#n9173676

[qutkcb2062014tutorialgroup8]

New media, Big Data and Telemetrics (WK9 content)

Prior to exploring week nine’s topic I asked myself the question; ‘what even is big data?’ Well, Siegel (2013) suggests that “...data embodies a priceless collection of experience from which to learn” which evidences this type of new media is a lot more relevant than I had initially expected.

When properly analysed, data has the ability to unveil people’s motivations for the decisions they make, highly beneficial knowledge for organizations around the globe. Using the metaphor of a gold rush, Seigel (2013) continues with the notion that through this massive influx of data we are able to discover gold - the facts behind the data. He explains that it is from this data that predictions are made possible.

“Predictions drive how organizations treat and serve an individual, across the operations that define a functional society” (Seigel 2013).

Television programs are one of many organizations that implement this concept of analysing data in order to further their success. Through social media, television audiences may experience new channels of “mass conversation” (Spurgeon in Harrington 2013). Harrington (2013) discusses the manner in which “the television industry has responded to these developments be seeking out new ways of engaging in, and promoting, this conversation.” This concept of convergence between new media and these organizations has ultimately enabled the opening of doors between television programs and a seemingly limitless supply of technological resources. Twitter’s hashtags in particular, act as a means of collating data enabling the television industry to experience tremendous growth.

The power of #hashtags

Since the conceptualization of audiences as ‘active’ in this new technological society, “television has been well understood as a medium that readily catalyses audience discussion, interaction, fandom and other social activity” (Harrington 2013, 244).  In his lecture, Darryl Woodford (2014) discussed hashtags as a way of coordinating discussion around a topic in a relatively easy way to capture and analyse. It is discussed that twitter opens the lines of communication between users in real time through a collective conversation about their chosen television programs describing the platform as a “second screen” audiences can experience in their “virtual loungeroom” (Harrington 2013, 240-241).

“Television can be enhanced when experienced alongside others” (Harrington 2013).

A recent study suggested over 60% of people now use social media while watching television (Ericsson in Harrington 2013, 240). The popularity of this platform has been identified by television networks/programs that recognise this growing trend as an opportunity for success attracting audiences through hashtags and incorporating tweets into television (Harrington 2013, 242). Television program ‘The Voice Australia’ frequently utilises twitter to attract popularity to the show with live tweets constantly posted to audiences at home while further displaying their tweets on the bottom of our television screens tracked by the hashtag #TheVoiceAU which is frequently trending on Twitter. Harrington (2013) identifies this type of response to social media by networks as a “return channel” which both ignites discussion on twitter and attracts more people to the conversation.

See the voice’s twitter here: https://twitter.com/TheVoiceAU

I feel that Jones (Harrington 2013) really specifies the power of new media for television as he suggests; “Television networks can no longer assume that the production of quality content will be a distinguishing or determining factor in what programming audiences choose…they must deliberately craft intensive relationships with viewers, and formulate connections that will encourage routine and repeated viewing.”

Harrington (2013, 244) further discusses that in order to understand the meaning-making activities audiences participate in, as well as the way in which television is experienced; observations by television stations/programs are essential. These observations are conducted via platforms like twitter, which present a phenomenal prospect; the ability to collect and analyse a great quantity of data at minimal cost or effort instantaneously. This provides insight into the thoughts, feelings, emotions and opinions of a specific targeted audience which is then able to be analysed by television programs and stations to make appropriate and relevant decisions (Harrington 2013, 247).

REFERENCES

Harrington, Stephen. 2013. “Ch 18 Tweeting about the Telly: Live TV, Audiences, and Social Media.” In Twitter and Society. 237-248. Accessed May 11, 2014.

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

Woodford, Darryl. 2014. “KCB206 Internet, Self and Beyond: Week 9 lecture notes.” Accessed May 8, 2014. http://www.dpwoodford.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/KCB206-Big-Data-Lecture_Small.pdf

[qutkcb2062014tutorialgroup8]

New Media Empowering or Impoverishing? - Lexy Haggard (week 9)

Politics for me is definitely not something I generally take interest in, although, after exploring week eight’s content I must say I’m intrigued. The realisation of the massive role new media plays in our social and political world is astonishing!

  It was discussed that power relationships make up society (Sauter 2014) which is prevalent on not only large scale relationships like that between a society and its political leaders, but also on a smaller scale such as that between us as QUT students and our tutors, unit coordinators and faculty staff. These power relationships depend on a leader or person in charge and a body of INVOLVED people. Similarly, the electronic tools of new media enabled the revival of people’s loss of interest in politics with the opportunity to become more involved (Sauter 2014).

The role of new media in our political sphere as a tool for the people, allowed a more mobile and active participation in politics which assisted with instigating social and political movements. This counter-power resistance facilitated by new networked communication structures (social media platforms facebook, twitter, etc.) ultimately gave rise to a uniting of the people over common interests and beliefs who henceforth, experienced an increased sense of community. It is these feelings of support that leads to the overcoming of one’s fears, resulting in action by the people who feel a sense of safety in numbers (Sauter 2014).

“As the communications landscape gets denser, more complex, and more participatory, the networked population is gaining greater access to information, more opportunities to engage in public speech, and an enhanced ability to undertake collective action. In the political arena ... these increased freedoms can help loosely coordinated publics demand change” (Shirky 2011).

These opportunities to engage and become active participants are rarely ignored in our modern technologically developed and dependent society. Gladwell (2010) highlights the manner in which social media has “reinvented social activism” as social media platforms including Facebook and Twitter enable those once powerless, to unite through time and space with a common purpose. He further draws our attention to what was later dubbed ‘the Twitter Revolution,’ the 2009 Moldova protests in which ten thousand people stood up against their communist government in protest. Those involved in this movement were brought together through the Twitter hashtag #PMAN; Piata Marii Audanari Nationale. Translatable as ‘Great National Revolution Square’ this twitter hashtag drew the people of Moldova to the gathering place in which the protests were conducted. This example highlights change.org’s argument that new media technologies are providing “the power to connect with more people and make more change” (Sauter 2014).

See more here: https://www.change.org/en-AU/guides

Gladwell (2010) argues that historically significant social and political changes once occurred without new media, and that among these technologies constant involvement within our society, “we seem to have forgotten what activism is.” While this point is a valid one, Shirky suggests an alternate way to consider social media; “as long-term tools that can strengthen civil society and the public sphere.” Taking what is described as “the environmental view” Shirky’s (2011) stance assumes that political change will more easily occur with the dissemination and adoption of concepts within the public sphere arguing that “social media is not a replacement for real-world action but a way to coordinate it.”

Evidently, new media can be identified as a tool that is both empowering and impoverishing politics within our society as oppose to simply one or the other.

REFERENCES:

Gladwell, Malcom. 2010. “Small Change: Why the Revolution will not be Tweeted.” The New Yorker, October 4. Accessed May 4, 2014. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all

Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “KCB206 Internet, Self and Beyond: week 8 lecture notes” Accessed May 4, 2014. http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_4_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fcontent%2FlistContent.jsp%3Fcourse_id%3D_108110_1%26content_id%3D_5232450_1

Shirky, Clay. 2011 “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change.” In Foreign Affairs 90:1. Accessed May 4, 2014. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67038/clay-shirky/the-political-power-of-social-media