What Happens When Technology Converges?

As expressed in Lunenfeld's article our society is moving away from download based media towards upload based media.  Here he is describing how download based media was media that the audience has passively consumed and ‘downloaded’, whereas upload based media, demands the audiences participation to upload and create their own media.  He puts forth the idea that we are moving from a consumption model to a production model and describes television, which was once the main source of domesticated media, as “the high fructouse corn syrup of the imagination.”  This expresses how television requires no individual thought or imagination and instead the audience becomes sheep that passively consume what the advertisers paying want them to hear.  Uploading, on the other hand requires active audience participation which expands individuals opinions and knowledge of different forms of media.

As the Internet continues to expand we see how uploading for ourselves is possible more and more through the convergence of different types of media.  Take Facebook for example, what used to be simply a social media site to converse and keep up with friends, has turned into a website that connects video functions, audio functions, web pages for bands, movie stars and television shows and more functions that one could possibly hope to harness alone.  Like Sterne argues though, while its true we are able to upload for ourselves “our deepest commitments—to inclusion, equality and participation within a public—bind us to practices whereby we submit to global capital”.  In the example of Facebook, yes we are able to use the functions to our advantage, but we are still consuming main stream media and products by 'liking' the pages of television shows or other cultural product pages.  Corporations use social media that is based on active participation, to get people participating in what will make money for them in the long run.  So still in an era where active participation is encouraged, we are still essentially being controlled for the sake of consumerism.  This is however now the only way in which corporations can continue staying in business as forms of advertising on television have become less effective with the rise of the Internet.

Who would ever think that I would feel sorry for the large corporations that have been brainwashing my mind to consuming products but as the Internet is expanding towards new media, television, music, movie and advertising industries have needed to try extremely hard to keep the audience engaged in their products.  Since the age of “produsage” the music industry especially has been fighting hard for artists(and producers of course) to continue making money as it is now so easy to pirate songs of the Internet.  Similarly, movies and television shows are less consumed through businesses, and more so freely online with streaming and downloading website littering the Internet.  This being said, I am sure the corporations will find ways of continuing to make money, but they are going to have to exploit the new media that is continuing to emerge, such as through pages on Facebook.

 Everything is done online or on a computer now, and we are finding new ways to make the Internet accessible at all times, such as having it on phones or now on the iPad.  Technology has expanded so much that I would not be surprised if in the next 50 years that our use of paper could be completely erased and instead we will do all of our writing on individual iPad’s or something similar.  If the Internet and especially social media had not become so popular, I doubt that such technology would be created so quickly.  As Rheingold discusses it was the power of communities and connectivity, like Facebook, that are the heart of the digital era and not specific technology like the iPad. This of course would not be a bad thing as it would help the environment, but it just shows how much the Internet and the convergence of different types of media and technology have changed, and are continuing to change our every day lives.

            Through taking this course I have realized how many different tools for sharing your ideas are really on the Internet.  While I have always assumed that these sort of functions were possible given the immense library of apps and websites on the Internet, I had never before used them or thought of using them to spread my own ideas.  Now that I have had the opportunity to share my opinions on a virtual world I have to say that it feels good to see 775 pages views on my blog, a number that I would have thought unachievable for me, even if most of the views are my own classmates and professors.  The feeling that someone is actually reading and is interested in what I have to say makes me more inclined to continue to use forms of social media to do some of my own ‘uploading’.

 

Can We Become Our Own Journalists?

Canada has always been considered a democracy, citizens are able to vote and engage on who they think should represent them as a country.  With the rise of the Internet and social media, we are now able to take the term democracy to a new level as every citizen has access to social media and a voice to be heard.  In the past freedom of speech has been more difficult to achieve or every citizen didn’t exercise this freedom to the full extent.  Now freedom of speech in Canada allows every citizen the ability to become a journalist on any topic they are interested in or feel passionate about.  This was brought up in the article by Hermida who discussed the fact that journalist rely heavily on online tools, and since they are accessible to the public as well, more citizens have the ability to report on anything. For example just recently in this class we learned how to use Storify, and although I wasn’t aware of its existence before taking this class, I can see the benefits it possesses as you can research information from various social media sites and Internet stories to create a journalistic piece on any issue that is a topic of discussion.

I can really see the benefits that websites like Storify can have on social awareness and activism.  By putting websites together to connect to the main issue, information is easily accessible to anyone who searches that topic and wishes to be involved.  If that person then adds on to the issue by conducting their own research on the subject, the knowledge is expanded even further and a chain of events can occur.  If an issue is discussed enough online, the chances of it become aware in mainstream media is higher, and then the issue is brought to the eyes of a nation wide audience.  With this kind of chain of events, social activists are able to really connect with a large audience in a way that they could never do alone before.  We now have to voice to make mainstream media listen, and judge for ourselves what we want to see on television.  Although this chain of events doesn’t happen in every case, even having the issue circulating through the Internet is enough to make people think twice.  What was really noticed in the article from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, was the fact that television, which is the majority of people's go to news source, is lacking in reliability.  Now that we have the ability to discuss ideas in an open environment, we are relying on each other to get the facts straight.

I have to say that through this course my eyes have really been opened to the world of social media and the outcomes that can come from using it as more than a way to communicate with friends.  I still have my doubts about getting into twitter to get my points across, but I have to say that I really enjoy this blog.  I feel as though I am part of something bigger than my own life when I’m writing in it and though I don’t think anyone is listening other than in my class, if I continue writing past this course on things that really inspire me or issues I’m passionate about, I will be able to make a difference to somebody.  I also hope to use it to document my life through my travels, things that I’ve learned about different cultures and myself in hopes of connecting with someone who has had the same fears and doubts as me.

Why Teach ESL in Korea?

Response to sarajnewman

Response to sarajnewman

I really like the passage you chose that highlighted the major motivations for piracy.  I feel as though sharing in an online community and sampling in the form of remixing songs go hand in hand.  Today, it is common to find music that is sampled from others music, including within the well known band Led Zepplin.  They used rifts and ideas from others songs to create some of the most well known music.  Now with technology available to the whole public, we are able to download music freely and use that music to sample and create new songs.  All music is a form of art and building off ideas in art to make something completely unique is a part of that.  Because music is an art, it should be being shared within the public to listen and create off of.  Copyright laws protect the rights of the artists claiming the music as their own.  We as a the public who participate in piracy are not violating laws because we are not claiming we wrote or performed the songs.  You also made a point that I addressed in response to another podcast which is the expense of music.  I'm a poor student and would not have been able to afford the thousand plus songs on my ipod, but does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to listen to them? Or should I settle for listening on the radio with advertisements playing every other song? As if we aren't surrounded by enough.  

Response to sperrier686

Response to sperrier686's Podcast

You make a good point when you say that money is required in this world and because of this artists should be rewarded for their fruits of labour.  While I agree with that as being true to our society, there is still radio coverage which they are paid for every time their song is played, as well as concerts and other ways to make money with their music.  People seem to be so concerned for the artists and producers in the music industry and while they should be rewarded for their efforts, we cannot deny that the ones who become popular, whose music is most pirated, are still making millions through various different means.  When music is pirated people are not stealing it and claiming it as their own, they are appreciating the song and the easiness it takes to download it online.  In this day in age I really cannot see piracy online changing so I feel as though it is irrelevant to say they 'should' be making money of the songs that are pirated, because they aren't and will continue to lose money because people will continue to download music for free.  

Response to afcallaghan

Response to afcallaghan's Podcast

As much as I would like to agree with you and spend the money to purchase music I have to say that I don't.  Maybe it is because I grew up downloading music off the internet on sites like Kaza since I was 11 years old that makes the difference.  I found that when I did purchase full albums at stores like HMV I would not even care to listen to full albums only the songs I like.  I understand that iTunes allows you to buy singular songs but as a student I honestly cannot afford to buy every single song.  Why is it that we are able to listen to music for free on the radio but it becomes a crime once we download them off the internet?  We are now so used to downloading that we even use the internet to watch movies now, causing retail chains like Blockbuster to be closed down.  We are moving into an age where copyright laws are harder to keep track of because of the immense data on the Internet that are copied.  Music started out as an art but as soon as we were able to commodify it, we did.  I understand paying to go see a concert because their is the experience of seeing them live, but in this day and age I really don't think we should need to pay for music when it is so easy not to.

Podcast

These actions are reflected by the means with which the Big Five record companies (EMI, Universal, Sony, Time Warner and BMG [Bertelsmann]) have extended their market dominance to the Internet. The Napster system of peer-to-peer sound file trading posed a serious challenge to the existing recording industry, but the decision in  A&M Records et al.  v. Napster firmly established the on-line intellectual property rights of entertainment industry conglomerates and reinforced the Big Five’s existing market oli-go-poly. The defeat of Napster puts an end to one form of unregulated Internet market exchange. The question remains what the new platform for music distribution will be, and what flexibility and sharing of roles between creators, publishers and consumers will be allowed.

https://soundcloud.com/gforsythe-1/alexa-reads-for-comm-2f00

Sharing our Ideas

Throughout each century, society’s ideals, norms and cultures have dramatically changed. First information was able to be freely accessed and then copied, next society focused on physical ownership such as owning property and resources, but as we have moved into the 21st century, ownership transferred from physical property to abstract property including ideas, information and patents.  We entered into an age where products and ideas are bought and sold, so copyright laws are put in place to protect people's assets as copying is much cheaper than creating an original. As discussed in Kirby Ferguson's documentary  ' We hate losing what we've got'.  I remember when I was a kid how big of a deal it was if somebody copied your idea, it was even tattle tale worthy.  We have no problem copying if we are the ones doing it but as soon as someone tries to copy an idea, we become very territorial, wanting all the credit for our own cleverness.  What I should have listened to as a child and what we should remember when discussing copyright laws is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.  If we are sampling riffs from other songs like artists have done time and time again, it is only because we think it is good, but is that enough? 

Music and movies have always been an ongoing sociological factor throughout history and expresses the mentality, values, and ideas of culture: the reflection of society.  They also reflect a huge amount of existing material as Ferguson discussed that through social evolution we copy, transform, and combine ideas to create new or better ideas. With the advancements in technology, our society has changed, placing creativity and expression in the hands of the everyday consumer, and allowing the sharing of ideas and information to become effortless.  Through downloading, sharing and sampling, editing, music and movies have changed with each decade, becoming more technologically advanced. There are even musicians now who only base their music only on sampling, such as Girl Talk. With the ease that it takes for regular people to create and edit media, it becomes harder for the system to control copyright laws over material on the Internet.  This allows us to create freely accessible cultural commons on websites such as YouTube.  We now have to power to put out our own versions of songs sampled and remixed from others without too much thought to copy right laws.  That being said there is the fear of copyright laws that probably hinder a large portion of the population from playing around with sampling.  We have more power now than we ever did before, if every person was to be sued for the sampling they put out online, then the government would have to go through the effort of locating all of the culprits.

We have come so far with the advancement of technology that it is about time power is given to the people in the form of editing and creating.  All ideas are interwoven anyways so the notion that we cannot take a previously recorded song and mix it with others seems silly.  Musicians and movie producers have been basing ideas on previously invented ideas for years so why should we be hindered from mixing our own ideas and freely distributing them on the Internet?

Moving Pass Borders

Both Jenkins and Miller discuss in their articles on New Media convergence the concept of new media and how it changes Canadian society for the good and the bad.  With new media comes a whole new kind of community, one that has no borders and exists purely online.  As Pierre Levy states with the rise of common technology, "Not everybody knows everything, but everyone knows something, all knowledge resides in humanity."  This collective intelligence he speaks about, binds us together making us equal in the fact that we can all access knowledge, but at the same time exploits us as we are not in power of that knowledge, instead five media conglomerations monopolize most of what we attribute as "common knowledge".  Here Miller's ideas come in as he believes new media is first a new form of commodified consumption and second form of exploited media labour.  When we take Canadian media as an example, you see just how much it lacks in Canadian identity.  This is because of the five companies that control our Western media, and the Americanization of Canadian media.  Like Miller discusses this is a form of exploited media labour, leaving us with a lack of national identity. Our borders are so blurred with the rise of media and the Internet, that our neighbours to the south engulf our media.  With the rise of new media convergence we have to wonder if it is a positive or negative aspect of Canadian media.

For Better or for Worse

I have always been obsessed with new technology, and since cell phones have become popular, I have been sucked in to getting a newer and fancier phone each year.  With every phone that I have held in my possession through the years, each one has had a new feature by the next year.  From texting first, to MP3 players, to Wireless Access and finally to my IPhone which takes Internet access to a new level.  As much as cell phones have changed and impacted my life, I only really started noticing my reliance on them within the last couple of years, especially since buying my Iphone.  Though not everyone is as connected to mobile technology as I have been, as Josgrilberg (2008) states, "Even those who are not 'connected' have somehow been touched by the social changes that information and communication technologies promoted- for better or for worse."  For better or for worse.  That is a concept that I wish to explore because although I can admit to a minor obsession with technology, as I grow older I see the impact that being in constant communication can have.  The constant need for technology urks me as I feel that I should not need to rely on something so much even though I do.  With mobile phones it used to be texting and the need for constant communication with my peers.  With the rise of the Iphone and other smart phones, the need for communication and new technology became even greater for me.

Since Smart phones were created as Goggin discusses, the world of mobile technology has been steered away from mere conversations with our peers, to include the whole world, interconnected by the Internet (Goggin 2009).  Smart Phones could now be considered portable and light computers, with many of the same functions.  The downside as a consumer to this, as discussed in christainsblog91, is the growing need for businesses to move their advertising to the mobile world.  If there is a new form of Internet and technology, businesses must capitalize on this, by forcing advertisements onto personal devices.  As if we do not see advertisements enough, we are now being bombarded by them in every form of technology.  Since the Internet is now on our phones, so is the media and the ads that come along with it.  It is a smart idea for businesses but as a consumer and regular citizen, I have to wonder whether the line will ever be drawn or should we just come to accept that advertisements through forms of technology are here to stay.  Here the struggle of 'for better or for worse' comes in to play.  On one hand, we have the incredible power of the Internet in the palm of our hands, on the other, we are forced to be consumers through the advertisements not only placed on television, radio, and magazines but now on our own individual phones as well.

Iphone and smart phone users are not only permanently connected to the Internet, they now have the capability to do 'real life' things easier than ever before. Cell phones started with talking to your peers anywhere you wanted, but Smart phones now have more underlying technology than we could have ever possibly imagined (Walker et. al. 2008).  A video from the early '90s called "Knowledge Navigator", portrayed what Apple predicted technology would come to in the future.  The video shows a touch screen device that organizes dates, to-do lists, reminders and more.  The device did not look far off from the Ipad of today, but had many of the capabilities of an Iphone, a portable device which organizes dates, offers to do lists and reminders.  Even though Apple predicted such a device, they could not have predicted the expansion of mobile communication technology, connecting us wherever we go.  As discussed in Raymond's Blog, the features of Iphones have expanded to give us Apps, every day functions which make daily problems seem simpler.  There is no need to visit the bank anymore, you can just transfer money through an App on your Iphone.  Need a calculator? Look no more, as you can simply use the App on the device that is constantly glued to your side.  We rely on Smart phones now for not only communication, but also simple tasks that we could very easily accomplish without them.  Smart phones make us lazier with pure convenience in the palm of our hands.  For the 'best', they make our lives simpler, for the 'worst', we are becoming increasingly lazy through technology.  Technology will always create a wedge between an easier lifestyle and truly looking out for the best interests of society.

http://www.glasbergen.com/tag/comics-about-smartphones/

They've Really got a Hold on me

As discussed in the Social Implications of Mobile Telephony  by Scott Campbell and Yong Jin Park, mobile technology is the cutting edge of technology in our generation and has impacted the world by spreading the message "you cannot function without a mobile phone".  The article discusses the relationship between communication and the body, and how cell phones have made communication possible at any point in time.  Our generation seems to feel the need to be in constant communication at all times, especially with the popularity of texting.  If we are not communicating on our phones, we are waiting to be communicated with, waiting for that phone call or text message, waiting so much so that we are incapable of leaving the house without our cell phones.  If we do indeed forget our phone, we have minor to major anxiety attacks over whether it was misplaced or wondering if we will miss anything important.  Since cell phones are seen by the majority of working society as essential, Cell phone providers capitalize on this big time by setting out a newer version of the various models every year.  Now we not only think that cell phones are essential, but with the new conceptualization of smart phones, we have inner competitions, wanting to get the newest and best phone.  When I recently went home for Christmas vacation I saw a group of friends I had not seen in a couple of years,  what I noticed instantly was that in a group of ten people only one did not own an Iphone, and she stood out.  We are influenced by our peers as much as we influence ourselves into wanting the newest and most high tech phones.  If we get the newest phone before others, we consider ourselves superior, if we purchase it late it is because we feel pressured by our surroundings to be 'in the loop'.  Cell phones create competition and obsession, and as of this point Western society could not function without them, a sad thought when twenty years ago we could.