#n8553025

This final blog post will be on the Week 9 topic New Media, Big Data and Telemetrics by Darryl Woodford (2014). In this blog post I’ll review what big data is and provide an example on how big data is used currently and how important and powerful a tool it is in our modern times. Every time we click on a website or make a purchase we are generating a piece of data. As Siegel (2013) suggests, that data is a priceless collection of experience from which to learn from. Big data is collating that information and understanding customers more confidently and accurately on a much larger scale. According to SAS (2014), the mainstream definition of big data includes the three V’s: volume (the amount of data being collected), velocity (the speed at which data travels) and variety (which includes data in all types of formats). But one particular online visual that stood out to me was this notion, and almost likening Big Data to the planet developing a nervous system – meaning that Big Data has the ability to measure, analyse, visualise and then respond to what’s happening all around the world in real time. I’ve learnt that big data has many universal meanings, and the YouTube video on blackboard ”What is big data?” really outlines what big data means to a business professional in today’s society. Some definitions included: a means to running a better business for customers, providing global access to all the possible information about human response and human innovation, and providing a more accurate analysis that can lead to confident decision making and reduced risks. While I was browsing the web I came across a YouTube video “What Big Data Says About You,” where photographer and journalist Rick Smolan talks about Big Data and mentions an interesting example. In his interview, Rick talks about the Gates Foundation who has being trying to eradicate polio in Nigeria. Looking at satellite maps they found that there were villages in Nigeria that nobody knew existed (they didn’t exist on any known map). So, the Gates Foundation gave out ten thousand GPS enabled cell phones to polio inoculation workers to make sure they go to every single hut (and visit every single family and child). Unless you inoculate everybody you can’t eradicate it, so this idea of using satellites combined with cell phones to eradicate polio is an example of how big data can be used to help people (especially in developing countries). I guess it’s not something that leaps to mind when you talk about big data, but this human story really helped me understand big data in a different way (a way that most of the definitions provided didn’t). In closing, Darryl (2014) covered New Media, Big Data and Telemetrics in the week 9 lecture in depth. Most importantly, it was reiterated that big data is perhaps one of the most important frameworks of our generation. No longer are we an information age but a network of intelligence and collaboration. References Seigel, Eric. 2013 “Introduction- The Prediction Effect.” In Predictive Analytics, 1-16. Hobroken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Inc. Accessed May 10, 2014. Statistical analysis system (SAS). 2014. “Big Data – What it is and why it matters.” Accessed May 10, 2014. http://www.sas.com/en_us/insights/big-data/what-is-big-data.html Woodford, Darryl. 2014 “New Media: Big Data and Telemetrics: Week 9 lecture notes.” Accessed May 10, 2014. Youtube. “Polio’s Last Percent – Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.” Accessed May 7, 2014. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU3Lw7Nn3qg Youtube. “What is Big Data.” 2012. Accessed May 7, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahZGEusG13A Youtube. “What Big Data Says About You.” 2013. Accessed May 7, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc1zBNC9wNY

As authoritarian governments such as Turkey, try to limit access to social media, people are more determined to undertake collective action and demand change (Shirky 2011). Malcolm Gladwell (2010) questions this kind of activism and argues that platforms such as Twitter and Facebook are built around weak ties. If Twitter is a just way of following, and Facebook is only a tool for managing acquaintances, why is it then that through the use of Facebook, thousands of people gathered to protests in the streets of Egypt? If the Facebook message wasn’t created, would it have the same outcome? The answer is no. In further readings, sociologist Mark Granovetter observed that “there is strength in weak ties” and that “our acquaintances–not our friends– are the greatest source of new ideas and information” (Gladwell 2010). This supports the notion that slacktivism is the new activism. I believe that new media politics and engagement is one of the most important elements of social media in today’s society. Dictatorial governments and policy makers in countries around the world should be held accountable. There needs to be a balance, but as it stands, those that are missing out are everyday citizens and the only way to have a voice and have any kind of power, is through the use of new media tools like Facebook and Twitter. References Faris, David. 2010. “(Amplified) Voices for the Voiceless.” Arab Media & Society, 11. Available at: http://www.arabmediasociety.com/?article=750 Gladwell, Malcom. 2010. “Small Change: Why the Revolution will not be Tweeted.” The New Yorker, October 4. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “New Media Politics and Engagement”: Week 8 lecture notes.” Accessed April 22, 2014. Shirky, Clay. 2011 “The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change.”In Foreign Affairs 90:1. Available at: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67038/clay-shirky/the-political-power-of-social-media

I don't exactly talk like this to my mum but let's HOPE it doesn't get to this stage!!!!!!!! References: Youtube. 2014. “Text Slang.” Accessed April 12, 2013. http://www.youtube.caom/watch?v=wB3D6W7ZHts Baym, Nancy K, (2010). Chapter 2 : Making New Media Make Sense. In Baym, Nancy K, Personal connections in the digital age, (pp.22 - 45). Cambridge: Polity Press. Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “New Media Enterprises. Week 6 Lecture”. PowerPoint Presentation. Accessed April 5, 2014.

In week 4, Theresa talked on the topic of new media enterprises. She placed large emphasis on the importance of reconceptualising audiences and also how new media capitalist has blurred the idea of participatory systems. The reconceptualisation of audiences around the world has impacted the way social media and the Internet exists. In the lecture, Theresa explains changing societies and how over time people are no longer driven by physical labour. This is because activities that they’re involved in consist of multiple smaller tasks that can take place anywhere and is less expensive with smaller technologies. Following this shift in societal changes, Zittrain (2009) supports the notion of a collaborative and participatory economy and emphasises the importance of crowdsourcing. In his presentation, Zittrain (2009) used Hurricane Katrina as a prime example of crowdsourcing and highlighted the effects that everyday citizens had on reuniting families during such a tormenting time. This is a positive example of how the reconceptualisation of audiences has influenced society. Theresa touches a little bit on the notion that consumers are no longer passive but active audiences and that people will not participate in future without payment (2014). She goes on to say that there is a change in the ‘work landscape’ to include companies and people positioning themselves in networks, with the ability to be more flexible, open-ended and dynamic. We’re all participatory systems in one way or another. This can be anything from commenting on a friends Facebook status to completing an online survey for a company. But is it really a shared space where workers and providers are both equally better off? No. There is definitely a capitalist approach when it comes to the Internet, but in the last few years there has been a significant increase in terms of how we as workers/consumers/the audience individually govern and take responsibility for our own work and the work of others. The second part of my blog will talk about the identifiable power that providers have on social media and how they position workers. Fuchs (2013) goes on to talk more about corporate colonisation of social media and how large corporations dominate the public sphere/participatory democratic space. An example of this is gamification and playbour. They are both ways in which users become workers by play and communicate are modes of production. In the long run, businesses gain a cheap and diverse workforce and workers are left without pay, without benefits and without an answer. These new enterprises, such as crowdsourcing, are ways for workers and consumers to participate and be a part of a bigger picture. No longer are they confined by top down regulations, but there is a sense community amongst online users. Although I found this week’s readings to be quite challenging, I have a better understanding of how audiences have, and are being reconceptualised and how the Internet now offers a more participatory approach compared to media from 20 years ago. References: Zittrain, Jonathan. 2009. Minds for Sale (video, 1hr 16mins). 16 November. Available at: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/2009/11/berkwest Fuchs, Christian. 2014. “The Power and Political Economy of Social Media.” In Social Media: An Introduction, 97 – 125. London: Sage Publications. (Available on CMD) Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “New Media Enterprises. Week 4 Lecture”. PowerPoint Presentation. Accessed April 5, 2014.

Lastly, with the convergence of new media technology and the introduction of social media platforms, producers have an endless supply of advertising. Fans are also equally advantaged with an increasingly active role in media production through social media sites just like the example of Veronica Mars above. The points I’ve raised in this short blog highlight the importance of audiences/fans and their place in new media production. References: Burgess, Jean and Green, Joshua, (2009). Chapter Two : YouTube and the Mainstream Media. In Burgess, Jean and Green, Joshua, Youtube : online video and participatory culture, (pp.15 - 37). Cambridge UK: Polity Press. Sauter, Theresa. 2014. “New Media: The Entertainment Industry. Week 5 Lecture”. PowerPoint Presentation. Accessed April 5, 2014. Shefrin, Elana (2004). Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and Participatory Fandom : Mapping new congruencies between the Internet and media entertainment culture., Critical Studies in Media Communication 21 (3) pp.261-281.

In Week 3, Theresa touched on the topic of creating new media content in today’s modern times. In particular, how that content is being produced across a variety of platforms through the use of convergence and spreadability, which I‘ll talk more about later in the blog. Firstly, before I go into more detail, I think it’s important to acknowledge that yes; there is definitely a changed relationship between audiences and media providers, but does that mean audiences feel empowered or disadvantaged? In Jay Rosen’s blog (2006), Tim Porter suggests that everyone is each other’s audience, whether you’re a good listener, a critic or someone who comments on another person’s Flickr photo, the publisher-audience relationship remains, but instead it is a loop not a pipe. This loop supports the participatory culture in which we live today. No longer is there a top down form of communication; instead, we (the users) are more active participants in our consumption and distribution of new media. An example of this is the sharing of content on Facebook and YouTube, with the movement of messages from person to person (Green and Jenkins, 2011, 111). This form of spreadability has empowered users to be more active participants and draw attention to interests and issues that the people, formerly known as the audience prefer (Rosen 2006). Convergence plays a large role when you consider the different technologies today allowing us access to the internet. These include laptops, IPhones and androids, Ipads etc. Perhaps the most valuable reasoning in support of empowering users is from the inventor of the World Wide Web himself, Tim Berners-Lee, who noted that his intention for the Internet was that it be a two-way flow of information (Brake 2013). The emergence of the Internet has made it so much easier for users to interact and harness the power of user-generated content. For example, people are able to create their own personal websites and contribute information to others (Brake 2013). So why then are users being disadvantaged? Well, it’s obvious that most of the people reading this blog have viewed a YouTube clip, so let’s not beat around the bush. We have collectively generated data for online media businesses. I browse the web and view YouTube videos all the time, but does that mean I’m being disadvantaged because I enjoy new media? Yes and no. In the lecture, Theresa goes on to talk about the reasons why users are being disadvantaged, and they include, but are not limited to, material, motivation, skills including operational, informational and strategic, and usage access (2014). These are primary reasons supporting user disadvantage. In my opinion, Rosen (2006) nailed it when he said, “there’s been a shift in power.” He’s not supporting the fact that the people now have all the power and the media lost theirs. Rosen suggests that this new “balance of power” is significant and changes the equation. References: Brake, David. 2013 “Are We All Online Content Creators Now? Web 2.0 and Digital Divides.” Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. Published online before print: 8 Nov 2013. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12042 (Available on CMD) Green, Joshua and Henry Jenkins. 2011. “Spreadable Media. How Audiences Create Value and Meaning in a Networked Economy.” In The Handbook of Media Audiences edited by Virginia Nightingale, 109-127. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. (Available on CMD) Rosen, Jay. 2006. “The People Formerly Known as the Audience” PressThink: Ghost of Democracy in the Media Machine, June 27.(short blog post). Avaliable at: http://archive.pressthink.org/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr.html

As a young adult, one of my fears is for an employer or a person unknown to me, to search my Facebook and learn information about me I understood to be private. Boyd (2011) argues that searching has become commonplace activity amongst Internet users today, with more than 2.4 billion (study shown in 2012) people using the Internet around the world (Terry 2014). People today have become so reliant upon media that it comes to shape our sense of reality (Deuze 2011). We build our lives around the internet, we search for definitions, organise meetings, pay our bills, book trips around the world, learn new languages, and even purchase products using our name, address, bank details and much more. We not only share our information with organisations and companies but with a space and collection of people (Boyd 2011). It's important to understand that the Internet plays a massive role in constituting our lifestyle, our identity, and our culture (Flew 2014). We are told to believe that our information is kept private however is not necessarily protected by coherent regulatory framework, but as Papacharissi and Gibson state, being social does require some (voluntary) abandonment of privacy (2011). References: Baym, Nancy K, (2010). Chapter 2 : Making New Media Make Sense. In Baym, Nancy K, Personal connections in the digital age, (pp.22 - 45). Cambridge: Polity Press. Boyd, Danah, (2011). Chapter 2 : Social Network Sites as Networked Publics – Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. In Papacharissi, Zizi, A networked self – identity, community, and culture on social network sites, (pp.39 - 58). New York: Routledge. Deuze, Mark (2011). Media Life., Media, Culture & Society 33 (1) pp.137-148. Flew, Terry, (2014). Chapter 1 : Introduction to New Media. In Flew, Terry, New media, (pp.1 - 17). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Papacharissi, Zizi and Gibson, Paige L, (2011). Chapter 7 : Fifteen Minutes of Privacy : Privacy, Sociality, and Publicity on Social Network Sites. In Trepte, Sabine and Reinecke, Leonard, Privacy online : perspectives on privacy and self-disclosure in the social web, (pp.75 - 89). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. YouTube. “Facebook: What Privacy?” 2012. Accessed 14 March, 2014. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bywO--sXENU Zuckerberg, Mark. 2006. An Open Letter From Mark Zuckerberg. Accessed 14, March 2014. https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook/an-open-letter-from-mark-zuckerberg/2208562130