# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 6: Premiere Pro

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 6: Premiere Pro

# data[].attributes.body
During the Podcast my friend Dave had to get from the recording and go answer the door. So in order for us not to have a giant gap in the audio, I cut the gap out of the sound file using Adobe Premiere Pro. That went very effortlessly and now I have one complete, seamless, audio file.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 5: OBS Studio

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 5: OBS Studio

# data[].attributes.body
For my Long Form Project I am conducting a podcast with my buddy Dave who helped me create my logo. He does not go to CSU, he lives in Georgia, so we had to conduct the podcast over Discord. Discrod is an app that allows people on PCs to be in a "party" together and talk simultaneously with one another. There is no audio recording features built into Discord so I downloaded OBS studio to create the podcast and the quality was awesome. After a few tutorials I was ready to conduct the podcast and after it was all said and done the audio sounded great.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 4: UX Report

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 4: UX Report

# data[].attributes.body
This was a snipet from The Light Phone website. The Light Phone was the subject of my UX Report and I thought this snipet from their website accurately demonstrated what I was trying to accomplish by doing a desirability study. These are some features that users want and may be implemented into The Light Phone. The column on the far right shows features that will never be added to The Light Phone because it compromises the idea behind it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 3: Poor Designs

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 3: Poor Designs

# data[].attributes.body
In this experiment, we were asked to take pictures of everyday things that are poorly designed. In the picture below, the soap is poorly placed below the sinks because the mirror is so large. This is a prime example of a poor design, right in our own backyard.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 2: Interacting with Places

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 2: Interacting with Places

# data[].attributes.body
For this assignment Lexie and I went down into the Ram Skellar and observed what was going on around it. We were conducting a UX Observation study to see how people interact with their environments. It was an interesting study because we got to think critically about the Ram Skellar and how we interact with it and within it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technological Experimentation & Learning 1: 80's Laser Cat Assignment

# data[].attributes.subject
Technological Experimentation & Learning 1: 80's Laser Cat Assignment

# data[].attributes.body
In this lesson we used Photoshop to create 80s laser cat memes. It was our first experience with Photoshop in the class and it was difficult at first, but as I became more comfortable with the software I quickly caught on to what we were trying to do. I really enjoyed this assignment and thought it was a creative way to remix.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 12: Long From Project

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 12: Long From Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 12: Long Form Project

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 11: Spinuzzi, "Participatory" 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 11: Spinuzzi, "Participatory" 

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 10: DeVoss & Porter, “Why Napster Matters” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 10: DeVoss & Porter, “Why Napster Matters” 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 10: DeVoss & Porter, “Why Napster Matters”

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 9: Beck, “Invisible Digital Identity” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 9: Beck, “Invisible Digital Identity” 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 9: Beck, “Invisible Digital Identity”

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 8: Vie, “Digital Divide 2.0" 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 8: Vie, “Digital Divide 2.0" 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 8: Vie, “Digital Divide 2.0"

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 7: Dolmage, “Mapping Composition” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 7: Dolmage, “Mapping Composition” 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 7: Dolmage, "Mapping"

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 6: Amidon and Reyman, "Authorship and Ownership of User Contributions on the Social Web"

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 6: Amidon and Reyman, "Authorship and Ownership of User Contributions on the Social Web"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 6: Amidon and Reyman Reading

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 5: Pannafino & McNeil, "UX Methods"

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 5: Pannafino & McNeil, "UX Methods"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 5: Pannafino & McNeil, "UX Methods"

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 4: Amidon, Stedman, DeVoss, “Remix & Unchill” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 4: Amidon, Stedman, DeVoss, “Remix & Unchill” 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective volgCast 4: Amidon, Stedman, DeVoss, “Remix & Unchill”

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 2: First encounter with Youtube

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 2: First encounter with Youtube

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 2: First encounter with Youtube

# data[].attributes.headline
Reflective vlogCast 1: Oliver, “Net Neutrality I”

# data[].attributes.subject
Reflective vlogCast 1: Oliver, “Net Neutrality I”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reflective vlogCast 1: Oliver, "Net Neutrality I"

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 12: Ridolof & DeVoss, “Rhetorical Velocity”

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 12: Ridolof & DeVoss, “Rhetorical Velocity”

# data[].attributes.body
For some reason this is the topic that I have had the most trouble understanding this semester. We got in groups during class and tried to piece this subject together, but for some reason I just can't seem to fully grasp this idea. The reading "Rhetorical Velocity" gives a simple and understandable description of what Rhetorical Velocity is all about, and I somewhat understand it. I believe it is how a piece of rhetoric and why a piece of rhetoric, like a press release, is developed. Further, it is the strategy, the reason why, certain elements are included in the piece of rhetoric and why they are phrased and why they are placed in a certain way within the piece. From my limited understanding, another important part of rhetorical velocity, is the timeliness of the rhetoric, as in, when it should be released and how it should be released (platform, size, manner i.e. print, video etc.). And that is all I have to say about that. Hopefully I hit that definition somewhere in the ballpark of correct.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 11: McKee, “Net Neutrality and the Infrastructure of the Internet” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 11: McKee, “Net Neutrality and the Infrastructure of the Internet” 

# data[].attributes.body
These two quotes sum up my feelings toward this article and laws surrounding Net Neutrality,:

"Once providers start to privilege some applications or websites over others, then the smaller voices get squeezed out and we all lose." (Obama, 2007)

"With the loss of net neutrality, we lose the multitude and diversity of opinion and perspective." (McKee, 2016)

Why would we want to lose the multitude and diversity of opinion and perspective? I mean if this truly the case, as in, if loosening Net Neutrality Laws and regulations lead to this future, why would we let this happen? Why would we vote the individuals who back this into a position where they can act on it. I just do not understand why this is happening. I just do not see why people would vote for this? Is it not obvious enough that this is a bad thing? I cannot see any way that this would benefit anyone other than the individuals working high up in Communication Organizations? PLEASE SOMEONE ENLIGHTEN ME! Tell me why and how this benefits the everyday citizen and why you are voting for individuals who back up these corporations. I am open to hearing information, I am open to hearing opinions, but as of right now I cannot see why anyone in their right mind would want this to go through, other than being the CEO of AT&T.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 10: Sohn, “Verizon... restricted service during fires...” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 10: Sohn, “Verizon... restricted service during fires...” 

# data[].attributes.body
For me, this article exhibits the reason why we need regulations in corporate America. Allowing such wide open corporate freedom seems to invite such occurrences because regulations aren't holding anyone accountable for their actions. Rather than being empathetic and outward looking towards this situation, it is almost as if Verizon pushed matters under the rug and said it was the fault of the FPD, "Verizon’s argument appears to be that, since the FPD paid for a lower level of “unlimited” broadband service that nonetheless allows the company to throttle their data once a certain limit is reached, there is no net neutrality violation. If the FPD wanted an actually “unlimited” service (i.e., with no data caps), their argument goes, it should have purchased a higher and more expensive level of unlimited service in the first place." Wow. Maybe I am looking at this to cynically, but it seems to me as if Verizon is placing blame on the FPD and hiding behind the fact that as of now there is no net neutrality violation. So now Verizon will not be held accountable for their actions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 9:  Pew Research, “Digital Divides 2015”

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 9:  Pew Research, “Digital Divides 2015”

# data[].attributes.body
I found the presentation to interesting and thought provoking. The graph that peeked my interest the most was Income vs. Internet users within the household. After examining it, I was surprised to learn that the gap between users was that small. But after thinking about it, to me this shows me that access to technological hardware and software is becoming much more common place and maybe even cheaper. Depending on the type, free software is fairly easy to find. Hardware such as basic laptops and desktops seem to be affordable and available, whether it be used or new. Also thinking about public places like libraries that offer free but timed internet and hardware usage has opened the web to all those who want to access it, I could see why it is such a small gap between income and internet users.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 8: Kershbaum, “Modality” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 8: Kershbaum, “Modality” 

# data[].attributes.body
When thinking about Kershbaum's ideas, what intrigued me the most was the idea that, "Multimodal inhospitality occurs when the design and production of multimodal texts and environments persistently ignore access except as a retrofit." the key wording here is "except as a retrofit". Kershbaum builds on this by saying, "Retrofits are problematic because they tend to be added on only after complaints are lodged and determined to be legitimate." which to me seems lazy, why not build the content to have these, at least basic, accessibility structures and features to begin with and build up from there. I think it to be ridiculous considering the amount of technological availability and freedom coders have, in regards to content building on the web. I would like to know more about why it is that these web environments build accessibility features after the fact. Is it just laziness? That seems doubtful. Is it because they are waiting to see what disabled visitors are looking for? I am trying not be cynical when thinking about these reasons, it is just unfortunate that disabled people do not have access to certain web environments until their claims to add features are approved. I am sure there are two sides to this coin, I can't claim experience to either but I would like to know more behind why these features are not already installed in the structure of the web environment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 7: McSherry, “Dancing Baby” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 7: McSherry, “Dancing Baby” 

# data[].attributes.body
In relation to the post below and even the post below that, this is where I think Copyright Law goes to the extreme.

"In this case, Universal Music Group claimed to have a good faith belief that Ms. Lenz’s video of her child dancing to a short segment of barely-audible music infringed copyright. Yet the undisputed facts showed Universal never considered whether Ms. Lenz’s use was lawful under the fair use doctrine. If it had done so, it could not reasonably have concluded her use was infringing.  On behalf of Stephanie Lenz, EFF argued that this was a misrepresentation in violation of Section 512(f)."

Barley audible music infringed copyright? Seriously? This to me is just ridiculous, what harm is the barely audible music doing to Prince's career and fortune? Really shame on them, I don't understand the mind set behind the decision to legally pursue that family other than greed.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 6:  U.S. Copyright Office, "More on Fair Use”

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 6:  U.S. Copyright Office, "More on Fair Use”

# data[].attributes.body
"Promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances."

In alignment with my post below I think fair use is a great piece of legislature in place that protects people from the ridiculous claims of the corporate world. A piece of Fair Use that really stood out to me, was the last section on "Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work" it says, "Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work." to me this is really the most important thing to consider because if it is not harming the original individuals work or stealing profits from them than really what is the reason for not allowing someone to use it? It frustrates me to think that someone already making absurd amounts of money would be cruel to someone who is enjoying someone else's work, only to create something great, and harmless, from it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 5:  Lessig, “Laws that Choke Creativity”

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 5:  Lessig, “Laws that Choke Creativity”

# data[].attributes.body
After watching this, I thought about how as a musician/artist myself, I personally would be very happy if my compositions were "remixed" by someone. I view it as being "free publicity" for my creation, I guess as long as credit is given where it is due. It seems to me like having creative people helping other creative people, instead of creators being limited by corporations is a better system to have in place because this promotes more creativity and creation than having sponsored artists that everyone has to beat essentially. Not everyone will be able to reach the point of having a sponsor and not everyone will be able to reach the amount of exposure as other individuals, so it seems having a system that encourages more creativity will help with evening the playing field in a sense. I think Copyright laws are important but if they choke creativity, are they really there for the right reasons?

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 4: Eyman, “Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 4: Eyman, “Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric” 

# data[].attributes.body
I found it very interesting that the word Digital has Latin roots to "Digits", referring to fingers. "Digital also refers to our fingers, our digits, one of the primary ways . . . through which we make sense of the world and with which we write into the world. All writing is digital: digitalis in Latin, means “of or relating to the fingers or toes” or “a coding of information.” This makes me think about a keyboard, which is the way we record almost all digital input and is primarily recorded through the physical movement of fingers typing in it. As said in the reading, thousands of years ago written communication was “executed with the use of fingers and codes—from the Mesopotamian Cuneiform, to Egyptian and Mayan hieroglyphs, to Chinese logograms, to Aztec codices”—constitute the “first artifacts of scientific and technological developments, hence the origins of technical communication, visual rhetoric, and digital rhetoric”. When we think of the word Digital we think of having to do with modern technology, screens, computers, etc., and that "Digital" is a modern word to describe the now bu to past civilizations it seems like Digital could have had the same meaning, they just used a different form of technological communication i.e. paper, pen, carvings, stone tablets etc. to describe it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 3: Koltay, “New media and literacies” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 3: Koltay, “New media and literacies” 

# data[].attributes.body
After reading this, I thought about Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an interesting space because it can consist of knowledge from a professional or knowledge from an amateur, which is why it is regarded as being an unreliable source. "Amateurs on the Web 2.0 undoubtedly produce some kind of content, while there is often no real possibility to provide quality, to pursuit aesthetic goals or simply being critical, even though this is not perceived by the majority of users, who are encouraged to produce anything, without giving attention to its value." Amateur users can produce content on Wikipedia but there is definitively not an attention to value as the site is made for objective purposes, to find factual information on subjects, but ends up a lot of the time, having false
information.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 2: Kress and van Leeuwen, “Multimodality” 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 2: Kress and van Leeuwen, “Multimodality” 

# data[].attributes.body
While reading this I couldn't help but think about emojis and memes and how both of those things embody the ideas in this reading. It is interesting to me to think about how over time, primarily through the advancement and evolution of technology, monomodals became multimodals; emojis and memes being evidence of this. It seems that as time goes on and technology evolves we see for things come together rather than separate and isolate themselves into individual aspects; rather things come together to evolve into something more advanced. Even something that seems to be so childish, like emojis, is actually a really accurate representation of this idea of multi-modality. An emoji can incorporate all these individual components and combine them to create something so simple yet brilliant.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weekly Reading Post 1: Daley Expanding Literacy

# data[].attributes.subject
Weekly Reading Post 1: Daley Expanding Literacy

# data[].attributes.body
"In  short,  our shared  experiences  as  human  beings  are  more  often  than  not

derived from the images and sounds that exist on screens."

This quote really sums up, to me, what our generation is all about. We are all sharing experiences based on interactions with screens. Right now, I have music playing in the background, typing on one screen and the reading pulled up on another. The only way to access this page is through a screen, and in that way makes it an essential form of communication and soon enough, I believe the only mode of communication. Looking forward, I believe that in a world not to far off from today's world will be made up almost entirely of screens. Whether this is a Dystopian view or Utopian one i'm not sure, but I truly believe it is one of inevitability. I just hope that face to face communication will not become foreign, and that screens, although important, will not take over what it truly means to interact as humans.