|
| Wake Up and Smell the Roses - Outside!
While psychologists hesitate to use the term "addiction" to describe individuals who have a dependency on the Internet, there are organizations that offer online services to curb correct this problem.
The Center for Online Addiction (COA) is a training clinic and institute that specializes in cyber-disorders such as cyber-sex addiction, cyber-affairs, problem day trading, compulsive online shopping and gambling, and childhood Internet addiction.
The COA website offers an online test that measures two things:
1. You already know or strongly believe you are addicted to the Internet, this guide will assist you in identifying the areas in your life most impacted by your excessive Net use.
2. You are not sure whether you're addicted or not, this will help determine the answer and begin to assess the damage done.
I took the test just out of curiosity; my score was 12 out of 100. According to my score, I am an average online user who may surf the Web a bit too long at times but I have control over my usage. I found that many of the questions did not apply to me – I never neglect household chores to be online nor do I block out disturbing thoughts about my life with soothing thoughts of the Internet.
I enjoy face-to-face interaction. When I have a conversation with an individual in person, I find that I am more attentive and can focus on what we are talking about on. Plus, I like seeing and hearing someone laugh at my story or offer me a hug if I have a bad day. A (: or a *hug* seen on the computer doesn’t offer the same effect.
According to the APA Press Release, the largest group of Internet “addicts” comprised of middle-aged females and those (both men and women) who were currently unemployed. The COA conducted a clinical study, which found that the average age of Internet addicts was 29 years old for males and 43 years old for females.
I was interested in knowing how university students are affected by online addictions. Caught in the Net, a novel written by Dr. Kimberly Young, studies how the combination of unstructured, free, and unlimited Internet use breed college / university communities of severe addicts, who are just beginning to awaken to the seriousness of plummeting grades and ruined social lives.
Although I haven’t read Dr. Young’s book, I find it difficult to believe that there are very many Internet addicts at the University of Western Ontario. We pride ourselves as being students of a very “social” school!
Although the use of instant messagers, the availability of high-speed connection in computer labs, and a population of sexually-excitable young males may contribute to Internet addiction, I question the validity of Dr. Young’s concern that Internet addiction causes plummeting grades and ruined social lives.
Experts debate nearly every aspect of the Internet's effect on mental health, while advocates argue that the new medium's social benefits outweigh its risks. I’d agree with the pro-Internet perspective. Every mass medium raises issues of social risks and benefits but I honestly believe that common sense plays a large role in combating online addictions.
Until there is proof that links mental health and Internet addiction together, I’m inclined to say that people should have better self-control.
I found it slightly disturbing that Dan Moore’s scenario is becoming an increasingly familiar story. Barbara Jamison’s article revealed that the Internet can “destroy a life.” He had a job, wife, and family and he lost everything because of his addiction to online pornography.
Dan Moore should have thought about his children sleeping in their bedrooms and about his neglected wife as he logged online to check out porn. I have no sympathy for him. He calls himself a “self-defined compulsive personality-type,” which may not necessarily be an excuse but he is deflecting some of the blame to this disorder.
I can “self-define” myself as obsessive-compulsive about clothes and neatness. Yes, I fold and sort all my clothing according to colours and then shades. Yes, the pants hanging in my closet are exactly 2 inches apart on navy blue hangers. Yes, I vacuum and clean my apartment every week even if it’s sparkling clean. But I don’t let this disorder affect my entire life.
So, my message to Dan Moore and others is to wake up and be social. There are so many people to talk to and so many things to do – the dependency on a computer and the WWW is sad. | | |
| Enough is Enough - “Cybercrime” Legislation as Censorship
Legislation for mass mediums can be a thinly veiled form of censorship. With each mass medium, governmental bodies have attempted to control the content and message sent out.
During World War II, radio became a major instrument of “national policy;” the government controlled this medium as strict censorship was imposed and most programs had to be submitted to censors three weeks before broadcast.
The American government has also controlled television. The Federal Communications Commission, created by the government, had basic responsibilities that included assigning station frequencies and call letters, assigning and renewing broadcasting licenses, assigning coverage areas, and maintaining research in the communication field. Although the FCC did not have the authority to censor material on television, they indirectly had control to who produced content on television.
The Internet, as Chris Bailey’s article The International Convention on Cybercrime notes, has become a powerful organizing weapon for social movements challenging the domination of some increasingly isolated and discredited political leaders. Governmental authorities are now trying to tackle "cybercrime" by setting and enforcing regulations to end private communication that exists on the Internet.
Such legislation violates the rights and freedoms of all Western democratized countries.
Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, all citizens are entitled to the following fundamental freedoms:
§ Freedom of conscience and religion
§ Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
§ Freedom of peaceful assembly
§ Freedom of association
While the Internet does facilitate criminal acts such as child pornography, hate literature, and even communication between so-called “terrorists,” to begin to impose regulation would impede the very notion of a free flow to information.
I understand and appreciate the justification for intercepting Internet communications as a means to combat the sexual exploitation of women and children, and to combat the activities of racist groups.
Hate crimes violate the human rights of society and rob minorities of the dignity and respect they deserve. Everyone is entitled to live free from discrimination and harassment. Hate crime offenders utilize the Charter as their right to declare religious beliefs open without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practice or by teaching and dissemination.
This use of the Charter is questionable but the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as may be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act in Britain and the Wiretapping Act in Japan goes directly against the democratic practices each country boasts as having.
As Western politicians constantly criticize communist nations for the lack of democracy for its citizens, aren’t our Western politicians guilty of the same thing when they wish to place legislation for mass media?
Whereas “the Internet now allowed people to commit crimes in a number of different countries without having to move from their armchairs,” isn’t that also true of the telephone?
I’m tired of the argument that censorship is needed for better of society. There will always be individuals who misuse technology and media.
The West maintains such a “superior” position over the rest of the world in terms of having a democratic political system. It’s important to note that our Western world is not as perfect and egalitarian as we are led to believe.
| | |
| A Battle Bigger than Ours
“When you have certain threats, you give up certain rights to protect against those threats.”
– Stephen Brown, Palisade Product Marketing Manager
I understand Stephen Brown’s argument that protective measures may diminish certain rights and freedoms but these measures are for the good of society. He is a businessman promoting his company’s bandwidth-management tools that allows networks to control how much traffic is permitted for high-volume service.
However, I want to present a scenario where certain individuals are at an extreme disadvantage when information, websites, email, and even file-sharing programs are controlled or censored, such as the case in China.
As the third largest country in the world, next to Canada and Russia, China is home to approximately 1.27 billion people. The mass media in China function strictly within the bounds set and is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. Under Mao Tse-tung’s communist system, mass media are the tools of the state and played the main role of propagandist.
The Internet is not excluded from the government’s strict control.
Chinese authorities have issued more than sixty sets of regulations to govern Internet content. Just one regulation outlines that no individual may use the Internet to create, replicate, retrieve, or transmit information that:
- Incites to resist or violate the Constitution or laws of the administrative regions,
- Incites to overthrow the government or the socialist system,
- Incites division of the country in harming national unification, invites hatred or discrimination among nationalities,
- Makes falsehoods or distorts the truth in destroying the order of society, promotes sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, and murder, engaging in terrorism, injuring the reputation of state organs,
- And other activities against the Constitution, laws, or administrative regulations.
This one set of regulations effectively eliminates almost all questionable content from the Western world. Websites that provide information on hate literature and crimes, anti-war and pro-war arguments, instructions to construct weapons, and even sexually oriented material would be censored.
But are these regulations and filters really beneficial for a society that prides itself for being democratic and defenders of individual rights and freedoms?
The Internet opens a door to a freer flow of information. Despite all the negative and problematic material found online, I support freedom to and of information on the Internet especially in countries where propaganda authorities effectively controlled the flow of information, news sources, and information outlets.
In China, Internet traffic into the country goes through government filters that block certain sites. Examples of blocked websites include BBC, ABC, MSNBC, ZDNET, Amnesty International, news.com, WiredNews, China News Digest, and most US news media.
The government has made it a criminal offence to use the Internet to access or spread “threatening” information. These regulations give the government discretion to find, arrest, and punish any form of expression that conflict with the government’s plans.
Newspapers, television, and radio are converging online. People can verify information through different sources and form their own opinions disregarding biased information. The Internet can mean some freedom from press controls and a public forum for citizens of a closed society to discuss politics and current events.
The Internet is revolutionizing the way Chinese communicate and interact.
The Western world has enjoyed this liberty for years; why erect fences and stop signs now?
Is the degree of the perceived danger so great that certain institutions need to use censorship?
Yes, child pornography websites are illegal and should be stopped but how far is too far?
Why aren’t more people aware of these filters?
I’ve given up some rights and freedoms. After all, I use computers on campus. I use Rogers Cable, which has a download cap. On the rare occasions, I come across a website that tells me that I don’t have the necessary authority to access the content.
These examples are so trivial in comparison to the people who have severely restricted access or even none at all. Whereas there may be little control over the situation over China’s governmental control of the Internet, let’s appreciate having information to everything our heart desires.
| | |
| Home Sweet Home: The New Workplace
In “The Virtual Workplace: A Reality Now,” Wayne Cascio defines virtual workplace as a new paradigm of work. Employees operate remotely from each other and from managers and can work anytime and anywhere.
Virtual workplaces are also known as telework or telecommuting, which occurs where paid workers work away from their normal place of work, usually from home. According to Statistics Canada, in 1998, over 900,000 Canadians were teleworkers. Bell Canada, Lanark County Ontario, and IBM Canada are three companies that employ the most number of teleworkers.
However, as with most aspects related to jobs, there are advantages and disadvantages to virtual workplaces.
Fans of virtual workplaces argue that telework can save millions while helping to balance busy lifestyles, while reducing job related stress. From an employee’s perspective, telecommuting is beneficial for the following reasons:
• Saves money for food, clothing, dry cleaning, bus, parking, fuel, highway tolls, and insurance.
• Reduces commuting time.
• Provides job access to those in geographically remote areas.
• Improves morale, work satisfaction and motivation.
• Recognizes importance of family, increase single parent/dual career households.
Critics of telecommuting argue that a virtual workplace is detrimental to both employee and employer. Some challenges of telecommuting from an employee’s viewpoint are as follows:
• Increases potential for home and family distractions.
• Possibility of becoming a workaholic with longer hours.
• Causes feeling of isolation with reduction of social interaction.
• Fewer career and promotional opportunities from reduced office influence.
• Diminished access to resources found only at workplace.
I don’t think that telework is for everyone. If an individual can work independently, efficiently, and productively at home, s/he must exhibit the ability to focus and organize time responsibly.
Personally, I enjoy the structure and routine of going into an office building for work. Although I appreciate the benefits of working from home, I value the social aspect of interacting with co-workers and clients. I prefer face-to-face communication as opposed to emails or instant messages to my virtual team on the computer.
I also like to separate my “work” from my “home” life, which is already a problem for most people. It is difficult enough to leave work and even office politics at the workplace. I’d like to be able to go home after work hours and set aside as much work-related material as possible.
I think that more companies will utilize virtual workplaces as globalization continues. As the Western world becomes more connected through new technology, new structures of the workplace will develop. Computers, the Internet, and high-speed connections will facilitate communication between supervisors and employees, account managers and clients, and headquarter companies and its subsidiaries companies.
I’m interested in pursuing a corporate communications career and eventually working for a PR consulting firm. A major component to public relations is communication. A PR professional should have both the means and capability to use various media to communicate, including face-to-face interactions to virtual meetings.
I anticipate that ten years from now, my job will involve a certain characteristics of a virtual workplace. If all goes well, I hope to develop an international clientele. To avoid jet-setting across the world, I will rely on live video-streams over the Internet, email, and online file transfers.
If it is a matter of choice, I still prefer to work at the office and not from home. Even though I think I have the characteristics of being a good teleworker – being organized, having good time management skills, and the ability to focus and avoid distractions – I think that I’d be more efficient and have more fun in a workplace that had face-to-face interaction.
(on a completely unrelated note, formatting these weblogs on xanga drives me crazy!) | | |
| Darn those Internet Scams!
Since I am a paranoid skeptic, I’ve never been a victim of an e-mail scam. I also have a policy of never sending forwards of any sort to friends and family. I hate receiving them so I hate sending them. However, after reading articles about e-mail hoaxes from the RCMP Scams Section, it became apparent that people are being fooled into spending money or forwarding e-mails filled with false information.
I receive an astonishing amount of junk mail in my e-mail account everyday. While my automatic reaction is to delete all mail from unfamiliar names or e-mail addresses, I have encountered several “request” that are most likely Internet scams. These few occasions are the result of friends and family sending me forwarded e-mail. Even then, I’ll scan over these e-mails then delete them.
I find that the e-mails that get noticed and forwarded are the ones that play on fear and compassion. Get-rich-quick and work-at-home schemes are normally understood as being scams so these e-mails are deleted to the “Trash Folder.” Warnings about computer viruses and ways to help dying children raise money garner more attention.
“DON'T DOWNLOAD THE FILE “X!” It has a virus that rewrites your hard drive and obliterates anything on it. Please be careful and forward this e-mail to anyone you care about.”
E-mail warnings about computer viruses typically appear informative and harmless but there are dangers that most people fail to recognize. While a warning message may be a hoax, the e-mail may have an attachment that promises to protect your computer against the “infected” file.
A Trojan horse virus could be attached to an e-mail message as the anti-virus program. If the reader downloads and executes the Trojan horse program, it could do the damage described in this message.
Also, false warnings become a nuisance when they are inaccurate. Preying on fear and paranoia, inaccurate computer virus e-mails add to the junk on the Internet. Most people will forward the e-mail to friends and family since so phony information is being passed along.
Hi, my name is Amy Bruce. I am 7 years old and I have severe lung cancer from second hand smoke. I also have a large tumor in my brain, from repeated beatings. The doctors say I will die soon if this isn’t fixed, and my family can’t pay the bills. The Make A Wish Foundation has agreed to donate 7 cents for every name on this list. For those of you who send this along, I thank you so much. Have a heart, please send this. Please and thanks you.
Heartbreaking e-mails such as this request from Amy Bruce are powerful as people believe that they are helping a little girl who is severely ill. In addition, the Make-A-Wish Foundation is well-known and respectable. Amy Bruce’s association with the Foundation adds credibility, despite the deceptive nature of the e-mail.
According to Make-A-Wish Foundation, they do not conduct Internet and e-mail requests. Most people won’t question the validity of a terminally ill child’s request. These e-mail scams are even more compelling when there is a photograph of a child lying in a hospital bed.
I’m not sure how successful these “dirty dozen” scams are. One method to minimize the proliferation of e-mail hoaxes are to check and verify the validity of the claim before you take any action.
If you are interested in making lots of money without much work, find out about the company offering this business opportunity with the FTC. Similarly, check if a charity really behind the e-mail request. A quick check on the Make-A-Wish Foundation website informs you that Amy Bruce’s e-mail is false.
Although this strategy requires more time and effort than just clicking the “forward” button, it minimizes fraudulent claims and stops inaccurate information. Do everyone a favour and check the information before passing it along. I know that I’d appreciate it. | | |
|
