Looking @ Past Readings >>> Forward to Essay

Walter Ong discusses the "garbage in, garbage out" complaint about computers in "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought." The same can definitely be said for short films. There is plenty of garbage out there...the dude that farts onto a flame seeing if it will explode, people doing stuff to their friends after they pass out at a party, etc... chances are, those people did not set out to make something meaningful. While we may enjoy those crappy videos, we understand that they are purely entertainment. In other words, we WANT the garbage. However, we just might not want it all the time. For the times we don't want it, there is good, deep stuff out there, too.
There is a an excerpt from Baron's "From Pencils to Pixels" that really sums up how I feel about this video technology: "as old technologies become more automatic and visible, we find ourselves more concerned with fighting or embracing what's new. Ten years ago, math teachers worried that if students were allowed to use calculators, they wouldn't learn their arithmetic tables. Regardless of the value that parents and teachers still place on knowing math facts, calculators are now indispensable in math class." I think the same definitely goes for low budget videos. There are definitely people, like Alexandra Juhasz, who feel these low budget videos are dumbing down out culture, but you can already see that they are becoming more of a staple in the education system today. How often does a teacher show a YouTube video in class? Most do at least once throughout a semester. I'm not saying that These videos should be used ALL THE TIME by teachers, but I think they can definitely help make things a little more interesting in the classroom.
There is a relationship between comics and short movies as well. When shooting a short movie, it is done in pieces, kind of like a comic is done in panels. Each piece is a little story, but as a whole, they accomplish something much bigger. If pieces were removed, the whole would be completely different.

Low Bridge Videos: Good or bad?

The actual process of making a simple video is pretty fun. Its nice to get to do a project and have very little limitations put on it. Its also nice to be able to work with other people on a fun project rather than the typical, horribly boring collaborative assignment. There are definitely a few connections between the making of a video and the writing process. Although the actual mechanics are different (you don't normally need a video camera to create a piece of writing) the processes are almost the same. First, you start out with a basic idea. After you decide what you will write about or make a video on, you do some brainstorming. Whether you rite it down or just do it mentally, it always happens. Then you create the work. Next you edit. In writing this is proofreading and revising; in film making its actually editing. Then, you share your work and await its review.
I can see why Anderson would advocate the use of low budget media. I think it definitely does help students to be more create and break way from the "repressive and undemocratic" ways of the education system that is in place. When we sat in our groups today, we were all trying to figure out what we were going to do for our videos. I have never seen so many people actually engaged in what we were doing. Everyone seemed to be excited to have a little freedom. I do also agree with Juahsz, however. There is definitely more crap on YouTube than useful, informational works. I think it is a great idea to use it for a fun project, but not much more than that. It is definitely a medium that should be viewed as entertainment, not education.

Peer Review Recap Part 3

There really weren't any similarities between my posts. The first I was just talking about Google Docs and the second I was discussing the Wetpaint Wiki. It seems that my opinion hasn't changed about Google Docs. I still really like it. It is so much better than the Wiki. The only thing that makes the Wiki better is that the Wiki allows you it view more people's papers, which gives you more examples to examine. I like that Google Docs lets allows you to put in a direct comment to someone. It is much better than having to put a thread in at the end. It seems that Brittany Reed and I feel the same way about peer review: our views really haven't changed that much. We also agree on the fact that people tend to sugarcoat things while doing reviews of their peers' papers. This can cause for people to do things wrong and never really be told, which makes the process of peer review useless. Susan McCraken and I seem to disagree: she likes the Wiki better than Google Docs. She thought that Google Docs was more complicated, which i completely disagree with. Setting up the Wiki was a nightmare! Google Docs is so easy to put together and edit. One thing her and I did agree on was that when you don't get much of a draft done, it is hard to really get much out of peer review. I have had drafts ready for both peer review sessions before this, but this time around I really didn't have much ready because I had two other huge assignments that were actually do on this day. To be honest, I probably won't even out what I submitted into my paper.
As a whole, I think peer review is extremely helpful. It makes it easier for you to see mistakes that you may have made. When someone else reads your work, they always see things that you as I writer do not see. It is also really good to have other examples of work to look at. The best things people can do to get the most out of peer review are to bring a good draft with them, be completely honest about the work that they review, and to not take the criticism of others to heart. We are all just trying to do the best we can!