Guillot_Annotation+10

Rachel Guillot Film Annotation 10  We Live in Public The film “We Live in Public” released in 2009 and directed by Ondi Timoner, followed the life of Josh Harris, a significant figure in the internet and network communications field. The film began as a historical overview of the thoughts and decisions that went into internet when it was first created and goes on to describe experiments with social networks in a physical as well as digital/online world.

The film “We Live in Public” spoke about how the internet changes the human condition. As Josh Harris realized, sex sells so he directed his programs so accompany that. The internet has the ability to program people’s lives through directing ads straight to the audience. Advertisements online can be personalized and the transaction is only one click away further encouraging consumer habits. These are shown on google and facebook for starters. Emotionally, the internet blurs the barrier between that which is real and that which is virtual and more and more children are being brought up online rather than by physical sources. The values they learn are based on what corporations sponsoring programs and ads want them to learn. This creates a group generated consciousness. What the internet does is create environments where we can be an alternate character separating our connectivity to the physical world and the necessity we have of caring for it. If we are able to be someone else in a different world online then we are less likely to care for the one we are in physically. The experiment of Quiet showed how a world with no privacy has detrimental effects to the individual. As one man yelled at another for entering his shower space [an open, clear shower that had cameras broadcasting to any who cared to see] if his mind a physical and virtual occupation of the space were different thought the effect was the same. This film addresses the problem of Big Brother and the constant surveillance as well as the collective consciousness it creates.

The film’s most compelling aspects were its sequencing and chronological movement through the film, the mix of history and life and facts, and most of all, the images and footage of the two experiments, Quiet and We Live in Public. The film’s interviews made the viewer think about the extreme societal effects that a network like the internet has, especially when it becomes a social network as well. It was interesting to hear the interviews with Alanna Heiss because Moma and PS1 [the organization she is involved with] are such well known locations and projects.

The areas the film could use some work on would be to add a few more environmental effects of the internet era. The film did well describing social effects but most of the connections between these and the sustainability problems had to be deciphered by the viewer. The film was also very graphic in terms of imagery limiting the crowd it could be displayed to and the setting. It read very much as a storyline of Josh Harris’ life and was confusing at points following Josh’s viewpoints on the situation as he went from enthusiastic to experimental to overwhelmed, switching between publicity and privacy.

This film is certainly not directed towards a younger audience. The viewer needs to be mature enough to handle the scenes and images shown. It would be best not shown in a classroom setting but censored would not have the same effect because the purpose is to show the extremes the situation/experiment caused.

As an environmental education film I do not believe it has a great use. I was interested in it so show a completely different side to sustainability problems, a matrix point that is not usually considered but educationally I believe it only works as a film for upper level students in courses that can and will critically analyze the ramifications of many of the decisions made and directions taken. The points of intervention in this film focused most upon social aspects and seemed to be demonstrated in areas that Josh Harris did wrong such as focusing too much upon the public aspect and not enough on the private. Brought up in the film is the point that it is productive to separate the individual from the media We should know that if our entire lives are to become public there is nothing left that is ours alone. Everything is shared and collective. The collective and the online networking allow for ideas to be spread rapidly and to all types of people which now is used in the way that all movies, have websites they are connected to. I have visited all of the websites of the films I have seen and the most productive aspect of them is the links to other areas of intervention and more information. This film focuses primarily upon the matrix of problems and history behind them rather than solutions to the problems.

I looked into the rules regarding [|internet advertisements] and found that advertisements on the internet are required to follow the same rules as other advertisements including disclaimer and disclosure notices. In regards to privacy laws, the [|Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA][|//)//] in 2000 stated that commercial websites directing to children under 13 must obtain parental permission before collecting information from the visitor. I also looked into [|social networking] and how much it encompasses so much of the general population. According to a UK study, 75% of 18-24 year olds have a profile on a social networking site and 95% of British undergrads regularly use social networking. The internet has more and more involvement with our daily life and in a survey done by [|Digital World, Digital Life], it was shown that 53% of participants used in the internet to help another person deal with an illness or health condition, a practice that is very personally related. More information from a participant of Quiet can be found [|here.]