Friday, 30 January 2009
Week 2: Topic 2 | Blogs
EXPRESSION | Well, originally the essence of blogging is publishing your thoughts and musings to the world, and it is noticeable how blogger is clearly designed to make it as easy as possible but at the same time enables more advanced functions like HTML-support and custom layouts for those "in the know".
In this case it works very well as it enables us to put our different findings in different posts and make it easy for people to find similar posts by using tags.
INTERACTION | It's nice to have an on-the-spot comment-option here on blogger enabling people to comment immediately after reading the post without having to go elsewhere. Hopefully over the next few weeks the blogs will become a places of in-depth discussion and fiery debates! It's a nice thing to be able to read back what people are on about, something you can't do in a real-life discussion without having to ask and halting the process of the conversation when doing so.
TIME | The same goes here as what I said about this this specifgic topic about the forums, really. It is nice to do the work at a time when you are at your best, whether it's at 10 AM or 10 PM, the site works the same and people can respond to your posts anytime after you've posted them!
AUTHORITY AND IDENTITY | THe person who's blog it is is sort-of in charge I think. But more like a discussion leader, if anything. He/She brings up the points of discussion and the conversations go from there. For the rest of it I think the same sense of equality is on the blogs as there is on the forums.
SPEECH & WRITING | The same applies as to the blogs, I feel. The mode of address is quite informal as there is no requirement to use formal "essay style" writing. It is merely a platform to raise topics and share your findings with others. It is even possible to just say that you really don't get or really don;t agree with something that's written or taught on the course.
Thursday, 29 January 2009
Week 2: Topic 2 | Forums
EXPRESSION | Of course posting on a forum is different from just saying things in a group meeting or actual seminar. For one thing user's would've thought more about HOW they are going to make their point before they start typing away. I don't think the views expressed themselves are very different though. Also it allows people to have a good hard think about what is being said and come back later to respond. Something you can't to in real-life as, well, you would've left by then.
INTERACTION | It is sometimes hard to get how people MEAN what they say. Are they being sarcastic or do they ACTUALLY agree? On many online communication platforms they have emoticons (smileys) to help get your point across, but out forum doesn't. This doesn't always make it easy to understand how to interpret what is being said sometimes.
TIME | One of the great advantages of using a forum ios that they are available all the time, you can whack a question onthere as soon as it arrises and you can respond to it whenever you've thought of an answer. It's also handy as some people are morning people while other, like myself, are definitely NOT and function better at night.
AUTHORITY AND IDENTITY | Every one is equal on the forums, there is no way somebody can shout over you as all opinions get the same space and the same amount of attention. Talkative people and those who are less confident to speak in "public" are both able to express their opinions like equals.
SPEECH & WRITING | The tone of the forum is quite informal, so the way we all interact onthere is not too different from how we address each other on a day to day basis.
Week 2: Topic 1
The "money making" part of the whole software-upgrading thing, I would think, is quite often an important factor in a company's decision to release a new version of their succesful packages. After all, by the time everybody's got the previous version of the software no more money can be made from sales unless a new product or a new version of a product is launched.
However, I wouldn't say it's the only reason for these constant updates. Technological developments within the computer industry follow eachother up very very rapidly indeed and consumers DO want to make use of these new technologies. After all, what's the point of these technological advantages if there is no software available enabling people to make use of them. This basic concept of new version being released has, to many consumers, been considered a "given", even so much that people now even upgrade their hradware because their old PC/PDA/netbook/whatever couldn't cope with the latest version of the machine's operating system. This could well be because companies put a lot of effort into promoting the new software as a revolutionary new step. But really, how exciting amnd different can the new Windows or Office be? Still the whole upgrade-concept can't JUST be blamed on commerce I think, even freeware like Firefox, which is free to download, gets updated regularly to sufficiently please the consumers' needs.
2> The 'Newness' of new media
The term 'New Media' is ofcourse a bit vague as any form of media would be "new" by the time it was/is introduced. But I guess we'll just have to think of the term 'New Media' as one of those terms that are just called that, even if it technically might not be entirely sound.
I guess the statement that "nothing has changed" isn't entirely true. I would agree that some concepts from older media forms can be found in new media forms but what I feel make new media different are the way they allow instant feedback, quicker selection of what you want to access and, what basically includes the other two points, it's great emphasis on interactivity. Also New Media forms can be yupdated all the time. A newspaper's released once a day, buy it at night and it'll be the same as in the morning, whatever else has happened that day. (Remember when the papers were still baning on about the 2012 olympics while earlier that day the same city was the target of terrorist bombings? Ouch, bit of a painful example that was, but I guess it helps me make my point.).
3> Progress
I would say that yes, it is. The number of services available on any of the new media platforms increases all the time and even old media forms have made their way onto new platforms. Like E-books and television on your mobile.
It has increased but also changed the commercial world significantly. Just think about how big a business Amazon has become completely based on an online service and how both legal and illegal downloading have spawned platforms like iTunes while conventional record stores like HMV and especially Zavvi are struggling to make sales.
Politically it has made it very easy for parties to get their message across to many people as they can elaborate on their agenda's a lot more online than they can in, say a flyer or political party broadcast on television.
And, let's face, it's probably only a matter of time until we can vote online. Maybe then people can actually be bothered to vote then as it's much less of an effort.
4> Analogue & Digital media, the differences
The break is there, but not THAT clear cut. Yes, digital ENABLES things like instant-delivery and interactivity, but doesn't always do so. Digital television does enable for interactive features (PRESS THE RED BUTTON NOW!!!!! NOT IN A MINUTE!! NOW!!!) but the actual broadcast itself is still a one-way communication, so, improved picture and sound aside... it's not really that different a broadcast. the same goes for DAB Digital radio broadcasting, there is more choice, the sound is better, but it's still just radio. I'm not even quite sure wether or not DAB can even be classified as New Media or not. Is a DVD digital? It's full of one's and zero's and the first D stand for Digital but it's still a physical thing that really doesn't do that much different from an old VHS tape, it just plays things. The pretty menu's aren't THAT much of a breakthough, really.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that digital and analogue do not necessarily represent new and old media repectivly. CD's are digital, but were available WAY before there was such a thing called "New Media". All we can safely say is that there IS old media out there that is digital, but NO new media that is analogue, simply because new media is based on digital technology.
A lot of new media are inspired on old media forms in form though, we still start an e-mail the way we used to start a letteror memo and some websites do look a lot like magazines or newspapers.
5> Digitally and code
The end result of the whole procedure might not be so different, after all, an essay is an essay. But the whole process of getting there would be very very very different, there would be even more planning and more drafts until there's a final piece of work that is completely error free and that you are completely satisfied with. A time consuming process it might be but it WOULD call for more and better planning of what you want to say simply because you can't just bang something in later. And there is no way of doing it at the last minute as sometimes happens nowadays. It'd take longer, but it would be a good way to force students to get their act together.
6> Immersive interactivity
I suppose Lunenfield's concept applies to things like MOO's and MUD's, but even more to online games like World of Warcraft, or any other type of realistic online activity or agem that allows you to adapt a different persona in order to "immerse" into a differtent virtual/imaginary world through new media technology.
7> Non-linear
I think I can see what he means there. Whereas traditional media, like books for example, need to build up a story or article and slowly engage and capture the reader in order to keep his/her attention, a non-linear text doesn't need to do that. The web is a GREAT example of this, if you lose interest in something you just click on something else, and that way you are enabled to look for EXACTLY what you want to find out/know. Reading the web is very very selective and therefore pages tend to go for the bare essence of the message.
8> New voices
This enables texts to be REALLY REALLY specific as the web is big enough for everything. A text doesn't need to address a big audience in order to be out there (as it doesnt need to be printed and thus there aren't commercial reasons for wanting a big audience) and can there fore have an audience as specific, or niche, as they want to. And because anyone can publich on the web, and anyone can find this stuff, views and opinions that were normally not mainstream enough to make it to conventional media forms can be expressed, as alternative, controversial or unusual as they might be. These can be political, but also be just about a very specific sub culture. About anything, really.
9> Ideal interactivity
Oooh, ideal is a bit of a dangerous concept I suppose. Especially as it's down to people's personal tastes, but still. Even things like Facebook and Myspace that allow people to interact in a wide range of different ways: messages, private messages, games, pictures, video, instant messages, chat... there is still a third party involved. Facebook has grown into a big corporation and Myspace is owned by Murdoch's News Corporation. I guess a bit of censorship isn't too bad though, as some stuff out there is just unsuitable or distasteful, but then again, isn't that what freedom of speach, and freedom within interactivity is all about? But on the other hand its bigger platforms like Myspace that gives people the attributes to communicate in such a broad fashion, but then isntantly comes with a set of ideals and ideas of what is appropiate. So, bit of a dillema there.
Friday, 23 January 2009
Task for week 1: MUD's and MOO's (characteristics and use)
An imaginary world described by text only, where users can not only chat but use special, universally agreed upon commands to play games with each other.
A MOO is pretty much the same thing but in a MOO, as opposed to a Mud, users can perform programming-codes to alter things.
Both these things allow people worldwide to casually communicate and play together by setting up their own online imaginary persona.
It is basically a very basic form of things like World of Warcraft and similar games where users do pretty much the same thing but can make use of a virtual world in which they can visually customise their character. ( http://www.worldofwarcraft.com )
A nice way to pass the time for some but not useful for actual communiations when there are other, much more to-the-point ways of communication available for formal and contructive communications.
My personal experiences with any of these things? None, so far. But it could be an interesting thing to try in the next few weeks to see what it's like and perhaps post something on the blog about.
Task for week 1: Chatrooms, (instant) messenger services and IRLs (characteristics and use)
The basic concept of instant messenging is quite simple. A (fairly small) piece of software tells you which of the people you have added to the application's "friend-list" are online and whent heya re you can open a chat-window in which you can instantly send eachother and an unlimited amount of short terxt messages thus enabling an actual conversation, be it in text-form. Users can also send each other files and pictures. Users who have a webcam and/or microphone installed on their computer can use these to have actual audio and/or video conversations with each other.
Chatrooms are similar in the sense that messages are sent instantly, however they are mostly divided by region or a specific interest or subject and a meeting place to talk to a larger group of people you may not even know.
IRL's are basically a different term for web-forums, where subjects can be discussed in a post-after-post manner rather than in real-time.
I personally mostly use MSN Messenger as it has more or less become the standard form of instant messenging. It's a good way to keep up with other people's going on's or simply to pass the time. However, occasionally it's a good way to communicate actual constructive information when doing university group work and an actual physical meeting isn't possible for whatever reason.
Task for week 1: Websites (characteristics and use)
There are basically two flavours of websites:
Some websites websites consists of files stored as they are seen by the person who visits the webpage, who has no influence on the content of the website, the maintainer of the website would actually have to change the files on the server individually and specifically to change the website's content. These are called static. Many websites are dynamic, where files are stored differently to make it easier for the websmaster or webteam to update the information. For example news websites that constantly needs updating, or webpages where visitors can interact by responding to or adding to the content of a page. Like this one, for example. The rise in dynamic websites have brought about the arrival of what we call web 2.0.
Web 2.0 (although some would argue that we're already on 3.0) has changed the internet a lot. Interactivity is key and static information providing websites are no longer the norm. Almost every website you visit nowadays asks you to respond to articles, upload pictures, add videos (YOUTUBE!!!) or discuss things in web-fora. Forming some sort of online-community, or indeed, an imagined community. Even websites that do not allow this sort of interaction often do still allow you to sign-up/log in and change the website's appearance and spacing to suit your own preferences. People's online persona, can often be quite different from their real-life persona as the internet allows them to basically present themselves however they want themselves to be seen.
I personally use the internet all the time. For all sorts of things, research, entertainment (again, Youtube, but also things like iPlayer and 4OD), to find news or to indeed respond and discuss things on web-fora. And let's not forget that websites like Myspace and Facebook, who tend to pretty much rule the average student's life, are also web-based and are pretty much taking this whole online-community thing to the next level.
Task for week 1: E-mail (characteristics and use)
E-mail messages, are almost instant, depending on its file size, and this is what makes them a very popular form of communication, not only for personal purposes, but also between staff of companies and other institutions. They are fast, private (as the receiver needs to log in to be able to read them), and fairly reliable.
However, servers can crash, mail-account can reach their maximum data-quota or, even worse, email providers can discontinue their services altogether.
I personally use e-mail all the time, as many people I would think, to stay in touch with relatives and friends or to send enquire companies about their services and stuff like that. E-mailing a company is always a bit less intimidating than actualyl calling them, however, an E-mail can easily be ignored which emans you end up having to call them.
Nowadays, I don't tend to use e-mail as much as I used to for informal messages to friends with the arrival and increasing popularity of social networking websites such as Myspace and Facebook.
Thursday, 22 January 2009
Online lecture Word-file - Part 1: Digital vs. Analogue (The science bit)
This article/lecture's first main argument seems to function mainly as an introduction to the concept of "new media" and points out that in this unit "new media" basically refers to "digital media".
Digital, as opposed to analogue means that actual "stuff" is being translated to code. DIGITal is called that because it's made out of DIGITS. Whereas analgue data actually gets physically stored, be it by picture (on an old fashioned film roll) or ridges (on a gramaphone record.)
Digital is a much smaller/streamlined/FASTER and much more precise way of saving and sending files and data. The data is translated into a code made out of 1's and 0's and transferred to the other end where it gets translated back into actual stuff. Of course there can be glitches where the code doesn't arrive 100% correctly which can then lead into a file having a little mistake in it which can cause it to not work at all.
Most of all digital enables to send much more data in less space, if that makes sense at all.
For example: Analogue telly where the airwaves send the actual pictures can only broadcast 5 channels (and in some areas only 4) where as the digital freeview terrestial technology enables 30-ish channels to be sent through the airwaves because they are turned into code first. But in order to receive them you need equipment that can translate the code back into the actual channels. In this case the infamous freeview box we all love so much. But because the broadcast has been turned into a code first and the whole code is translated back to visual/sound the data arrives much clearer which is why digital usually has a sharper picture than analogue. However, sometimes some part of the code can't get picked up properly by the aerial which then causes little parts of missing data which results in those little squary bits on the screen we see sometimes or the picture freezing for a moment. Luckily the box arrives data all the time so the error usually doesn't last very long whereas an error in the sending of one particular file could result in the whole thing not working.
Because things like the internet and mobile communications require a lot of data to be sent continuesly, there is no way things like the internet (esp. broadband!) could've worked if it was based on analogue technology. So yeah, it pretty much can be said that we owe a lot to digital technology and that the arrival of digital technology has changed our daily lives a lot, considering how many things we use every day (mobile/tv/internet, or even mobile TV though the internet!!) wouldn't have existed otherwise!
More to come soon! Esp. more things of how it affects us and stuff.
Tuesday, 20 January 2009
Study guide week 1: Topic 1
The study guide tells that for Topic 1 for this week we need to familiarise ourselves with the different forms of online communication that we are going to need for this unit.
The two main points highlighted in topic 1 are:
a) What are the characteristics (in terms of the kinds of communication they allow) of the following?:
b) How do you use them if you do; what for; what’s your experience of using them?
Email and email lists
Usenet and Bulletin board systems
IRL’s chat rooms, messenger services
MUDs + MOOs – merging with online gaming
Websites
Intend to start reading today on the subject and respond to the questions as soon as I've finished reading/researching/thinking about it.
Lecture 20/01/2009
We need to keep up with out blogs on a week-by-week basis as they really will be assessed per week. In our blog entries we are required to address the findings of our research and our own opinions of it. Then fellow group members can respond to it, hopefully turning the whole thing into a bit of the discussion about the whole thing. After 10 weeks we'll drop this method in favour of an essay.
We were told that even the whole title of the unit "new media" is one that can be questioned as every form is media can be regarded "new" when they were first introduced.
We also got told some stuff about "netiquette" (how you're supposed to behave in our online communications) and the meaning of the term "RINCY" (Read it, no comments yet.)
Also, we were asked to post blog entires about this weeks reading/lecture as found on MC home.
So, here is where the whole thing starts...
- Been introduced to the forums
- Set up our blogs (As you probably would've guessed)
- Made our groups
My group consists of my good self, Jason New (for as long as he's here, anyway), Sam Jarvis and Pete Byrne. And one of today's skyvers will probably be added to our group next week.
Oh, would you look at that? It's an actual, factual picture!!
