Future-Gazing eCulture

You don’t need a crystal ball to see what the future has in store for the world of technology. Today’s advancements in digitalisation and communications networks give a vague illustration of how society could potentially operate and function in the years to come. Scientists have confirmed that to-date, there are many technological advancement works in progress; some being a little more than sparks of ideas, some being fine tuned, and some simply waiting to launch into the right market conditions. While each idea dreamt up and turned into a reality holds a promise of improving or transforming current technology conditions, no-one can be certain of the affects they may have on future endeavours.

Many of the most sophisticated and powerful technologies that are utilised in today’s society aim to improve people’s lives, from powerful medical imagery to new sources of energy. The decision to advance current technology forms was not made by the Government or other political bodies alone. A certain percentage of tax payer’s money goes towards scientific research, as well as funds that individual’s voluntarily contribute. While many of us hope that there will come a day where technology will dictate how people live their lives, some of us question where the line is drawn between technology helping us and technology becoming who we are.

There have been many ideas submitted for new technology reforms, particularly since the creation, introduction and success of the Internet. Although not all are realistic, these proposed inventions give us an insight into what people believe technology is able to achieve – if the right amount of time, effort and resources were implemented. While we should never underestimate the capacity and power of technology, the idea that we could one day have robots as slaves or flying cars as transport does not only seem impractical, but also demonstrates society’s dependence on technology and lack of motivation. The possible re-shaping of humanity due to advanced technology may also alter society’s current and established values and beliefs and as a result, modify or amend the attitudes and respect individuals have towards each other. We will no longer require the help or assistance of others, only our technological counter-parts; which has the potential to turn us into a cyborg – half human, half machine.

I personally, have no issues with technology undergoing the advancement process – but only if it is to be utilised in order to assist people in areas to which we have no natural control over. I do however; think it is inappropriate and unreasonable to advance technology merely for the sake of simplifying people’s lives. If we all became in possession of a flying car, it would not only not require us to drive it, but also encourage the notion that we can afford to be lazy. Realistically, the world isn’t like that and nor should it ever be. Depending heavily and solely on advanced technology has the potential risk of leaving us clueless if one day, it fails us and crashes. By then, there is good chance that people will have become unfamiliar with the traditional or old ways of completing simple tasks; due to a “machine” always being present to do it for them. I agree that advanced technology should be utilised in areas such as medicine and education, whereby such an implementation can have life-changing results; but don’t believe that it should be applied to current inventions that don’t need to be improved. The future may be uncertain, but definitely not bleak.

War Reporting As eEntertainment

The reporting of war has flooded our television screens, radio stations and internet pages for many decades. While many of us are not directly affected by the war itself, the images or footage that are publicised to us can often be quite descriptive and of a disturbing nature. Being regularly informed of nature of the wars that are constantly occurring in third-world countries around the globe is not usually due to public preference, but solely for the benefit of reporters and journalists within the media industry. Although considered to be “real life” news coverage, war often displays acts of violence and brutality, which can be disturbing to some people and as a result, decrease the number of viewers and war-related stories being published. Jordan Crandall (2004: 110) also believes that “the popularity of Reality TV has something to do with the change of attitude towards the reporting of war.”

Embedded journalists are responsible for reporting current war occurrences and are forced to abide by many various rules of engagement. These rules or restrictions require that details of military action can only be described in general terms, and writing about future possible missions, classified weapons, and sensitive information remain prohibited. When assessing the traditional ethical codes of conduct that journalists must follow – to seek and report the truth, to minimise harm, to act independently and to be accountable, it also becomes difficult to establish what kind of “power”, if any, these reporters hold. For privacy and confidentiality reasons, it is understandable that journalists are not permitted to release any protected or exclusive information in relation to the war. This however, has lead some of us to question the validity of the coverage we as viewers and outsiders are exposed to, and the degree to which journalists are producing inaccurate or misleading war stories.

It has become evident that Reality TV has had the tendency to be “staged”, even though its aim is to provide entertainment that is spontaneous and unscripted. As a result, what we view in this context has often been discovered to be pre-recorded or rehearsed. The same has also been said about the reporting of war and the images or coverage released into the public domain. “Live” footage of the war has been known to be edited, altered and manipulated, in order to release stories that do not necessarily reflect on what has happened, but are merely what reporters deem to be of an appropriate nature. Bound by the guidelines of ethics, journalists are often left with no choice but to publish misleading war footage in order to protect the soldiers themselves as well as the citizens and residents in that war-stricken location.

It is the responsibility of reporters to provide comprehensive and accurate news coverage to the public. There is ultimately no genuine reason why this shouldn’t occur, as journalists are given the ability to give viewers a front row seat to the war by being assigned positions alongside combat and support troops. Reporters are no different from the rest of human beings in society, and are well aware of their duty to respect those fighting for their country by providing a truthful representation of the current war state. This however, often goes astray, with many family members and friends of the soldiers discovering the stories being published are somewhat offensive to the situation. We are therefore left to believe that it is most likely that the truth will never be told behind what really happens at war, which is mainly due to the censorship of information reportage and ability for a commander of an embedded journalist’s unit to block the journalist from filing stories via. satellite connection at any time. As much as we would like to believe that all reporters and journalists have good intentions, at the end of the day they will publish and report anything that will get them more money, a good reputation and high ratings.