Racism is condemned by the majority in its obvious forms. Other than the most extreme of bigots, who in their right mind would admit to, or openly support, obvious forms of racism? The answer is nobody. But what happens when these lines are not so clearly drawn, and we may gain advantages or information we are not even aware is skewed?
This is where Daniels comes in. In his study he looked at the fluidity of which students flowed from credible civil rights sites to those that are “cloaked” websites, meaning they pretend to represent civil liberties they do not really stand for upon further examination. These websites claim to represent facts, but are far from credible.
The study showed students flowed seamlessly between legitimate civil rights websites and cloaked ones. In this day and age, more and more people are getting their information from the internet, and this can be a great thing! People can truly educate themselves easier than ever. Simply with access to the internet one could conceivably teach themselves anything.
The problem is where they find this information. There are no requirements to the information posted on the internet, and with a little skill you can make just about anything look legitimate and credible. The URL to a website does not often tell you the full story of the motivations behind the website or who might be funding it.
So what are we to do? Should we distrust everything we read? No, and this isn’t the point. The point is that we need to be as critical of things on the internet as we are in real life (or at least I hope people are). We need to ask questions, check sources, and gather enough information as to make an informed decision for ourselves as to the credibility of both the information and the person who gave it to us.
What both Daniels and I are trying to say here is that you cannot just believe everything you see, hear or read. We need to be true academics, and as such learn to question things are find fact and morality for ourselves, and not allow someone, somewhere with a keyboard and some knowledge of the internet to shape our opinions without a little scrutiny.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firmly on topic today…
Being that it is MLK day, and that the topic is cyber racism, this would probably be the part where I commend this great man for everything he did, and then embed a video of his most famous “I Have a Dream” speech for all to see. Sadly, I cannot do this.
I wish I could, but the current copyright laws in the United States say that in order to watch the video, one must pay $10 for the rights to it. This might be one of the more backwards things I have ever heard.
Nobody would argue the greatness of what this man did, just as nobody (in their right mind) would argue racism is completely gone today. So why is it that one of the most emotionally charged and important speeches on the topic of civil rights and racism in America is not posted all over for the world to see? Why is it we feel the need to commercialize one of the most important moments in America’s brief history?
Would you charge someone to read a copy of the Declaration of Independence? Would you be required to cough up $10 in order to sign our national anthem? How about paying money to read The Gettysburg Address and be moved by its content? No you say?
Then why in the hell are we charging people for what should be a cornerstone in the education of any single American? The answer, put simply, is we shouldn’t. These are the reasons why things like SOPA and PIPPA are important to everyone. Copyright laws are often broken, and it’s shit like this that highlights it the brightest.
Side note: Because I cannot post this moving and historically important video, I am refusing to post any other videos, links, or pictures both in protest of this atrocity of law and in honor of a great man; Martin Luther King Jr. This explanation is the only link I will post.
No comments:
Post a Comment