EOTO2 Post

 

Diffusion of Innovation - Electric Vehicles 

The Diffusion of Innovation theory is an interesting one. It discusses why innovations or ideas are adopted or rejected by society and what influences the decision to adopt the innovation early, late, or not. According to the theory, five elements influence the spread of an innovation, those are: The innovation itself and how useful or interesting it is to the general public. The adopters and why they are adopting an idea can also influence others, especially these days when people follow influencers’ suggestions. The communication channels or how the idea is being spread. Time or how long the innovation has been around and how well known it is, and finally, the social system which may be friends or family or influencers adopting the innovation and sharing about it so others will adopt it as well. I have chosen to look at this theory through the innovation of the electric vehicle (EVs). In the 2020s, we see electric cars and hybrids all over the roads, but this is a late adoption of an earlier innovation.


The first successful EV in the US made its debut around 1890 thanks to William Morrison, a chemist from Des Moines, Iowa. His six-passenger vehicle was capable of a top speed of 14 miles per hour and was essentially an electrified wagon, but it helped spark interest in EVs. At the time, gasoline cars required manual effort to drive, shifting gears was hard, they needed to start with a hand crank and they were noisy and smelly, while electric cars were quiet and easy to drive with none of the toxic emissions of gas-powered vehicles. So why didn’t they catch on back then? EVs always had the five characteristics of innovations. It was a good idea, it was relatively easy to produce, it was compatible with the needs of the masses, people could try them out and easily see that they were a better quality vehicle than gas cars and better for the environment and they were simple to learn to produce and drive. The problem then was that EVs fell short in the area of elements that influence the spread of innovations. Yes, the innovation was a good one, yes, there were adopters, but communication channels were not extensive then, they had not been around very long and people were still wary of them and the social system was not helpful because there just weren’t enough people talking about them. When Henry Ford’s Model T was introduced in 1908, it made gas cars available and affordable. While an EV of the time cost about $1700, a Model T was only $650. With the discovery of Texas crude oil, gas became cheap and readily available for rural Americans, and filling stations began popping up across the country. In comparison, very few Americans outside of cities had electricity at that time. In the end, EVs disappeared in 1935. In the late 60s and early 70s, oil and gas prices were at an all-time high and Congress took note and passed the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976, authorizing the Energy Department to support research and development in electric and hybrid vehicles. EVs were again on the rise. Or were they? We have all sorts of electric and hybrid options now, from the Toyota Prius introduced in 1997 to the Chevy Volt in 2010, yet some still refuse to adopt this technology.


What has taken so long for this innovation to spread and become the primary choice for vehicles? We already talked about how EVs met all the criteria for a solid innovation, but in the past, they fell short of elements that influence spread. Now, we even have plenty of adopters. The tech has been around long enough that everyone is aware it exists, they have been persuaded by the fact that they have low emissions, they require less maintenance than gas cars and electricity is cheaper than gas, but what is taking so long in making the decision, buying an electric or hybrid car and trying it out for themselves? We hear about the idea that EVs are expensive, it is hard to find charging stations, charging takes too long (20 minutes), they don’t have enough range, and they will cause higher electric bills at home (but lower gas bills so it evens out), batteries are expensive batteries and they don’t do well in cold weather. So we are back to the adopters as the cause of the delay in a broader acceptance of electric vehicles. The communication channels exist but there are just as strong communications coming out of the gas and oil companies insisting EVs are dangerous or unreliable, so people sit on the fence, especially if their social system is influenced by Big Oil and is talking them out of trying an EV. In the end, EVs have always been a victim of five elements that influence spread, they have the five characteristics of good innovation, they have adopters that have gone through the five stages of adoption, and they even have three of the five elements that influence spread, but much like anything in our society, if the communication channels are disrupted or influenced by misinformation designed to keep the money in the right pockets, this will also influence the social system and it leaves innovations like EVs still struggling for adoption over 100 years after they were invented.

Blog Post #7 Antiwar

The Evolution of the First Amendment

When the First Amendment was emerging, the Supreme Court didn’t originally interpret it for the populace, it was geared more toward the government getting involved in decisions. Until 1914, when World War I started, the court essentially stayed out of state and local happenings. When The Birth of a Nation, a silent film about the Civil War and the birth of the Ku Klux Klan, debuted, it was met with violence and protests on both sides. Finally, Ohio banned the film, and the filmmakers sued under prior restraint, but this was disputed because they said the film was commerce and not protected by this law.

In 1917, the United States entered World War I, and Congress passed the Espionage Act in case people said things against the war or released military secrets that would damage the war effort - and even today, we hear about whistleblower cases for espionage. While the Espionage Act was originally passed for government employees, Congress now wanted to punish anyone who spoke out against the war or the military. This may be one of the reasons that, to this day, we do not hear or see very much in the way of anti-war sentiment in the media. Congress took it one step further with the Sedition Act, which says it is a crime to speak out against the government at all, and in 1919, the cases of Schenk, Debs, Frohwerk, and Abrams brought this debate to the forefront. These journalists spoke out against the war and were jailed for sedition. The Supreme Court sided in favor of the government against these men, claiming that the anti-war stance was incitement because it could cause others to rise against the government and that it was not protected speech because it posed a “clear and present danger”. Later, however, Justice Holmes dissented in favor of  Abrams due to the marketplace of ideas, wherein we want to hear good ideas, and just because Abrams was against the war, it did not mean that he was not making good points that may need to be taken into consideration. This argument is still used to this day.

In the early 1920s, the advent of radio and radio news allowed voices to be heard across the country, so information was able to travel faster and farther than before. Finally, the 19th amendment was passed, giving women the right to vote, which then amplified this segment of the population's voices as well. This was a time of progress and change, we had a good stock market, it was the Jazz Age, art and architecture were innovative, and race relations were changing, too. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court was still behaving as it always had. Taft wanted to make a change, and in 1925 he passed the Judiciary Act (certiorari) allowing the Supreme Court to pick and choose the cases they thought were worth hearing rather than having to take them all. One of the first cases under the new Act was Pierce v Society of Sisters which was an argument that said forcing kids to go to public school rather than having the choice to go to Catholic school violated the 14th Amendment because liberty means that people can raise their children in the manner they see fit which includes sending them to whichever school they choose. The Supreme Court decided to incorporate the Bill of Rights into Due Process to get down to the state and local levels. Finally, in 1931, the Minnesota rule sought to put a gag rule on sensationalism, but prior restraint was argued so the court used the “near rule” to decide if they should allow it. This outlines three exceptions to Prior Restraint, if it is pornography, if it poses a national security threat, or if it is considered incitement.

The government continued to try to stop publishers and protesters so the Supreme Court added three more exceptions, first stating that prior restraint is unconstitutional, second, the burden of proof is on the government and third the act must represent direct irreparable harm and these work together to help protect the first amendment. So with all of these protections, why is it still so hard to find anti-war voices in the media? This is likely for a few reasons, mostly because the United States has a huge military complex, we have bases all over the world and are involved in various conflicts at any given time usually regarding oil production or some civil rights violation. If these antiwar voices were heard by too many Americans, they may start to question the very thing that makes the United States what it is and that could be considered incitement which is not protected speech.

Blog post #6 EOTO1 Reax

Reaction: Video

The blog post I chose to review was Maggie’s post on the evolution of video. I thought it would be interesting because video is such a huge part of our lives, with YouTube and TikTok, not to mention television and movies. I was surprised to learn how the technology originally developed. In 1839 photo negatives were invented by William Henry and these allowed people to capture images that eventually led to Jules Marey developing the chronophotographic gun which would allow people to take twelve photos per second, almost like when people photograph models or action shots. They could then place these photos back to back at high speed giving a video effect. This concept reminds me of stop motion animation or silent films, which is exactly what people started using them for. 

In 1891 Thomas Edison further improved on this technology by inventing the motion picture camera and color and sound were added in the early 1900s. People started using this new technology to produce movies and TV shows, which revolutionized the film industry. I was also surprised to learn that the VCR was invented in 1954. It wasn’t until the 1980s that people had this technology in their homes, so it was hard to believe it had been around all that time before it was available to everyone. I was also surprised to learn that digitization was only perfected in 2008. That was just over 15 years ago! When digitization took over, it increased the quality of videos and enabled people to better edit and alter videos, especially animation. Now videos are everywhere. Video technology is a huge part of everyday life, whether we are using it for social media, entertainment, or even our jobs. It is amazing to think that just about 10 years ago, we were still creating videos much as they did in the 1950s with only some technological advancement. With the advent of AI, it will be interesting to see where video goes from here.

EOTO Terms & Concepts

The Story of Podcasts

Almost everyone has heard of podcasts, even if they haven’t actually listened to one. The first podcasts were basically on-demand radio. They were episodic audio programs that listeners could find and download online through platforms like Spotify or Apple Podcasts. Much like NPR (National Public Radio) podcast hosts would use their shows to discuss things such as politics, news, sports, and movies or music. The main difference was that listeners could subscribe to these shows so they would know as soon as a new episode was available. Today, podcasts have evolved into a diverse medium featuring any topic you can imagine, from true crime to history to health and technology, but where did it all begin?

Back in 2004, Adam Curry, a TV announcer, and software developer Dave Winer came up with the idea that people would love to hear stories about current happenings rather than reading about them. A year later, Curry founded PodShow, which is a podcast promotion company, and began hosting his own shows. Curry is often referred to as The Podfather for his role in the founding of the medium.

Podcasts are a simple but interesting concept. According to Liz Covart, evolution has hardwired the human brain to be receptive to oral storytelling and almost all podcasts tell stories. These stories are prepared and organized with a beginning, middle, and end, enabling listeners to hear the story of a person, place, event, or some other phenomenon. The sole purpose of these types of podcasts and audio dramas is to convey a story and create an intimate storytelling experience. Because the platforms for podcasts already existed, it was easy for this medium to take off. Podcasts are inexpensive to produce, only requiring a microphone, an interesting story, and some research. Over the last 20 years, podcasts have taken the internet and the world by storm.

The good news is that studies show that podcasts are good for your brain. Some of the benefits of consuming podcasts include: helping to increase levels of empathy, foster relationships, and boost compassion. They also reduce screen time which is good for our eyes, and many of them are highly educational so they can improve your vocabulary and make you a better listener and conversationalist.
However, in excess, podcasts can distract you from your work and social connections and even impede your ability to learn and remember. Further, as the distribution of podcasts expands, so does the potential for libel, slander, privacy violation, intellectual property infringement, and other forms of media liability risk. There can even be a risk of convincing people of things that may not be true, such as what was done with the amazingly popular Serial podcast, where the host revisited a murder conviction, which ultimately resulted in a retrial and release of the accused, who is now believed to actually be guilty.

It doesn’t seem to matter what generation you are from or whatever your interest is; there is a podcast for it, and people can be found listening to podcasts all the time. So many of my friends enjoy podcasts like Call Her Daddy and Hot Mess because you can go on with your life, driving, working out, or going for a walk, and you can listen. Rather than playing music, both old and young people are listening to podcasts. As long as people are using critical thinking skills and are careful not to overdo them, podcasts are a great option for educational and entertaining content that you can access anywhere, anytime.

Blog Post#5 Privacy

 

The Importance of Privacy

Although I knew that online privacy was an issue, I didn't realize the extent of it until I watched these TED Talks. It is hard to quantify how these issues might affect me, my friends, and my family because they literally affect everyone on the planet. We already know that Google doesn't forget, and all of our pictures and posts on social media will probably be there forever, but what we might not release is the problem with facial recognition software. I was shocked to hear that face.com has a database of 18 billion faces online. The idea that people can find out your name, where you live, and where you work just by seeing your picture online is unbelievable. 

Even if we are cautious on our social media, it is still too easy for people to track us down. In the second TED talk, we learned that not only do the police have military-grade weapons, but they have military-grade surveillance as well. Using automatic license plate readers, they can track where you go and even who you are with, so they can also access cell tower data to reveal people's locations, which is a huge civil liberty threat now that data can be stored in the cloud, there are no limits to how much information they keep and for how long. 

In the third TED talk, we learned about wiretapping and how companies build surveillance into our networks, which means that someone from our government or another government can be listening to our calls or reading our texts. The government claims that they need to be able to do this to fight terrorism, but most people are not terrorists, and this again poses a civil liberties threat to innocent people being surveilled. Finally, we heard about cyber harassment, also known as revenge porn which is when your personal photos are shared online without your consent. While some people may think this does not apply to them with our advanced photo editing technology, anyone can be put in a compromising position even if they never sent a personal photo out. The scariest part of this situation is there are very few laws to protect people, and it can take up to a year to get these photos taken down.

The government needs to create laws to protect us online. The internet is international, so it makes it hard, but stricter penalties will serve as a deterrent, at least. Unfortunately, the government approves of some of these surveillance techniques and fights against legislation that would protect us from them. so what can we do to protect ourselves? The speaker in the first TED talk did give some good advice. Even though we already know these things, we definitely need to be reminded to be careful what we post to remember the purpose of what we are posting, and not fall in love with ourselves and not post too much information. Second, we definitely need to be using the encryption features available to us. Encryption is the default on many of our Apple devices, as well as FaceTime and WhatsApp, but we need to check what protections we have available to us and enable them immediately. 

Blog Post #3

 

The Importance of Free Speech

The theory that resonates with me right now is the theory of “Stable Change” or Safety Valve. This theory says that people who are allowed to speak their minds are less likely to be violent. This theory feels most important right now because we just ended a presidential election cycle. We see this theory in action today as people are given the right to vote or speak their minds on who they want to be elected. At the same time, one side is going to be unhappy about the decision, so they will need that opportunity to vent and air their grievances so that things hopefully don't boil over and become violent.  

Due to my lack of education in politics, I struggle to see how politics plays a role in everyday life. I chose this theory because it aligned with voting as an example of people being allowed to “speak their minds.” The violence aspect of the theory made me think that people are less likely to get violent if they have a choice in who gets put into office and if they are able to express discontent if they need to.   

Another part of the theory that I think applies to today is the section where it says that because people can speak freely, the government is able to catch someone who would potentially make a dangerous choice. I’d like to think that the government hearing people's complaints might also lead to positive change. Finally, the theory of stable change can also be seen in everyday life because when we vent to our friends it helps keep us calm. 

While the theory of stable change resonated with me most at this time, it is the theory of individual self-fulfillment that is the most important to me. This is based on the idea of free speech, and it really speaks to everyone's individuality and autonomy. Having the ability to say what they think allows us to not only be contributing members of society but also allows us to create our own identities and be fiercely individual. We see this theory in action every day on social media, in the news, and maybe most especially in art. 

Writers are at the forefront of this theory because in exposing themselves, they sometimes run into issues such as book banning and burning. After all, people don't want to hear what they have to say. Books are banned for a variety of reasons, some because they have violent content, some because they have diverse characters, but ironically, most book bans occur with children's literature, and most often due to content such as witchcraft or talking animals. Self-actualization is one of the most important and personal rights that we each have, and we should respect each other's rights to their own self-fulfillment. We often see The theory of stable change and the theory of stable self-fulfillment working together as people are able to use their platforms for their art to vent any discomfort or discontent they may have.

EOTO1 Post

Tech Timeline

It's hard to believe there was ever a time when social media didn't exist because most people use it daily. However, only 20 years ago, everything changed with the invention of Facebook. Originally called Facemash, what we know as Facebook was created by Mark Zuckerberg when he was 23 years old. Zuckerberg was a computer programmer and developed a social networking website for fellow college students. He launched The Facebook in February 2004, and in a month, over half of the undergrads at Harvard had a profile. The network was extended to other universities and became Facebook.com in August 2005. At that time, there was no way to interact with other college students outside of his university, and he thought it would be a good idea to create a network that allowed students to share course information as well as make friends. 

By December 2005, Facebook had 6 million users, and by 2023, it had almost 3 billion. Facebook has a huge demographic of people from the age of 18-65, with the highest number of users in the 25-34 age group and the highest usage by males at 56.8 percent. Originally, Facebook was a great thing because it made people from across the country and world be able to interact with one another and share pictures and stories. Since then, one of the problems this has created is the broad sharing of misinformation. This phenomenon is still an issue today, especially during election season. It's very easy to create fake accounts, and due to the global penetration, it's easy to create false accounts within minutes. On the plus side, Facebook remains a great way to advertise products, so companies are still willing to advertise on the site. 

In 2010, Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger created Instagram. The name is a mash-up of an instant camera and telegram. The app was originally called Burbn and was a location-based app that allowed people to check in and share photos. Unfortunately, it was too similar to Four Square, but they noticed that people were enjoying sharing their photos, so they redeveloped the app into Instagram. Instagram had 2 million followers 6 weeks after it launched. In 2012, it was purchased by Facebook for 1 billion dollars. In 2024, Instagram became the most popular photo-sharing site, with over 2 billion users. Instagram also has a broad demographic with users from ages 18-65 and the highest usage in adults 25-35 and skews toward women at 55.4 percent. 

Although Instagram was originally created to share photos with friends, it has grown into a force in advertising, and it's the leading social media platform used by marketers worldwide. Instagram does not face the same misinformation issues as Facebook since users cannot link to external content, but it still poses certain problems. Many users curate their photos to create the illusion of a perfect life, which has been linked to increased levels of anxiety, depression, and FOMO. Additionally, users with public accounts often receive unwanted contact and are frequently exposed to inappropriate content. Although most of us imagine living in a world without Facebook and Instagram, we have to consider if sharing all of our information is actually healthy for us I don't think social media is going anywhere soon, but we as users may want to give extra consideration to what we share for the benefit of ourselves and others.