About Anne Jindra
My father was one of the first computer technologists, one of the first gamers, one of the first to explore this new thing that was evolving called “the internet”. I grew up on a computer, I hung out in the first social media platform- the forums of CompuServe. I learned to program in Basic when I was seven, was raised on lessons on computer hardware and software. I proceeded to do absolutely nothing with that knowledge, and yet it has given me a foundation that is priceless. Telephones became just phones and then expanded back out again into smartphones. We are now at a point where the majority of our human interaction occurs not through speech or hard copy, but over some form or another of a computer.
This understanding of technology was one of two things that helped shape my interests, helped shape who I am and how I see the world. As a teen I lived a very sheltered life. My family is shy and conservative and naturally I was developing that sort of temperament. It would have been very easy for me to fall into the trap of having a narrow view of reality, in which others are two dimensional and people who disagree with me make no sense.
A college mentor opened my eyes to a much larger world- the world of paradigms and the study of human thought. I was lucky enough to know the late Professor Barber. His deep and abiding love for philosophy was simple and inspiring. He believed in truth and logical order, and he was able to communicate that belief, and the reasons behind it clearly and with conviction. I will never regret petitioning the Deans of the Psychology and Philosophy departments for a joint degree, and I will always feel honored to have studied under a man who had the rare quality of being quietly, and humbly, powerful.
Despite my love for structure, I had an interest in its more chaotic aspects and kept trending away from the colder world of logos and into the real world, and the real people that lived there. On graduating I took a job in the communications field, in cellular, and stayed there for six years. It was a fascinating business, even working on the retail end, but the jobs weren’t quite right. I was looking for something more. I moved on, creating and teaching a four course series on the use of electronic media in marketing, working odd jobs while I tried to figure out how to get to where I was going.
We are lucky enough to be living in an era where study easily continues outside of the walls of traditional institutions, and I furthered my desire for education by researching Psychology, Language and Culture. I hadn’t come across any discipline that incorporated the three although the very clearly had places they overlapped. Ontology was close, but it is very tech heavy and focuses more on structure and less on user interaction.
Finally I ran into the field of Organizational Communication, and from there the larger subject of Communication itself. This is where I want to be, this is what I want to do. We’ve been moving through an information revolution, but its focus has been on technology, not on information. That’s finally beginning to change.
There was a question posted to Reddit- If someone from the 1950s suddenly appeared to day, what would be the most difficult thing to explain to them about life today. The number one answer was- I possess a device, in my pocket, that is capable of accessing the entirety of information known to man. I use it to look at pictures of cats and get in arguments with strangers.
The issue that we are facing is not one of capability, it’s one of efficiency. This has been confronted on a similar, albeit smaller, scale already with the birth of enterprise architecture. As companies (and governments) became more dependent on technology to function they became entangled within the limits of that technology. Enter the enterprise architect, using one of four methods to streamline the process, and get what they call “artifacts” where they needed to go.
Our communications systems need a massive overhaul. Legislation is struggling to keep up with the quickly changing needs of a system that evolves so quickly it seems almost organic. International boundaries are being tested and data is being spewed across social media platforms in a haphazard way. A very large portion of our lives are being lived inside of our communications systems, and there are few standards of quality for how those systems are constructed. Those networks are increasingly becoming an international concern and we are not yet at the point where we can agree that they should be regulated at all, let alone how. Until there is a better understanding of the problem I don’t believe that progress will be made.
The first attempt to regulate the internet portion of our communication network happened this past December when the UN proposed global regulations. The reaction was explosive. Google collected over three million signatures in opposition and the United States ultimately refused. Was this the right move to make?
The fact that our open system leaves us vulnerable is without question. Is it worth the cost? That is the type of question that catches my interest. It’s the perfect blend of psychology, philosophy and culture that starts a frenetic google binge. I’d just as soon get paid to do that.
The structure isn’t the only thing that’s a hot topic, the use is as well. Recently the EU stated that it would be using social media to disseminate information on political topics in order to reduce misunderstandings on the part of voters. President Obama’s success is in no small part due to his savvy use of the communications network in America, letting him speak directly to our citizens. Communication as a part of the political process that is changing rapidly, and becoming increasingly bidirectional.
Communication is a field that is happening now. That’s not to say there aren’t exciting advancements in biology and physics, or astronomy- but those aren’t my fields. They aren’t things that I chase down in my free time because I can’t shut off the curiosity. I ultimately want a career that continuously incites me not only to consume the newest research and technology at challenging rates, but also to process that information well enough to come up with reliable strategies to utilize and modify the existing platform and start the cycle all over again.
Research in this area is absolutely fascinating. The internet is a completely unexplored frontier and the way people react to, and interact with it is interesting on many levels. Recent research (Determinants of Internet News Use: A Structural Equation Model Approach, by Jin Yang and Padmini Patwardhan (WJMCR 8:1 December 2004)) shows that age and education have no effect on the likelihood that a person will use internet news venues.
It seems counterintuitive that these two factors, which normally dictate this type of interest, have no effect at all. Instead it’s how much of a relationship the person has with the internet that predicts how likely it is they will use internet news. It’s forcing us to not only ask what, but to also ask why.
The use of language to communicate has long been an interest of mine, but with the explosive popularity of memes the use of mixed media is a new and fascinating twist. It’s something that’s been present in print media for some time, but it’s used in a very different way.
This is where I want to be, and this is what I want to do. I want to be a part of the discussion that is happening already and will continue for years. I want to be a communications architect. I have a lot of hands on experience in the communications field and am thoroughly enjoying my work as I move forward.