Political Blog: Lethal Injection

The issue of Capital Punishment via lethal injection is causing a stir all the way up to the Supreme Court. They agreed to hear a case from three death-row inmates in Oklahoma that challenges the use of midazolam, the first of three administered drugs.

The midozolam is meant to induce a coma-like state. It is then followed up by rocuronium bromide, a paralytic, and then finished by potassium chloride to stop the heart.

The challenge comes from the claim that the midozolam isn't capable of fulling inducing the comatose state. Last year, on three separate cases, the executions encountered issues. In April, a man regained complete consciousness, which caused the White House to order a review.

The case the inmates make is that the use of midozolam is unconstitutional as it constitutes cruel and unsual punishment. They turn to the three recent cases and point out its flaws. Additionally, the European Union and many pharmaceutical companies recently banned the previously used drug, sodium piothental, and the choice to use midozolam was a scrambled effort on Correctional's part.

Opponents say the drug is entirely safe. In the vast majority of cases, midozolam has caused no complications. In fact, the review of the man who regained consciousness turned out to be the fault of a misplaced IV. There is no concrete evidence that indicates that midozolam doesn't work. Additionally, the inmates will likely be granted an extension of their dates while the case is under review.

In my opinion, Capital Punishment is all wrong. Using drugs to end a life is still murder. My opponents would say that due process has resulted in a death sentence, but I don't think death should have been an option from the beginning. I fully support the review of this and all drugs used for Capital Punishment. I hope they find out that no drug is perfect, and therefore without a viable option for the death, they ban Capital Punishment entirely.

"Progressive Politics" Questions

1.     Why do the Democratic leaders embrace blogging as a potential political communication considering the traditional media landscape in politics?

            Democratic leaders have come to embrace blogging as a potential political communication because it could help them win elections. It grants them access to the young people with new ideas and loud voices. It allows candidates to have a controlled online presence wherein to state their platform and interact with voters. It's the perfect place for their information to be disseminated, discussed, and returned with commentary as well. Young people and new voters are usually the target area for politicians, as older voters are usually stuck in their ways, so targeting them with software they already are adept as using is the perfect way to connect.

2.     Blogging encourages a participatory culture. In what way does the participatory culture in blogging expand digital media convergence?

            With a participatory culture imbued into the essence of blogging, it is natural for digital media convergence to expand. Blogs are marketing tools and vie for the most attention; the largest readership. Therefore, it is necessary for individual blogs to reinvent and converge old and new ideas. Adding images, video, audio, and everything in between is cutting edge: it will draw attention and increase readership. As the competition thickens, the blogs themselves will be generators of new media. 

 3.     In the article, the author says: “The ability of the Internet to erase geographical distances can become a structural weakness in elections where district lines and eligibility are key.” How can blogging counter this weakness in the process of turning the netroots to grassroots?

            Blogging can counter this weakness by being methodical about changing the locations of limited net access into ones of new access. If a party entered an area, say a poverty-stricken urban area, and funded a project that brought internet access to the area, they could create the conversation as they go. An election could be turned into a humanitarian pursuit. By converging grassroots and netroots, the weakness of lack of understanding and aptitude for technology could be combatted.

 4.     The author spends the second half of the article discussing the lack of diversity in current blogosphere dominated by elite bloggers. Please use the concept of digital convergence to explain how blogs can become the real bearer of freedom, democracy, egalitarianism, and participation in the new media communication?

            Digital convergence states that all forms of media synthesize, reinvent, and spread at unprecedented speed. Of course, in order to become a part of the river, one needs internet access and an education that teaches one how to use it. But, as time presses forward, initiatives will grant more people from diverse populations internet access, and bring them into the stream of conversation. This will be the movement away from egalitarianism. Of course, the elite will fight back, but when it is needed, freedom, democracy, and voice will all be level in the new media communication.

"Virtual Revolution" Questions

1.     The web is celebrated as the revolutionary technology that is great leveling of humanity creating equal opportunity, equal access, and equal potential. However, there are only a quarter of people on the earth who can use it. How do you explain the controversial argument here?

The purpose of the web is to have a ungoverned space for all of humanity to take what they need and give what they can. It is a large controversy and counter to its original purpose to not have every human connected to it. The largest issue at hand are amenities. Many places do not have the technological prowess to sustain the web. Of course, these are the places that could probably benefit from it the most. Of course, the web is now in the hands of corporations looking to make a profit. They cannot make it free to all without losing their primary motivation: capital.

2.     How is Wikipedia the best example to implement the leveling ideas of the Web rooted in the cultural revolution of 1960s, namely the Libertarianism in the counter culture? How does it explain some of the digital convergences?

Wikipedia is the best example of leveling ideas because it is built from grassroots. Anyone, with or without an education, can edit information. The battle becomes one of ideas, and the greatest thinker wins in the end, regardless of degree or status. No content is against code; everything may be written about. People with radical ideas have a place to explain themselves, rather than be explained, and vice-versa. Wikipedia also explains digital convergances because it relies on the idea of participatory culture and collective intelligence.

3.     How does the Web make it possible for different kinds of digital convergence?

The web allows for the convergence of various kinds of digital media by being a free-for all for pictures, videos, music, audio, text, etc. Anyone can post anything onto the web, which can bring about the convergence of ideas, systems, formulas, lifestyles, events, and just about anything else.

4.     How can the Internet become a challenge for traditional authority? Use the political landscape changes in some counties to illustrate your answer.

The internet challenges traditional authority because many authorities in power still use a despotic style. They don't want their subjects to come upon ideas that may challenge their rule. Worse, those that wish to challenge it don't want the ideas to spread, which is the first tool the internet has. On the other hand, many positive rulers are susceptible the the internet creating falsehoods. A bad idea or lie could easily proliferate on the internet.

5.     Do you believe that getting information free can set us free eventually? Why or Why not? Do you see any concerns of the complete freedom or self-expression without limit on the Internet? Why or why not?

I do believe that free information will set us free. That doesn't mean there won't be casualties, though. All information is good information. It is a long and arduous road to come to the truth, but the journey is just as important. My concerns are over privacy, freedom, hate, and just about all ideological sentiments. They are subject to destruction. But, the god will prevail in time.

6.     In traditional media communication, it has the “vertical” authority. In the Web communication, it becomes “horizontal?” How do you explain the change? How does this create the possibility for digital media convergence?

"Vertical" authority refers to the media outlets' control over all forms of news and information. A consumer had to pay to access information that is told entirely from another source. Now, with web communication, this appears horizontal, not vertical. Now, users and consumers can create the media they want each other to consume. The web looks more like a gigantic network rather than a pyramid structure. Now, all forms of media technology and all aspects of the human condition are up for grabs (and shares, likes, favorites, etc.) from anyone plugged into the web.

7.     Why is that the Web is free critical for the success of the Web itself? How does that clash with the corporate business ideology? How does that pose challenges for copyright issues at the same time? What will happen if the Web is not free?

The Web must be free in order to fulfill its purpose. It must break all chains on communication and allow there to be a space of absolute free communication. Businesses, hoping to make money off of everything, are inherently against this. They would need to control the web in order to make money off of it. This is entirely possible and hopefully unlikely. Copyright laws may benefit from the web control, but, there must be an alternative outside of abandoning net neutrality. If the web is not free, the door swings wide open for corporate interests to dominate ideology and thought no longer becomes free.

COM 264: "Digital McLuhan"

1. What are the differences between the pre-literate acoustic world and the alphabetical visual world? How does the media of television become a part of the acoustic world?

In the pre-literate acoustic world, messages were exchanged predominately through sound. While this tended to lend more control to the speaker - reducing bias and misunderstandings - the messages would die as people died. In the alphabetical visual world, messages remain broadcasted through a variety of channels in recognizable forms. While they do not die, they are more susceptible to ailments like misunderstandings and manipulations. Television combines the two, synthesizing audio and visual into one element.

2. Why does the alphabet have the segregating tendencies? How exactly does the printing press reverse the segregating tendencies?

The alphabet has segregating tendencies because, during media infancy, very few people were literate, and even those that were could not scramble around a book and all read it at once. This caused the rich elite to process the alphabet slowly, hardly close to the masses. The printing press sends the message out to the population. Although it is susceptible to classist machinations, it has developed over time to reach the vast majority of the population. Lagging behind, literacy moved faster to catch up with the spreading printing press.

3. How does the alphabetic communication in online communication make cyberspace acoustic? How is the online acoustic world different from the television, radio, or print acoustic world?

Online communication is truly acoustic not because digital messages appear as a visual, but, the message exchange is nearly identical to an acoustic exchange. Real-time live chatting allows people from any corner of the globe to have a conversation as if they were in front of each other, exchanging acoustics. The television, radio, and print acoustic world is entirely different because they are controlled mediums. The internet is free flowing and contingent only on choice. No one can have a conversation with a new anchor, radio host, or talk show host in real time when engaging them through their respective acoustic worlds.

4. Not only do we invent media and media technologies but also we select their uses in different contexts. What are the two selection criteria? According to the selection criteria, please discuss what will happen to our online communication in 20 years.

The two selection criteria lie on the belief that we can become greater than our human limitations. First, the media must be larger than our given senses. Second, we want the exchanged communication to be as close to an organic exchange as possible. People want to experience the human condition to the absolute maximum, which we believe is possible through media. Therefore it must feel like we genuinely are visiting the Grand Canyon or Paris. Online communication will steer towards virtual reality components, allowing people to (artificially) feel the senses of being in certain places or having certain experiences.