Final Blog Post: Invasion of Privacy

I would like to believe that I have a relatively healthy relationship with technology, especially in comparison to people around my age. According to Comparitech, the average American spends a little more than seven hours looking at a screen everyday. I can confidently say that I average at around four hours of screen time a day on my phone. This is mostly due to the fact that I am simply too busy to sit on my phone for long periods of time, on top of the fact that I simply do not like being on my phone. There is not much on my phone that I look at in terms of entertainment; I only use two social medias and do not watch videos or shows during my spare time. I mostly use my phone as a form of communication, whether it is for emails or if someone from school, work or a club needs my assistance. Since I cannot carry my computer everywhere, my phone makes it easy to access my emails and do what is necessary for work or school. 

Besides communication for school and work, I will use my phone for social media. However, I typically only go on social media at the very end of the day for the most part. Social media is not my favorite thing, and it never was. I got into social media during my middle school years. I only got it because I felt left out. With Instagram being new at the time, all my friends seemed to obsess over it. Whenever my friends and I would hang out, it would seem like they were only on their phones for Instagram and there was almost no talking. I hated it. So, in turn, I begged my parents to let me get an Instagram account. Not necessarily because I genuinely wanted it, but because I felt left out. That was my initial downfall with social media- the feeling of fomo. 

I never ended up using Instagram too much; I did not like people knowing where I was, who I was with or what I was doing. I have the same mindset today. On top of that, I did not like seeing what other people were doing. Part of it was because I did not care what the people who I was not close with were doing. It was also because I would feel left out when I saw the people I know doing things I was not. It is no surprise that social media leads users to compare themselves to one another. I disliked comparing myself greatly. Seeing posts that led me to compare or led me to feel left out just did not feel right. With that, I started using social media less and less because I did not see any fun in it. Nevertheless, I did like to see my close friends’ pictures, especially now that many of us live in different states. That led me to get Snapchat, my second and last social media account. I enjoyed and still enjoy being able to see the faces of my friends that I have not seen in a while. Snapchat feels a little more personal than a text from across the country. On top of that, there is a little more privacy granted with private stories. I do not mind Snapchat as much as I do Instagram. Regardless, I have found that for years I have been telling myself that I would delete my social medias, and that I do not need them. However, even after years, I still have yet to bring myself to delete my accounts. I am sure it is because I have just grown used to having them, but I am not pleased with this.

In all, my problem with technology is social media. Social media is a paradox- it is meant to unite and connect people, but all I see is hatred, oversharing and misinformation. I know in recent years, many have turned to social media as a form of activism. I do not condemn it necessarily. I think it is great to send messages to a large audience with a click of a button. It is powerful. However, I do not trust it. Most, if not all the time, I have no idea where information is coming from. All I know is that I have seen that same political post about a hundred times in a row. It definitely grabs my attention, but I cannot say that I trust what I am reading or believing it. Nevertheless, all the posts bring me to do my own research and I end up enlightening myself on a new topic. There is a downfall to this though. It is no surprise that there are an infinite amount of grievances people have in this world that they would love resolved. However, with all these issues coming to surface on social media, many people feel the responsibility to take on all these issues, ultimately leading them to burnout. 

My family and most of my friends share similar thoughts to me when it comes to technology and social media. A number of my friends do not have social media, or have it but have not used the app in months or years. Perhaps that is why I think the way I do. My parents raised me away from mobile phones and social media. It felt like I was always late to the game with technology. I would not have it any other way though. As I grow older, I constantly fear what my digital footprint looks like. I am a private person, I do not like the idea of my information getting out. Fortunately, upon looking up my name on Google, the only thing to come up is my LinkedIn, which is not the worst thing to come up. I am always refreshing my social media accounts, whether that include removing posts and comments, unfollowing or blocking people I do not know or want to follow me. I try my very best to present the best version of myself on the internet because you truly never know who is watching. I will get notifications from LinkedIn saying people I have never heard of in my life are looking at my LinkedIn account. It is weird to me and I simply do not like it. Nevertheless, I know the footprint I have left is not bad by any means. I have been cautious with my relationship with the Internet and always will be. As I said, you never know who is watching.

Diffusion of the Typewriter

It is no surprise that the typewriter has become a rather obsolete machine. With the rise of personal computers and phones, there ceases to be a need for typewriters for many people around the world. Of course, there are still a few people and places, laggards if you will, that continue to use the typewriter. However, there are not many of them. 

Nevertheless, the typewriter was still a major and widely-used invention prior to personal computers and phones. Even in its pioneering era, there were many different types of typewriters being created and used. The launching period of the typewriter could be traced by the 1500s in Italy as a man tried making a machine that impresses letters onto paper for his blind friend. From there, many got a similar idea to create machines that impress letters onto paper in the most efficient way. Not many everyday people had access to these typewriter-like machines as they did not have the money or resources, or ability to create one themselves. 

The uptake of the typewriter began in 1714. The patent that Henry Mill had been granted by Queen Anne of England in 1714 truly sparked the ability for early adopters of the typewriter to set in. Not many people had access to the typewriter quite yet due to its largest and inefficiency. It is in this uptaking stage that the typewriter is evolving to become a more widely-used machine. By the 19th century, more and more people were getting their hands on typewriters. Christopher Latham Sholes created the first practical typewriter in 1867, which was later patented in 1868. People like Thomas Edison and Mark Twain had gotten their hands on the typewriter by the 19th century and started setting a norm. Edison was the first to try to input electricity into the typewriter. Twain was the first to purchase a typewriter and submit a typewritten manuscript to a publisher. 

The typewriter was becoming a more normalized machine by the 1870s. At this point, major improvements were being made to the typewriter for the sake of making it a more widely used invention. The normalization of the typewriter almost forced improvements unto the typewriter. As writing became more visible, speed was increasing, size was decreasing, more people were prone to buy the device. The maturation of the typewriter came with the late majority of users during the beginning of the 1900s. By 1914, the first power operated machine of practical use was produced by James Fields Smathers. Afterwards, there was a continuing effort to make the power operated typewriter 

Sources:

Encyclopedia Britannica. “Typewriter.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.britannica.com/technology/typewriter.   

 IBM Archives. “The History of IBM Electric Typewriters.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/modelb/modelb_history.html#:~:text=The%20first%20 practical%20 typewriter%20was,on%20a%20sewing%20machine%20stand. 

New World Encyclopedia. “Typewriter.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Typewriter#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20historians%20have%20estimated,but%20nothing%20further%20is%20known. 

Polt, Richard. “A Brief History of Typewriters.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://site.xavier.edu/polt/typewriters/tw-history.html.

The Sherman Antitrust Act

Just as the Industrial Revolution began to boom in the United States, monopolies began to take over industries. It destroyed competition and small businesses across the country, fixed product prices and limited consumers’ choices. With that, on July 2, 1890, The Sherman Antitrust Act was approved. The Act passed the Senate on April 8, 1890 with a vote 51-1, and passed the house by a unanimous vote on June 20, 1890. The Act was finally signed into law by Benjamin Harrison on July 2, 1890. The Sherman Antitrust Act would be the first federal act to outlaw monopolistic business practices. States had previously passed similar laws. However, these state laws were limited only to intrastate commerce, thus the Sherman Antitrust Act was passed. The Act was named after US Senator John Sherman of Ohio who was an expert on the regulation of commerce.

The Sherman Antitrust Act authorized the United States federal government to institute proceedings against trusts. More specifically, any combination “in the form of trust or otherwise that was in restraint of trade or commerce among the several states, or with the foreign nations” was declared illegal. Also, specific individuals and companies that have suffered losses due to trusts are permitted to sue in federal court for triple damages. This was an attempt to dissolve trusts that destroy business. Those who went against the Act are subjected to a fine of $5,000 and a year in jail.

However, there was an issue with the Sherman Antitrust Act- its vagueness. The Act was signed into law to restore competition in industry, but the Act is so loosely worded and failed to define critical terms like “‘trust,’ ‘combination,’ ‘conspiracy,’ ‘monopoly.’” Fortunately, this issue was dismantled in United States v. E.C. Knight Company in 1895. The company had control over 98 percent of all sugar refining in the U.S.. Nevertheless, it was declared that the American Sugar Refining Company did not in fact violate the Sherman Antitrust Act because the company’s control of manufacture did not necessarily constitute a control of trade. The Act was further reformed with in 1914 with the Clayton Antitrust Act, which “elaborated on the general provisions of the Sherman Antitrust Act and specified many illegal practices that either contributed to or results from monopolization,” and the Federal Trade Commission, which “provided the government with an agency that had the power to investigate possible violations of antitrust legislation and issue orders forbidding unfair competition practices.” Then in 1920, the Supreme Court of the United States applied their interpretation of the Sherman Antitrust Act with the “rule of reason.” This rule of reason instituted that not every contract or combination restraining trade is unlawful. 

In all, the Sherman Antitrust Act has been successful in eliminating monopolies in United States’ industries. It has given small businesses the chance to thrive as the Act has allowed competition in industries. With competitions, consumers then have choices in what they buy, whether it is regarding a larger range of prices of goods or larger range of quality of goods. The Act especially helps lower class consumers as they are not stuck with fixed prices that may be too expensive. Although the Act targets large companies and puts restrictions on these large companies, it may be seen as beneficial as companies have the chance to focus on producing the best product.

Sources:

https://www.britannica.com/event/Sherman-Antitrust-Act

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/sherman-anti-trust-act#:~:text=The%20Sherman%20Anti%2DTrust%20Act%20authorized%20the%20federal%20government%20to,foreign%20nations%22%20was%20declared%20illegal.

Each One Teach One

 

Recently, in my Media Law & Literacy class, we had the great opportunity of getting the chance to learn from our fellow classmates. More specifically, our classmates taught each other about different forms of technology that have impacted the world significantly. One presentation that caught my attention the most was about Bluetooth. Bluetooth is one of those technologies that I use and many other people use almost everyday without giving it second thought. It is an odd creation in that people have the ability to connect two or more devices to each other out of thin air. It is a confusing technology, at least to me. 

Fortunately, the presentation about Bluetooth shed some more light on the technology a bit more. I found that it was created in 1994 by two men named Haartsen and Ericsson. What I found the most interesting is that Bluetooth was named after King Harald Bluetooth, a nordic king. This is because Harald Bluetooth unification of Denmark and Norway acts as a symbol for how Bluetooth technology connects devices to one another. With this, the runes of the king’s name has been used as the Bluetooth logo. As a history geek, I appreciate the use of historical figures, especially the symbolism.

The History of Typewriters

 Although typewriters have become an obsolete invention, it has contributed greatly to the evolution of communication. The typewriter became the machine that enabled people to mass produce writings and allow for neatness, compactness, legibility, and easier and faster communication. The beauty of the history of the typewriter is its contributors. The typewriter was not made by one person in one time span. Instead, the typewriter is the result of incremental developments made possible by many different inventors who worked independently of one another, oftentimes in competition with one another. This happened over the span of several decades. According to the New World Encyclopedia, “historians have estimated that some form of typewriter was invented 52 times as tinkers tried to come up with a workable design.” Nevertheless, as with many other inventions, the contributions to development and production of the typewriter has resulted in a commercially successful instrument.

Sholes and Glidden typewriter

Prior to the first typewriter, there were many inventions that resemble or had the same purpose as a typewriter- impress letters on paper. However, according to IBM, the first known patent for the typewriter was granted on January 7, 1714 by Queen Anne of England to an English engineer named Henry Mill. By September of 1867, the first practical typewriter in the United States was constructed by Christopher Latham Sholes. Sholes’ model was mounted to a sewing machine stand with a carriage controlled by a foot pedal, and only wrote in capitals. This was the machine that created the QWERTY keyboard still used today. However, the machine was rather large and inconvenient. Nevertheless, Sholes continued to make improvements to the machine, ultimately making its speed faster than that of a pen. The first commercial model manufactured by Sholed was released to the public by 1873 under the name Remington and proved to be a success. 

Hansen Writing Ball

Major improvements have been made since 1873. For example, in 1914, James Fields Smathers of Kansas City, Missouri created the first power operated machine of practical value. He continued to work on improvements after his return from World War I. By 1920, Smathers produced the first advance model, which was later turned over to the Northeast Electric Company by 1923 for further development. Under the Northeast Electric Company, a self-contained motor was added to the powerbase of Smathers’ typewriter, thus creating the Electromatic Drive, which was a power unit used for all kinds of typewriters. The Electric Company ended up building and selling 2500 of the power units to typewriter companies.

In 1928, General Motors purchased Northeast Electric Company. However, the Electromatics did not follow this transfer of ownership. Instead, Electromatic Typewriters Inc. was created. By March 4, 1930, the first Electromatic model of the typewriter was completed. To help with the steady growth of the typewriter, Electromatic Typewriters Inc. became a division of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) in 1933. After joining IBM, the typewriter faces many more decades of improvements to bring further efficiency, whether that would be concerning speed, portability, quality, and more.

IBM Electric Typewriter

Before phones and computers took over, the typewriter was the writing machine. It enabled the reduction of time and expenses needed to write up documents. It also encouraged the spread of writings as many authors turned to the typewriter for publications, created a communication system for the business world and created jobs for women in the office as typists. It did take some time for the typewriter to catch on, and it went through many trials and errors to become the most efficient model of itself, it changed lives for the better. Many left dreaded factory jobs to find comfort in an office. It opened up more jobs for women. It helped with the spread of knowledge through writing. It helped the everyday person communicate to their family and friends faster and easier. Most importantly, the typewriter being one of the biggest technological achievements of the 19th century shaped technological advancements in communication for decades to come.

Sources:

Encyclopedia Britannica. “Typewriter.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.britannica.com/technology/typewriter.   

 IBM Archives. “The History of IBM Electric Typewriters.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/modelb/modelb_history.html#:~:text=The%20first%20practical%20typewriter%20was,on%20a%20sewing%20machine%20stand. 

New World Encyclopedia. “Typewriter.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Typewriter#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20historians%20have%20estimated,but%20nothing%20further%20is%20known. 

Polt, Richard. “A Brief History of Typewriters.” Accessed April 3, 2022. https://site.xavier.edu/polt/typewriters/tw-history.html. 

Social Media: The Check

There are eight values that go with free expression: Marketplace of Ideas, Participation in Self-Government, Stable Change, Individual Self-Fulfillment, Check on Governmental Power, Promote Tolerance, Promote Innovation and Protect Dissent. Free expression facilitates each of these values within the United States, or at the very least is meant to. Of the Eight Values of Free Expression, the one that I find the most important is Check on Governmental Power. Accountability is necessary in a democracy. Although the United States government holds itself accountable through checks and balances of the branches, it ought to also be kept in check by its principal, the people. In The Checking Value in First Amendment Theory, Vince Blasi explains free expressions, and its role in keeping a check on the abuses of government. With an ever-changing political and social climate, it is necessary and important for the government to be held responsible. 

Although Check on Governmental Power is just one of the Eight Values of Free Expression, it actually encapsulates the essence of some other values. For one, Check on Governmental Power and Participation in Government go hand-in-hand. Free expression acts as a source of information for citizens. Without free expression, citizens may not have the ability to make wise and informed decisions in elections. With elections being one way of holding the government accountable, the type of knowledge acquired through free expression is the knowledge necessary to keep the government in check.

Check on the Government also relates to the value of Protecting Dissent. The First Amendment was instituted to ensure the protection of minority views, even despite its unpopularity. Free expression was meant to help in the prevention of mob rule, but it was also meant to protect a citizen’s freedom to disagree with the government. As argued by Steve Shiffrin in Dissent, Injustice, and the Meanings of America, dissent ought to be promoted as it is the core of free speech. Free Expression and dissent combat injustice. It acts as a check on the government by allowing citizens to express their grievances with their government. Without free expression, or if it were suppressed, the government would not be made aware of the injustices they commit. 

To make more sense of this idea of checking governmental power, we can look at how social media is being used today in the US government. We live in an age where US politicians and offices have their own social media accounts to spread their own news and ideas, and connect with the people better. Many everyday citizens use social media to collect their news, whether it be directly from a politician or office’s account, or from another account. From there, many people will repost the news they find, or share news they have read about, often expressing grievances they have with the government. Free expression regarding the government on social media is almost like a cycle this way: read and repost. With many members of the US government having social media accounts, the citizens’ read and repost cycle gets the attention of the government. Social media has become a major amplifier of Americans’ voices in government. In this way, it has served as a major checking tool on governmental powers as it is a news source for participation in self-government, and amplifies dissents.

In the United States, we see the most exchange between the government and Americans when social media is brought into play. Social media has encouraged more and more Americans to vote since the 2008 election, and played a tremendous role in the recent 2020 election. Social media has also played a major role in amplifying the voice of the minority, more specifically women and people of color in recent years in regards to Roe v. Wade and Black Lives Matter. Free expression is not a new practice in the United States by any means. However, free expression now has the opportunity to be amplified more than ever with social media. Voices from all around the world can be shared with anyone. With that, people have more access to knowledge and resources. There is more pressure on citizens to speak out on the injustices their government commits and hold the government accountable.

Being politically active in this day and age has made me resonate with the value of checking governmental power more than any other value. As a young adult who uses social media relatively regularly, I see lots of posts regarding the US and foreign governments quite frequently. Most of these posts are expressing dissent towards the governments, and seem to be meant to rally support behind that dissent. Eventually, I cannot make it through my feed without the same dissent coming across my screen with each consecutive post at times. It is something I find interesting and useful in politics. The mere effect of one person posting a dissent and the chain reaction of people reposting the same is astonishing. Social media is a powerful tool as it reaches such an extensive audience.

Supreme Court of the United States

I have been infatuated by the United States Supreme Court from a very early age. In fact, the history of the Supreme Court has inspired me to take up history as my major, apply to law school and pursue law as a career. I have spent a significant amount of time studying the Supreme Court and the United States legal system as a whole; I have even dedicated my undergraduate research to the creation and foundation of the Supreme Court. I find a lot of beauty, and also disaster, within the United States Supreme Court.

Because I have spent a lot of time studying the Supreme Court, there was not much from the article Supreme Court or video on the Supreme Court that was new information to me. One thing I did find a bit surprising with the United States Supreme Court from Supreme Court is the fact that it is considered the most powerful judicial body on Earth. When I think of the US government, I typically think of the Supreme Court being the least powerful branch. Granted, US judicial power has expanded immensely since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, I was surprised that there was not another other judicial body in the world that held more power than the US.

I also learned of the specific mannerism between the Justices that is meant to help the Court run more smoothly. For one, each Justice shakes all the other Justices’ hands before discussing and reviewing. This is to prevent the Justices from holding grudges against one another. The Justices also make sure that each Justice has spoken once before any of them are able to speak for a second time or more. It is nice to know that the Justices emphasize respect for one another. Court can be very trying, and there is a lot of pressure on these Justices who do not share all the same conscience. To know that the Justices make an effort to respect one another for the ease of the Court gives me a new appreciation for Justices.

I will not lie, as a history student interested in going into law, I have looked up to the Supreme Court and its Justices. Whether it be a good or a bad thing, I used to idolize the Court at a very young age. With that, expectations were set high for Supreme Court Justices and myself. However, after listening to the Justices discuss what the Court is like in Supreme Court, I was surprised yet comforted. Many of the Justices mentioned that it took quite some time for them to grow acclimated with the new environment they faced. There was comfort in knowing that the Justices had felt like they jumped in head first and that it took some time to adjust, even despite their previous experience. I used to think that the Justices walked into their position well prepared, as if they were born for the role. Apparently, this is not the case. Now, some may find it discomforting that the Justices are not exactly sure what they are doing as Supreme Court Justice during their first couple of years, it makes me gain a little more respect for them. It humanizes them, and I think that is important to have when it comes to people in government.

Between the articles and the video, the key aspect I took away was that there is no inside story of the court; there is only conversation for all to hear. The way the Court functions is meant to flow like a conversation. The Justices are not there to condescend people or scare them, or politicize the issue. They are there to focus on a specific aspect of the brief, ask questions for points of clarification, not necessarily to prove a point. The Court’s job is not to politicize, and it is not to be a terrifying process hidden from Americans. The point of the Supreme Court is to ensure the promise of equal justice under law for the all American people. They are responsible to the law and the people.