Times are Changing

How is it Possible to be Unbiased?             I found these readings on the digital divide to be very informative to my point of view, specifically because I was naïve enough to believe most of the population in the U.S. had access to the internet. In another class I asked, “How has Social Media (specifically Facebook) been used to create action for or against public policy?” and while I see it is a topic that can be further investigated, the question still remains who would be affecting public policy through these social media channels? Could my research have been skewed if I were not thinking about what types of data to collect? Could it be skewed because I am trying to prevent this bias from occurring? I think it is possible. While I believe it is important to develop research ideas, I now see the dilemma on gathering fair and unbiased data as there are variables that we simply do not think of.             This leads me to my next thought; what is more important to research

There Must be Two Sides to Every Theory Although I agree with Baym on a lot of her points, I can’t seem to get past the fact that she seemed very biased in her writing. I agree that humans have the ability to choose what media sources to engage in, how to use them for our benefits, and how to improve them in the future, but I didn’t see deep discussion that media has not negatively affected our lives. Unfortunately, she decided to briefly touch on those topics instead of evaluating them. Throughout the book, Baym would briefly discuss the negatives of her believes instead of fully engaging in those theories. For example, the belief that digital media has improved our lives by being able to be a part of online communities. Yes, I also believe that we have the ability to be a part of new communities and to engage in broader areas, but that doesn’t mean that people actually do. She skimmed over the idea that people are not more engaged simply because they have acc