Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Webinar Experience


It was wonderful to have a couple of friends join the live webinar and ask some questions pertaining to what I have poured my soul into for the past 7 weeks. Getting to present was fun, but I loved getting to field questions behind the scenes. There were so many ideas flowing around and I really think that this webinar will have a positive influence on people's perception of digital culture and how it relates to literature. Now that is all finished, I sigh and wish we could keep going. My research has been tied to so many other individuals in the class and it will be hard to see them go as this term ends.

I was intrigued by some of Jeff's questions about whether digital scholarship is something good or bad. I was able to say that researching people rather than texts has opened by world up to a new level of information that will greatly influence by writing in the future. It has been an awesome experience. One person who joined the webinar was my former high school band director. He sent me a link to a blog that greatly influenced some of my thoughts about control in the digital world and how it related to Orwell's novel. Getting to have him hear my thoughts made me really appreciate our emphasis on social proof during the course. It is sad that the sun is setting on this course, but the good thing is that we will continually be connected through digital media.


Standing at the Brink


As my English 295 is coming to a close, I feel that I am standing on the edge of a great chasm, looking over the edge, and wondering how I will make it to the other side. This chasm represents my future in academia and my approach to researching and writing about literature. I have come so far from where I was at the beginning of the semester with my apprehensions about the digital world and using social media to research literary topics. My apprehensions have vanished as this new digital world has become more familiar to me.

I think that this "leap of faith" that my class has taken is an event that many people need to experience. There are so many wonderful opportunities in the digital world to meet new people and experience new ways of thinking about literature. The concept of social proof allows for ideas to be tested and improved upon.

A recent experience I had with social proof was sharing a rough draft of my final paper with a co-worker from Deseret News. I was terrified at the prospect of sharing some of my rough ideas with him, but I knew that he would be able to help me have a better focus in my paper. After sharing my paper with him, he texted me multiple ideas about how my paper should be focussed and even some questions of his own that he wanted to have answered about the how technology companies can be viewed as Big Brothers. This experience gave me a confirmation that the process of social learning bears good fruit and is a leap of faith worth taking.

I plan to continue using the skills I have learned this semester and expand them to other fields of knowledge as I continue my education. 

Monday, June 11, 2012

Learning Outcomes: What I've Learned, in Summation


These are some things that I learned this semester:

1. Learn and Follow the BYU-I Learning Model

During the semester, I have done my best to follow the guding principles of the BYU-I Learning Model. Before every class period, I have tried to complete the assignments that have been given and also prepare myself for the class discussion that day. I am usually afraid to give comments or ask questions, so I took some time to think about the discussion that we were going to have before class and note things that might contribute to the class that I could talk about. Another form of preparation that I have tried to do this semester is spiritual preparation. I think this was more manifest when the drafts of my paper were due. I made a point to say my prayers and ask Heavenly Father for guidance concerning how my paper should go. I also asked him for a lot of strength to be able to tackle the many tasks I had to get done this semester so I could balance my studies with work. 

Along with personal preparation I have sought to teach others along the way and learn from my fellow classmates. Through the many discussions with my cohorts that we have had this semester, I have made a point to listen to my fellow students and learn from them about how I could improve my research. An example of a learning experience that I had was when I met with Jen Winterton and Ashley Lewis as a cohort on the roof of the JFSB. We sat and discussed the directions of our papers and decided that we wanted to have a Google hangout to continue to discuss our ideas. Throughout these meetings, both Jen and Ashley were full of ideas of where my topic should go. They really helped me organize my first idea about how blogging can influence politics and social development, as evidenced in this post, "Records of Rebellion..." Most of these sources were recommended by my cohorts. Their added knowledge helped me to create more.

I also remember one day that Jen and I were trying to figure out where her topic of collaboration should go. We were throwing around a bunch of ideas and I brought up some ideas about how online pornography and gambling were sucking the life out of people just like the main antagonist of her book of study, Dracula. With those ideas we had a great discussion about the possibilities of where her paper could go. Even though this did not end up being the final idea she ran with for her paper, she was able to go deeper into the power of collaboration and create a really good paper

The last part of the learning model talks about pondering and proving. I think one moment where this really hit me during the whole research process was when I had to make a trailer of my idea for the class. I remember thinking about my topic and wondering why Orwell's book, 1984, was important to me. As I thought about all the research that I had been doing, my thoughts focussed on Winston, the main character, and his journal writing. Winston wrote to express himself and his ideas about the world around him. He was able to experience freedom through his act of creation. Those thoughts made me tie together a lot of ideas that I had been receiving from Dr. Burton and my other classmates and I was able to make this video on YouTube. It was a great experience for me to share this video with others and find out how much they liked it. This really proved to me that the research I was doing had worth. 

           

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Looking back...to look forward.

Yesterday was a long day. I hadn't slept well the night before because I was full of anxiety about the final draft of my paper for my English class. I spent the day trying to tweak my paper and find a way to bring all my ideas into a cohesive order before my grading conference at 2:45 pm. I finished right in the nick of time and ran from the library to the meeting with Holly, Anna, and Dr. Burton. As we read each others' papers, I felt like my paper, even with all the work I put into it, was a shadow of what it needed to be. After the grading conference finished, I stumbled out of the JFSB and walked heavily to my car. I had tried to put my heart and soul into my paper. It was the final product of all the research I had been doing this spring. And in the end, I felt that it didn't manifest the raw intensity of the thoughts I had been sharing with my friends and acquaintances through social media.

For me, the transition from thinking strictly about research through the use of social media and then having to compose a traditional paper was a bit difficult. Blogging, tweeting, and commenting using Google+ allowed me to relax and get out my thoughts in a raw way that reflected exactly what I was thinking. I could sit and just type away and ideas would flow like a river from my mind. When I started working on my traditional research paper, I felt that the flow of inspiration was crimped. Writer's block set in like a sickness. My way of thinking felt restricted because I had to turn my ideas that were stylistically informal and the many discussions that I had with people and put them into a formal paper. Traditional writing is also much more stressful than writing blog posts and tweets because a definite form is expected for your paper. Ideas have to gel the entire way through. I feel there is more freedom in blogging and other forms of social media because a definite form is not expected. 

I feel that writing through the medium of social media and also writing traditionally both have their place. I have learned so much interacting with others to find research for my paper. It made my work feel like something living rather than something static. I loved getting feed back from people like my friend Matt at Deseret News. The concept of researching people rather than just topics also helped me view research in a very different light as opposed to just going to the library and looking up articles and books. Writing the traditional paper made me think more deeply about the topic I was writing on and helped me form a solid argument. The social media created a way I could network with others and get their opinions on my thoughts.  I will definitely never approach a research the same way as I have in the past. 

Friday, June 8, 2012

Final Draft. It is a relief to have this finished.


Hickey 1
Alan Hickey

Dr. Burton

English 295

8 June 2012

Thoughts on Control: Hegemony and Choice in the Digital Age

After clicking on a blue lollipop on my Facebook page, a video began to play showing an eerie corridor in what seemed to be a dilapidated psychiatric ward. The camera moved down the hallway and turned into one of the rooms. In the room sat a man with a grubby, white tank top and greasy hair. He was sitting in front of a computer searching some website. As the camera moved closer to the man, I was shocked to see pictures and information from my Facebook page on the screen of his computer. He searched through my pictures and I cringed as his dirty hands stroked the mouse as a sign of crazed pleasure. After searching my photos, he input my information into a search engine and brought up directions to my home. The man then slowly turned his head from the screen and looked directly at me with crazed eyes and a wicked smirk. From outside, I heard a car door slam, and I jumped with terror thinking that I was about to die (Jameson).      
Although this video’s purpose was directed to educate people about the physical dangers of putting too much information on the Internet, it raises many questions about how personal information can be used that is on the Web. Companies like Google and Facebook are able to amass hundreds of pages of personal information on users, from which items people are searching for, to even addresses and private conversations (Humphries). This control over personal information has given many technology companies the clichéd title of “Big Brother,” coined from George Orwell’s novel, 1984, where Big Brother is the political figurehead of a totalitarian government that controls almost every aspect of peoples’ lives. A great concern echoing throughout today’s digital world is over the access allowed to personal information and how this information is used.
The issue of the control of information makes people wonder how much influence technology companies have on individuals. A question that persists is: Are these companies “Big Brothers” that seek to control consumers’ lives?  The argument of this paper is: not really.  Although many believe that the world of digital media is being controlled by contrived ideological hegemonic systems created by technology companies, such as Google, Facebook, and Apple, this control is mostly imagined because consumers of digital media are able to control the actions of companies through acts of creation and the use of purchasing power. These acts inspire competition and disavow companies of dominance and control.  

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Rough Draft with New Intro


Thoughts on Control: Hegemony and Choice in the Digital Age

The period of human history currently playing out has been deemed the Information Age. With a simple click, a seemingly infinite amount of information is accessible to practically anyone for free, or reasonable prices. This information ranges from nonessential facts amassed on sites like Wikipedia, to personal profiles created on Facebook detailing the basic aspects of peoples’ lives. A great concern in the digital world of today is the access allowed to personal information and how this information is used. Companies like Google and Facebook are able to amass hundreds of pages of personal information on users, from what search items people are looking for to even addresses and private conversations. This control over personal information has given many companies the clichéd title of “Big Brother,” coined from George Orwell’s novel 1984. For example, Facebook has been accused of selling personal information of consumers to marketing companies and ad agencies in order to make more profit. In today’s digital world, companies appear to be vying for control of this personal information amassed from consumers and also the means by which to use it to make profit. The mode by which these corporations seem to control consumers is by creating ideological hegemonies, which make consumers compliant to these privacy risks. Although many believe that the world of digital media is being controlled by these hegemonic systems created by companies such as Google, Facebook, and Apple, this control is mostly imagined because consumers of digital media are able to control the actions of companies using capitalistic ideals to inspire competition and disavow them of dominance and control.  
In George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, the subject of governmental control and the perpetuation of a coercive and ideological hegemonic system are examined using the totalitarian regime of the Party with "Big Brother" at its head. Orwell plays with different theories of how totalitarian regimes control their subjects: through mass presence, control of the media, social interaction, and compliant dependency. These ideas apply to any type of ideological or coercive hegemony and are applicable to our digital world today. Massive companies such as Google, Facebook, and Apple are accused to use similar means of control as described in Orwell's book to influence a society of consumers to place trust in their products.
Even with these supposed controls placed on consumers, this does not mean that these companies actually control individuals. While I was reading through 1984, I was impressed by the main protagonist’s resistance to the Party’s ideological controls, such as the Two Minutes Hate and other propaganda of the Party, through his act of keeping a journal (Orwell 14). In the story, Winston purchases an illegal journal and begins to record his thoughts and feelings about his life and the negative influence of the Party. In reaction to the Party’s mode of oppression, Winston pens repeatedly the phrase, “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER” (Orwell 19). In this act of creation, Winston reveals that he is not completely controlled by the domineering eye of Big Brother. The whole of act of journal writing in the novel represents humanities ability to have freedom of will no matter what modes of hegemony are used to control them. Not only does this form of creativity allow Winston to not be controlled, it gives him a voice to call known and unknown others to embrace their unalienable freedom of choice. Winston writes to these others by saying:

To the future or the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone—to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of double think—greetings!  (Orwell 26-27)

This statement is a symbol of how hegemony, both ideological and coercive, can be resisted and an individuals freedom be maintained.
Fiction is not the only realm where writing has been symbolic of resistance to hegemony. While in prison, Antonio Gramsci wrote volumes of criticism against the fascist regime of Mussolini through the guise of literary and cultural criticism. Just like Winston, Gramsci was able to maintain his impregnable freedom of will and thought until his death in 1937 after 11 years in prison (Burke). Gramsci’s criticism presented in his Prison Notebooks contains theories of hegemony describing how hegemonies can be enforced through two distinct ways: coercive means, usually by the “political society,” or “spontaneous” consent given by the masses in reaction to the ideology of the “dominant fundamental group” (Gramsci 145). Forms of this second kind of hegemony, or ideological hegemony, are being employed by the mega-technology companies of today to convince people to use their products. Examining the methods of the Party in Orwell’s novel in comparison to the methods employed by companies will help explicate this form of hegemony used by these companies, and also help reveal why these methods do not actually control individuals.  
In 1984, one method used by the Party’s hegemonic system to keep party members in line is through the use of mass presence. In the book, every Party member’s home has a piece of technology known as a telescreen. These screens provide a way for Party members to constantly be fed propaganda by the Party and also constantly be observed. This constant observation keeps the subjugated citizens of Airstrip One mostly in submission to the decrees of the government.
Winston, the protagonist, only finds ways to rise against the hegemonic system by being able to get away from the all-seeing eye of Big Brother. He does this by finding places that are out of sight of the telescreen, such as the small alcove in his room where he writes in his journal (Orwell 9) or the room he rents above Mr. Charrington’s shop in run-down London where he rendezvous with Julia for their sexual escapades (113-116).
This idea of control by constant observation, or presence, translates to the digital world. Google, by amassing rights to be the default search engine on many Internet browsers, has been able to create a vast presence on the Web that has even led to the addition of "google" as a verb in the dictionary (Merriam Webster Online). Tim Wu, in a webinar about his book, The Master Switch, explained that the reason people use Google so much is because of this presence. Google being accessible almost everywhere makes it convenient to use and logically people would ask themselves, “Why not use Google” (Wu Webinar). Though this convenience makes it seem that Google is monopolizing the market as an Internet browser, their overwhelming presence does not mean they directly control which mode of consumption consumers use. The existence of competition between other search engines such as Yahoo and MSN with Google adds evidence that convenience does not equate to control (SEJ). Google may remain as one of the top grossing Internet companies, but that does not show it controls individuals ability to create and branch out from Google because there are no restrictions to the contrary.  
The hegemony of 1984 is also continued by the Party's ability to modify the past and control the information that is consumed by individuals. Winston describes this constant flux of truth by using the Newspeak word "doublethink," which means, according to Winston, “[t]o know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them…” (Orwell 23). The idea of changing or controlling what information people are privy to is part of the reality of the digital world. Google, for example, has certain algorithms that modify searches to personalize them for each of their individual customers based on their search history and perceived interests (Levy). This in effect censors the kind of information you are able to view when surfing the Internet. Though this algorithm can in theory limit the kinds of search results given according to individual’s preferences, Google does not have the ability to control how this information is used by each consumer. Google is unable to dominate the potential for creation of individuals who use its product, and therefore the company does not maintain complete control.
Another aspect of control that is part of the hegemony in Orwell’s book is the Party’s attempt to control individuals through social interaction. As a way to imprint their ideology on party members, the Party organized certain club organizations for youth, like the Spies. The Spies organization was specifically organized to instill principles of loyalty to the Party in youth by teaching them how to recognize potential dissension from party policies by others. They Spies were even known to turn their own parents into the Thought Police for crimes against Big Brother (Orwell 24). These clubs went on group hikes and other communal activities to create bonds of familiarity with its members that would grow into a feeling of being part of something greater than each individual alone. This social interaction breeds brotherhood that not only bonds the Spies together, but also binds them in commitment to following the party. This social interaction used by the Party is also a method that is used to invite consumers to willingly consent to use a product.
In the digital world, Facebook embodies a company that has used social interaction as one of their products and also as a way to promote their product. Facebook is a social networking site that allows individuals to create individualized profiles and share information with friends for free. This product was made popular because of the ability to easily connect with those that you know and communicate with them freely about almost anything. The popularity of Mark Zuckerberg’s product was bred on the “club” mentality of social interaction, as described with the Spies previously. This mode to establish ideological hegemony has appeared to be successful and has brought millions of users under the umbrella of Facebook, but that does not mean that Facebook is able to control these consumers’ decisions. Facebook’s lack of control has recently been revealed with the company’s decision to go public. Many investors have tried to jump ship as the price of shares fell below the estimated $38 per share (Bloomberg). These consumers with investments in Facebook were not tethered to the company just because of the opportunity for social networking. They had personal interests in the company that were not met, and they chose to act on these interests for their personal welfare. This shows that Facebook did not have enough control over investors and consumers of its product to stop them from losing faith in the company’s direction.
One last aspect of ideological hegemonic control used in 1984 that is applicable to digital media is the process of how the Party made its members dependent upon their services for basic necessities and wants. Throughout the text, Winston Smith uses products controlled and distributed by the party. Products like cigarettes, razors, gin, and even chocolate are produced and controlled by the direct influence of the regime and competition is nonexistent. This form of Communism creates a narrowed society where each individual’s options of consumption are limited. This compliant dependency that Party members have with the regime of Big Brother is similar to the "walled-garden" that Apple has created for hardware users (Burton). The world of Apple products includes iMacs, iPads, iPhones, iPods, and MacBooks. These products each have the capacity to sync with one another and have software that can only be used between Apple devices. Many products like iTunes limits users to how audio media can be played and shared due to copyright and certain restrictions Apple places on the sold content. Further, Apple's apps can only be purchased from the Apple store and are not freely open to users of Apple products. These forms of product control create a niche for consumers that invites them to become compliant with their dependency on the company for their products.
Even with this “walled garden” of exclusive use, Apple can be controlled depending on the actions of consumers to buy their products. Steve Jobs, the former CEO and founder of Apple, stated in an interview that his whole goal was “to create the best product possible for consumers” (Steve Jobs interview). Because Apple has based its marketing strategy off of capitalistic principles, resistance to its ideological hegemony is simply a matter of choice. The competition that continues to exist between PCs and Apple shows that complete dominance of the hardware industry is out of Apple’s grasp. Consumers dictate how companies fair on the market are able to control companies’ actions through purchasing power.



























Monday, June 4, 2012

Thoughts on Control: Hegemony and Choice in the Digital Age


Thoughts on Control: Hegemony and Choice in the Digital Age
Humanity, as a whole, desires to rise above oppression and embrace principles of liberty that enable them to have freedom of expression.  In today’s digital world, there are many companies that appear to be vying for control of the information presented on the Internet and also the means by which to access this material. The control manifested by these corporate giants is sometimes assumed to seep into the lives of individual consumers and strip them of their ability to choose what kind of media they consume and create. The mode by which these corporations seem to control consumers is by creating ideological hegemonies as opposed to using coercive means. Although many believe that the world of digital media is being controlled by these hegemonic systems created by companies such as Google, Facebook, and Apple, this control is mostly imagined because consumers of digital media are able choose which media they consume and create freely.

In George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, the subject of governmental control and the perpetuation of a coercive and ideological hegemonic system are examined using the totalitarian regime of the Party with "Big Brother" at its head. Orwell plays with different theories of how totalitarian regimes control their subjects: through mass presence, control of the media, social interaction, and ideological brainwashing. These ideas apply to any type of ideological or coercive hegemony and are applicable to our digital world today. Massive companies such as Google, Facebook, and Apple are accused to use similar means of control as described in Orwell's book to influence a society of consumers to place trust in their products.

Even with these supposed controls placed on consumers, this does not mean that these companies actually control individuals. While I was reading through 1984, I was impressed by the main protagonist’s resistance to the Party’s ideological controls, such as the Two Minutes Hate and other propaganda of the Party, through his act of keeping a journal (Orwell 14). In the story, Winston purchases an illegal journal and begins to record his thoughts and feelings about his life and the negative influence of the Party. In reaction to the Party’s mode of oppression, Winston pens repeatedly the phrase, “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER” (Orwell 19). In this act of creation, Winston reveals that he is not completely controlled by the domineering eye of Big Brother. The whole of act of journal writing in the novel represents humanities ability to have freedom of will no matter what modes of hegemony are used to control them. Not only does this form of creativity allow Winston to not be controlled, it gives him a voice to call known and unknown others to embrace their unalienable freedom of choice. Winston writes to these others by saying:
To the future or the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone—to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of double think—greetings!  (Orwell 26-27)

This statement is a symbol of how hegemony, both ideological and coercive, can be resisted and an individuals freedom be maintained.

Fiction is not the only realm where writing has been symbolic of resistance to hegemony. While in prison, Antonio Gramsci wrote volumes of criticism against the fascist regime of Mussolini through the guise of literary and cultural criticism. Just like Winston, Gramsci was able to maintain his impregnable freedom of will and thought until his death in 1937 after 11 years in prison (Burke). Gramsci’s criticism presented in his Prison Notebooks contains theories of hegemony describing how hegemonies can be enforced through two distinct ways: coercive means, usually by the “political society,” or “spontaneous” consent given by the masses in reaction to the ideology of the “dominant fundamental group” (Gramsci 145). Forms of this second kind of hegemony, or ideological hegemony, are being employed by the mega-technology companies of today to convince people to use their products. Examining the methods of the Party in Orwell’s novel in comparison to the methods employed by companies will help explicate this form of hegemony used by these companies, and also help reveal why these methods do not actually control individuals.  

In 1984, one method used by the Party’s hegemonic system to keep party members in line is through the use of mass presence. In the book, every Party member’s home has a piece of technology known as a telescreen. These screens provide a way for Party members to constantly be fed propaganda by the Party and also constantly be observed. This constant observation keeps the subjugated citizens of Airstrip One mostly in submission to the decrees of the government.
Winston, the protagonist, only finds ways to rise against the hegemonic system by being able to get away from the all-seeing eye of Big Brother. He does this by finding places that are out of sight of the telescreen, such as the small alcove in his room where he writes in his journal (Orwell 9) or the room he rents above the prole’s shop where he rendezvous with Julia for their sexual escapades (113-116).

This idea of control by constant observation, or presence, translates to the digital world. Google, by amassing rights to be the default search engine on many Internet browsers, has been able to create a vast presence on the Web that has even led to the addition of "google" as a verb in the dictionary (Merriam Webster Online). Tim Wu, in a webinar about his book, The Master Switch, explained that the reason people use Google so much is because of this presence. Google being accessible almost everywhere makes it convenient to use and logically people would ask themselves, “Why not use Google” (Wu Webinar). Though this convenience makes it seem that Google is monopolizing the market as an Internet browser, their overwhelming presence does not mean they directly control which mode of consumption consumers use. The existence of competition between other search engines such as Yahoo and MSN with Google adds evidence that convenience does not equate to control (SEJ). Google may remain as one of the top grossing Internet companies, but that does not show it controls individuals ability to create and branch out from Google because there are no restrictions to the contrary.  

The hegemony of 1984 is also continued by the Party's ability to modify the past and control the information that is consumed by individuals. Winston describes this constant flux of truth by using the Newspeak word "doublethink," which means, according to Winston, “[t]o know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them…” (Orwell 23). The idea of changing or controlling what information people are privy to is part of the reality of the digital world. Google, for example, has certain algorithms that modify searches to personalize them for each of their individual customers based on their search history and perceived interests (Levy). This in effect censors the kind of information you are able to view when surfing the Internet. Though this algorithm can in theory limit the kinds of search results given according to individual’s preferences, Google does not have the ability to control how this information is used by each consumer. Google is unable to dominate the potential for creation of individuals who use its product, and therefore the company does not maintain complete control.

Another aspect of control that is part of the hegemony in Orwell’s book is the Party’s attempt to control individuals through social interaction. As a way to imprint their ideology on party members, the Party organized certain club organizations for youth, like the Spies. The Spies organization was specifically organized to instill principles of loyalty to the Party in youth by teaching them how to recognize potential dissension from party policies by others. They Spies were even known to turn their own parents into the Thought Police for crimes against Big Brother (Orwell 24). These clubs went on group hikes and other communal activities to create bonds of familiarity with its members that would grow into a feeling of being part of something greater than each individual alone. This social interaction breeds brotherhood that not only bonds the Spies together, but also binds them in commitment to following the party. This social interaction used by the Party is also a method that is used to invite consumers to willingly consent to use a product.

In the digital world, Facebook embodies a company that has used social interaction as one of their products and also as a way to promote their product. Facebook is a social networking site that allows individuals to create individualized profiles and share information with friends for free. This product was made popular because of the ability to easily connect with those that you know and communicate with them freely about almost anything. The popularity of Michael Zuckerberg’s product was bred on the “club” mentality as described with the Spies previously. This mode to establish ideological hegemony has appeared to be successful and has brought millions of users under the umbrella of Facebook, but that does not mean that Facebook is able to control these consumers’ decisions. Facebook’s lack of control has recently been revealed with the company’s decision to go public.

Some argue that the establishment of hegemonic systems is a potential reality because of the ignorance and consumerist nature of individuals. Alan Kirby..;As consumers interact with literature on the internet, they are able to create meaning for themselves from their intimate relationship with material. Kirby argues that this will make individuals ignorant and cause them to conform. In light of these thoughts, I would add that this ignorance and conformist mentality can be used by companies to control individuals in a hegemonic system. By using different forms of advertisement and creating different portals to create interactive content or pleasurable online experiences, companies like Google, Facebook, and Apple are enabled to influence users and steer them in the direction they see best.

My ideas have been greatly influenced by the posts of Jonathan Erdman and his blog, the Theos Project. We have been able to have many discussions explaining our concerns with the control that different companies have over peoples' lives and the possibilities of too much power being exercised by these mega-technology companies. We feel that it is necessary that consumers not be ignorant and take a stake in protecting themselves from being constantly controlled by being aware of these companies influences.

By the end of 1984, Winston has been completely brainwashed and pronounces that he loves "Big Brother." His ideas become twisted because of the forceful means used to curb his creativity and free thought. He is controlled by the different means employed in hegemonic systems. Today, the digital world is controlled by companies that seemingly control our lives without our complaint. We sometimes ignorantly consume products, both hardware and software, and are joyed because easy access to the great World Wide Web of information floating in the ether that is at our finger tips. Sadly, if we are not careful, we may be dragged into a world where information and accessibility to the great information and social interaction on the Web could bring us into a compliant subjection to the whims of companies like Google, Facebook, and Apple. People need to be aware of themselves on the Web and need to be protected from these possible hegemonic systems. Being able to be informed about the attitudes of these companies will help get us out of this ignorant, conformist mindset and not perpetuate a possible dystopia as described in 1984.