enhop

[enhop]

Producers and Consumers Merge and Markets and Tools Converge. (Sauter, T. 2013)

"What happens when a large number of people make active decisions to pass along an image, song, or bit of video that has taken their fancy to various friends, family members, or larger social networks? Increasingly, all of us - media "producers" and consumers alike - are also media appraisers and distributors." (Green, J & Jenkins, H. 2011)

See, although I am not a regular viewer of the TV show Parks and Recreation, I often come across snippets of the series on my Facebook and Twitter news feeds.  These snippets are usually links to Youtube, where the video is embedded within the new media and ready to play.  If I enjoy the clip I will 'actively' make a decision to either 'Like' or 'Comment' on YouTube, 'Re-tweet' on Twitter or 'Like,Share or Comment' on Facebook.  I could also post the video on a blog of my own..... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP7ebyqBn_M

See I believe the above video is relevant to last weeks privacy discussions and a subject Theresa touched on in this weeks lecture concerning disadvantages of Web 2.0 and the fact that algorithms are taking over (Sauter, T. 2013). 

But my point is that by me 'Liking, Sharing, Retweeting or Commenting on' the above video, makes me a media consumer, appraiser and/or distributor.  I become a perfect example of Green & Jenkins theory of 'Spreadability' (Green, J & Jenkins, H 2011), as are the people who originally shared this with me, or at least brought it to my attention through some form of 'New Media'.  

The reason I actively seek to perform these additional actions while consuming media could be put down to the fact that I feel like I am part of a community, or that I am contributing to/or collaborating with, a community space (Lessig, L. 2008).  On this occasion contributing to a Tumblr group dedicated to discussions regarding 'New Media'.  These communities or spaces attract consumers and producers, like myself, and they are what Lawrence refers to as a "Hybrid Economy" where the sites are run with the understanding of both monetary and sharing economic value (Lessig, L. 2008)

(Montage taken from www.disney.com.au, www.warnerbros.com.au, www.abc.net.au/triplej/ & www.jump-in.com.au/show/theblock/fans-v-faves/)

Modern businesses (like those pictured above), especially those within the field of Media, in my belief will have to conform eventually to the idea of 'Hybrid Economy' (Lessig, L. 2008) through their online practices and will have to harness the notion of 'Spreadability' (Green, J & Jenkins, H 2011), as it can be a powerful tools to get the edge on competitors.

Both the Lawrence Lessig reading and this weeks lecture, discussed that there are those 'for' the emergence of Web 2.0 and those 'against' it.  Some who believe with it comes empowerment and those who believe that media audiences becomes disadvantaged.  Those in favour see this as a "redistribution of power" as well as an "emancipation of audiences" (Sauter, T. 2013).  Those against tend to see the users free contributions as a form of "exploitation" by the media companies, as well as an "explosion of content" (Sauter, T. 2013). 

I personally feel empower by the fact that I can post a video of my choosing, within this blog/community, without feeling exploited by the Media companies who just got free advertising for their show (Parks and Recreation) or product (YouTube).  In my eyes by me sharing this video, all parties involved are receiving some form of value.

References

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. Accessed March 23, 2013  (CMD) http://blackboard.qut.edu.au

Lessig, Lawrence. 2008. “Hybrid Economies” in Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, 177-224. Penguin: New York. Accessed March 23, 2014. (CMD) http://blackboard.qut.edu.au

Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “Week 3: Creating and Consuming New Media Content.” Accessed 21. March, 2014. 

[enhop]

Week 1 - Introduction: What are “New” Media and where did they come from?

As Dr Theresa Sauter points out at the beginning of the first lecture for the subject of Internet, Self and Beyond, "New Media aren't just technologies, they're a lot more" .  

So what I got from the Week One lecture and readings was, The Three C’s and the Four Perspectives. 

Staring with what  ‘New Media’ actually is I refer to Lievrouw and Livingstone’s 2005 definition that “new media is information and communications technologies and their associated contexts” (Flew, T. 2014). 

Web 2.0 plays a key part in what New Media is, and was analyzed thoroughly in the Terry Flew reading.  A key aspect of Web 2.0 according to Flew was its ability to harness collective intelligence, “allowing thousands upon thousands of individuals and small producers to co-create products, access markets, and delight customers in ways only large corporations could manage in the past (Flew, T. 2014).   Some other aspects of web 2.0 include, collection of inside data for predicting user behaviour, community development practices and lightweight business models. 

As discussed by Terry Flew, Barr’s (2000) Three C’s of Computing, Communication, and Content are what are converging to form 'New Media'.  These terms are used to steer  away the belief that ‘New Media’ is just new technologies, where in fact New Media is so much more, such as but not limited to, its ‘Practices’ and its ‘Social Arrangements or Institutions’.  Technologies themselves are also converging, where we are seeing what was one just a phone now operating as a camera, social network and mailbox, to name a few.   

So this now brings us to the four perspectives of ‘New Media’ and its effects.   

Now with the Internet being the “fastest growing communications medium ever” with and estimated 2.4billion users worldwide (Flew, T. 2014), it does not surprise me that people’s belief of how 'New Media' and 'Web 2.0' is affecting society, differs greatly from person to person.  The Nancy Baym reading was a good insight into how peoples perceptions of New Media differ, while going in-depth into four major perceptions, Technological Determinism, Social Construction of Technology, Social Shaping Perception and Domestication.

With ‘Technological Determinism’ revealing the widest range of information in her chapter, Baym points to this being mainly focused on “Humans having little power to resist new technologies” (Baym, N. 2010).  She goes on to discuss the Utopian (improved world) and Dystopian (worsened world) perspectives within this perception, by looking at Anonymity, Limited Social Cues and Social Isolation. 

http://www.jlomac.com/2012/12/11/final-essay/

Whereas ‘Social Construction of Technology’  or S.C.O.T, see’s humans as being the “primary sources of change in both technology and society” (Baym, N. 2010).

http://www.medicalfutureslab.org/2014/03/06/there-are-no-dumb-questions/

The final two perceptions are Social Shaping of Technology and Domestication of Technology, with the first being grouped in between our first 2 perceptions and suggesting that “consequences of technologies arise from a mix of affordances (Baym, N. 2010), and the latter showing that what was once a new and scary technology or new media is now part of the norm. 

http://jaime-jtrain.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/youve-got-mail.html

Therefore from the information provided to me in Week 1, I feel I can now confidently discuss what New Media is, how it is formed through the convergence of past and present elements and how the publics perception of its effects differ and why different people feel different ways. 

REFERENCES

Baym, Nancy K, Personal connections in the digital age, (pp.22 - 45). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Flew, Terry, New media, (pp.1 - 17). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. 

Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “KCB206 Internet, Self and Beyond: Week 1 Lecture Slides.” Accessed March 14, 2014.