast to the film, in the novel Cardinal Baggia died in a fountain and there was a fight between the assassinator and Robert Langdon, the American scholar of history who wanted to rescue the Cardinal.
All these above mentioned facts and lots of other differences made the film that uninteresting for me and I would not recommend watching the film to those who already read the novel. In conclusion, I can understand some changes of the film version in order to shorten the length, but I cannot understand why the filmmakers also changed some names of the protagonists and why they left some good thrilling scenes, especially in the end of the film.
http://www.angelsanddemons.com/
Now, after watching it I have to say that I am really disappointed of the result. I found it very disappointing to compare this new film to Dan Brown’s famous novel. The novel was not only much more interesting and thrilling than the film was, unfortunately and much more important was the fact that the film version sometimes was completely different from the great novel.
For example, there was no Leonardo Vetra in the film. The killed person in the beginning of the film was not the famous scholar and father of Vittoria Vetra; it was “just” a colleague of her whose name I cannot remember. Moreover, one of the four kidnapped and later on killed “preferred” Cardinals in the novel was Cardinal Baggia from Italy who interestingly survived the assassinator in the film and finally became pope. In the film there was also no fight in the fountain where Cardinal Baggia was rescued now. In contrast to the film, in the novel Cardinal Baggia died in a fountain and there was a fight between the assassinator and Robert Langdon, the American scholar of history who wanted to rescue the Cardinal.
All these above mentioned facts and lots of other differences made the film that uninteresting for me and I would not recommend watching the film to those who already read the novel. In conclusion, I can understand some changes of the film version in order to shorten the length, but I cannot understand why the filmmakers also changed some names of the protagonists and why they left some good thrilling scenes, especially in the end of the film.
http://www.angelsanddemons.com/
Moment of Zen 05/12/09
I am still asking myself if I will ever use some of these “new media” websites/tools we discussed in class. After our group discussion on these “new media” tools I must say that I am still interested to check them, but I cannot see how I could profit from these “new media” tools like Yahoo! Buzz. I had to prepare a handout on a “new media” tool called Yahoo! Buzz and I was very unhappy about the fact that Yahoo itself, by creating Yahoo! Buzz just wanted to drive larger traffic to their own website and that Yahoo hoped that it would give them an advantage over larger online media competitor companies, such as Google, the well-known largest website in terms of search engines. Therefore, I could see Yahoo’s personal benefit on the one hand, but I could not see any public utility on the other hand. Finally, I am really looking forward to learning more about the other “new media” tools and hopefully they will be much more useful for me than Yahoo! Buzz is.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Moment of Zen 05/05/09
The most astonishing fact about last weeks presentations on the old traditional media was the idea of the “printed” book as a traditional medium which still exists and which will supposedly survive all the other upcoming changes of the new media as well. I was wondering whether the traditional book will really survive the next modern era of the so-called new invented ebook. On the one hand the medium book exists for hundreds of years and is still that important today, but on the other hand the new ebook has got several advantages a book never had and will never have. On the one hand, it is much more comfortable to travel with a slim ebook than to travel with a traditional hardcover. On the other hand, an ebook is very expensive and what happens in case of low battery? I will always prefer traditional books instead of ebooks because I definitely like the idea of having a hardcover in hand and I also prefer to keep and collect the books after reading. All these above mentioned facts make it that interesting for me to see what will happen to the traditional books in the future and I am really looking forward to reading my next “printed” book.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Moment of Zen 04/28/09
What are the main differences between old traditional and new media?
What will be the "next" upcoming new media in the future and how useful will them be?
Why do porn websites play such an "important" role on the Internet?
What will be the "next" upcoming new media in the future and how useful will them be?
Why do porn websites play such an "important" role on the Internet?
Carl Djerassi
Recently there has been much discussion about the awarding of an honorary doctorate to Carl Djerassi by the TU Dortmund, Germany. Carl Djerassi was awarded the honorary doctorate by the TU Dortmund, Germany last Thursday April 23rd because of his literary works and not because of his worldwide success as chemist. It was Carl Djerassis’s 21st award to honor his works, but he was awarded for the very first time ever because of his literary works and he was awarded for the first time by a German university.
Actually, Carl Djerassi, a chemist, novelist and Professor of chemistry at the Stanford University, USA is best known as the father of the so-called Pill, thus as the inventor of the first oral contraceptive pill. The also called birth-control pill made and still makes it possible for many heterosexual couples and other heterosexual people to have sex without getting pregnant, therefore to decide when and with whom a woman wants to have a baby. The development of “the Pill” was a major breakthrough the scholarship and the whole world, especially the “women’s world” experienced in the mid of the past 20th century. “The Pill” and therefore Carl Djerassi allow women great latitude and for sure the men do benefit as well.
A great latitude Carl Djerassi himself really had to fight for to resume his own liberty. Born in Vienna, Austria in 1923 he was forced to flee from Austria in 1938 because of his Jewish background. When Austria became part of “Nazi Germany” it was to dangerous for Carl Djerassi and his Jewish mother to stay in Austria and they decided to escape to Sofia, Bulgaria where they already used to live until Carl was five years old when his parents broke up. Carl’s father was a Bulgarian Jew and he still lived in Sofia when he decided to remarry Carl’s mother in order to protect Carl Djerassi and her against Nazi Germany and against its leader Adolf Hitler. Later on Carl Djerassi went to the American College of Sofia where he attained fluency in English. In 1939 Carl Djerassi and his mother emigrated to the United States of America where Carl made his career and became one of the most important, maybe “the most important” chemist worldwide.
Last Thursday evening I attended the awarding of the honorary doctorate to Carl Djerassi by the TU Dortmund, Germany and I found it very interesting that Professor Grünzweig among other things called Carl Djerassi a “Kulturtourist” or a “Kosmopolit”. Indeed, it is interesting and difficult to say to which culture or nation Carl Djerassi exactly belongs. He is born in Austria, half Bulgarian and spent almost all his life in the United States. He also was awarded by so many different institutions and universities of so many different countries all around the world what makes him a so-called “cosmopolitan” and what makes it nearly impossible to say to which culture Djerassi now belongs or to which culture he feels he belongs to. How does Carl Djerassi define cultural identity for himself as a “Kulturtourist”? Is it for example like Stuart Hall defines cultural identity, thus a shared culture, but one true self besides others?
All this above mentioned facts and Carl Djerassis’s “second string to his bow” as a novelist and playwright make Carl Djerassi so interesting and impressive and it makes me think about cultural identity and cross-cultural literature more than ever before.
www.djerassi.com
www.tu-dortmund.de
Actually, Carl Djerassi, a chemist, novelist and Professor of chemistry at the Stanford University, USA is best known as the father of the so-called Pill, thus as the inventor of the first oral contraceptive pill. The also called birth-control pill made and still makes it possible for many heterosexual couples and other heterosexual people to have sex without getting pregnant, therefore to decide when and with whom a woman wants to have a baby. The development of “the Pill” was a major breakthrough the scholarship and the whole world, especially the “women’s world” experienced in the mid of the past 20th century. “The Pill” and therefore Carl Djerassi allow women great latitude and for sure the men do benefit as well.
A great latitude Carl Djerassi himself really had to fight for to resume his own liberty. Born in Vienna, Austria in 1923 he was forced to flee from Austria in 1938 because of his Jewish background. When Austria became part of “Nazi Germany” it was to dangerous for Carl Djerassi and his Jewish mother to stay in Austria and they decided to escape to Sofia, Bulgaria where they already used to live until Carl was five years old when his parents broke up. Carl’s father was a Bulgarian Jew and he still lived in Sofia when he decided to remarry Carl’s mother in order to protect Carl Djerassi and her against Nazi Germany and against its leader Adolf Hitler. Later on Carl Djerassi went to the American College of Sofia where he attained fluency in English. In 1939 Carl Djerassi and his mother emigrated to the United States of America where Carl made his career and became one of the most important, maybe “the most important” chemist worldwide.
Last Thursday evening I attended the awarding of the honorary doctorate to Carl Djerassi by the TU Dortmund, Germany and I found it very interesting that Professor Grünzweig among other things called Carl Djerassi a “Kulturtourist” or a “Kosmopolit”. Indeed, it is interesting and difficult to say to which culture or nation Carl Djerassi exactly belongs. He is born in Austria, half Bulgarian and spent almost all his life in the United States. He also was awarded by so many different institutions and universities of so many different countries all around the world what makes him a so-called “cosmopolitan” and what makes it nearly impossible to say to which culture Djerassi now belongs or to which culture he feels he belongs to. How does Carl Djerassi define cultural identity for himself as a “Kulturtourist”? Is it for example like Stuart Hall defines cultural identity, thus a shared culture, but one true self besides others?
All this above mentioned facts and Carl Djerassis’s “second string to his bow” as a novelist and playwright make Carl Djerassi so interesting and impressive and it makes me think about cultural identity and cross-cultural literature more than ever before.
www.djerassi.com
www.tu-dortmund.de
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
_edited.JPG)