Storify : Violence in media affect children’s behaviors

This is  a link of my story on Storify. My topic is about violence in media whether affect people’s behaviors, especially for children. I support media violence affect children’s behaviors, while I also gave counter arguments in my Storify. 

I have chosen this issue because i found that people are easy to influenced by media, and there are more and more advanced technologies to come out in our lives, so we are in the digital era nowadays. We should concern about what and how media content influence on our thoughts and actions, particularly children can not classify what is good or not. And violence in media content become the trend in these days whether in movies, television shows or video games, children are facing with the potential risk digital environment, so people should concern about this problem no matter what it is a controversial issue. Therefore, I give more specific information in my Storify to discuss this thing.


Module #6: Summation of Blog

In my previous blog, I gave two things for citizen journalism and social activism. One of them is participation and the other one is free will for people in the digital era. I think people can get more opportunities of participation in social and cultural affairs by using social media tools. Moreover, more participation can contribute to higher democracy of the society, and higher democracy can give more rights of free will for people. I think these form a mutual relationship to each other.

After reading comments about my previous blog, I found that there are some interesting points which I like. As yknwt said that there is an example to explain how social media affect democracy of the country. This example can improve my point more clearly because social activism can improve even overthrow the government’s policies and actions for people. Through these, people are more active than before because they can change something what they want by social media tools rather than just accept all information. Social media offer a platform to some social groups which they need be noticed by the public and give the more and broad space for everyone which can express  opinions what they want. This way can get everyone together and participate in social and cultural affairs.

In addition, katielisanne left an very interesting question which I think it for a while because this question gives me a sign to think about whether citizen journalism is good or not. We have to say that social media make people participate in the whole society frequently than before, but we have to think whether every information is helpful to the public by everyone.I agree with katielisanne, she thinks that people should be educated when they want to be a “journalist” or they create a new. Because we should have responsibilities for our information which we create and publish, everyone can view your information, even they believe it. At this point, I think social media give much freedom to everyone, however, we also consider that the authority of information on the Internet.

Therefore, I will change my point a little bit through these comments. Even though I still think social media can contribute to citizen journalism and social activism by participation and free will because it increase democracy in the society than before, we also consider whether every information is credible or not because we are hard to classify backgrounds of everyone, especially for knowledgeable authority.

Module #6: Initial Blog Post

In this module, even though the main topic is about “e-journalism”  in the recent years by advanced social media tools, I think we can include that this also reveals the society is improving the democracy by interconnecting of social media.

Nowadays, people can report everything by using social media, such as Facebook, Twitter and so on. We are not just watching TV to get news or other information, we can create our own news to the public by these social media tools. Based on the two questions of this module, I think there are some new opportunities for citizen journalism and social activism. First, I think participation is the most vital thing in this digital era. As before said, people can make news by themselves to the public whether who a professional journalist is or not. And in the massive information net, people are hard to classify who you are and they do not care about whether you are a journalist or not. People just give and take information by social media. Therefore, people have more participation than before by new advanced technologies. More participation, higher democracy. While, as Henry Jenkins and David Thorburn pointed out, it does not improve the democracy for people even though we have to admit that the Internet and social media affect social and cultural affairs somehow, especially in the political field. They gave the quote by Jonah Seiger who is cofounder of Mindshare Internet Campaigns: “The evolution of the Internet and politics is going to happen a lot more slowly than people expect.” That is to say, though people participate in social and political affairs, they still can not change them what they expected. However, we have to say that people have more rights to the society by writing commentaries and news than we are in the traditional media age. So, I think participation is very important in this “e-journalism” era.

Second, free will is the other opportunity for citizen journalism and social activism. As for me, I have take the course of COMM 2P91 which is focused on the relationship between social media and the whole society. And I have taken the topic of my presentation to talk about social media and social activism. I have researched many websites and social media tools for social activism. I found that we can not only take news of social movements and affairs by CBC or TV, but also can get many different social groups’ news and information by their websites and own social media. Such as Movement, ItGetsBetter and so on, those are all about different social groups have social campaigns by their own news, stories and events. This way offer the discussion platform of free will by different people to express their own stories and identities. As Peter Dahlgren said, “An important attribute of the net (broadly understood) is its capacity to facilitate horizontal, or civic communication: people and organizations can link up with each other for purposes of sharing information, providing mutual support, organizing, mobilizing, or solidifying collective identities.” Thus, people have more freedom to express their identities by new social media, it leads to the improvement of citizen journalism and social activism.

In conclusion, the advent of social media leads to citizen journalism and social activism. That is to say that these factors are in the circular relationship, people can have more participations and more independent free will to write and share their own news and stories by social media tools, this contributes to the formation of citizen journalism and social activism.


Dahlgren, P. (2012). Reinventing participation: civic agency and the web environment. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations. 4.2, p27.

Jenkins, H. & D. Thorburn. Introduction: The Digital Revolution, the Informed Citizen, and the Culture of Democracy. in Jenkins, H. & D. Thorburn eds. (2003). Democracy and New Media. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. p1-17.

Module #5: Podcast

I choose the topic which violence in media can affect people’s behaviors, especially for children and adolescents. I select an article online which called “Violence in the Media – Psychologists Help Protect Children from Harmful Effects.” This article pointed out the relationship between violent media content and children’s behaviors. There are many specific examples and research results to show TV, broadcastings and video games are effecting children’s behaviors. It is from their findings, significance and practical application to reveal the close relationship between violent media content and young people’s behaviors. This article can be a direct and credible support source to relate to my topic. I will introduce the specific information in my Podcast.


American Psychological Association. (2004) Violence in the Media – Psychologists Help  Protect Children from Harmful Effects. Retrieved from

Module #5: Summation of the blog

This week, I just received one comment for my blog, but this comment is interesting because it gives an opposite argument for my suggestion which decreases the rate of piracy in the music industry.

As for me, I wrote the suggestion which people can spend money to listen music to decrease the rate of piracy online. While, the comment thinks that it does not work even though consumers expend money in the music industry. Because it argues that we can not expend a large amount of money to support artists and they can get money from business and record companies, people do not do this behavior when they listen music online. This is a big difference between the comment and my opinion.

I have to say her point is interesting and sounds good. However, I still think that this can encourage more and more people to have the sense of piracy when they are charged online to listen music. I do not think it can increase the economy when there is someone just spent $1 when they consume music online, but this behavior can tell people respect others’ intellectual properties online. Moreover, there are more and more problems appear due to these advanced technologies, because it is hard to define which behaviors are piracy and which are not in the virtual world. Everyday we are in the massive information world, we do not have time to check whether our actions are piracy or not because we just enjoy the convenience by the Internet. Due to these reasons, there are some people who are easy to stole others’ works to make huge benefits, this phenomenon we have to notice and we should prevent them from violating the copyright law.

In my previous blog, I put a question which how to define piracy definitely. I have read articles in this module, I found that sharing files online either can improve our culture somehow, or belong to one of piracy behavior in our society. And I think we should do something to change the current free music apps, while the comment said that it is not piracy problem when people consume music online by free. I have also read others’ blogs and there are many different opinions about piracy. Therefore, I think it is really hard to judge other people whether are violating the copyright law in the Internet.

In conclusion, even though I also do not like people are charged by music websites and apps, it still can be an action of respecting producers and creators’ works. I hope that the copyright law can ensure producers and creators’ benefits, and it should concern about consumers’ conveniences when they are using the Internet.

Module #5: Initial Blog Post

Before I read those articles in this module, I just have thought that piracy is violating the copyright law and it copies others’ works or intellectual properties without permissions by creators or owners. While, I wonder that how to define piracy certainly after I have read those articles in this module. Focused on the music industry specifically, piracy or impermissible invasions of music works always happened no matter  in the past or at present. Therefore, there is a question is asked in this module which how to balance the behaviors of consumers and the benefits of business or produced record companies.

Firstly, I come up with a question which how to define piracy certainly. In the article of Dale Bradley, he gave an example of Napster which means recycling information online by combining with different people or agencies. This is a sharing system by peer to peer, and it leads to the wider culture, especially for youth culture. It also gave the positive impact of this behavior which means that Napster gives more opportunities to participate in online activities for young people, and it also encourages more and more creativities to appear online to share with more people. For example, we can think about the popularity of music in traditional media and new media. In the past, people can only listen to music by radio, television or films. The popularity of music is limited. However, we can find many music ranks of popular or new song by the Internet, like BillBoard, iTunes or youTube. These new media give more platforms to the popularity of music. With these new convenient media developing, there are more and more problems of copyright or intellectual properties of music to appear, like download without permissions or many website stole music copyright illegally to avoid the expensive the copyright expense. As the example of Napster, it encourages people to sharing files with others online, is this piracy or just the way of sharing with others online. It is hard to decide this behavior whether is piracy or not.

And there also is another article by Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell, they agree with the point which new media leads to more piracy problems at present. They pointed out the interesting thought which they experienced motivations of online activities by people to define piracy. They classified some categories, “Motivations among this group include a desire to share content, to sample content before purchasing, to acquire intellectual property that is unaffordable, and to subvert copyright law.” I believe that there are many many people have one or two more motivations when they consume music creativities. Like me, I want to share good music or songs which I like with my friends on Facebook or Youtube; or I will download songs I liked regardless of the copyright because I am not on to this issue. So, should I am deemed to violate others’ copyrights or intellectual properties because these motivations? I don’t think so because piracy is hard to explain very specifically by consumers’ behaviors online. Therefore, more and more record companies are faced with the thorny problem when they are confronted with consumers’ behaviors.

I think iTunes is good example to solve piracy in the music industry because it addresses the copyright exceedingly. When we want to consume songs on it, we should pay money to get it. Even some songs are free, we can not ensure those satisfy the needs from us. Honestly, I do not like this way which it charges some money to get you want, but I have to say this way can solve piracy in the music industry efficiently. Otherwise, I  suggest strongly websites or new media can undertake the responsibility to avoid the copyright problem when people consume stuff online, this also can decrease the incidence rate of piracy on the Internet.


Bradley, D. (2006) Scenes of Transmission: Youth Culture, MP3 File Sharing, and Transferable Strategies of Cultural PracticeM/C Journal. 9(1).

Steinmetz, K., K. Tunnell (2013). Under the Pixelated Jolly Roger: A Study of On-Line PiratesDeviant Behavior. 34 (1), pg. 53-67

Module #4: Video—– Remix and recreate and copyright

I choose three different editions about the same song which is called Hey Jude by the Beetles. I want to show that copyright is very important in our society even though there are a large amount of things to remix and recreate in the virtual world. In this video, it shows the three different editions of the song, but they still keep the original melody and lyrics. The most important is about those different editions of this song are keeping the original singer’s name — The Beetles. This reveals that copyright ensures producers and creators’ benefits. I think copyright also balances the relationship among producers, creators and consumers.


Here is my video link:


Module #4: Summary of blog

When I looked at all comments about my previous blog, I found most of them are agree with my point which copyright is a necessity in the public now. Especially, I like one of them pointed out the quote. This quote is very interesting and it is general to depict the phenomenon which copy others’ works and recreate the new content. This quote is said by Wilson Mizner, “If you steal from one author, it’s plagiarism; if you steal from many, it’s research.” I totally agree with this view and we can found that there are many “researches” which seemed like it. For example, Youtube is a huge collective platform which collect all forms of videos by anybody. Everyone can make and create their own videos by watching their works. We can not say this is plagiarism because they still are new forms even though they are based on others’ old content. Moreover, I found that the same point after I have read the other one’s blog. She addressed that there is a huge amount number of songs when she typed in one sentence of lyrics after she has heard in nightclubs or other public places. And also we found that there are many editions of books, songs and films. Those are based on original works and recreate the brand new content to the public. We can not say those violate the copyright law, we just can say these are distributions to the society by different social media tools.

In addition, there is one comment which leaves a question for me. She asked me whether I can ensure every student can copy the totally same sentence in the massive information on the Internet. My answer is I can not ensure it, but as I said in the previous blog that is a system which prevent students from involving in the copyright problem. I do not say I doubt students will violate the copyright law, but I think this is a good way to stop them to make some plagiarism problems. Nowadays, the virtual world is the same as the open economic marker. We can get benefits from this open and free place, and we also are easy to involve in the disordered situation. People should find some solutions to prevent them from copying others, this is a reason why there is a very restrictive copyright law to appear at present.

In conclusion, I still think the copyright is a necessity for our society because this is a good way to balance consumers and producers’ benefits and keep a relative safe virtual environment in this digital era.

COMM 2P91: Personal media assignment #5—Collective Action—Kony 2012

After I have watched the video of Kony 2012, I think that more and more people can know about Joseph Kony who is a leader of LRA. Through this video, people raise their awareness about him who is a violent and advocate war person and takes cruel actions to people, especially for children. I have to say this is good way to promote the idea which is arresting Joseph Kony and rescuing those children. I have used this video to my  presentation of this course in the last week. I think that this video is a way to express social movement to the public. By this social media, more and more people know what are invisible children and how to help them. As my presentation said that different social media of different social movements stand for different social groups which they need help from others. As the same as invisible children, they are a special group which under the control by Joseph Kony and need be rescue by other people in the public. Through Youtube, people can know more about them and express broader as soon as possible.

While, we have to think about it also has benefits and constraints by this social media. As benefits, there are more and more people who come from all over world to know how invisible children live in the cruel lives, and also governments can notice this affair under the heavy pressure of public opinions, even people can help those children somehow by donation or supporting this campaign. These are good way to advocate this campaign by this social media. However, there are many doubts because this social media. Many people doubt whether this story is real or not because this is on Youtube which can be made any video or films by anybody. And they wonder that this is really helpful to invisible children and arrest Joseph Kony because this is a complex problem in the whole world. Then, Youtube is not very professional website to relevant world wars and campaigns, so not everyone believes this reality or doubt the purpose of the creator of this video. Therefore, this social media leads to two opposite views about this campaign.

In addition, I have read Zuckerman’s blog post. I have some comments about this blog. I think that this blog is very good way to express his arguments about Kony 2012. For example, he provided some criticism about this video and offered some example why people doubt this video. He pointed our the new concept about oversimplified of this issue. I like this point but I do not agree with it because this is a very complex problem to solve. Kony 2012 is just a form which express what problems are in Uganda and how invisible children live in the cruel lives, it can not included in all information about threat and wars and so on. Moreover, it can not be a solution to solve this kind of problem. As the international court pointed out, they can not guarantee we arrest Joseph Kony as soon as possible and they should find a better way to solve this affair. I found there are many comments about this blog, and most of them debate with this blog even though we have to say some points are very interesting in this blog. Some people think Kony 2012 is a good video to express invisible children’s lives; some people argue that this is a way to attract more people to watch this “documentary film”. I found another criticism link: curtis/2012/mar/08/kony-2012-what-s-the-story. This links is about whether Kony 2012 is real story or not. As I said before, many people doubt its reality, and they think this is just the same as documentary film because there are many facts are wrong in this video. And It leads to an intensive debate in the public, many people wonder what the real purpose are for creator.

Above these, we can think that social media and global communities are the mutual relationship between each other. Even though Kony 2012 has many arguments, it really addresses some communities’ attentions and make the international court take an action for arresting Joseph Kony. At same time, more and more people join in this campaign through these communities which promote this video or let more people participate in the debate which is good way or bad way to help those invisible children. Though there is an intensive debate, it still lets people know what invisible children are an how people live in Africa. I think this worked for the public to know more information around the world. In addition, as I post the link before which is talking about whether it is a film or real new to the public. I think it doesn’t matter for anyone no matter who are filmmakers or consumers. Because it really leads to the campaign which people can participate in it to help invisible children even though some facts are wrong in this video, and people are really paying more attention to it no matter who are supportive or opposite. And the most important point I think which is still affect to people by rhetorical arguments even though it has not enough credibility. I believe that many people who are the same with me cried when we watched this video. This reveals it is successful.

In conclusion, I think Kony 2012 become a typical example of collective action and social media. Even though it has many criticism by many people, anyway,we have to say it is a successful to get many attention by people at the same time. It is a great sample to show the mutual relationship between social media and collective actions.

COMM 2P91: Personal media assignment #4—Social gaming

I have chosen two games which are called Candy Crush Saga and Texas Hold’em Poker. Candy Crush Saga is a game app on Facebook, and I know about it through my friends sharing on Facebook. This game is matching the same jelly beans and get different points by arranging in different pairs or groups. When you can not find any same groups, there are hints to help you find them. Especially, you can know your score in your friends’ rank when you finish one level, and you also can share your score with your friends on Facebook. I think this is very interesting because you want to keep pace with other friends even over their scores. The other one is called Texas Hold’em Poker which is playing cards with others online, this is an app which you can download to your phones and Ipads. This game seems like a real card game in casino, you can play with two people to twenty two people. As started, everyone can hold two cards which are only seen by ourselves, and then the dealer will give the five cards which are seen by everyone. We just look at which one’s card points are bigger than others, he is a winner.

Even though these two games are very different between each other, they still have one social common which they need contact to others to play and connect with your friends by these games. I know Candy Crush Sage after my friends invite me to play it on Facebook, and I complete one level and I can share my scores with my friends on Facebook, and we can know others’ scores by sharing. Also, the card play which is plying by many people together, you can play with your friends together online and chat with which your next step is in the game. This is the same as the chatting tools online which connect with others by social media tools.

When I play with these two games, I found that there still are some differences between them. These two games can help me connect with other friends and know something among each other. Like Candy Crush Saga, we can know that they play it today when they share with their scores on Facebook. This game is just sharing among friends. While, Texas Hold’em Poker is an open place which you can play with anyone. You can invite your friends or you can play with other strangers online. This way can help you know more new friends or contact to the society somehow. Through these ways, people improve their social connections with others by social games and get closer with friends than before because this offer the new way to contact with others.

However, I think social games have constraints and benefits to the whole public. On the one hand, as I said before that social games can improve the relationship among people. As Candy Crush Saga and Texas Hold’em Poker, these are ways to contact to other people no matter who they are. On the other hand, I think social games are also limit people to connect to the outside at the same time. As we known, we think those people are “nerd” when we heard about some people are addicted to social games. They never go outside to connect with “real people”, they just stay at home and face to the screen and enjoy the virtual world. Like them, they will lose connection with the real world and are hard adapt to the reality because they even do not know what happen in the real world. Therefore, social games are not very perfect ways for social connection, people still need contact to others by using traditional social media tools.

Moreover, we have to admit that social games are becoming more and more popular in the public. Honestly, I am not a real gamer and I do not like online games, but I have to say more and more people are playing those social games. There are some incentives to lead to popularity and social connection of social games. First, we can found that most of games are competition models, people play with them and they have defeat to overcome others, and many games have to upgrade levels to enter into the next play. Those are easy to let people addict to social games. And also, we always play with our friends and we want to keep pace with others’ levels, we continue playing social games to connect to others.

In conclusion, I think social games are the one of ways to connect with others or the public, and also it has incentives to make popularity to the society. We can use it to make our social relationship more better than before, while we also balance our real and virtual worlds.