One person will read my lowly blog

So a blog is created every second and on average one person will read it according to google's latest study. Do I count reading my own? It is virtually talking to one's self. Damn good thing I can amuse myself since I am my own audience. Knowing that I am the only one reading this, I am going to begin using this as a stream of consciousness in my spare time. This should be the best tool of amusement I've stumbled across in Y-E-A-R-S!

Anyone still checking this?

If you are bored and checking this I am sorry, but I am officially in hibranation. I will continue to use this blog in the future when I have important things to share with you all, but now I am too busy absorbed in my growing and development of a social worker, I have no time to type random thoughts. I will let people know if this changes.

Alternative uses for technology

If gangs can do...then so can we!
I got this article out of the USA Today 7/6/06 http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-07-06-gangs-web_x.htm regarding gangs using the internet to post threats, brag about illegal activity, recruit members, etc. In my mind, I think this in some ways is proof that the digital divide is lessening. I would rather see the internet be used for good, but the fact that gangs are accessing the internet sort of creates the question in my mind just how wide is the digial divide? The typical gang member is more than likely a minority from an impoverished background. Yet, they are accessing the internet to further their own cause.

Winona Shares
http://www.winonashares.org/
Members of the community in Winona started Winona shares over a year ago. It is a way for people to connect with agencies about volunteer opportunities. But even better than that, it is a place for people get rid of stuff they don't want around their house anymore and get it in the hands of people who are in need of it. It is great for people who are looking for household items, people who want to unload things, and for the environment since a lot of this stuff would otherwise end up in the landfill. I haven't heard the stats on how many people have connected, but I have utilized it myself a few times and have had good outcomes.

What a relief!

I am so incredibly happy for our chat on Thursday with April Kirkharts last week. I am the first to admit that I am just a bit of a cynic. I say I am a realist- my husband calls it pessimism. I figure working in social work I can't be to pessimistic or I would be doomed. But to the point...April really opened my eyes for the first time about how technology can really improve people's lives- specifically people living in poverty. I know how technology has improved my life, but that isn't relevant to everyone. Unfortunately, I did not have this perspective up until then. See previous blogs and discussions for evidence of this fact. Chad pointed out that you can find negatives in anything new. I don't usually have to look to hard esp. when it comes to technology. Keep in mind- I graduated from undergrad in 1999 and I was still typing my papers on a fancy type writer because I was too impatient to learn Word. I did use e-mail a little at that point, but not much. I maybe did not learn specific ways to implement technology with my clients, but I did get the message that I need to open my mind and eyes to the power of the internet and all that can be accomplished by people who should have access to it, but don't. I was too caught up in how hard it would be and how many hurdles would need to be jumped. They still exist, but if you can look past those it will be much easier to sell the idea (to foundations and people with money to share) of technology expansion to better people's lives.

two-tierd internet service

So technically at this point in my evening I should be responding to other people's blogs, but I just thought of something that totally pisses me off and will have a huge impact potentially on advocacy and community organizing online.

On MPR about a week before this class started I heard that there is a push for internet companies to begin to regulate the amount of websites a person may has access to in the future. The basic premise for those not familiar with this concept is that internet companies will charge companies a rate (supposedly pretty large) in order for their site to be able to be accessible quickly and easily by consumers of that internet company. So companies like google, e-bay, etc. who have enough $ will be able if not really willing in order to maintain their market niche. However, non-profit organizations who may already struggle to maintain a website will be pushed out by the fact that their site will load too slow or may not even load at all. This will be a huge hinderance to small businesses and agencies and may discourage web development for these organizations.

This is where I think the government needs to step in to prevent this insane idea that will only benefit internet companies and no one else.

Here is a website that speaks more to the topic:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=957

The luxury of blabbing in the blogsphere

One of my classmates hit the nail on the head in the discussion board stating that people in poverty may not feel computers are a priority especially if they don't see it as is a tool for them or somehow useful. I truly believe that this viewpoint amongst low- income families is slowly changing, but it could take several years. The question that is hanging out there for me is "Are people really better off with personal computers in the first place?" Yes, computers give us more access to information quickly, they help us in research projects and keeping in touch with friends. However, I know I spend a lot of wasted time on the computer. I sometime brag to friends how little I watch T.V. I tell people that information with pride, but you know what? My T.V. time was replaced by the internet. I don't play games or surf porn, but I can't really account for a lot of the time I am online. I know I e-mail quite a bit and look up news, but those 2 things combined make up less than 50% of my online time. So knowing this, how can I promote a technical tool that interferes with true (in person) social networking, causes eye strain in small children (http://www.tifaq.com/kids/aoa-children_vision.html), causes carpel tunnel, is more than likely becoming the alternative babysitter (TV being the first) for many families, and allows very easy access to a lot of negative things such as the above mentioned porn.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not want to limit computer access to anyone except maybe child molesters out there who are on disney.com as I type. I just wonder if all this technology is really good for our society. In terms of our organizing class, I really think it is a good tool to reach out to many people, but the valuable in-person connection is lost. This concerns me a great deal. Our culture could see a huge paradigm shift in the coming years- it is happening already. Some teens are spending huge amounts of time online and not really learning how to connect with peers in person. I can understand this- the internet is safe in a way because it is so anonymous. You can belong to a world where you can make yourself up and/or hide away. Whatever you desire. You can find sites where you won’t be judged and if you are you can always find a new chat room or site that you can feel you belong. This is harder in the real world. I struggle with all of this so much. I don’t think this technology belongs only to those who can afford it, but on the other hand, I am worried about a future where everyone is online, connected 24-7 and very little face-to-face social interaction occurs.

Just a thought on community organizing online

I have now been in attendance of several online classes and have read articles, other people's thoughts about online organizing, etc. At this point, I have developed a theory of sorts- this may change as I learn more, but here it is for now. The internet and all the current technology that is available is the most useful for the people who are leading organizing efforts to gather new information, ideas, and reach out to other organizers in who are doing similar work. This could be social work professionals or leaders in a neighborhood or community, but the power of the internet is not far reaching enough YET for most organizers to use it as an effective tool for outreach to the masses. The PEW article along with Crandall's article really reiterate how I feel. People with money have better access to technology. Not only that, but people in higher socioeconomic classes more than likely have had more exposure to technology as well. As social workers we have been told time and again to start where our clients are. As I am taking this class, I just keep having this image in my head of a very ambitious social worker out there online trying to organize a community event and failing miserably because he/she was overly eager to get into the technology age and the people he/she is working with are just not there yet. I think moveon.org and some of these other politically driven online orgs are successful because their target groups are 18-50ish people with computers and money. They know that is who their audience is and it works, but that is not our audience as social workers. So I am very eager to learn more about the technology divide and am looking forward to our speaker on Thursday.
One of my classmates hit the nail on the head in the discussion board stating that people in poverty may not feel computers are a priority especially if they don't see it as is a tool for them or how it is useful in some way. I truly believe that this is slowly changing, but it could take some more years. The the question that is hanging out there is "Why is this so wrong?" Yes, computers give us more access to information quickly, they help us in research projects and keeping in touch with friends. I know I spend a lot of wasted time on the computer. I sometime brag to friends how little I watch T.V. I tell people that information with pride, but you know what? My T.V. time was replaced by the internet. I don't play games or surf porn, but I can't really account for a lot of the time I am online. I know I e-mail quite a bit and look up news, but that those 2 things combined make up less than 50% of my online time. So knowing this, how can I promote a technical tool that

Thoughts on blogging and community organizing in the USA

This is my first non-Costa Rica related blog directly related to our class. I have some observations from blogging that can be correlated to online advocacy. I am aware that many people checked out my blog while we were away. The only reason I knew this, however, is because I got e-mails and spoke to people after my trip that said they followed our trip while we were gone and complimented me on the method and how much they enjoyed reading what I had to say. My mom tried to leave comments on the blog, but could not get a sign-in name. Many of my friends didn't even bother to sign up for various reasons. If I was trying to organize online and had the small number of posters I did, I would have thought I was not reaching any sort of audience and would be very discouraged. This is one of the bigger hurdles I see with online advocacy and we have touched on it in class. It is SO easy to be an online "looker" and never actively participate in the process. If it is complicated to sign-up or even the fact that people need to register may turn people away. I can see so many great applications for this technology, but I am struggling to look past the huge hurdles that need be addressed to accomplish the goals of any organizational effort. Also keeping in mind, that I love technology (esp. gadgets with buttons!), but I am also slow to embrace it for various reasons (financial, time it takes to learn, etc). Community activism is based on wide participation. I would like to know concrete ways to get people interested in participation and discussion and start to engage people who may come to browse and then move on.