Jared Linder

I was given a relatively easy task recently: give a couple of words/insights/thoughts on what it is to be an IT Professional from a student's point of view.

Seems easy enough. A couple of lines and out, right? But, trying to define what that means proved more difficult than I'd imagined. What started as a simple exercise became laborious: I ultimately crafted these words from all that I could muster from the depths of my understanding of this conceptual modern enigma of a profession and pressed forward toward as poignant a description as possible.

I then realized I was writing this for myself. And maybe for you.

As we move into the 21st century, business culture is definitely witnessing the evolution of the IT Professional. No longer is the role only for computer programmers and engineers. Today’s IT Professionals are positioned to be crucial knowledge workers for a diverse range of professional situations that can and do go beyond the technical, to the executive and educational levels.

The IT Professional must bring an understanding not only of technology itself, but also of the possibilities that those advancements have for both businesses and society. This realization also instills the IT Professional with the responsibility to educate, manage, and demystify: technology without informed, able users serves little purpose.

The IT Professional creates for oneself a wide swath of opportunity by comprehending the extraordinary power that technology has toward unifying once-seemingly divergent career paths and employment choices. Distance education seminars and telemedicine sessions can be conducted using the same types of technology that keep corporate email and personal phones performing accordingly, and IT Professionals are indispensable in understanding how to make each function.

In this new economy, as technology continues to pervade, the line drawn between IT Professionals and non-IT Professionals will not merely blur, but will necessarily dissipate. Leaders will be at a disadvantage in this new economy if they lack at least some understanding of the technology that surrounds them and the systems that enable normal operations.

My personal venture into the world of the IT Professional is in fact due to all of the above factors. By creating for myself a broader understanding of the industry, I am not only reeducating myself on the functions and possibilities of the new economy, I am actually helping to craft and design its future.

This personal reinvention will allow for actual invention.

Jared Linder
Graduate Assistant and Institute Fellow
Center for Information and Communication Sciences
Ball State University
2/21/07

Posted by Jared Linder at 12:03 AM | Permalink

Much has been written about Steve Jobs’ recent proposal to remove digital rights management (DRM) from electronic music. But now Hollywood is weighing in on DRM concerns for movies. Currently unlike music CDs, most DVDs already contain safeguards that prohibit most users to pirate a given movie, so utilizing DRM for electronic movies seems to be in line with their existing preventative measures.

However, users treat movies differently than music: some people want to own copies of movies, while others may merely want to see a given movie once. This difference in user behavior may translate differently concerning DRM than for music listeners. By utilizing different types of DRM, studios may be able to offer a different business model: one-time play movies, or weekly rentals, each priced accordingly, for example.

And, although most consumers would state their opposition to DRM, by utilizing some type of DRM, Hollywood could potentially offer more flexibility and choice—not less—to users than if all copyright protection was removed. The issue may be less about piracy and more about individual usage rights for different pricing structures.

Sources:

Mcbride, Sarah. (2007, February 16). Hollywood weighs copyright protections. The Wall Street Journal, p. B3.

Fisher, Ken. (2007, January 15). Privately, Hollywood admits drm isn’t about piracy. ArsTechnica. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616.html

Posted by Jared Linder at 05:21 PM | Permalink

Twenty-seven European national telecommunication regulators are in disagreement over whether to move to a single European regulating body. Regulators were under the direction to either propose the creation of a single regulating body by Friday February 16, 2007, or to grant power to the current European Union (EU) executive.

The conflict exists due to many nations having different regulations and policies currently, as well as the different understanding of current EU regulations. The argument from the EU commission is that different application of rules, as well as strong associations between national providers and their own regulatory bodies, is making business difficult across Europe.

Although currently disagreeing on moving toward one regulating body, the national regulators did stress their willingness to develop a stronger “network of independent regulators.” The EU Telecommunications Minister stated she would push to assume some of the powers of the national regulators since a unified solution was not reached.

Sources:

Jolis, Anne. (2007, February 17). Europe telecom officials balk at a tie-up. The Wall Street Journal, p. A2.

Paul Meller. (2007, February 5). EU telecom regulators face deadline. NetworkWorld. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/020507-eu-telecom-regulators-face.html

Posted by Jared Linder at 05:19 PM | Permalink

Viacom Inc. is ordering YouTube to remove all its video clips from the Internet video site citing copyright infringement. Currently is it is approximated that there are over 100,000 clips from Viacom shows and movies on YouTube. Previous agreements between the two parties resulted in YouTube removing full versions of uploaded media, while still hosting short clips from shows and movies. Viacom is the parent company of popular channels such as MTV and Comedy Central.

Viacom was working both to achieve payment from its material being on YouTube, and to get assurance that filters would be created to ensure uploaded content was appropriate.
YouTube is apparently working on developing a “fingerprinting” technology that can identify copyrighted material, and either remove the material, or determine how to share advertising revenue with the copyright holder.

YouTube frequently deals with copyright situations, and removes clips as requested. Viacom is now also demanding that YouTube not allow future postings of Viacom material on the site. Although copyright law is clear about a site having to remove content at an owner’s request, there is debate if YouTube has to comply with this request due to copyright law not being clear about preventing a site from posting material in the first place.

Viacom currently has an agreement to air its videos in return for ad revenue on Google Video, which is run by Google Inc, also YouTube’s parent company. In January, Viacom launched its own video-sharing site, Acceptable TV.

Sources:

Karnitschnig, M. (2007, February 3). Viacom orders removal of videos from youtube. The Wall Street Journal, p. A3.

Grossberg, J. (2007, February 3). Viacom’s youtube smackdown. Retrieved February 4, 2007, from http://news.yahoo.com/s/eonline/20070203/en_industry_eo/70fb7ed5_cfd04c60_926e_731bdd91167a

Posted by Jared Linder at 05:13 PM | Permalink

Rupert Murdoch is trying to bring My Space to a new audience: China. So far, many media ventures aimed at China have been less than stellar. Several media and content providers, including Murdoch’s News Corp., currently have operations in China, but none have witnessed the breakaway success that the huge market potentially possesses:
China has an estimated 137 million Internet users.

In order to achieve success in this new market, News Corp. is reportedly considering partnering with at least one Chinese company to help bring the venture to fruition. Speculation is that News Corp. may have to give up 50 percent ownership in the Chinese MySpace venture in order to successfully break into the market.

Adherence to policies, regulations, and government involvement is nothing new to outsiders wishing to do business in China. Ubiquitous U.S. companies like Yahoo! and eBay have recently turned to local Chinese operations to help improve less than stellar results.

Also, looming not far from any Internet deal, is China’s national program for a “civilized Internet.” This policy allows for purging of unwanted online content. And, with that common understanding, the concept of My Space pushes forward into an entirely different market and social network.

Sources:

Fowler G., & Dean, J. (2007, February 2). In China, myspace may need to be ‘ourspace.’ The Wall Street Journal, p. B1.

Kharif, O. (2006, September 21). Murdoch’s mission to china. BusinessWeek. Retrieved February 5, 2006, from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2006/tc20060920_643272.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_more+of+today's+top+stories

Posted by Jared Linder at 05:10 PM | Permalink

I was listening to an interesting NPR program on the way to campus this morning. The topic was words, communication, and manipulation. It was a relatively infuriating program. But maybe that was the point.

Dr. Frank Luntz was speaking about his new book Words That Work.
Dr. Luntz carries a specific political slant, and was showing how to better use specific words to help smooth relationships for people who carry that same slant. Using words to further an agenda, whether for corporate or governmental agendas is a dangerous, ethically-questionable game (ex. pitching the idea of using "exploring for energy" instead of "drilling for oil").

In my opinion, the practice borders on manipulation. This is an effective way to communicate; however, we have to watch the power we possess. For words are power. Dr. Luntz understands this.

Now on to the positive:

He stresses word choice and tone. Excellent concept, and effective when used properly.

He also stated this morning that the level of hostility in a conversation is usually indirectly proportional to the listener's level of understanding of the subject. This is a beautiful concept, and probably a true observance.

I admit I have not read Dr. Luntz's book, merely listened to him discuss it. But I will pick up a copy soon and comment on the actual material inside.

Hopefully it will contain much insight into one communicator's idea of personal communication, and will possess usable ideas on helping to facilitate understanding of concepts through effective communication, while focusing less on using words as tools of the educated as potential weapons of personal agendas.

I will let you know how it goes.

Posted by Jared Linder at 12:11 PM | Permalink