Thoughts on Chun (1-127)...

There were two different areas that struck me during the first two chapters of Chun: 1) Her notion of "space" and the separation of physical and virtual bodies, and (2) the differences between the message and the medium.

First, Chun states that cyberspace "is a free space in which to space out about space and place, fact and fiction" (43) allowing users to "see oneself...where one is not" (54). As I was reading, I began to get a little paranoid about what I looked like while I was surfing the net, checking email, or chatting with friends online. I think if we were to watch a videotape of ourselves doing these things, Chun's notion of separation of the physical self from the virtual self would be quite self evident. Of course, our fingers are typing, our facial expressions might change, or we might cross or uncross our legs, but our minds occupy a space that is limitless, yet no bigger than the diameter of our screen. We fully absorb ourselves in this world, whether we are shopping on Amazon or sampling music on iTunes. "By moving from URL to URL, we cut the scenery or space between fixed locations" and are able to navigate through vast corridors of information (47). I wonder how this shift from a physical space to a virtual space will eventually effect the workplace and academia. Our class is a prime example--outside of our class discussions, we interact through our blogs. Rather than physically meeting for discussions, we "jack-in" to our virtual class space, read each other's postings, and experience an infinite potential of ideas, links, and pictures/videos. And all we need is a 15-inch computer screen to do that?

Second, I wanted to briefly touch on Chun's notion of message vs. medium. I think a lot of ideas from this chapter will be fleshed out as we get into later chapters, but I found it very interesting that some argue (concerning pornography) that "the medium was the message, and the message was the pornographic invasion of the home" (81). To me, the invasion of pornography into homes via the Internet is a natural progression, just as it was with the printing press and television. Porn will always be one of the "staple dark sides" of humanity, and, as Chun states, pornography, sexual practices, and commerce have not changed since the printing press, or since early prostitution" (80). Therefore, the type of medium does not matter. There are certainly a lot of good things online as well, and I think many of the same arguments could be made for ESPN.com bringing sports news into the home, too. Or into the workplace, which I am guilty of. The medium enables, but the message itself will always be interpreted by the user. I think that many take the medium for granted because of the ease with which it allows us to access information, but I don't see the two connected anymore than I connect a person's voice with my cellphone.