COMMENT in response to Elyse's blog Newspaper vs Online

Elyse, I completely agree with what you have said. There is no denying that daily newspaper has declined over the past decades and with continual advancements in technology trends, it is suggested it will continue on this path. I don’t believe in its entirety however, that people are turning away form newspapers as a medium running directly to online sources. It’s vital we take into account that many people use these technologies in conjunction with each other.
It is interesting to note the relationship we share between ‘new’ and ‘old’ media. This relationship is “rarely linear, in either their patterns of use of their trajectories of development.” (Flew, 2005, XV). What the internet has done is presented varied ways of consumption. Many believe believed that television would bring the death of newspapers however, people continue to submerse themselves into the convergent world of technologies where they combine the media forms they have available. Terry Flew puts it quite aptly in his New Media book describing “ As convergence develops, the employment demand of new sand media outlets is increasingly for journalists who possess media multi-literacy’s and are able to develop stories in formats that include short online pieces, online video, television, broadcasts, edited stories, and longer feature articles” (Flew, 2005, p.88-89). The convergence of these new media technologies plays an important role in the continuing life of newspapers throughout society.

References:

Flew, T. 2005. New Media. 2nd edition. South Melbourne: Oxford.

COMMENT in response to Natalie's Blog

Comment in response to 'Television. Is it falling behind?'

Nat, your blog presented a great debate and pointed out many key problems that face the television as a medium, jeopardizing its place in society.
It is without question that the expansion of Web 2.0 has given television a ‘run for its money’. As you mentioned, and Bruns suggests, media preferences will edge towards interactivity, intercreativity and produsage (Bruns, 2008). This statement reigns true, especially today in our convergence driven world. To some extent I believe television has taken steps towards providing an interactive environment for its viewers. Emergence of cable and satellite television has in some way presented a platform in its interactivity with its audiences. Take for instance Foxtel IQ. Features allow you to stop, start, rewind and record live television. There also exists to a degree, an element of participation in the television which features specialist and nice channels in comparison to the free to air, stock-standard programs free to air presents. (Flew, 2005)However your blog effectively conveyed that theses changes to television though significant, “have not dramatically changed the experience of television to its viewers, since it remains a medium where someone other than the viewer determines the available menu of content and options at any given time.” (Flew, 2005. p. 2) As indicated in your blog television has no inbuilt opportunities where it can embrace new media technologies. Perhaps society is happy to keep the television as a medium which they passively consume? It is possible for it to survive. However, for television to encompass new media through its interactivity, intercreativity and produsage, the answer still lies with the prevailing option of distributing the television programs and films online. (Bruns, 2008)

References:

Bruns, A. 2008. Reconfiguring Television for a Networked, Produsage Context. http://snurb.info/files/Reconfiguring%20Television%20for%20a%20Networked,%20Produsage%20Context.pdf (Accessed May 2, 2008).

Flew, T. 2005. New Media. 2nd Ed. Oxford: Victoria.

COMMENT in response to Cassandra Brown's Blog

Comment in response to ' Nouveau Niche is the new black':

Cassie, I found your blogg a very interesting read pointing out many of the key elements which centralize the transition of society into a niche market. As you effectively point out in your blogg, it is evolution of the internet which makes these previously hard to reach paths so much more accessible. I myself, have first hand experience of this shift to the tailored market, through my evolving taste in music. Without the tools of the internet there is no way I would have the same interest in music as I do today. The way I have discovered most of favorite bands is through a process. I would hear songs through sites such as Myspace, enjoy the sound, and then looked further into their band for other songs as well as similar bands/artists. This online transparency prominent in the virtual world (Trendwatching, 2005) has exposed me to a new realm of artists and bands I had never heard of before, simply because they weren’t products of commercialization. I also agree strongly with the points you made about the markets tailoring to the individual needs of consumers. You effectively describe the shift throughout the markets, with even mass products subject to individualization. Ipods, Myspace sites, Nokia handsets and Mini Coopers all provide options to be customized and personalized. (Trendwatching, 2005) It is also interesting to note the point that Anderson makes in his article, The Long Tail, which discusses “many of our assumptions about popular taste are actually artifacts of poor supply-and- demand matching – a market response to inefficient distribution.”(2006) Now that we control what we can access through online sites, we are no longer products of mass distribution. We have the power.

Reference:
Anderson, C. 2004. The Long Tail. Wired. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html?pg=5&topic=tail&topic_set= (Accessed April 2, 2008)

Trendwatching. 2005. Nouveau Niche. http://www.trendwatching.com/trends/NOUVEAU_NICHE.htm (Accessed April 2, 2008)

The great debate: Online vs. Offline

Is there a need for daily newspapers in our dot.com age??

For decades daily newspapers have played a pivotal role in society. The coming of the twenty first century brought about many changes not only technologically, but also in the way in which we view the importance of daily newspapers in our lives. The online verus traditional distribution of news presents a debate which continues to infiltrate society. At present many believe that newspapers “are unimportant in the contemporary, highly diversified mass media world.” (Bonner, 2006: 193) Contrary to this, many still believe there is still relevance for daily newspapers despite living in an age of online and global media.

The birth of the World Wide Web emerged as one of the most significant technological developments which had capabilities of improving newspapers significantly. The web provides news many steps up from the traditional newspaper, providing not only text and graphics but also providing option of video, sound and linking capabilities. (Knight, 2000) These capabilities, offered by advancements in technology have redefined the way news is communicated. The explosion of the internet provides society with immediacy. People can access news and information when and where they want.

Bill Gates, the chairman of Microsoft Corporations once claimed that “the web will be as much a way if life as the car by 2008, probably before.” (Knight, 2000: 73) As we drift into mid 2008 this statement reigns true and extremely relevant to many. However, there are a significant proportion of Australians, and citizens of the world for that matter with whom this statement does not apply. Figures have suggested a decline in the popularity of daily newspapers; this reduction in numbers however, cannot completely justify their irrelevance in society today. Many of us fail to keep in mind issues such as the ‘digital divide’ which exists throughout Australia and the world.

Convergence has impacted the way we consume media. Today people are exposed to a smorgasbord of technologies compared to earlier years where newspapers provided a sole source of news and information available. So, while there appears to be a decrease in the significance of newspapers, it’s important we also take into account many people use these technologies in conjunction with each other. Today many newspaper companies have web sites which work in union with their newspapers. In my opinion technology has enabled audiences to explore more in-depth issues of interest whilst also providing avenues to access archived material. What online news sites do is work with previously established news sites and offer as an improvement, redefining ways in which news is communicated to them.

Overall research suggests that society has seen a significant decline in newspapers since their birth in the early 1800’s. So are newspapers the ageing medium? There relevance is certainly questioned as we continue to grow into a time poor society. The birth of the World Wide Wed has allowed news and information, through the touch of a button, to be accessed when and where people desire. Unlike Gates prediction – a proportion of society does not have access to technologies such as these. The digital divide means that many still rely on tradition media sources for their news and information. Needless to say, many who do have access to this technology continue to rely upon the traditional daily newspapers. It is evident that newspaper levels have reduced however, the newspaper continues to be an important and relevant medium in society relied upon by many. After all, as Dennis DuBois puts it, “Nothing beats the feel of paper in your hands.” (Macdigg, 2006)


Some interesting reads:

Newspaper vs. Online: Print Vs. Digital a conversation. http://www99.epinions.com/content_3321077892

Macdigg blog, Newspaper vs. online news. http://www.macdigg.com/blog/2006/11/newspaper-vs-online-news.html

References:

Bonner, F. (2006) “Magazines”, in Cunningham, S., and Turner, G (eds.) The Media and communications in Australia, Crows Nest: Allen and Unwin, pp. 193-208.

Knight, J., Steemers, J., and Weedon, A. (2000) “Convergence: The international Journal of Research into New Media Technologies,” Remediation and the Desire for Immediacy vol.6, pp62-72.

Knight, J., Steemers, J., and Weedon, A. (2000) “Convergence: The international Journal of Research into New Media Technologies,” A monkey looking at a watch: Cultural practices, Technology and understanding social process. vol.6, pp72-85.

Macdigg. 2006. Newspaper vs. Online news. Macdigg: technology related columns. http://www.macdigg.com/blog/2006/11/newspaper-vs-online-news.html (accessed May 5, 2008)

You've got h8 mail.

As I scour my daily newspaper, it seems we are bombarded with the articles about cyber bullying and online hoaxes. As Frances whiting, author of the article, 'You've got hate mail', so effectively puts it"Bullying has stepped out of the shadows of the playground. It's gone hi-tech and round -the- clock, forcing some kids to leave their school - and others to take far more drastic action."Several other claims have been made through various newspapers and magazines that the online environment, in particular social networking sites such as Myspace, Facebook and MSN are the culprits for a surging number of cyber bullying cases and suicides. So are these sites really the blame for bullying? It is a well known fact that bullies have been around forever. It’s the common tale that “as long as there have been sheds, there have been bullies to step out of the shadows behind them.” (Whiting, 2008) Technology has however given birth to a new breed of bullies. Nowadays, the bullying doesn’t stop when the leave the school gates. It follows you home encompassing victims as it filtrates their life 24 hours a day.
Dr Marilyn Campbell, Senior lecturer in psychology and Education at QUT describes the process well.

"Cyber bullying, or bullying through technology, can be done in myraid ways. Via email, by text messages, by enterering social networking sites such as MySpace, Facbook and Bebo, then setting up fake, mocking profiles and inviting others to join in. By accessing someone's site as a friend then sabotaging it from within. By taking and distributing images from mobile phones, by posting videos on YouTube, by impersonating someone online, by threatening a player in an interactive game room, by doctoring online images. It can be done by "blocking" targets from entering instant messaging applications such as MSN and not allowing them to join in the online conversation. It can be done in all theses ways and "any other way you can think of, it's being invented and re-invented all the time."(Dr Marilyn Campbell, 2008)

According to Campbell the 24-7 nature of the cyber bullying “will have fair more psychological damaging consequences” because of the nature of it. At present several offences to cyber bullying are listed in the Queensland criminal code. The severity of cyber-bullying at present is grossly underestimated by the majority of the population. At present several schools throughout Brisbane have been forced to implement anti-bullying policies. But how much of this can schools really monitor? What control is there against this potentially lethal form of online bullying? It is evident that schools have recognized the severity, through implementation of policies such as the anti-bullying one. Is this enough but? As the World Wide Web continues in infiltrate the social fabric of lives, the problem of cyber bullying continues to grow. I have merely brushed the surface of this topic as time permits me from fully exploring the depths of this issue. It is a problem and a large one at that which comes with the emergence of new media technologies. It is also a area that needs a lot of attention and fast. Before its too late.

Round one: Producer VS Consumer.

Before technological changes and advancements within society occurred, relationships between producers of media and their audiences were very different. The shift from the stereotypical couch potato, the audience now plays a role in determining what, when and how he consumes media. The audiences now have the option to play the role of the producer, consumer, distributor, media fan and critic. (Jenkins, 2002) Audiences play an involved, critically aware and discerning position in their relationship with the media. The rise of the participatory culture has presented a more level playing field between the media’s producer and the audience giving them more freedom and influence in the constructs of social and cultural ideologies present within media. Even with this newfound power of consumers the question still lies; do producers still have the upper hand in dictating the media?

New media technologies have had profound changes on the relationship between consumers and media producers. Adoption of these technologies means that “audiences are gaining greater power and autonomy as they enter into the new knowledge culture.” (Jenkins, 2002; p187) The interaction of new media and knowledge provides audiences with the tools and technology to store, alter, redistribute and interpret the media which surrounds them. The gap between consumers and producers has most definitely diminished over the years but is uncertain to what extent of power the producers really have over consumers.

Producers are using the new participatory culture in a way to essentially cater to their needs. “Producers are incorporating ideas, including social and cultural influences of viewers into their design process.” (Jenkins, 2002) An example can be taken from the producers of Xena: Warrior Princess, and their convergence with consumers.
“Producers … were fully aware that some fans wanted to read Xena and Gabrielle as lesbian lovers.” With the knowledge in mind thanks to the participatory culture producers began “to consciously weave ‘subtext’ into the episodes.” This example shows the impact consumers had on influencing the cultural and social connotations of the text; producing content which goes against traditional societal norms. If technological changes were not prominent producers may not be aware of what their consumers want and often wouldn’t dare challenge cultural and societal norms without the backup by their consumers for fear of possible backlash. This participation by the audience within the text depicts a change in the relationships of producers and consumers and the example above highlights the influence in cultural power that consumers now have.

The rise of new technologies has, without a doubt broken down traditional barriers between media consumption and media production.
There is no question that a changing relationship between consumers and producers, due to technological advancements, is taking place. However the extent to which the cultural and social power consumers have is questionable. It is clear that consumers to some extent have impacted the social and cultural norms within the media they consume. In the end the producer has the upper hand, ultimately implementing changes which will most viably serve them. The advances in technology have provided consumers with greater power, working towards creating a more level playing field between consumers and producers in the actual content they produce.

References:
Jenkins, H. 2002. Interactive Audiences. In The New Media Book, ed. D. Harries, 157-170. London: BFI Publishing.

Open source work

How is open source work ( as an example of community produsage) different from commercial production?

Leadbeater describes the process of open source work, as one where amaetures play a significant role in the creation of content. (2003) This open source movement " arises from non- commercial spaces, where people engage in activities for personal fulfillment or community involvement." ( Rennie, p43)The main difference that exists between the two is that open source work is baised on the collective intelligence of many non-professionals where as commerical production consists of a qualified team, limitied in numbers.


Open source software has a dominance in niche markets not widely catered to commercially. Large differences exist between open source and commerical production with commercial production often bound by a number of limitations. These limitiations usually involve the money and time that can be poured into these projects. On the other hand, open source work "sucess depends simply on the ability of projects to attract participants of sufficient expertise and enthusiasm. " (Bruns, 2008)

"Perhaps in the end the open-source culture will triumph not because cooperation is morally right or software 'hoarding is morally wrong... but simply because the commercial world cannot win an evolutionary arms race with open-source communities that can put orders of magnitude more skilled time into
a problem." (Raymond, In Flew. 2005)

References:

Raymond, E. 2005. In New Media, T. Flew, 2nd ed. South Melbourne: Oxford.

Rennie, E. 2005. Creative World. In Creative Industries, ed. J. Hartley, 42-54. Malden: Blackwell publishing ltd.