My favorite recent story that I came across was on Wired.com. There I found an article about "Canada's dumbest car thief." This individual took a tricked-out car for a test drive, only to never return. The owner of the dealership, an internet-savvy 20-something, went straight to the automotive discussion forum Beyond.ca and posted a description of the vehicle and the suspect.

What started as a mere post on a forum branched out and used many other online tools such as Facebook and Google Maps to discover the suspect's name, address, and other personally identifying information. Since the thief kept the car parked in front of his own house, the dealership owner knew exactly where to send police, and made sure to be there to tape the arrest and post it on YouTube--a fitting online ending to a crime solved thanks to the Internet.

While the Internet is a tool often used for entertainment or research, it also offers means to track down criminals for crimes that occurred offline. The resolution of these two different cases is just so cool that it shows how much the Internet has to offer when its powers are used for good!

As someone who loves the internet and spends her entire workday attached to it, the fact that internet is twice as popular as television is no surprise to me--especially considering that the age of people survey went down as low as 15. Younger people tend to be more tech savvy in general and therefore more likely to use internet and other new media as opposed to, say, reading a print newspaper.

As Jordan points out in her post, however, there are questions as to whether internet is truly twice as popular as television. For instance, are people watching TV and surfing the internet at the same time? I know that I often watch TV and chat online simultaneously. Although I have a Tivo, there are times when shows have not been recorded and I've had to watch the episodes online. Does this count as television or internet or both, according to the survey?

Ms. McCollum also notes that there is no distinction between whether these media are being consumed only during leisure time, or other times as well. I would bet that most people surveyed would include work internet use when asked how much time they spend online during the week.

One conclusion from the survey is that "consumers tend to use the media they grew up with." Thus, younger people are more likely to use the internet, and older people are more likely to turn to TV and print media. Although this is an unsurprising find, it does interest me to see how people of different age groups adapt to new medias and how quickly they embrace them (if at all). Although the internet is quickly taking over as a new media source, it is also taking over the old medias such as print, television, and radio. With the ability to get all forms of media online, it is no wonder that the internet beats its other media competitors by such a high margin.

Rand mentions several tasks and experiences we had that will never be relevant again, and will be relegated to those tales of "when I was young we didn't have the internet, and we had to look things up in BOOKS!" and the like. It's easy to take for granted all of the information available at our fingertips and to forget that the data did not always come so effortlessly. It's even more astonishing once you realize that this information revolution has only really spanned the last decade or so.

Now that we are used to the constant barrage of information and being constantly connected, it is often hard to break away. Even more real to some is the sense of panic that comes when they are not able to rely on their computers or cell phones. Take, for example, this clip of a segment that aired a year ago on the Today Show. The Managing Editor of Forbes agreed to go a week without technology, and he broke down in tears and demanded his phones back before he even hit the 48 hour mark.

Have we become too dependent on electronic gadgets for our own good? Or do they serve to keep us more closely connected with family, friends, and colleagues, allowing us to interact on deeper levels than were possible pre-Internet and cell phones?

As someone who spent summers as a young teen volunteering at the local library for the kids summer reading program, as well as worked at the University library both as a student and as a post-college full-time employee, I obviously have a bit of an affinity for libraries. In fact, I think they are a wonderful institution, and take advantage of their services at least once a month.

I love that I can get a book from dozens of different locations, delivered right to my local branch, for a nominal fee. As a member of a monthly book club, I am able to borrow many of the books, instead of having to rack up costs (and taking up valuable bookshelf space) buying books that I might not enjoy. I also love that many libraries have set up ways to check out digital audio books online. Libraries have come along way from being merely book repositories, to really embracing the digital age. Any librarian in charge of digital services will probably excitedly tell you all about the new ways in which the library is taking advantage of the Internet and other digital formats.

Speaking of Internet, does anyone else love that libraries offer free internet? I can't tell you the number of times I've had issues with my internet or had work done to my apartment and have had to seek out a new source of internet and electrical power in order to continue with my work day. The library provides a wonderful haven for exploring, researching, or working on your laptop.

While it surprises me that the current 18-30 set reported library usage at 62 percent, it also makes me glad. It proves that there is hope for the future of public libraries--that even though those users closer to the 18 year old mark probably can't remember a time without internet, they still understand the value of tangible reference books, newspapers, and magazines. Sure you can read a lot of that stuff online these days, but there is definitely something to getting your information by sifting through those books. I find reading reference materials or magazines to be a much more pleasurable experience when I can actually turn the pages. Libraries are a great example of how you can mix the paper world with the digital, and it seems that, at least for now, the younger generation recognizes this and is appreciative.

As the author of the blog post, as well as the course instructor, Professor Matthew Nisbet lays out the subjects up for debate in his class. Besides posting about his course on internet social interactions, things get more interesting when he states that students will engage in classroom debate via blog comments. Using blogs as a way to debate online social media is a great way to really capture those conversations. Points that may eventually get lost in an oral debate are retained for posterity and immediately available for all to see in the online realm. Debating in this written manner also allows one to reflect upon his/her statements and make sure to provide compelling evidence to backup the claims.

It also allows those of us no longer in college to see the kinds of views that are held by those in their late teens and early 20's--views that, because they come from a vantage point that may not remember a time without Instant Messaging, Match.com, Myspace, Facebook, blogs, etc. may not realize what an impact they have made on traditional methods of interaction.

Even among those of us who remember the "olden days", we may also be too accustomed to the ease of keeping in touch that technology provides to note the impact it has on face-to-face communication. Does online social interaction detract or enhance traditional interpersonal communications? Only time will tell, and I suspect the debate will still rage on long after the semester ends.