For our project, i filmed some interviews, and wrote/filmed our intro. During this project I got to hear some people's opinions about the issues we learned about in class, and put them together in a cohesive form.
For this project, I organized the first meeting during which we met at th college library coffee shop and made a decision as to how we are going to approach this project and what questions we are going to ask. Afterwards, I interviewed 4 of my friends and passed off the video files to Richard. I learned from this project that there are a significant portion of the student population that don't feel that technology is actually that important to their learning experience. And that although the digital divide may exist amongst the extremely poor, it is more of a socio-economical thing rather than a racial issue. To use the race card on the issue of access is kind of preposterous. This video allowed me to take what i learned in this class outside and compare it with what others feel based on their personal experiences.
For this project, each of us filmed some clips and I collected all of them and edit the vedio. I attended all the meetings that we had, I think all of us put in some good effort in this video and it was fun "reading" over all the videos that we have and deciding which parts are important and which parts can be droped.When editing video, it was interesting to see people have different opinion about the relations between race and digital advantages. I noticed that most of the Asians do not think the race affect the digital access and digital advantage. However, surprisingly, lots of white people say they can feel the advantage of their race, that was something interesting to me.I think this video shows different people's point of views and opinion on race and digital issues. Now we are able to hear more voices other than people in the classroom. (majority of people are white in the classroom).It was also nice that Gardner went to the South madison Library and interviewed some elders and young kids, it was good to know other people's opinions, that some of them strongly felt the digital divides.
For the video I attended the first meeting where we brainstormed idea's for the project and assisted in developing questions for our video. I attended our second meeting where we updated each other on our progress and shared files. I then interviewed several people in my apartment complex and shared those videos at the third and final meeting.
The thing that I found most interesting when doing this project was the difference of opinions between madison students and people in the world outside the bubble of connectivity that the university provides. It really drove the point home that not everybody has access to the kinds of things the university provides, like more computers than anyone could possibly use. But I suppose this stuff should be provided to university students because we pay a lot of money to be able to have access to nice facilities.
an extension of what i wrote to try and get more points: "... granted there exists a certain bais amongst the people that we interviewed - the majority of them came from an upper -middle socioecomic status/ white suburbia (as evidenced by the gentleman in the white hat. This could be easily related to why the government does not subsidize internet for poor people - as the majority of the population has internet, it would be quite hard to see things from the other side of the 'digital divide' and thus, thoroughly difficult to pass legistlations to support spreading digital access as van djike framed it. Gardner interviewing people at the south Madison library contributed significantly to the overall representativeness of the sample and as we see, their opinions clearly vary from that of the Madison student population. "