For this digital project, Im not entirely sure what i want to do. i know i want to make a video. Since my paper is going to be about dolphins, i was thinking that i could make a video of dolphins talking about how they feel about how they are being treated. i would set up an interview style video with two dolphins talking to eachother and both would be wearing dolphin masks.

Im slightly worried about this paper. Actually really worried about this paper. i know im writng about sea world and how they get their dolphins and if they changed their ways from buying from the fisherman who acquired the dolphins in the worst way possible. but im not sure what my thesis statement is or how im going to convey that in my video.

My topic for the research project is going to be the enhancement of humans but technological means and the different reactions people have based on their uses. Specifically this will involve the topics of steroids and the use of adderol. I’m sure tterr are multitudes of different video presentations that I could do to portray this kind of topic but none I can think of that are not overly complicated and just plain boring so I will be opting for the 3d printing option.

I was thinking about something along the lines of a fully functioning syringe wil some sort of pill inside of it. I was looking at the websites for the printing and I see no reason why this kind of thing wouldnt work. It may be a little complicated to actually make the syringe work but I think it’s doable.

For my research paper I plan to be doing something relating to media bias. In particular, how today’s 24/7 media culture effects and influences our views on issues. To do this effectively I plan on comparing and contrasting cable networks like Fox News, CNN and MSNBC as well as discussing how the involved parties now have greater control of their own messages thanks to sites like Twitter (as the Obama and Romney campaigns did during the most recent Presidential election and Israel and Hamas in the most recent Gaza conflict).

For the digital part of this project I’m torn between doing a video or a 3D object. For the video side I’m leaning toward a “mashup” of clips featuring of Fox and MSNBC on an issue, mixed in with some commentary from a third source like the Colbert Report and The Daily Show. I also may have clips of online text articles in the clip to show the “truth side.”

As I am not a skilled video editor, and the fact that I am not so sure I have the proper computer and tools to undertake such an ambitious project (I have a Windows PC which is great at a lot of things but not as good as the Mac for video editing), I am also considering doing a 3D print out of a microphone. On the back of this mic would be the logos of MSNBC, Fox and CNN, with the word “TRUTH” on the front. The top of the mic (the big circular area) would be something like a globe, to symbolize that this is a global issue. I would accompany this with a PowerPoint explaining how I created this and why (possibly with some clips interspersed as well).

Still unsure which direction I will go in, but this is where my head is right now.

My topic is cloning for the purpose of extending human life. For the Digital media project, i would like to make a video. In this video i will have someone with “tattooed” lines all over his face (incision lines), being interviewed on who he is. He will reveal his life in a “cloning factory” were he was taught to live a lie, and that his purpose was to give his organs to humans. He will also reveal that they were taught that they are worth less than humans. He will describe the factory living conditions, and how it at first looked like a prestigious school  for these clones, and that the organ removal was a privilege to serve the community.

This would serve the purpose of showing a dystopian future that could be a possible outcome of cloning humans. this is of course based off the paper thesis which would argue against cloning of Humans.

So in keeping with the theme of Technology vs Evolution my brain drifted to the world of the many machines that keep people from dying. As that thought floated in my head the last couple of days the perfect idea for a 3D object came to mind. The idea is to build a virus. More specifically a virus that is being attacked by an antibody because of the vaccines artificially created.

My notion of medicine is that it is beginning to outsmart mother nature and it is beginning to keep up with the curve balls that mother nature throws it. As the virus adapts to the vaccine the technology adapts to the virus and as this continues technology will always be one step ahead of the virus and as a result people will live to be much longer. The ramifications of fighting mother nature wont be clear as of yet, however I’m sure in due time she will tell us herself.

I’m still not sure which to do for my paper because of the subject I have chosen. I will be arguing how the in the nature vs. nurture argument in sexual orientation, the biological component (nature) decides it, more specifically I will be dealing with the case of Chaz Bono. What I was going to try to do was possibly create a 3D object of a brain, small one, in some creative way. I’m still not sure how exactly to do that yet or what exact angle I’m going to take.

The 3D object I personally feel to be a bit simpler, I guess. I honestly do not like this side of the research project because of the area of concern we are dealing with, bioethics. I just don’t see how this is going to be enjoyable. Anyways, I think the idea is pretty cool and I’m gonna try to use the 3D printer, most likely for a small brain because the argument I’m making all centers around this organ. I want to see, however, how to make it in the simplest way so that it is easy to print, but still in the method I want to convey my argument.

In finding a logical way to compare these writers I look to their styles of writing, Etgar wrote Fictional stories while Colm wrote the Novel “Brooklyn” based on a story that actually took place. When Etgar was asked a question by a student during the Q & A session of his speaking about a story the student had thought he written his answer lead him to explain to us that “he doesn’t know how to write about real life experiences in his live”. After hearing Etgar say this I quickly inferred that Etgar liked to use his imagination and creatively in his stories. While on the other hand Colm choose to write a much less fictional story when he base his writing off a true story that he had heard as a child. By seeing the different styles of writing choosing by these authors I can give reason to the different levels interest i had in them when they spoke.

As many would agree, listening to Etgar was a lot more enjoyable and interesting then to hear Colm speak. Etgar’s way of speaking reflected his writing for the most part. A sufficient word that describes how he spoke is the word colorful. His speaking was colorful because of the humor which at times was inappropriate and the way he brought a personality to his speaking. His “colorful” way of speaking can directly be connected to his fictional way of writing in the sense that he is a very creative person which is more interesting to the individual then something that is redundant or bland. We as a culture embrace creatively because it interests us. The lack of creatively in both Colm speaking to us and his book is the reason why I did not enjoy either. Colm speech was hard to pay attention to because it was just like his book in the sense that he focused a lot on unimportant detail in a very bland way. Not to take away from Colm as a writer because I am sure there are many people that enjoyed his novel and would love to hear him talk but for me I would much rather read and listen to an author with creatively and who has a colorful voice like Etgar Keret.

As listeners, i guess comparing and judging is bound to happen. On thursday when we were told to listen to two speakers talk about their writing, by the reaction of the students it became obvious who the more favorited was; Etgar Keret. My reaction to keret was a bit ironic personally because i remember dreading into the conference center trying to wake my self up mentally to prepare for another speech; meanwhile earlier that day during Toibin’s speech i was up and ready and maybe even a bit excited to see the author who’s book we read over the summer. Even with my exhausted state Etgar Keret took it away and didnt fail to grab my attention.

Both speakers had completely different ways of speaking and tones in their voice. Toibin even with my utmost attention towards couldn’t get much of a reaction out of me. Though his story was deep and thorough and his words made sense and were meaningful he lacked some qualities of a entertaining and inspiring speaker. Some qualities which Etgar definitely expressed. He managed to successfully maintain the attention of the crowd by getting his words out there and also crack jokes to get the audience laughing. Almost everything Etgar would say has a certain tone to it. Either it was through his sarcastic remarks about his wife and kids and the german tv show person or when he was reading his different texts out loud or when he randomly asked someone for a tissue because his nose was running OR was it just his thick accent that i got a kick out of. I overall enjoyed just being there in his presence as he continued speaking. And even was a little disappointed when he had to leave early for his flight. Meanwhile in the earlier Toibin speech i felt totally indifferent, if not maybe even a bit relieved when it was over. Not intending that Toibin was a bad speaker or anything. Just when compared to Keret, Keret definitely has my vote.

So yeah, extra credit assignment blog, hooray!! 🙂

Last week, LC13 went and listened to two authors in a row, Colm Toibin and Edgar Keret. To be honest, I really did NOT like Colm Toibin at all, because all he did was summarize his book (or at least thats what I heard, if I’m wrong then my bad……)

Edgar Keret was very amusing and I liked some of the things that he said.

One of them was: “I’m sure anyone who lives in this world can see the darkness of it, even those who live in the light can see the dark spots”

That sounded really deep and i wanted to hear more from him. He is very respectable and funny where as Toibin sounded dull (although i liked his accent).

I feel like Toibin had no creativity whereas Keret had so much creativity i swear i could’ve seen a double rainbow on a starlit sky in that conference room. (not literally of course, or else i could be crazy)

Now, about that last paper……

The idea of it is nice, I am SOOOO looking forward to using that 3d printer for our assignments. Well, not actually USING it (like personally,) but to have something like that for a project/paper is pretty cool 🙂

My topic is the world’s technological dependency, problem is, I’m not 100% sure on what to narrow it down to. I prefer it to be something unique, and not as common as what you would see everyday (i.e smartphones, ipods, etc). As I put more thought into it, I am very confident that once I actually get on track with my brain (which rarely ever happens) my assignment will come out really well.

Looking forward to it!!