Privacy

Privacy in today’s United States has surpassed the level of a topic or a theoretical idea. As information technology and people’s dependence on virtual platform networking keep growing, privacy has turned into a highly marketable business and become an inseparable part of the US economy. When the word privacy first appeared in literature in 1534 according to the Oxford English Dictionary, it would have been difficult to imagine such single-dimensional idea would grow into a capital influence to society. In common context, privacy denotes a state of seclusion by choice. Today after four and a half centuries, the definition of privacy has not changed a great deal. However the domain of privacy has been vastly expanded due to the new risks, challenges and technological advancement people are faced with.

The idea of privacy has a strong association with security, according to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Humans reside and function in communities yet individuals constantly maintain certain distance from one another to achieve a stable level of comfort and safety. As a result, certain personal information, for instance physical address, earning profiles and medical records, is universally classified as private in modern civilized societies. Unauthorized disclosure of this sensitive information inconveniently shortens or even eliminates interpersonal distance by providing a full exposure of people. Not willing to risk the possibility of invasion to personal comfort zone and security, people today emphasize more and more and privacy.

A beautiful aspect of the United States is its respect for people and individuality. In such spirit, the promotion of privacy is a realization of this American value. Not only does privacy maintains distance between individuals, it also reserves people from public examination. Not having to justify every decision and action, people can arguably be more true and honest to themselves. In other word, under the protection of privacy, people are able to freely develop into the characters and personalities they wish. In addition, the more and more frequent use of “private/personal opinion” or “private/personal voice” when people make a comment is also worth discussing. By classifying a message being private, the commentator consciously disassociates from “the majority’s point of view” and declares the personal value as he/she speaks, which in fact magnifies individuality.

In addition, privacy functions as a signifier of status symbol in a hierarchical society. In the US, privacy denotes a sense of exclusiveness. For example, a party classified private demands participants belong to certain social groups. The expression of private house and private vehicle implies the possession of wealth and a high standard of living. In other words, access to privacy requires meeting certain preconditions, whether it is specific social affiliation or income levels. It is interesting to observe the group of people in our society demanding the highest level of privacy: Hollywood celebrities. As public figures, these stars and artists obviously belong to the highest income group in the country, which enables them to afford tank-like vehicles and personal castles to avoid unnecessary camera exposure outside of work. However, their action to achieve higher and higher level of privacy appears to be counterintuitive for exposure is their very means to generate even greater income.

Since it helps us maintain personal security and define ourselves as unique individuals, it appears to be completely justifiable to put heavy emphasis on privacy. However, a dilemma is created when our certain practices contradict with our intent to value privacy. The popularity of online networking and communication encourage people to be more and more accessible to each other. Also in our society, legal and governmental actions oftentimes override individual privacy, for instance the PATRIOT act and income tax laws. Must accessibility be strictly against privacy? Would it be possible to achieve a harmonious balance between the two? A fair conclusion is difficult to be drawn for we are in a time where privacy is a well-oiled machine in the economy.

Works Cited
“Privacy.” Oxford English Dictionary. March 2008. https://vpn.lib.ucdavis.edu/cgi/entry/,DanaInfo=dictionary.oed.com+50188914?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=privacy&first=1&max_to_show=10
“Privacy.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. March 14th, 2002. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/privacy/

What I Think about Blogging

How time flies. I simply cannot believe we are already approaching the end of summer session 1. These six weeks we spent together in UWP 101 have been a unique exploration of writing like nothing I have experienced before, an exploration I have enjoyed every minute of. Since we were asked to develop this post as a class reflection, I would like to share my thoughts on the learning process and educational value of this course.

I had mixed feelings when I first learned students would maintain personal blogs instead of writing conventional essays in this class. On the one hand, I felt excited for I believe universities should exist as a cradle for innovative ideas and practices. On the other hand, I was skeptical how we could work to incorporate a casual communication medium such as blogs into a formal writing experience. Judging from the quality of our works at this point, my initial worries are proven to be unnecessary. It is incredible to witness blogs working seamlessly with an upper division writing class.

One of the reasons I conclude behind our class success is the openness or public accessibility attached to the idea of blogs. Writing is a means of communication that involves more than one person. As we have been explicitly emphasizing since day one, our posts will be viewable by not only our classmates but also the general public. The consciousness of being observed or judged certainly motivates many of us to experiment and perfect our writing from ideas to techniques. In addition, unlike a traditional English class, we only have one hard weekly deadline but several soft due dates for our works during the week. This practice best ensures the quality of writing by effectively eliminating unnecessary procrastination yet allowing room for the true night owls to choose their most efficient work hours.

Most importantly however, I especially appreciate the courage we possess as a class to challenge the “formality” promoted by many conventional writing courses. I understand some instructors’ hesitation to employ a new writing platform such as blogs. Highly personalized, blogging in many ways resembles keeping a personal journal. Because of the potential subjectivity, blog posts may not be deemed as convincing as a traditional essay that follows the PIE (points, information and explanation) formula. In the pursuit of writing persuasiveness, however, we oftentimes neglect a basic fact: many students simply do not have a mature or strong idea of the topic when first given a writing assignment. Blog writing in this sense provides us with a public yet highly privatized space to safely formulate our opinions no matter how fragmented they are. In the process of continuous blogging and discussing as a class, students are now able to adjust, refine and affirm their original ideas. And all of these efforts will eventually lead to writing an intellectually sophisticated essay, which is the universal goal of all English classes.

Innovation poses risks, and that was a bullet we had to bite when introducing blogs as the writing medium for this course. I am pleased that our class turned out to be a success, and our blogs shall remain an exciting memory of our college education (if they are not to be deleted at the end of the class).

Produced by Photographers, Owned by Media

When I first laid eyes on Truman’s picture of a paintball game, a strong sense of familiarity struck me. The photo reminds me of a game I recently played called Army of Two. A first person shooter, Army of Two emphasizes seamless cooperation of two soldiers in order to survive war. Similarly, Truman’s picture exudes vivid intensity of a battle, demonstrating the importance of teamwork in modern day sports. However, what truly strikes me about the picture is explained in the writer’s description. The depiction of this close range combat scene was taken by a friend of the writer’s at the risk of being shot by stray paintballs.

To me, the photographer’s effort in preserving a loyal image of a fierce combat in spite of personal safety is very admirable. This level of determination to obtain a truthful picture of the game is also displayed by many war photographers who are dodging bullets on a daily basis just to capture the cruelty of battles through their lenses. Thanks to them, we are able to gain a taste of war even thousands of miles away from the hot zone. Despite their respectable efforts and sacrifices, however, I question if we can truly see war pictures as the most honest representation of war itself? In the same spirit, I have doubts if we can rely on pictorial presentations to learn the truth of any event?

Photography does not appear to be much different from writing. A picture is a photographer’s observation and interpretation of an event not only through the lens of the camera but also from the judgment based on the person’s values. For instance, let’s revisit Truman’s picture. If the photographer were to leave the teammate on the left out of the picture, the message could have turned from “teamwork” to “evasive action,” or even just a bland narrative of “Truman firing a paintball gun.” In other words, the essence of an event could be drastically different depending on the photographer’s presentation. Moreover, even if photographers could form the most objective perspective to illustrate an occurrence, it would be hardly possible for a single person to investigate all facets of the happening to come to a fair conclusion. Given the power of nearly manipulating visual influence and the subjectivity in the nature of photography, I feel skeptical about pictorial demonstration of any event.

A picture is worth a thousand words, but a picture does not speak for itself. Today the true power of reporting lies in the hands of the employers and distributors of photographic works, namely the media. Even though neutrality is a required quality in news reports, different networks inevitably hold their own agendas and biases in news production since they are managed by different interest groups. Interestingly and disturbingly, a same photographic representation of an event could be interpreted and presented dramatically different by two opposing players in the media arena. Shown above is a news report on the Tibetan Riot that happened in March 2008. The photographic comparison made by a Chinese website shows how a credible news network like CNN would tailor pictures toward their points of view in reporting. Today we have more and more sophisticated photographic technology to preserve space and time in lifelike pictures; however the seeing-is-believing spirit can no longer be held true because photos have grown to be a new means of manipulation, which seems to be paradoxical and troubling at times.

While remaining appreciative to photographers’ continuous hard work and sacrifices in presenting different realities surrounding us, we have a need to be extra cautious and question what we are presented with by the media. In this day and age of media manipulation, the only way we can break free comes from gaining perspectives from as many sources as possible and examining the messages with our critical mind.

A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words. Really?

Except for the times when I am playing video games, I am not a visual person. Hence when I learned one of our weekly writing assignments being a digital image analysis, my heart immediately sunk. Completely clueless about digital photography, I borrowed a friend’s camera and started brainstorming for picture ideas. In the thinking process, a Kip Fulbeck style makeup-free people portrayal project and a UC Davis in advertisement versus in reality photo comparison came to mind, which were later deemed too ambitious. Sticking with practicality, I eventually took the least risk and snapped the picture above.

Would you agree that this picture depicts nothing more than a driveway to a regular garage in a typical house in Davis, or just anywhere? A car parked in the driveway could be an indicator of two possible facts: someone is home and the garage is filled, perhaps by another car. The beige color scheme on the wall exudes a warm aura, hinting the property could be a family home. A pathway to a garden on the right reflects that some residents in the house have a passion for plants. At a glance, this house fits into every stereotype about a boring, lifeless residence in the suburb; this house is where I live in Davis.

As a resident in the property, I attest our house is anything but boring. I share the space with three student runners on the UC Davis Cross Country Team. Living with athletes is an interesting experience. Instead of seeing their three minute glory on the course, I have an opportunity to go behind the scenes and witness the enormous effort they have to put forth in order to render the best performance. Seeing their insistence and persistence on striving for 0.01 second faster everyday is truly an inspiration to me. In addition to inspirational people, this house is also well equipped with different appliances that appeal to the general college crowd, which easily makes the coolest house on the street. In the living room we have our home theatre with surround sound. A Wii and a Playstation 3 are wired to the system on which we enjoy occasional movie watching and video gaming. The garage is the band room and meeting area, in which a drum set, fishing gear, a DJ station, roller skates and camping equipments can be found. All residents in the house live in harmony for not only do we share chores and living costs but also fun.

That being said, showing off is not my intent. They say, a picture is worth a thousand words. I say, don’t judge a book by its cover. Earlier when we saw the first picture, how many of us would consider the people and equipment behind the bland walls and make an argument of the hip appeal of the house? Technological advancement and mass media today have given us an overwhelming flow of information that we simply do not have enough time to digest word by word. Gradually, we have grown to become more and more dependent on pictorial material for a more direct feed of information. While enjoying the convenience of graphical demonstration, we can easily forget the limitation of photographs: they are illustrations from a single perspective. It is completely justifiable to analyze what message a picture is trying to convey. However, it seems to be even more critical to question what it does not cover. Go beyond the photo, investigate the story from different angles and come to an educated collusion. That perhaps is the most valuable skill we can exchange for the premium we pay for college.

Can We Be Indifferent?

I was reading Carol’s post on discrimination and stereotypes in astonishment. In my interpretation, she equates stereotyping to a major avenue to social acceptance. In addition, she also questions the idea of censoring racially derogatory language because it does nothing but “makes [discrimination] invisible.” Personally I found the analysis in this post not completely compatible with my experience. Therefore, I feel compelled to offer a few of my thoughts on the same issues in response to Carol’s post.

At the beginning of her post, the writer analyzes a video clip from Eddy’s blog and concludes that “we all discriminate and stereotype at some point in our lives.” I am in agreement. Discrimination and stereotypes often appear as generalized or falsified assumptions against a certain social group that the public lacks knowledge of. Very well illustrated in the video, children are individuals who possess limited knowledge and life experience hence tend to offer definitive, inaccurate responses to photo portrayals based on unfiltered outside influences. Nevertheless, society as a whole mostly consists of sophisticated, mature adults with well established values. Different from children, adults tend to evaluate their actions and judgments based on continuous learning and experience accumulation. As a result, I fail to come to the writer’s assumption that people choose to “continue [their] ignorance even though [they] are given the choice to become more accepting.”

Additionally, in her example the writer acknowledges her active stereotyping and considers the reason being her family upbringing, which I found interesting. People inevitably shape their first impressions about society from their first school: home. Nevertheless I believe people’s worldviews and ideologies are constantly deconstructed and reconstructed as their knowledge and experiences grow. Therefore, I have doubts about the writer’s rationale behind her decision of continuing to stereotype given that she is in constant exposure to new, well researched ideas and knowledge in higher education. Moreover, I am personally disturbed by the writer’s explanation of her action as a way to be “normal” and “socially accepted.” It would be tragic if our society had come to a point where people must acquire social acceptance at the expense of other ethnic groups. Fortunately, we are not such a community. As college students, we have a responsibility to examine today’s racial reality in America more carefully and critically. With injustice and prejudice still haunting different communities, we must remind ourselves that ignorance is not a luxury America can afford.

Lastly, the writer expresses her concerns about censorship on language against minorities, questioning if such action would make discrimination invisible. I would argue in favor of such censorship. The promotion of politically correct language should not be seen as a constraint to the freedom of speech; instead, it is an effective means to raise cultural awareness and respect. I completely believe in Carol’s good intent for an understanding world where people could be civilly open to each other about their dislikes or even hate. However history has vividly illustrated the danger of such degree of “freedom.” The Nazi orchestrated the Holocaust because of the hate for Jews. On-going genocide appears to be an everyday scene in Darfur, Sudan today because of openly pronounced hatred between ethnic groups. And America also had her share in racial hate crisis in the Japanese Internment Camp era during the Second World War. I believe in open dialogue. However as we learned from these historical lessons, openly sharing our hate, especially unfounded hate, does not seem to be the magic recipe to create understanding and love. To examine the stages of genocide, we can easily conclude that racial and cultural awareness in language is the key to the prevention of escalating hate between ethnic groups.

Sometimes I would question myself the value of a college education. Is it a diploma I can use to prove my intellectual competency? Is it the key to a financially stable life? Perhaps. But more importantly, I value the tools I have gained and the critical thinking skills I have developed in higher education because they are my light in examining the reality surrounding us, a seemingly fair, but highly racialized reality. In such reality, I fail to imagine equality being achieved by indifference and blind conformity. Nonetheless, with necessary skills and tools, one has a choice to break the silence and challenge injustices for the good of others. This is how the value of my college education is realized.

Laptops

I have mixed feelings about college. On one hand, I look forward to attending classes for continuous exposure to new knowledge excites me. However, I do not appreciate the fact that college education is like a shadow of students. Unlike a regular job where people can leave everything behind and head home after an eight hour shift, schooling entails endless work that requires students put forth an effort on and off campus. For this very reason, I would describe my feelings for my laptop is a fine representation of my attitude towards college.

My laptop is one in the Toshiba Satellite line of products. From the outside in its open position, the computer consists of a seventeen inch screen in the vertical dimension and a standard keyboard with a touch pad horizontally. In a metallic blue shell along with a fingerprint reader, the unit appears to be bulky and heavy, which exudes a sense of sturdiness. Under the hood, this laptop has some fairly powerful key components such as a Duo Core processor and two gigabytes of memory, all of which ensures the possibility of multitasking. Lastly, the enabled wireless connectivity allows the owner, me, to stay mobile with the Internet.

My laptop is my endeared friend and dreaded enemy. I enjoy the occasional movie and TV watching on its high definition screen for I don’t own a fancy television. In addition, I appreciate the convenience from its mobile internet connectivity. However this is also where things go sour with the computer. I classify my laptop as my workstation on which I process and store nearly all the school related documents. Therefore the laptop’s mobility creates an opportunity to blur the line between study time and personal time. Although the convenience of mobility goes both ways, I discover my personal time is more often invaded. College is an intellectually rigorous experience. To do well, students commit more time and effort than the lectures they sit through at school. Thanks to laptop’s mobility, I often find myself staring at spreadsheets even at 1 am when it is supposedly people’s bedtime. I don’t consider this a healthy convenience.

America is easily one of the most hardworking societies in the world. Our consumer culture constantly pushes us to be financially accomplished. To obtain this goal, everybody must commit themselves to harsh work standards and ethic: work anytime and anywhere you can and it’ll pay off tomorrow. Laptops are a representative byproduct of this belief for it allows people to literally carry work with them. Nonetheless while enjoying the convenience of mobile computers, have we ever examined and questioned ourselves? How much laptop time have we consumed at the expense of foregoing interpersonal communication and interaction or simply personal health? I wouldn’t argue the fact that laptop computers are a clever invention. However, while taking advantage of modern technology, we must reserve space and time for activities that make us normal, healthy humans. I wonder what it would be like to have a UC Davis No-Laptop Day.

A Word on Political Correctness

Last quarter I was assisting the Cross-Cultural Center’s (CCC) Search Committee with the hiring effort for a new assistant director. In the final stage, we interviewed five candidates who were outstanding individuals and proved to possess necessary skills for the position. A lady with a law degree from Boalt School of Law and years of experience in community work was our favorite in the bunch. So close to receiving an offer, she made a comment during an informal lunch conversation that flipped our positive impression with her 180 degrees. “It is just lame that education is not the State’s first priority,” she said. She was eventually voted not suitable for the position by the committee.

Many may question the rationale of our decision, but I still consider we made the right choice. For those who are not familiar with the CCC, it is a university unit and a safe space for students of all identities to learn and experience diversity and student leadership. Political correctness (PC) is one of the many virtues valued and embraced by the CCC staff. Regarding the scenario above, I believe most of us would agree this lady didn’t mean harm in her comment. However in my opinion, expressing one’s disappointment with a reference to people with disabilities was very disrespectful. In fact it appeared to be even more dreadful when such comment was made in a casual setting, which could be deemed as an accurate reflection of one’s mindset and values. At UC Davis where we practice the Principles of Community, we should not allow room for exclusive and discriminatory language.

Language political correctness nowadays is a popular movement especially in politics and academia. I understand how this phenomenon could be vexing for it forces people to be prudent and neutral in verbal communication, which is not necessarily a speaking habit that everybody is accustomed to. In yesterday’s class, some classmates even questioned if significant difference existed between PC and non-PC language. I would argue there is.

I don’t know exactly when “power words” based on socially disadvantaged people’s accounts started to be adopted for and introduced to our communication, all of which is just to add dramatic effects to conversations. To examine these “power words”, such as “something is so gay/lame/retarded,” with our critical thinking skills, we can easily see that the users position themselves as verbal oppressors and are perpetuating ideas/values that have been long abandoned in the stream of history. One beautiful aspect of the United States is its emphasis on equality across people and respect for individuals, and the use of “power words” undoubtedly undermines this fundamental value of our country.

Political correctness may cause temporary inconvenience in our verbal communication because we now need to choose our vocabulary more carefully. Nonetheless I personally think it is well worth the “trouble” for it is one of the few places in society we can literally practice equality, at no cost. Say what we mean and mean what we say. That’s the whole point about communication after all, isn’t it?