The BBC Sport website is probably the site I use most, other than Facebook. It is laid out in a way I find very easy to use, and am very familiar with, which is part of the sites appeal. On the left, there is a list of all the sport catergories the site offers, and links to analysists columns and archives. In the middle, there is the main sport headlines, in both picture and written form. The use of pictures is a huge bonus, as it decorates the site with colour and appeal. Above these is a flashing banner which moves from left to right with links to the top story. On the right hand side is links to other daily stories.
I like the site because it is updated in a matter of seconds when a story breaks, and it now offers users the chance to watch clips and highlights of sporting events and interviews. There is also links to BBC Radio stations with live sport commentary. As simple as this may sound, I like the use of colour. The banner which says SPORT is in red and yellow, which stands out and looks appealing. The fact it offers news, information, visual and audio options the site offers. On a cultural level, it is simply a sports information website.
It is culturally appealing to all ages, as it offers games and fun, offers intellectual opinion and views, and audio/visual attractions.In terms of a cultural level, it is centered around sport and sporting culture. It is often said that sport is dominated in popularity by men. Despite this, the site is not gender specific, and is not set out in a way that could be viewed as overtly masculine.
It keeps up to date with modern culure in the sense that it offers links and so on for users who would use a mobile phone, and with the inclusion of watching live tv and highlights through links on the site. I am a user because it is very quick, it entertains me in various forms, offers insight and opinion which I believe and trust, mainly as it is the relaible BBC!
It has all the characteristics of a news site, but due to my own personal interests, It is very appealing and accessible. People are able to text and post there own opinions during live sport, but I have never dobted or not trusted these unknown users, as I feel the site users all have and share the same purpose for using the site. As it is the BBC, all comments will be assessed before they are put on the site by moderators. This interactivity also shows that there is also the opportunity of being a 'produser' on the site, even if it is limited. I have never thought of the site as a community, simply because it is more likely to be accessed simply to view it and read articles as opposed to contributing to the site. I think the site definately gets used in terms of socio determinism, as it gets used because of how people are, as opposed to how technology works.
Thursday, 26 February 2009
The forum and communities of practice
The term of communities of practice certainly applies to the work we have done in the new media cultures unit. The basic argument made by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger is that communities of practice are everywhere and that we are generally involved in a number of them - whether that is at work, school, home, or in our civic and leisure interests.
Wenger states-
"Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour: a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils defining their identity in the school, a network of surgeons exploring novel techniques, a gathering of first-time managers helping each other cope. In a nutshell: Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly." (Wenger circa 2007)
Within each community of practice, there are different characters and differences between people. There are those who are new to it, those with experience, those with authority (guessing this is Alison!) and those who don't really contribute to the community. It is a joint enterprise because we all contribute to it, and work within it to make it what it is.
According to Etienne Wenger (c 2007), three elements are crucial in distinguishing a community of practice from other groups and communities. These are the domain, the community and the practice. I think the definition Wenger gives for the community applies most to our blogging work. He says 'In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other, and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other' (op. cit.).
We are all needed for our own individual skills in order to make the community what it is. For the community to function in the way Wenger defines it as being.
Wenger states-
"Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour: a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils defining their identity in the school, a network of surgeons exploring novel techniques, a gathering of first-time managers helping each other cope. In a nutshell: Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly." (Wenger circa 2007)
Within each community of practice, there are different characters and differences between people. There are those who are new to it, those with experience, those with authority (guessing this is Alison!) and those who don't really contribute to the community. It is a joint enterprise because we all contribute to it, and work within it to make it what it is.
According to Etienne Wenger (c 2007), three elements are crucial in distinguishing a community of practice from other groups and communities. These are the domain, the community and the practice. I think the definition Wenger gives for the community applies most to our blogging work. He says 'In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other, and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other' (op. cit.).
We are all needed for our own individual skills in order to make the community what it is. For the community to function in the way Wenger defines it as being.
Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Wenger reading and tasks
I have been involved in many 'communities of practice', without really thinking about it in this manner. This includes things like football teams, Boys Brigade, Work and so on.
I will use my work with the Anglia Co-operartive Food Group as my example. I am employed by the group, have gained educational achievements with them, and have a network of friends as a result. In terms of what the group does, it is simply a foodstore which provides for the local community. The aim of all the 'commuity of practice' members is to serve this community around it in the best possible way. This includes being approachable and helpful, as well as being able to solve difficult problems. As Wenger states; "Members of a community are informally bound by what they do together- from engaging in lunchtime discussions to solving difficult problems- and by what they have learned through their mutual engagement in these actitvities."
We function as an organisation through working together and on specific departments to benefit the customers. This ranges from serving them, advising them are making goods available for sale. This close working relationship that the staff have, means there are many close working relationships as a result, which enhance the company further, and makes the job in hand run smoother.
Over time, this makes your personal skills with people and communication a great deal better, and problem solving skills are strengthened. The continuous routine of this kind of community may seem repetitive, but there tends to be new and exciting challenges within a set routine on a daily basis.
I think the main thing to remember about communities of practice is that they are better operated when working as a team, or as a community, but this is not always possible. In a comunity like the workplace, it is a requirement to work as a group, but individual skills and differences are sometimes needed, so that each individual skill is used most effectively. For example, in a working community like the example I have given, you need people who can handle finances, those who can manage others, those who can bake goods, and those with the necessary cleaning abilties, to name but a few. These skills are all needed to make 'communities of practice' work well and effectively survive.
I will use my work with the Anglia Co-operartive Food Group as my example. I am employed by the group, have gained educational achievements with them, and have a network of friends as a result. In terms of what the group does, it is simply a foodstore which provides for the local community. The aim of all the 'commuity of practice' members is to serve this community around it in the best possible way. This includes being approachable and helpful, as well as being able to solve difficult problems. As Wenger states; "Members of a community are informally bound by what they do together- from engaging in lunchtime discussions to solving difficult problems- and by what they have learned through their mutual engagement in these actitvities."
We function as an organisation through working together and on specific departments to benefit the customers. This ranges from serving them, advising them are making goods available for sale. This close working relationship that the staff have, means there are many close working relationships as a result, which enhance the company further, and makes the job in hand run smoother.
Over time, this makes your personal skills with people and communication a great deal better, and problem solving skills are strengthened. The continuous routine of this kind of community may seem repetitive, but there tends to be new and exciting challenges within a set routine on a daily basis.
I think the main thing to remember about communities of practice is that they are better operated when working as a team, or as a community, but this is not always possible. In a comunity like the workplace, it is a requirement to work as a group, but individual skills and differences are sometimes needed, so that each individual skill is used most effectively. For example, in a working community like the example I have given, you need people who can handle finances, those who can manage others, those who can bake goods, and those with the necessary cleaning abilties, to name but a few. These skills are all needed to make 'communities of practice' work well and effectively survive.
Friday, 20 February 2009
Analysis of blogs
Many blogs provide commentary or news on a particular subject; others function as more personal online diaries A typical blog combines text, images, and links to other blogs, web pages, and other media related to its topic. The ability for readers to leave comments in an interactive format is an important part of many blogs.
I have chosen to analysie a blog i've been reading for some time now. It's titled "What on earth is going on?" It's by someone I know personally, Shane Croucher, who has a very colloquial and satirical look at society and news issues. The main thing I look for when reading something, is for it to entertain me, and this blog does this. It is written with a purpose; to criticise our society, and to express emotion and opinion. But, most of all, it provokes a response from the reader, either because it opens your eyes on how comical certain areas of our society are, or through its blunt and humourous perspective.
Croucher uses data and research materials relevant to the topic mentioned, and often uses these facts and figures to create a counter argument against it. In a recent article posted, he explains how Nasa has spent a certain amount of money on space research and scienitific development, and what it could be spent on more beneficially to society. So although Croucher writes in a colloquial manner, it is an outlook on society which reminds me of Jon Stewart from The Daily Show. He takes 'hard' political news and adds humour in an entertaining way. I admire the ability Croucher possesses of being able to use satire in a realist manner in expressing himself on current debates and issues in society.
http://shanecroucher.blogspot.com/
I have chosen to analysie a blog i've been reading for some time now. It's titled "What on earth is going on?" It's by someone I know personally, Shane Croucher, who has a very colloquial and satirical look at society and news issues. The main thing I look for when reading something, is for it to entertain me, and this blog does this. It is written with a purpose; to criticise our society, and to express emotion and opinion. But, most of all, it provokes a response from the reader, either because it opens your eyes on how comical certain areas of our society are, or through its blunt and humourous perspective.
Croucher uses data and research materials relevant to the topic mentioned, and often uses these facts and figures to create a counter argument against it. In a recent article posted, he explains how Nasa has spent a certain amount of money on space research and scienitific development, and what it could be spent on more beneficially to society. So although Croucher writes in a colloquial manner, it is an outlook on society which reminds me of Jon Stewart from The Daily Show. He takes 'hard' political news and adds humour in an entertaining way. I admire the ability Croucher possesses of being able to use satire in a realist manner in expressing himself on current debates and issues in society.
http://shanecroucher.blogspot.com/
Bruns reading and response
I think the word produser simply represents a user who is also a producer. Or as Bruns says, they are involved in user-led content production. This is what is seen as being Produsage. Examples of produser-led content creation are things like open news (Indymedia), open source, and open content repositories, such as Wikipedia.
Produsage is "the collaborative and continuous building and extending of exsising content in pursuit of further improvement." (Bruns). These terms are certainly useful in understanding collaborative creation of content online, as they describe how easy it is to be a 'produser'. They are terms to describe the process which is very relevant in todays world where this process is an integral part of new media. I think that intercreativity is the ability to be creative and free to do so, whilst in an online community. This ould apply to games like The Sims, and sites like Indymedia.
If a site functions to restrict and prevent a 'free for all' then it certainly does defeat the purpose. As Bruns says, "produsage models are in the process of being more widely adopted across a number of content production domains." So this highlight how widely used and approved these produsage models have become. Bruns argues that sites like these need to be open in order for them to "flourish", and attract new produsers. I agree with Brun's idea that there needs to be some sort of hierachy though, as this helps the site to be usable and dependable. Sites that spring to mind are Wikipedia and Indymedia again as they follow this system. There needs to be some order to prevent people being insulted, stereotyped and so on.
I can see it lasting in the forseeable future, and doubt it will be a trend as it has become engraved in modern media. But this doesn't mean it won't become dated or less popular, as is the case with all new mediums. In a sense, it already is technically exploited as there are still institutions behind the sites who still have control over it. The other problem is funding some of these site, and I can see them becoming increasingly dependant on advertising and promoting other commercial forces. I don't see how conflicts in communities would ever cause media of this kind coming to an end. As long as there is a need, desire and vast usage of this meduim, it will remain in our culture.
Produsage is "the collaborative and continuous building and extending of exsising content in pursuit of further improvement." (Bruns). These terms are certainly useful in understanding collaborative creation of content online, as they describe how easy it is to be a 'produser'. They are terms to describe the process which is very relevant in todays world where this process is an integral part of new media. I think that intercreativity is the ability to be creative and free to do so, whilst in an online community. This ould apply to games like The Sims, and sites like Indymedia.
If a site functions to restrict and prevent a 'free for all' then it certainly does defeat the purpose. As Bruns says, "produsage models are in the process of being more widely adopted across a number of content production domains." So this highlight how widely used and approved these produsage models have become. Bruns argues that sites like these need to be open in order for them to "flourish", and attract new produsers. I agree with Brun's idea that there needs to be some sort of hierachy though, as this helps the site to be usable and dependable. Sites that spring to mind are Wikipedia and Indymedia again as they follow this system. There needs to be some order to prevent people being insulted, stereotyped and so on.
I can see it lasting in the forseeable future, and doubt it will be a trend as it has become engraved in modern media. But this doesn't mean it won't become dated or less popular, as is the case with all new mediums. In a sense, it already is technically exploited as there are still institutions behind the sites who still have control over it. The other problem is funding some of these site, and I can see them becoming increasingly dependant on advertising and promoting other commercial forces. I don't see how conflicts in communities would ever cause media of this kind coming to an end. As long as there is a need, desire and vast usage of this meduim, it will remain in our culture.
Thursday, 19 February 2009
Meikle reading and response
I think there are a set of conventions which tend to be adhered to by news sites on the web. Both Marshall and Burnett say that news tends to be "informational", cast in terms of "reception and consumption." News online is not as direct and 'in your face' in terms of how you consume it. You have a choice of what news you read and research, what articles you search for and what news corporation you obtain this from. Marshall and Burnett state that news is based far more around research and such like when online. I think this is very true. When you turn on the tv, you may be a secondary viewer or tertiary viewer, and not want to watch the news. In this sense, the news comes to you. Online, you are in control of this, and can research the news at your own leisure, showing how you go and find the news. News has virtually re-invented intself and placed itself back into the cultural norm.
I think that there are new kinds of journalists in today's world. In days gone by, the role of a journalist was to gather news and publish it through the night and even by the week. This convention is still used by newspapers and magazines. But the role of a journalist has had to adapt with the prominence of the internet. Meikle says how there is n ongoing "shift in the boundary of what constitutes newsmakers." This is because of sites like Wikipedia. As mentioned in this weeks lecture, 'Wiki' stands for a gathering of people, so Wikipedia is a site where the public are the authors and journalists. Anyone is able to post an article and information, with approval from the sites maintenance people. This is revolutionary, as it allows us as consumers and users to become the informers and the journalists. As Meikle states; "The Indymedia movement offers clear examples...in its spectacular growth and in its promotion of open publishing models. As a forum for non-professional journalists of all stripes, Indymedia’s development is a vivid example of the shifting boundary around who gets to make the news." Journalists are renowned for investigating and researching items. In terms of internet news, we act as journalists as we chose where we go to obtain information, and process it ourselves. The problems with this have been evident however. Saddam Hussein's execution was broadcast live on some news sites, and when the 9/11 attacks broke out, people were writing all sorts of reasonings and explanations online, until the bigger news corporations could confirm. This shows that there is a new culture of journalist online, but the old trusted techniques and conventions are still required, and we still trust in the long-standing news corporations.
News can never be truly open! Fact. It will always be written in a certain way, spun in a specific manner, put into a soundbite, or made into a dramatised spectacle. It may be 'open', it may be subject to personal opinion, but within the construction of News, comes a perspective or outlook which denies it of truly being open. For example, Indymedia leads you towards a specific opinion and perspective, even though it describes itself as being "a network of activists who provide an open publishing platform." www.indymedia.org.uk
People still write and produce things in a way they want you to intepret them. This shows how society has changed in terms of technology, but the debates surrounding Murdoch's empire and how he leads people to a certain political perspective and leaning are still ever present in this so called 'open news.' In the 80's he had a conservative leaning, which changed to labour in the 90's in his papers and sky news. I still think he spun people to voting labour in the 1997 and 2001 elections.
So, yes, we do live in an age where it is possible to write news 'openly', but it will always be tainted with bias, opinion or wont allows others to view that news as open.
I think that there are new kinds of journalists in today's world. In days gone by, the role of a journalist was to gather news and publish it through the night and even by the week. This convention is still used by newspapers and magazines. But the role of a journalist has had to adapt with the prominence of the internet. Meikle says how there is n ongoing "shift in the boundary of what constitutes newsmakers." This is because of sites like Wikipedia. As mentioned in this weeks lecture, 'Wiki' stands for a gathering of people, so Wikipedia is a site where the public are the authors and journalists. Anyone is able to post an article and information, with approval from the sites maintenance people. This is revolutionary, as it allows us as consumers and users to become the informers and the journalists. As Meikle states; "The Indymedia movement offers clear examples...in its spectacular growth and in its promotion of open publishing models. As a forum for non-professional journalists of all stripes, Indymedia’s development is a vivid example of the shifting boundary around who gets to make the news." Journalists are renowned for investigating and researching items. In terms of internet news, we act as journalists as we chose where we go to obtain information, and process it ourselves. The problems with this have been evident however. Saddam Hussein's execution was broadcast live on some news sites, and when the 9/11 attacks broke out, people were writing all sorts of reasonings and explanations online, until the bigger news corporations could confirm. This shows that there is a new culture of journalist online, but the old trusted techniques and conventions are still required, and we still trust in the long-standing news corporations.
News can never be truly open! Fact. It will always be written in a certain way, spun in a specific manner, put into a soundbite, or made into a dramatised spectacle. It may be 'open', it may be subject to personal opinion, but within the construction of News, comes a perspective or outlook which denies it of truly being open. For example, Indymedia leads you towards a specific opinion and perspective, even though it describes itself as being "a network of activists who provide an open publishing platform." www.indymedia.org.uk
People still write and produce things in a way they want you to intepret them. This shows how society has changed in terms of technology, but the debates surrounding Murdoch's empire and how he leads people to a certain political perspective and leaning are still ever present in this so called 'open news.' In the 80's he had a conservative leaning, which changed to labour in the 90's in his papers and sky news. I still think he spun people to voting labour in the 1997 and 2001 elections.
So, yes, we do live in an age where it is possible to write news 'openly', but it will always be tainted with bias, opinion or wont allows others to view that news as open.
Wednesday, 18 February 2009
Website Analysis-BBC Sport
The BBC Sport website is probably the site I use most, other than Facebook. It is laid out in a way I find very easy to use, and am very familiar with. On the left, there is a list of all the sport catergories the site offers, and links to analysists columns and archives. In the middle, there is the main sport headlines, in both picture and written form. The use of pictures is a huge bonus, as it decorates the site with colour and appeal. Above these is a flashing banner which moves from left to right with links to the top story. On the right hand side is links to other daily stories. I like the site because it is updated in a matter of seconds when a story breaks, and it now offers users the chance to watch clips and highlights of sporting events and interviews. There is also links to BBC Radio stations with live sport commentary.
As simple as this may sound, I like the use of colour. The banner which says SPORT is in red and yellow, which stands out and looks appealing. The fact it offers news, information, visual and audio options the site offers. On a cultural level, it is simply a sports information website. It is culturally appealing to all ages, as it offers games and fun, offers intellectual opinion and views, and audio/visual attractions.
In terms of a cultural level, it is centered around sport and sporting culture. It is often said that sport is dominated in popularity by men. Despite this, the site is not gender specific, and is not set out in a way that could be viewed as overtly masculine.
It keeps up to date with modern culure in the sense that it offers links and so on for users who would use a mobile phone, and with the inclusion of watching live tv and highlights through links on the site.
I am a user because it is very quick, it entertains me in various forms, offers insight and opinion which I believe and trust, mainly as it is the relaible BBC! It has all the characteristics of a news site, but due to my own personal interests, It is very appealing and accessible.
As simple as this may sound, I like the use of colour. The banner which says SPORT is in red and yellow, which stands out and looks appealing. The fact it offers news, information, visual and audio options the site offers. On a cultural level, it is simply a sports information website. It is culturally appealing to all ages, as it offers games and fun, offers intellectual opinion and views, and audio/visual attractions.
In terms of a cultural level, it is centered around sport and sporting culture. It is often said that sport is dominated in popularity by men. Despite this, the site is not gender specific, and is not set out in a way that could be viewed as overtly masculine.
It keeps up to date with modern culure in the sense that it offers links and so on for users who would use a mobile phone, and with the inclusion of watching live tv and highlights through links on the site.
I am a user because it is very quick, it entertains me in various forms, offers insight and opinion which I believe and trust, mainly as it is the relaible BBC! It has all the characteristics of a news site, but due to my own personal interests, It is very appealing and accessible.
Thursday, 12 February 2009
Music sharing online
Music and the music industry still remains as one of the most influential industries in our culture. However, the dynamics of it have changed in recent years. Growing up as a kid, I can always remember going to Woolworths and Andy's Records for CD's. And yes, Andy's Records was the bees knees and still remains so in my mind. But music as a whole is no longer consumed in this way. It is now about downloading it, ripping it and sharing it online that has caused a drastic change. This means that the consumer market, even the target audience has changed, as has the way it is financed and enjoyed as a medium. As we are all aware, Woolworths has gone, Zavvi is in debt and even Andy's Records had to go. HMV has ditched its single chart sales, and radio one announced that it would begin to compile weekly chart sales based on download sales as opposed to shop sales.
It has been well documented that The Artic Monkeys, Lily Allen and others were found online and through social networking sites like Myspace. This means that not everyone will become a star, but the door is open for unknown acts to be noticed. Our societies love of the reality tv shows and gameshow competitions has even attracted music, through shows like the Orange unsigned act etc. So music will change as it always has done; into a contemporary medium that suits the era, whether that be 12" LPs, cassette tapes, CDs or itunes.
Yes media companies are always needed. People have the talent, media companies have the financial backing, and this formula producers the music for a consumer market. This will remain the case i'm sure.
It has been well documented that The Artic Monkeys, Lily Allen and others were found online and through social networking sites like Myspace. This means that not everyone will become a star, but the door is open for unknown acts to be noticed. Our societies love of the reality tv shows and gameshow competitions has even attracted music, through shows like the Orange unsigned act etc. So music will change as it always has done; into a contemporary medium that suits the era, whether that be 12" LPs, cassette tapes, CDs or itunes.
Yes media companies are always needed. People have the talent, media companies have the financial backing, and this formula producers the music for a consumer market. This will remain the case i'm sure.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
My thoughts on social networking sites, and user generated content
Im Afraid to say that I too have been caught up in the craze that is the social networking websites. Facebook is perhaps the biggest form of procrastination in my student life. My experience of it is good overall, the site offers me what i need, it allows me to express myself, comment on others, and often be reminded of the night before. And prompted when certain events are happening so i know what's going on. It is fair to say that it started off as a 'thing to do' and has now become an addiction where i find myself updating my status at least once a day if not 5. I have never viewed it as an online community untill i began this blog, but I still see it as a neccessity and a great form of communication and expression. I like the fact you can chat with people, and write things on their wall and even do a bit of 'lurking' on what friends and family are up to! Not that this is cool, but we all do it! We seem to now be in the post modern stage where if you don't have Facebook, you are out dated and 'uncool'. It is the norm to use such sites, due to a desire to be conneced and informed.
Due to this rapid increase in social networking, many critics have had many opinions and views on the effects they have on society and the impact on individuals. A 2008 book published by Forrester Research Inc. titled Groundswell builds on a 2006 Forrester Report about social computing and coins the term groundswell to mean "a spontaneous movement of people using online tools to connect, take charge of their own experience, and get what they need-information, support, ideas, products, and bargaining power...from each other."
I thought I would highlight the positives and negatives as I see them of Social networking sites.
Positives;
- CMC can allow relationships to develop and communication to be possible at any given time.
- Buinesses are opting to use social networking sites and layouts as it is a good way to advertise their product.
- Social networking allows us to identify and connect with friends and strangers while on the go. Such computer mediated communication also allows us to reconnect with friends from the past whom we may have lost contact with.
Negatives;
-Employees are now more likely than before to carry on inappropriate conversations at work. Communicating through such technologies creates a relaxed feeling in a professional environment. Some messages that should be relayed in person are being sent through the computer.
- People's details are exposed on the web for all to see.
- People can change their identity and be someone they are not.
I predict that social networking websites will continue to rise in popularity, as the internet becomes more available worldwide.
Due to this rapid increase in social networking, many critics have had many opinions and views on the effects they have on society and the impact on individuals. A 2008 book published by Forrester Research Inc. titled Groundswell builds on a 2006 Forrester Report about social computing and coins the term groundswell to mean "a spontaneous movement of people using online tools to connect, take charge of their own experience, and get what they need-information, support, ideas, products, and bargaining power...from each other."
I thought I would highlight the positives and negatives as I see them of Social networking sites.
Positives;
- CMC can allow relationships to develop and communication to be possible at any given time.
- Buinesses are opting to use social networking sites and layouts as it is a good way to advertise their product.
- Social networking allows us to identify and connect with friends and strangers while on the go. Such computer mediated communication also allows us to reconnect with friends from the past whom we may have lost contact with.
Negatives;
-Employees are now more likely than before to carry on inappropriate conversations at work. Communicating through such technologies creates a relaxed feeling in a professional environment. Some messages that should be relayed in person are being sent through the computer.
- People's details are exposed on the web for all to see.
- People can change their identity and be someone they are not.
I predict that social networking websites will continue to rise in popularity, as the internet becomes more available worldwide.
Lister pages 172-184 and my response
I think that online communities can be seen as both empowering and disempowering, depending on how it is viewed. It is seen as empowering due to every user having their own passwords and details so that only they can log in. Certain people are also able to then become someone else through this community, depicting themselves in a way they choose. This notion allows people to feel empowered as they are fooling others or leading others to believe this. This gives people a great deal of empowerment. However, it has been revealed that sites like Facebook and Myspace keep personal details like phone numbers and adresses for years and people from all over the world have access to this. What is empowering about that? Also, the fact that with things like Facebook, people can put photos up or write things about you which can expose you, so again, this is disempowering.
This does mean however, that the net can provide people with a public sphere where they can interact. But with this public sphere, the problem is that people can hide behind a different identity, and who you thought you were interacting with in this sphere, may not be who you thought.
People are able to then produce this culture themselves as opposed to having it supplied to them. But the flaw with this is that the culture must exsist in some form before it can be produced, or people are already demanding it to some extent. This goes back to the idea that media culture is never really new, it always takes some previous form and evolves. So while ordinary Net users can become producers, their role is still mainly a consumer, and are responding to a need for culture.
This does mean however, that the net can provide people with a public sphere where they can interact. But with this public sphere, the problem is that people can hide behind a different identity, and who you thought you were interacting with in this sphere, may not be who you thought.
People are able to then produce this culture themselves as opposed to having it supplied to them. But the flaw with this is that the culture must exsist in some form before it can be produced, or people are already demanding it to some extent. This goes back to the idea that media culture is never really new, it always takes some previous form and evolves. So while ordinary Net users can become producers, their role is still mainly a consumer, and are responding to a need for culture.
Into the Blogosphere - Blanchard reading and my response
Blanchard raises many points on the idea of communities and computer mediated communication. I feel that the word community stands for a selection of people who are within a specific area, whether virtual or real, who communicate through various forms. Therefore I believe that this term 'community' is acceptable when applied to virtual worlds. On social networking sites like Facebook, which could be deemed as a community, people interact through pictures, conversations, and leaving personal comments etc. This is the way a community would operate.
The term 'virtual settlement' is an important one when you are considering the concept of a virtual community. Jones stated that in order to understand a virtual community, you needed comprehension of the virtual settlement in which it operated. The way I interpret this is as follows. The word settlement implies people gathering and 'settling' somewhere. When these people are settled, a community can develop. This applies to new houses being built in an area, contestants on Big Brother, and to a virtual community which 'settles' into an area on the net. If there was no settlement, then a community wouldn't develop, so the term is an extremely useful one.
I suppose I have never thought of online interaction as a community, but upon reflection it is clear to see wht it can be seen as being so. A community has events, contrasting characters, those you know well and those you don't, and beyond all, is somewhere you feel comfortable or at ease. If this was applied to Facebook, it is easy to see why it is viewed as a community, although this seems an odd term to use in my view. It could be said that this has derived from face to face interactions, but many people change their identities when online as opposed to face to face, so the two cannot realistically be thought of in the same way.
The term 'Lurker' is one that when thought of as strangers looking at you and your life online, is not only scary, but slightly perverted! Emphasis on slightly!! The term is surrounded with a negative vibe in the same way the word criticism is - people always assume this in a negative context. However when this term Lurker is broken down into meaning, how many of us can say we have never sat in a cafe, looking out the window and making a comment on someone walking past? How many of us can say we have never looked in through an open door or window of someone's house? This is lurking, it is an intrusion or viewing of someone else's life. We all walk around being judged by others, but are fine as we are unaware of it in general. But when it is done online we fret and fear for our personal space. Everyone has a different role within a community and function, so if you consider we as a society are all lurkers in some form, then no one can be booted out or not needed.
We can make assumptions from this of course, as the vast majority of the people were female. But the age was only an average, which doesnt account for the fact that 1 participant might be 14 and another 73. So the ideas and assumptions we make about this community are very broad and vague, sothe identities could be inaccurate.
A community could be seen as a group of people who interact online, as well as depending on what's on offer and what is done with this. Certain people will chose to 'belong' or participate to a certain community due to interests/beliefs and what rewards there are for doing so. It is going to depend on what is on offer that appeals to the user in their eyes, and what benefits they will get out of it. In the eye of the user(S), they will opt to be in a community where it suits them best, as opposed to just selecting an online community to participate in.
The term 'virtual settlement' is an important one when you are considering the concept of a virtual community. Jones stated that in order to understand a virtual community, you needed comprehension of the virtual settlement in which it operated. The way I interpret this is as follows. The word settlement implies people gathering and 'settling' somewhere. When these people are settled, a community can develop. This applies to new houses being built in an area, contestants on Big Brother, and to a virtual community which 'settles' into an area on the net. If there was no settlement, then a community wouldn't develop, so the term is an extremely useful one.
I suppose I have never thought of online interaction as a community, but upon reflection it is clear to see wht it can be seen as being so. A community has events, contrasting characters, those you know well and those you don't, and beyond all, is somewhere you feel comfortable or at ease. If this was applied to Facebook, it is easy to see why it is viewed as a community, although this seems an odd term to use in my view. It could be said that this has derived from face to face interactions, but many people change their identities when online as opposed to face to face, so the two cannot realistically be thought of in the same way.
The term 'Lurker' is one that when thought of as strangers looking at you and your life online, is not only scary, but slightly perverted! Emphasis on slightly!! The term is surrounded with a negative vibe in the same way the word criticism is - people always assume this in a negative context. However when this term Lurker is broken down into meaning, how many of us can say we have never sat in a cafe, looking out the window and making a comment on someone walking past? How many of us can say we have never looked in through an open door or window of someone's house? This is lurking, it is an intrusion or viewing of someone else's life. We all walk around being judged by others, but are fine as we are unaware of it in general. But when it is done online we fret and fear for our personal space. Everyone has a different role within a community and function, so if you consider we as a society are all lurkers in some form, then no one can be booted out or not needed.
We can make assumptions from this of course, as the vast majority of the people were female. But the age was only an average, which doesnt account for the fact that 1 participant might be 14 and another 73. So the ideas and assumptions we make about this community are very broad and vague, sothe identities could be inaccurate.
A community could be seen as a group of people who interact online, as well as depending on what's on offer and what is done with this. Certain people will chose to 'belong' or participate to a certain community due to interests/beliefs and what rewards there are for doing so. It is going to depend on what is on offer that appeals to the user in their eyes, and what benefits they will get out of it. In the eye of the user(S), they will opt to be in a community where it suits them best, as opposed to just selecting an online community to participate in.
Monday, 9 February 2009
Facebook and social networking
I think that Facebook has proved so popular because when it became available, it was 'fresh' and new. I agree that it follows all of the same concepts as previous social networking websites, but at the time Myspace was becoming dated, in my view, and Bebo has never really appealed to the masses. Facebook became a cult craze, and word spread fast about it. Within 2 years, I think it will have lost some of its appeal, unless it finds a way to reinvent itself, in the same was tv has with digital.
I agree that many people represent themselves in a way they want others to view them, not neccessarily how they actually are. I know people who will untag themselves from pictures so they are not embarrassed or family members dont see them etc. But I sense that some people are more comfortable in this environment. For example, people will talk freely on Facebook, be keen to speak and share things, but in person are quiet and are completley different. This concept of 'other' identities and representations are prominent in all areas of media. In magazines, photos tend to be immaculate, in tv, presenters are always done up with make up etc. We live in a world where we are all too keen to see others embarrassed and shamed, as long as it isnt ourselves. Facebook is a prime example of this.
I agree that many people represent themselves in a way they want others to view them, not neccessarily how they actually are. I know people who will untag themselves from pictures so they are not embarrassed or family members dont see them etc. But I sense that some people are more comfortable in this environment. For example, people will talk freely on Facebook, be keen to speak and share things, but in person are quiet and are completley different. This concept of 'other' identities and representations are prominent in all areas of media. In magazines, photos tend to be immaculate, in tv, presenters are always done up with make up etc. We live in a world where we are all too keen to see others embarrassed and shamed, as long as it isnt ourselves. Facebook is a prime example of this.
Friday, 6 February 2009
selves and others online, and Facebook
Facebook has shot to prominence within the last 2years. It is described as a social networking site. It enables people to communicate in a variety of ways, like Facebook chat, sharing photos and videos, and people can comment on what others have said, in a similar way to blogging. People often express themselves through the status bar, in which people write any feelings and emotions, or simply what they are up to at the time. People add friends, relative and colleagues, and then have access to their profiles. The main type of people on Facebook are young people. I am friends with fellow students, school friends, cousins and work colleagues, which enables me to easily communicate with people from various parts of my life. People tend to present themselves as fun and outgoing judging by their status' and comments. My favourite thing about Facebook is the fact it tells you when other peoples birthdays are, which helps me remember, plus it provides me with a cheap way to say happy birthday! For those without Facebook, here is a link. http://www.facebook.com/. The site is structured with lots of different applications, such as photo albums, a personal inbox and a public wall for friends to write on. People only have full access to your account if you accept them. There are so many ways you can communicate, which is why Facebook is so popular. It takes on similarities to other social networking websites like Myspace and Bebo, so users are easily familar with the structure.
selves and others online
The internet certainly offers the chance for people to express themselves in ways they wouldnt otherwise. There has been much coverage in recent years about people who become someone else when they are online. On Channel 4 recently there was a documentary following people who spent their entire days logged into cyber sites, and virtual world websites. These include sites like papermint.com, which encourage people to create themselves in computer form and communicate with other users online. This is seen as unusual, and the more contemporary and popular forms of social interaction are sites like Facebook and Myspace. These allow people to share thoughts, feelings and photos etc. It allows people to show their character, show others photos and videos of events they have been at, and write about common interests and show personal relationships and chat to friends. The obvious ciriticism with this is that people can tamper with their identity, change characterisitics, and manipulate others into thinking they are someone else. People can hide behind a virtual character, which presents a problem to others. For me, the game The Sims is what has provoked this trend in virtual games and sites. Does anyone agree or disagree?
Wednesday, 4 February 2009
Emails certainly take on the idea of previous communication methods. They are written in a certain way, often formally when it is business related, and conversationalist when it is too a friend. Emails appeal to a vast majority of people as they follow on from a previous form, which enables people to pick this up easily. The only change in language has resulted by consequence of 'text' talk from mobile phones. But, in relation to Bolter and Grusin's theory of remediation, new media forms certainly take on a previous form and adapt into what is percieved as 'new'.
The purpose new media serves in society and its benefits are unquestionable. They certainly enhance the things we do in the sphere of society; things like online shopping, and banking make money and suchlike accessible in an instance. Having elderly grandparents means thy struggle to shop for themselves, so ordering food to their door is a huge help. Our ideologies as a society have adapted to this idea. Many were wary about leaving and giving personal information online in the form of adresses and bank details, but despite many problems still occuring, people opt to use the internet in this way due to it being convienient. New media is thusfore viewed as both a progress and as a hinderance; many use it for business, shopping etc, but when it goes wrong, new media is criticised. But the ideology of society is that whatever its flaws, new media and technology are necessary and ultimately symbolise progress.
Monday, 2 February 2009
Robins viewpoint is not necessarily arguing against there being new technology, but he feels it will amount to the same as all other new forms; an apparent integral role in society, which we are all subject to needing. Growing up as a kid and not having a Gameboy made me adrift from others, due to the capitalist view that all kids should have one, and you were 'different' if you didnt. This is certainly applicable to mobile phones in contemporary culture. I beleive we are governed by a techno-capitalist society, where a growing majority will buy because it's new, and depend heavily on technology. The 'newness' of media is unquestionable, as every new form does something new or is entirely original. Robins is arguing that these new forms serve to simply further strengthen our techno-capitalist society.
New media and the concept of it began to thrive in the 80's, resulting in a hype which has surrounded it ever since. In all social contexts, the 20th century moved into a world that thrived and almost depended on technology. To keep up with this trend institutions and companies aimed to sell high amounts to consumers through new media forms, such as DAB radio and digital tv. For me, the debate which surrounds upgrade culture is this; is it the consumer market that demands these new and innovative meduims or is it driven by businesses with financial motive? I think itis both. Businesses like BSkyB know there is a demand for services and their product, so will produce it at a price to suit them. Consumers are seemingly prepared to pay anything for an upgrade in exsisting media forms. Media has to update itself to continue to be in high demand and 'fresh'.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
