This is a great point. With this kind of marketing, companies like Target can save their resources and use them where they know they will get maximum returns. Tailoring ads allow for greater engagement with will directly lead to more sales. #UWJ201 #317

As long as articles and pieces of media are fact-checked, edited, and given some personality by humans, then the implication of AI should not be an issue. There should be a label explaining the process of creating the article, but as long as there is transparency, I think it's ok. #UWJ201 #317

Through the interactive reading, I learned how difficult it is to shuffle between news that is real and news that is not. AI can do such a great job of mimicking someone's voice patterns, but there are some simple tells like stuttering, emphasizing words, and breathing. #UWJ201 #317

I think there should be. Although it is technically protected by the First Amendment, there should be a line drawn for disrespectful and heartless acts like this. Even if most forms of hate speech are legal, the most extreme of them should be considered illegal. #UWJ201 #317

I would argue this is a conflict of interest. Although the Twins are not good at all, Dan Hayes may try to undermine their positives and shine more light on their negatives. So the few times the Twins do something good, Hayes might under-report on it. #UWJ201 #317.

The article "Can we make artificial intelligence ethical?" gives suggestions that need to be implemented in AI. Some of those include avoiding bias in algorithms and addressing privacy concerns. This article was written years ago. Do you think AI creators have done this? #UWJ201 #317

I think the sheer amount of advertising is enough to cancel out the effectiveness of it. Taking politics and the most recent election as an example, there were ads left and right both praising and knocking Susan Crawford and Brad Schimmel. So, I think they almost cancel each other out. #UWJ201 #317

That's a great question. Although I might use less peripheral than I used to, there is definitely still a good combination of both. I think both routes can work together to create an even better and more informed decision. #UWJ201 #217

In the reading "Recommendations for Media...," one of the suggestions they give is to deny a platform to anyone making unfounded claims. I find that interesting because most journalists do the exact opposite today and write about whatever gets the most clicks, as crazy as the claim is. #UWJ201 #317

Great question. I think because we are so polarized as a state and nation, digging up dirt on a particular candidate will not change the way people vote. People stick to their political party and, especially today, rarely switch sides. #UWJ201 #317

That's a great point you bring up. I think the contrary could also be true. Because adults have seen and experienced more, they are able to better pick out what seems fishy and incorrect. #UWJ201 #317

In Monday's lecture, we talked about fake news and the sheer amount of it leading up to an election. We learned that more fake news is circulating than truthful news in the months before an election. How much does this affect the way people vote? #UWJ201 #317

As we learned in lecture, journalists only have a set amount of time to investigate and write a story, so the depth they would like probably isn't possible. Though there are stories that can take longer and gather more information, the majority of them are not like that. #UWJ201 #317

Yes, I think so. Journalists are supposed to be trusted by the people, and that means giving them the cold, hard facts on any situation. If they are unable to do so without favoring a side, they should state it somewhere in the article. #UWJ201 #317

In lecture this week, we learned about the technical definition of bias. I believe it is more important now than ever before to understand the biases that surround different media outlets. That begs a question: exactly how much has bias grown over the past several years? #UWJ201 #317

This 100% shapes public opinion. Journalists report on what gets them the most clicks and publicity, and unfortunately, that happens to be the rowdiest and craziest protestors. They rarely focus on the peaceful protesters, who make up the vast majority. #UWJ201 #317

This is an interesting concept because it is a great example of how divided our world is today. People are so quick to align with their party's views and bash the opposing party that they don't even realize some policies are the exact same. #UWJ201 #317

After listening to our guest lecturer, I find the concept of "pay-per-click" ads interesting. These ads are at the top of the results tab in search engines, but companies only have to pay if their ad is clicked on. So, this could be free publicity if nobody clicks. #UWJ201 #317

Although there are personalized ads already, I think the degree to which they are personalized will only increase. As human data can be processed and analyzed at an even greater rate, ad personalization will happen at a rate we haven't seen before. #UWJ201 #317

This is a great thought, and I think it would influence their career aspirations. Let's take the recent aviation disasters as an example: because of its constant negative coverage by the news, people who were aspiring pilots might now be pushed away and consider a new career. #UWJ201 #317

It is interesting that even though most crime rates have dropped over the past 20 years, people think there is more crime simply because of its coverage. The media tends to cover the bad, and those who consistently watch these channels will only see the bad, skewing their beliefs. #UWJ201 #317

This is a great point you bring up. I think it's both important and eye-opening to see what we talk about in lecture unfold in real life. I'm glad we are now able to use what we learned and apply it to analyzing media outlets and recognizing bias.
#UWJ201 #317

Great question Simon! As the saying goes, strength in numbers. So if more people agree to a certain issue, then it is easier for there to be a movement. The more informed a society is, the more likely its people are to petition for change. #UWJ201 #317

After reading the article regarding how to get ads working for you as consumers, I haven't found an article I've related to more. Every point they're making, from a desired action to a reason to act now to "ads that don't look like ads," I have experienced before myself while scrolling. #UWJ201 #317

This is an interesting question. I think the main idea behind it is that journalists are scared to fail. If they follow the crowd and create a story on something they know people want, there is a much lower chance the article will flop. Going left when others go right is quite risky. #UWJ201 #317

This is a great question. I think part of the answer is because new stories are fresh, and spark ideas people haven't heard before. These stories create new ideas and emotions--something ongoing stories cannot do. I think negative stories create conflict, something people love. #UWJ201 #317

Prof Wagner explained the experiment where people were given news broadcasts with different emphases, which changed their level of concern about individual issues. That made me realize that the news can force us to draw attention to certain issues, and push others under the rug. #UWJ201 #317

I agree. With these different forms of integration, corporations don't allow people to create their own opinions; they are forced into one type of belief. This is why having a variety of news is so important, it allows people to see all angles. #UWJ201 #317

I think the point of the news is to report the facts, with the only bias coming from opinion-based articles. With the assumption that the majority of Americans are uneducated, horse-race reporting does people no good. People need to know the facts, not who's winning. #UWJ201 #317

I learned from "Who Owns the News?" that 39% of Americans don't trust the media. This worries me because of the individual problems of distrust. The media, which reports on the government, is supposed to be what we trust most. So, how are we supposed to advance as a nation with no trust? #UWJ201 317