Hardt's Blog

What I learned

2006-11-29T15:29:00.000-08:00

I have learned that not all writing is the same. Writing for the web is completely different from other medians of publication. People pick up a book to read what it is about. People pick up a magazine to read articles. People go to websites for many different things. They might want find information, ask a questions, buy a product or post their own informnation. In designing and writing for the web, you have to keep all these things in mind. There is not just one primary audience. You will be writing for mulipy audiences who want to access the site for a variety of reasons.
This is what makes writing for the web so different. It is about organization. You have to organize the site and the writing on the site so the different audiences will find everything they are looking for in an easy and simple manner. The organization of the site matters as much as the content published on it.

2006-11-19T14:40:00.000-08:00

I would much rather prefer to work on the living web. The pages that are described as being fixed, are usually informational pages. They are usually writing in a serious, boring format. There is no creativity or originality injected into those types of pages. The problem is that there is not much a person can do to change this. It is mainly due to the type of content that must be represented.
The 'living' web pages, like blogs allow the writer a considerable amount of creativity and originality. Blogs can be written about anything. That is why people enjoy writing them. There is no real format and can vary greatly in the writing styles that can be used. Blogs are usually written to convey the writer's feelings or opinions about am issue. It lets the author write about something that they are interested in. The content type allows a freer approach to the writing.

Web Design

2006-11-12T17:32:00.000-08:00

I support these current trends. They offer simple, easy to use web sites. They allow you to easily find what you are looking for without having to search the entire site several times. I especially like the idea of lots of white space and very sparingly used graphics.
I would like to believe that the web has become more professional from when it was first introduced to the public. When people first started to use the internet, it was full of bright, annoying colors and grossly 'cute' graphics. With the growth of e-commerce, websites had to become more professional. If these sites wanted people to use them, the sites had to have easy navigation and be able to be read very clearly. These two factors have helped the web to become very professional and easy to use. It was a much needed change.
Our group will be trying to use man of these current design trends. We will be using a lot of white space. What is in color will be easy to read and they colors will not be bright enough to blind the user.

2006-11-05T16:46:00.000-08:00

The web is full of amateurs. That is why people like it. Viewer like the feel of amateur videos. They are small clips that can entertain you for a few seconds to a few minutes. People do not expect them to be of high quality or to be complex, involving deep plots. People want to see short, mostly stupid little clips that are entertaining.
Many people like the idea of the amateurs web because allows the viewer to participate. They can go and make their own clips. It encourages people to be creative. At the same time, web users understand that they can not make videos of Hollywood quality. Typical web users do not have the time or money to make full length featured films accessibility to the web. When peole want to produce some of their own content or wheb they want to watch some small entertaining clip.
The creativity of web will not threaten more professional outlets. Much of the content on the web is only considered creative because of the media in which it is presented: the web. If those web outlets were to extend their material to fill up an entire movie, TV show or book, they would not be able to. Their creativity exists because of the restrictions that are placed on their media: time, money, the competition with the millions of other web material.

2006-10-22T19:21:00.000-07:00

I do not read blogs. I do not search for them. I don't trust them. I never search for blogs. If I want to find out more information, I go to print sources are credible web sites. I do not trust them. I think that blogs are a new and dangerous outlet. People will start to read them and trust blogs as credible, objective, and unbiased source of news and information. And blogs are definitely not that. I think that information and news should be presented in a professional manner and that the presentation of the material adds to the credibility. Posting on the web automatically takes away some credibility. Blogs are usually written in a friendly, conversational tone. This takes away from the credibility. Blogs usually allow feedback or have discussion forums. When someone is looking for information and they see a blog with feedback from some one who posted 'This Blog Sucks; twenty times, it takes away from the credibility.
Blogs have started a dangerous, and in my opinion horrible, trend. I will refuse to read them until they have become too infused into our media to ignore. And by then, I fear that the news media, along with society, will have followed some sort of downward spiral of dumbness that will be almost impossible to pull out of.

Scouts Honor

2006-10-10T19:00:00.000-07:00

The Web has made available almost any information that one could ask for. It has also made available a lot of information that is false, misleading and incorrect. The problem is figuring out how one is supposed to decide what is accurate information and what is not.
The easiest way to decide this is to only use credible sources. This would include already established print publications that have gone online or such web sites as Salon. All of these sources are heavily copy edited and try to use distinguished and professional writers. The problem with using this approach is that it greatly restricts the vast resources that the web makes available.
To use other sources and to discover if they are honest and accurate takes a little more time and energy. But it gives one a greater source of information and research. One way to discover if a source is accurate is to check for information about the source itself on the web. One can use user comments or find a web site that rates information sources. It is also a good idea to check established informational sources and see if they say anything about the new source of information.
Also, with the web, one can research the writer or publisher of the information to find out if it/him/her/they have a history of being accurate and honest. In the end, one must use their best judgment to figure out for themselves if the source is accurate or not.
As a web publisher, there are several steps that can be taken to have your work evaluated as honest and accurate by others. The best way is to present the material in a professional manner. These means having a web site that is easy to use and presents information in a clear and distinguishable manner. Also, all information should be presented in proper grammatical form. One should also cite where they got the information that they have published.
Another way to make one's work appear accurate and honest to others, is to provide a channel for feedback. This could include a discussion board or a place to post user comments. This would let anyone trying to decide if your information is accurate and honest to view the conclusions of others.

Credibility

2006-10-02T06:46:00.000-07:00

It is very hard to establish credibility on the web. As rule for myself, I try to use as little web research as possible for school work. That does not mean I will not use the internet. I have no problem using established sites like The New York Times, Salon or other highly respected works. I will never use Wikipedia and I rarely use search engines. I still use these tools but I do not explicitly rely on them for information. If I find information on search engines, I will then use that information to narrow my search in print publications. If I can find it in print, I will gather my information from that source instead of online.
If I can not find print publications to back up online information then I am very cautious about using that specific data. If I can find several online sources that state the same thing, then I will judge their credibility to find out if I can trust the information. I base credibility on other users reviews, presentation of the material and my own personal judgment.
To make your information credible to others, it is important to present yourself in a professional manner. That means using proper grammar and correct language. It means properly and exhaustively citing your sources. Other than that you can not really do much. It is up to the reader to use their own discretion.

Security Information

2006-09-25T07:11:00.000-07:00

As we become a web based society, meaning that almost everything you do can be done on the web, there are many problems that arise. One of the most important, and most difficult to answer, is that of what information should be accessible to who.
In dealing with the new social online networks ( Myspace, Facebook, ect.), there is a lot of information available out there. Many people have enormous amounts of personal information on there sites. This is not always the safest thing to do. Some people might use the information for subversive and malicious purposes. The chances of this happening to any on certain individual is relatively small. But there is still that chance. Basically, you have to use your own discretion and post what you are comfortable with other people seeing, not just your close friends.
As for employers making decisions based on information they can find on these social networks, that depends a good deal on what you do. If are a regular employee, like most people, then I do not think that any information gained from these sites should be allowed to be applicable to the work environment. Your job is not your life. You should be able to have a social life completely free of your job.
The only situation where personal information should be reflected in the work place is when you are a visible employee. If you are a person who is going to be pursued by the media ( for things like interviews, press conferences) then you are a high profile person of interest. If you are the type of employee who constantly meets with clients then you should be very careful of what you post online. You would be considered a high profile employee. If you are someone who will represent the company, then your company has every right to make decisions based on what you have personally posted online.

Tools to deliver News

2006-09-17T17:26:00.000-07:00

Journalism is the act of gathering news about events, people, places, ideas and objects, then making them readily accessible to others. With the creation of internet social networks, cell phones, blackberries and other communication tools, journalism is instantaneous. You can get any information you want at anytime. As soon as a major event happens, websites like MSN have a headlines up in seconds. The news media is as pervasive and important as ever. But these new technologies and social channels are also causing a lot of worries and problems.
As the popularity and even shear number of blog's explode, they show the main weakness in the new technologies. All blogger's publish their own content. In most cases it is just a single person posting either news stories or their own opinions. The problem is that on many instances, it is difficult to tell the difference. Journalism is supposed to be objective and unbiased. Many bloggers are not true journalist. They post articles in their spare time. They have no allegiance to journalistic ethics. This allows the information pool to be diluted with opinion and heresy.
Also, since many of these people are their own publishers, their is no copy editor, no one to check the facts. This causes a lot of misinformation to be spread around.
There is some good to come out of all of this. With the growth of social networks, people are becoming more informed about news events. These networks allow more information to be spread faster. Also, information can be updated and be up-to-the-minute. People tend to check these networks several times a day. Most people do not watch several newscasts or read more than one newspaper.

Question of the Week #2

2006-09-10T17:21:00.000-07:00

In my own life, I love to read newspapers. I like sitting down and reading magazines. In the daily life as a student, I have to use the computer so much that I take any chance I can get a break from the screen. That being said, I also read several papers online everyday. Why? First, I can not get them in print, at least on same day delivery. Second, I can do it anytime I have access to a computer. I do not have to carry around a paper with me to read it.
As for magazines, I always read them in print version. It might take me a whole week to read an entire issue of Time magazine. I read one article at a time whenever I have some free time.
I do not think that print forms of these types of media have to worry about all out exctinction. They might have an initial drop in readership but even that decline will reach a certain point and straighten out. There are times when the print version of these types of media are more convenient. Also, as long as there are people willing to pay for the advertising, the print versions will still be there. I do not think that everyone will turn to online advertising. That would concentrate too much advertising in one media. The idea of advertising is to reach as many people as possible. This would include advertising in as many different media modes as possible.
I also think that as our demographic ages, the people will turn to the print version of these types of media more often. I think that as technology advances and computers become even more pervasive in our lives, people will need a break from it. That is when they will turn to the print versions of newspapers and magazines.

Question of the Week#1

2006-09-02T10:54:00.000-07:00

Writing for the web had changed the standard writing format. When someone is writing for the Web, they no longer have to include certain aspects of their issue or topic. With the Web, you can just insert a link to another website. Many people use this to explain background information or a detailed subject in their writing.
There are both positive and negative side effects of this new format. One positive aspect of writing on the web is that it allows a greatter amount of information to be included. If a person has a qoute in their writing, they can add a link for the person who is attributed with making the comment. This link could contain biographical information about the person which would help the reader understand the bias or opinion included in the qoute.
A negative consequence is that with the ability the use links, some writers might become lazy. Instead of doing their own research, they might just insert a large amount of links. Also, with so much information avaliable on the internet,( and the ability to copy and paste) there is a greater temptation to plagiarize.
As for my own personal experiences of writing for the web, I have none. But I do see a great increase in my future. I would like to build a career in print journalism. With the advancement of technology and the growth of the internet, this increasingly calls for an ability to write for the web. Who knows if paper versions of newspapers will still be available in thirty years? No matter what the outcome, if anybody as a desire to write in their future, they need to be able to adapt to writing for the internet. It is going to be a large part of everybody's lives in the future.

trail

2006-08-28T15:24:00.000-07:00

test post