De kans is groot dat je in het afgelopen jaar wel eens in aanmerking bent gekomen met het fenomeen dat misschien wel zal uitgeroepen worden tot het woord van 2016 in de communicatiewereld. Na het onderzoek Digimeter 2015 liet Lieven De Marez, professor innovatie-onderzoek aan de UGent, het begrip “digibesitas” vallen. Wat houdt dit precies in?
Even een berichtje sturen via WhatsApp, een serie bekijken op Netflex en ondertussen nog even bellen via Skype, herken je je hierin? Deze nieuwe trends hebben vandaag hun vaste plaats opgeëist naast de traditionele media. Bovenop de vele sms’jes die we sturen, zijn we nu ook 24 uur op 24 bereikbaar via Whatsapp. Voor het eerst komen de mensen in tijdsnood omdat ze dagelijks zowel oude als nieuwe media combineren. Vooral de generatie tussen twintig en dertig jaar oud is van dit fenomeen het slachtoffer. Ze zijn opgegroeid met een waaier aan communicatiemiddelen. Als student hadden ze hier tijd voor maar eenmaal in het actieve beroepsleven kunnen ze die levensstijl niet meer verderzetten door tijdsgebrek.
Velen leggen zichzelf regels op om op een positieve manier om te gaan met deze nieuwe realiteit. Zo legt een groot aantal reeds zijn smartphone op de achterbank van de wagen om geconcentreerd te blijven op de baan. Anderen verplichten hun kinderen om de gsm voor het slapengaan af te geven. Beïnvloeden de nieuwe media ook jouw leven en hoe ga je ermee om?
VRT SANDBOX: HELPING JOURNALISTS TO FRAME OUR WORLD
MAY 2016
VRT Sandbox is an international collaboration between VRT, EBU and iMinds, where innovative companies and startups get a chance to implement their technology in the VRT ecosystem. Sandbox is currently working with Eeyou, a startup that wants to build a platform for premium VR content from Europe.
We spoke to VRT’s Fredo De Smet.
Let’s start with the “big” question. Is VR the next frontier of journalism?
Journalism is challenged with many frontiers. VR is one of them.
Mostly because VR is a new paradigm in media. We take the consumer beyond the traditional video frame to an immersive experience.
Ironically this frame-killing-medium can help us to frame our world. Journalism has an important role in the framing of our world, so I believe we’ll see interesting things in VR and Journalism.
How feasible is VR technically, cost-wise and ethically?
At the moment we have a long way to go, both technically and cost-wise. At this point we need too much time and data for the post production.
At the same time we are using semi-professional cameras, while 5G servers are too big and too rare. So at this point we are in constant beta and the data is too heavy.
However, I believe that these challenges will be tackled soon by the big corporate companies.
What are the pros and cons of immersive experiences when it comes to news?
Storytelling in VR is a big challenge. We cannot copy the traditional storytelling techniques we have been using in film or television.
The framing is done by the spectator, not the director. You can have the feeling you are at a different time or place.
That is both a pro and a con. Pro because it opens up perspective to new experiences, con because we still need context and framing of the situation/story.
When does it get too much?
This is different from person to person. More and more I see people around me for whom traditional news is too much.
What is the toughest challenge and what do you have to be conscious about?
Obviously there are some technical issues you have to accept.
How to direct a recording without being in the image? How to use sound as an extra layer of story and data, which is a very important aspect?
Or how does the place where you are shooting look like.
But in my experience, the biggest challenge while shooting VR videos is how you as a director relate to the story/subject. Are you showing, telling or interpreting reality?
What could this mean when it comes to telling very charged human stories, like the refugees and migration crisis?
This is a good question. In situations like this you need to find a good balance between showing the place or situation (immersive) and telling the story (journalism).
When found, this can lead to a great VR experience that will leave a big impression on the spectator.
While we continue to wait for the “killer app” that heralds breakthrough how do you see VR developing over the coming months?
I have been researching this and it is indeed true that ‘the killer app’ is an important step broadcasters are struggling with. That is why VRT Sandbox is collaborating with Eeyou, a startup that wants to build a platform for premium VR content from Europe.
Regarding the headsets, you have to see this on a larger scale. The HDM are indeed a weird and rare way to look at videos.
But investing time in VR storytelling will help broadcasters to anticipate new technologies with similar challenges such as augmented or mixed reality.
What are you currently working on?
This month we are releasing a new and beautiful VR story consisting of two videos shot in Syria. Good thing about this production is that the script and recording has been done by a journalist who was trained by a VR production company we have been working with over the past year. This is the first video where the creative process was controlled by a journalist and I am proud to say you can tell the difference.
Last week, iMinds-CUO was strongly present at the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children at Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts. The IDC conference’s mission is to bring together researchers, designers and educators to explore new forms of technology, design and engaged learning among children. IDC offers a wide-ranging program, supporting and facilitating the exchange of ideas within and between all of these communities. The theme for this year was Empowering Children to Create. Two iMinds-CUO submissions were accepted for the competitive papers track, which has an acceptance rate of 23%. Furthermore, one short paper in the form of a poster and two workshop contributions were presented. Here is the full list of accepted papers, short papers and workshop contributions from iMinds-CUO.
Before the actual conference, iMinds-CUO colleague Marije Nouwen and I presented our work at a workshop hosted by UX researchers at Google. The workshop was about balancing the needs of children and adults in the design of technology for children. Marije presented her contribution Exploring Stakeholder Requirements for Parental Mediation Software (co-author: Bieke Zaman) and I talked about Child Empowerment by Design to increase transparency and child-friendliness in the Terms of Use of websites for children (co-authors: Veronica Donoso, Valerie Verdoodt, Karin Slegers). On the first conference day, I furthermore presented the paper Challenging Group Dynamics in Participatory Design with Children: Lessons from Social Interdependence Theory (co-authors: Ann Laenen, Bieke Zaman, Vero Vanden Abeele). This paper explores whether Social Interdependence Theory (SIT) is a useful theoretical framework to anticipate on challenging intragroup dynamics in co-design with children. The study is part of my ongoing PhD research and describes a case study conducted within the IWT project EMSOC.
On the second day, iMinds-SMIT researcher Lizzy Bleumers presented the paper Sensitivity to Parental Play Beliefs and Mediation in Young Children’s Hybrid Play Activities (co-authors: Karen Mouws, Jonathan Huyghe, Maarten Van Mechelen, Ilse Mariën, Bieke Zaman). The paper describes parental beliefs and mediation practices regarding children’s facilitated play in hybrid (mixed digital/physical) environments and how they can be taken into account through design. This study is part of the ongoing iMinds project WOOPI. During the poster session later that day, Marije presented the short paper A Value Sensitive Design Approach to Parental Software for Young Children (co-authors: Maarten Van Mechelen, Bieke Zaman). This paper presents an explorative inquiry into stakeholder values related to parental software for young children, using a Value Sensitive Design approach. The study was part of the iMinds project Ragasi.
In general, reactions were very positive and especially the reflective stance in all three papers was much appreciated by the audience. Some reactions on Twitter:
The University of Central Lancaster will organize next year’s IDC in Manchester: www.idc2016.org. The 15th edition of the conference will be chaired by Janet Read and Dan Fitton from the Child Computer Interaction Group (ChiCI). Until that time, IDC 2015 Proceedings papers are available free at the ACM Digital Library.
Will it be possible to measure and predict Reader Engagement?
Twipe is proud to be one of the leading industry partners in a major research effort partly funded by the Institute of Science and Technology of Flanders. Together with Mediahuis, Online Focus and 2 research groups of KU Leuven and iMinds Media we have launched the EngageReaders project.
The EngageReaders project investigates the extent to which readers show involvement with a digital newspaper…
Sven Marievoet, a partner at Adhese talked today about the collaborative Belgian project iMinds but made the telling point as well that collaboration can and should have its limits.
“We specialise in visitor matching so when visitors arrive at a site we know them already, we match them and evaluate
for both suitable content and ads. We do that for billions of impressions per month for government and retail stores as well as publishers. We did a project for iMinds and work with the usual suspects like Rubicon, Google, and so on. What we find works is that we let them have some of our data, but we always ask for data back from them in return. Plus we design access so that if one day we don't like Google or Rubicon any more then we can shut that part of the system down. It is the best way to work as a publisher.”
