Talking About Net Neutrality

Posted on by meaganmacphee

For many people, net neutrality can be a confusing and overwhelming topic.  In order to fully grasp the definition of net neutrality one must have a solid understanding of how our internet services are packaged and provided to us, and how these services might be affected by changing political policies. For many of the that people I approached to interview for this project, net neutrality was a word they had heard tossed around but had never fully understood. According to Renee Hobbs’ book, Create to Learn, “communication and information” can be used “to make a difference in the world.” Even if some of these communicative actions do not get that much attention, “often such initiatives produce results” (pg. 87).  In creating my vox pop, I am striving to make the concept of net neutrality more accessible to the public.

https://soundcloud.com/meagan-macphee/asc200diy3mmac

As defined by Wired, net neutrality is the “the idea that internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon should treat all content flowing through their cables and cell towers equally.”  When net neutrality is in place, service providers are unable to charge more for faster access to certain websites or limit the websites that users are able to visit. Whereas net neutrality protections had been significantly strengthened during the Bush and Obama administrations, the Trump administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been less inclined to preserve net neutrality regulations. In November 2017, the FCC announced that it would begin to dismantle net neutrality protections, effectively opening up the space for service providers to be able to determine how broadband is used.

In an extreme scenario, this deregulation will allow for service providers to create bundle-like packages, similar to how cable channels are bundled for television viewers.  A user would only be able to access the websites that are included in the bundle that they paid for. Service providers will be able to promote greater and faster access to websites that they have a financial stake in; for example, Comcast (which owns NBCUniversal) will be able speed up streaming times on the forthcoming NBC streaming website while slowing down its users’ access to competitive sites like Netflix.  

While proponents of deregulation argue that anti-trust laws will prevent large service providers from completely crippling smaller companies, net neutrality advocates insist that deregulation will undoubtedly harm competition. Smaller companies, like startups, have often used the democratic, level playing field of the internet to jumpstart their businesses.  With the internet becoming less of a democracy (and arguably more of an oligarchy), smaller companies will no longer have the same access to resources as the larger, more established companies that are connected to service providers.

As well as being a resource for new companies, the internet has long been an open and accessible way to learn the news and gain information.  According to a 2016 study by the Pew Research Center, 38% of Americans receive their news from online.  If service providers are able to control what news sites their users have access to, and how easy that access is, they have the potential ability to shape the way that a large number of Americans see the news landscape, and–by extension–the world around them.   Service providers could potentially make it easier to access news sites that support and advocate for their own special interests. In March of 2019, the Save the Internet bill was introduced to congress.  The act would essentially restore the previous net neutrality regulations that were in put in place by a 2015 act.  The act recently passed the House of Representatives and is progressing to the Senate. To learn more, visit https://www.savetheinternet.info/.

Source: https://mashable.com/2017/12/15/tech-companies-saving-net-neutrality-internet-service-provider/

Works Cited

https://www.wired.com/story/guide-net-neutrality/

Coldewey, Devin. (2019, April 9).  Net Neutrality Restoring Save the Internet Act Passes the

House, Moving onto Senate. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/10/net-neutrality-restoring-save-the-internet-act-passes-house-moving-on-to-senate/

Finley, Klint. (2018, May 9). The Wired Guide to Net Neutrality.  Retrieved from

https://www.wired.com/story/guide-net-neutrality/

Finley, Klint. (2017, November 22). Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the

Internet. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/heres-how-the-end-of-net-neutrality-will-change-the-internet/?mbid=GuidesLearnMore

Mitchell, A, et. al. (2016, July 7). Pathways to News (The Modern News Consumer). Pew

Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.journalism.org/2016/07/07/pathways-to-news/

Nusca, Andrew. (2017, November 23). Net Neutrality Explained: What it Means (and Why it

Matters). Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-neutrality-explained-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters/

Talking About Net Neutrality

Posted on by meaganmacphee

For many people, net neutrality can be a confusing and overwhelming topic.  In order to fully grasp the definition of net neutrality one must have a solid understanding of how our internet services are packaged and provided to us, and how these services might be affected by changing political policies. For many of the that people I approached to interview for this project, net neutrality was a word they had heard tossed around but had never fully understood. According to Renee Hobbs’ book, Create to Learn, “communication and information” can be used “to make a difference in the world.” Even if some of these communicative actions do not get that much attention, “often such initiatives produce results” (pg. 87).  In creating my vox pop, I am striving to make the concept of net neutrality more accessible to the public.

https://soundcloud.com/meagan-macphee/asc200diy3mmac

As defined by Wired, net neutrality is the “the idea that internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon should treat all content flowing through their cables and cell towers equally.”  When net neutrality is in place, service providers are unable to charge more for faster access to certain websites or limit the websites that users are able to visit. Whereas net neutrality protections had been significantly strengthened during the Bush and Obama administrations, the Trump administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been less inclined to preserve net neutrality regulations. In November 2017, the FCC announced that it would begin to dismantle net neutrality protections, effectively opening up the space for service providers to be able to determine how broadband is used.

In an extreme scenario, this deregulation will allow for service providers to create bundle-like packages, similar to how cable channels are bundled for television viewers.  A user would only be able to access the websites that are included in the bundle that they paid for. Service providers will be able to promote greater and faster access to websites that they have a financial stake in; for example, Comcast (which owns NBCUniversal) will be able speed up streaming times on the forthcoming NBC streaming website while slowing down its users’ access to competitive sites like Netflix.  

While proponents of deregulation argue that anti-trust laws will prevent large service providers from completely crippling smaller companies, net neutrality advocates insist that deregulation will undoubtedly harm competition. Smaller companies, like startups, have often used the democratic, level playing field of the internet to jumpstart their businesses.  With the internet becoming less of a democracy (and arguably more of an oligarchy), smaller companies will no longer have the same access to resources as the larger, more established companies that are connected to service providers.

As well as being a resource for new companies, the internet has long been an open and accessible way to learn the news and gain information.  According to a 2016 study by the Pew Research Center, 38% of Americans receive their news from online.  If service providers are able to control what news sites their users have access to, and how easy that access is, they have the potential ability to shape the way that a large number of Americans see the news landscape, and–by extension–the world around them.   Service providers could potentially make it easier to access news sites that support and advocate for their own special interests. In March of 2019, the Save the Internet bill was introduced to congress.  The act would essentially restore the previous net neutrality regulations that were in put in place by a 2015 act.  The act recently passed the House of Representatives and is progressing to the Senate. To learn more, visit https://www.savetheinternet.info/.

Source: https://mashable.com/2017/12/15/tech-companies-saving-net-neutrality-internet-service-provider/

Works Cited

https://www.wired.com/story/guide-net-neutrality/

Coldewey, Devin. (2019, April 9).  Net Neutrality Restoring Save the Internet Act Passes the

House, Moving onto Senate. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/10/net-neutrality-restoring-save-the-internet-act-passes-house-moving-on-to-senate/

Finley, Klint. (2018, May 9). The Wired Guide to Net Neutrality.  Retrieved from

https://www.wired.com/story/guide-net-neutrality/

Finley, Klint. (2017, November 22). Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the

Internet. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/heres-how-the-end-of-net-neutrality-will-change-the-internet/?mbid=GuidesLearnMore

Mitchell, A, et. al. (2016, July 7). Pathways to News (The Modern News Consumer). Pew

Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.journalism.org/2016/07/07/pathways-to-news/

Nusca, Andrew. (2017, November 23). Net Neutrality Explained: What it Means (and Why it

Matters). Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-neutrality-explained-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters/

Transgender on the TV Screen: How Transgender Individuals are Represented in Primetime TV

Posted on by meaganmacphee

Through my infographic, I am attempting to communicate how inadequate and inaccurate transgender representation on television has been in recent years.  In doing so, I am striving to take my viewer on a journey which first explains how much representation there is, explores the quality of that representation, and finally, discusses why transgender representation in the media matters.  

For the color pallette, I decided to use a variety of pinks and blues, and white as a reference to the official transgender flag.  I chose to visualize the data point of how many transgender characters there are in primetime television through means of a pie chart.  I felt that the pie chart would emphasize just how small of an amount 6% is–I believe that the size disparity of the two sections would underline this statistic. Next, I crafted two sections that demonstrate how this 6% is broken up by demographics of race and gender.  By illustrating these data through differently colored people symbols, I am striving to show how the vast majority of transgender characters are white and female-identified; not only is there very little representation, but the representations themselves are far from diverse.  I next wanted to demonstrate that most of these characters are not series regulars–meaning, they only show up in one or a few episodes. Consistent positive representation is more likely to have an impact on viewers’ attitudes (“Where We Are on TV,” GLAAD, 2017, pg. 27), so series regulars stand to have much greater influence.  I chose to visualize this data point through a series of increasingly fading figures in duplicate television screens. In doing so, I am hoping to show that transgender characters are more likely to be transient and temporary before they “fade” away from our television screens.  Finally, I concluded my infographic with a section about why all of this data matters. I accompanied my facts with an image of a television with a heart symbol; I wanted to communicate that television has the ability to foster tolerance and acceptance.

Laverne Cox as Cameron Wirth in the short-lived Doubt (CBS)

While designing the infographic, I tried to hold the concept of dual coding theory in my mind.  As explained by Hobbs in Create to Learn, dual coding theory “refers to the cognitive process involved in comprehending visual and verbal information” and “explains why infographics are effective for informing and persuading” (2017, pg. 157). While choosing how to visualize my data, I sought to underline the main points of every section in a way that not only repeated the story of my data but also added to it.  I wanted to ensure that my viewers were seeing the data represented twice over so that they would resonate with them even more.

Tom Phelan as Cole on The Fosters (Freeform)

I chose the topic of transgender representation in television because a majority of Americans (84%) do not personally know someone who openly identifies as transgender, and therefore I believe that it might not be a subject that many cisgender Americans reflect on regularly.  I want to prompt the viewers of my infographic to think critically about the quantity and quality of transgender characters on their screens, and how these representations may emotionally affect any of the almost 1.4 million trans folks around them.

You are What You See: Looking for Myself and My Queerness on Television

Posted on by meaganmacphee

As human beings, we tend to make a lot of assumptions based off of our first impressions.  When we first meet someone, we are innately tempted to categorize them in some way, to place them in a single box that makes sense to us.  However, a person’s identity is more than one, straightforward category; rather, a single identity is composed of many different varying and intersecting identities of sex/gender, race/ethnicity, class, sexuality and many other aspects that reflect personality, upbringing, and surroundings.  

When someone first sees me, they perceive that I am a cisgendered, white, twenty-something woman.  Although all of these things are true, there are many other less obvious facets of my identity. They will not immediately see that I am middle class, that I am American (please ignore the crumbs of Cool Ranch Doritos on my face), or that I am not differently-abled.  Most significantly to me, they will almost never perceive that I am gay.

Although this is usually one of the last parts of my identity to be revealed to new acquaintances, my queerness is–to me–one of the most important parts of my identity.  I think it is because I have not had an easy journey of acceptance when it comes to my queerness; I struggled with internalized homophobia for a long time and found it challenging to come out to my family.  I have never exactly read as queer. I am actually rather “straight passing,” so when people do not easily recognize this part of my identity, it feels like an act of erasure. Because of the complicated and trying emotional journey that I have had to complete, I now feel extremely proud to be gay. I have a deep love of television, which often conflicts with my identity as a queer woman.  Although the media landscape is rapidly improving in terms of representation of diverse sexual orientations, there is still a lot of room to grow.  As a teenager, I remember searching for representations of myself on my favorite shows and coming up with almost nothing. When I did magically stumble upon a queer female character, she was often over-sexualized or trivialized, her orientation turned into a joke.  Almost without fail, this character would be killed off within the next few episodes. Later when I was conducting research in college, I realized that this occurrence was significant enough to have earned a name: the “Bury Your Gays” trope. A popular website for LGBTQIA+ women even compiled a list of gay ladies who perished before their time. These characters’ deaths were always played for drama and high ratings, but to a scared, closeted young women, it almost felt like they were being punished for something.  I needed multidimensional queer characters who could give me confidence, but instead I got stereotypes who died too soon and only left me more afraid.

Marissa! Cooper! Deserved! Better! (The OC)

Over time, this has changed. Due to public outcry over the Bury Your Gays trope, more queer women are coming onto the screen and staying there. Teens now have Riverdale’s unapologetic Cheryl Blossom, Everything Suck’s nerdy Kate Messner, and The Bold Type’s outspoken Kat Edison. Although there are many more queer women on TV today, representation is still extremely limited.  A majority of queer female TV characters are white, cisgender young adults and twenty-somethings. There are very few representations of queer women of color (like One Day at a Time’s Elena), masculine-of-center queer women (Vida’s Eddie), or older queer women (Tig Notaro in One Mississippi).  I am lucky; I can now see my own queer identity reflected on the TV screen.  However, I am wary for my fellow members of the LGBTQIA+ community who are not afforded the same privilege.  

One Day at a Time’s Elena (right) with her non-binary significant other

Explosive Imagery: The Man With the Codes

Posted on by meaganmacphee

For my first DIY assignment, which I have titled, “The Man With the Codes,” I have chosen to alter the iconic image of the nuclear bomb exploding over Nagaski in 1945.  Using photoshop, I laid an image of Donald Trump’s yelling head over the bottom part of the mushroom cloud. The overall effect is that the atomic bomb looks as if it exploding from an angry Trump.  I intended this composition to not only be a commentary on the President’s impulsive temper, but also a remark on the danger of having such an unpredictable and impetuous Commander-in-Chief in charge of the launch codes to our nation’s nuclear arsenal.  

Original Image: The Bomb Exploding over Nagasaki

ihttps://blackboard.usc.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-5800127-dt-content-rid-17948292_2/xid-17948292_2

In addition to the overlay, I also edited both photos to add to the overall aesthetic effect. I smoothed out some of the photo grain and on the original Nagasaki image, but also added some photo grain and markups to the contemporary photo of President Trump.  I also blurred the border lines between the two images and adjusted the vibrance, contrast, and levels so that the two images would fit together cohesively. I chose to make the Trump image grayscale because I wanted the overall feel of the new image to be historic; I wanted to intentionally age the photo so I could thematically connect my piece to the idea of history repeating itself.   Through my new image, I am trying to comment on the legacy of such violence and the danger of repeating earlier mistakes; a danger that we, as a nation, now find ourselves in.

Original Image: Donald Trump
https://envisioningtheamericandream.com/2016/05/19/lessons-learned-from-goofus-and-gallant/trump-yelling/
Final Edited Image

One Man’s Opinion

Posted on by meaganmacphee

In his article, “The UK needs to respect the Brexit vote and leave the EU,” for the USA Today Opinion section, Nigel Farage aggressively condemns the idea of launching a second referendum regarding the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union.  He insists that the British Parliament and Prime Minister Theresa May are refusing the acknowledge the will of the people–the majority of British voters voted to leave the European Union in the initial referendum in June 2016.  

SOURCE: USA Today published this article in its Opinion section, suggesting from the start that the reader should not interpret the content of the article as hard fact, but rather as the perspective of one person.  The newspaper even offers a somewhat half-hearted attempt to explain who that one person is through the byline: “Nigel Farage is a former UK Independence Party leader and vice chairman of the Brexit campaign group Leave Means Leave.”  Although the newspaper shows that Farage has a close proximity to the Brexit situation, they do not explain how just how close that is to their American readers who may have a lesser understanding of the intricacies of British politics.  Nigel Farage is a far-right politician, who has been very outspoken against immigrants and has been a person of interest in the FBI President Trump/Russia investigation since 2017.

MOTIVATION: In line with his connections with the far-right political movement, and his anti-immigration stance, Farage’s motivation in this article is to condemn the British Parliament and May for failing to agree to terms of withdrawal from the European Union. By placing the burden of blame largely on May and the “Remainers,” Farage attempts to create more division among the different parties of the British political system.

EVIDENCE: Farage makes several large-scale claims that he does not backup with evidence.  He writes inflammatory statements such as, “Not only was Brexit the biggest democratic mandate in British political history,” and “To ignore them or ask them to vote again, before the first decision is even implemented, would be incredibly damaging to who we are as a nation” without providing any evidence to support these claims. Farage relies too much on purposefully provocative rhetoric as opposed to grounded facts to support his claims.    

LOGIC: Although delivered with inflammatory rhetoric, Farage’s logic is ultimately sound.  His main claim is that to enact a second vote would be essentially ignoring the due democratic processes laid out in the initial referendum.  This logic is sound: the majority of British voters opted for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union during a general election in 2016, and therefore the British Parliament and Prime Minister May should honor the democratic will of the people.  

LEFT OUT: Perhaps the strongest argument for this article’s credibility is just how little is left out.  Although the main section of the article is devoted to Farage’s composition, USA Today then follows his thoughts up with both contradictory and supporting thoughts from political writers from several outlets, as well as thoughts from the general populace.  The newspaper seems devoted to portraying the issue from multiple perspectives.

Screen Light and City Lights

Posted on by meaganmacphee

The day started like most days do: I gradually and begrudgingly blink awake and immediately reach for my phone.  Upon gripping it in my hand, its familiar weight immediately making me feel comfortable, I begin to scroll through my gmail, my Facebook, and my Instagram–actions that I will repeat several times throughout the next twenty four hours.  In fact, they are actions that I enact almost without thought or premeditation, ones that serve to distract me from the boredom of rote tasks or the stifling void of my own thoughts (I joke). All together, my scrolling, liking, and meme-tagging will take up around two full hours of my day.  It will significantly lengthen the time it takes for me to do my homework. It will distract me from my readings, some of my obligations, and from a few of my social interactions. It makes me sad to think that my screen time keeps me from enjoying my life without a filter, and makes it immensely more challenging for me to make time to sit with my own thoughts.  

My Media Consumption Log

Some of this time, however, I am happy to give up. For example, a solid chunk of these two hours were spent sending a hilarious meme around to my friends (I could almost hear myself giggle every time I hit the send button).  Another chunk of the time was spent coordinating social plans for the evening, and the reward of a fun time was well worth all of the texting.

The Meme that Brought Much Joy to My Day and the Day of Others

In fact, the highlight of my twenty four hours–a long and winding trek on Mulholland Drive to look at the city lights with a friend–was only made possible by my media consumption.  In the morning, I spent forty-five minutes on Yelp, researching the best overlooks along Mulholland. (A fun fact–you essentially cannot park anywhere on the street past 9pm unless you want a $500+ parking ticket.  I love Los Angeles.) Another five minutes was spent on Google Maps, researching the best route to get up to the hills. Once my friend and I got in the car, I immediately queued up a necessary element to any night drive: an excellent Spotify playlist.  For the next three hours, we listened to amazing music, talked about our lives, and took in the city lights. And for all of the preparation that I so painstakingly did, I did not end up using that much of it. Once I hit Mulholland Drive itself, I just let myself wander the winding route without navigation, seeing where the night took me.  By the time we drove up to a deserted and windy overlook, our phones were tucked away, and the only visible light was coming from the city below. For anyone who has not seen it, Los Angeles at night is breathtaking; the lights emitting from the building and streets look like a thousand stars clustered in the dark sky. Although I had spent most of the preceding twenty-four hours necessarily tuned into my many screens, the best moment of the day was almost completely unplugged.  

Can you park at any of these places after dark? No, no you cannot.