Reader Response Draft 3

In Moore’s article (2011), she claims that the new social media (i.e. Twitter and Facebook) has caused a global revolution, and threatens the social order. It has aided the success of various uprisings, as a form of organizing tool and broadcasting platform, reaching global audiences at a much faster rate than mainstream media. However, some argue that this digital activism has been an on-going issue, and not only a recent phenomenon. Furthermore, director of International Freedom of Expression York argues that it has to be accompanied with offline action in order to be successful. Nonetheless, as a result of the political sensitivity revolving around social media, countries such as China, Vietnam and Burma have imposed strict restrictions on their digital space, as well as pressurised private companies for data. However, their effectiveness has been put to the question.

With the rise of technology and digital usage in the 21^st Century, it is indeed true that social media is able to reach a wide audience with just a click of the finger. This has made it a very useful tool in attracting global attention and raising awareness about various issues. Personally, as part of this digital generation, I also had first-hand experience such as in the example of the Pink Dot Movement. Started out on a social media platform Facebook, it had gained the attention of many youths around Singapore and started a virtual rally, which later led to the largest, record-breaking turn out in the demonstration at Hong Lim Park this year. Furthermore, its success has also inspired people around the world such as in Hong Kong, Montreal, New York etc to organise the pink dot event.This shows how the use of new social media has grown to be powerful platform.

However, without the accompaniment of an off-line activism, linking individuals and getting the word out through technology will be rendered useless. Based on the article, some argue that the use of new social media merely acts as a catalytic factor. I agree that this is true for a few reasons as follows.

Firstly, despite the huge commotion over the internet, it is unlikely for governments to take any demonstration seriously without concrete action. After all, the internet is merely a virtual platform. It is difficult to pressurise for changes if each individual does not rise up to his or her stand and make a statement offline. It might be able to translate ideas but these ideas will only end up becoming empty talk. Thus, it is difficult for the new social media alone to create a global revolution.

Secondly, the use of social media faces a huge challenge – censorship. Due to the power of the social media and its political sensitivity, some countries have imposed restrictions on their digital space, which limits the capability of social media. A valid example, as proven from the article as well, is the “Great Firewall” of China. The Chinese government has strict control over the cyberspace and censors any information that threatens their national security. Although the effectiveness of such measures was questioned, it still shows how the new social media is not a viable tool to be used alone, as there is no guarentee.

Thirdly, the use of new social media has its limitations as well, as it is only able to reach those who are more tech-savvy. In the case of Singapore, although our nation is developed and generally technologically advanced, the prevalence of social media lies only in the younger, more tech-savvy population. The older generation might not trust and rely as much on this new form of media. Thus, the spread of ideas would only be able to reach a certain group of people, hindering its effectiveness.

In conclusion, I agree with the article, and how the prevalence of the new social media has indeed changed the social construct and caused a “global revolution”. However, it must be used hand-in-hand with other measures and concrete action in order to be successful in its uprising attempts.

Reference:

Moore, J. (2011). Social media: Did Twitter and Facebook really build a global revolution?  http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2011/0630/Social-media-Did-Twitter-and-Facebook-really-build-a-global-revolution

Reader Response Draft 2

In Moore’s article (2011), she claims that the new social media (i.e. Twitter and Facebook) has caused a global revolution, and threatens the social order. It has aided the success of various uprisings, as a form of organizing tool and broadcasting platform, reaching global audiences at a much faster rate than mainstream media. However, some argue that this digital activism has been an on-going issue, and not only a recent phenomenon. Furthermore, director of International Freedom of Expression York argues that it has to be accompanied with offline action in order to be successful. Nonetheless, as a result of the political sensitivity revolving around social media, countries such as China, Vietnam and Burma have imposed strict restrictions on their digital space, as well as pressurised private companies for data. However, their effectiveness has been put to the question.

With the rise of technology and digital usage in the 21^st Century, it is indeed true that social media is able to reach a wide audience with just a click of the finger. This has made it a very useful tool in attracting global attention and raising awareness about various issues. Personally, as part of this digital generation, I have also had first-hand experience such as in the example of the Pink Dot Movement. Started out on a social media platform Facebook, it had gained the attention of many youths around Singapore and started a virtual rally, which led to the largest, record-breaking turn out in its demonstration this year. Furthermore, since its success a few years ago, it has also inspired people around the world to organise the pink dot event, such as in Hong Kong, Montreal, New York etc.This shows how the use of new social media has grown to be powerful platform.

However, without the accompaniment of an off-line activism, linking individuals and getting the word out through technology would render useless. From the article, some argue that the use of new social media merely acts as a catalytic factor. I agree that this is true for a few reasons as follows.

Firstly, despite the big hoo-ha over the internet, it is unlikely for governments to take any demonstration seriously without concrete action. After all, the internet is merely a virtual platform. It might be able to translate ideas, however if each individual does not rise up to his or her stand and make a statement offline, it is difficult to pressurise for changes and these ideas are merely empty talk. Thus, it is difficult for the new social media alone to create a global revolution.

Secondly, the use of social media faces a huge challenge – censorship. Due to the power of the social media and its political sensitivity, some countries have imposed restrictions on their digital space, which limits the capability of social media. A valid example, as proven from the article as well, is the “Great Firewall” of China. The Chinese government has strict control over the cyberspace and censors any information that threatens their national security. Although the effectiveness of such measures was questioned, it still shows how the new social media is not a viable tool to be used alone, as there is no guarentee.

Thirdly, the use of new social media has its limitations as well, as it is only able to reach those who are more tech-savvy. In the case of Singapore, although our nation is developed and generally technologically advanced, the prevalence of social media lies only in the younger, more tech-savvy population. The older generation might not trust and rely as much on this new form of media. Thus, the spread of ideas would only be able to reach a certain group of people, hindering its effectiveness.

In conclusion, I agree with the article, and that the prevalence of the new social media has indeed changed the social construct and caused a “global revolution”. However, it must be used hand-in-hand with other measures and concrete action in order to be successful in its uprising attempts.

Reference:

Moore, J. (2011). Social media: Did Twitter and Facebook really build a global revolution?  http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2011/0630/Social-media-Did-Twitter-and-Facebook-really-build-a-global-revolution

Reader Response Draft 1

In Moore’s article (2011), she claims that the new social media (i.e. Twitter and Facebook) has caused a global revolution, and threatens the social order. It has aided the success of various uprisings, as a form of organizing tool and broadcasting platform. However, some argue that it has been an ongoing issue, and not a recent phenomenon. Nonetheless, as a result of this political sensitivity, countries such as China, Vietnam or Burma have imposed strict restrictions on their digital space, although their effectiveness has been put to the question.

With the rise of technology and digital usage in the 21^st Century, it is indeed true that social media is able to reach a wide audience with just a click of the finger. This has made it a very useful tool to attract global attention and raise awareness about various issues. Personally, as part of this digital generation, I have also had first-hand experience such as in the example of the Pink Dot Movement. Started out on a social media platform Facebook, it had gained the attention of many youths around Singapore and started a virtual rally, which led to the largest, record-breaking turn out in its demonstration this year. Although we were not strong activists, my friends and I had worn pink to show our support on the day itself. Furthermore, since its success a few years ago, it has also inspired people around the world to organise the pink dot event, such as in Hong Kong, Montreal, New York etc.This shows how the use of new social media has grown to be powerful platform.

However, without the accompaniment of an off-line activism, linking individuals and getting the word out through technology would render useless. From the article, some argues that the use of new social media merely acts as a catalytic factor. I agree that this is indeed true for a few reasons. Firstly, despite the big hoo-ha over the internet, it is unlikely for governments to take any demonstration seriously without concrete action. After all, the internet is merely a virtual platform. It might be able to translate ideas, however if each individual does not rise up to his or her stand and make a statement offline, then these ideas are merely empty talk. Thus, it is difficult for the new social media alone to create a global revolution. Secondly, the use of social media faces a huge challenge – censorship. Due to the power of the social media and its political sensitivity, some countries have imposed restrictions on their digital space, which limits the capability of social media. A valid example, as proven from the article as well, is the “Great Firewall” of China. The Chinese government has strict control over the cyberspace and censors any information that threatens their national security. Although the effectiveness of such measures was questioned, it still shows how the new social media is not a viable tool used alone. Thirdly, the use of new social media has its limitations as well, as it is only able to reach those who are more tech-savvy. In the case of Singapore, although our nation is developed and generally technologically advanced, the prevalence of social media lies only in the younger, more tech-savvy population. The older generation might not trust and rely as much on this new form of media. Thus, the spread of ideas would only be able to reach a certain group of people, hindering its effectiveness.

In conclusion, I agree with the article, and that the prevalence of the new social media has indeed changed the social construct and caused a “global revolution”. However, it must be used hand-in-hand with other measures and concrete action in order to be successful in its uprising attempts.

Reference:

Moore, J. (2011). Social media: Did Twitter and Facebook really build a global revolution?  http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-Issues/2011/0630/Social-media-Did-Twitter-and-Facebook-really-build-a-global-revolution

Breakthroughs

An event that has shaped your life and the person you have become

Perhaps some people were born to be natural leaders but I had never felt that that was in my blood. By sheer luck, I was offered the opportunity to be a facilitator in the Student Leadership Congress (SLC; 2012) despite my limited experience at that time. SLC is an annual three-day event which aims to hone the leadership skills of participants. As a facilitator, I was responsible for smooth execution of the event as well as guiding student leaders from various schools to acquire relevant skills and “breakthroughs” – the theme for the year. Quite comically, I had also attained my own “breakthrough” through the event.

Despite my initial worries and apprehension, SLC was a very enjoyable learning experience for me. I had picked up many skills, such as learning how to manage the dynamics and welfare of my group members (which ranged from primary to tertiary levels). Also, it helped me to develop my critical thinking as I had to guide the students to their learning points when conducting debriefs, which was not easy. Even though it was only for a mere three days, I derived a great sense of achievement watching my students grow and develop their potential towards the end of the event. This was further enhanced with the bonds that I had forged with them, knowing that my enthusiasm had made the event an enjoyable and fun one for them too. 

People say that you have to be a leader to lead. I would have never expected myself to become a "leader", but leading a group of participants through a camp is something I really enjoy doing. I realized that I could truly find joy and meaning from this, and even went on to work as an outdoor camp instructor after my A’levels, where I gained more of such skills. On hindsight, I am grateful for the opportunity that has given me a life direction and helped me to become the better person that I am today.

Summaries

Facebook article

According to Leake and Warren (2009), research shows that university students who are frequent facebook users tend to underperform in examinations as compared to non-facebook users. This is observed in their lower 'grade point average' and exam scores, and is due to the reduced time spent on studying.



Digital Divide article

Wakefield (2010) argues that there is an increasing the digital divide between countries, which is becoming a global issue. According to ITU (International Telecommunication Union) analyst Gray, the scale of this divide reflects the economic condition of a country. Thus, many developing countries are trying to improve the problem with the implementation of wi-fi villages and e-learning programmes. The Internet is able to reach the minority communities and improve their standard of living. However, concerns were raised over the capability of citizens to use these resources.

My English Language Learning Journey

To be completely honest, I find it odd how I have landed myself in this class and be made to think about what the English language means to me. I would not dare to proclaim about my level of proficiency in the language, but coming from an English-speaking family (albeit mixed with Singlish like most Singaporean families) and a generation that detests the Chinese language, I feel that I do not have a valid excuse not to excel. In fact, I used to love writing when I was much younger. I remember there was once in secondary school when I scored a 26/30 for one of my essay examinations, which was a huge confidence boost in my writing abilities, because such an occurrence was rare - even for the generally good writers. However, my love for writing started to dwindle off when new types of essay writing were introduced in our syllabus. 

I came to realise that the way English is taught in schools was very restrictive, and had always to follow a certain format. I believe the school was forcing us to adopt the approach they wanted, and we were penalised whenever we did not do so. Not that that was bad or wrong, but language in itself is something very dynamic and expressive and I think some of the essence of it is lost when the school forces us to conform in a certain way. This had left me to conclude that my forte lies only in narrative-writing and one-worded essays where I could freely express my ideas the way I wanted it to. I had managed to get away with that pass the O’levels because we still had that option of doing so; however this was no longer the case in GP. Despite struggling to adapt to the essay styles I have always avoided, I had managed to pick it up quickly although my grades usually fluctuated like crazy. Admittedly, I was caught off-guard in the A’levels when I knew I did not have sufficient knowledge for any of the questions posed. 

Although I still feel slightly indignant for having my academic ability judged based just on a one-time examination, I guess I would just take it as a blessing in disguise to brush up on my skills (particularly so since I’m in FASS) and make the most out of this course! 

(Edited 28/8/14)

HI :D