This week’s readings offered what I would consider to be two different arguments both pointing to the same conclusion. In the first reading, we learn the history and background of the blogging “genre” – through the use of representative anecdotal examples of how our culture has become focused not only on knowing, but on sharing… this concept of the fact that the only true privacy is so public that no one cares. The author’s example of how Bill Clinton offered to share so much in an effort to highlight his transparency and “every man-ness” until it got to a point where President Clinton felt it had gone “too far” is a good one about how we — through blogging — are willing to make our private thoughts and lives public, to a degree.
The reading did strike a bit of a chord with me because I, too, blog about my life. And only lately have I offered that blog space up to friends and family as a means of keeping in touch and “knowing” what is going on in my life — anecdotally, of course. Certainly, there are times when I completely don’t think about the fact that a week from today I’m going to get a call from my mother who’s somewhat disturbed about the fact that my guy and I had a really bad fight last week that caused me to spend a good part of the night roaming the streets of Pioneer Square. It’s long over now, and it’s something that was used to highlight something else, but she’ll be fixated on one small element of the entire story. For me, this is the height of convergence… my life, played out in a public manner, but anonymous enough that it is still reasonably private, but being public enough to be called to account. Ugh!
On the other hand, the discussion of convergence took me right back to the last discussion I had with Comcast. Convergence is generally defined as “the degree or point at which lines, objects, etc., converge,” however, if one looks at the definition in biology for convergence, “similarity of form or structure caused by environment rather than heredity,” one begins to see the relevance to this week’s reading on the blogging genre. The convergence of services coming from different technologies, funneled through a common environment is sold to consumers as “efficient and cost-effective,” when in fact, the efficiencies and cost-effectiveness are really held by the provider. That is not to say there is no convenience or efficient for the user. Certainly there is benefit to having everything on one (rather large) bill. However, what does that mean in a storm? Does one lose Internet, cable and telephone… uh, yes, yes, one does. Convergence can be bad, too.
Convergence in life can be bad, too… or it can be liberating. I suppose at some point we’ll all learn to take one another at face value. We’ll accept the efficiencies and convenience for just that — efficiency and convenience — and we’ll realize we’re paying for both.
Salo9979's Blog 