Diffusion of Innovation #8

When discussing innovation, there are many developments over the decades that have made significant strides in the innovation of technology. These advancements have thrown us toward a future run by technology. Today, I will be discussing diffusion theory and how that relates to cell phones. 

Before we can look at cell phones using the diffusion theory, we must first discuss what the diffusion theory is. The diffusion theory is an idea that explains how new concepts are spread. When new innovations are first introduced to the world, not everyone is quick to accept and adopt them. 

When looking at diffusion theory there is a clear chain that innovation passes through before it is widely accepted. The first to try innovations are the bold risk-takers. They enjoy new ideas and love the thought of the world-changing through this innovation. This group is known as the innovators. 

The next to take on the idea are those who set trends. They like to influence people to broaden their minds about the prospect of an innovation. They promote the positives of the innovation and show others that the innovation has a purpose and can be widely loved if given a chance. These would be known as the early adopters. 

Above, I mentioned people needing time to broaden their minds. Not everyone automatically accepts new innovations into society. The early majority have to wait and see how this innovation can be beneficial to their lives. Once they see it has a purpose, they adopt the innovation. 

The late majority will wait until everyone else has adopted this innovation. They do not join in quickly on the adoption of an innovation. They slowly join over time. 

Laggards never adopt a trend unless they have no other choice. 

Now that we have discussed diffusion theory, we can apply it to the innovation of cells and smartphones. When looking at cell phones, there is a clear chain of how cell phones were integrated into society, which clearly shows the diffusion theory. 

Innovators are the ones who love technology. They bought the wireless smartphone when it was new on the shelves and the price tags were ridiculous. These influencers were celebrities or prominent business people, who began to promote smartphones and saw the potential. 

Once phones became more affordable and accessible, you began to see the early majority have a smartphone in everyday life. With the late majority finally joining in, the innovation was now adopted in communication with others. The laggards, such as grandparents, may have never gotten a phone other than the landline they already had or possibly a flip phone. 

Smartphone innovation took over mainstream media quickly due to the access it gave people to communication and entertainment in one innovation. Then add how it can help manage your life with easy ways for productivity. How could that be any better?  

Some did see it as a life enhancement. Some believed that owning a cell phone gave the right to privacy away. Others just did not like the idea of a life being glued to a phone. 

Diffusion theory explains the spread of an innovation but what is not discussed are the negative side effects. Today we see many people such as younger generations going back in time to no social media and flip phones. Many ask why? 

The reasoning is very clear:  with the development of cell phones came the development of social media and personal data being stored. Many believe that social media has ruined the mental health of younger generations. 

If you are like me, you may feel as if people do not need to have access to every moment of your life. With the increase of social media came the decrease of having a private life. Everyone having access to your life can be detrimental, especially if you become reliant on the validation of other people through social media. 

When social media and cellphones both started off they made people feel connected in ways they had never been before. Distance didn't matter anymore. Friendships online became prominent and many felt a sense of finding community with social media. 

On the other side, people choose to not have social media or a smartphone because that can cause harmful behavior with scrolling becoming your main focus and the risk of your privacy being taken. If someone decides to stay off social media they are ultimately avoiding fake news, negative mental health effects, and doom scrolling. On the flip side of that, choosing not to have a smartphone means that you are giving up your opportunities to hear important news, connections through social media, and recent trends that may be important. 

When discussing which side outweighs the other, it is hard to tell with social media and cell phones which side is better. With all the positives and negatives listed above how do we come to a final conclusion? Well, ultimately that comes down to what is right for you. 

I hope through this post, I have helped give you positives and negatives that could help you with your choice!

Progressive Era Blog Post #7

America has survived many time periods of historical conflict or eras. The Progressive Era is one notable era where we begin to see people voicing opinions against the government and being imprisoned for it. We still see some of this in today's time; it's just not as severe as jail. When someone voices an opinion today, there are ways to keep it hidden. Today we will be talking about the progressive era and how that impacted our right to freedom of speech. 

The progressive era is most known for the start of World War 1. This war was drastic and changed the course of everyone involved. It caused the deaths of around 11 million people. This war sparked much outrage at the powers leading the war, which led to the deaths of so many people and could have been avoided. War causes people to become vocal about their frustrations. 

“Public opinion is becoming shocked and alarmed at the thought that this country could be dragged into the horrors of a general European war, although she has no direct interest in it and is, admittedly, bound by no treaty obligations to take part.” - The Manchester Guardian 

People during this time were outraged at the war. Many believed that we had no obligation to fight in it to start with; we were losing our loved ones and had no way to stop it. The only thing people knew how to do was speak out against the entity that involved us in this war, the government. 

Of course, the government does not like it when people use their voices to oppose something they are doing. To the government, it is an annoyance to speak your mind. So they decided they were going to combat these annoying protests with severe punishment. 

You may be thinking that this can't be possible; that would be against our First Amendment rights. My response would be that you are absolutely correct! However, the government decided to implement new laws, such as the Sedition Act and the Espionage Act.

The Sedition Act was implemented in 1918 and placed heavy restrictions on one's freedom of speech. The Espionage Act of 1917 was reinforced by the Sedition Act, giving the government the authority to punish those who spoke out about events of the time. It restricted the criticism of the government and support for opposing countries and especially punished those who spoke out about the war or the draft. 

The most prominent moment in history that showed the gravity of the situation was the moment that Upton Sinclair was dragged off of a stage and arrested for reading the First Amendment; they didn't even let him finish the sentence he was on. This was a direct display of how far the government was willing to go to silence those who went against them. People challenged laws over decades to get confirmation that speech would be protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that speech is protected unless it is inciting lawlessness. 

Although the Sedition and Espionage Act has not been implemented yet, there are still ways that the government tries to censor people who speak out about their practices. With the increase of information being available at our fingertips, they had to get creative about how they censored people in the current time of 2025. 

I want you to take a moment and go to the search engine you use and type in "does the government censor voices." In the search result, it says no. Of course, the government doesn't want you to know you are being censored. When discussing people who speak out against war or the government, it tends to not get as much media attention. Why?

The reason why is still the same as almost 100 years ago. The government does not want people to use their voices to speak out against them. They want everyone to go along with the ideals that people in power tell us are "good" decisions for the future of our government or country. When a lot of information that should be seen is not being promoted. This is now through the use of algorithms. 

The First Amendment is one of the most important amendments. It's what gives people their right to have a voice, and to run a country effectively, you have to listen to all of the voices of your people. We see the question of the First Amendment being brought up now with the discussion of TikTok. On TikTok, there is a widespread belief that the government is censoring certain information online that speaks out against current events. 

As we can tell, the debate on how far our freedom of speech should be protected will always be a question. The government will never give a clear answer. Throughout history, the First Amendment and its power have been questioned and will probably continue to be. As long as the American people have a voice, they will find a way to censor it. I hope through this post, I opened your eyes to the way the government tries to silence you and encouraged you to not stand for it.