Past, Present, and Future Tense...Reaction

Upon reading Gregor Muir’s “Past, Present, and Future Tense,” I am convicted of the shallowness of my view of what new media is. Up to this point I would’ve labeled websites and digitally produced 2D and 3d animation as new media. This article has prompted me broaden that view. If I were to create a website with nothing on it but a white back round on it would that be accepted as new media? If so would it be considered “good” new media? Many of the works described in this article would not fit the bill as aesthetically pleasing. This in turn raises the question does art as a whole need to be aesthetically pleasing to be art. I think not. But I think it helps if it is to be accepted by the public at large. This truth makes me question what I want to get out of my time in E.M.A.C.? Do I want to make pretty pictures that make people smile and serve more or less as decoration? Am I here to just learn software to communicate others ideas and sell their products? Do I want to be like these artist who used these emerging technologies to expand the boundaries of art and force people to look at these mediums differently? I think I want to do all of these. Another thing that struck me while reading this article is all the new ethical questions that popped into my head. Is it ethical to film people jumping off a bridge to their death? Or is this a way of using art to draw attention to this occurrence? Is it ethical to create websites that people visit that leads them to think that something wrong with their computer? Is it ethical to use others work in new ways if it violates copyright laws? As I try to answer these things I’ve come to realize that I don’t have all the answers. Who am I to say what is ethical anyway. Am I responding solely to the art or the artist? Is there a difference? What do you all think?