The reward system in video games does make it more appealing and addicting especially with kids. My five year old is amazed when he reaches a new level in Call of Duty (yes I allow him to play) he even learned the meanings to new word like “checkpoint” and will often sound words out to learn them, my point being he’s excited to learn these new words because they are implemented in the game, he enjoys school work as well but you can tell he’s enjoying call of duty. It could be the fact he knows he’s completed a level and the reward is to continue in the game, he’s played so much he’s learned without actually intending on learning as mentioned in the text.
Johnson also mentioned that it was the dopamine system in the brain that controls the reacts to rewards like a type of accountant and as an adult I do believe that video games are a way of just relaxing and experiencing reward without the wait. I like to play Madden football, and I play to win every game and get to the super bowl and win that, it gives me a type of personal satisfaction that was explained with Johnson and the dopamine system. To be honest, I don’t fully understand the type of research that has been done and his report was some extensive but I hope I captured the overall idea.
1. What types of research were have been done for this study and where?
2. Do video game inventors implement this type of neuroscience researches in the development of their games?
Steve Johnson advocated Pop Culture as he defines it as a complex alternate view on life. He focuses on video games where he talks about how when we play, we get rewards and it positively affects us because we get motivated. For example, in games like World of Warcraft, every time you work up experience points and level up, you start glowing temporarily as a sign that you leveled up. People like instant gratification and the rewards that you get after working for something is what many people look forward to. Unfortunately in life, we don’t get to experience the instant gratification that we get in video games because it may not be instant. Though, there are times where we experience something similar to instant gratification. For example, back in the day, if I were to get at least three A’s in my report card at elementary school, my Mom would promise that she would take me to Chuck E. Cheeses or buy a game that I wanted. Many other times, we don’t get that privilege because it’s not instant gratification. It’s more delayed. For example, working out at the gym in order to lose weight and gain muscle. In video games, you would get experience and skill points. But in real life, you don’t get instant results because it’s gradual. What Johnson is trying to say in my opinion is that pop culture is a gateway to a complex reality that defies the boundaries of real life in order for one to be able to see a different perspective.
Neil Postman argues that technology is bringing something in and phasing something out. He basically says that traditional things such as talking, letter writing and others are getting phased out with the advent of texting, emails and many more types of media. Postman also acknowledged that in the future, even people will be phased out in favor of machines. He believes that teachers would eventually be phased out by television or other forms of media. While technology makes things more convenient for us in life, it also takes out traditional life. Like Paper Maps are obsolete because there’s GPS or Google Maps. Letters are starting to be phased out in favor of emails. Even texting and “facebooking” is used as much, if not more than actual phone calls. Examples in my life where Postman’s argument is true is the movies. I used to rent movies out of Hollywood Videos (a video rental company similar to Blockbuster) but with the advent of online streaming, I’ve gradually stopped going to Hollywood Videos. I also remember passing by the Virgin Superstore in SF as I was walking to a Wondercon. It used to be a place where people bought physical CD albums. But due to iTunes and MP3s, even CDs are getting phased out. It’s pretty sad to see traditional things we love starting to phase out and who knows, maybe Facebook and Emails will become a thing of the past someday.
Neil Postman’s argument in the video was that technology is taking something away from us. Although it was contributing to the technological advances in the future, these advances were also taking something away from us. For example, Postman stated that sometime in the future, people would have the ability to do banking in the comfort of their own home due to these advances. Although it serves us for convenience, it also takes something away from us. Usually, one would have to go out to the bank and cash a check. That social experience of being out and being in an environment where one interacts with their surroundings is important to us as human beings. Technology may present a step forward into the future, but he states that we should keep in mind what were giving up. Yes, a lot of the things that Postman said do prove his statements. Take the present for example. So many people are interested in social networking site, that individuals even post their information online. Instead of getting to know someone in person, they can just pull up their profile, and instantly know their likes and dislikes. A perfect example of this is Facebook. People can now add friends from all over the country. Although this is a good sight to keep in touch with people, this also defeats the purpose of getting to know someone in person.
Neil Postman’s main argument was that we don’t live in a oral based world where what people tell us is what controls , but we voluntarily want to be controlled.
Technology he felt always gives us something. But it always takes something away. How he put it was you have a responsibility to one another. When you walk into your house you can’t turn your family off, but on the web you don’t have that responsibility so you can just turn them off. How I understood this point was my friends if we are in person you say bye you always say bye it’s in polite to just walk away. But on chat people sign of int he middle of conversations. But they problem is now people sometimes won’t say bye in person. At school my friend will see someone they know and just walk away and never say a word unless I do. So it’s take away that responsibility.
His other point was school. We learn to socialize in school, but with computers it emphasizes individualism. You don’t need people around when you’ve got more games and books and tv shows and blogs and on-line chatting to the point where you are over flowing with information. Which brings me to his last point we become information junks we have so much information we don’t know what to do with it so in return it becomes meaningless.
Steven Johnson’s main argument was that popular culture can be a good thing and is more complex then what people say it is. It shows us a different perspective. What he focused on was video games. He felt that video games give you rewards that are clearly mapped out and defined so you are guaranteed to get it which in returned releases dophime which is your bodies way of searching for more. Unlike life where you have to postponed those rewards and you have no guaranteed they will even come. An example he used was the sims and I did agree with this point. I know that if I read a cook but in the sims I gain a skill and I can cook a cake the more times I read the more I can cook. If I read a book now does not mean I can cook it or ever will be able and even if I could one day it will be down the road in a few weeks or so. So I understand what he is saying about the guarantee that video games give you that life can’t.
Reality TV still shocks me that people will allow to be on shows like Flavor Flav and Real World. I just never understood why fame was so important that you will allow yourself( in my opinion) to be viewed in a negative way by the world just for your “fifteen minutes of fame”. Now I don’t think it’s fair to view these people based purely of the show considering that put people in situation that are bound to erupt in chaos. For example the show Wife Swap switches to wives and puts them in the other household for two weeks. Doesn’t sound to eventful actually like it would be kinda cute right? Well how about making one family Catholic and the Believe in the devil? So I can’t base everything from the show but I can say that even knowing that the show is to create conflict people still do it! That is still a mystery to me.
It’s all just a median to what is going on in the world. Like it says with All in the family and Married..With Children they are all just a reflection of what society is fighting against or questioning at the time and that thing always seems to be social norms( at least to me). Bill Maher had talked about how the character in All in the Family would always say “To the moon Alice” implying he would hit her. That was funny back then But showing that in the 90′s people would have had a fit. or Like Leave it to Beaver I watched it with my father and sister once and it was cute but my sister reminds me by saying” It’s funny, this is all sweet but you know back then there were rooms that women were not allowed to enter in the house” which in turn changed the whole way I watched the rest of the episode.
Question one- What drives people to have there 15 minutes of fame even if they are seen as low class in there society?
Question 2 -Does Tv have the power to change social norms? or can it only reflect social norms?
Postman’s main argument is that television focuses on television as a medium rather than a technology, particularly in America. He contends that the dangers of television are not in its role of providing simple entertainment but in representing all experiences as entertainment. Watching too much television creates the assumption that all aspects of life have a redeeming amusement value because television has portrayed them this way. It is particularly effective in that it provides a “variety of subject matter, requires minimal skills to comprehend it, and is largely aimed at emotional gratification.” America’s capitalist economy allowed all the capabilities of television to be exploited and exported across the globe. American television as a medium differs from many other places in this regard. Whereas programming is a commodity in other countries, a television may serve the same function as a radio but with images, broadcasting news from one station at various times of day for the purpose of serving government interests. Postman uses the example of news to show the entertainment driven focus of television, saying that the amiable cast and stories of tragedy and primitiveness shown in dramatic imagery behind action driven music makes it more of a play and less a relay of information. I think another prime example is the recent sleuth of ridiculous game shows that sway contestants with the hope of money for performing absurd tasks. Shows like WipeOut exploit the compulsion in us to schadenfreude, that is, delight in the misfortunes of others. Game shows like “Minute to Win It” and “Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?” showcase the American dream, giving away thousands of dollars if a contestant can move an Oreo from his forehead to his mouth or answer simple questions about geography. Any of these games could be played at home but the high stakes of the prizes, the eye-catching design of the set, and the charm of the hosts urge us to watch and root for contestants.
Television is one of the main sources of technology that people have in their households. It’s crazy to know how many people own televisions. Television was a new invention in the 1920’s and was finally distributed to the U.S. in the early 1940’s. Television was a great source for obtaining news, watching shows of different genres, and even learning about the latest news about their celebrities. Not only was television a good source of entertainment, it’s also a symbol of social status. People now a days average two televisions in their home. Occasionally one set per room. For example, I have 3 televisions. We have one TV per room. I believe that people own multiple TV’s for convenience. Having the ability to watch your favorite shows in multiple rooms is really convenient.
It’s amazing at how technology advances so quickly these days. I was watching TV when an ad for HDTV came up. The described it as the “ultimate HD experience”. A couple of minute later, a commercial for ESPN 3D came up. Technology has made it possible to watch TV in 3D. I remembered when 3D was only something one would experience in a movie theater. It’s amazing at how fast technology is making this possible.
What other upgrades could they customize with the TV?
Why does it seem like technology is moving too quickly?
POINTS:
Television is one of the strongest representations of Pop Culture because it’s one of the most powerful in terms of exposure and popularity. An example of how this worked is the presidential elections back when the television was a new product. The presidents were showcasing their speeches and it swayed the voters. With such a powerful weapon of exposure, it also has led to controversy due to content. One notable incident was the Superbowl Nip-Slip with Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake where Janet Jackson was “exposed” on live television. After that incident, the FCC decided to implement a few seconds of delay on live programming in order to prevent anymore controversial incidents. But like all forms of rules, it gets broken either intentionally or unintentional, but it helped reduced it.
There are many different content of television to fit the tastes of many people ranging from action to sports to comedy to reality and much more, but one type of content that many people can agree that they watch is the news. Whether it’s local, global or gossip, we always want to stay up to date with what’s going on in life, what are the new trends and much more. I personally watch the news every morning when I eat breakfast because I want to know what locally is going on in my life and sometimes it helps me whether it’s parts of SF closed due to a parade or updates on how schools are doing with budget cuts. Another thing that many people agree that they see is advertisements because it’s broadcasted on many channels and it serves for us to be aware or to get their product. It has a powerful influence because I remember a few days ago, a commercial ran for Taco Bell and it influenced me to eat Taco Bell that day just because I was exposed to a commercial. I probably wouldn’t have eaten Taco Bell that day if I wasn’t influenced. Other than commercials making us aware of issues and influence, it’s also used by the government in order promote themselves in elections.
QUESTIONS:
With the advent of the internet/youtube/etc., do you think television would become extinct?
Nowadays, how much time do you watch television compared to your childhood?
