Let's Talk Girl Talk

This wacky looking man above is Gregg Gillis, or better known as Girl Talk.  Gillis used to be an engineer... until he quit in May of 2007 to focus solely on something else.  What is that something else you may ask?  By night, Gillis is a disc jockey that specializes in mashup music.  Some people may think this is just a little hobby, but Gillis has released several albums under his name, performs in several clubs, and has created a large fan base.

So what is mashing music exactly?  Girl Talk produces mashup-style remixes, which consists of a dozen or more unauthorized samples from different songs to create a mashup.  Mashing music may sound harmless and innocent.  In reality, Gillis is sampling intellectual property of other artist which puts him in an awkward situation with Copyright Law.  Some may call this stealing, but is he really?

Gillis claims that he has "Fair Use" of the samples because the character of the use is transformative.  Section 107 of Copyright Law solely protects him and his music, because his music is considered a fair use on intellectual property since the material is transformed enough to change the context and essentially become something completely new and original.  In the end, Girl Talk is indestructible to Copyright infringement by taking existing songs and transforming them into his own original song.  So, as long as Gillis keeps the motive of his music sampling transformative enough to generate a completely new and original work, Girl Talk will live on.

Image from

The Internet and Interactivity

Interactivity on websites and on social media is a very useful tool when it comes to sharing these contents with friends and family. Let's say you're reading an article and you come to the end and it offers you to share it on Facebook, Twitter, and even and option to email the article to anyone you'd like. This can be very helpful, but is it becoming a little too much?

The Onion posted an article, Internet Users Demand Less Interactivity, that states people are getting sick of these interactivity techniques. In summary, the article says that people are tired of being bombarded with constant requests to share content on social media, make ratings, leave comments, and generally "join in on the discussion." Many people just want to view content and enjoy the time they are spending on it and then move on, not continually get pop-ups asking to share, rate, comment, etc.

Most people would say to just ignore them, but how can you when it's popping up on your screen every couple of minutes? I've experienced this many times when reading an article and all of a sudden it asks me to join the fun, rate the website, leave a comment, etc. when all I want to do is read an article. Becomes very annoying and frustrating.

On the other hand, I understand why these site have so much interactivity throughout their pages. Many sites have these links to share, comment, rate, etc. so that particular site can become more popular and gather more followers. The only way to become more popular on the internet is by becoming more interactive with viewers.

Interactivity is a love/hate relationship amongst the internet. Websites and social media sites love it to become more popular, and viewers hate it when all they want to do is view a site. One of the many quotes on the article, linked above, is so true:

"If I wanted to tell someone about something, I'll just tell then individually. Or better yet, they'll stumble across it on their own."

Which Law is Better?

When thinking about social media, the words “value” and “power” come into play.  The value a brand takes from it and the power it gives to the people.  We all know the difference between social media and traditional marketing such as newspapers, television, advertisements, billboards, etc. is that the consumer can interact on social media.  Not only does social media give power to people who view it, but it also adds valuable feedback to a brand’s marketing campaign and can help them evaluate what people think.

To help understand how these social media platforms gain value and power, there are three laws: Sarnoff’s Law, Metcalf’s Law, and Reed’s Law.  Of these three laws, I feel there is only one law that I agree with most.  That law is Sarnoff’s Law.  It’s very simple, it states that the value of a broadcast network increases in direct proportion with the number of users.  I agree most with this law, because it’s just simple and easy to understand compared to the other two laws.  For example, a Twitter page with 5000 followers is 4 times as valuable than a Twitter page with 2500 followers.  The other two laws have complicated mathematical equations to solve, making it confusing as to where that math came from.  The math is very simple for Sarnoff’s Law; network’s value = (number of participants)^2.  The math is still questionable as to where it comes from, but it makes a little more sense than Metcalf’s and Reed’s Laws.

My thoughts about the way people might get their information in five years are basically how it is today.  People will be using the Internet to access their information like they are today, but on a more mobile level.  I feel people will begin to use their cell phones more often when trying to find information.  Most people now use their laptops and when they need to their cell phones.  But with the way our country is becoming so fast paced, people will have to use their phone for one the go situations.  I know I have began using my phone for accessing information more often than my laptop.  If I need to find something quickly, I will instantly pull my phone out rather than my laptop because it’s easier to access.

Let me know what your thoughts are!

Online Identities - Real or Fake?

Online identities can be a complex topic. Especially when it comes to an authentic online identity. This cam be split up into two parts. One being that someone's identity on a social media, such as Facebook, could be completely fake. This means that person is not who they are and are pretending to be someone else. An example of this could be someone pretending to be a celebrity by adding in photos of that specific celeb. Their intentions could be to hurt that celebrity's reputation, or just because they have nothing better to do. The second part is people making their life on social media something that it isn't. For instance, someone could have an entire album of photos on Facebook showing how much fun they have, but in reality they may not be happy at all. They just want people to think they are happy through their photos and posts. It's kind of like putting a mask on, showing people what you want to see not what it actually is.

It can be very difficult to determine if someone's online identity is true or not. There's no real way to tell if a certain social media page is real or fake. Whenever I'm asked for a friend request on any of my social media outlets, I always make sure they are authentic. I pretend I'm a spy and do a little creeping on their page. I'll immediately look to see if we have any mutual friends, if there is no more than ten mutual friends, that's automatic delete. If we have more than ten mutual friends, I'll creep a little deeper into their page. I then begin to look through their posts and pictures. If I don't like what I see, whether it be inappropriate posts, rude posts, or just out of the ordinary posts, that's a deleted request right then and there. If that person can pass those test, I will accept their request.

It's all about what you believe in. If you have a gut feeling that someone online is not who they say they are, do a little research into their page or just automatically ignore them. There are so many people out in the online realm that have nothing better to do than to make fake online identities. Always be careful who you let into your online identity.

Image from: http://transformationalstrategist.com/leadership-skills-being-authentic/