Don't Copy That 2
Thursday, October 22, 2009 by Sergio
It's very important that all you pirates see this.
It's the official sequel to this 90s gem for those not in the know.
It's the official sequel to this 90s gem for those not in the know.
Originality
Monday, October 19, 2009 by Maria
Thinking back on last weeks lecture, a thought struck my mind upon the idea of today's originality and how Prosumer participation impacts this originality. For example if you take a character from The Simpson's and a character from South Park and fuse the two into one storyline, (even if the storyline is your own original idea) the characters are not and always remain the ideas of someone else (e.g. Matt Groening - creator of The Simpsons). Therefore a Prosumer's work of such is never fully authentic seeing how they are often reluctant to borrow a part of the initial original in order to produce their own version of what has already been done.
Therefore, this might mean that rather than increasing the consumer's creativity, arguably for some this may be doing just the opposite. Originality becomes a lot more frail when it is reused on numerous occasions, limiting the chances for those using it to create something completely of there own. Originality may keep decreasing as fusions and parodies of a wide range of diverse work keep being made with the time and effort which could have gone into the creation of authentic personal production.
Moreover, a work of authenticity is a lot harder to create than that of a mere mashed-up reproduction. Therefore, seemingly to our advantage the creative process is made far easier for the Prosumer through its simplified chance to use parts which have already been provided for us. A picture colouring book serves as a good symbolic example for today's Prosumer society; the colouring book being the media, web etc, and the child being the Prosumer. Whilst the child learns how to colour in accordance to their own views of how the picture should or could look like, they are actually not developing their own imagination in terms of drawing their own picture seeing how it has already been provided for them.
Hence, what so kindly enables us to create a personalized version of someone else's work also limits our own creative process in truly making something of our own. Because we choose to lean on the work of other's, we ourselves become more creatively infantile as we let this work carry a large portion of our ideas.
Therefore, this might mean that rather than increasing the consumer's creativity, arguably for some this may be doing just the opposite. Originality becomes a lot more frail when it is reused on numerous occasions, limiting the chances for those using it to create something completely of there own. Originality may keep decreasing as fusions and parodies of a wide range of diverse work keep being made with the time and effort which could have gone into the creation of authentic personal production.
Moreover, a work of authenticity is a lot harder to create than that of a mere mashed-up reproduction. Therefore, seemingly to our advantage the creative process is made far easier for the Prosumer through its simplified chance to use parts which have already been provided for us. A picture colouring book serves as a good symbolic example for today's Prosumer society; the colouring book being the media, web etc, and the child being the Prosumer. Whilst the child learns how to colour in accordance to their own views of how the picture should or could look like, they are actually not developing their own imagination in terms of drawing their own picture seeing how it has already been provided for them.
Hence, what so kindly enables us to create a personalized version of someone else's work also limits our own creative process in truly making something of our own. Because we choose to lean on the work of other's, we ourselves become more creatively infantile as we let this work carry a large portion of our ideas.
Milo Demo with Peter Molyneux
Friday, October 16, 2009 by CbrIan
The famed game designer Peter Molyneux demonstrated the “Milo project” at Microsoft’s E3 press conference. This interactive game provides the new kind of interaction and connection between a virtual character with players through the Project Natal motion camera.
According to Peter Molyneux, he mentioned that the controllers construct the barrier to the connection with players. Following the video, the virtual character in the game is like real person with emotion and action. For example, his head was down and he was not looking to the player because he does not want to obey to do homework. Moreover, the player was feeling worry with the boy who walk carefully on the rock. The interaction between them is fascinating that can challenge our sympathy.
According to Peter Molyneux, he mentioned that the controllers construct the barrier to the connection with players. Following the video, the virtual character in the game is like real person with emotion and action. For example, his head was down and he was not looking to the player because he does not want to obey to do homework. Moreover, the player was feeling worry with the boy who walk carefully on the rock. The interaction between them is fascinating that can challenge our sympathy.
Saving Film, Music
by Jon Meoli
This post is largely in response to Robz' earlier post about prosumers saving the New Zealand music industry. He talked about how technology can lower the amount of money a film needs to gross to become a success, and I believe this is true even outside of New Zealand, and even outside of the film industry. It also works in the music business. For example, The Format, an indie-rock band from America, was dropped from their record label prior to the release of their second album because the label didn't like what they recorded. So instead, they released the album on their own and ultimately distributed it for free because there was no overhead involved (the record company allowed them to keep the rejected songs, and thus paid for them to be recorded). With this method of self-distribution, the band was able to expand their fan base and sell out shows nationwide, all while not seeing a dime from their record company. Much of the technology they used to master and distribute the album was self-developed, so in agreement with what Robz posted earlier, the lower overhead brought upon by new technology can do wonders for music and film.
Signal Types in Theory.
by May Rose
Every day we rely on signals, whether traffic lights or electronic. Judith Donath talks about Signaling Theory in her article Signals in Social Supernets. She talks about how we rely on these signals when trying to perceive people such as statements made, facial expressions and consumption qualities.
These signals can be divided into three catergories:
1. The Assessment Signal which is normally reliable because one must have the quality in order to produce the signal. E.g. Playing the guitar well involves skill.
2. The Strategic Signal is another kind of Assessment Signal which indicates that a person has a large amount of a resource by wasting it.
3. The Conventional Signal which is when a person describes themselves. This is seen as the least reliable of all signals but can be kept honest through social values and laws.
But as with many things, these signals can be faked with enough perseverance. These signals are easier to fake on SNS sites. This can backfire if friends see you in real life and start questioning. Best bet is to not post anything that you couldn’t justify later.
These signals can be divided into three catergories:
1. The Assessment Signal which is normally reliable because one must have the quality in order to produce the signal. E.g. Playing the guitar well involves skill.
2. The Strategic Signal is another kind of Assessment Signal which indicates that a person has a large amount of a resource by wasting it.
3. The Conventional Signal which is when a person describes themselves. This is seen as the least reliable of all signals but can be kept honest through social values and laws.
But as with many things, these signals can be faked with enough perseverance. These signals are easier to fake on SNS sites. This can backfire if friends see you in real life and start questioning. Best bet is to not post anything that you couldn’t justify later.
by Charmaine
Some current examples of businesses that are actively using social media marketing in Auckland that I have been quite impressed with are @giapo and @wagamama_nz. Wagamama frequently posts updates about upcoming 'noodle eating competitions' and spontaneous giveaways, e.g. "if your on nuffield st right now near wagamama tweet me for some love..you have from 7.36pm - 7 .42pm go !" Similarly, Giapo's page shows constant interaction with customers. They are clearly inviting the customer to engage with them frequently and in a friendly, casual manner.
This highlights how social media can be a very useful tool to businesses. I would guess this requires very little labour. The casual tone of the engagements don't demand a huge amount of thought or even literacy competency - notice how typos are excused - and thus, any part-time worker would probably be able to handle it. Above all, Twitter is free. Its effect is in regularly reminding the customer of their loyalty to the brand, as well as the fact that the brand is constantly available and providing goods/services.
This highlights how social media can be a very useful tool to businesses. I would guess this requires very little labour. The casual tone of the engagements don't demand a huge amount of thought or even literacy competency - notice how typos are excused - and thus, any part-time worker would probably be able to handle it. Above all, Twitter is free. Its effect is in regularly reminding the customer of their loyalty to the brand, as well as the fact that the brand is constantly available and providing goods/services.
Privacy in the digital age
by JCT
Living in our digital age has left us more exposed than ever before - we are all participants either knowingly or not.
Public surveillance technology is increasingly rampant in western societies with surveillance cameras installed in many suspecting and unsuspecting corners of urban cities with CCTV in London as the most surveillant city in the world. While CCTV is monitored by qualified CCTV workers, I discovered this article http://www.cctvcore.co.uk/15-10-2009-internet-eyes-could-be-on-you.html which expolits citizens lack of privacy further by giving anyone with internet acccess the ability to view CCTV footage of people in shops. This proposal will be launched later this year which further suggests that the concept of privacy is losing grip in the western digital spheres. After shopping centres, the scheme will surely hit the streets, and any other public spaces. A future of being able to watch anyone, anywhere from the comfort of your own home could possibly be the near distant future. And if it does? Privacy is dead.
Public surveillance technology is increasingly rampant in western societies with surveillance cameras installed in many suspecting and unsuspecting corners of urban cities with CCTV in London as the most surveillant city in the world. While CCTV is monitored by qualified CCTV workers, I discovered this article http://www.cctvcore.co.uk/15-10-2009-internet-eyes-could-be-on-you.html which expolits citizens lack of privacy further by giving anyone with internet acccess the ability to view CCTV footage of people in shops. This proposal will be launched later this year which further suggests that the concept of privacy is losing grip in the western digital spheres. After shopping centres, the scheme will surely hit the streets, and any other public spaces. A future of being able to watch anyone, anywhere from the comfort of your own home could possibly be the near distant future. And if it does? Privacy is dead.
Prosumer Capitalism
by Simon
I have been contemplating the rise of prosumerism in a capitalist world and have come up an interesting point of view. Can prosumerism be effective in a capitalist environment? Youtube is a site designed for prosumerism, however most of the content is mass produced media. I'm talking about music videos, pirated movies and television programmes. It is well known that youtube is the most popular video site on the internet but perhaps its popularity is the downfall of its ideals. Sure initially most of the videos were produced by users but as its popularity grew, the balance shifted.
I guess my point of view is that a site can no longer stay true to its idealistic prosumer aims because as soon as its popularity grows it turns into a haven for people trying to watch movies for free, or for artists to get their songs heard and videos watched. Youtube started out as a prosumer site but was quickly jumped onto by a large variety of different media forms. Of course this is not policed as it brings in large amounts of money to the creators of the site. In a capitalist world prosumerism is limited by its potential to reap economic rewards.
I guess my point of view is that a site can no longer stay true to its idealistic prosumer aims because as soon as its popularity grows it turns into a haven for people trying to watch movies for free, or for artists to get their songs heard and videos watched. Youtube started out as a prosumer site but was quickly jumped onto by a large variety of different media forms. Of course this is not policed as it brings in large amounts of money to the creators of the site. In a capitalist world prosumerism is limited by its potential to reap economic rewards.
free music for everyone
by --jk
This week in tutorials we discussed if the morality was the same between stealing a handbag and music on the internet. For me the answer is no because when stealing a handbag, one is physically stealing and the thief is easier to be caught. When stealing music on the internet, you are in your own personal and private space and because downloading music is so normal, we don't feel much of the guilt. The internet has opened many options and downloading music is one that is so easily accessible to us. Even though there is itunes that sell music for a couple of dollars, we download music because it is free and easy. Artists are still promoting their albums in stores but some have followed the footsteps of radiohead in offering few promo songs to download. Fall Out Boy when promoting their new album at the time Folie A Deux, allowed users to get a free song just by signing up on their mailing list and recently new singer Kesha has done the same. On her website http://www.keshasparty.com/, after viewing her video for her debut song TiK ToK you are able to get the free mp3 by email. Through the internet, people are so used to downloading music for free and I think it is useful for artists to promote their music in this way because it lets their music be known for many people and their popularity and reputation could grow through it.
Prosumers
by flyboi
I can't think of anything better than getting what you really want. The relationship between the producer and consumer is a great one because not only do you get to standardise products to satisfy basic demands by the consumer, and the company profits will increase due to mass customisation. This is extremely important between the businesses and the clients because both benefit from another.
Professional consumer is focusing where more and more people are becoming much more demanding with their personal hobbies, skilled amateurs who are willing to DIY, whether it is a table to be made with industry quality tools, or photos taken at a wedding using a similar camera that a professional photographer would use. This is brilliant as it means everyone has access or equal opportunity to create masterpieces and they wouldn’t necessarily need to purchase professional equipment at expensive prices because they can use technology that is affordable and just as good as the pros.
Let your creative juices flow and give it a go. Pull out your digital camera and begin to take photos at the wedding, become the photographer you have always dreamt of. Companies and individuals are utilising the end-users to develop their products. You asked for it so you’re going to get it, use it!
Professional consumer is focusing where more and more people are becoming much more demanding with their personal hobbies, skilled amateurs who are willing to DIY, whether it is a table to be made with industry quality tools, or photos taken at a wedding using a similar camera that a professional photographer would use. This is brilliant as it means everyone has access or equal opportunity to create masterpieces and they wouldn’t necessarily need to purchase professional equipment at expensive prices because they can use technology that is affordable and just as good as the pros.
Let your creative juices flow and give it a go. Pull out your digital camera and begin to take photos at the wedding, become the photographer you have always dreamt of. Companies and individuals are utilising the end-users to develop their products. You asked for it so you’re going to get it, use it!
profile pics and facebook vacations
by Unknown
Website: The 30 Standard Facebook Profile Photo Styles
I came across the above website the other day and, after scrolling through and looking at all the different types of profile pictures, I realized that probably everyone I am friends with on Facebook could be categorized in one of the thirty groups. I remember when I first got Facebook three years ago; it was exclusively for college students. Of course now everyone has one, but I found it interesting how much you tell about a person by the profile picture, or better yet, where people are in their lives. For example, I am studying abroad so I have a picture of me in the South Island. Some of my close family friends have pictures of their children, because they are obsessed with them. People have pictures of them partying so they others will think they are cool and others have just random pictures because they are weird. Another aspect of the article I liked was the opening sentence: “Over the weekend I took a trip through Facebook to look at the various Facebook profile photos…” It made me laugh to think that if logging on to a social networking website is considered a “trip,” our society has to change fast or I don’t know how anybody couldn’t consider themselves a cyborg.
I came across the above website the other day and, after scrolling through and looking at all the different types of profile pictures, I realized that probably everyone I am friends with on Facebook could be categorized in one of the thirty groups. I remember when I first got Facebook three years ago; it was exclusively for college students. Of course now everyone has one, but I found it interesting how much you tell about a person by the profile picture, or better yet, where people are in their lives. For example, I am studying abroad so I have a picture of me in the South Island. Some of my close family friends have pictures of their children, because they are obsessed with them. People have pictures of them partying so they others will think they are cool and others have just random pictures because they are weird. Another aspect of the article I liked was the opening sentence: “Over the weekend I took a trip through Facebook to look at the various Facebook profile photos…” It made me laugh to think that if logging on to a social networking website is considered a “trip,” our society has to change fast or I don’t know how anybody couldn’t consider themselves a cyborg.
In relation to what Anna was talking about on Monday about Prosumers, I was thinking about the second meaning of the term Prosumer, the Professional Consumer and how the increased amount of cheaper, professional quality technology can potentially keep the New Zealand film industry afloat.
Due to New Zealand's small size and small economy, for a New Zealand made film to be considered a success it must make at least a million dollars at the box office in order to make a profit from the cost of its production. The NZ film fund has a limited amount of money to give to NZ film directors, but with cheaper, higher quality technology such as cameras and editing programmes, post-production in films can become alot cheaper and allow for more amateur New Zealand films to be made that have the aethetic feel of a Hollywood movie.
Due to New Zealand's small size and small economy, for a New Zealand made film to be considered a success it must make at least a million dollars at the box office in order to make a profit from the cost of its production. The NZ film fund has a limited amount of money to give to NZ film directors, but with cheaper, higher quality technology such as cameras and editing programmes, post-production in films can become alot cheaper and allow for more amateur New Zealand films to be made that have the aethetic feel of a Hollywood movie.
by mrs jones
"Acute viral rhinopharyngitis, or acute coryza, known as an upper respiratory virus, is a contagious, viral infectious disease of the upper respiratory system, primarily caused by rhinoviruses, (picornaviruses) or coronaviruses. It is the most common infectious disease in humans;[1] there is no known cure, but it is very rarely fatal."
When hearing these words, one might think twice about putting their selves at risk of catching this possible fatal virus. Yet as a marketing technique, viral marketing works exactly like the common cold does: people are 'infected' by the virus purely by being in close proximity of the disease, they don't have a choice in the matter, ignoring it would be like ignoring an over-sized male fairy flying through a church service; and the infected are most likely to 'gossip' to their work colleagues, I commonly hear “Oh I feel so bad today”. The success of viral marketing lies within how good the campaign is, you may have never of heard of “The Subservient Chicken”, but then you may have seen the graffiti work on the footpaths around Auckland advertising District 9. Whether you wanted to or not, people were talking about District 9 without really knowing what it was all about. In this day and age, when people everyday are bombarded with hundreds of advertisements everyday, being different is key to being noticed by consumers who are becoming smarter and smarter and less sensitive to advertisements. We can safely assume that this type of marketing is going to become more interesting as time goes on. I know I’m sick of the one look movie posters!
Sharing and Culture Tinkering
by Anonymous
Section 92a of the Copyright Amendment Act of New Zealand demands Internet Service Providers to police Internet users for any possible acts of copyright infringements. In a sense the university of Auckland acts as an IPS for students. The university’s websites officially writes (http://www.auckland.ac.nz/uoa/home/for/current-students/cs-student-it-essentials/cs-computer-securitythat) “The use of P2P file sharing applications to download files in breach of copyright is not permitted”. This is problematic, P2P software’s are a portal which creative students could use to share ideas and inspire creative works. It is “Guilt by accusation” Possibly promoting passivity and not culture tinkering.
we are less private
by Mana-o-whakaaro
We are less private
As Boyd elaborated on in the article 'Facebook's privacy trainwreck’ there are costs to pay with becoming socially converged. Social convergence occurs when different social contexts are collapsed into one. Our friends, family, social groups, are all within a similar space, such as face book for instance. Our control is lost with social convergence due to the inability to control what is private information that we want all to see versus our close friends and family.
New Technologies are constantly being used to bring people closer together. We are not as private as we use to be. For example mobile phones have shifted from talking within a home setting to talking anywhere, anytime and place. We are becoming less reliant on paper forms, and are completing and submitting important forms online, not to mention managing our personal finances online also.
Although our privacy and security is somewhat guaranteed with us placing our lives “online”, it seems that we are adopting and taking the risks of our personal information online.
As Boyd elaborated on in the article 'Facebook's privacy trainwreck’ there are costs to pay with becoming socially converged. Social convergence occurs when different social contexts are collapsed into one. Our friends, family, social groups, are all within a similar space, such as face book for instance. Our control is lost with social convergence due to the inability to control what is private information that we want all to see versus our close friends and family.
New Technologies are constantly being used to bring people closer together. We are not as private as we use to be. For example mobile phones have shifted from talking within a home setting to talking anywhere, anytime and place. We are becoming less reliant on paper forms, and are completing and submitting important forms online, not to mention managing our personal finances online also.
Although our privacy and security is somewhat guaranteed with us placing our lives “online”, it seems that we are adopting and taking the risks of our personal information online.
Advertsiers Rein
by mrs jones
Blogging and what products bloggers choose to endorse should be ideally influenced by nothing but the own bloggers perception of how great the product is. But really when a blogger earns hardly any money from what they blog, dangle a carrot in front of them and of course they are going to take those extra few dollars to pay their rent. The whole premise of blogging is that we are giving an alternative to the news corporations which are highly invested in from outside forces, and giving a voice to the Joe Bloggs who isn’t paid to say that they love the XT network (when really how many times is Richard Hammond going to use a Telecom phone??) and instead is entrusted to say they really did find the best lip gloss.* Rachel Zoe, a controversial figure in Hollywood has even put an Editorial Policy on her webpage saying "Never in a million years would we accept money (or Barneys giftcards) in exchange for editorial endorsement. That would be bananas. The bad kind.” By saying this openly, she is building her reputation as a serious, trustworthy blogger. America has paved the way for this premise of honest and uninfluenced reporting to be an actual reality, the Federal Trade Commission, a very major and important regulator - "decided to approve new rules to stop independent bloggers from hiding their links to advertisers." Absolutely amazing, this in theory should stop all bloggers from endorsing the overpriced-good-for-nothing products and instead give praise where it’s well deserved. But really is such a law going to work, when in New Zealand we have a law to 'stop' all illegal downloading. Yet in class its obvious there’s quite a few participating in this "illegal activity". So are we all criminals? I guess by law we are, by I don't feel like one so that makes it all okay. And morally if bloggers want to brought and lose that reputation of honesty and trustworthiness, than I guess readers will just have to accept it.
*Best Lip Gloss: Isabella Pelle; Even does free shipping worldwide!
*Best Lip Gloss: Isabella Pelle; Even does free shipping worldwide!
Prosumer and copyright online
by yvonne
According to Grinnell suggest passive consumers has became active as the application of Web 2.0 on the internet, where the model of Prosumer influence on the development of information technology. People are free to use the sources such as images and videos and music on the internet, but still there is no such law to protect the copyrights of the origin workers.
Web2.0 provides platform of market place that cans facility to doing things, enable people to use it, such as personal blog links to other blog and variable all the time. Flickr is other example of processing photograph,which can store and category images and allows people present in a community online. Wikipedia allows people to edit and make equal contribution of information. Public remix and recreate media on YouTube. Those indicate users as creators in participatory media. This is remixing, focus on using others work with different experience to challenge the traditional media and to define a new media.
Prosumer either is the consumer or producers. They are strongly engage with the activity and participate actively. They can easily access others creation and remake a new product. Actually, it is unfair to the original worker which has already made a tortious behavior and no body recognized it. Some anonymous make collective works of online which some song or novel has been used in the original work. Those anonymous work it not to gain financial benefits for the purpose, but they have already used the copyright of the original worker without notice. In fact, there is no such restriction that people use online sources. It also claims that the boundary between legal and guilt behavior is not clear enough, resulting to use the sources for free nowadays.
Today, internet becomes a necessary good in our daily life. And also the internet will become a tendency which digital our daily activities. We don’t have the power to control the internet,but we do have the ability to control ourselves.
Web2.0 provides platform of market place that cans facility to doing things, enable people to use it, such as personal blog links to other blog and variable all the time. Flickr is other example of processing photograph,which can store and category images and allows people present in a community online. Wikipedia allows people to edit and make equal contribution of information. Public remix and recreate media on YouTube. Those indicate users as creators in participatory media. This is remixing, focus on using others work with different experience to challenge the traditional media and to define a new media.
Prosumer either is the consumer or producers. They are strongly engage with the activity and participate actively. They can easily access others creation and remake a new product. Actually, it is unfair to the original worker which has already made a tortious behavior and no body recognized it. Some anonymous make collective works of online which some song or novel has been used in the original work. Those anonymous work it not to gain financial benefits for the purpose, but they have already used the copyright of the original worker without notice. In fact, there is no such restriction that people use online sources. It also claims that the boundary between legal and guilt behavior is not clear enough, resulting to use the sources for free nowadays.
Today, internet becomes a necessary good in our daily life. And also the internet will become a tendency which digital our daily activities. We don’t have the power to control the internet,but we do have the ability to control ourselves.
Watching television online
by BoSox
We have discussed the outright downloading of music and videos via p2p technologies, but what about watching television shows or films online, without downloading transferable files? What I keep coming back to is the fact that they're available on so many different sites and in so many different forms, just waiting for people to watch. I primarily use the site Sidereel to access programs for free. There are others like TVLinks and AllUC that provide the same service, links to free episodes of television and movies. While the latter two are rather simple in their design and seem to be trying to stay under the radar, Sidereel is quite "out there" in its image.
The design of it encourages users to link to Facebook, Twitter, and other SNSs, therefore advertising the site, and also its access to free, copyrighted material. I bring this up because in this context, I really feel no remorse for using Sidereel to watch shows that I would otherwise have to pay large amounts of money to view. If a site is making absolutely no efforts to fly under the radar, and still is not shut down, then why should I feel bad about "robbing" Comcast Cable of an extra $100/month to get premium channels? In my opinion it is the cable company doing the robbing.
The design of it encourages users to link to Facebook, Twitter, and other SNSs, therefore advertising the site, and also its access to free, copyrighted material. I bring this up because in this context, I really feel no remorse for using Sidereel to watch shows that I would otherwise have to pay large amounts of money to view. If a site is making absolutely no efforts to fly under the radar, and still is not shut down, then why should I feel bad about "robbing" Comcast Cable of an extra $100/month to get premium channels? In my opinion it is the cable company doing the robbing.
Illegal Downloading
Thursday, October 15, 2009 by jotaylor
Let's cast our minds back to the not so digital age...and consider illegal downloading. As children we recorded everything and anything via VRC and good old cassette tape. I do not consider recording this way to be illegal, so then if the opportunity to download online is there, why is it illegal? It is only recently that illegal downloading seems to be an issue, surrounding how this negatively affects media industry creators such as artists and their labels.
But who really looses when we download? Chris Crocker a frequent YouTube video blogger appears to strongly believe that it is the artists who loose when we illegally download.
This explicit video shows a distraught and offended artist who believes it is a crime to download music. And despite being overdramatic I think Crocker does have a valid point as it is the artist who looses when we illegally download. Although we give them popular recognition by illegally downloading their music they receive no money for it.
Web 2.0 and User Agency
by KBPeters
In class Luke asked this question: Do these technologies create greater user agency and cultural citizenship?
I believe the answer is yes, they do. I may be biased because I am a film student and so I appreciate the ability to manipulate and contribute to art without having to be a professional. User generated content is a means of expression, and an important one in the 21st century. Copyright laws and issues with intellectual property need to get up to speed and realize that technoculture is an all-inclusive culture which brings people together and gives an artistic and intellectual voice to those who may not normally have one. You tube and blogs are truly unique communities where ideas are shared in a fairly anonymously format across great distances, and I think it is a mistake to downplay the importance of Web 2.0.
'Moral Panic' Re: Digital Piracy
by Aalia
Can the moral panic in regards to digital piracy be equated to other more justified ones about drugs, drink driving or dangers of Internet? Since these panic tactics are aimed to give parents a jolt, it would be interesting to know what’s their take on it. Is it a deliberate exaggeration? Or are the copyright zealots justified in their propaganda?
I decided to do a survey amongst my family and friends (35-68 yrs). And what I found was:
- They are most certainly not losing sleep over it, like they would do over drugs.
- They recognized it as being wrong, but there was nothing strictly 'criminal' about it.
- Many feel that the concept of property has changed, the notion of authorship is also going a similar revision, and that the laws should be more aware and accommodating of that.
- Rather than the piracy ads awakening their conscience, they find it inducing laughter.
-The industries and RIAA are taking a very heavy-handed approach, which is having the opposite effect - the 'pirates' are inclined to rebel more, just to spite authorities.
-And lastly, all of them admitted that they had engaged in illegal downloading sometime or another so they can't really stop their kids from doing it.
I decided to do a survey amongst my family and friends (35-68 yrs). And what I found was:
- They are most certainly not losing sleep over it, like they would do over drugs.
- They recognized it as being wrong, but there was nothing strictly 'criminal' about it.
- Many feel that the concept of property has changed, the notion of authorship is also going a similar revision, and that the laws should be more aware and accommodating of that.
- Rather than the piracy ads awakening their conscience, they find it inducing laughter.
-The industries and RIAA are taking a very heavy-handed approach, which is having the opposite effect - the 'pirates' are inclined to rebel more, just to spite authorities.
-And lastly, all of them admitted that they had engaged in illegal downloading sometime or another so they can't really stop their kids from doing it.
I saw an article last week about (possibly) the first High Court order that was issued through Twitter. It is very similar to a case that I wrote about a few weeks ago concerning the blogger who made defamatory comments about a model, and where Google was forced to reveal the identity of the said blogger. In this case, someone had set up a fake twitter page impersonating Donal Blaney, a prominent right wing blogger and lawyer. A High court order was subsequently issued via twitter to demand the anonymous poster to reaveal their identity and stop posting with the name of Donal Blaney, because he was breaching the copyright and passing off as Mr Blaney. This not only raises issues about privacy and intellectual property online but it also calls into question the boundaries between technology and culture and law since it is very hard to define what consists as "real" law online. Most countries have only recently accomdated for such things, although they have been focussing on music and film piracy for a while now. However, this is a clear example of them catching up with new forms of technology and media. It also gives a good example where technology is effectively used to bypass a sometimes very slow and expensive traditional law process, by directly contacting the person via their page rather than resorting to ISPs releasing information about them.
the importance of internet today
by EunJin
An interesting question raised in the tutorial this week was the importance of internet in our lives today. I believe it's impossible to live without internet nowadays. For instance, from my experience, you can't access university information without it nor can you enroll to the university. This includes 'FTVMS203 blog' itself.
Also in the 21st century, it is almost impossible for the businesses to operate without the aid of internet. It takes a vital role in marketing, advertising and sales for businesses. An example: http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Importance-Of-Internet-Marketing&id=394205. Internet is also used as amusement like online games, blogs, chatting, accessing information, music, videos, and films.
Internet has shaped the way we interact with media today. It has definitely made access easier and cost effective to communicate. It is an important tool that is essential for education as well as an amusement today.
Also in the 21st century, it is almost impossible for the businesses to operate without the aid of internet. It takes a vital role in marketing, advertising and sales for businesses. An example: http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Importance-Of-Internet-Marketing&id=394205. Internet is also used as amusement like online games, blogs, chatting, accessing information, music, videos, and films.
Internet has shaped the way we interact with media today. It has definitely made access easier and cost effective to communicate. It is an important tool that is essential for education as well as an amusement today.
cyborgs
by display name
So I arrived at the lecture on cyborgs thinking: there is no way that I am a cyborg. But as the lecture proceeded, and to my own surprise, my view on the subject started to change; I began to realize that I am actually a form of a cyborg; a mundane cyborg. Technology has just become so stitched into my life that I had been unable to realize how unordinary and unnatural it really is. My own personal, most significant digital prosthetic would be my cellular phone, not a flash one by any means. Its alarm wakes me up in the morning, its clock informs me of the time throughout the day because I do not wear a watch, and its features allow me to contact and meet with friends when I am out and about. The cellular phone is just one example of a taken for granted technology that has become so relied upon, so ordinary, and pervasive in the lives of most, to the point that we often forget that it is of technological form, and not natural. The cellular phone’s importance and position as an extension of the self is often re-established in times where we are without it for long periods of time; at these times we are able to realize what we are unable to do without the technology- to not call a friend. It is at this time that we can reflect over what it in fact enables.
The Variables within Downloading
by Jess Leijh
After discussions about downloading, it is clear that it is not exactly black and white. This is evident when it is placed alongside other crimes of stealing, such as in the 'Downloading is stealing' trailer we all fast-forward through.
This video compares downloading films and music to stealing tangible items such as handbags. Although downloading is considered stealing, I do not think it can be compared to this. When downloading, you are making a copy of the original item, not taking it away completely. So even though those who produced it, lose money, they do not lose the item itself. Another way in which it differs is context- when stealing someone's bag, you are in public or someone else's private space, know the consequences of your actions, and physically have to plan how to succeed. Downloading is de-contextualised, and therefore the stealing feels anonymous, also less deviant because of how easy it is to do from your own bedroom.
I am not saying it is ok to download, but if the industries want to teach us not to, they should create better warnings, not ones that are so easily dismissed and laughable....
This video compares downloading films and music to stealing tangible items such as handbags. Although downloading is considered stealing, I do not think it can be compared to this. When downloading, you are making a copy of the original item, not taking it away completely. So even though those who produced it, lose money, they do not lose the item itself. Another way in which it differs is context- when stealing someone's bag, you are in public or someone else's private space, know the consequences of your actions, and physically have to plan how to succeed. Downloading is de-contextualised, and therefore the stealing feels anonymous, also less deviant because of how easy it is to do from your own bedroom.
I am not saying it is ok to download, but if the industries want to teach us not to, they should create better warnings, not ones that are so easily dismissed and laughable....
It doesn't have to be old against new
by Mr. Jones
There was a very interesting story coming out of the UK this week. Essentially the legal representatives of a multinational organisation attempted to gag the Guardian newspaper from reporting that a member of parliament had asked a question about the company in parliament. This a law firm with quite a reputation representing a large and powerful corporate entity, to the point that there was no hesitation in trying to supress one of the things we are surely entitled to, which is to hear what our elected representatives are saying on our behalf. Thankfully the experts at the law firm seemed to fail to take into account the role of blogs and Twitter. To cynics it will come as no suprise that multi nationals, seeking to bypass issues of rules and regulations in pursuit of profit, will apply whatever pressure is deemed necessary to disrupt critics, no matter how legitimate. What is gratifying about this story is that new media technologies enabled a defense of free speech in real time, and enabled legitimate criticism to take place. So in this case the strategy of suppression has completely failed, but the practices that led to criticisms of the company are now more widely disseminated than before the attempt at gagging the press.
Will ITunes ever be the same?
by Unknown
I never really knew what DRM (Digital Rights Management)-music was until the past few weeks. Sure, I knew that the music I purchased on ITunes couldn’t be transferred from one IPod to another, without it costing money, but I didn’t know what the organization was. However, everything about ITunes and DRM changed this year.
Website: http://www.macworld.com/article/138000/2009/01/drm_faq.html
This website tells how ITunes has adopted DRM-free music, meaning that once somebody purchases a piece of music, they can hold all the rights to share it with others. EMI, Sony, BMG, Warner Music, and Universal are all major record labels that are allowing Apple to sell their records DRM-free. This is significant because it marks a changing attitude towards, and acceptance of, our culture’s new view of technology. Today, with all the file-sharing networks, music is a free market; consumers see downloading music as a cultural and creative activity. By not selling DRM-free music, consumers back lashed and went to alternative methods of gathering free media: file sharing networks. By selling DRM-free music, ITunes, along with other large media corporations, are showing that “stealing a handbag is not the same as downloading music for free.” However, because this realization took so long I am unsure if consumers will ever go back to using ITunes as they once did because they have accepted their file-sharing networks.
Website: http://www.macworld.com/article/138000/2009/01/drm_faq.html
This website tells how ITunes has adopted DRM-free music, meaning that once somebody purchases a piece of music, they can hold all the rights to share it with others. EMI, Sony, BMG, Warner Music, and Universal are all major record labels that are allowing Apple to sell their records DRM-free. This is significant because it marks a changing attitude towards, and acceptance of, our culture’s new view of technology. Today, with all the file-sharing networks, music is a free market; consumers see downloading music as a cultural and creative activity. By not selling DRM-free music, consumers back lashed and went to alternative methods of gathering free media: file sharing networks. By selling DRM-free music, ITunes, along with other large media corporations, are showing that “stealing a handbag is not the same as downloading music for free.” However, because this realization took so long I am unsure if consumers will ever go back to using ITunes as they once did because they have accepted their file-sharing networks.
Who is more important, artist or patron?
by Jon Meoli
When deciding who, if anyone, piracy hurts, I couldn't help but think back to the Renaissance and how wealthy families used to commission artists to produce work exclusively for them. Jesse Lacey of the band Brand New touched on the analogy in this interview in which he said the only money he gets from their record company is for the advance to make the record, not the sales. So while artists are commissioned to do work for the record companies, the work is really still the artists, regardless of who holds the copyrights. Just because Michael Jackson's estate owns most of the Beatles catalog doesn't mean that the songs are no longer the Beatles'. Just because Pope Julius II commissioned the painting of the Sistine Chapel doesn't mean that it is not by Michelangelo.
The Yar article says that rights-holders lose over $20 billion in the U.S. What do they do to deserve that money in the first place? It's insane to think there is even that much money to be made, especially considering the average artist doesn't see any of it. On the other hand, the Vatican has probably recouped what it paid Michelangelo in visitor costs a million times over. So what to make of the record company claims that piracy hurts them? Well, I suggest they start buying paintings.
cyborgs
by Andy
I think the definition of a cyborg is wearable technology, or technology that has invaded them physically at some point. Then i thought to myself, We must all be cyborgs in some way.
Those who would not classify as a cyborg would be one who has never worn glasses, or has never worn braces, or has fillings or has put headphones in their ears. Personally right now, i am looking at the computer with contacts in my eyes and in the past i have had a small peice of metal in my knee to remove a small peice of broken bone.
because when we think about it, what we need to do before we define cyborgs is define technology. People define technology in different ways, but one way in a sociological definition is
3. (Sociology) the total knowledge and skills available to any human society for industry, art, science, etc.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/technology
Those who would not classify as a cyborg would be one who has never worn glasses, or has never worn braces, or has fillings or has put headphones in their ears. Personally right now, i am looking at the computer with contacts in my eyes and in the past i have had a small peice of metal in my knee to remove a small peice of broken bone.
because when we think about it, what we need to do before we define cyborgs is define technology. People define technology in different ways, but one way in a sociological definition is
3. (Sociology) the total knowledge and skills available to any human society for industry, art, science, etc.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/technology
Youth 'cannot live' without web
by Technoculture and New Media
A (UK) survey of 16 to 24 year olds has found that 75% of them feel they "couldn't live" without the internet.
Read the story on the BBC here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8305731.stm
Read the story on the BBC here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8305731.stm
Era of traditional media can be referred to as the mass society. In the mass society, the role of media is delivering the same message to unspecified number of users. Through the Newspapers, magazines, radio and television to passes the massage to the public was the primary role of traditional media in society. Nowadays, the new media bring the big change to the role of traditional media.
1. Traditional media: The information comes from a small number of senders to users. Radio and television is the good example of it and highlight broadcasting.
New media: The information is delivered to small number of users from a minority of senders. New media is targeting a narrowcasting which is opposite from traditional media. Narrowcasting helps communication as well as the recipient part of the information processing device.
2. A new media have the popularity of interactive features, depending on personal communication and narrow broadcasting. For example, the media system allows senders to directly send a specific message to users and even allowing the exchange information between people.
3. New media require the users to send and receive messages at the same time which is the non-concurrency part of new media. In the past, users have to necessarily use television and radio at the same time to get information.
4. The content of information for traditional media is standardized whereas new media have the flexibility of content of information. Existing radio and television have the limited number of channels to present. On the other hand, the new media have an infinite number of channels to be able to deliver multiple information to broadcast specialized programs.
5. The access to traditional media programs that mass media provide is open and universal. This means it provided free to the public as a service and delivered publicly. However there are limited access channels in new media.
1. Traditional media: The information comes from a small number of senders to users. Radio and television is the good example of it and highlight broadcasting.
New media: The information is delivered to small number of users from a minority of senders. New media is targeting a narrowcasting which is opposite from traditional media. Narrowcasting helps communication as well as the recipient part of the information processing device.
2. A new media have the popularity of interactive features, depending on personal communication and narrow broadcasting. For example, the media system allows senders to directly send a specific message to users and even allowing the exchange information between people.
3. New media require the users to send and receive messages at the same time which is the non-concurrency part of new media. In the past, users have to necessarily use television and radio at the same time to get information.
4. The content of information for traditional media is standardized whereas new media have the flexibility of content of information. Existing radio and television have the limited number of channels to present. On the other hand, the new media have an infinite number of channels to be able to deliver multiple information to broadcast specialized programs.
5. The access to traditional media programs that mass media provide is open and universal. This means it provided free to the public as a service and delivered publicly. However there are limited access channels in new media.
facebook profile photos
Wednesday, October 14, 2009 by vanillaface
I was on Facebook the today and was looking at the different profile picture that my friends had and with reference to the second lecture, I noticed the differences in the profile pictures of males and females and how they allow for the performance of gender. I did a small survey of 10 of my facebook friends, 5 of each sex at random and here are my results...
Females:-1 had pictures only of them self in poses that could be interpreted as sexually suggestive due to the facial expression and body language, were wearing makeup etc and had taken the photo them self.
-4 had photos of them with a group of friends while looking happy while dressed up at a party/town/ball.
Males:
-1 had a photo of a female celebrity in a bikini.
- 1 had a photo of their car.
-1 had a photo of them with their friends pulling a face that is not commonly associated with being attractive (although both guys are actually real babes... which is subjective of course...)
-2 had a photo of them with a group of their mates drinking alcohol.
Although the number of people of surveyed was small, I summarised from this was that females had photos where they appeared the most attractive or in a light which showed them as feminine while males had photos which showed them as masculine by having profile photos containing things commonly associated with masculinity (women as sex objects, drinking, cars etc) and also not caring as much about their personal appearance as females (having a profile photo which shows them not looking so attractive...). These photos allow for the performance of gender by both sexes picking a picture which shows them performing gender by having associations with attributes commonly linked to masculinity and femininity.
Females:-1 had pictures only of them self in poses that could be interpreted as sexually suggestive due to the facial expression and body language, were wearing makeup etc and had taken the photo them self.
-4 had photos of them with a group of friends while looking happy while dressed up at a party/town/ball.
Males:
-1 had a photo of a female celebrity in a bikini.
- 1 had a photo of their car.
-1 had a photo of them with their friends pulling a face that is not commonly associated with being attractive (although both guys are actually real babes... which is subjective of course...)
-2 had a photo of them with a group of their mates drinking alcohol.
Although the number of people of surveyed was small, I summarised from this was that females had photos where they appeared the most attractive or in a light which showed them as feminine while males had photos which showed them as masculine by having profile photos containing things commonly associated with masculinity (women as sex objects, drinking, cars etc) and also not caring as much about their personal appearance as females (having a profile photo which shows them not looking so attractive...). These photos allow for the performance of gender by both sexes picking a picture which shows them performing gender by having associations with attributes commonly linked to masculinity and femininity.
Taking Back The Web (2.0)
by willist
So much of this course is about the additional power we have voluntarily but often unwittingly handed over to private organizations and government. I’m of course talking about the Facebook tagging, Twitter updates and BlogSpot blogs that have got employees fired, ended relationships, and launched criminal charges against civilians.
I think all of us have become more interested in privacy online, and also the copyright and ‘Terms of use’ we are being subjected to. This got me researching a number of different (mostly indie) movements around the web to throw-off online marketing networks, employers, and government institutions.
The first things I came up with were a number of ‘VPN’ and ‘Proxy’ server solutions such as MegaProxy and Hotspot Shield. These services channel all your requests to destination servers, thru their own server network. The trouble is a number of corporate and government websites have the ability to filter these networks through their IP address, and block access.
An alternative to the Proxy is an Open Source ‘Tor’ Project. Basically what Tor does is route all your Internet traffic thru a number of relays (other people’s computers) and then sends the request to the destination you intended. In other words you might be surfing the web as if you were a user in Turkey, whilst a user in China, may be surfing as if they were a New Zealander. This service has proved pretty invaluable for citizens and journalists in nations like China, where web content is vigorously restricted.
Finally, the Opera browser developers are working on a new hosting service for your own computer called “Opera Unite”. Basically it allows you to host your own Facebook like profile on your own PC. This terribly Voice Over’d video explains it better than I can.
I really like the concept behind 'Unite', but as with all these services the biggest issue seems to be bandwidth and connection reliability. Who wants a Facebook profile that shuts down when you turn off your computer. Especially when corporations like Facebook are willing to foot the bill themselves.
Viral marketing and prosumption
by CVAJ
An interesting example of viral marketing has spring up today similar to the cult classic The Blair Witch Project...
Paranormal Activity produced with a budget of US $10,000 is receiving snowballing hype. The movie has only been released in a few cities in the US with zero marketing campaign. The catch, fans can 'request' for the movie for their their city... With reportedly over one million requests it serves a striking example of active consumption facilitated by technological developments.
Go on - request it!
Paranormal Activity produced with a budget of US $10,000 is receiving snowballing hype. The movie has only been released in a few cities in the US with zero marketing campaign. The catch, fans can 'request' for the movie for their their city... With reportedly over one million requests it serves a striking example of active consumption facilitated by technological developments.
Go on - request it!
Individual Creativity
by flyboi
Rock music may dominate today's pop charts, with numerous subdivisions such as alternative, metal, pop and punk to choose from. Any number of sources can be found for the blend of sounds known as rock music. How on earth are record companies/corporations putting their copyright stamp on it when it is not at all original?
All music is influenced by someone or something so you’re actually using a concept or idea that had already existed. So is your creation really original and you have the right to stake claims to copyright? The whole copyright and proprietary rights become clouded here because really the author or artist has created something new BUT from borrowed conventions. Where does one draw the line? How do corporations justify proprietary rights over material that has already been reproduced yet they claim as original and their own?
In my personal opinion I would have to agree with Becker and Stadler “information is a raw material that needs to be freely available” after all its not really the corporations or the artists idea, their creation has been influenced by the existing.
All music is influenced by someone or something so you’re actually using a concept or idea that had already existed. So is your creation really original and you have the right to stake claims to copyright? The whole copyright and proprietary rights become clouded here because really the author or artist has created something new BUT from borrowed conventions. Where does one draw the line? How do corporations justify proprietary rights over material that has already been reproduced yet they claim as original and their own?
In my personal opinion I would have to agree with Becker and Stadler “information is a raw material that needs to be freely available” after all its not really the corporations or the artists idea, their creation has been influenced by the existing.
The new dot-com bubble
by Sion
The dot-com bubble was a phenomenon of the late 1990s, when there was unguarded optimism for Internet-based businesses. Many companies came to be referred to as “dot-coms,” after the .com in many web addresses. The dot-com bubble was the biggest market bubble ever seen, and many investors lost big. But some companies have been survived the dot.com boom when so many other web based companies failed. Amazon was spending on expanding customer base and letting people know that it existed and it stands between the author and the reader, the musician and the listener. It's just another super-store, just one with a lower cost of overheads. Google focused on spending time on creating more powerful machine capacity to serve its expanding search engine. Both companies knew that fundamentals don’t lie.
There are some new kind of internet bubble are emerging. In 2007, new Internet technologies have prompted another rush by start-ups and industry stalwarts to tap the burgeoning energy associated with Web 2.0 wikis, blogs, podcasts, widgets and social networks to quickly extend their Internet real estate. But while the Web 2.0 phenomenon may have some things in common with the Internet bubble, experts note that there are also stark differences, including the low cost of entry for companies launching blog, wiki or social networking businesses. The main difference, however, is that this time around consumers are driving the adoption of the technologies rather than companies trying to force their Internet sites and wares onto users, according to industry observers. Yet, a rush to create Web 2.0-based systems will lead to a new dot-com bubble that will burst under the stress of failing businesses. If they want to survive in rushing web 2.0 based systems, they should consider the fundamentals as Google and Amazon did.
There are some new kind of internet bubble are emerging. In 2007, new Internet technologies have prompted another rush by start-ups and industry stalwarts to tap the burgeoning energy associated with Web 2.0 wikis, blogs, podcasts, widgets and social networks to quickly extend their Internet real estate. But while the Web 2.0 phenomenon may have some things in common with the Internet bubble, experts note that there are also stark differences, including the low cost of entry for companies launching blog, wiki or social networking businesses. The main difference, however, is that this time around consumers are driving the adoption of the technologies rather than companies trying to force their Internet sites and wares onto users, according to industry observers. Yet, a rush to create Web 2.0-based systems will lead to a new dot-com bubble that will burst under the stress of failing businesses. If they want to survive in rushing web 2.0 based systems, they should consider the fundamentals as Google and Amazon did.
User Generated Content in Media
Tuesday, October 13, 2009 by Jay
As described by Alvin Toffler in the previous lecture the definition of 'prosumer' where consumers are more involved in the design and manufacture of products that could be made to individual specification and part of the creative process, the increased prevalence of user-generated content (UGC) such as discussion groups, blogs, wikis on the Internet has caused these media to seep into enterprise environments for uses in a more functional capacity.
Unfortunately, UGC is also more likely to contain biased information, blurring the line between fact and interpretation. In this respect, UGC can end up telling readers more about the author than on the subject matter. Users might view UGC as being less reliable in their decision making process. Such particular UGC as Wikis is one that I find that exemplifies this idea that contents may contain irrational facts and information which isn’t deep and broad enough for finding meanings.
Having been moved away from the Web1.0 to 2.0, now Internet seems to act as a platform for people to become more interactive. This involves many people uploading videos personally for mass number of viewers. The notion of audience participation and agency is unique to new media since all SNS's are designed for you to customize nearly everything within it and here users become an active media participants. With my particular SNS, Cyworld, I find to have a greater sense of agency than I would have in the older form of media web 1.0. Also this form of participation in the Internet I feel more engaged in media more active than for example watching a film.
I would say to a certain extent I would consider myself to be a 'prosumer' in a sense that now new technology allows various ways to participate in media and being active rather than just as spectators especially without having to require special skills to achieve this. It is useful in which can extend links to other blogs as well. However there are times when I tend to just rely on existing contents.
Unfortunately, UGC is also more likely to contain biased information, blurring the line between fact and interpretation. In this respect, UGC can end up telling readers more about the author than on the subject matter. Users might view UGC as being less reliable in their decision making process. Such particular UGC as Wikis is one that I find that exemplifies this idea that contents may contain irrational facts and information which isn’t deep and broad enough for finding meanings.
Having been moved away from the Web1.0 to 2.0, now Internet seems to act as a platform for people to become more interactive. This involves many people uploading videos personally for mass number of viewers. The notion of audience participation and agency is unique to new media since all SNS's are designed for you to customize nearly everything within it and here users become an active media participants. With my particular SNS, Cyworld, I find to have a greater sense of agency than I would have in the older form of media web 1.0. Also this form of participation in the Internet I feel more engaged in media more active than for example watching a film.
I would say to a certain extent I would consider myself to be a 'prosumer' in a sense that now new technology allows various ways to participate in media and being active rather than just as spectators especially without having to require special skills to achieve this. It is useful in which can extend links to other blogs as well. However there are times when I tend to just rely on existing contents.
Blogs, tweets and your Journalism career...
by riisujon
With the increasing popularity of blogs and twitter as personal social forums, it was perhaps only a matter of time before journalist ethics and professionalism was brought into question, regarding their personal use of such sites.
In a recent article in the media and marketing section of the Australian newspaper concern was voiced by major news organisation's about their current social media policies and their effectiveness. As a result and to reflect a changing digitalised social world, new edicts and rules are being sent out to news room staff, to clarify the expectations the media companies expect of them.
The most problematic issue involved making sure journalists maintained their ethical standards and professional journalistic integrity, with regard to the posting of personal material on social networking sites, personal websites and blogs etc...
The general consensus amongst the major media companies including the BBC and The New York Times is that journalists should only write or post private articles, that could also be published in their capacity as a professional news journalist.
The New York Times stated that journalists need to be aware that what they write privately can be easily accessed, manipulated or disseminated, and as such, their personal views must be non biased, non political and avoid any critical debates or problematic issues, so any material that is written could also theoretically be published by the newspaper.
It seems it just got tougher for professional Journalists to express themselves in the social landscapes of the private media sphere, knowing that the big brother of management is watching.
Self identity through music
by ltop
I came across a website today that is called last.fm which is sort of a social networking site where you can share music interests with your friends. The website measures how often you listen to specific songs and how many songs you have listened to throughout your membership of the site. With this information the website can also recommend music to you and compare your music taste with your friends. It can be seen as a place where you develop an identity through your music, as people can see exactly what you are listening to at the exact time you are listening to it. I think this is a very interesting concept because this can connect people through music, which can be a very important thing in many people's lives. Many would probably think this is the same as just another facebook group, but it is actually not because the focus is not on socializing specifically, but rather on sharing music and to learn more about your own “musical identity”, which is why I found it quite unique compared to anything I have seen before.
Blogging/Online Music Legal Debate
by SpencerD
Here's an article I found on Wired.com, regarding a legal debate that's been going on in the states.
Essentially, the long and short of it as that an attorney defending a client in an anti-piracy lawsuit was blogging some angry comments about the Recording Industry Association of American, the organization that was after his client. Even though Judge Robert M. Levy ruled that the comments of the lawyer, Ray Beckerman, were less than 'forthcoming at times', but still not quite bad enough to warrant the level of complaint the music industry had dished out. Furthermore, the RIAA was suing 30,000 people at once, and Beckerman managed to get the charges dropped against the woman he was defending (who claims that she'd never even been near enough to a computer to pirate ant music).
This entire debate really harks back to the lecture we had about the power of the blogosphere. It seems as though had the lawyer made these same comments about the RIAA in any other medium, he'd have been legally punished for it by one of the judges involved. Yet because it was done on a blog, he seems to have gotten off the hook. There's still a lot of debate as to whether or not it was ethical for the lawyer to keep a running blog about the misgivings he personally had with the RIAA, and whether or not he technically broke any laws, but I'll leave that up to the courts to figure out. I guess it just further shows the power of blogging for politically and morally motivated speech
Is Society A Victim Of Internet Piracy
Monday, October 12, 2009 by Simon
For a couple of days now I have been contemplating the idea that society itself may indeed be a victim of internet piracy. Society and in particular group interactions have the potential to be dramatically changed by the easy availability of media online. My point is best illustrated through the medium of film. In the past watching movies especially at the cinema was largely a group activity enjoyed by couples or groups of friends. Now many people choose to download pirated films and watch them at home alone. This is just one example of how the availability of digital media online can change group dynamics, or remove them all together. This trend can filter through to other aspects of life as the public no longer has the need to interact with other people when they can access almost anything they want from the comfort of their own homes. At the very least people were forced to interact with the cashier at the video store if they wanted to rent a movie. While this is a slow and gradual process, internet piracy has the potential to damage society by changing the way people react with others. Record companies and corporations are not the only victims.
Web 2.0 and Prosumption
by Rick
If any of you have ever heard of or played GTA: San Andreas on PS2, XBOX or PC, i think you'll find this link very interesting: YouTube - Gta San andreas Street BMX.
I think this video shows a very good example of audience agency. This video represents users taking and modifying a now 'classic' PS2 game, displaying incredible skills in defying the games capabilities in order to share with other users on YouTube, with no explanation other then for fun.
The game has received 119,113 views and 232 comments.
The fact that this video has received so many views and comments can help to explain users online in the Web 2.0 era - very capable, to find this video funny at all it assumes viewers know about game editing, camera editing, has played the game already and understands at least its premises, understands the functions of how YouTube operates.
The fact that so many positive comments have been placed regarding the video, reflects a growing number of producing-users, who take time (in this case, a lot) to create a video people will find humorous for no other reason then sharing and entertainment (it would have taken far less time not to have edited the video and posted it on YouTube).
There is no obvious profit motive for making this vid that i can see, there are many videos posted by other players of their stunts in reply, and, i think its a good'un
Researching further on this i found players have also posted several videos, and reply videos about 'interesting' ways to kill their in-game girlfriends: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8twFt69fd4c.
If people are doing this on a classic game (Rockstar Games 2004) what will people be posting (publicly) on modern similar games (powerful graphics engines and more realistic gameplay). Here's one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NT5TIbC6Z8&feature=related.
I think this video shows a very good example of audience agency. This video represents users taking and modifying a now 'classic' PS2 game, displaying incredible skills in defying the games capabilities in order to share with other users on YouTube, with no explanation other then for fun.
The game has received 119,113 views and 232 comments.
The fact that this video has received so many views and comments can help to explain users online in the Web 2.0 era - very capable, to find this video funny at all it assumes viewers know about game editing, camera editing, has played the game already and understands at least its premises, understands the functions of how YouTube operates.
The fact that so many positive comments have been placed regarding the video, reflects a growing number of producing-users, who take time (in this case, a lot) to create a video people will find humorous for no other reason then sharing and entertainment (it would have taken far less time not to have edited the video and posted it on YouTube).
There is no obvious profit motive for making this vid that i can see, there are many videos posted by other players of their stunts in reply, and, i think its a good'un
Researching further on this i found players have also posted several videos, and reply videos about 'interesting' ways to kill their in-game girlfriends: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8twFt69fd4c.
If people are doing this on a classic game (Rockstar Games 2004) what will people be posting (publicly) on modern similar games (powerful graphics engines and more realistic gameplay). Here's one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NT5TIbC6Z8&feature=related.
Prevalence of Advertising
Sunday, October 11, 2009 by BoSox
I remember reading an article about growing advertising on blogs about a year ago. I am unable to find it at this point, but it concerned advertising that had begun appearing on blogs, specifically those written by and targeted toward moms. It was "exposing" the hidden adverts that were lurking in blogs, ready to jump out at unsuspecting readers, and it may have been that way at the time. By now, however, I feel that people are much more aware of the prevalence of advertising and wouldn’t be shocked by a mom profiting from her blog.
Basically, these women tend to be stay at home moms who are given products at no cost, in exchange for writing about and "suggesting" them to other moms. Marketers do know the power of such bloggers, as shown by this Youtube video:
I did have a look through "The Mommy Blog," however, and found something quite interesting in the post titled "Gimme an F! Gimme a T! Gimme a C!" written on Oct. 5. The blogger states that she does not write reviews or receive payment for writing about products, though she does still receive unrequested products from hopeful companies.
This post restored my faith in bloggers who are obviously on the web not for personal gain, but instead for the joy of blogging and to provide entertainment and information for others in the same position.
Basically, these women tend to be stay at home moms who are given products at no cost, in exchange for writing about and "suggesting" them to other moms. Marketers do know the power of such bloggers, as shown by this Youtube video:
I did have a look through "The Mommy Blog," however, and found something quite interesting in the post titled "Gimme an F! Gimme a T! Gimme a C!" written on Oct. 5. The blogger states that she does not write reviews or receive payment for writing about products, though she does still receive unrequested products from hopeful companies.
This post restored my faith in bloggers who are obviously on the web not for personal gain, but instead for the joy of blogging and to provide entertainment and information for others in the same position.
Something raised in the tutorial this week was the convergence of different media forms and we were discussing if the internet was becoming more and more like television. I found this to be particularly true in terms of major local TV channels. Even as early as last year it was easy to watch practically any TV show or news that you wanted on YouTube, but now, I'm sure most of you have found the huge changes brought to the site, especially relating to copyright infringements and advertising. Posting from personal recordings are very quickly removed due to copyright infringents, and the TV companies themselves, have resorted to put up their own videos (usually not the whole video, but only previews) as well as their own ads for their shows and YouTube ads. We can see that they are trying to capitalise as much as possible and in a way encourage people to watch their actual shows on TV more.
Locally, TV channels such as TV1 news have ads embedded on every single one of their news clips and in some cases, we are actually more bombarded with ads online than we would have , watching news on TV. Online platforms have definitely shifted as an alternative to traditional media to one that is increasingly controlled by big coorporations and gatekeepers - who decide what we should see or share - just like it is in the offline world.
Locally, TV channels such as TV1 news have ads embedded on every single one of their news clips and in some cases, we are actually more bombarded with ads online than we would have , watching news on TV. Online platforms have definitely shifted as an alternative to traditional media to one that is increasingly controlled by big coorporations and gatekeepers - who decide what we should see or share - just like it is in the offline world.
the open book of our lives
by --jk
In our society today with our technological devices it is hard to define the word 'privacy'. Features such as the news feed on Facebook acts as a watchdog for many of us.The idea of social convergence invades our personal space and privacy and our minor details are being exposed to everyone. Although we choose to put that information in the open on SNSs for our friends, there is the feeling of invasion behind it. The information we put out is available for people to see but the idea of showing everyone in our friends list is an invasion to privacy because it is not intended for certain people to be notified of. The concept of privacy has changed for many people today as a result of using new media technologies and SNSs because being notified about people's information and conversations with other people has become normal. Our information is constantly exposed through these sites but if people are concerned about their privacy, they should not post it out in general. Nothing is really private unless you don't post the 'private' information on Facebook.
In this weeks article Yar discuses the topic of the lack "of resonance in public sentiment about either the inviolability of intellectual property rights or the harmfulness of their traduction", which also brings about the question as why it is that if hypothetically having to steal from a store a moral individual feels the actual shame of the crime they are committing, whilst not feeling an inch of the same shame in response to the crime they are committing on-line through the act of piracy. Is it perhaps that we choose to be les aware of the idea of right and wrong within the privacy of our own home? This seems to be a strange and fascinating tendency in our nature, which isn't afraid to break the law as long as its in secret.
Perhaps it is that some of us keep in mind that when we are performing the acts of piracy we are not robbing the actual cast or crew of the film who may be our celebrity hero's. We are simply robbing the investors of the film forgetting that they in fact made the film possible for us to watch in the first place. But because online access provides us with the chance to get something for free which we would normally have to pay for we siese the opportunity to save as well as get faster access to a new release which we would commonly have to wait to first be provided for us in the cinema. After asking certain people the question as to why they download or bye pirated films one of the most interesting answers that I recieved was "after all it is the person who stole the film from the film studio, who is the real criminal, we are simply taking a piece of what has already been taken." In this case we are similar to the voucher's who are simply eating the remains of an already dead corpse. However our 'minor' individual participation further encourages the massacre of the film industry's budget, slowly lowering film production in both quality and quantity.
Perhaps it is that some of us keep in mind that when we are performing the acts of piracy we are not robbing the actual cast or crew of the film who may be our celebrity hero's. We are simply robbing the investors of the film forgetting that they in fact made the film possible for us to watch in the first place. But because online access provides us with the chance to get something for free which we would normally have to pay for we siese the opportunity to save as well as get faster access to a new release which we would commonly have to wait to first be provided for us in the cinema. After asking certain people the question as to why they download or bye pirated films one of the most interesting answers that I recieved was "after all it is the person who stole the film from the film studio, who is the real criminal, we are simply taking a piece of what has already been taken." In this case we are similar to the voucher's who are simply eating the remains of an already dead corpse. However our 'minor' individual participation further encourages the massacre of the film industry's budget, slowly lowering film production in both quality and quantity.
A nation of criminals?
by Katie
After reading Yar and other opinions on the morals of illegal music downloads, there seems to be a common thought that online piracy is a catalyst for other more sinister behavior, something which I disagree with. Like a classmate mentioned, there is a big difference in downloading a music track and stealing the physical CD from a store. The latter is premeditated, involves risk and implies certain character or behavioral traits of the thief that leads them to physically steal the goods, hence petty theft often escalates to more serious crimes. However, since illegally downloading media arguably doesn't involve these elements it can hardly be seen as a crime, and therefore is unlikely to escalate to more serious situations.
In the post Psychology of Internet Music Piracy, on the website Not Evil Music Niklas Ramo says "It is hard for people to consider piracy as a real threat, because you can’t see the Internet pirates actually stealing anything tangible. Downloading an album is different from shoplifting, because online digital copies are “non-rivalrous” goods", to which I fully agree with.
Personally, I think that the fight against music piracy is fruitless, as like the tradition of making mix-tapes in the '90s, file-sharing and torrenting media has become a hobby for todays youth. People aren’t setting out to purposefully partake in illegal behavior, it’s just an activity that has become normalized in society, namely because of the lack of social stigma around it. If it has become so engrained in society, then it can hardly be argued that in every instance downloading media illegally can lead to more serious crimes, as if it was true then we would be dealing with a whole generation of criminals!
On a lighter note, here's a song by satirical musician Weird Al Yankovich on the effects of music piracy:
Privacy in using Google account
by yvonne
One of our classmates mentioned that Gmail context-sensitive advertisement in tutorial, which makes me concerned about the privacy in our email. I used hotmail for ages and recently I signed a Google account for publishing post in blogger, and I found that it’s so convenient to sign a Google account, which is functional and various tool for use it. I think that is the reason why so many people own a Google account. iGoogle also has been personalized in my setting. There are BBC News, YouTube, weather in Auckland and a web game on my iGoogle. As people always said I search from the internet to nowadays I Google something on the web. The big difference is the Google already become a mainstream search engine. Why is Google？ I use Google scholar to search books for a research essay. It can adds any book to my library. It saves lots of time to go to the library. And Google translate also helps me read some second language books much easy. However, Gmail is also my new land. I never write any personal information or private message to people because it’s not necessary to consider about its privacy. As context-sensitive ads become a new tendency used in mail, I would like to say our privacy has been digitalized and analyzed from words to a number. Its physically transform which make me have a deep think. Even Google company said they will never publish our privacy or protect our privacy at the first place, how can I know if it is true. Although, we use email to contact and communicates our friends, and I don’t like my content being highlighted and similar content appears to you. It looks like our privacy little secret space infringed and opened by ‘watcher’. I have to suggest that we need a real privacy in life.
The Issue of Downloading.
by May Rose
Last Week’s lecture on Copyright and Intellectual Property end with three perspectives on the anti-piracy debate:
1. People should not download things illegally at all.
2. People should use judgement when choosing what to download, e.g: Download illegally from established artists and buy local artists music; Download single mp3s but buy full albums; or buy songs from artists one really likes while illegally downloading songs that you will just toss away later.
3. People should be able to download whatever they want for free since it is easy.
Along with this, many people argue that file sharing is a way of bonding with friends and like giving them presents as since in one of this anti-piracy video from last week’s lecture:
They argue that people should not give what is not theirs. But by saying this does it mean that it is ok to share bought entertainment? One legal version can be the base of many illegal copies.
Companies and authorities like RIAA and MPAA want people to stop downloading things illegally but their “efforts” are not good enough. They need to stop campaigns like this one which people fast forward on their DVD players:
And start having more with people who are actually affected. Here a few good ones from Paula Abdul and Jack Black:
1. People should not download things illegally at all.
2. People should use judgement when choosing what to download, e.g: Download illegally from established artists and buy local artists music; Download single mp3s but buy full albums; or buy songs from artists one really likes while illegally downloading songs that you will just toss away later.
3. People should be able to download whatever they want for free since it is easy.
Along with this, many people argue that file sharing is a way of bonding with friends and like giving them presents as since in one of this anti-piracy video from last week’s lecture:
They argue that people should not give what is not theirs. But by saying this does it mean that it is ok to share bought entertainment? One legal version can be the base of many illegal copies.
Companies and authorities like RIAA and MPAA want people to stop downloading things illegally but their “efforts” are not good enough. They need to stop campaigns like this one which people fast forward on their DVD players:
And start having more with people who are actually affected. Here a few good ones from Paula Abdul and Jack Black:
Silly Lily...or is she?
by riisujon
The debate continues in regard to copyright law, digital rights and piracy...
Lily Allen thought she might have a go at igniting the issue and posted her thoughts and views of file sharing on her website blog.
Her basic overall argument was that illegal file sharing was hurting and having a dangerous effect on the music recording industry in the UK. As such she wanted to put the problem firmly into the public domain, in order to increase public/industry debate and feedback on the issue. Unfortunately for Lily there was feedback, lots of it, sadly for her it was overwhelming negative towards her stance, so much so that she deleted the blog form her website.
One stand out rebuttal to Allen's blog was a new media you tube clip, constructed brilliantly from Dan Bull, a UK musician himself, who took much offence at her idealistic tone and point of view. Here, see for your self.
As for the online resentment towards her, could it be because Lily Allen herself is a highly paid UK recording artist, with a lucrative major label record deal, that people don't have as much tolerance with her position on piracy, compared to say that of an an artist that is on a independent label.
Also her approach to readers on the blog was to more or less to demonise them for the practice of and partaking in illegal file sharing, and not herself provide any solutions or alternatives in her position as a musician (which could be quite valuable many thought).
Anyway if you believe her twitter comments it is job well done. She has created more publicity for the issue of copyright infringement, and as such is happy to leave it at that, more firmly in the public conscious.
It seems the debate is gathering momentum, with indications that the powers to be in the UK are starting to listen and take the issue of copyright infringement seriously. Options being put forward include the same legislation still being evaluated in New Zealand, of shutting users online access down for continuous suspected copyright infringement(Section 92 of the Copyright Infringement Act).
Intriguly Radio Head's name was mentioned in relation to the (FAC) Featured artists coalition in the support of anti piracy legislation. Radio Head...hm, wasn't that the same band that not so long ago revolutionised online digital access to their music by allowing their new album to be either purchased or downloaded for free..
Perhaps they created a monster by removing the control away from them (the artist and their record label), and instead giving power to the consumer in whether they purchased the music or not. Perhaps now as a result they have difficulty in the control or limit of free downloads for their music overall
The debate is very much in its infancy, and as such digital rights is now and will continue to be a very problematic issue. Due to the overwhelming access and freedom the Internet now provides to download music, it will take some time to make any real progress or implement sustainable mechanisms in moving forward for the industry and the consumer...
Lily Allen thought she might have a go at igniting the issue and posted her thoughts and views of file sharing on her website blog.
Her basic overall argument was that illegal file sharing was hurting and having a dangerous effect on the music recording industry in the UK. As such she wanted to put the problem firmly into the public domain, in order to increase public/industry debate and feedback on the issue. Unfortunately for Lily there was feedback, lots of it, sadly for her it was overwhelming negative towards her stance, so much so that she deleted the blog form her website.
One stand out rebuttal to Allen's blog was a new media you tube clip, constructed brilliantly from Dan Bull, a UK musician himself, who took much offence at her idealistic tone and point of view. Here, see for your self.
As for the online resentment towards her, could it be because Lily Allen herself is a highly paid UK recording artist, with a lucrative major label record deal, that people don't have as much tolerance with her position on piracy, compared to say that of an an artist that is on a independent label.
Also her approach to readers on the blog was to more or less to demonise them for the practice of and partaking in illegal file sharing, and not herself provide any solutions or alternatives in her position as a musician (which could be quite valuable many thought).
Anyway if you believe her twitter comments it is job well done. She has created more publicity for the issue of copyright infringement, and as such is happy to leave it at that, more firmly in the public conscious.
It seems the debate is gathering momentum, with indications that the powers to be in the UK are starting to listen and take the issue of copyright infringement seriously. Options being put forward include the same legislation still being evaluated in New Zealand, of shutting users online access down for continuous suspected copyright infringement(Section 92 of the Copyright Infringement Act).
Intriguly Radio Head's name was mentioned in relation to the (FAC) Featured artists coalition in the support of anti piracy legislation. Radio Head...hm, wasn't that the same band that not so long ago revolutionised online digital access to their music by allowing their new album to be either purchased or downloaded for free..
Perhaps they created a monster by removing the control away from them (the artist and their record label), and instead giving power to the consumer in whether they purchased the music or not. Perhaps now as a result they have difficulty in the control or limit of free downloads for their music overall
The debate is very much in its infancy, and as such digital rights is now and will continue to be a very problematic issue. Due to the overwhelming access and freedom the Internet now provides to download music, it will take some time to make any real progress or implement sustainable mechanisms in moving forward for the industry and the consumer...
Copyright Law
by M09
Copyright as law is a tricky matter. Copyright protection of sound recordings only lasts 50 years from creation. To complicate the matter, a single recording could guarantee the copyright of two different people (songwriter and composer, for example). Also, the rights of these two people are not equal. Songwriters may receive royalties for life plus 70 years, compared with the 50 years from composition for performers.
Cliff Richard in particular stands to lose due to the fact that many of his early recordings are passing the 50 year mark, which means he will no longer receive royalty payments on those songs. He disputes the disparity in rights between songwriter and performer, "We are as important to a song as the writer is because we give it life". However, major artists are a minority. Most artists will not sell millions of records and accordingly their contracts stipulate large percentage payments back to record labels. In such cases copyright extensions represent little benefit. Gowers Review of Intellectual Property recommended against law changes partly due to this fact.
Additionally, there is an argument to be made against current copyright law as it weakens free market competition. This is especially concerning when we realise copyright is instituted at the moment of recording and quality or offensiveness is no obstacle to copyright protection.
Cliff Richard in particular stands to lose due to the fact that many of his early recordings are passing the 50 year mark, which means he will no longer receive royalty payments on those songs. He disputes the disparity in rights between songwriter and performer, "We are as important to a song as the writer is because we give it life". However, major artists are a minority. Most artists will not sell millions of records and accordingly their contracts stipulate large percentage payments back to record labels. In such cases copyright extensions represent little benefit. Gowers Review of Intellectual Property recommended against law changes partly due to this fact.
Additionally, there is an argument to be made against current copyright law as it weakens free market competition. This is especially concerning when we realise copyright is instituted at the moment of recording and quality or offensiveness is no obstacle to copyright protection.
by flyboi
One Laptop Per Child means exactly what it says. I have to admit though it’s not a bad idea in fact it’s a fantastic idea...if you’re living in a developed country such as NZ. I can’t fathom the logic behind giving kids from third world countries laptops, especially if they’re struggling to focus from the rumbling of their hungry stomachs.
Samoa is considered a third world country, how about the recent tsunami that wiped out hundreds and left thousands homeless? Would the kids that are hungry, in need clothes and medical attention benefit from receiving a laptop? Definitely not! So I have to agree with Bill (Mr Gates) and his concerns with this whole scheme, how could you substitute a laptop for food? Get real Mr Negroponte!
This is clearly an example of the limitations of technological determinism, the idea that the technology is the primary force that controls how individuals and society change. Ok so I get what Negroponte is trying to do, by teaching children how to learn and that in order for developed countries can only develop if its citizens are educated, so it would fit right because they would be conforming to the modernity of the technologically that is given to them...but none of this can be achieved if children are malnourished.
Malnourised children will eventually die, if they die then it isn’t actually One Laptop Per Child because the most important component is absent, the child. My thoughts...give them a laptop AND food not only to survive, but have the strength to actually operate it, I know how hungry I get when I’m sitting at my laptop for a while...hmmm I’m going to make a sandwich right now.
Samoa is considered a third world country, how about the recent tsunami that wiped out hundreds and left thousands homeless? Would the kids that are hungry, in need clothes and medical attention benefit from receiving a laptop? Definitely not! So I have to agree with Bill (Mr Gates) and his concerns with this whole scheme, how could you substitute a laptop for food? Get real Mr Negroponte!
This is clearly an example of the limitations of technological determinism, the idea that the technology is the primary force that controls how individuals and society change. Ok so I get what Negroponte is trying to do, by teaching children how to learn and that in order for developed countries can only develop if its citizens are educated, so it would fit right because they would be conforming to the modernity of the technologically that is given to them...but none of this can be achieved if children are malnourished.
Malnourised children will eventually die, if they die then it isn’t actually One Laptop Per Child because the most important component is absent, the child. My thoughts...give them a laptop AND food not only to survive, but have the strength to actually operate it, I know how hungry I get when I’m sitting at my laptop for a while...hmmm I’m going to make a sandwich right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)