This COMM 555 course on New Media Narratives has been a revelatory experience for me. I have learned different concepts and perspectives that have shifted how I think about writing, publishing, and the role of technology in shaping narratives. One of the topics that was particularly new and impactful was Module #7 on Technobiophilia. The readings, particularly Sue Thomas' article "Next nature: 'nature caused by people'", was insightful. This reading challenged the notions I had about the relationship between nature and technology. I had previously viewed these as separate and often oppositional spheres. In addition, I often saw technology as representing a departure from the natural world. However, Thomas' perspective that "neither we nor our environments are very natural at all" changed the way I saw that relationship.
The core notion of the "biophilia hypothesis" is that humans have an innate need to affiliate with life and the natural world. This concept resonated deeply with me more than anything else. I could relate to that sense of wonder and attraction to the natural world that Thomas described. However, the recognition that even the most "natural" phenomena today are in fact "nature caused by people" was eye-opening (Thomas, 2014). Examples like electronic plants, lab-grown meat, and other technologically-mediated interactions with the natural world forced me to reconsider my assumptions. Furthermore, Thomas' discussion of how our ideas about "natural" and "unnatural" are highly contextual and shifting over time was also fascinating. I liked the way she situated the trepidation around in vitro meat within a broader history of initially unsettling but eventually accepted technological interventions in the "natural" world. It made me realize how the "nature" we think of as stable and reliable is actually in constant flux. As such, it is shaped by human ingenuity and innovation.
Beyond the specific content, I felt that the emphasis in this course on critical analysis, multimodal engagement, and digital curation was valuable. The course is different in that it is not all about consuming information passively. It also requires the learners to actively curate, reflect on, and create digital content. This aspect has pushed me to develop essential skills for navigating the modern media landscape. For instance, the discussions around topics like identity, representation, and protest narratives online have been significant. They sensitized me to issues of power, bias, and diversity that are crucial to consider. Looking ahead, the key takeaways from this course will influence how I engage with technology, narratives, and the natural world going forward. I will approach these domains with better understanding and a critical perspective. This is because I am now attuned to the complex relationship between human, technological, and "natural" elements. I will also be more intentional about seeking out diverse voices and perspectives, rather than defaulting to mainstream or dominant narratives.
Additionally, my appreciation for the role of curation, multimodality, and digital engagement has grown tremendously. I can see myself applying these principles in both my personal and professional contexts. For example, I will be leveraging digital tools and platforms to tell richer, more impactful stories. The hands-on experience with AI writing tools, particularly, has opened my eyes to both the potential and the limitations of these emerging technologies. In short, the COMM 555 course has been a transformative experience. After all, I have expanded my horizons. The course has also equipped me with a better understanding, and critical understanding of new media narratives. The different topics, the emphasis on multimodal learning, and the thought-provoking readings have left a lasting impression. I am grateful for the opportunity to have explored this domain. I am excited to apply these lessons in my future endeavors.
Comments
Post a Comment