Response to Berger's "Ways of Seeing"

But in Episode four when we Berger talked about how ads are now framed by our lives they seem to lose some effectiveness. Our brains have to suspend disbelief to believe something is true. When we see an ad for luxury handbags next to a homeless person, or ads for alcohol or lingering on the bus next to kids coming home from school, it takes you out of the moment. It's hard to buy into the life of the ad when it sharply contrasts with reality.

Now with ads being targeted it seems like we are trying to return to the tradition of media being more stationary and appealing to an audience. Websites are constantly tracking us, trying to predict what we will want next. After visiting Amazon and looking for dog treats, I saw ads for the same treats I was looking at pop up on Facebook, Instagram, and other sites I visited that day. When I did a Google search to research types of popup campers, I started seeing images of tents on the margins of online forums.

But like when paintings are stationary, each person will not be seeing the same thing. When I use my mom or step dads computers, I see ads for car parts, tea, and insurance. When I help my brother with homework his ads are for toys, and video games. We are again receiving media that matches the audience it is intended for.

I would have liked him to spend more time on the exploration of paintings used for symbolism vs paintings used to display wealth. The painting of the Dutch woman or nude paintings that were not designed for the viewer seem like subtle challenges to the tradition of painting. On the surface they seem to say one thing, but anyone with the ability to look deeper and interpret can see past what is obvious. The same is true with advertisements.

I was surprised he did not talk much about physical advertisements or works of art that often. It seems as if people have moved away from depicting “ideal” forms through sculpture, and a lot of contemporary sculpture is abstract. Also showrooms, for example Ikea or Crate and Barrel, seem to be persuasive in selling the idea of the perfect home. As you walk around the store, you imagine if you buy this one piece of furniture, one organizing item, your home can be one of envy.

Response to As We May Think and Long Live the Web"

I am divided on whether the web should allow data to be shared more freely. I think the best way to reduce restrictions is to reduce government interference and monopoly in systems. The government gives power to corporations to create a bottleneck on a market. They can enforce patents, and kill competition through lawsuits. A self regulated system will bring the most diversity. But self regulated systems are also open to more threats without government regulation. ON systems like Craigslist scams are rampant, and there is no recourse once money is lost or something is stolen and sold. As Berners-Lee mentioned in the essay, stalkers can easily find and track victims if they are computer literate enough. Even large companies were able to target marketing or raise insurance rates because of limited privacy laws - or just because there is no "internet police" to enforce them. As society continues to evolve and change, and as information becomes readily available to bigger groups I feel both the benefits and the drawbacks will increase. Hackers will figure out new ways to steal data, more sophisticated scams will appear, and companies will continue to spy on their customers. If we continue to keep the web open I feel there needs to be more education and awareness around internet safety, better privacy laws, and a more unified global community.