This is just the beginning.

FINAL PROJECT PROPOSAL

How to begin proposing or contemplating a final project appropriate for metaprogramming in the societies of control...This course has kept students on their toes as we have twisted and turned to navigate the reality tunnels created by the powers that be. We have addressed this from a rhetorical standpoint, attempting to understand how this "rhetoric" has controlled our attention and our perspectives on issues ranging from the War on Drugs to intellectual property to biometrics and other surveillance methods made possible by evolving information technologies.

Through this mind-fucking, word-authority propaganda, the metaprogrammer has attempted to clear the mind–accept everything, believe nothing–and think critically in order to discern the bells and whistles that distract the information consumer from what is going on behind the curtain. Unfortunately, with the proliferation of information on the internet and other traditional media sources, it can become increasingly difficult to see the truth. And besides, there is no truth, no objective, concrete reality that lies beyond what we see, or are told to see. Language and symbolic control systems create further problems, discrepancies that people can have after seeing the same event. This "truth" can induce quite an existential crisis, which it has, but fear not. I will return the favor. If someone is trying to control my attention, my thoughts, fuck it. I will attempt to control the thoughts of others. If I am rewriteable, then so are YOU. I will do so not by presenting my own version of reality–well, that’s not true–but by analyzing the reality filters of information sources.

For the final project, I would like to conduct a rhetorical media study to analyze the bias and premise lock that pigeon-holes media sources into disregarding contradictory information and focusing on only one slice of the 360 degree view of the world. Because of the technological nature of this course, I will address only internet sources of information. I will also limit my sources to American media in order to illuminate all of the conflicting accounts from one international perspective. Also, the most "liberal" sites usually do try to look at things from an Earthly perspective. And where they lack sufficient skepticism of American-centrism, I will provide the ball busting and be the "voice of reason" and superiority—Mmwhahaha!

Again, I will look to examine multiple sources covering one issue. When one specific issue is not addressed by multiple sources, then I will broaden the scope to an entire topos and see which aspect of the issue is addressed by what source and why some information is excluded.

The sources will be websites that represent the traditional media of print and television, i.e. nytimes.com and cnn.com, as well as internet only sources such as blogs of journalists and independent networks representing the polar extremes of liberalism and conservatism (Teaching Online Journalism <http://tojou.blogspot.com/> , The Black Republican <http://www.theblackrepublican.net/> , WesternDemocrat <http://www.westerndemocrat.com/>).

I would like the subject of the analysis to revolve around the Iraq War. This is the definitive story of this period in American politics and produces a wide array of infoganda as the concerned sources/parties attempt to control the attention of the media consumers. Because of the horrific events that took place yesterday, I would like to begin the project there, introducing the media’s coverage and exploitation of violence and expound upon the issue from there.

This is an important issue in American culture; because of the surplus of information available to the public, citizens often rely on only one source of news. No source is objective, and one can be so devastatingly locked into an exigence or premise that the viewer can lose sight of the subjectivity of the source. Examining multiple outlets covering the same event should illuminate the necessity to question everything presented in the media.

The project will unfold as I gather sources everyday and compile the presentations to find the gutter spaces between what is addressed. Once I compare and contrast the coverage, I will identify patterns to pinpoint the biases of each source. I will make links to the pages and post video and audio when it is available. That way, my audience, this class, will be able to see the primary sources for what I am analyzing and claiming. The depth and breadth of the project’s timetable feasibility will become more clear as I gather information.

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

Won’t my information just be a similar, individual spin on what happens in the media/world?

–This may be a difficult issue to address. It will be tough to establish a credible ethos, but I hope to do so by making compelling arguments and convincing the audience that my exigence for this project is to have a more balanced view of mediation of human events and expand limiting perspectives presented as objective.

UBIK Remix - 27 March 2007

ubik remix.doc 

ubik remix analysis.doc 

Remix Grade - I think the actual remix is well-written and uses a sensible and effective amount of material from Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.  On the other hand, it used a limited amount of material from the actual pages of Ubik, and at times this felt like a simple replacement of text, then a remixing.  After reading the explanation after I read the remix, all of oyur intentions in the remix became much clearer (hence the purpose of the explanation I guess).  I think your comparison of Alice's shaky reality with the way Dick messes with the audience's reality was very effective.  It was more effective then simply comparing Joe's chaotic trip through the book to Alice's trip through Wonderland.  By elaborating on the way Dick attacks the reader, your remix's intentions were achieved if read in a way that focuses on how your changes are affecting the reader.  Grade: A- 

                            -Tbotbotbot

Wednesday, February 14th - SNOW DAY

Ubik begins like all good science fiction, with the audience in the dark. Psis, inertials, teeps, physiognomic templates, a portable protophason amplifier? Philip K. Dick doesn’t slow down for the reader to stop and ask why, rather allowing the audience to be clued in as the story unfolds. Aside from his films, this is my first encounter with Dick and already it is easy to see how an underground following lingers around his stories and ideas in a nano-technological, effervescent glow. Questions, Questions, Questions. The word “ubik” appearing only in the epigraphs takes on what appears to be any signification the author pleases. “Safe when taken as directed” repeats leaving speculation to create its own significance. A drug or, rather, a panacea for all that ails society. We worry about the sanctity of our privacy, the threat of terrorists attacking Hometown, U.S.A., so we let George W. Bush stick his thermometer up our ass until he’s playing the xylophone with our teeth. “Terminate anxiety; contacting your nearest prudence organization will first tell you if in fact you are the victim of unauthorized intrusions, and then, on your instructions, nullify these intrusions–at moderate cost to you (9).” Moderate, ha–in the eye of the beholder. In Dick’s world, the cost is our identity; any traces of freedom eradicated for the good of the order. (Help me, save me, protect me, just make sure someone is watching me goddamnit!) Being beaten down by technology, we are all half-lifers. But what are the other possibilities? Glen says “nothing.” Ella believes we will “float out of the System, out into the stars (12).” Who knows. For now, take comfort in the warmth of our technological blanket. Forget yourself as we merge into one consciousness with the strongest signals speaking for everyone. “After prolonged proximity...there is occasionally a mutual osmosis, a suffusion between the mentalities of half-lifers (17).”

“My advice to people today is as follows: If you take the game of life seriously, if you take your nervous system seriously, if you take your sense organs seriously, if you take the energy process seriously, you must turn on, tune in, and drop out.” –Timothy Leary