#n7212143

In this week’s lecture we learnt about the phenomenon of Big Data, predictive analytics and how these concepts are reinventing the entertainment industry’s traditional modes of determining success. Big Data is essentially a buzzword that is used to represent the billions upon billions of bytes of data generated by the interactive processes of online business. The world’s information is now accessible in real time, generating statistics and figures corresponding to every nuance of interactivity. “Big data right now is leveraging all the advances in computing in order to make sense of all that information” (Chung, 2012).There’s ways to pinpoint the multitude of people that are talking about which specific news topics, which websites are accessed the most on a regular basis and which country listens to which musical artist the most. Analysis of this kind of data can accurately measure the way the public consumes any aspect of online life.  

Twitter hashtags are being analysed by television studios as a new mode of interrelation with viewers that goes beyond mere rating statistics. A television show’s social media presence and ability to generate an online dialogue has become almost as important as traditional platforms for measuring a show’s success. Cooper Smith wrote in Business Insider Australia that “Social TV activity creates a trove of useful data, which can be put to use to generate more effective advertising and better programming decisions”(2013).  Social Media functions as a real time focus group for television shows and a way for a network to determine the key demographics and opinions of their viewers. When an advertiser wants to know the kind of audience a television show has; big data analysis provides a more accurate, detailed depiction of these kinds of statistics than ever before.  It shows how an audience interacts, interweaves and connects with the wider media ecology (Woodford, 2014).

One example of a show fully embracing the world of social media is the hugely successful reality dance competition Dancing With the Stars. Last year the show partnered with social media giant Facebook to revolutionise the way their show functions.  Each episode now utilises two of Facebook’s main tools, its keyword API and keyword insights API. These API’s capture live conversations happening over the social network in real time which are displayed as messages and data on-screen during and after a dancer’s performance. This data is then analysed to determine which dancers are generating the most buzz and breaks down the volume of conversations into specific demographics such as age, gender and even hyper targeted to geographic locations (Marechal, 2013). This new mode of cross platform media interactivity not only makes for a more immersive consumer experience, but actively encourages viewers to create a social media dialogue to essentially promote the show. It is an inventive synergy exercise that has positioned the show as a modernist platform on the forefront of a new wave of entertainment technology. . 

Big Data has revolutionised the way entertainment is now marketed, created and consumed. As Anthony Silva stated in the Economist’s short video shown during our lecture: “We can measure so much more than we ever could, and now we’re going to be able to visualise so much more than we ever could and it’s going to provide a whole new framework for understanding human civilization (Silva, 2012)” It’s an exciting new development in new media that certainly can be pinpointed as one of the more exciting revolutions in popular culture today.

References

The Economist, Andrew Chung. “What is big data?.” YouTube. YouTube, 26 June 2012. Web. 11 May 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahZGEusG13A>.

Marechal, AJ. "Facebook Friends 'Dancing with the Stars' for First Entertainment Pact (Exclusive)." Variety. N.p., 16 Sept. 2013. Web. 11 May 2014.

Smith, Cooper. "Social TV Is Moving Beyond The Hashtag, And Deep Into Big Data Territory." Business Insider Australia. N.p., 13 Nov. 2013. Web. 11 May 2014.

The lecture in week 8 looked at new media’s growing influence on modern politics. Social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have changed the way we perceive and interrelate with political figures. The phenomenon of blogging has broadened the discourse of issues by giving anybody with an internet connection a voice. The participatory open source nature of the internet has been widely embraced by some of the biggest political factions in the world with major parties all over the world pouring millions of dollars into active social media campaigns to connect with the general public. However, one of the most polarising and revolutionary phenomena in new media is also it’s most controversial and misunderstood.  WikiLeaks is an online journalistic organization that quickly gained notoriety since its inception in the mid 2000s for leaking information of “ethical, political and historical significance” (WikiLeaks, 2014) that has been obtained illegal or leaked by anonymous sources.

WikiLeaks serves to usher modern politics into a new age of governmental transparency and accountability. An mission statement that has been heavily condemned openly by almost every western leadership in the world. The site first broke into the mainstream in 2010 after the first of a reported 250,000 US diplomacy cables started to be leaked to  international press, providing an unprecedented insight into how the world’s biggest superpower handles foreign diplomacy.  The cables revealed detailed accounts of corruption by foreign regimes, intelligence on undercover arms shipments and horrifying video footage of American Apache helicopters gunning down civilians in Baghdad (Leigh, 2010). The leak came from a former soldier, Bradley Manning who abused his access to the state department archives to upload 1.6 gigabytes of classified documentation stating: “"Information should be free. It belongs in the public domain" (Leigh, 2010). He has since been imprisoned in Kuwait; meanwhile no soldiers responsible for any of the “collateral damage” have been met with any form of repercussions.  

WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief, Julian Assange has been labelled a “high-tech terrorist” by both right and left sides of the American government. Some extreme right wing supporters have even called for him to be assassinated for treason. Assange himself stated in a opinion piece in The Australian that:  "The swirling storm around WikiLeaks reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth" (2010).I think one of the most relevant quotes that sums up the state of this battle for free speech and truth dates back over 40 years to the peak of the Watergate scandal in 1971, when Senator George McGovern declared to the New York Times: “The greatest danger in this country today is not the release of these documents, but the secrecy, the deception, the politics, the manipulation which is undermining the confidence of the American people in both political parties”. I find it perplexing that an organization that is purely dedicated to revealing the ugly truth as to how our world is run is met by such opposition.

  Schafer, Michael L. "Wikileaks Has Changed Journalism, But It Didn't Do It Alone." Lippmann Would Roll. N.p., 13 Dec. 2010. Web. 04 May 2014.

Assange, Julian. "Don't Shoot Messenger for Revealing Uncomfortable Truths." The Australian. N.p., 08 Dec. 2010. Web. 04 Mar. 2014.

Leigh, David. "How 250,000 US Embassy Cables Were Leaked." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 29 Nov. 2010. Web. 04 May 2014.

The internet has changed the way every facet of our business, personal and public lives are conducted, but despite its influence on the human experience it is still by and far one of the hardest platforms to effectively police, govern or control. Large sections of the platform operate almost like international waters in terms of distance from any form of law or order. While it is certainly more difficult to hide behind a veneer of anonymity on the World Wide Web than it was two decades ago, it is still a long way from being impossible. A number of key factors have made the internet a viable platform for varying levels of illegality and corruption.

Firstly, the internet isn’t as easily definable or tangible as similar mediums such as print media. “Communication can be anonymous or hard to trace back to an original source and evidence can be destroyed, hidden, wiped or altered by computer users or computer systems operators” (Flew, 2014). Identifying characteristics such as IP addresses which track a computer user’s modem to their exact location can be easily bypassed. Any experienced computer user is aware of hacking tricks to wield a constantly changing IP, which makes tracking perpetrators of any tangible internet based crime very difficult.

Another central issue is the broad international nature of the web. In his 2014 scholarly study on internet crime, Terry Flew said Internet users are able to “evade national laws by accessing content or undertaking transactions through other territorial domains” (Flew, 2014). This has been one of the key factors affecting the internet media piracy war, with pirates finding safe haven in countries with slack copyright laws such as Sweden or parts of Eastern Europe.

However, the main problem factor that makes internet piracy so impossible to govern is the sheer scope of the medium itself. Even if the tiniest 0.0001 percent of the billions of people online twenty four hours a day decides to conduct in illegal activity, it would simply be too much for any kind of regulatory policing body to handle. The main examples of arrests made in relation to internet crime have just been the largest and most visible proprietors of crime such as Mediafire, Napster and PirateBay.

Unfortunately, shutting down massively popular services such as these hasn’t done much to curb the problem. When the first version of PirateBay was shut down in 2012 after an extensive and lengthy international court case, the accused still managed to have the last laugh. “In retaliation, Pirate Bay wrapped up the code that runs its entire Web site, and offered it as a free downloadable file for anyone to copy and install on their own servers. People began setting up hundreds of new versions of the site, and the piracy continues unabated” (Bilton, 2012).

So will there ever be a conclusion to this brand of illegality? It doesn’t appear so, as long as the internet remains as large and as widely used as it is it will always be a target for crimes.  

Bibliography

Flew, Terry, (2014). Chapter 11 : Internet Law, Policy and Governance. In Flew, Terry, New media, (pp.178 - 197). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Our new media landscape has transformed the way we view, interact and promote every facet of the entertainment industry. It was no easy transition. The early 2000s were fraught with massive corporate lawsuits trying to protect their former business models. People were no longer buying or watching films in the same quantity anymore. Consumers could consume media content far easier, albeit illegally in the privacy of their own home than ever before. Once the dust of literally hundreds of lawsuits and billions of dollars cleared, it became apparent corporate entities had to adapt to survive in a new landscape. “Consumers are no longer satisfied just to enjoy print, video, or other forms of entertainment and information passively. In today’s search-driven world, consumers are actively looking for control, community, and interactivity” (Booz & Co, 2014). While this was certainly no easy transition, it did open up a wealth of platforms for new approaches to distribution, promotion and interaction with audiences.

In order to stand out in vastly different marketplace, businesses have had to adopt innovative strategies to promote their media product. This mentality has seen the implementation of transmedia becoming more and more commonplace, forcing studios into wielding a certain level of sophistication, panache and brand awareness across a variety of different mediums to truly standout in a saturated market. To appeal to a modern audience in film or any art form you have to present them with something unique to hold their attention. The very concept of transmedia ties into this. It differs from traditionalist notion of storytelling by presenting concepts, characters or stories across a variety of platforms such as film, television, literature, video games and the internet. If utilised properly it can create a consumer experience that challenges and encourage audiences to play more of an active role in the entertainment they watch or read or listen to making for a much more immersive and visceral consumerist experience.

  The internet levelled the playfield between the independent and corporate sectors, by giving content creators the opportunity to easily and cheaply appeal to global audiences. They now have the ability to seek out and appeal directly to a niche audience; the kind of intimate experience that a million dollar advertising campaign cannot compete with (Rheingold, 2002). An idea that has the potential to appeal directly to a certain kind of audience can be extremely cost effective.

  Local Aussie Horror film, The Tunnel (2011) is a clear point of reference. Its entire budget came from online donations via a “$1 for a frame” fundraising scheme (Brown, 2011). This is a perfect example of the benefits and profiteering in a transmedia world. The positives for the filmmakers are obvious in the sense that this provides much needed funding completely independent from the traditionalist Government bodies, but it also encourages the consumer to take an active role in the film’s creation. It embraces and immerses the audience into their creative process which will see them actively embrace the work. The fan response was immense and it insured the tiny independent film get screened at the prestigious Cannes film festival, in addition to a theatrical release through Hoyts cinemas, a cable syndication deal and DVD distribution deal.

While not every example is as profitable as The Tunnel, it’s clear that the new media landscape has vast benefits for every kind of content creator whether its big business or independent. In the end of the day while the revenue stream system has changed irrevocably, the consumer is the one who ultimately stands to gain.

  Bibliography

Rheingold, Howard 2002, Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, Basic Books/Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, Mass.

 Brown, Mike. "Paramount's ''The Tunnel'' to Be Released on BitTorrent and DVD - Neowin.net." Neowin.net - Where Unprofessional Journalism Looks Better. Ignition, 18 Mar. 2011. Web. 21 Oct. 2011. <http://www.neowin.net/news/paramounts-the-tunnel-to-be-released-on-bittorrent-and-dvd>.

For the past two decades, computing has relied on the limitations of your own personal hardware and software. This is a task which has gotten increasingly harder and harder as technology continues to evolve at an alarming rate. One of the main topics we learnt about in our week five lecture is the phenomenon of “Cloud Computing”.Clouds are essentially virtual servers that can be constantly updated and accessed anywhere in the world, enabling users to access and upload applications and data on-demand through a web browser regardless of their physical location or device.  

It is a new “way to increase capacity or add capabilities on the fly without investing in new infrastructure or training new personnel“(Knorr, 2011).  The licensing restrictions that are required to run software for the hundreds sometimes thousands of computers that are required to run large scale business operations can be a tricky and costly thing to manage. However “...with the right middle ware, a cloud computing system could execute all the programs a normal computer could run. Potentially, everything from generic word processing software to customized computer programs designed for a specific company could work on a cloud computing system”(Strickland, 2013). Some of the biggest digital corporations in the world clearly have seen the benefits this new kind of technology possesses, with giants such as Microsoft, IBM and Google investing tens of millions of dollars into research. The era of personal computing is now over, with this new brand of international data management quickly becoming the new norm in big business and at home.  

  However while the power of this new kind of internet workplace is undeniable, it is not immune to security threats and problems. There is a present danger involved in storing data on password protected virtual servers online. Simple hacking tricks such as “key logging” can track down a record of a user’s login details and passwords, opening up entire virtual servers content to a world misuse and potential illegal activity (Strickland, 2011).  Another sizable threat is data loss. Placing complete trust in an online server to store important data has its flaws. We all know that even the most sophisticated powerful software and hardware can malfunction or simply stop working. There’s small percentage of cases where files have become corrupted or lost in an upload process. While the chances of this are happening are slim. A large multinational company with terabytes upon terabytes of data stored cannot run the risk of even losing the smallest iota of data for any reason (Wilson, 2010).

  So do the positives outweigh the negatives in the world Cloud Computing? While the negatives are certainly clear, these are problems that could be attributed to any kind of work with computers. I think the personal and corporate benefits of a world where online collaboration, storage and software can be freely accessed at any time certainly overpower the disadvantages and it’s clear that this is the next stage in the internet’s evolution.

  Wilson, Karin. "Cloud Tech News." Cloud Tech News. N.p., 2010. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.

Strickland, Jonathan. "How Cloud Computing Works." HowStuffWorks. N.p., 2011. Web. 30 Mar. 2014

In recent years, a power shift in the new media landscape has changed the way we perceive and interact in the information age. The rise of social media, blogging and user generated content has blurred the lines between consumption and production, breaking down the walls between audience and media. Users have more control than ever before in a new world where the “production of ideas takes place in a collaborative, participatory mode...enabling all participants to be users as much as producers of information and knowledge” (Bruns, 2008).

However, our relationship with the way media is distributed isn’t just limited to user produced content. A key idea we learnt throughout the lecture is the notion of “spreadability”. This relates to how audiences dictate the kind of content that reaches mass audiences. “Audiences play an active role in “spreading” content: their choices, their investments, and their actions determine what gets valued” (Jenkins, Green, 2011). This new mode of information distribution is an unprecedented form of communication which has irrevocably changed the way media is presented, distributed and consumed.  ”It is no longer about what you read as an audience member, but how you engage with and reshape that text through the technological and social affordances of new media” (Meyers, 2012). This phenomenon applies to a theory called “Two-Step Flow” which deals with the way media texts and news don’t directly penetrate a mass audience the way they once did. Instead such content is filtered through “opinion leaders” and then communicated to a larger audience. This theory applies to the nature of blogging in today’s age which is fast becoming just as widely consumed as a legitimate news source.  

In the lecture, Theresa contextualised the state of media today by looking back at the history of content distribution.  In particular, “hyperdermic needle model” a mode in which a particular viewpoint is injected into a passive audience by mass media. It relates closely to the idea of propaganda and was largely credited to the rise of Nazism in Germany in 30s and 40s.

While the idea now that everyone now has a platform and a voice can certainly be viewed as a positive (certainly better than Nazi Germany), the obvious downside is that because everyone has access to the same means of distribution, these networks have become oversaturated.  “Days of content are uploaded to YouTube in less than an hour. Blogs are published by the hundreds around the world“(T. Brown, 2013). While this culture of users acting as producers certainly empowers people and makes for a broader and more diverse internet, it makes it harder and harder to find reliable, high quality content. Now that the traditional modes of information distribution are quickly becoming less relevant by the day, what does the future of media hold? Will the unstructured information free for all of blogging and social media continue to rise? Or will people grow tired of the saturation and the overload of content and return to traditional structured modes of information seeking? Is there even a way to go back?

Bibliography:

Green, Joshua and Jenkins. 2011. The Handbook of Media Audiences. Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester.

Jenkins, Henry, and Joshua Green. Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture (2013):

Bruns, Axel. Towards Produsage: Futures for User-Led Content Production (2006):

Meyers, E. A. "'Blogs Give Regular People the Chance to Talk Back': Rethinking 'professional' Media Hierarchies in New Media." New Media & Society 14.6 (2012): 1022-038. Print.

In recent years, a power shift in the new media landscape has changed the way we perceive and interact in the information age. The rise of social media, blogging and user generated content has blurred the lines between consumption and production, breaking down the walls between audience and media. Users have more control than ever before in a new world where the “production of ideas takes place in a collaborative, participatory mode...enabling all participants to be users as much as producers of information and knowledge” (Bruns, 2008).

However, our relationship with the way media is distributed isn’t just limited to user produced content. A key idea we learnt throughout the lecture is the notion of “spreadability”. This relates to how audiences dictate the kind of content that reaches mass audiences. “Audiences play an active role in “spreading” content: their choices, their investments, and their actions determine what gets valued” (Jenkins, Green, 2011). This new mode of information distribution is an unprecedented form of communication which has irrevocably changed the way media is presented, distributed and consumed.  ”It is no longer about what you read as an audience member, but how you engage with and reshape that text through the technological and social affordances of new media” (Meyers, 2012). This phenomenon applies to a theory called “Two-Step Flow” which deals with the way media texts and news don’t directly penetrate a mass audience the way they once did. Instead such content is filtered through “opinion leaders” and then communicated to a larger audience. This theory applies to the nature of blogging in today’s age which is fast becoming just as widely consumed as a legitimate news source.  

In the lecture, Theresa contextualized the state of media today by looking back at the history of content distribution.  In particular, “hyperdermic needle model” a mode in which a particular viewpoint is injected into a passive audience by mass media. It relates closely to the idea of propaganda and was largely credited to the rise of Nazism in Germany in 30s and 40s.

While the idea now that everyone now has a platform and a voice can certainly be viewed as a positive (certainly better than Nazi Germany), the obvious downside is that because everyone has access to the same means of distribution, these networks have become oversaturated.  “Days of content are uploaded to YouTube in less than an hour. Blogs are published by the hundreds around the world“(T. Brown, 2013). While this culture of users acting as producers certainly empowers people and makes for a broader and more diverse internet, it makes it harder and harder to find reliable, high quality content. Now that the traditional modes of information distribution are quickly becoming less relevant by the day, what does the future of media hold? Will the unstructured information free for all of blogging and social media continue to rise? Or will people grow tired of the saturation and the overload of content and return to traditional structured modes of information seeking? Is there even a way to go back?

Bibliography:

Green, Joshua and Jenkins. 2011. The Handbook of Media Audiences. Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester.

Jenkins, Henry, and Joshua Green. Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture (2013):

Bruns, Axel. Towards Produsage: Futures for User-Led Content Production (2006):

Meyers, E. A. "'Blogs Give Regular People the Chance to Talk Back': Rethinking 'professional' Media Hierarchies in New Media." New Media & Society 14.6 (2012): 1022-038. Print.

BLOG #1, 16/03/2014

We did an exercise in our third tutorial where we had to Google search the name of the stranger next to us. The results where surprising. Not only were the results accurate but more often than not people were baffled by the breadth of information readily available in the public domain. Addresses, businesses, phone numbers, private details and extensive family histories were unearthed with little to no effort. It is a legitimately unsettling feeling to know complete strangers can find out everything about the quality of your character within a few short clicks of a mouse button. With the advent of social media the idea of personal anonymity is quickly becoming a thing of the past. Our lives are on show and there’s not much anyone can do about it. As soon as I got home I instantly changed the privacy settings on my Facebook probably in vain to reduce the nature of this kind of phenomenon.

When Facebook started it was a somewhat revolutionary platform that functioned as a tool to easily network, share and connect with friends and family. The site rapidly beat its social media competitors, leaving similar sites such as MySpace to squander away their relevance as mere footnotes in internet history. Facebook became a cultural phenomenon; the most user-friendly and powerful Social Media tool of all time. As time progressed, updates to the site’s interface gradually chipped away at the site’s default privacy settings. Information about users became significantly more accessible to the general public than ever before. In 2010, founder Mark Zuckerberg stated: “doing a privacy change for 350 million users is not the kind of thing that a lot of companies would do. But we viewed that as a really important thing”. He sees Facebook as a constantly evolving platform to reflect society’s “cultural norms”.

A research report entitled “Privacy, Self-Disclosure,Social Support, and Social Network Site Use“ from the University of Hoheim in the United States argued the company’s notion. Using statistical analysis and surveying, the report came to the conclusion that the general public’s need for privacy increased in correlation with use of the social networking tool (Trepte, 2013). In the 2011 book, contributor K. Markman  stated that people ”…try to segment contexts by discouraging unwanted audiences from participating,or by trying to limit information to make searching more difficult, or by using technologies that create partial walls through privacy setting”. If it doesn’t truly reflect the consensus of their vast user base, why does Facebook continually re-evaluate it’s privacy settings?

 A credible explanation would be that Facebook feels threatened by social networking rivals such as Twitter who operate as a completely public domain service for users to share all aspects of their lives with other users and the public. However, Facebook is far bigger and growing faster than any of its competitors. People deserve the right to be able to conduct themselves in today’s social networking world without having their lives made permanently public.

Trepte, Dr. Sabine. “Privacy, Self - Disclosure, Social Support, and Social Network Site Use.” (2013): n. pag. Web.

"Facebook’s Zuckerberg Says The Age of Privacy Is Over." 2010, ReadWrite. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2014.