Thursday, September 29, 2011
Week 9 - e-democracy, man
Last week I talked about how the internet allowed for a rise in citizen journalism. This is about a rise in citizen activism.
WikiLeaks is a massive grey area when it comes to ethics. What did they want to achieve? Did they want worldwide revolt/anarchy? The New Yorker articlehighlights one of the WikiLeaks personnel as being somewhat in favour of it: “[Birgitta] Jonsdottir has been in parliament for about a year, but considers herself a poet, artist, writer, and activist. Her political views are mostly anarchist.” (2010)
And the article also mentions he’s not so gracious or mature when dealing with “prospective” enemies, not proven ones: “‘WikiLeaks will not comply with legally abusive requests from Scientology any more than WikiLeaks has complied with similar demands from Swiss banks, Russian offshore stem-cell centers, former African kleptocrats, or the Pentagon.’ In his writing online, especially on Twitter, Assange is quick to lash out at perceived enemies.”(2010)
I’m all for what WikiLeaks is doing, which is forcing society to acknowledge that there is corruption and that’s it’s not just in those third world African countries far away that we don’t have to deal with; it’s closer than we think.
While it is the a leader in bottom-up activism there are others. We should take their lead, but not their example.
I admire the work of all these people.
Khatchadourian, R. (2010) 'No Secrets: Julian Assange's mission for total transparency' The New Yorker, June 7. [URL: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian]
Monday, September 19, 2011
Week 8 - New Practices of Journalism and News
Ted asks us the question “what do new forms of information gathering and dissemination such as citizen journalism mean for new media audiences, and the practices of traditional news media?”
Rule #1 of the internet should be “You should not believe the crap you read on the internet; however convincing it is”
Perfect example: I was in a Politcs tutorial and it was our last lesson so our tutor said we could ask her anything. One guy put is hands up and asked her opinion the alternate theory on the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center. He said he’d read a conspiracy theory online that had said that 9/11 was a fake, that the World Trade Center would take too much to repair and so the attacks were to claim insurance. He also stated the theory had said that the American Government (more Bush than anyone else) was chummy with the Bin Laden family and therefore had planned the whole thing.
The same sentiment had been displayed in Michael Moore’s Farenheit 9/11, where he questioned why the Bin Laden family had been flown out of the USA just after the attacks happened, and why had Bush done nothing when he heard about the attacks.
You should have seen our tutor’s face. She was very gracious (she could have bit his head off) but she simply stated that the theories were exactly that, theories.
The students argument was that they were rather convincing. I couldn’t help but cringe as an academic who had probably spent most of her life studying politics and media was being questioned by a second year student.
But my story shows that people will believe anything, and while the internet is a powerful tool for getting the truth out there, it’s also just as powerful for getting bullcrap out, too.
There’s heaps out there, I did a Google search “September 11 was a fake” and got about 97,100,000 results, here’s one of them: http://bit.ly/deCrgL
Sometimes the irony or joke is lost on the user, and is used out of context.
Speaking as a journalism major, I feel I’m on a great position to be able to report the truth. You no longer have to pay your dues getting coffee for the editor before your story gets published. All one has to do is create a blog, or a free peer reviewed citizen journalist site and it’s up.
Of course, one good thing about major news outlets is that they don't usually print useless information (I said usually) and avoids kicking up too much of a fuss (less revolutions you see).
Is the internet a modern example of the Christian Bible? Years of reads, interpretations and rereads has created an entire religion that millions live and die by; the same affect could be said for the internet, many swear by what they read on the Internet too, but I don’t want to get into a religion discussion.
My personal advice is we have to take everything we see on the internet with a grain of salt, especially Wikipedia. Although, I heard the university was thinking of permitting Wikipedia as a verified source?
Rule #1 of the internet should be “You should not believe the crap you read on the internet; however convincing it is”
Perfect example: I was in a Politcs tutorial and it was our last lesson so our tutor said we could ask her anything. One guy put is hands up and asked her opinion the alternate theory on the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center. He said he’d read a conspiracy theory online that had said that 9/11 was a fake, that the World Trade Center would take too much to repair and so the attacks were to claim insurance. He also stated the theory had said that the American Government (more Bush than anyone else) was chummy with the Bin Laden family and therefore had planned the whole thing.
The same sentiment had been displayed in Michael Moore’s Farenheit 9/11, where he questioned why the Bin Laden family had been flown out of the USA just after the attacks happened, and why had Bush done nothing when he heard about the attacks.
You should have seen our tutor’s face. She was very gracious (she could have bit his head off) but she simply stated that the theories were exactly that, theories.
The students argument was that they were rather convincing. I couldn’t help but cringe as an academic who had probably spent most of her life studying politics and media was being questioned by a second year student.
But my story shows that people will believe anything, and while the internet is a powerful tool for getting the truth out there, it’s also just as powerful for getting bullcrap out, too.
There’s heaps out there, I did a Google search “September 11 was a fake” and got about 97,100,000 results, here’s one of them: http://bit.ly/deCrgL
Sometimes the irony or joke is lost on the user, and is used out of context.
Speaking as a journalism major, I feel I’m on a great position to be able to report the truth. You no longer have to pay your dues getting coffee for the editor before your story gets published. All one has to do is create a blog, or a free peer reviewed citizen journalist site and it’s up.
Of course, one good thing about major news outlets is that they don't usually print useless information (I said usually) and avoids kicking up too much of a fuss (less revolutions you see).
Is the internet a modern example of the Christian Bible? Years of reads, interpretations and rereads has created an entire religion that millions live and die by; the same affect could be said for the internet, many swear by what they read on the Internet too, but I don’t want to get into a religion discussion.
My personal advice is we have to take everything we see on the internet with a grain of salt, especially Wikipedia. Although, I heard the university was thinking of permitting Wikipedia as a verified source?
Monday, September 12, 2011
Week 7 - The Long Tail
As I still don’t fully understand the long tail, but as Chris Anderson describes it: “You can find everything out there on the Long Tail. There's the back catalog, older albums still fondly remembered by longtime fans or rediscovered by new ones. There are live tracks, B-sides, remixes, even (gasp) covers. There are niches by the thousands, genre within genre within genre”
So as I see it, you are better off selling a lot of singular niche or unique titles, rather than a few of the more “popular” titles like Britney Spears. It’s sort of ironic I guess, Britney Spears is popular, but then again, so are the niche items, according to sales. I’m still a little confused...
Wait, more people are into niche than they are into popular?
“Combine enough nonhits on the Long Tail and you've got a market bigger than the hits.” (Anderson, 2004)
Oooooh! so I was sort of on the right track!
Moving right along... I get a little nostalgic when it comes to the tech and commerce of the 90’s. I tried finding a cassestte recorder so I could make actual mixtapes, and I never pass the record section in op shops (yes, I’m an opshopper). My behviour reflects the trend that as we are given more and more options, more ways to buy the popular, we find our tastes are in the niche and the vintage.
The rise of the hipster, which I think I have mentioned on this blog, is nurturing the Long Tail. A hipster loves everything old/“vintage” and ironic. Today’s hipster listens to his Walkman rather than his iPhone (which is in his pocket) wears tweed he bought not from the opshop, but from American Apparel, and rides a fixie that he spent thousands refurbishing to make it look older.
(click here for the evolution of the hipster, and see how they nurture the Long Tail market)
I’m saying that it’s now fashionable to have old and unique things. The eigthies saw “Freaks” (weeds smoking, army jacket toting rebellious types on the fringe of society) revelling in the niche of unique stylings, as did the 90’s. Now it’s everybody with a little quirky obsession that they bought from etsy.com. I’m saying there’s money in it.
While there is money in selling copious amounts of popular crap you could get in hot dollar, you can just as much, even more in marketing to the wide publics taste for the underground.
Anderson, C. (2004). The Long Tail. Wired, 12.10 [URL: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html]
Friday, September 2, 2011
Week 6.2 - CONVERGE
“In the world of media convergence, every important story gets told, every brand gets sold, and every consumer gets courted across multiple media platforms.” (Jenkins, 2006, p3)
It’s hard to imagine a world without convergent technology. I’m from a generation that brew up with the early stages of modern computers and mobile phones. I remember when Dad got a Palm Pilot and though it was the coolest thing ever... It didn’t even have wifi!
So according to our mate Jenkins, media convergence is “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behaviour of media audiences” (2006, p2). In effect we haven’t been thrust into convergence culture like our older counterparts, but it has slowly infiltrated our lives, or flowed. As we were learning new things about the world, new technology came with it and we hardly batted an eye.
To show how completely oblivious people were back in the day of the effect computers would have on the world I have two quotes for you (bare in mind, the computers they’re talking about took up large halls and buildings). It was the chaiman of IBM, Thomas Watson, back in 1943 who stated "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
And then of course: "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
Oh how naive they were! In the tute we spoke about how convergence affected our working life. Many of us told examples of being on holiday and wanting to check our emails, or the fading line between work and play time.
I think back to those futuristic films like The Fifth Element, where Bruce Willis can’t drive anymore because his license has expired and the car won’t work without enough points on his license (which he inserts into the car itself, doesn’t have to go to the RTA or anything). Or Eagle Eye, where a supercomputer uses all connecting devices (e.g. CCTV camera’s, wifi, ATMs, mobile phones, etc) to put into motion steps to kill off what it deems corrupt government personnel, through the likes of Shia Labeouf. Or even Back to the Future II! When Marty McFly gets fired through his television! But that’s a little morbid.
I’m not going to complain about convergence culture, it’s definitely cool, but I worry how far we will go before we can’t control it, before everything is connected and we devolve again into users, not produsers. It’s sad to think that in an age where we have more freedom to move and engage we find ourselves shackled more tightly to those things that keep us connected.
Jenkins, H. (2006). 'Worship at the altar of convergence: A new paradigm for understanding media change'. In H. Jenkins, Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide (pp 1-24). New York: New York University Press.
It’s hard to imagine a world without convergent technology. I’m from a generation that brew up with the early stages of modern computers and mobile phones. I remember when Dad got a Palm Pilot and though it was the coolest thing ever... It didn’t even have wifi!
So according to our mate Jenkins, media convergence is “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behaviour of media audiences” (2006, p2). In effect we haven’t been thrust into convergence culture like our older counterparts, but it has slowly infiltrated our lives, or flowed. As we were learning new things about the world, new technology came with it and we hardly batted an eye.
To show how completely oblivious people were back in the day of the effect computers would have on the world I have two quotes for you (bare in mind, the computers they’re talking about took up large halls and buildings). It was the chaiman of IBM, Thomas Watson, back in 1943 who stated "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
And then of course: "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
Oh how naive they were! In the tute we spoke about how convergence affected our working life. Many of us told examples of being on holiday and wanting to check our emails, or the fading line between work and play time.
I think back to those futuristic films like The Fifth Element, where Bruce Willis can’t drive anymore because his license has expired and the car won’t work without enough points on his license (which he inserts into the car itself, doesn’t have to go to the RTA or anything). Or Eagle Eye, where a supercomputer uses all connecting devices (e.g. CCTV camera’s, wifi, ATMs, mobile phones, etc) to put into motion steps to kill off what it deems corrupt government personnel, through the likes of Shia Labeouf. Or even Back to the Future II! When Marty McFly gets fired through his television! But that’s a little morbid.
I’m not going to complain about convergence culture, it’s definitely cool, but I worry how far we will go before we can’t control it, before everything is connected and we devolve again into users, not produsers. It’s sad to think that in an age where we have more freedom to move and engage we find ourselves shackled more tightly to those things that keep us connected.
Jenkins, H. (2006). 'Worship at the altar of convergence: A new paradigm for understanding media change'. In H. Jenkins, Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide (pp 1-24). New York: New York University Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)