As
we have talked about before in this course, I am a consumer when it comes to
online content. Although I participate in social media sites such as Facebook,
twitter and instagram, I wouldn't consider myself a producer. I don't create
educational videos or discuss relevant issues online. Even though I don't
produce, I really enjoy watching what others have produced. Such as youtube
videos, watching television shows online and looking at pictures. I think a
true producer is someone who contributes meaningful information or creates
interesting content online (I am not there yet). What inhibits me from producing
and posting online content is lack of skill. I’m not sure how to make a “cool”
video, and I haven’t had the desire to post my thoughts online. Everything you
post is there for life, so you have to be careful of the content that is being
posted (which relates back to my previous blog about Facebook).
Henry Jenkins (2004) discusses media convergence, how tons of different ideas
from different places come together as one. My first thought was smartphones,
which he also mentioned. Phones used to be used as purely a way to communicate
with one another, now you can play games, access all social media sites, and
send pictures and text (Jenkins, 2004). Now people are always multitasking,
media is shaping the way people are, it can lead them to do certain things,
change their thought process and decisions on products. Jenkins (2004) brings
fourth that on one hand media is now easily accessible, cheap and fast paced
for the community, but on the other hand it is dominated by small, limited
groups of people. Therefore one person or group can change the way everyone
thinks. If there information is put out through all different types of media, TV,
internet and radio, everyone is hearing this message. That being said, there is
no real consistency for media, because we have so many ways to access
information now. We can see an overload of different viewpoints at our finger
tips. Jenkins (2004) says that we can either have media all focused on one
message, through one or a few people or a bunch of different sources, where
than the public decides what is important, it is very difficult to find a happy
medium between these two.
Teresa Rizzo in YouTube the New Cinema of Attractions explains that this
concept is much like it was back in 1906. Kirby Fergusson says that everything
is copied from something, and therefore YouTube was somewhat formed on the
basis of something else. Movies are a bunch of events that lead to a climax,
whereas YouTube is random and acknowledges that people are watching. On YouTube
you can post comments and responses to the videos, and they are available all
day and night. The whole point of YouTube is to gain attraction (Rizzo). People
enjoy the immediacy and intense experiences, it creates visual curiosity by
labeling videos as “amazing clip” or “must watch” (Rizzo). YouTube is an example
of something that made by people for the people. Consumers, such as myself
enjoy watching what producers have made. Being able to comment and share what
we want, gives us the feeling that we can freely access and share ideas even
though there are copyright laws pushing against us. Convergence, and access to
these online materials is uneven within given countries, the wealthier have
access to computers and Internet and therefore others are striving to keep up
with these technological advancements.
Jenkins, H. (2004) The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence International Journal
of Cultural Studies March 2004 7: 33-43
Rizzo, T. YouTube: the New Cinema of Attractions SCAN | journal of media
arts culture. Vol 5, No. 1, Online journal.
I agree with and like your comment about You-Tube being by the people for the people. Unfortunately the cynic in me see's that quote and says "Ok, everyone is on here so we have to figure out how to make money" and that is what they did with the commercials you have to watch now to see certain videos. There is easy money to be made and the technology that allows people to remix, borrow or steal also allows people to make that easy profit. I'll use an example from the Everything Is a Remix Video. The documentary refers to George Harrison being sued because he had accidentally lifted the melody from The Chiffons song "He's so Fine" for his song "My Sweet Lord". A Beatle back then was a guaranteed mass audience much like today with the Internet and social media which also means a chance to make a lot of money. For me that is what it is all about.
ReplyDeleteI like your point on movies being a bunch of separate events that lead to a particular climax considering maybe those events did not originally happen in such order or perhaps even someone improved the story with a bit of imagination to increase popularity and therefore profits. I also enjoyed your view in regards to consumers gaining a sense of perceived freedom towards their published ideas; being able to have a voice on the production (clip, song, video etc..) only furthers our participation of such media. Consumers get so involved that they even turn into producers and the cycle advances as generations gain more technological enhancements. Also, your last point was very fascinating as some countries are fortunate enough to have access to such technology whereas others are not (not to mention are not even comparable to the health, wealth and education of first world countries); making it more difficult to expand wealth and education across nations.
ReplyDelete