Barrack Obama has said some pretty lame things since he's been in office, but his latest rant caught my attention, particularly since it was a knock on the video game generation. While I do understand his point to a degree, his statements regarding technology and gaming certainly show that there's a huge disconnect between our leadership and current citizens under the age of 40.
Article Quote:
***"You're coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank all that high on the truth meter," Obama said at Hampton University, Virginia.
"With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Obama said.***
Video games are a distraction, a diversion and a form of entertainment, which is the entire point of playing them. I think there could be room for using video game technology as a tool of empowerment, but often most of us are looking for an escape from the real world. It sounds to me like Obama is tring to blame technology for things and his statements honestly are off-putting to many people like myself who voted for him. Video games could certainly be used to further political agendas and political ideals, but I kind of like my distractions just the way they are now.
Original Article
kezins's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
I hate how if someone just mentions Xbox or PlayStation in a negative it's all out attack on gaming and we need to burn them at the stake. Don't be so defensive. I'm perfectly content as well but I'll be the first to acknowledge my contentness with society is also a contentness for an ill informed country and a really questionable use of the average persons technological resources.
That day is, apparently, today.
I was thinking about that too. I'm hoping he's just rattling off a list of random technologies. I say this because I've seen him us an iPod. O.o
...
Yeah, I think he was just trying to make a point, but he deserves to be called out on that =P.
Then again, she (or any of us) might be out of our minds being so singularly focused. Some of us wouldn't be, but that's where you get extra-ordinary people doing extra-ordinary things...
While gaming, facebook, iPads and the like are all capable of delivering wonderful information, it's also capable of delivering "people" - making us realize how very small the world is and allowing us to be exposed to new ideas and thoughts.
Yes, education is there... and frankly I think most of us use it without even batting an eye. If I want to buy a new car I am no longer at the mercy of my local dealer- I can find copious information first so that I am an informed consumer. I am better able to be an informed voter, an informed employee.
While we don't necessarily learn a lot in the way of "facts" while we are on facebook, twitter or gaming - I think we sometimes learn something more valuable... the art of communication. In many ways these tools are able to provide us with the "small towns" that have gradually faded away in our transient culture. People can essentially sit down to tea or at the local pub with kids that have moved away, old school friends, neighbors or new internet friends.
Obama and other politicians have to look at the positives to technology... because really, the negatives are pretty minimal and no less than the previous societal ills.
A videogame passed that quote onto me. So...suck it? IDK. I don't really care.
Out of context, I have no idea what the fuck he's trying to say.
(( So he can be the "Big Nanny" of the USA in general wo/being asked WTF. ))
Also,
He's just jealous he can't use electronic devices not regulated by the CIA's crypto.
Also Also,
Remember McCain doesn't even know how to send an email. LOL!
...What?
But the argument can be made for the opposing side with the same power and effect. Your point?
I don't think he's disputing technology can do good, after all the internet is definitely to thank for his victory, but it can also harm.
Are we really gonna get this butthurt over this?
@RenegadePanda
Welcome to politics. And the media. And PR. And the world.
You just described every politician in the history of the world.
"But the argument can be made for the opposing side with the same power and effect. Your point?"
Can you explain this, please.
It's like a book. A book can inform AND entertain or just entertain. A book can have a point or be pointless. A book can encourage or discourage.
It's a fair argument for both sides. I don't he's winging the absolute of one side but rather presenting one side. But god forbid he do that because all of a sudden nerds get all bent out of shape because Obama mentioned that playing video games might not be as productive as learning what's going on around you.
And you can do both. Ultimately my point is, for the 3rd or 4th time, this is not worth getting upset over. Like anything you can lose yourself in the internet and videogames when you could be doing more productive things. And you can also do be on the internet, enjoy yourself, and inform yourself.
I understand you now. While I share your frustration at the over-defensiveness of gamers in general, I don't think it's appropriate to direct this at someone who seeks to present the other side of the matter to the light of Obama's argument. He may be right in what he's saying but he has here only admitted of the banal, comfortable application of technology and in neglecting positive aspects of gaming he portrayed a skewed reality. It's reasonable to present a counter-argument. While some people here might or might not be reacting over-defensively, that one argues contrary to Obama does not imply their over-defensiveness.
I heard this speech a few days ago and while he's pretending to encourage non-biased information consumption, in reality he's wanting you to give his Old Media buddies web hits and ratings, nothing more than that.
More or less, Obama sees blogs, twitter, Facebook, podcasts and good 'ol radio as things diluting his ability to get his message out there to you. The technology we had under Ronald Regan, Bush Sr. and Clinton is not the the same tech we had under Bush Jr. or Obama. Times change, the New Media has empowered us in ways he doesn't like nor do his friends in the Old Media.
TV news, newspapers and magazines are going the way of the dinosaur. And things like IPad, DVRs and Netflix give us greater control over what we want to see.
In other words - not him.
Radio is a resilient thing, too. It was there before TV and the internet and its the only portion of the Old Media that can survive amidst this newer technology. And worst of all in Obama's case, conservatives own the radio waves. While newspapers and TV stuggle for advertising revenue, AM radio stations make off like bandits. And since the revenue model they follow is exactly the same as TV, newspaper and magazines, its hard to find fault with it.
And that's why you see guys like Bill Mahar suckling to the teet of HBO now. He doesn't have to worry about advertisers there, just cable revenue? Problem is, well, that whole Netflix and Redbox thing is ravaging Time Warner and Comcast cable packages aren't they?
Technological advancement and innovation have allowed us with so many options we're free to choose what we consume. Obama should actually be happy about that. I check Fox News and CNN's sites, I check out the Drudge Report and the Huffington Post. This is what he wants, right? People with common sense already do what he was advocating.
Problem for him is they're just not agreeing with him, really.
So let's do a little violin motion and carry on. Go cry on Bush's shoulder, Mr. President, we didn't like or listen to him much either.
@The Silent Protagonist
Right. If you're going to go full-blown with your interpretation, let me tell you mine.
It seem to me like the thing he's trying to say is that in the overabundance of media and information, the overall value of this information has depreciated. Nowadays, anybody can air their views and present information how they see fit because the means to this mode of expression has become extremely attainable. as such, we have an over-abundance of information, a bombardment, through which we must wade and decipher as robust or unintelligible.
Back in the day, this mode of expression was not available to the masses. The means by which information could be spread at large was in the hands of a decisive bunch of competing parties. Given their positions, they were forced to responsibility and dignity in that their ability to express was comparatively rare, and so had an according value. (Not so much with American media nowadays, I hear, but a semblance of this can still be seen elsewhere, e.g. to some extent in the RTE.) The value of information that came with this responsibility has since dwindled with the explosion of that same mode of expression.
People are gorging on the ability to mass express so much so that they often don't hold themselves to any responsibility. A ton of the infomation out there is irresponsible, misdirected, or downright stupid. We have to learn to be able to wade through it, but it's also important to try to get people to feel responsible, to rethink and wonder, to restore value to the mode of mass expression. Hence the whole...
"...information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation"
At least, that's what I think.
As long as old people rule th politiscape (spoiler alert: they will) that will always be the case. The same arguments were going down when radio an tv hit the scene. A televised debate? You will not believe the controversy that caused. Everyone was afraid the visual would distract from the audio. Ironically they were probably right.
Your politician will never be your buddy or the guy in the apartment above you. That doesn't happen. Becaus if they were they wouldn't be in politics.
It's not even politics. Nobody is even commenting on Obama (well except for Renegade and the OP to some extent). It's a discussion on what Obama is saying which is a lot more than you can say for most conversations involving the word Obama in America.
"It's a discussion on what Obama is saying which is a lot more than you can say for most conversations involving the word Obama in America."
If I could fap individual comments, I'd fap this. This has all been pretty intellectual and thought-provoking, which is a welcome change of pace as of late.
At least no birthers have entered this thread. (Yet?)
SOCIALIST!!!
The country that's run by corporate dogs that I don't like but will defend to the death with the gun I openly carry around (for no reason at 'toll) is being ruined by Obama! Oh woe is me!! I shall join my tea party! I don't hardly pay taxes but I'm being taxed to death!! We're RUSSIA!!
END SARCASM...
;)
Sounds good to me, man. My momma didn't raise no fool. ;)
When can the impeachment hearings begin?
Obama was essentially saying that as a society most of the information we are in taking is purely 'trivia' based and has no real practical application. Basically we are taking in too much crap from all media forms, be it T.V, radio, or in fact games.
As for the part about being bombarded with information, it's really give and take. There've always been crackpots and smart people; the internet only gives everyone more access to both. It's up to the citizens to get their information from proper sources.
I lul'd.
But seriously who makes an impeachment statement over an article like this? Even as a joke.
All politicians are nerds. You have to be a massive dork to become president, regardless of politics. And they are often old people. When our gamer generation gets to the stage where our vintage is running the earth, we'll be fine with games, but fearful of the stuff our kids are playing with and doing.
I do kind of agree that information overload on the internet is sort of destroying credible news. There are too many news shows and sites and not enough news to actually fill them, so they pad with idiocy and opinion.
Might sound crazy, I know...but it's something to think about.