Draft

Like all forms of media, the landscape of sports writing has changed drastically as technology has advanced. What was once just a short segment on the evening news has evolved into twenty-four hour live coverage and analysis. TV stations like ESPN demonstrate the almost insatiable desire that Americans have for sports. ESPN has managed to turn even the most mundane of events, such as a game of rock, paper, scissors, into an epic competition. One of the new frontiers that are just starting to be explored in the word of sports writing is the Internet. It has opened the door for greater freedom and opportunity than most traditional mediums. With the Internet allowing for practically anyone to post their opinion for all to see, suddenly sports writing is no longer restricted to the big newspaper and magazine publications. More importantly, those who are writing are no longer solely professional journalists. With the traditional restrictions of who is reporting on sports lifted, the restrictions of how it is reported have also loosened. The simple formula of using first hand quotes from the players and teams, followed by short analysis is no longer the only manner that sports news is presented. As a result the sports writing world has opened up its doors not only to the athletes that it covers, but also the fans that follow it.

One of the new rules of sports journalism is that having writing experience is no longer a necessity. Looking at three of the most popular sports blogs on the web it is apparent that professional journalists do not write them. Major league pitcher Curt Schilling, NBA player Paul Shirley, and sports fan Bill Simmons all have very popular web sites where they write about the world of sports. The reason that these blogs are so successful is because of the knowledge that each of the authors possess. David Weinberger states that, “Knowledge on the Web is a social activity. It is what happens when people say things that matter to them, others reply, and a conversation ensues (Weinberger).” In each of the blogs the author uses their specific knowledge to tackle issues surrounding sports. Schilling and Shirley use their experience and exclusive knowledge as world-class athletes to give a new perspective to their writing, while Bill uses his experience as die hard sports fan to relate his readers. There is no better example of the social aspect of knowledge of the web the Simmons’ Mail Bag. In his monthly Mail Bag Simmons’ answers his reader’s questions on a variety of topics from player’s uniforms, to what happened on MTV’s Real World last week. By examining one question from his Mail Bag it is easy to see Simmons’ role as author. A reader asks, “Can we start calling Kevin Durant "The Durantula?" He's big, he's dangerous and even a little spidery at times (ESPN.com).” The reader is suggesting an idea when it comes to the nickname of an up and coming young player. While this has very little to do with his on the field play, it is part of the culture that surrounds the sport, which is one of Simmons’ main focuses. The manner of the question suggests that the reader is looking for Simmons’ approval of the nickname, or at least wants to get his opinion before starting to use it. This speaks to the amount of respect the readers have for Simmons’ opinion. Because it is known that he is an expert in pop culture and sports, his verdict on the matter can be crucial to its popularity. Even in Bill’s response you can see the power that he holds with his readers. “I'm vetoing that one. Sounds like a failed WWF character from the late '80s (ESPN.com).” While he is certainly using the term “veto” in a jesting manner, it is more accurate than he probably is aware of. By attacking the nickname he is almost surely eliminating it from future appearance in the website, and possibly also from his reader’s vocabulary.

On his own blog www.38pitches.com Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling gives readers the inside scoop when it comes to Red Sox baseball. Curt does his own version of the Mail Bag where he answers questions from his readers. Unlike on Simmons’ website where the questions can range from movies, to TV, to music, on Curt’s website the questions are almost exclusively baseball related. Curt is not known for his movie reviews or his social commentary, people visit his site because they want insight into the mind of a major league pitcher, and how the world of sports works from the inside. Curt is able to provide insight into things that only professional athletes would be able to answer. One reader asks, “How important is a players number to him? Why 38 (38pitches.com)?” While other writers could speculate the significance of uniform numbers, Curt is able to answer from his first hand experience of having a number, and from all of the contact he has had with other players. Just as the readers do not ask Curt for his approval of a new nickname, they would no ask Simmons’ what the significance of an athlete’s number is.

While Paul Shirley does not answer reader’s questions explicitly, there is little doubt that their curiosity is satisfied after reading his blog. Although a bench player that hardly plays, Shirley gives insight into the life of an NBA player. To most people the life of an NBA player is something so far removed from their situation that they cannot really relate to it. Shirley however, is able to give the feeling that he is an average Joe tagging along and living with these larger than life figures. When reading Curt Schilling’s blog you get a sense that he is an integral part of the team that is usually right in the middle of the action. With Shirley it feels almost as if he is separate from the team, but for some reason he has been given complete and total access to the team. In his blog he writes, “I wonder sometimes if my teammates get bored on the court. At times it seems that the game almost comes so easily to some of them that they forget to concentrate and subconsciously allow the opponent back in the game just so they can have some competition (NBA.com).” Shirley makes sure to separate himself from his teammates. Since he gets hardly any playing time, he cannot say for sure how his teammates cope with trying to maintain focus and intensity over long periods of time. While a journalist could make the same claim as Shirley after watching a Phoenix Sun’s game, it would not carry the same weight. Shirley is a more credible source when it comes to the psyche of the team because not only does he get to observe the team more than anyone else, but also because he has a personal relationship with those on the team. When Shirley makes a personal statement about Steve Nash or other players on the team, the reader’s are more likely to believe it than if another reporter had written it. While a reporter can ask Steve Nash about his wife, they are probably receiving a rehearsed or censored answer because Nash knows what he says will be published. Shirley however, can find out how Nash truly feels in a casual conversation because the two men are peers.

The recent success experienced by social networking websites on the Internet has brought them under great scrutiny. One of the main issues that has arisen from these sites is the issue of personal privacy. Part of the reason that privacy is such an important issue on social networking websites is due to the amount of information that users post on them. People are posting detailed personal information about themselves in places that can be accessed by millions of people. With the amount of information that is available it could prove to be very useful, but it could also become very dangerous. The question then arises, are the risks worth the benefits? As decreased privacy allows for more interaction and socialization, it also opens to door for more harm to be done. Instead of looking at how these websites protect or don’t protect their users, I think it is more valuable to look at how people feel about their privacy on the web. What do these feelings tell us about people’s priorities when it comes to safety, and how do we use them to solve the paradox of privacy?

When examining social networking sites the language that is used to describe them reveals a lot about people’s attitudes towards them. In examining closely the issue of privacy as it relates to social networking sites one concept continually emerges. The concept is of the personal information contained in these sites as a mine containing valuable resources. In an article for NewScientist.com Paul Marks states, “No plan to mine social networks via the semantic web has been announced by the NSA, but its interest in the technology is evident”(Marks). His use of the word “mine” equates the information to gold, or some other precious material. It clearly emphasizes the potential value of the information, but does not say specifically what it is. In addition, in an article for The Register it was written, “In 2003 US Congress stopped Pentagon projects being operated by retired admiral John Poindexter which aimed to mine public and private records for information on individuals suspected of terrorist activity”(The Register). Once again the term “mine” is used, and this time the value is explained as the ability to fight terrorism. In this case the information is only useful to those who are harvesting it, which would be the government.

While the myriad of information can be used for good, it can also be used to cause harm. For all of the advantages that social networking sites offer, they also offer great opportunity for identity fraud, and other deceptions. It is natural then some people would use social networking sites in order to harm people and their reputations. Annalee Newitz, for SecurityFocus describes an incident where a person’s account was compromised. In her explanation she remarks, “The attacker didn't stop there -- she or he also plundered his friends' "locked" entries” (Newitz). The language that Ms. Newitz uses tells a great deal about the situation. Continuing with the idea that a person’s personal information contained in these sites is valuable, she says that the entries were “plundered”. This metaphor calls to mind the image of a long-bearded pirate hijacking treasure out on the open seas. It would not be that far fetched to picture someone “sailing the seas” of the Internet in search for someone’s personal information that could contain some value for them.

Perhaps even more revealing than the idea of plundering personal information is the fact that the person is referred to as an “attacker”. This is very important because it helps to bring the crime being committed for cyberspace into the real world. It shows how people put so much value on their personal information, that even though all of this happens in cyberspace, the effects of an Internet crime are very real. It also reveals how imperative defense is for social networking sites. With all of these so called “attackers” out there, it is important for people to be well protected so that they do not end up getting hurt. Finally, the idea of the attacker helps to relieve the person being attacked of any blame. When a person is attacked randomly on the street it is considered as bad luck, but no one claims that it is his or her own fault, the blame lies with the attacker. This is important because it absolves users of some responsibility online. It is not their fault for posting sensitive information for the public to see, it is the person’s fault that took advantage of them.

Despite all of the references to “mines” and “plundering” the drawbacks of having so much personal information available for all to see are significant. Paul Marks also states that, “The ever-growing online social networks are part of the flood of Internet information that could be mined: some of the top sites like MySpace now have more than 80 million members.” (Marks). When he says this, in addition to using the “mine” as a metaphor for the information, he introduces the idea of a flood as a metaphor. It is no mistake that the Internet information is being described as a “flood”. With the sheer volume of users that social networking sites have their records are expectedly overwhelming. It is easy to see a person getting overtaken by the violent sea of personal information. In addition to conveying the magnitude of the information it also implies its potential for danger. With all this personal information being available for anyone to access it creates a large opportunity for people to take advantage of unsuspecting users. Finally, the image of a flood helps to illustrate how little control anyone has over the entire situation. Since each user posts all the information individually, it is near impossible to control the content that is available for others to see.

The final important metaphor that I came across when examining social networking sites was the idea of “connecting the dots”. This gives us another important insight into how social network users are viewed in society. Marks makes the claim that, “the NSA is pursuing its plans to tap the web, since phone logs have limited scope. They can only be used to build a very basic picture of someone's contact network, a process sometimes called "connecting the dots" (Marks). In this metaphor the people of social networking sites are considered “dots” from a simple drawing game. This further diminishes the person’s value as a human being, and removes any emotion. While there is a lot of sympathy for other people out there, there is no sympathy for “dots” on a page. The other notion that is taken from the “connect the dots” metaphor is the illustration of how easy it is for people to be connected to one another online. In a world where all too often people focus on how they are different from one another, these online websites help demonstrate how much people have in common, and how easy it can be to connect with someone else.

In conclusion, it is apparent that people place great value on the information that they post on the Internet, but at the same time they are often careless about what and how they post. This current trend of continued transparency among people on the Internet is already starting to have consequences. One of the most notable backlashes of too much personal information has stemmed from the introduction of a new feature on Facebook.com. The feature allows for users to receive updates whenever one of their contacts makes any changes in their profile. The typical response to the new feature has been negative as many users feel that it is giving them too much information, and they do not want it. "The new features are almost like it's trying to make me be a stalker even though I don't want to"(www.epic.com). People are starting turn on social networking sites because they are giving them too much of a good thing. While the reason they joined the sites was to connect with other people, they don’t want to be that close with that many people. How far people will allow their privacy to be invaded remains to be seen, but the future of social networking sites surely rests on how much information people are willing to share with one another.

1st body paragraph

Part of the reason that privacy is such an issue on social networking websites is due to the amount of information that users post on them. With more people than ever posting their personal information on the Internet there is no shortage of data to be compiled. “The ever-growing online social networks are part of the flood of Internet information that could be mined: some of the top sites like MySpace now have more than 80 million members.” (Marks). It is no mistake that the Internet information is being described as a “flood”. With the sheer volume of users that social networking sites have their records are expectedly overwhelming. It is easy to see a person getting overtaken by the violent sea of personal information. In addition to conveying the magnitude of the information it also implies its potential for danger. With all this personal information being available for anyone to access it creates a large opportunity for people to take advantage of unsuspecting users. In addition to the threat posed by other users looking at personal information there is also the prospect of corporations or the government getting a hold of it. Finally the image of a flood helps to illustrate how little control anyone has over the entire situation. Since each user posts all the information individually, it is near impossible to control the content that is available for others to see.

Introduction

In recent years in America social networking websites have started to grow at a rapid rate. There are sites allow people to connect with each other all over the world in any variety of ways. Sites such as Myspace and Facebook allow people to meet each other based on common interests and friends. While other sites such as Secondlife and Everquest allow people to interact in a digital imitation of reality. These sites offer many people the chance to interact that normally would not be able to. However, as people spend more and more time communicating with each other over the internet, they are spending less time interacting face to face. This poses a dangerous threat to people’s social skills. While the internet can emulate real life at some times, it is not the same as reality. As people become accustomed to interacting with one another in cyberspace they lose the ability to interact with one another when there is not a computer between them. Social networking websites are actually making it more difficult for people to connect with one another, instead of making it easier.

Annotated Bibiography

Henshall, Stuart. Unbound Spiral. 16 Mar. 2004. 30 Jan. 2007 .

Social Networking sites do little to actually help people socialize. It offers them the ability to associate with one another, but there is very little social interaction. Rarely does a relationship in the cyber-world translate into a real world relationship. Social networking websites need to find better ways for people to interact with each other if they want to continue with their current success.

Iskold, Alex. Read/WriteWeb. 21 Sept. 2006. 30 Jan. 2007 .

Different social networking sites are using unique features to attract users. Simply connecting people to each other’s profiles is not enough to remain competitive in the growing industry. In order to compete a site must offer additional services such as the ability to share music and/or pictures.

Lenhart, Amanda, and Mary Madden. Pew Internet. 7 Jan. 2007. 30 Jan. 2007 .

In recent years the popularity of social networking websites has skyrocketed. They are no longer a flashy new trend, but are now a large part of many people’s lives. The sites have particularly caught on in American pop culture. In America these websites are most popular among teenagers, and specifically teenage girls.

Roush, Wade. Technology Review. 18 Nov. 2005. 29 Jan. 2007 .

Although social networking websites were slow to first get off the ground, now that users are getting a better understanding of the technology they are starting to grow rapidly in popularity. In addition, social networking sites are coming up with innovative ideas to make them more practical and useful to its users. As these websites improve upon the features they offer, the distinction between real like and cyberspace continues to be blurred.

Siklos, Richard. The New York Times. 21 Jan. 2007. 30 Jan. 2007 .

Social networking is moving into all different aspects of life. The latest area that it has started to invade is the business world. Many of the large corporations are trying to take advantage of this trend by coming up with new features to offer their users that is more practical in a business setting. Websites are starting to take the place of other mediums such as magazines that used to create social communities.

Eubanks

Following the President’s State of the Union address last week, Republican representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado had the following criticism of President Bush’s temporary worker program: “I am disappointed but not surprised that the president has chosen once again to trot out this same old pig, albeit one with a slightly new shade of lipstick.” I thought that this was a very interesting metaphor for him to use. It sheds a light on how he feels not only about the president’s proposal, but the president himself.

The most obvious part of the metaphor is that he is calling the president’s proposal an “old pig”. Thinking of the president’s proposal as a pig evokes images and smells that are both quite unpleasant. In addition stating that is an old pig makes it even more unpleasant. To help complete the visual metaphor he describes the pig as wearing a “slightly new shade of lipstick”. As if the image of an old pig was not ugly enough now one has the picture of a pig with lipstick smeared all over its face.

In addition to the visual image the metaphor has other implications. It is saying that president Bush is being dishonest and deceitful. He is using cheap tricks to try and disguise an ugly old pig as something that is not just different, but beautiful and pleasant. However it is quite obvious that lipstick will not make a pig look beautiful, and in fact will make it look much worse. The message is that this lackluster attempt by the president to disguise his plan is actually much worse than if he had just been straightforward and said the same thing again.

THE BEST POST EVER

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A BLOGGER GREATER THAN I!