Jeffrey Sconce’s Haunted Media, what
are people’s first impression to new technology.
How can we learn from existing and relatively more established
communication technology. Jeffrey Sconce take us on a media archaeology
tour. What can we learn from the development of technology, what phonoem
do we see throughout the recent history of communication?
Originally, I didn’t find the piece interesting or related to discover
new particularly found relations with my research in visual perception.
After the second and third read, I started to understand through
Sconce’s piece, it closely and intentionally document telecommunication
from telegraph’s use in 1840 and continuously swift to elegraph to
television, wireless telegraph, network radio broadcasting in the 1920s,
television in the early 1960s, and cyberspace today. What were people’s
reaction in a culture historian’s view. For example, in the opening the
Sconce takes three distinctive news in different places to emphasis the
phenomenon of telecommunication. //insert examples.
A cultural interpretation. For Sconce there are ”three recurring
fictions or stories” and ”five distinct moments in the popular history
of electronic presence” that need to be considered (8). The first of
these stories is about disembodiment that allows the communicating
subject ”the ability, real or imagined, to leave the body and transport
his or her consciousness to a distant destination” (9).The second and
closely related fiction tells of a sovereign electronic world that is
somehow beyond the material realm that we mortals live in. A cast of
androids and cyborgs inhabits the third fiction, which addresses the
anthropomorphizing of media technology. These three stories, Sconce
asserts, have been told countless times during the last 150 years. Yet,
as Sconce is quick to emphasize, it is the discontinuities that matter
more than the supposed similarities. ”Tales of paranormal media are
important, then, not as timeless expressions of some undying electronic
superstition but as a permeable language in which to express a culture’s
changing social relationship to a historical sequence of technologies”
Conclusion
To conclude, this essay has addressed a number of significant issues
including how we see and perceive using cognitive psychology to
understand, what we perceive may interpret in different meanings in our
brain, the problems we have with communication through technology
through the sociology and readings from established researchers.
Actor-network theory which shows that we study subjects individually and
forget about the connection in between.
The evidence highlights in perception. It is often studies as though it
were an isolated activity. However, it is a necessary part of physical
behavior, and often it provides the motive for that behavior. We
perceive, and based on our perception, we act. We use perception to
monitor and control our action. To improve our ability to perceive, we
often move toward the object of perception. We filter out most of the
information we receive, and attend to only those features of our
perception that we need to guide an action. (Kruger, Artificial Reality,
II p.199) Most of us knows about vision test, it tests your vision
accuracy, if its 20/20 or adjustment is needed. But there are more to
learn about visual perceptual ability. For example, focusing, eye
tracking, fixation, binocular, fusion visions…just to name a few.
When visual information is perceived incorrectly, instead of reinforcing
the experience, it distracts, and treated as cannot be trusted. The
visual perception test at the market are either expensive or in the
designer’s world, it is used to accommodate the perceptual tendency. I
see this research in steps and the first step is reminding people that
there is more than if you can see, there is your visual perception. Then
understand individuals visual perception strength and weakness. There
are so many factors can affect communication. To begin with, we need to
learn what we are looking at, and understand our visual perception
strength and weakness because it is the first and most used information
reception which contacts to our brain.
As human we tend to be biased. We believe what we see. But what we see
often does not process correctly. It is even seldom mentioned. I begin
the exploration form small incidents, and events that perceptual me.
Which mentioned in case studies. And I try to examine them in different
ways. The journey so far has been exciting, I found out about different
ways to understand my surroundings. In this paper, I dived deeper in
visual perception and particularly how to recognize facial expressions.
I believe, understanding how we see and know what we are seeing will
mitigate the gap of understanding. It’s easy to make mistakes in
perception. We stereotype, we rely on perceptual sets, we commit
attribution errors, and more. The first step to improving our perceptual
abilities is to be mindful of our perceptions. We must be aware of our
perceptual tendencies, and conscious of how those tendencies might
affect accurate perception. The first thing we can do is to know
yourself: Recognize your own tendencies toward bias. The second thing we
can do is to focus on other people’s characteristics. We might recognize
their group memberships, but it’s important to treat each person as an
individual. Third, we should check the accuracy of our perceptions. In
part, this means separating interpretations from facts. This also means
generating alternative perceptions. We can test our perceptions for
accuracy, sometimes by simply asking the other person if our perception
is correct. Lastly, we should revise our perceptions as necessary.
Sometimes our perceptions are accurate from the start, and other times
they simply are wrong. It’s important to recognize and admit this. At
the same time we still have haptic, audio, olfactory, taste to explore.
We know we notice different things, and there are differences between
culture, up-brings which can affect how we understand or feel the same
material. But the one thing that we all share is visual perception
ability. If we can understand what we are seeing, we can approach other
factors objectively. The specialist who have profound knowledge of
visual perception ability usually work around it, or wait for the
symptom occurs then try to cure it. I think we can work toward it.
\cite{1956}
\cite{latour1993}