With the recent, untimely death of Michael Jackson, a very intriguing dialogue has emerged. While mentioning his passing, anchors on the news stations have included such names as Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe and Frank Sinatra. All icons that deservedly have their place in our cultural lexicon. However, their passing did not face the environment of social media and citizen journalism of which Mr. Jackson’s departure is now the target.

Reports that arrived immediately following the announcement of Jackson’s death flooded the airwaves (that term’s still relevant when referring to TV and the Internet together, right?). It was in fact via Twitter that we here at the LAMP first learned of this occurrence. It didn’t take long before these reports started to dissect this newly deceased man’s life, pulling up stories, images and videos of his various missteps and malfunctions off the stage. Somehow this was appropriate to mourning the loss of one of the biggest impacts in the last quarter century on our global culture - both entertainment-wise as well as with regards to humanitarian efforts. The public debate became one about his legacy - how it should be framed and what should be its content.

What now emerges, just as the wicks in the mourning candles lit last night in remembrance of this man start to cool, is another debate. What damage is news coverage of his passing doing to other important stories? Is his death newsworthy? In the wake of the protests in Iran, does the sidetracking of the focus the Western media had put on the uprisings harm the cause of the protesters (this of course presumes that media coverage in the West has helped the protesters and not hurt them)?

We do not take a particular position on this matter. Frankly, we’re delighted that people are even debating what is newsworthy and what isn’t. It speaks to a much more prevalent media literacy that exists, and it doesn’t escape our notice that the same media folks are choosing to participate in this polemic (social networks, Twitter) are the same ones that informed us of these current events to begin with.

We’ve been manning an account on Twitter since early 2008, and at first we were merely using it in our workshops to demonstrate to our students the different social media in the Web 2.0 arsenal. Gradually, over time, we started to use the platform to engage in conversations with others about our work but also about the subject of media literacy, which led to us trying to specifically address the medium of Twitter through Twitter itself. Through this implementation, we’ve discovered some incredibly dynamic and beneficial qualities to Twitter, however, none more than Twitter’s search function. Type any term you want, and you receive a realtime, updated stream of tweets from everyone who mentions that term in their tweet. Instantly, you can see what people all around the globe are saying through Twitter about “model airplanes” or “world cup 2010″. Recently, this function has served a much more prescient, geo-political purpose.

On Friday, general elections for Iranian President took place. Shortly after,  incumbent President Ahmadinejad was declared the winner, defeating his rival Mir-Hossein Mousavi. The reaction worldwide was astonishment and shock, but none more outraged than those within Iran’s borders. Gradually, demonstrations began to assemble on the streets of Tehran, growing in intensity, despite the threats of armed response from the government. Coinciding with these brave protesters, another demonstration has emerged on Twitter. Thousands of people are spreading information, links, pictures and other words of encouragement all with the hash tag of #iranelection, which means when you perform a Twitter search on that term, you can witness the constant stream of tweets it chains together. I encourage you to spend a few minutes reading through the long list of updates. It’s pretty incredible. You see hundreds and perhaps thousands of folks around the world using this “useless” medium to voice their support for those Iranians gathering to demand their voices heard and their votes counted.

While monitoring the events that are unfolding on Twitter (and on some other sites as well), several things occurred to me. Numerous messages are being forwarded about actions by the Iranian Government:

“They’re cutting off all connections now, Google Talk, Yahoo Messenger Twitter..”

“CONFIRMED!! Army moving into Tehran against protesters! PLEASE RT! URGENT!”

While monitoring this stream, I’ve encountered these repeated over and over by folks who probably have the kindest of intentions, but how do they possibly know that what they are spreading is accurate information? There have been several photos posted via TwitPic that depict some gruesome scenes, but again, how are we certain these photos are coming from these harrowing events? Another item was posted several times in Twitter that the BBC’s website had changed it’s colors to green in order to show solidarity with Mousavi’s supporters (”2mw: rt@omasciandaro: The BBC web site just went green in support of Iraninan opposition. Small gesture, huge message. Go green! #iranelection“). However, this isn’t true. The BBC’s website has been these colors for a long while.

We asked several questions on Twitter about this subject:

-How many of you are following #iranelection? How many of those tweets w/that label can you trust? What % need to be dismissed? % heeded?

-Twitter + #iranelection = first Internet uprising? http://bit.ly/ZQYDc But who’s in command? Are there guiding principles?

-How do you trust the “factual” ones? are those twitpics really pics of #iranelection? Who’s factchecking?

While this is by no means a statistically significant sampling, the only responses we got to our questions were of the nature that factchecking, guidance and critical analysis weren’t important to what was being attempted through Twitter. This response brings up a whole bunch of other questions: What constitutes an uprising? Do these well-intentioned folks really understand Iranian politics and the positions Mousavi held in the election?

Maybe we’re seeing the first Internet uprising, and perhaps other uprisings also dealt with this amount of misinformation being disseminated, but one thing is for sure: Twitter is more than just telling others about the chili cheese dog you had for lunch.

In my last writing here on LAMPpost, I talked about how my husband and I are in the process of moving and decided to get rid of our old television set. Like many other people, though, we have much more than a TV that we need to dispose of. As we went through our things, we found various random electronic items like old routers, phone cords, frayed extension cords, chargers and the like. We’ve set this e-waste aside (I call it my e-landfill) and yesterday I started looking for e-waste dropoff sites and Department of Sanitation events where I can bring a shopping bag full of stuff to one place and know that it will all be taken care of–reused, recycled, whatever. But, I came across a disturbing piece of news: All of these events, which were coordinated with the DSNY, private companies and nonprofits, have been cancelled until further notice due to budget cuts.

Of course there are alternatives. I can take my stuff to EplanetEwaste and pay for the convenience of more or less handing them a bag of stuff and walking away. One excellent option is to bring unwanted e-waste to the Lower East Side Ecology Center, although their e-waste events are currently on hold until September. Another is RecycleThis!, which was formed in 2002 in response to Mayor Bloomberg’s recycling program budget cuts, but their event calendar is empty. Outside of that, I can investigate buyback or donation programs for every individual piece of e-waste I’ve stockpiled.  This can be done, but it’s time-consuming and inconvenient for me to have to make separate trips for each item.

That’s not necessarily an excuse not to recycle my e-waste, but what I hate is that it is at all difficult. A densely-populated city like New York, where mp3 players, laptops and cell phones can seem like standard issue items, should make it as easy as possible for me and everyone else to make responsible choices. I could just stuff it all in a garbage can; that won’t be illegal until July 2010. PLANYC has a lot of great ideas for reducing carbon emissions, but–and please correct me if I am wrong–basic recycling isn’t part of it. I understand that nobody likes making budget cuts, but it’s counterproductive to try to build a healthy city in a modern age where electronics recycling is not sponsored or more widely promoted by the city. Let’s hope that when the downturn starts to turn up, the DSNY e-waste programs will be restored.

When my husband and I decided to move, we looked around our current apartment and started to think about what would come with us, and what we would sell or give away. One of the first things we landed on was our television set. At 32 inches and seven years old, it has served us well, but we both felt like it was time to move on and enter the modern world of the flatscreen. The current set is bulky, very heavy and takes up a lot of space, but the living room in our new home is a little bit smaller than where we reside at the moment. Space-saving decisions have had to be made, so we chose to upgrade to a flat-screen which we’ll mount on the wall. The problem? Our move-in date is June 5, but we agreed that the best day for a stoop sale was on Memorial Day, May 25.

We ended up giving away the old TV set to an elderly neighbor whose equally elderly television had died; truly, we could not find anyone who wanted to buy our practically ancient device. In the meantime, we’re watching TV shows and movies online from a laptop, and it’s a different experience. Years ago, as a graduate student living just above the poverty line, I went without television at all and just watched DVDs on the set I bought with my college graduation money. It was kind of great not having ads and chatter being brought into my home, but instead I was in control. So, it’s surprising to me that I miss television at all, knowing firsthand how great life can be without it.

Even with the rise of sites like Hulu and YouTube, the percentage of people who prefer to use their computer as their television remains rather low; a recent study by Pangea and YPulse found that only 10% of teens opt to watch shows on their laptop rather than on a TV set. In some ways, I can see why. The form does change the way you view content, however so slightly. While watching a movie last night, it didn’t have the same larger-than-life feel that lingers on a big screen. I had to keep hitting the mousepad every 5 minutes when the screen went blank to energy-save mode, lulling me out of my couch potato state. And since the computer is something I typically use to do work, the impulse existed to catch up on email with the movie playing in an inset window. Sure, I check email in front of a regular TV, but the difference is that I don’t feel like it’s what I’m supposed to be doing, since that isn’t the purpose of a television. It’s different on a laptop. I had more distance from what I was watching, and couldn’t quite commit in the same way.

I suppose the real test would be to ban myself (and my husband) from watching anything at all on the computer, and spend two weeks with no movies or videos whatsoever. But, come on. Moving is stressful enough, right?

Yesterday saw another step in the move towards enabling a child-as-consumer consumer: Billmyparents.com. Essentially, it’s PayPal, but without that silly age restriction that bars minors from using it. With Billmyparents, instead of entering credit card information for an online purchase, kids click a billmyparents button. The parent then receives a text message or email notification telling them that their child wants to purchase something, but the purchase will only be completed upon the parent’s approval. Currently, billmyparents is only available on a special shop with Amazon.com.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I like the idea that parents have the opportunity to talk to their teens about what they are buying and why they want it. It’s important for everyone to learn that just because you want something, that doesn’t mean you should have it, and it’s safer than giving your kid a copy of your credit card to use unrestricted. Speaking from personal experience, when I was a teenager, both of my parents worked, meaning there often wasn’t time for them to join me on shopping for school supplies or clothes, and the task of picking up groceries was sometimes delegated to me and my siblings. I’ll admit right here that (sorry Mom and Dad) not every single one of my purchases made with the card was ethical, but for the most part, I didn’t abuse the privilege. After all, my parents did look at the bill each month. I appreciated their trust in me,  and it was helpful in a hectic household for other people besides my parents to spend money. 

On the other hand, I don’t love that the credit industry is now extending to young people. It’s one more channel for kids to be told that they can (as it says on the shop) “get stuff now, no credit card required.” This is a horrible statement, both because it is misleading and because it is irresponsible. If billmyparents.com could brand itself as a helpful service doing some kind of good, instead of just one more way for kids to pester their parents, then I might feel differently. Besides, in reality, there are already plenty of ways for kids to shop online; all they have to do is use an account created with a parent’s credit card info. Billmyparents is simply codifying an existing practice, but bringing the credit card holders into the mix–which I think is a good thing, as long as it does lead to conversations about want, need and fiscal responsibility.

Last night, Executive Director D.C. Vito and I attended the demonstration of an exciting new video game, Mega-City Hero, created by a nonprofit organization called The Ten Project. Aimed for kids who are roughly ten years old, the game was created on the premise that today’s youth will be building tomorrow’s cities, and that the innate creativity and imagination of young people can be harnessed for urban planning solutions. Each player chooses one “mega-city” in which to play; a few choices are New York City, Lagos, Jakarta, Shanghai and Mumbai.  Once the city is selected, that player is sent on a mission, which is decided upon by a real-life expert in architectural or urban planning.

One example of a mission was, “How can fisherman only catch the kind of fish that they can sell?” The player on this mission would then work to solve the problem, perhaps by designing a new kind of fishing net, or by going out to talk to fishermen about the obstacles that keep them being more profitable while also sustainable. The player would then create a design using the game’s platform, and that design would be shared with the expert, who could potentially put the ideas into practice. Players earn points for missions, and can also work in “tribes” to collaborate on a mission–for example, a player who has chosen to play in Mexico City but who actually lives in India might do well to partner with someone with someone in Mexico. As players gain more points, they move up on the leadership board, and have the opportunity to win sponsor prizes. The difficulty also increases with the more missions players accept.

The director of The Ten Project is John Tattersall, who also administered the demo. He has filmed 16 seasons of “Survivor,” been nominated seven times for an Emmy in cinematography, worked with various philanthropic organizations throughout the world, having visited 90 countries and lived in 18.  He certainly has a great idea with Mega-City Hero, and hopes that it will be an after-school program in urban and rural schools all over the world. I personally love the empowerment it brings to young people to have an impact on their world, and the interaction between players and professionals who can use some of that creativity to work on problems in their city. I love that the kid in India and the kid in Mexico can work together and share ideas about how urban problems are solved or viewed differently in each of their countries. When we at The LAMP talk about working with teachers to integrate and explore new media in their classrooms, this is the sort of thing we’re talking about.

My concern is the territory of need that may prove an obstacle to the game being a success. In particular, I wonder about access. The teacher sitting next to me was saying how she loved the game but wasn’t sure if her students would be able to participate, because the game is Web-based and her school doesn’t have a decent Internet connection. In addition to needing the Internet connection, players also benefit from having access to things like digital cameras that they can use to present and share their ideas, and interact with each other across the globe. There is also the issue of how media literate the children and teachers are in a certain area. Low-income schools and communities may be able to get computers with government grants or philanthropic support, but the machines are useless if they are not also provided with the media literacy that is necessary for them to be productive, responsible citizens of the digital world. In his presentation, Mr. Tattersall spoke about wanting to engage squatter communities and slums with the game, but I’m not sure yet about how they would be able to do that without expensive equipment.

To be fair, Mega-City Hero is not going to solve all the problems of the world, nor does it intend to–I don’t think it was created to address or solve the issue of access or poverty. In order to have the greatest impact with the broadest spectrum of players worldwide, Mega-City Hero will need to incorporate organizations like The LAMP, One Laptop Per Child, Kiva and many, many more doing similar work in their countries. Truly, this is a project of gigantic proportions, and I think it is an incredible opportunity for young people to make a positive change and consider the impact they have on the world around them.  Because it is so large, it will move in baby steps at first in relation to the scope of the vision Mr. Tattersall described for us last night. Yet they will nonetheless be giant steps to a world of empowerment, creativity, understanding and growth.

–Emily Long

Five years ago, a respectably-sizable furor broke out when, performing with Justin Timberlake in the 2004 Super Bowl Halftime show, Janet Jackson suffered a “wardrobe malfunction” that resulted in the exposure of her nipple on national television for nine-sixteenths of a second. The FCC was displeased, and received complaints from viewers all over the country. A back-and-forth argument ensued in the courts, with CBS saying the incident was virtually impossible to predict or prevent, and the FCC claiming that the CBS had willfully violated standards of decency and 20 CBS stations should pay a fine of $550,000 for the mishap. In July of 2008, a unanimous Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia overruled the FCC, and suggested that the FCC did not have sufficient evidence that CBS caught the nip slip on purpose, and so was protected by First Amendment.  Two days ago, however, the case was sent back by the Supreme Court to be reviewed once more by the same Circuit Court that unanimously found CBS not guilty of any intentional wrongdoing, and free of paying the fine imposed by CBS.

My gut reaction is, why are we still talking about Janet Jackson’s nipple? It was exposed for a very brief period of time, and CBS and Justin Timberlake apologized for the whole thing, as did Janet Jackson, saying the stunt went further than she intended. I would happily make the argument that most all people in the world have two nipples of their own, but I do get the argument about context.

And yet, my head reacts differently than my gut when it comes to this. Taken in the grand scheme of things, this case could set an important legal precedent when it comes to the limits of both the First Amendment and the FCC for accountability of fleeting moments of indecency. And yet, this case doesn’t seem terribly complex from a legal standpoint. I wonder what it is we’re really talking about now when we talk about Janet Jackson’s nipple. A decline in American values? Celebrity? Sexism?

Whatever it is, let’s talk about that instead. I don’t care to see this dragged out over many years at a cost to taxpayers (during an economic collapse, no less), all so we can decide if the brief exposure of a woman’s nipple on national television was profane. There are much bigger things happening in media that deserve far more legal scrutiny–take, for example, cases like that of Michael Savage. His 15 years broadcasting hate on San Francisco radio has gotten him banned from Britain, and we’re told a “wardrobe malfunction” lasting less than a second is worth over five years of legal toil and our tax dollars?  Puh-leeze.

Hugh Jackman’s current twitter profile reads, “”I will donate 100K to one individual’s favorite non profit organization.Of course,you must convince me why by using 140 characters or less.” Of course, New York City’s only non-profit organization providing free media literacy training for New Yorkers would like that money. It would help us hire much-needed teachers and administrative staff, purchase equipment, expand to reach more people throughout the city, develop more programs, and a whole lot more. Even if you’re skeptical that it’s really him, it’s a fun challenge! Send a tweet to @realhughjackman, and tell him why we deserve his support!