Brydan Meredith Reflection on Project Brief 4

The Reflection

I am going to begin my writing by looking at some of the most problematic and most successful aspects of our submitted work and the effect collaboration had on it; I think a good place to start is with the problematic.  An issue that arises when collaborating on one specific text, regardless of its medium, is that every member of the group gets to affect the final product in a major way. On the surface this may seem like a welcomed circumstance, especially considering that a key aspect of the project was to collaborate- a baseline skill set for all media practitioners. However, the intermingling of everyone’s thoughts and ideas can lead to an incoherent final product that (to use music as a metaphor) that feels like a medley of different ideas roughly strung together, rather than a full song.

When working on our various drafts as we approached our final product, this became an issue, especially in regards to our medium (a newspaper) which traditionally has different writers writing diverse pieces. What we needed to find was a set voice that strung our work together. With three writers this was a challenge. Our solution was to pose ideas and edit everything together around a shared premise, targeting the tone of each article. In regards to our final product, it feels like a newspaper bound together by a point of view, however it is  let down by its stylistic diversity. It failed to read as a work entailing just one voice.

I think one of the most successful aspects of the completed work was our ability to focus on one specific aspect in regards to our central media idea. In the context of mediums we explored dying print media, a relevant concern in a digital day and age. After annotating various articles, I had many ideas come to mind, many issues I wanted to discuss and explore further-as did the rest of the group. That week we decided to look at Print Media, and explore it in the context of history and the future. The next week we realised this would be too big, so we narrowed it down to just Print Media, still a huge idea. However, the week after that we pinned our project down to the death of print media within the context of our society. The ability to narrow down the framework slowly but surely gave the project a suitable scope and created the potential for myself to explore a really interesting, and highly relevant issue (just days before writing this Newscorp shut down print paper MX). The practical framework of our project is reflected in our final product, instead of dealing with large, ambiguous issues, we tackle a singular one thoroughly.

In terms of creating the final product it was very hard to find even ground. In a different medium, for example film, gaining a sole voice can easily be created by simply pulling the images and various elements of the film together as a group- creating a singular, shaped meaning. However, in writing it is hard to change tone and language use as a group- and when it is done, the charm and individuality of the original piece is often lost. What we aimed to do was to find the sweet spot, where every article was a unique and different piece that appeared to be written from the same author. I think this challenge was good to have earlier on in the course because it perfectly highlighted one of the lesser known difficulties of collaboration.

Another difficulty in regards to collaboration is sacrificing ideas. There were times where I really wanted to add something that I thought was interesting and useable in regards to our ‘central idea’ which didn’t fully correlate to our group aim.  It is tough to let go of these ideas for the sake of our group, especially when you believe in them; however deep down I knew they couldn’t work. I learnt in this new media making environment that ‘biting the bullet’ is inevitable; and that surrendering ideas is vital for good collaboration- though this was tough the first time, I believe in the future I won’t be as precious with my ideas now that I understand the broader goal.

Online communication was very important in in this assignment; it allowed the group to constantly collaborate and share ideas. As we were annotating various articles in regards to mediums we constantly uploaded our various progress (and article work) to our Facebook group, referencing the chapter and author. Not only was this handy because we could see what our fellow group members were doing, but we also had direct access to the source which allowed us to (easily) read the same articles- which in turn prompted discussion.

Lastly, I would like to say how fantastic it was working with Stephanie and Niklas; they were both easy going, accepting and supportive of everyone’s ideas! 10/10

Week 11 Lectorial

The Remix and The Glitch

A BLOG POST

After doing the readings on remix’s this morning I entered the lectorial with a frame of reference relating to what we would be studying.  In a similar way to editing, in sampling, things are also broken into parts and put together in order to create new meaning.

Another thing that was established was that there is ‘no such thing as an original idea’ we can always deliver content in new and interesting ways but the content is often an adaptation of something else. This correlates to Star Wars and its influences. Star Wars when released wasn’t an adaptation of any particular text, however it borrowed and used tropes from the genre of sci-fi and took classic shots from old films, in some cases frame for frame.

It’s kind of interesting how the Oscars and Cannes adore intertextuality, yet The Grammy’s absolutely despise it (you cannot win record of the year if you sample). I wonder why it’s ok for one medium (movies) to blatantly borrow elements from previous texts but not for the other.

A certain thing I really enjoyed in this lectorial was when Dan talked about Walter Benjamin, who concerned himself with new ideas of representation and posed questions such as: How does reproducing something change the original artefact? For example, if we watch the Great Gatsby film, will we view the original novel in a different way, a different light? On top of these ideas Wally Benjamin questioned the authenticity of ‘original’ texts.  Dan also used Walter as an example of someone who was living the very history he was writing about. Dan spoke about this to get rid of the stigma that old academics lived boring, constrained lives.

Another thing Dan spoke of was the idea of social media as being authentic. Questions were posed such as: Could you argue that living in or on social media than living in the real world? Is there more ‘aura’ on social media? You are getting a sense of somewhat through their various social mediums, does this add to the aura? Is this a more pure mode of engagement, seeing what people want us to see? I tend to think that there is a difference between someone’s perceived self-image and who they actually are. And that the most authentic way to connect with someone is face to face.

Notes from the lectorial (un-edited)

  • Images and words can very often achieve the same ends.
  • Sequels and spin-offs were very prominent in the 1930/40’s. Right now we are in a glut of sequels and spin offs.
  • Printing press=mass culture and spread of ideas.
  • In the 1930’s new ideas of representation struck Walter Benjamin, how does reproducing something change the original artefact? How is it authentic?
  • Any copy is dependent of its source, a copy lacks the originals environment, history and concept.
  • Benjamin’s concept of the aura is little more than a feeling, it is linked by experience.
  • We talk about social media as being in-authentic, yet it is about connecting with people. It is somewhat real. An aura of a person can’t be captured in a single twitter. How do we integrate this stuff into our experience of the world.
  • Benjamins example of aura: can you capture the moment? You can mass produce it!
  • How authentic is the reproduction of the original?
  • NADAS
  • Control c and control v. The more popular of the radio announces would be payed to be human jukeboxes and they would just play songs so people could socialise.
  • Listened to funk
  • Artists would release extended versions of their songs mixed by DJ’s.
  • Content and form is when the remix become its own discourse, linked with its own media culture.
  • Information sharing=remix culture.
  • Consumers now creators
  • Public domain=free ideas, build on each other’s ideas.
  • You can’t argue your creativity when its based on somebody else’s stuff
  • Culture is built on the past
  • Activity Girl Talk Sample
  • La Di Da Di (5th most sampled song ever)
  • ‘don’t you look good tonight!’
  • INXS ‘I need you tonight’
  • I want you back
  • Cecilia
  • U2
  • Justin Timberlake
  • You can see mash up breakdown on website. Mashupbreakdown.com
  • Our comprehension of allegory is based on our previous experience or our ability to revisit the artwork. When you recognise a reference in a film signifies the end of historical representation, we understand intertextuality to well?
  • Remix is about reconfiguring form and not just content.
  • Mad men: Pop Art-Osterworld Pop Art.
  • Pop is more than an ethos than an aesthetic
  • Pop artists cut up consumer culture made it something new, put it in the box.
  • The internet as a network relies entirely on sampling.
  • We can remix everything on the internet, this moment of the birth of the new is the quest of all art making. In a world where there is no more ideas, how can something completely new be created?

Week 11 Regressive and Reflexive Mashups in Sampling Culture

Regressive and Reflexive Mashups in Sampling Culture, 2010 revision by Eduardo Navas

In this article Eduardo Navas talks about the importance of remixing, sampling and ‘mash-ups’ in the current, post-modern media environment. Navas wrote of remix cultures as being ‘a global activity consisting of the creative and efficient exchange of information made possible by digital technologies’ as well as defining  the activity of sampling is ‘taking pre-existing materials’ in order to create new texts’. Though Navas talked about the roots of sampling in the music industry spawning from DJ’s and producers in the 1970’s in the genre of hip-hop and disco, he takes the ideas and the purpose that spawns from creating music in this way (sampling) and generalises them to media as a whole, in specific social networking sites and the web which serve as platforms for sampling and constant give and take creation.

A minor critique I have on this article is its ambiguity, Navas wastes sentences and doesn’t signify his main points explicitly enough, so when I was reading this I had to decipher between all the different roles remixing, sampling and mash-ups are playing in the current media environment.

Something I enjoyed however were the two types of mash-ups which Navas defined by their functionality: The first is regressive, which is common in music and is used to mash-up two juxtaposing acts. These mash-ups lead to new/interesting music. An example of this would be sampling Lady Gaga vocals over a quintessential Arctic Monkey’s rhythm. The second type of mashup is Regenerative Remix a ‘combination of content and form’ that allows the source using the form of a Remix to Specifically Communicate an idea in the current media environment. Regenerative remix can only stay relevant if it continues to adapt and change in accordance to the media environment. An example of this would be Google News. If Google news doesn’t adapt stories and media artefacts by mixing them and creating a brand new, coherent news video or article, Google News as a source doesn’t stay relevant. In today’s day and age Navas contends that regenerative remix’s are vital, he uses the ‘possibility of watching a video on an iPhone  while text messaging’- a common occurrence in today’s day and age as an example. Apple are mixing the Content (the text writing that constitutes the text messages, the various ideas being communicated and the Form the Iphone and the Video application, to create not only a new medium and new ideas but a whole new experience for the consumer.

Navas also talked about how sampling and remixing influenced post-modernist thought, which I thought was quite interesting. Some people believe the sheer amount of intertextuality in media lead into a ‘suspension or collapse of history’, as if new content can no longer be created. This links into a bit of research I did the other day after watching a Ted Talk on sampling, I looked into ‘Rockists’ who believe sampling (taking previously recorded music and re-contextualising it) is a form of low-art and is highly unoriginal. The Grammys also adopt this train of thought- an artist can’t win song of the year or record of the year if it is an album based on sampling. However, many believe sampling and remixing to be the future of music and impact music in a similar nature to the way it has impacted social media and the internet. Mark Ronson described sampling as inserting yourself into the life of the song, in other words-h believes sampling regenerates it, turns it into something new. Navas agrees that regenerating offers a ‘great challenge’ and understands its legal and conceptual difficulties but goes on to state that is fine if you ‘do justice to intellectual property’.

I believe Sampling is the future of art and that intertextuality is not something that should be frowned upon-but endorsed. Some of the best shows of the all time, such as The Simpsons heavily depend on past sources to create new, humorous and original ideas.

A thought I had the other day, in regards to copyright and intertextuality, was that each musician should nominate certain songs (5% of there catalogue) to be used in media and independent films, royalty free.

Obviously, this is not a great deal for the musicians, a way around this could be if a media company earns over a certain threshold (lets say  $500,000 dollars), they have to pay copyright regardless of if they use a nominated track or not.

 

Everything is a Remix

Even though 74/100 Hollywood movies a year a adaptations of pre-existing texts, ‘original’ films constantly use conventions of their genre, sub-genre and past texts (specifically in the medium of film) to produce the film. Star Wars here was a classic case study, and what was eye-opening was just how phenomenally intertextual it was! I was pretty impressed by how it adapted and effectively used shots from previously released (some even little known) films. I also really enjoyed the quote ‘I have seen further by standing on the shoulders of giants’ that pretty much sums up the power of adaptation, remixing and intertextuality.

Personally I think the best films are where the templates of specific genres are subverted and transformed into a wholly original and unique text.

Another quote that I thought was interesting was ‘creation requires influence’.

Week 10 The Tutorial

Week 10 Tutorial

Today Brian gave us some very useful information that as a group should be used to create a better final product.

Some ideas we explored were:

– Exploit the limitations of the medium within the medium. You could purposefully struggle with your format.

– The quality of the actual object transcends whatever it is online. This is handy. (Does this explain the rise in vinyl)

– Think about local newspapers, that shift from how a newspaper represents a city (certain media are associated with particular geographical spaces) for example the age with Melbourne, historically you have city level newspapers, the Australia. What happens when globalization individual audiences are a lot more interested in global media, for example the guardian doesn’t have an Australian history, this is possible because of the digital culture, decline in youth readership of newspapers, think about the advertising internet provides, the internet provides a lot options for advertising. Thick description!

Map ideas out, prioritise them, and think about what will be done with them.

  • Decline in publishing, there are many self-published authors now.

– YouTube broadcast yourself idea, you could almost produce your own newspaper it doesn’t require a whole company to produce a newspaper, an individual can do that.

– What kind of evidence I we going to bring to substantiate our claims, get evidence, its creative but also a research project.

– Parody and satire is a defence in Australia, you can claim pre-existing material as a defence not a right. You can get sued for it, it is not protected by rights.

– How do different mediums impact audiences.

– The medium is the message-what does this have to do with print media.

 

Week 10 Lectorial

Institutions in Today Lectorial

In today’s lectorial we looked at two key things, the first being institution and the second was work placements. Firstly I will start with institutions; Institutions are defined by their principles, values and rules that correlate with their place in society. An example we used was Marriage which is a social institution, it is built on principles such as love, values such as honesty, trust even family and rules/regulations for example it is only to be between two people.

Various Media institutions, though consisting of different principles, values and rules, are created and defined from the same fabric. A task we performed in class today was brainstorming the institutional characteristics of a particular institution, I had community media.

Community Media

Relationship to audience/users (‘mode of address’)? Often through radio stations where the presenters will talk about how the town or the specific community is faring that day, local news coverage. I find local stations to be more specific and more tailored to their audience than a major broadcasting institution. A specific community has an easily definable target audience.

  • What are their core values? Family values, local political concerns such as specific government funding to certain places, the welfare of the listeners, the welfare of the townships.
  • What is their status? They should voice the concerns of the people, due to this position of power they amongst the community they are respected and viewed as a legitimate source because the ‘voice’ they adopt is one created by the listeners, the people.
  • How are their activities ‘professionalised’? I’m not too sure what this question means, however the tone community media adopts should be a formal, disciplined one that contrasts and effectively communicates the voice of the community.
  • How are they more than a business? Often they are a symbol of the community; they harness the community’s views and values as well as bring character into the community.
  • What forms of regulations constrain their activities (internal & external)? The audience is an external constraint. If the institution is broad casting in a largely left wing area to put forward and discuss highly right wing topics would potentially ruin the reputation of the company.

Notes from the Lectorial

 

  • Sociological meaning: The focus of The Wire is institutions each season it focus on distinct institutions. Individuals struggling against the institutional constraints they are within, often the institutions win.
  • Marriage is a social institution: Legal/regulatory aspect. Meta-institutional frame, Widely accepted/practiced. Institutions can’t just be ideas. Cultural rules. It has rituals. Heavily symbolic element to it. Tied into gender roles. Rituals surrounding it. Kindship structure changes. The Wedding industry is a commercial industry.
  • Blog post on technology creating short term memory issues-remember The Project. Link to Socrates writings.
  • Media Institutions: ABC, The News, Journalism, Newscorp, Cinema. Broadcast Television., Community Radio, Cinema.
  • Media industry: Regulate and Structure activities (they create different ways of working), they are enduring, Even CEO’s are kept accountable against the institutions history and practices. The institution overrides the individual. Values are shared within the institution (an SBS employee got sacked for comments made on ANZAC day). Public is aware of the status. Channel 10 is situated in the youth market, entertains and engages the ‘Young at Heart’. Channel 10 isn’t tied to a literal age. New York times is the pillar of respectable journalism yet trust was broken due to a journalists comments on a specific topic.
  • Media watch is about the breach of trust between the institutions and there audience. The institution has breached their trust with the audience.
  • What does the audience invest in their institution? Respect? Trust?
  • Work Attachments
  • You have write a report on your work. It’s a reflection.
  • Don’t do it publicly
  • Offer your services specifically, say you are going to do this…….and this………..
  • Be strategic, do a plan, do a calculated plan.
  • Community stations?
  • Work outside of your comfort zone
  • You could even write a script for your phone call. Should tailor it for each institution.
  • Tailor each individual application for specific media companies.
  • This is an opportunity- it’s very broad. You have to be supervised by a professional.

Week 10 Institutions Reading

FI found the Making public television social? Public Service Broadcasting and the challenges of Social Media journal by Jose Van Dijck and Thomas Poell particularly interesting because it showed the enormous impact that the rise of social media, interactive media and platform mobility had on European Public Broadcasting. The article concerns itself with how public broadcasters are coping to the challenges posed by social media, it explores the difficulties that arise when looking to distribute across relevant mediums and producing ‘up to date’ media.

When reading the introduction, a specific example jumped out at me, the question the authors asked were ‘How can public broadcasters profit from social media? I interpreted this question as referring to how public institutions can use social media to not only gain an audience (most likely a younger ones) but intertwine social media with television content. An example that came to me in regards to ‘Social T.V’ was the after-match football coverage.

Before social media moulded and shaped the media landscape in such a profound way, the post-match show consisted of a single shot that presented the commentators discussing and analysing the match events that had previously unfolded. However whilst watching the coverage after the Swans/Demons game last Saturday night, I noticed (at the bottom of the screen) tweets from fans were constantly being displayed and highlight, in was so profound that I couldn’t focus on what the presenters were saying. I was sitting there  consuming social media spawning from a different medium (my television). This example demonstrates the convergence of the social media and public broadcasting and how the two are interdependent. In recent years it is quite obvious that social media has become a vital part of television, especially on the government funded stations such as the ABC. It is unlikely to watch a talk-show or even game show without Tweets and Posts from Twitter and Facebook respectively, appearing.

To look at how public broadcasting has intertwined itself with social media I only have to open up Facebook and view my home page. At the top right of my screen which shows me what’s ‘trending’ I have ‘Mad Men Finale’ an AMC production, the first thing on my home page is an article published by 774 ABC Melbourne entitled ‘Dying at home’ and the next is a Rolling Stone Breaking Bad Article. This shows television influencing social media, by setting up Facebook pages and Instagram accounts the producers allow the audience to engage with the shows on  separate platforms to which they are initially broadcast. They create a new level of engagement. Television heavily impacts the culture of social media. An example of this is with ‘Mad Men’ tonight. I spent 50 minutes watching the episode and probably about an hour on various social media sites and blogs reading up fan interpretations and comments.

Djick and Powell’s article demonstrates that ‘user participation and independent audio-visual creations’ threatens to compromise the public value of major broadcasters. I feel as though the increasing commercialization of social media services such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter could very much get in the way of the consumption of public broadcasting. It’s interesting to see how the ABC have gone about combatting this, with their creation of I-View. It’s marketed as a modern (note the I in front of the view), easy to use and has a convenient  broadcasting app and website. The ABC are taking profitable products (T.V shows/films) and exposing it to an audience in a thoroughly accessible, modern medium. Channel 10 who claim to be marketed at people aged 25-54 ought to do that same, in order to reach their target demographic.

Another idea that came to mind when reading this was the thought that the ‘golden age of television’ characterised by shows such as Breaking Bad, True Detective, Game of Thrones may be in response to social media and the rising interact media medium.

This idea correlates to how public television has profited from the abilities of social media to engage new audiences, specifically makers without compromising public value. Fan fiction and fan art has certainly taken off since the rise of social media, because the media makers not only have inspiration (the original T.V show), an audience and a means of distribution.

Kaplan and Heinlen defined social media as platforms that allow for the creation and exchange of user generated content. Back in the day it was public broadcasting that challenged and entertained viewers by involving them in public debates and discussing society. The sheer grandeur and diversity that the platforms of social media create has replaced the role of public broadcast television. This article didn’t condemn public service broadcasting or call it a dead medium, instead it talked about how medium and the correlating institutions went about adapting to the new media climate.

Other Notes……….

  • Digital platforms gave users un-impeded and free access to the online distribution of audio-visual and textual content.
  • Back in the day public broadcasting copied ideas from commercial broadcasting. A common critique was that they were posting content void of public value.
  • The new medium defined citizens as media professionals. It’s interesting how the role of the audience has changed.
  • Is the social media the issue or an ally striving for user engagement?
  • Initially social media had a poor business model it was just a ‘friends’ site with only banner ads. Now it is entirely commercial. Google, facebook……all went ‘public’ but not towards public broadcasting, they became a public company, they went public on the stock exchange.
  • Wikipedia, a space for user generated content is completely, entirely commercial.
  • Early 21st century PSB expanded across online platforms. We can observe this overlap every time we go onto the internet.
  • Virtually impossible to keep social Medias intrinsic commercial forces at bay.
  • To keep a younger audience public broadcast media have to integrate twitter and YouTube into their set-up. They are forced to confront their issues rather than ignore them.
  • Corporately ruled ‘social’ online environment.
  • The web 2.0 and digitization was embraced by public broadcasting believing online participation was a key strategy for public broadcasting to regain their significance in the national arenas. Triple J is a station that has done this well. Social Media has given them a new lease of life.
  • Public broadcasters in Europe are set guidelines to how they approach and use social media. It is a dangerous public sphere!

 

Week 9 The Tutorial

Week 9 Tutorial

I spent a far whack of time this week reading up and annotating various sources in regards to ‘mediums’ in media. I also did a bit of research on Marshall McLuhan and his theory that the medium is the message. A specific example that was used in one of my readings was the printing press which revolutionised society. It allowed for the exchange, the mass exchange, of ideas allowing for more people to voice their opinions-even if it was against the authorities of the day. Anyway, without rambling on to much about what I learnt the medium that spawned print culture affected thinking in a far greater way  than the content of what was being released. It opened up a new possibility of thought.

In today’s tutorial we brainstormed as a group and began narrowing our ideas down onto one specific topic, one specific question. This is proving to be the most challenging aspect in terms of creating our final product,  there is so much information in regards to mediums and so much that can be demonstrated and said that all ideas can’t be used even if there good. I faced a similar problem last year when I was doing my final Drama presentation, I had some good ideas which I spent time on, but had to scrap.

Week 9 The Lectorial

Audiences Lectorial

This lectorial talked about the changing role of the audience that came as a consequence of the shift from broadcast to post broadcast age. The audience went from a silent, passive one that consumed information that flowed as a one stream from the media industry to an audience with a voice that can pick and choose what consume and (most importantly) how to respond.

We were shown a clip of Robert Menzies introducing Australia to the television with the emphasis being on its capacity to educate.  This is in contrast to American views of the time that believed the televisions main use to be that of entertainment purposes. Another particularly interesting thing was Menzies tone of voice, obviously he was talking to an imagined audience (and probably a very broad one) and because of this he adopted a very monotonous/neutral tone. This shows how ill-defined audiences were (particularly in Australia) at this particular time. This is in stark contrast to the present where niche audiences are very much impacting media production. In this day and age a person looking to present to a particular audience would adopt a very different ‘voice’ to Menzies, tailored to the specific audience. This shift in audience was described in todays lectorial as from Broadcasting to Narrowcasting.

From an advertising side of things companies have to imagine the audience differently, they have to go and chase these audiences due to the fractured media landscape we live in. A key question these companies ask is how do you track and find these niche audiences? Everything is spread out, sporadic.

Another quote/sub-topic that interested me was the theorising of the ‘active audience’. Communication is a gamble, you code the audience to convey a meaning to the audience, however this is not always going to work, they may not be able to decode what you put into the text. For example, to learn from Mad Men we have to decode meanings, what happens if I get a meaning Mathew Weiner didn’t want to put into the text. This is the gamble he as a creator/communicator is taking.

Interpellation: The process of which individuals/readers are ‘hailed’ in other words when the individual is prompted by a text to recognise him or herself as being a subject that belongs in a role.  For example, your role as a citizen, in the library when the cameras are applied for your safety, you are interpellated into being a victim. I am guessing this is a key tactic in advertising, the creators of the advertisements tailor their adverts to a specific demographic. By hailing in this demographic in order to make them recognise that they need the product, they can directly target the potential consumers of this specific product.

Hollywood has used popular culture to supress the population, to make sure they are docile, make sure they are lost in mindless entertainment; the pop-culture is used against them. European migrants picked up on this in the 1930’s and were outraged. This is correlated to production of many pop songs these days, they are made in factory’s formed from a factory mode lacking individuality. These ideas and modes of creation link in the quiet, the passive audience.

Finally, due to so many texts being made available, the bridge between high culture texts and low culture texts is accessible to everyone. Audiences are omnivores they can consume well cultured texts steeped in history and tradition on the same networking service as keeping up with the Kardashians.

 

Week 9 Audience Reading

Audiences Reading Blog Post

The article ‘the people formally known as the audience’ written by Jay Rosen and published on Press Think, underlines the new role of the audience that has come about due to the new broadcast pattern, a consequence of  interactive media. I enjoyed Rosens writing because he underlined the key changes in the role of the audience simply, without ambiguity. Another, more specific thing that I enjoyed him describing person to person media as a ‘horizontal flow’ in contrast to the past where media was produced by major commercial company’s forcing the audience to look up and consume from a single source.

After reading Rosens initial article I skimmed through the comments. One that came of note was Mark Howards who split the audience, or as he coined ‘actience’ into two parts. A passive group who simply wants great control of what they consume, there engagement and second group who wants to ‘produce, publish and distribute’ their own original content. I think is a very true interpretation of what different people want to get out of media in general these days. Many people just want to find more sources of entertain, and other people want to entertain. An issue only arises when to many people look to entertain and not consume. For example, on Instagram I rarely post pictures, I think I have posted about 3 all up, yet, there are a select portion of the people I follow (maybe about 15/80) that would post about 3 pictures a day, and my whole feed consists of entirely these people. Though we are both on the same platform, they assume the role of producer and I assume the role of the audience.

It would be interesting to conduct a study of these various roles and see if certain age demographics lean to particular roles on social and interactive media.

Anyway, back to Rosins write-up, this time for a critique. A key issue with his writing was his lack of acknowledge of the audience that chooses to remain passive. Even though I do have social media accounts, more of the media I thoroughly enjoy consuming I find from word of mouth not google searches or clicking on links. An example of this was the American version of The Office, I heard it was a great show, so I watched it on T.V. And that’s as far as my engagement went, I didn’t share official Facebook status’s, I didn’t re-tweet, I consumed in a passive one way style, and it is this style that Rosin completely ignores in his writing. In media there still very much is a place for the passive audience.

Skip to toolbar