The Andrejevic article addresses several different ways in which ramifications and consequences of online living can affect the world around us. When I thought of iCommerce, I didn’t think about something like what Nike did. I thought it was very interesting that Nike created a campaign to create interactivity between buyer and seller. It was smart of Nike’s behalf so they could use customer’s designs under their own property, but intriguing enough to buyers that they not only could design their own shoes but also interact with the billboard in Times Square. It was like imagined convergence in all different kinds of forms except an interactive billboard. I think that the “democratic desire” especially in American culture, feeds into our values beliefs and norms. I think about shopping online and even for one product there is usually at least one color variation that a consumer can choose from. It is interesting how trends change over time and we end up adding or subtracting different items to make the marketing fit the times. Under iCulture, the popularization of interactivity is stressed much like under iCommerce. This generation calls for attention to the needs of “prosumers” and “active audiences”. Collaboration in this sense has proven to be successful not only in commerce, but in culture as well. It used to be the America was the symbolic melting pot due to the merging of multiple cultures, ages and races that made this their home over periods of time. Now that there is electronic means of collectively creating and being in the same place, almost everywhere with an internet connection allows for tis joint type of creation. From blending with music to any other form of art, the article states that interactivity raises creativity and productivity but may benefit people and institutions other than the creators themselves. Under iMonitoring, the presentation of self is shown as a large part of the online community and focuses a lot on infidelity. The article argues however, the mutual monitoring has often been a part of culture and that the availability of online monitoring has just increased the capabilities of it. This brings to light the lack of expectation of privacy. With this in mind, we can understand that interactivity also plays a role in monitoring, but the question must be asked whether participation is a choice. The section on iPolitics talks about how public opinion has an effect on issues that politicians argue. This mention of interactivity talks about monitoring but as it may reduce public accountability in order to organize issues of public relations.
Image borrowed from www.solutionsiq.com
The Castronova article talks about synthetic worlds and focused on several different actions that occur online. The part that interested me the most was that section titled, “Worst and Best and Pretty Bad Visions”. The vision the author has for Meemaw was something I was surprised that hadn’t been marketed towards older people yet, or even those with close family ties. This interpersonal connection is something that is a basic need for many people and I cannot see why it doesn’t exist yet. Even the generational gap can be defeated with the ease of putting on glasses and pushing one button. Of course, not all communication online is warm family interaction, so we have to be careful where we go and what we do online, much like in the real world.
Image borrowed from www.itworld.com