There is currently a gap between people who enjoy the benefits of technology and those whose lives could be significantly improved by it.  Inveneo, a non-profit organization believes that access to communications has the ability to save lives. 

In order for people in underdeveloped countries to advance with faster services and more opportunities, they need a stronger connection to the outside world.  It will take the rich countries who are already experiencing the benefits of technology to do something major in helping those who do not have this luxury. Inveneo, a non-profit organization that was developed in 2004, is doing just this.  Inveneo’s goal is to send out tools for Information Communication Technology to people in organizations worldwide who can benefit from this advancement.  They identify, recruit, train and certify ICT partners to help lead and maintain their projects in foreign countries and Inveneo leaves the revenue in these rural areas for the citizen’s benefit.  “Since mid-2006, when Inveneo released its first product, Inveneo and our partners have supplied gear to or completed more than 45 projects in Uganda, Rwanda, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Burkina Faso, South Africa and Mali” (1).  Inveneo is making it a point to use a dependable product and service without punishing the environment; keeping things natural, safe, and inexpensive for the people in these poor rural areas.

Although I understand that there is controversy with companies like Inveneo going into foreign countries and introducing their technological practices onto them; at the same time, I understand and approve more, the benefits of this service.  Many countries, especially the younger generations that have a long road ahead, want to become involved in the new technology that the western cultures like America find to be a number one gain in society.  In order to become involved, it typically takes higher earnings to be able to afford a computer and its service provider.  With Inveneo, people are able to experience technology first hand in their current conditions.  While navigating Inveneo’s website, it appears that those cultures taking on these computer projects and labs, etc. seem to greatly enjoy the opportunity that has come knocking at their door!

Having computer access in poor rural areas Worldwide is beneficial in more ways than just one.  It goes beyond the surface of just surfing the net, e-mail and chat.  With the improvement in technology, people are now able to educate themselves, which in turn will advance them in their future opportunities.  Some remarkable key issues that Inveneo focuses on are: helping save lives (rural healthcare and relief), providing better economic opportunities in agriculture and market access, helping enforce human rights by making it more able to monitor and report cases, offering a better future for children through education.  Also, open source software can be viewed by everyone without the expensive software license issues.  “Each of the Inveneo Communications System’s components low-power design make them cost effective to deploy using solar or other types of alternate power with battery back-up (e.g., wind, partial grid, micro-hydro, etc.)” (1). Saving money through this cost-effective method will enable people in underdeveloped countries to focus more on furthering themselves through this new window of opportunities. 

With a computer people are able to make sense of the world and stay connected.  It makes it possible for people to design a resume, apply for jobs, contact businesses, trade with business, make faster transactions when ordering products or banking, get an education online, consult articles and online information for medical cures, or find answers to any dilemmas in their life.  I think it is healthy to give every individual who is suffering from lack of income or resources a computer.  Through organizations like Inveneo, the individual can advance his or her own knowledge and continue to share this knowledge with others.  

(n/a) http://www.inveneo.org/ (2007) Inveneo

It is very important to catch the audience’s eye in the initial glance of a web site.  Looking at both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama’s presidential websites, I was able to compare and contrast the two and see which one was more visually pleasing, user friendly and appeared to be most credible.

Throughout my research I was able to compare and contrast the content on each political web site of Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton, focusing on form, content, and writing style.  Then I focused in on the web sites structure and design to find out if it was helpful in search of political information. My initial reaction while browsing through both Clinton and Obama’s web page was surprising.  I was surprised because I am not familiar with politics online and noticed that both sites were set up very similar; both user friendly from the start and the design was very square, bold and simple.  Clinton and Obama both had big bold tabs up top where you can click on where you want to be directed.  Both sites used the American colors of red, white and blue and had everything simplified for its audience.

Form and Content

Surprisingly again, the content of both websites is similar in that the focus is on making contributions and up to date information on the standings of each political leader in each state.  Both sites list where the race is at thus far between the democratic candidates.  While dissecting Clinton’s page, I noticed that she has, in order of importantance, issues that she would like to step in as a leader and take charge of such as:  strengthening the middle class, providing affordable and accessible health care, ending the war in Iraq, improving our schools, etc.  While reading these key issues that need to be resolved in America, I felt that Clinton’s committee who designed this web page did an excellent job of presenting these issues and organizing them.  Obama’s form and content is also strong like Clinton’s and focuses in on important issues; however Obama has his issues of concern in a different order of importance.  Obama mentions civil rights, disabilities, economy, education, energy and environment, ethics, faith, family, fiscal, foreign policy, healthcare, etc. Although on these sites it does not say that these are in order of importance, as an audience member I would assume that they may be organized in such a matter.

Writing Style

Both Clinton and Obama’s writing style is easy to read and comfortable in a sense that the average American can relate to it.  To be honest, I was most impressed with Barack Obama’s writing style on key issues because he always starts with an inspirational quote and then he stated the current problem in bold first, following with his plan of action in detail listed second.  Clinton’s was written in paragraph form on how she will lead this nation to solve the problem within that particular issue.  I preferred Obama’s method because he made it easy to follow and read in a way of listing and his quotes were thoughtful and to the heart and it is the first thing that the reader reads before continuing on with his lecture on changing the future.

Structure of Information

The structure of both sites I found extremely helpful and easily accessible.  On each page, there are options to easily re-direct you to another page that may be of interest to the audience.  Plus, as an audience member I felt that I was in the loop with the constant updates on each politician’s current involvement.  Also, they have the other communities that you can get involved with like facebook and MySpace, UTube, Flicker, etc. in case you would like to follow up in a more fun and friendly manner.  Some prefer communities like this where they can post comments on politician’s pages, especially the younger generations.  I feel that the structure of both Obama and Clinton’s web design appeals to all audience types and gives the audience plenty of options to choose form in becoming more involved and part of the campaigning process.  Again, both web designs are set up in a way that makes it easy to navigate and successfully find the information needed. 

Hillary for President. http://www.hillaryclinton.com/

Obama ‘08. http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

Peace Corp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_corp

500 Contributors overall

Feb 17, 2003 Tobin Richard is the first contributor to the site

The content of the article is based on the history of the Peace Corp and its development by Congress. Throughout my research, I found that Wikipedia focuses mostly on the government’s establishment and details about the way it came to be, not necessarily its current success and struggles or where it will be in the future.  It was much less focused on personal acts of service by Citizens of the U.S.  The site did honor their philosophy and seemed to focus in on this right from the beginning of the Wikipedia article, which is to:

“Promote world peace and friendship through a Peace Corps, which shall make available to interested countries and areas men and women of the United States qualified for service abroad and willing to serve, under conditions of hardship if necessary, to help the peoples of such countries and areas in meeting their needs for trained manpower (1)

”I have selected this topic on the United States Peace Corp because I am extremely interested in joining the Peace Corp and I am interested to find out more about the acts of service and relief that volunteer can bring to other countries.

The topic appears somewhat biased in that it favors the Peace Corp owners and directors.  Wikipedia talks about  the history, establishment  and success of the workers, but not the actually volunteers who, in my opinion are giving a whole lot more by putting themselves out there in a new and uncomfortable environment unknown to them.  I understand that Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia; therefore, I did expect there to be historical information, but also more current up to date information about today’s Peace Corp and its current development and success of the volunteers and International development.  The sources cited throughout this article, did however seem credible, for most of them were either straight from the Peace Corp’s main website or from Congressmen.  Considering that Wikipedia is a free site that allows strangers to voice their own opinions, I was shocked that there were not more volunteers who wrote on what the Peace Corp is like today or what the future holds. 

Contrast to the Wikipedia site, while doing a ProQuest Advanced key search for Peace Corp, I discovered that there were 37 documents and of these, the majority focused in on safety, security and future expansion of volunteers.  While browsing through the ProQuest articles, I noticed that many were political and talked about support for the Peace Corp from politicians.  Secondly, I noticed that several articles were of personal experiences in the Peace Corp and biographies of people who have come and gone through the service.  Overall, I honestly felt more pleased and satisfied with ProQuest because the information seemed much more trustworthy and informative.  ProQuest is a source used often in Universities and is treated as a credible source by scholars.  I thought that Wikipedia would be more pleasing for the simple fact that it is now this new digital social network in which we can communicate our feelings and believes about a particular subject of interest or expertise.  Also, I am not comfortable with the format of Wikipedia, the quick facts and dates and that focuses less on storytelling or personal insight.  Wikipedia was very factual and jumbled with its many distractions off to the left hand column.  Also, there was very little written on Wikipedia about the Peace Corp, although there were helpful external resources available to search for on the web. 

Peace Corp. Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Feb 13 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_Corps

Peace Corp.  ProQuest.  2008 http://proquest.umi.com.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/pqdweb?RQT=512&querySyntax=PQ&searchInterface=1&TS=1203128114&moreOptState=CLOSED&clientId=2302&h_pub_title=&h_pub_title1=&h_pub_title2=&h_pub_title3=&h_pub_title4=&h_pub_title5=&h_pub_title6=&h_pub_title7=&h_pmid=&h_pmid1=&h_pmid2=&h_pmid3=&h_pmid4=&h_pmid5=&h_pmid6=&h_pmid7=&SQ=Peace+Corp&FO=AT&OP1=AND&SQ1=&FO1=BITXT&OP2=AND&SQ2=&FO2=CITABS&OP3=AND&SQ3=&FO3=CITABS&OP4=AND&SQ4=&FO4=CITABS&OP5=AND&SQ5=&FO5=CITABS&OP6=AND&SQ6=&FO6=CITABS&DBId=-1&date=ALL&onDate=&beforeDate=&afterDate=&fromDate=&toDate=&Oppubtitle=AND&pubtitle=&Opsubject=AND&subject=&Opcompany=AND&company=&Opname=AND&name=&Opgeo=AND&geo=&Opcc=AND&cc=&Opsic=AND&sic=&OpSF=AND&SF=any&OpLA=AND&LA=any&OpAT=AND&AT=any&revType=review&revPos=all&STYPE=all&sortby=REVERSE_CHRON&PageSize=10

One Lap Top per child project 

The one lap top per child project can be seen as a very effective approach for people in underdeveloped countries, but also as a profitable business rather than benefiting a cause.  Over the past year, underdeveloped countries have been given the chance to communicate with friends, family and strangers worldwide; however, recently throughout my online research, the project that was once seen as successful and educational enhancing is falling apart because of a money driven company called Intel.  While I was researching articles on ProQuest, I came across 12 articles under full text documents that were non scholarly articles and 6 articles under full text documents that I believe to be scholarly articles.  The reason I had to make my own judgment is because there were no results when I clicked on the scholarly button when doing an advanced search on ProQuest; however, in the end I found two great articles that had information that focused on the disadvantages of the project rather the advantages and opportunities it provides. 

The first article I choose, which just happened to be the very first article on the list, was titled “Hanafin scorns ‘laptops for all’ schools plan” by the Irish Independent in Dublin Ireland.  This article written on January 10, 2008, discussed the topic of education and science and debated the issue of the XO lap tops.   Fine Gael defends the cost of the lap tops saying that they need to be the price of $188 figuring in the “substantial costs for items, such as insurance, maintenance and networking”, but Mary Hanafin believes that the lap tops are not sufficient enough and “would need to have a good suite of software included, a good memory capacity and be small enough to be relatively portable given that children would have to carry them around”. The article featured several debates over the efficiency and advantages of these XO laptops.  And to make matters worse, just when foreign countries were getting used to the new XO laptop, Intel pulled out.  “Two countries, Libya and Uruguay, had signed memorandums of understanding but he was not aware of any production of the laptops yet in either country. To make matters worse, Intel, which is developing its own Classmate notebook, has just pulled out of the XO- I project and the likelihood was that the costs would rise rather than fall, said Mr. Morrissey.  Not only should grants and funding be available to purchase these laptops, but more quality lap tops that provide multiple usages should be provided worldwide for the simple fact of helping people in other countries who can not afford to buy their own lap tops. 

The scholarly article differed in a sense that its focus was on the relationship between Intel and the One Lap Top per Child organization (OLPC).  This article titled “Intel OLPC split, a cause for concern?” published on January 14, 2008 was described the disappointment that OLPC felt towards Intel after Intel failed to live up to their promises.  “Intel joined the OLPC board of directors in July 2007 and pledged to contribute $18 million to the group, despite the two having a strained history”.  Intel decided to stick with their low cost Classmate PC and compete against the XO; therefore, no longer helping OLPC’s cause internationally.  This scholarly article focused on NGO and Corporate partnerships and their commitments or lack there of in business. “Coverage of the situation has implied that Intel may have shown greater interest in selling its laptop than in benefiting the cause. But Intel has stressed its support of the larger CSR issue, which Darigan feels could ultimately protect its reputation”.  This article showed the heartache that a smaller company can feel when a larger money hungry corporation can squash them when alternative ideas arise.

In the end, both articles related in that they both stressed the issue of Intel representing itself poorly and not having their mind set on the customer’s needs but rather the product and its money making ability.  In contrast, the articles differed in that the first non-scholarly article focused in more on the quality and ability for the product to provide educational services to the youth and the scholarly article focused primarily on the partnership between the two companies not the actual product or customers.  Both articles were great articles and got me to think more in depth on the real reasoning behind these lap tops and its service to the world.

Hanafin scorns ‘laptops for all’ schools plan. (2008). Irish Independent, 1. Retrieved  January 30, 2008, from http://proquest.umi.com.offcampus.lib. washington.edu/pqdweb?did=1410840551&sid= 1&Fmt=3&clientId=2302&RQT=309 &VName=PQD

Garcia, Tonya. (2008). Intel-OLPC split, a cause for concern? PRweek. (U.S. ed.), 8, 1. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from http://proquest.umi.com.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/pqdweb?did=1421311371&sid=11&Fmt=3&clientId=2302&RQT =309&VName=PQD fixURL(“wrapURL7″, ‘http://proquest.umi.com.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/pqdweb

did=1421311371&sid=11&Fmt=3&clientId=2302&RQT=309&VName=PQD’)