#chloesormaz

[kcb206group4]

#data #twitter

Stephen Harrignton states “A significant amount of attention in the media industry over the last decade has been directed towards the idea of 'convergence’” (237, 2013). If the past 10 weeks have taught us anything, it’s that we are living in an era of convergence. No longer do we stick to a structured set time of viewing a TV show. Now we can access television shows at any convenient time and on whatever device we choose. With this idea of convergence comes the ubiquitous new media site, Twitter. It is, arguably, the most influential social networking site. Several TV shows targets audiences persuading them to tweet along while watching the episode. They set up and use specific hashtags and even go so far as to get the cast from the show to tweet along during the episode. Twitter is a valuable tool to get information from a wide range of people and audiences.  It is best to analyse the different levels within Twitter to get a better understanding of how this information, or data, can be best used.

Axel Bruns and Hallvard Moe state that there are “three key layers of communication on Twitter: the micro level of interpersonal communication, the meso level of follower-followee networks, and the macro level of hashtag-based exchanges” (16, 2013). This macro level of hashtag-based exchanges are what most TV shows rely on for engaging audiences. Axel Bruns and Hallvard Moe also suggest “The communicative flows which result from the establishment of active hashtag exchanges, at least in the short term, are usually less predictable than those enabled by follower-followee networks-but they are also amongst the most visible phenomena on Twitter, and most accessible to research” (18, 2013). Research is essential to collecting big data on audiences to enable websites and different media to specifically and accurately target audiences with new content. This data is not only used to target audiences but to also predict new trends. Eric Siegel suggests “Learning from data to predict is only the first step. To take the next step and act on predictions is to fearlessly gamble” (15, 2013).

This is an interesting quote because it can accurately explain how not every bit of data can be spot on. Essentially every click, every sent message, every searched item is a piece of information that create big data that can be analysed. Eric Siegel states “as data piles up, we have ourselves a genuine gold rush. But data isn't the gold. I repeat, data in its raw form is boring crud. The gold is what's discovered therein” (4, 2013). So from every single traceable movement everyone makes there is critically important information hidden within. The best part for data analysts is that Hashtags on Twitter, which are constantly growing, can make getting data and information easier and even produce more accurate results, even if they can be a little less predictable. 

Harrington, Stephen. 2013. “Ch 18 Tweeting about the Telly: Live TV, Audiences, and Social Media.” In Twitter and Society edited by Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt & Cornelius Puschmann, 237-248. New York, NY: Peter Lang

Siegel, Eric. 2013. “Introduction – The Prediction Effect.” In Predictive Analytics, 1-16. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 

[kcb206group4]

New Media Communication - #language

Image sourced from: http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1351634264368_7495046.png

Language is an important part of society and social interaction. When it comes to the Internet and the social practices connected with it, language can be an interesting and sometimes confusing component of communicating. The way in which we all use language to express our emotion through new media has changed even since I was in high school. Using MSN messenger to chat to my friends wasn’t always easy. For instance, a simple reply like “okay” can have so many different meanings or connotations.  Especially with somewhat over-sensitive teenagers, analysing everything that people say to them. If you imagine how many different ways you can say “okay”, it becomes clear that tone, affliction and intonation are important when understanding meaning of language. I feel that as a new media society we have developed and pushed the boundaries of how to convey meaning. With the use of hashtags and exaggerated spelling of words, as well as emoticons or emoji, being able to understand the tone of what is being expressed has become clearer. This development has been guided by particular groups of people online or particular types of new media that promote a certain discourse. As Baym states “mediated groups develop strong communicative norms that guide behavior” (56, 2010). It’s these social ‘norms’ that create the new language we all learn to use. The flip side to all of this is that you can easily pretend to convey a certain emotion without having to show your true feelings. For example if you had ill feelings towards a co-worker or friend, you could hide it easily by simply adding a colon followed by an end bracket to the end of any sentence, :)

interestingly enough, some comedy can be expressed well over the Internet, or through text, and is usually a cleverly worded joke. But sarcasm is a comedic style that is very hard to convey.

  Image sourced from: http://www.quickmeme.com/img/71/719d41266c1aa4fdd10eeb839be1fd3a45f648c147bf66612593d3e7bb131cd9.jpg

  The interesting point is whether the idea of language becoming lost in this new media age is accurate or not. Baron asks, “Is the sheer fact that we are replacing so much of our spoken interaction with written exchanges gradually eroding a public sense that the quality of our writing matters?” (6, 2008). I find this to be a really relevant and valid question to ponder. There is so much written work out there that is basically trash, in plain view or hidden in the abyss that we call the Internet. When there is so much room for you to write or express anything you want, without (in most cases) censorship, there is guaranteed to be worthless material created. While everyone has the ability to write, not everyone is a writer. However I personally feel that new media doesn’t mean a lack of spoken interaction, or that the written word has changed in quality. I feel like people know when something is written badly and will often call them up on it. Embarrassing people on their incorrect spelling or grammatical errors.

Image sourced from: http://cdn.themetapicture.com/media/funny-spelling-grammar-mistake-Facebook.jpg

I don't feel like new media has either greatly enhanced or impoverished our writing or communication skills. A change in technology does not mean a change of a person’s ability to write or create intelligent, clever, funny or thought provoking material. 

References:

Baron, Naomi. 2008. “Ch 1: Email to Your Brain: Language in an Online and Mobile World.” In Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World, 3-10. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Baym, Nancy. 2010. “Ch 3: Communication in Digital Spaces.” In Personal Connections in the Digital Age, 50-70. Cambridge MA: Polity Press

[kcb206group4]

Audiences and Spreadability

The way in which we access and distribute information and personal thoughts has changed dramatically over the years. People can now access new media at any convenient time and through almost any device they so choose. We live in a time where audiences decide when and how to watch something as well as deciding on the content. As Jay Rosen from PressThink blog stated on june 27th 2006, ”We graduate from wanting media when we want it, to wanting it without the filler, to wanting media to be way better than it is, to publishing and broadcasting ourselves when it meets a need or sounds like fun”. This idea of audience engagement in content is part of the theory of ‘spreadability’. Green and Jenkins state:

“Spreadability represents an alternative to now widely deployed metaphors which describe how audiences engage with content. Some, like viral media or memes, also seek to explain how media circulates…Spreadability stresses the technical affordances that make it easier to circulate some kinds of media content than others, the social networks that link people together through the exchange of meaningful bytes, and the diverse motives that drive people to share media.” (111-112, 2011). 

The interesting part of spreadability is the notion that some kinds of media are ‘easier’ to share. For example memes can be made so easily, are created and re-created, and shared across social media platforms constantly. Alice Warwick wrote on her blog 'Memes', (n.d.) “Memes are the closest thing to a native cultural form the Internet has, and, as such, they demonstrate the sprawling variety of the medium”. They spread from the bottom up, with 'imperfect' memes generating spark for better versions of the original. Content like this, and many others, tends to spread rapidly, “trending” through social media and going viral. 

Another example of this kind of quick spreading content are youtube videos. Whether it be a person with a sensation voice, or a kitten sneezing, these videos are created and shared in the same way as memes. Particular new media platforms, such as the app Vine, are a great example of spreadability. The six second videos are, usually, made by amateurs and can be seen by millions using the app, but audiences go above and beyond by making compilation youtube videos of “best vines”.

Audiences are not simply the consumers or producers, they go in between the two and re-contextualise to create new meaning. A photo of a subject with a juxtaposed text can re-contextualise the background image. It is intriguing and exciting to think that audiences can produce, consume and re-contextualise content. Even something as simple as a picture with words on it can have an impact on users. It can inspire them, make them analyse a topic or simply have a laugh. 

Image sourced from: http://www.usrepresented.com/2013/10/24/memes/

Bibliography:

Green, Joshua and Henry Jenkins. 2011. “Spreadable Media. How Audiences Create Value and Meaning in a Networked Economy.” In The Handbook of Media Audiences edited by Virginia Nightingale, 109-127. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell

Rosen, Jay. 2006. “The People Formerly Known as the Audience” PressThink: Ghost of Democracy in the Media Machine, June 27.(short blog post). Avaliable at:http://archive.pressthink.org/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr.html

Marwick, Alice. 2013. “Memes.” Contexts12(4): 12-13/ Available at: http://contexts.org/articles/fall-2013/memes/

[kcb206group4]

New Media- Society and Identity

“In today’s society, access to information is a key element of status and power and communication is instant, ubiquitous and mobile.” Donath and Boyd (71, 2004). Everything you have ever wanted to know can be found almost instantly on the internet. However over the years the internet has become a place where people can go to express, and even define themselves in ways that are constantly evolving. Not only can people make a blog or create a website to write in, but now they can instantly share and show anything about their life. This is made possible by the use of social media outlets like Facebook, Myspace, Instagram and Tumblr. As time goes on there is an increasing immersion of this new media by the general public. As Dueze states “Multi-tasking our media has become a regular feature of everyday life” (137, 2011). People are not only using one but multiple social media apps and websites.

However with this immersion of new media into everyday life, there comes the question of identity and privacy. Both seem to work hand-in-hand; the more you open up about yourself and express your identity, the more that information can be seen by others and, sometimes, used against you. Dueze suggests “…we have to recognize how the uses and appropriations of media penetrate all aspects of contemporary life” (137, 2011). It is important to recognise how new media exists in our lives, accept and acknowledge its importance socially, while remembering to analyse what information we share about ourselves or others. Papacharissi and Gibson suggest “In order to stay social, but also manage private and public information fluently, individuals must make critical decisions about how to share information in networked environments that thrive on sharing” (76, 2011). This can be difficult when most social media outlets are based on “sharing as a default and privacy as afterthought” (Papacharissi and Gibson 78, 2011).

The best part about new media is that it gives each person a feeling of identifying themselves, of having a voice. Papacharissi and Gibson suggest “Identity is something unique to the individual, yet constructing an identity does not take place in isolation nor is it a solitary activity” (80, 2011). Our identities are shaped and constantly reshaped by many external elements, such as personal experiences, technologies and society. In this way we can have many different versions of our ‘self’ that are appropriate in different situations. Our online 'self' is important to curate as it can be a crucial part of everyday life, whether it be at University, for work or socially. The idea of these new media's is to enjoy being online and sharing, and while it is essential to remember that your online communications/information are never truly 'private', it shouldn't stop people from being immersed.

Bibliography Deuze, Mark. 2011 “Media Life.” Media, Culture & Society 33 (1): 137-148.

Donath, Judith and danah boyd. 2004. “Public Displays of Connection.” BT Technology Journal 22 (4): 71-82

Papacharissi, Zizi and Paige L. Gibson. 2011. “15 minutes of Privacy: Privacy, Sociality, and Publicity on Social Network Sites.” In Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web, edited by Sabine Trepte and Leonard Reinecke, 75-89. Heidelberg and New York: Springer.

Chloe Sormaz

n8296731