Network Media

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8r-tXRLazs

 

This week, we looked at Legacy Video, or the video making that was before the digital era. The legacy video I decided to look at this week was the Music Video for “Video Killed the Radio Star” covered by The Buggles in 1979. It was played early in class and was an example I thought would be great to talk about being legacy media as well as it having similar techniques used by video artist Nam Jun Paik. The practitioner of this video is Australian Video Director Russell Mulcahy. He began directing in 1977 and is still directing today (mostly television projects) having built a career directing many music videos, tv shows and films.

The video itself was produced in 1979 not long after the song itself was released. The video was authored by the director and the crew involved understanding analogue cameras. Something that was mentioned in the Nam Jun Paike documentary was how a notable feature he used within many of his video works both personally and on TV Lab were video synthesisers. These devices allowed video creators to play with the image they were capturing (they could make it look distorted, clearer, or less realistic. In the music video, synthesisers are features a few times, most notably in the first verse of the song with The Buggles’ lead singer is performing (first picture below). This technique was really pioneered by Nam Jun and his other creatives who had been using it for Television Lab over eight years earlier.

 

        

The music video was not so much published as it was sent to certain television programmes to be aired so that audiences could watch it. “Video Killed the Radio Star” first premiered on the BBC program Top of the Pops to promote the song then would have been aired on other shows as it increased in popularity. A notable fact about the video was that it was the first ever music video aired on MTV and quite a fitting one at that. The subject matter of the song explores how powerful television and the new technologies in television are becoming compared to radio, which is fitting for the Music television channel considering how important and popular music videos had become in the last few years up until then.

The Kate Hirsfield reading contextualises the factors contributing to people such as Nam Jun Paike creating unique and original video art. I found it really interesting to read about how much change occurred particularly in America in the 1960’s. There was a real lack of trust in the Government due to the Vietnam War controversy and many also believed that television was overly controlled and produced for the”mainstream”, inspiring them to challenge traditions and values placed on them by previous generations. That being said many people did interpret their desire to challenge the norm differently. Some by taking a lot of drugs, others by engaging in different movements including the Hippie Movement, or the second wave or feminism that emerged.

For those interested in creating video, they pushed the boundaries in their art making. Not focused on whether their works would be liked by everyone or even anyone, they set out to created video art for the sake of seeing what they could do and practising creativity. Legacy video, whilst very important during its time also brought certain constraints. Some examples we found in class were that it was expensive to be apart of as there were several pieces of filming equipment to buy as well as editing equipment to buy if one intended on making something for others to see.

Although TV Lab was created for those wanting to make visually interesting and sometimes absurd video, there were not as many platforms that artists from other countries or states could participate in. There were also affordances here as well; for example those who did have cameras and equipment, could very much do what they wanted and capture what they wanted, just without the many platforms we have today. Its a pretty cool thing to see how far video has come over the past few decades and even though I do have memories of recording things on tape (VHS), its weird to think that it was the norm for certain generations.

Interested to see what video will be like in the future and if it will actually beat out radio one day…

 

The Photograph I am writing about does not have an official title but is described as “Princess Elizabeth Aged 16 Wearing the insignia of the Grenadier Guards, 1942”. The photographer or practitioner of the piece is Cecil Beaton who photographed for Vogue, Vanity Fair and later was the Photographer for the British Royal family and was practicing between 1926 and 1979 (he passed away in 1980 aged 76).

This is the image.

https://huxleyparlour.com/app/uploads/2018/06/Princess-Elizabeth-Aged-16-Wearing-insignia-of-the-Grenadier-Guards-1942-by-Sir-Cecil-Beaton-HM0287.jpg 

As mentioned in the title, the photograph was taken in 1942, and whilst the date is not clear, Princess Elizabeth was appointed Colonel of the Grenadier Guards in February of that year so the portrait would have been after this.

The photograph was shot authored using a film camera (as digital photography was several decades away) and whilst the specific camera was not mentioned, it is stated in Beaton’s biography that he often used Rolleiflex cameras. These types of cameras were very popular at the time and required a person to manually put the role of film into the camera and also having a strong idea of what you would like to capture. This is due to the fact that they only offered around twelve to twenty four exposures depending on what type of film was used. The Rollieflex, like most camera’s of the time had a limited capacity to focus on its subject depending how far away they were and so to shoot a portrait or something closer would have been ideal. The background of the portrait is slightly out of focus suggesting the Princess is sitting in front of a backdrop of some sort, this is also due to the fact that the background seems to resemble a base for the Grenadier Guards (a man in uniform is in the far distance).

Something interesting to note is how Elizabeth smiles in the photograph. According to Beaton’s biography the romanticism he wished to capture in the photograph was in part to help raise morale during the outbreak of war. This suggests that the photograph may have been made public through print media, most likely in a newspaper to show those in the UK that their future queen was involving herself in the country. Unlike other portraits taken of the Royal family, Cecil Beaton was a photographer who wished to capture them at their most natural and joyful states, in the process showing everyday people that they do regular things and are not this intimidating un-relatable monarchy. This is evident in both the Princesses’ smile as well as the way she has her head tilted and her hat slightly off centre. There isn’t any pretentiousness about the image, she simply looks like a regular sixteen year old, except in the uniform of the Grenadier Guards. Beaton did follow standard formalities of how the royals looked in more official photographs, but for the most part, their facial expressions and often what they were doing was much more organic than previous portraits.

Its interesting to compare the works of Beaton with that of Henri Cartier-Bresson. Both faced certain affordances; being well known and often commissioned to shoot events or people, yet both faced the inconveniences of photo printing at the time, where you had to get the film developed and decide who would receive the image and where it would be kept or documented. Bresson talks about the fluidity of life and how he believed photography should reflect that. After all you can’t really ask someone to make that certain face again or hold your arm that way.

The thing about Beaton was that it seemed like he too, was on the cusp of what became more modern photography. He was documenting the royals in all stages of life, but he was doing so not with the sole purpose of just proving that they existed. A point brought up in the first reading was that “we regularly see ourselves and others represented by the photographic medium both in its formal and informal guises”, (p.g  3). Yes this photograph is shot because of who the Princess was at the time as well as her new position as colonel, yet there was also an emotional agenda from Beaton. He wanted the world to see the family he met and got on quite well with. He shot them in their home, interacting with one another, doing normal mundane things, hence those of the general public who saw these images could feel interested and possibly more trusting towards them.

The photograph was published first in the British Royal Family’s archives possibly for a book of photographs (print media) and also mentioned before it may have been released in a newspaper or local British publication to raise moral during the war. Years later the photo may have been included in Beaton’s 1968 exhibition in the National Portrait Gallery, featuring a vast collection of Cecil Beaton’s photography of famous celebrities, landscapes and also pieces from what he took of the British Royal family. Nowadays, his work can be viewed online with specific google searches which shows how much the viewing of photo’s can change and evolve over time. Often at first the image is one of twelve images on a piece of film, then it is in a photo album or in a private archive, possibly an art gallery decades later through an instagram feed.

When the photograph was first distributed, there would have been several copies from the paper, but they would have been lost years later due to people not caring to keep that edition. I would say that the next few decades onward there would have been no real distribution as the Princess grew up and became Queen two years later, hence there would have been more relevant images (fun fact: her coronation was also documented by Cecil Beaton).

I feel like the older the photograph becomes, the more valuable and protected it is in terms of the original physical copy. Thinking back to how it was most likely used in a newspaper when first released most people would have been interested in it, but there isn’t the feeling of amazement compared to how it is looked at in 2018. Its like a photo in the news of Prince Harry and Megan attending a royal function, its newsworthy, but we aren’t really printing those photos on t-shirts or anything.

When/if the photograph was used in the exhibit, it might have been protected by glass in a museum that was guarded and deemed very valuable by the curators. Eventually, with the development of digital photography, there has been a trend of releasing old, often private photographs of well known figures in the world for public interest. We no longer just want to look at these images as they document where we are, we want to see them because we are interested in what the past looked like and what the world did back then. Also how far photography has come and who Elizabeth was at the age of sixteen unaware that she would become the longest reigning monarch.

 

Kuc, Kamila, and Joanna Zylinska, editors. Photomediations: A Reader. Open Humanities Press, 2016

Assignment 1

Annotated Bibliography 

Name: Alexandra Russell -s3662093

I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration – 

https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/support-and-facilities/student-support/equitable-learning-services

 

Blog Reflections:

Week 1: 

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

 

Annotated Bibliography

Week 1 Blogs

Miles, Adrian. “Blogs in Media Education: A Beginning.” Australian Screen Ed 41 (2006): 66–9. Print.

Words: 653

 

The article discuss the use of blogging within media education for students and teachers to use in their learning. Miles begins with an introduction of his own experiences as an educator with the use of blogs then goes on to discuss what blogging is. Through this he explains how it can engage students and why he believes it is worth using blogs in the classroom, going into detail for teachers, the structures that can be used to incorporate blogging into assessment so that it is useful and effective for the student. Miles concludes with an example of his own blog and his thoughts on how blogs can not only be used for assessment but why they can be very helpful in terms of students being informed about what is expected from their level of work.

The article’s main purpose and contention are exploring the use of blogs within media education and advising both students and teachers on how they can be incorporated into this area of study. Miles highlights the basis of his views and the accuracy of his piece through the “pedagogical context” (p.g 66, 2006) at the beginning of the article with both the blog he has maintained “since 2000” (p.g 66, 2006) as well as his involvement in the “ambitious” (p.g 66, 2006 project with the Bachelor of Media and Communication program, which allocated every student a blog throughout their degree since 2002. Due to the both informative yet personal tone of the piece, the context provided of Miles’ background in the project, the opinions of blogging and the information provided on how to use it appears logical and well considered.

There is clear explanation of the “web based publication” that is a blog. Miles looks at the numerous features of the medium including how it is archived by date, the inclusion of  a blogroll of other commonly read blogs. The user functions are also described in detail, for example being able to comment on other blogs, add text and writing to one’s own posts. Whilst accurately discussing the characteristics of a blog, in regards to the use of blogs in education Miles highlights the point that “successful blogging is not something that happens in one class”. Rather it is important for a considerate amount of time to be put into actually teaching student blogging skills as well as having a direct and clear use for them in assessment, otherwise they are harder to maintain or find interest in.

In terms of the piece’s relevance and argumentative skills, although Miles does not incorporate theories from other readings on the topic, with the different elements to blogging that he makes statements on they are always supported by a long discussion. This makes the reader understand why blogs are actually useful and they are further told how this can impact the student and better their media education. For example, Miles describes one advantage of using blogs in teaching how they “nurture…peer support and collaboration” (p.g 66, 2006). How he proves this is in the example of publishing assessments online through blogging. This way an excellent student is able to observe “why their work is in fact exemplary” (p.g 69, 2006), as well as a less highly achieving student can see why they received the mark they did and how they can improve.

In providing context of what blogging involves technically and personally for the user, why it should be used within an education setting as well as how it can successfully be used, the author makes a strong argument about the potential of blogging. The reader is able to see how it can engage and connect students and teachers much more than a traditional means of assessment can, if used correctly and with dedication from both parties.

 

Week Two Affordances

Norman, D 1998, The design of everyday things, Basic Book, New York (Sections: Preface vii-xv; Chapter one 1-13; Chapter 4 (constraints) 81-87; (computers) 177-186).

Words: 598

This selected chapters in this piece discuss common design patterns of everyday things, with numerous case studies and anecdotes on objects with considerable design flaws leading into the authors frustrations with these types of problems. The reading then talks about what Norman believes should make a good design and the qualities it should have. From this the topic of visibility within a design is discussed as being an important factor in an object, as it informs the user what the object is potentially used for. The concept of Mapping is tied into this and how there is the space between what you wish to achieve with the object and what “appears to be possible” (p.g 5, 1998). The author states the central idea of the book which is “The psychology of everyday things”(p.g 8, 1998) or POET which implies how we have an ingrained understanding of how different objects should hypothetically work. A part of this psychology is the interaction with affordances (which are defined and explored) and constraints of the object. These concepts are included to show how even with the hints and previous understanding one often has when about to use something, the sometimes over complicated design of it creates confusion and fails to fulfill its duty in being easily useable in the first place.

The accuracy of the piece is presented mainly in the use of anecdotes of people having difficulties with the faults of designs. Norman logically establishes to the reader the viewpoint that we as humans are designed to “make sense of the world” (p.g 2, 1998) yet we are faced with small small frustrations of being unable to work them. An example Norman uses is the experience of expecting a door to open when you push it, yet finding that you have to pull it open after making the mistake. In analysing how an object as simple as a door contains an issue that confuses many conveys how this is a considerable problem (after all there are hundred of thousands of doors in the world.) and it is accurate to say that there are design faults everywhere.

From here the relevance of explaining more of the psychological awareness we have of how objects should be used further deepens Norman’s point that we are not immediately to blame when we use an object incorrectly. The concept of affordances, stemming from the importance of “visibility” (“the correct parts must be visible and must convey the correct message”) (p.g 4, 1998) relates to “the perceived and actual properties of the thing” (p.g 9, 1998). Norman communicates that due to the affordances of an object being in place, it is only logical to assume that these properties will be usable and effective for the user of the object. He also points out the importance of the “constraints” of the object (p.g 12, 1998) and how they can aid a person in eliminating what the object cannot do or be used for. That being said, when these affordances and constraints are not clearly established for the user, here lies the weakness of the object. If it cannot be used correctly and if that correct usage is not satisfactory and effective, than this results in frustration and the design has failed due to we as the user following the correct assumptions and prompts for the object, yet it does not operate properly.

Overall, Norman’s analysis of the psychology behind everyday things, highlights how crucial it is that objects be designed on this basis of this in order to be most effective.

 

Week Three Network Literacy

Miles, Adrian. Soft Cinematic Hypertext (Other Literacies). RMIT University, 2012. (Network Literacy: The New Path to Knowledge 201-208)

 

Words: 566

The essay discusses the concept of “Print Literacy” and it can relate to a newer term “Network Literacy”. Miles looks at what it means to be network literate, and how it differs to being print literate in enabling a much more peer connected system.  The author discusses certain terms having to do with the network such as RSS, XML and how they allow us to weave information together and create a new publication, highlighting the use of tags and concluding with a summary of what it means to be network literate.

When discussing what Network Literacy is, Miles’ description of what it means to be literate: “in a nutshell…Participa(ting) (p.g 203, 2012) as a peer within the emerging knowledge networks” is well supported by further discussion in the piece. The author differentiates how one does not need to be informed about “the intricacies of programming” (p.g 203, 2012) but rather needs to be able to recognise “content and its containers” such as web pages or photos “are distributed across the Network” (p.g 203, 2012). Another key point brought up when distinguishing between print and network literacies is how unlike with books, in order to be “good” at Networks one needs to contribute, as much as they consume this media. This conveys an accuracy of what is expected from a participant as well as the incentive that in order to understand more about this topic, it is important to create and share things online.

Miles’ uses several hypotheticals, one example is of “Penny” (p.g 202, 2012) who borrows a book from the library and understands the codes and conventions of how the book is to be read. This provides a simple understanding how what it means to be literate in print, hence allowing for the reader to then understand the similarities and differences to being literate in Network media. The authors comments on how the evolution of the “exchange of information” has taken on new forms helps the reader again understand that there are different requirements to be Network Literate. Although it is not a requirement that people learn coding, Miles talks about how information can be brought in from many different web pages on the internet and added to a blog for example. His going into detail about tagging and the RSS and XML systems deepen the readers understanding of how they are able to create things in the Network, share them and find new pieces of information. The understanding that anyone can see what you make online aids the essay as the author doesn’t just state the advantages of involving oneself in new media, but rather holds a more neutral position; that creating and participating is a good thing, but to keep in mind that one’s writing style or what they choose to put in the Network may be edited accordingly to the millions of people who can see and comment on it.

This helps communicate the main ideas of the piece well; that to be literate in the network means to have an “awareness” (p.g 208, 2012) of the new, collaborative and easily shareable environment that it is. That it differs from being print literate, yet how there are certain functions that can be performed and there is a set way to perform them, most of all that there are many more possibilities to work on projects with others and make projects in different ways.

 

This week we looked at New media, Social Media and Instagram.

The Siapera Reading discusses how New Media can be many things and is “always evolving”. The reading also looks at why the term New Media is more effective than Online media or digital media.

The aspect about media is that it is sometimes Digital (e.g WAV files, Giphs etc.) and it is sometimes Online (For example Netflix or Stan), but neither of these things are a constant part of Media. So it isn’t the strongest way to define or establish Media in those terms.

New Media is more suitable as it implies that media is constantly evolving and changing (which connect how it can be sometimes online or sometimes digital) and hence this is a better phrase for it.  

Social media is one of those terms that can be pretty ironic at times. Elaine posed the question to us in the lecture about what makes social media social. Is it when we are typing a message to someone on facebook messenger, knowing that they are on the other end the chat that is considered social? Or does it have to be more active? Do we have to be able to see the three dot dot dot sign on the bottom of the text message telling us they are writing back in real time?

For me, social media I think allows the word social because it helps people connect to one another (a social act) without having to talk face to face. That being said, if we rely on social media too much as the only form of socialising, this can take away from what I think it fundamentally means; talking and interacting in person.

Another interesting part of the content for this week was how it is argued by some scholars ( Web 2.0 is really just a marketed version of web 1.0 for consumers to make them believe that it is a new vastly different product, when the opposite is true. From here we looked at the idea of web 3.0 which hasn’t become the norm in our society yet, but is becoming more common on social media and web sites.

Web 3.0 is formed around the concept of predicting what you as a consumer want and how it can be targeted towards you. In terms of examples like your web search history, if you are on a travel website that uses “cookies” and you browse away for a few moments online at random holiday deals, you may find yourself online weeks later with ads for travel deals coming up on your screen that won’t leave you alone. The cookie monster it could be called.

 

We’ve all had this, and it exists because websites believe that if they advertise anything that you have personally searched on the internet that you are guaranteed to come back to their business spend your money there. In their defence, websites always tell you that they use cookies and you are required to agree if you wish to proceed. There are both good and bad aspects to this cookie technique. On the one hand, you may see advertisements that interest you, but when you are getting pop up ads for that one time you bought that one thing off of Ebay, it can be really annoying and also frustrating making you feel like your being followed and manipulated a little bit.

The interesting thing is that even before Web 3.0 has taken over from Web 2.0, many companies such as Netflix are realising the issues with automatic recommendations and are trying to find that middle ground between suggesting suitable shows or programs that the viewer may enjoy, but not the extent that the content is too similar to what the viewer began watching. That there is some variety. Although its kinda concerning to think about, the fact that those at one of the Biggest online streaming services understands the annoyance from its audience, suggests that the main priority is the preference of the viewer. Hopefully it stays that way. 

 

This week some of the ideas we looked at included what it means to be Network Literate, the difference between the Web and internet, open architecture and the three elements that have helped shape Networked Media.

The second reading from the week by Adrian Miles looked at Network Media literacy a concept that I had never learned before:

“Network Literacy is, in a nutshell, being able to participate as a peer within the emerging knowledge networks that are now the product of the internet” (p.g 203).

Being able to look at the language and being able to collaborate with someone else on the project. Later discussing this in class, Network Literacy doesn’t mean that you must be fully educated in code or understand all relevant terminology (HTML, ISP, etc. etc.) but rather showing competence in the use of basic online functions to the degree that you can be apart of the online community and participate.

From here the difference between the internet and the Web was discussed. This was really beneficial for me as these terms have been used quite a bit in the course and whilst I had a brief idea of what they were about, I couldn’t tell you the difference between them.

The Train track metaphor was very helpful. The Internet is the biggest structure of the two terms. Everything runs through the internet- it is the train tracks. The web on the other hand is one of the different types of traffic that runs through the internet. It is smaller. Other things that run through include music files, instant messages such as through imessage. Another way we were encouraged to think about it is that the web is a kind of software that runs through the internet.

The web runs smoothly due to something called HTML or Hypertext Markup Language what. Basically, it tells a web browser how to display text, images, and other types of multimedia on a webpage.

With one of the definitions of the Internet is the concept of “Open architecture” which is like when you have many people working on the same project at the same time. The the ye oldy days the internet was decentralized, meaning that data could be worked upon through many computers that were interlinked, rather there was no main queen bee or centralized computer of information. If one part of the structure failed, the others could still be used. This also proves more convenient, as unlike a television Broadcast Network where there is one centralized place for the Network, the work produced online is safer and can be recovered much more easily.

We also went through three elements that have helped shape Network Media.

These include The long tail, web 2.0 and user generated content.

The long tail is a theory based around the idea that our culture and economy shifting their focus away from the relatively small number of hits (what is considered mainstream) at the head of the demand, instead moving towards the large amount of niche markets in the tail. The long tail is about low cost production.

The long tail theory brings in two key factors (quoted from the lecture slides). The first is digital media tools have become more widespread and cheaper.It is easier to enter into this niche market of say youtube as opposed to television. For example A blog costs less than a newspaper to run and create. This is a niche market yet is begin explored by a significant amount of online users.

The second factor refers to how search technologies (things like automated recommendation, reviewing and rating process) have an effect on distribution and marketing. We are now able to make highly individualised searches for things and this makes the survival of niche markets possible. No they aren’t mainstream but they are accessible.

Web 2.0 The next element was web 2.0 which we discussed in class. Basically, there was web 1.0 and from what I have come to understand, it was the white guys of Silicon valley coding their way into what would become what is known as the World wide web that we know today. However, the thing about web 1.0 is that it wasn’t the easiest to use, unless you were a computer genius, which most people were not.

However after working on Web 1.0 for a long time, soon 2.0 formed based on the idea that in the words of Tim O’Reilly that “Users add value”, and “The network is the platform”. This new version was much more user friendly as the creators recognised how much the survival of it included the affordances for the user and how well it was designed for them.

The last factor to help shape Network Media is “User Generated Content”. This is content like blogs, discussion forums, video sharing websites such as Youtube which it can be argued is the defining characteristic of web 2.0 as it embodies the focus upon the user interaction through them having the power to create content online.  

Overall this was a big lecture and set of readings, but it gave me much more of an insight into how much the web has changed and how much users influence how it evolves and what it evolves into.

 

Affordances this week linked back to the prompt for the subject:

‘How do the affordances of Instagram affect the way photos and videos are authored, published and distributed in the network?’

I have to say I was very grateful to learn that we would be looking at affordances as it was the part of the prompt that I realised I had no idea about.

The second reading explores the origins of the phrase which goes back to its invention by J.J Gibson in his 1966 book Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems with his best known book The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception producing the final definition.

Affordances refers to the properties of an object and a person. It “reflect(s) the possible relationships among actors and objects: they are properties of the world.” (Norman, 1999)

 

The example used in the lecture was the chair being the object and a human the actor. The affords support to a person. They can sit on it and rest, as well as they can stand on it affording them the use of height so that they can reach something. A useful point to remember is that an object might not present certain affordances to the actor it is in contact with. For example a puppy cannot receive the same affordance that a book can give a person, it cannot read the book or full appreciate what the book does. That being said, the book could make a good chew toy for the dog…

It’s here in the explanation that there is an opposing concept to affordances. And this is…

Constraints. Constraints are what they sound like. The things we absolutely can’t do. Constraints are then divided into four categories:

Logical Constraints e.g The arrangement of knobs controlling your stove burners should match the arrangement of the burners themselves.

Semantic Constraints e.g A red and green light in traffic mean stop and go respectively, yet a slow cooker uses the lights in the opposite way causing potential confusion.

Cultural Constraints (or conventions). For example we are told that we must wear the same shoe on each foot, instead of two different ones. So we do, and this is a constraint from being able to wear two different shoes.

Physical Constraints e.g  house key can only be inserted into the lock vertically and the correct way up.

 

Often with constraints, when a design doesn’t communicate how an object has them, this is how the frustration occurs when an object fails to do the thing you wanted it to (I found this idea from The Ethan Hein Blog).

It’s an interesting thing when talking about affordances. Reading about Don Norman and his fascination with watching how people interact with everyday objects and how the inability to work out how to use those things on the first or even second try reflects a bad design rather than personal incompetence, brought me back to Instagram. It’s so successful in having made so many affordances because it is well designed so that any person with a relatively good knowledge about digital media can use it without any major issues. Due to being able to recognise this, Instagram has gone on to be one of the most successful online platforms to date. Pretty Cool.

So this week was the first week of classes and the first week of Network Media.

 

And yeah I’m a little bit like..

 

 

But in a good way though 🙂

I chose the course because I was really interested in learning more about the different online networks that we use everyday through the internet and their origins as well what ways have our uses for them changed over time.

Particularly for my generation the way we communicate through the internet is a daily thing and we often take for granted how much technology has evolved as well as what the network really is. Information is given to us in a really different way now. It can be done through messaging, gifs, photographs, memes, the list goes on.
The first reading of the course delved into the use of Blogs within Media education and how they allow more possibilities for writing and conveying ideas than say a notebook or diary could. Thinking about blogging and my experiences with blogs (I have done a little blogging through my Media and Communications Course and read a few blogs outside of that), they really change the way I would approach certain assessments.  

A good point that the author includes is that “a blogger become(s) a publisher” (Miles, 2006) and through this you automatically feel a sense of importance and a sense of power. You are not simply writing to yourself, or one teacher who will mark your work then be done with it. The blog post exists after that and can be accessed by any reader. As a blogger you feel more of a responsibility and an enthusiasm towards writing a blog because it can be your voice, delivered creatively in any way you wish.

Yes, the information and the key ideas asked of you need to be there, but you can express them in a less constricted way and you are also able to be connected to other bloggers or online contributors.

A great point that Miles makes is that in terms of the education use for blogs assessment wise, you are also able to see what excellence looks like in terms of what others are writing and creating for their assignments. A student is able to understand why their work received the grade that it did and what it will take to improve or maintain the standard they have set. I never really thought about blogging this way and it makes me more interested in using over the semester.

We learned about how we will be looking at a prompt for the course which involves a focus on instagram:

‘How do the affordances of Instagram affect the way photos and videos are authored, published and distributed in the network?’

I definitely need to learn more about the affordances part and what an affordance really means. But I think Instagram it is a great example of how we as consumers are able to be much more active than previous generations in our thoughts and opinions being listened to and shared. Instagram is immediately personal and enables you to personalise what you put out there online. If you want to put a filter on your photo you can do that. You can follow people in the public eye, whom you probably wouldn’t be able to communicate with in real life.

Most of all, heaps of people can follow you and see what you’re doing. You can gain an audience that is larger and more diverse than you realise. From this, the way you create and release content is going to differ than just sending a text or a photo to a friend. How all of this it authored, published and distributed in the Network I’m not an expert on yet. But I look forward to learning about it 🙂