Laura Nolan - Manifesto

1. We should not attempt to turn our world into a game just because we may feel a sense of achievement and satisfaction while playing certain video games.

Many people use different technologies as a way to escape reality, but now it is being taken a step further. People who feel they are not given enough opportunities to feel the same kind of achievement and satisfaction they do while playing video games are now turning their real worlds into video games in order to feel that feeling of achievement and satisfaction. In her book Reality Is Broken Jane McGonigal even talks about the game she invented, where she takes on a secret identity, called Buffy the Concussion Slayer, to get over her concussion.

This statement was adopted because people should not be trying to substitute the real world with video games. If we were to make our world into a video game we would lose all concepts of what is reality and what is fantasy, because at the end of the day video games are fantasies and the real world is reality. It is important that people do not mix the two because, “Having a firm grip on reality is part of being a sane human being.” (Chaplin, 2).

It is important to consider this statement because people need to be able to separate fantasy and reality.

Source: Chaplin, Heather. “I Don’t Want to be a Superhero: Ditching reality for a game isn’t as fun as it sounds.” Slate. 29 March 2011. Web.

2. We ought to embrace technology, but not allow it to replace human face-to-face interaction.

Though technology allows us to communicate with people from as far away as other countries, it is eliminating the need for human face-to-face interaction. We need to embrace technology because it allows us to communicate and meet people from all over the world, but we cannot forget that face-to-face interaction is a vital component of communication and developing and maintaining relationships.

Face-to-face interaction is crucial in communicating and developing and continuing relationships because when you are face-to-face you are able to not only hear what the person is saying, but see what they are saying. Seeing how the other person reacts to what you say, seeing their facial expressions, seeing their hand gestures, are all important aspects of communication that are eliminated by technology.

This normative statement should be taken into consideration because it is an issue that is not only affecting us, but will have an even greater impact on future generations. Technology is only getting better and more powerful, and while that is a good thing, we need to be careful that it does not take over and that we maintain face-to-face interaction.

Source: Classmates. “Question Forum 1, Question 3.” Living Through Technology. 31 Jan. 2011. Web.

3. Social sway marketing ought to take the place of traditional advertising and marketing.

The definition of social sway marketing is “marketing with people, to influence others for behavior change” (PPT). Social sway marketing is important in today’s culture due to the fact that people are focused on individuality rather than the masses.

This new type of marketing must be adopted in order for consumers to connect with marketers and buy their products. For example, pitching a product to customers through Twitter has a greater impact on attracting those customers than it does displaying the product on a television commercial. Although many people remain skeptical of social sway marketing, it is important for companies to begin adopting these new techniques in order to remain current and relevant with their ever-evolving, technologically savvy customers.

This normative statement should be considered due to its importance in today’s society. Social sway marketing is a very new concept, and it is something that marketers, digital media personnel, and advertisers are gaining knowledge about, so we will be seeing much more of it in the coming years.

Source: Bernoff, Josh and Li, Charlene. Why the Groundswell – and Why Now? : Social Technologies Are Here to Stay. Harvard Business Press, 2008. Print.

4. Digitalized books should not be viewed as taking away the value of books, but instead giving us the convenience of having millions of books at our fingertips.

Digitalized books give us great convenience by allowing us to store hundreds of books in one source. Through digitalized books, such as kindles, we are able to also download a book anytime, anywhere. If my friend was talking about a great book she heard of I can immediately download it through my kindle and have it instantly.

In his article “Book Lovers Fear Dim Future for Notes in the Margins” Dirk Johnson talks about his worries of how books will fit into the digitalized world. He talks about how the value of books, such as the notes written in the margins by authors, will disappear in the new digitalized world. I do not see a reason why the value of a book has to disappear in digitalized books because who says authors can’t make comments through these digitalized books by typing them in?

This statement was adopted because people should not fear that a books value would drop because of digitalized books. People should see these digitalized books as a positive step forward in technology because they can now download a book whenever they want. If it is 10 o’clock at night and someone wants to read a book, they can. If someone is at the airport and their flight is delayed, they can download a new book to read to pass the time. Digitalized books provide such convenience that it is hard not to like and embrace them.

This statement is important to consider because people need to realize that digitalized books are not going to take away the value of books, but give us great convenience and accessibility to books.

Source: Johnson, Dirk. “Book Lovers Fear Dim Future for Notes in the Margins.” The New York Times. 20 Feb. 2011. Web.

Siegel, Lee. “The Digital Lives of Babies.” The New York Times. 18 Feb. 2011. Web.

5. We should remember that just because a new version of a technology comes onto the market, we do not need to upgrade to it.

When a new upgrade of a technology comes out everyone will rush to the store to buy it, a classic example of this is the iPhone. People were ordering the new iPhone 4 before it even came out, and once it did come out hundreds of people waited in line to purchase it, even though there is not that much of a difference between their “old” iPhone 3 and the iPhone 4. We do not always need to upgrade to every new version of a technology that comes out because most of the time the upgrade has little differences from the old version.

We tend to get materialistic with technology and always want the latest versions, but we need to remember that sometimes the new upgrade has little difference from the old one. Many limitations can come into play with people upgrading, such as a lack of money, but if nothing were in the way the majority of people would upgrade if given the chance. Sometimes it is good to upgrade, like if you travel a lot and your GPS has outdated maps, but most of the time upgrading is just for status or materialistic reasons.

This statement is important to consider because we are all guilty of upgrading at one point or another, even when the differences between the versions is next to nothing.

Source: Classmates. “Question Forum 4, Question 1.” Living Through Technology. 31 Jan. 2011. Web.

6. We should not panic if social media tools temporarily shut down.

People use various social media tools countless times a day, whether it is their cell phone, Facebook, Twitter, etc. One time I was out with my friend and her cellphone died. She became so panicked as if the world was coming to an end and we had to immediately go to her car so she could charge her phone. We have become so used to using various media tools throughout the day that we feel that we cannot live without them, but we can. Instead of running to go charge a cell phone when it dies, people need to realize that it is not the end of the world and that they can survive without it for a little while.

Eric Darr, the author of the article “Social Media Blackout” conducted an interesting experiment where he shut down access to all social media websites for a week at Harrisburg University. Darr said, “It is about pausing to evaluate the extent to which social media are woven into the professional and personal lives of the people on the Harrisburg campus” (Darr, 1).

Even though some students were not happy about having their Facebook’s and other social media tools taken away from them, this experiment showed them that it is possible to go without them. Instead of messaging one of their roommates from across the hall on a social media tool, they would have to walk across the hall and talk to them. By doing this the experiment not only forced students to realize that they can survive without social media, but it forced them to physically interact with others more than they would have if they could have accessed their social media tools.

This normative statement is important to consider because although social media tools make communicating easier, they are not vital – we can communicate without them.

Source: Darr, Eric. “Social Media Blackout.” Inside Higher ED. 9 Sept. 2010. Web.