Untitled

[ayladolankcb206]

My Big Brother friend, Big Data and Big News for Attention Seeking Viewers.

This week’s lecture discussed various aspects of new media, big data and telemetrics. One item of particular interest explored was the new phenomenon of television viewers commenting and discussing on the events of television programs in real time – and for all to see. This topic allows for many questions to be asked; who participates in this interactive viewing? What social media platforms do they use to do so? What is their motivation behind it?

Using social media to participate in live commentary on TV shows is a new media phenomenon sprouted from the audiences desire to have more control, or more of a say, when viewing television. Although many web 2.0 individuals may express this desire through only watching TV shows online, when and where they like, many people seem to enjoy the potential perks of being a traditional TV audience with a new media difference. It is likely that people who select the latter option are attached to the mid 20th century vision of a family laughing and enjoying themselves, huddled around a television set, but also want more opportunities to have their opinion on TV shows heard.

According to the lecture, in Australia the main social media platforms utilised for this purpose are Facebook and Twitter, with 46.51% and 53.49% of the market share respectively (Woolford, 2014). Quite strikingly, the US has much different statistics with Twitter being responsible for a massive 95% of TV tweeting (Woolford, 2014). These figures may be due to the formatting of certain shows being a little different in Australia, therefore warranting or even requesting a Facebook response rather than twitter. Australian programs such as Sunrise, Puberty Blues and The Project have statistically more interaction from viewers on Facebook; at least as a viewer of The Project, I can confirm that from personal experience the hosts reach out for Facebook comments etc more so than twitter interaction.

So why are viewers no longer happy with sitting back and assuming the comfortable and anonymous role of living room voyeur? The new media audience, as we have discovered throughout this unit, want to participate. They want their opinions heard, even better validated, and want recognition. Our obsession with celebrity has us tapping away on our iPhones during TV programs hoping and praying that our tweet appears in the continuous reel on the bottom right hand corner during My Kitchen Rules. Why do we want all of Australia to see that you “love the twins Greek dish this week, yum! #MKR” ? Probably because somewhere along the way you were also hoping for all of Australia to quickly realise you are an internet prodigy and you would have 500,000 new followers by the end of the episode...

Weller describes a few of the functions of our obsession with hash tagging to TV shows; “From attempts at getting the attention of celebrities and other public actors, to discussions in communities built around specific issues-and back again to broadcast-style statements from well-known individuals and brands to their potentially very large retinue of followers” (Weller, 2013). Have you ever had a friend that has flooded your news feed for days about how someone from Big Brother replied to their Instagram comment? I bet half the reason they were so chuffed is because they gained a nice handful of new “followers from it”. I know from personal experience from when my partners good friend Michael Beveridge went on the show and suddenly his pictures of breakfast were getting 5000 comments. Nobody cares that much about breakfast.

Weller, K, 2013, Twitter and Society, Chapter 2: Structural Layers of Communication on Twitter, p.15-28

Woolford Darryl. 2014. “Week 9 – New media, big data and telemetrics.” Accessed May 3, 2014. http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/

[ayladolankcb206]

New Media, New Power to the People

The week 8 lecture (new media politics and engagement) addressed the political roles of new media; mobilisation/activism for the people, transparency as tools for the greater good and campaigning for politicians (Sauter, 2014). For my blog post I would like to focus on the mobilisation/activism for the people aspect of new media in the political sphere.

The role of new media in the political world according to McNair involves informing citizens of occurrences, educating citizens on meaning of facts or events, exposing actions to public scrutiny and serving as a channel for advocacy (McNair, 2011). I think that although indeed new media may be utilised by politicians for campaigning, the benefits and power to the people it offers is its most revolutionary political function. A wonderful example was used in Clay Shirky’s Foreign Affairs article “The political power of social media: technology, the Public Sphere and political change”. This part of the article described the first instance of social media playing a major role in a national political movement; “On January 17, 2001, during the impeachment trial of Philippine President Joseph Estrada, loyalists in the Philippine Congress voted to set aside key evidence against him. Less than two hours after the decision was announced, thousands of Filipinos, angry that their corrupt president might be let off the hook, converged on Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, a major crossroads in Manila. The protest was arranged, in part, by forwarded text messages reading, "Go 2 EDSA. Wear blk." The crowd quickly swelled, and in the next few days, over a million people arrived, choking traffic in downtown Manila” (Shirky, 2011). In 2001, technology and social media was worlds away from what we are able to use it for in 2014, so it is even more impressive and monumental that new media was of such a great assistance to the people at that time.

Articles written as early in the new media timeline as 1998 describe exciting benefits for the masses that the changes in technology offer. New media was seen as a “revitaliser of publication participation” and an avenue that allows “citizens to have an input in policy making” (Bellamy, 1998). It is exciting that so soon in the development of new technologies academics were scoping what it would mean for the people; and that they were quite right.

  Although new media does offer politicians more facets of influence, I think the most impressive aspect of new media in the political sphere is definitely the power it gives to people. The public has more of a say in politics than ever before and can make things happen almost instantaneously as they band together on social media.

Bellamy, Christine and John Taylor. 1998. Governing in the Information Age. Buckingham: Open University Press.

McNair, Brian. 2011. An Introduction to Political Communication. 5th Ed. London: Routledge.

Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “Week 8: New Media Politics and Engagement.” April 17, 2014. http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal

Shirky, Clay. 2011 “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change.”In Foreign Affairs 90:1. Available at:http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67038/clay-shirky/the-political-power-of-social-media

[ayladolankcb206]

From fangirl to director... 21st century participatory fandom

This weeks lecture (week 5 - new media and the entertainment industry) looked at a few different aspects of new media's effect on the traditional entertainment industry. Some aspects discussed included traditional cinema, morals and fandom. This week I have decided to lightly discuss one particular aspect of this weeks readings: "participatory fandom" as described by Sherfin (Shefrin, 2004). 

Participatory fandom involves fans evolving from merely consuming new media but actually participating in the whole creation process. This new development in the entertainment industry gives fans of films, TV shows and so on the opportunity to actually influence the directors and producers... they may influence anything from whether or not a character get kills off (according to fan popularity or lack there of) to the actual plot of the show or film. One example of this participatory fandom is the use of it in Lord of the Rings... this proved to be a great decision for Peter Jackson and the rest of the crew as there was a powerful response from fans which likely contributed to the success of the overall film (Shefrin, 2004). Comparing this response to that of a Star Wars film, it could be directly argued that the film that did involve the audience in the storyline writing process etc was in fact the more successful production. 

Although some may argue that the entertainment industry is evolving and changing too rapidly I believe this particular development is a positive one. Fans are the ones consuming the new media so why not give them a say in the plot? I do not think there are too many downsides to this development... if you do not want to be a participatory fan then there is no need to be! On the other hand, it may be an exciting concept to many fans that they can now influence their favourite media. However, I personally would not involve myself in this sort of participatory "fandom" as I believe it may take away from the joy of watching films or TV series... in the sense that it may get to the point where nothing is a surprise as you were a part in the decision making process.

Shefrin, Elana. 2004. “Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and Participatory Fandom: Mapping New Congruencies Between the Internet and Media Entertainment Culture.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 21 (3): 261-281

[ayladolankcb206]

New Media Labour: Exploitation or Taking Fair Advantage?

This weeks lecture discussed participatory user labour that is involved in New Media. The following were listed as ways these "workers" are disadvantaged: •Low (or no) pay

•Unregulated labour marketplace

•No benefits or protection

•Overabundance of work

•Competition among workers

•Monotonous and repetitive work

•Surveillance

•Power disparities reinforced

•Addiction

•Moral valence – fake/paid reviews, contributing to a “greater bad”

•EVERYTHING becomes commercialised From the point of view of a new media user who has come across crowd sourcing, ReCAPTCHA, reviews and so on, I would argue that these "playbourers" are not being as hard done by as many sources may claim. Although indeed everything is commercialised, this is the case in all aspects of life. If you wanted to avoid commercials you would need to walk around blindfolded as they cover buses, billboards and buildings. No one who gets involved in this new media labour is at all forced to; it is easily ignored, and I believe most people with common sense know to do just that.

These companies rely on the desperate (and lets be honest, probably a bit silly) few that think it is worth while writing a 300 word review for 5 cents. Yes, it is taking advantage, but surely providing minimal amounts of money for their time is not the most sinister way to do so? Fuchs states that "The Internet and social media are today stratified, non-participatory spaces and an alternative, non-corporate Internet is needed" (Fuchs, 2013). Indeed, the internet is a very corporate space full of advertising. However, I think this idealistic vision is completely unrealistic... if this was to be the case, will we then also make non corporate TV channels, cinema companies and spaces without bus stop advertising? It is an implausible solution.

The physical exploitation via new media of workers on the other hand is a human rights issue. This is a case of labourers being forced to comply with the new media, as in the case of the Tesco arm bands that monitor how quickly they are stacking shelves, the monitors even remain on during bathroom trips and visits to a water fountain which reportedly effect their efficiency report (Suddath, 2013). If workers met the target they would be “awarded a 100 per cent score, but that would rise to 200 per cent if they worked twice as quickly” (Rawlinson, 2013).

This is unhealthy as it is encouraging employees to overwork themselves, not to mention avoid bathroom and water breaks, simply to reach a high “score”. This new media exploitation plays on the fact that the new generation grew up playing computer games aiming for a high score; they are introducing this game play state of mind in their work space simply to accelerate their working efficiency, perhaps to dangerous levels.

  Fuchs, Christian, 2013, Social media: a critical introduction, Chapter 5: The Power and Political Economy of Social Media", Sage Publications, London

Rawlinson, Kevin. 2013. “Tesco accused of using electronic armbands to monitor its staff.” The Independent, March 13. Accessed March 19, 2014.

  Suddath, Claire. 2013. “Tesco monitors employees with Motorola armbands.” Bloomberg Business Week, March 13. Accessed March 19, 2014.

[ayladolankcb206]

The two-step-flow: Anna Wintour vs Garance Dore...

The two-step-flow, as mentioned in the lecture, involves "audience members with the most power" diffusing content distributed by media producers to the wider public. This "flow" allows for an empowered audience that is very present in fashion related new media today.

  This real world example of the two-step-flow is relevant to me personally as my degree is a major in fashion and I also work within the bridal sector of the fashion industry. A lot of my role as social media coordinator involves sourcing content from websites or blogs to then repost and share with our social media audience. I mainly favour bloggers such as This is Glamorous and Drop Dead Gorgeous Daily as they have a lot of fashion and beauty content that can easily be tailored and reposted to appeal to my bridal audience. As this two-step-flow assists with my job on a daily basis, I do believe that the internet 2.0 users are an empowered audience as the sources, images and opinions are never ending and can be picked and mixed to portray whatever view point you want. So, I do believe that the two-step-flow is still very relevant today.

 For instance, sites such as Vogue or Style.com delivers photographs from the runway or front row at fashion week but the real commentary and conversation comes when blogs such as Oracle Fox repost the same imagery with their opinion on designs of the season or how to put together an outfit inspired by one of the celebrities that sat front row. As Lessig states, "the hybrid is a commercial entity that aims to leverage value from a sharing economy".

  As discussed in the lecture, 21st century technologies provide affordances that enable the distribution and reappropriation of content; so sites such as Vogue.com do benefit from having their photographs redistributed and credited by successful bloggers, whom have such a strong monopoly on the industry at the moment. As Nightingale states, having it's too down hierarchies "coexisting with a diverse network of platforms, offering grassroots participation".

  This empowered audiences ability to contribute freely and publicly means that often new media may be created with flawed content that therefore invites comment and reworking.

This is an important part of the new media creation process and the cycle of curation - conversation - circulation and recontextulisation. Without this participatory audience, fashion bloggers would be mostly self editing and posting opinions without knowing how the wider audience perceives their work.

  Berners-Lee hoped in 1999, "we ought to be able not only to find any kind of document on the web, but also to create any kind of document easily". This vision is now a reality as any individual with Internet access can create "any kind of document easily", and this dream is certainly now a reality.

  Berners-Lee, Tim. 1999. Weaving the World Wide Web. London: Orion Business Books

Lessig, Lawrence. 2008. “Chapter 7: Hybrid Economies” In Remix: Making Art and Culture Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, 177-224. New York, NY: Penguin

Nightingale, Virginia, 2011, Chapter 5: Spreadable Media: how audiences create value and meaning in a networked economy, p.109-127

[ayladolankcb206]

Blog Post #1 - 16/3/2014

The lecture content in week two discussed the role that media now plays in self shaping and everyday life. For instance, individuals now shape their identities increasingly within public media platforms. The lecture also addressed how popular media outlets are challenging conventional notions of privacy. These points of interest and very true of 21st century society and will without a doubt continue to gain momentum in the coming years as new social media platforms are introduced and our new generations get to an age of media participation: the children of today that grew up playing on iPads will surely outdo even Gen Y in terms of social media obsession!

As Deuze states, it is indeed accurate that society today offers individuals "a life lived in rather than with media" (Deuze, 2011; p.137). This is to say, social medias are now utilised so pedantically and automatically throughout daily life that it is indeed "lived in". I believe this view point to be accurate of the younger generations. Personally, I post photographs throughout the day to instagram without thinking. Anything from what I had for lunch to what outfit I wore; the quote "we can in fact see ourselves live" (Deuze, 2011; p.149) rings very true as most people of my generation, and the new generation, can look back at day by day details of their lives via online media.

The week two lecture discussed how individuals shape and reinvent themselves publicly in media; ones image is never fixed. Media users get gratification of their new looks or style choices via online communication. Taddicken and Jers refer to this gratification process as needing to be weighed up against personal privacy, which I believe to be a very valid and relevant point to be made. Increasingly females particularly are risking their personal privacy to a great degree as they are posting what we all now refer to as "selfies". This media practice "challenges traditional notions of privacy" (Raynes-Goldie, 2010) further as many individuals post overly revealing or NSFW (not safe for work) images of themselves: receiving instant online communication and gratification as a result and of course motivation. These sorts of aspects of media raises the question: "can we live ethically with and through media?" (Deuze, 2011; p.140). Certainly media is testing society's privacy ideals more than ever before. However, as the lecture states, technologies do not dictate how we act and interact, therefore it is fair to summarise that how media affects personal privacy is in the hands of the user. So, every one think twice about what you post on social media platforms... you never really know who will see it and just how public you are making your daily life. Keeping some mystery about your life and self is never a bad thing! "Have more than you show, speak less than you know" - William Shakespeare. Deuze, Mark. 2011. “Media life”, journal of Media, Culture & Society 33(1): 137- 148 Raynes-Goldie, Kate. 2010. “Aliases, Creeping, and Wall Cleaning: Understanding Privacy in the Age of Facebook.” Taddicken, Monika. and Jers, Cornelia. 2011. “The Uses of Privacy Online: Trading a Loss of Privacy for Social Web Gratifications?” in Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web edited by Sabine Trepte and Leonard Reinecke, 143-157