Essay in Liue of Exam

When publishing changes, so does society. Investigate and compare the impact of two publication technologies, one pre-1800 and one post-2000, on a specific aspect of society.

 

Publishing can be defined as the occupation or activity of preparing and issuing books, journals and other materials for sale. It can be seen as a way to simply spread information and bring something to the public’s attention. Publishing has transformed dramatically over the course of history and has varied from the printing press, smoke signals, radio and now most prominently the internet. Traditionally, publishing was a process monitored by hierarchical, ‘authoritative’ intermediaries. Publishing was initially only used by those people who were powerful or well educated, as it acted as a platform for them to express their 'worthy' thoughts and ideas. However, within the every changing and fast paced world in which we live in today, the abundance of platforms on offer is endless, and this 'worthiness' is no longer a question. The incredible accessibility of platforms within the 21st century such as a laptop, iPhone, iPad or computer, have given anyone with access to them the power to publish and thus the power to distribute and spread information.

We are “sensing, collecting, and manipulating data in near real-time with little to no human supervision” (Dodson, 2009). This in turn has resulted in the entire concept of publishing completely being revolutionised and transformed into something far more technically advanced and accessible. A key example of this can be seen by comparing the way content was monitored and distributed in the past and comparing it with today. In today's modern age, content is both unmonitored and uncensored, for example social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. In world which is constantly evolving, it has resulted in more and more platforms becoming available for the public to publish on. As a result of this, each time a new platform is created, it is more technically advanced than the other and thus affects the way in which the world operates. Thus it can be said that publishing ultimate shapes society, as every time it changes, it has a counter affect within the world we live in.

By focussing on Gutenberg's printing press as a form of publishing before the 19th century and comparing it to iPad, tablets and e-readers which are post the year 2000, will enable the comparison of how different publishing technologies have specifically shaped peoples attitudes and behaviours and ultimate, changed the way people communicate throughout the world. A focal point of this can be seen by using the aspect of society of education. During the time of the middle Ages, the font of publishing played host to both Monks and Scribes. This would entail the long awaited process of them having to hand write entire texts individually and was thus a strenuous procedure. Due to this, it resulted in texts which were inaccurate, filled with grammatical errors and thus “created a situation where only the elite were able to afford books and thus only a small percentage of the population knew how to read and write” (Arthur, 2004).

Following this, as publishing was only created by both Monks and Scribes; it meant that limited people were able to publish. This meant that it was an incredibly slow process, and thus it was rare for more than one copy to be made, due to the combination of the cost and the time it would take. However this was also furthered by the Church. During the middle Ages, the church held strict power over education as well as public opinion. Since “trained scribes…worked for the Church, and it seemed unlikely that the Church would loan out its scribes to copy the works of heretics” (Butler, 2007). Therefore, the Church had power over what was being published and spread, effectively allowing them to control the content and keep the masses uneducated and uninformed.

 However, during the 15^th century, things changed dramatically. It was during this time that the printing press was invented by Johannes Gutenberg. The printing press was an ingenious device that combined “several different inventions and innovations: block printing, rag paper, oil based ink, interchangeable metal type, and the squeeze press” (Butler, 2007). It can be said that the printing press was one of the greatest inventions throughout the world, as it ultimately is responsible for creating the concept which we know nowadays as ‘mass media’. Gutenberg created so much more than just an invention, as his device which used  the revolutionary idea of moveable type, allowed for the process of printing to be rapidly accelerated. Due to this, it dramatically increased the number of copies that could be printed in only a fraction of the time. Furthermore, “the printing press gave writing a consistent look and feel…[in addition] to consistent spelling, grammar, and punctuation” (Arthur, 2004). In essence, there was an increased spread of accurate information as a result of the printing press.

Due to the speed and process of printing rapidly changing, it meant that things such as books, magazines as well as pamphlets were able to be distributed to the public. This was because the ability to produce multiple copies was never made possible until now. As a result of this, it meant that barrier between the middle class and upper class. For the first time, the barrier between the middle class and the elite was disrupted, because everyone in society now had access to information as opposed to simply a selected few.

As a result literacy rates increased throughout society, as more books were available and thus less costly. Another significant effect of the printing press was that “more and more books of a secular nature were printed, with especially profound results in science” (Butler, 2007). Scientific discoveries could be discussed and shared, philosophical theories could be published and analyzed, and important texts like the Bible were finally available for public consumption. Essentially, the printing press gave people the ability to consume literature, and then communicate, critique, and share their ideas about it; this eventually became the foundation for modern scholarship and learning. In addition, “by giving all scholars the same text to work from, it made progress in critical scholarship and science faster and more reliable” (Kreis, 2000). However, undoubtedly one of the main industries in which the printing press had impact upon was education. A key example of this can be seen by looking how the printing press allowed students to experience visuals within learning, which was previously not available,  “the book [became] literally a teaching machine where the manuscript was a crude teaching tool only” (Arthur, 2004).

This was a focal point in time, when education drastically changed. Previous to this both masters and teachers needed to be present at all times, as this was simply the only avenue for learning. However what the printing press allowed was students having access to books which enabled them to learn at their own pace on their own time. In fact, “young minds provided with updated editions…began to surpass not only their own elders but the wisdom of ancients as well,” since students could critically evaluate texts on their own and expand upon outdated knowledge. (Arthur, 2004).

Just as things changed within the 15^th century, a ripple effect has occurred within the 21^st century. With publishing shifting into the digital age, with the internet and web 2.0 as the figure head, a direct result of this can be seen as the result of looking at how it has changed society as a response.

 

One of the main changes which is highlighted in modern publishing within the 21^st century, is that the opportunity for anyone to publish presents itself to anyone who has access to a computer. This change shows how power has shifted from traditional authorities to the everyday person. As a society, we have countless choice in regards to what platform we choose to use, and create content without the monitoring by an official or intermediary. The rise of the digital age has had a variety of positive effects on the landscape of education. For example, this “superhighway of information” known as the Internet employs “different features such as interactive examples, animation, video, narrative etc.” to encourage web-based learning (Abhy, 2010).

Therefore, students can learn, whilst having fun, for example engaging games. Furthermore, the internet is a fast an efferent way for people to access information in online data bases, which is essentially taking over libraries. It shows that students do not need to be in a class room to lean anymore and even degrees can be studied online; example being able to listen to lectures online not be physically present in the lecture theatre.Author William McCoy additionally states that “not every school has the resources and budget to send its students on field trips related to the course of study. When this is the case, the students’ education can suffer. But thanks to technology, students can use the Internet to virtually attend Web seminars put on by museums and other educational institutions” (McCoy, 2013). Therefore internet and technology have furthered education dramatically.

However, though the Internet has aided and revolutionized society and education in many ways, it also presents a range of weaknesses. As a society we publish all of our information online, and as a result of this has meant that is difficult to conclude what information published is accurate. A key example of this can be seen by looking at the popular encyclopaedia, Wikipedia. Anyone who has accesses to the internet has the opportunity to change information on a Wikipedia page and thus proves how information can be un trustworthy and inaccurate. Although the internet has unquestionably changed the publishing landscape, by focussing on the post 2000 devices tablets, including iPad and eReaders can further this greatly. The increase in usage of these devices has been shaped by their portability. This combined with their ability to connect to the internet and apps have made them useful educational devices.

Apart from the fact that they allow one to access a truly diverse range of information, they have completely changed the way in which it means to read a book. By looking at EBooks, it is no longer as simple as turning a page, but rather the ability to lock on links and interact thus engaging students more in education. Increasingly, it seems students and teachers are preferring this digital format over traditional texts, as evidenced by a Learning Unearthed case study, in which researchers looked at “the pros and cons of tablet implementation in the classroom…[and found that] the results were overwhelmingly positive with greater student engagement” (Kaufman, 2012). Specifically in America, iPads are being actively introduced into schools across the country, from early learning centres to universities, and may soon be added to the required school supply list. However, similar to the internet, these devices also can have a negative impact also. It can be said that the traditional texts such as books hold a particular value to education, and that by switching to digital texts is a disadvantage.

 
According to Nicole Crawford, screens—from tablets, to phones, to laptops, etc.— can actually be quite addictive, particularly for children. She alleges that too much ‘screen-time’ creates “notable changes in brain chemistry—most notably, in the release of dopamine….When kids develop a dopamine habit during early childhood, be it through sugary treats or computer games, more serious problems may ensue” (Crawford, 2013).

Furthering this, research has shown that long-term memory and mental performance can be hindered as a result of multitasking and information overload. Users of digital gadgets are said to “have trouble filtering out irrelevant information—and trouble focusing on tasks,” which proves that more research needs to be done as to whether tablets and other digital devices actually enhance or hurt educational development (Richtel, 2010).

Conclusory, it is clear that publishing ultimately changes our society. It does this through shaping the way we communicate within society. By focusing on the printing press, it proves how it revolutionised education for people around the world and as a ripple effect, increased literacy rates and thus an increase in education. By looking at the 21^st century, the same can be said for the internet due to predominantly the sheer simplicity of accessibility. However this in turn has both positive and negative effects and a balance of both new and old technology must be used within the class room.

 

Abhy. “The Impact of Internet on Education.” What Can You Be? N.p., 29 June 2010. Web. 7 November 2014. <http://www.whatcanyoubewithaphd.org/2010/06/29/impact of-the-internet-on-education/>.

Arthur, Peter. “The Impact of the Printing Press.” Text Technologies: The Changing Spaces of Reading and Writing. N.p., 2004. Web. 07 November 2014. <http://educ.ubc.ca/courses/etec540/Sept04/arthurp/researchtopic/index.htm&gt;.

Butler, Chris. “The Invention of the Printing Press and Its Effects.” The Flow of History. N.p., 2007. Web. 07 November 2014. <http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/west/11/FC74&gt;.

Crawford, Nicole. “Wired Kids: How Screen Time Affects Children’s Brains.” Breaking Muscle. N.p., 2013. Web. 07 November 2014. <http://breakingmuscle.com/family kids/wired-kids-how-screen-time-affects-childrens-brains>.

Dodson, Wesley. “Dawn of The Systems Age.” ScienceBlogs. N.p., 28 Dec. 2009. Web. 07 November 2014. <http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2009/12/28/dawn-of-the-systems age/&gt;>

Kaufman, M. “IPad Invading the Classroom.” IPad in Schools. N.p., 16 Dec. 2012. Web. 07 November 2014. <http://www.ipadinschools.com&gt;.

Kreis, Steven. “The Printing Press.” The History Guide. N.p., 2000. Web. 7 November 2014. <http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/press.html&gt;.

McCoy, William. “Five Positive Effects of Technology on Education.” The Houston Chronicle. N.p., Web7 November 2014.. <http://smallbusiness.chron.com/five positive-effects-technology-education-31222.html>.

Richtel, Matt. “The Price of Putting ‘Your Brain on Comupters'” NPR. N.p., 29 Dec. 2010. Web. 7 November 2014. <http://www.npr.org/2010/12/29/132369113/the-price of-having your-brain-on-computers>.

Temple, James. “All Those Tweets, Apps, Updates May Drain Brain.” SF Gate. N.p., 16 Apr. 2011. Web. 7 November 2014. <http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/All-those tweets-apps-updates-may-drain-brain-2374725.php>.

 

 

 

 

Distribution, Aggregation and the Social

Today we live in a word where data of all kinds is shared, distributed, and aggregated at an alarming rate and in an innumerable number of ways.
Accordingly to Wesley Dodson, the ‘Information Age’ we have been living in–characterized by a digital revolution and computerization of information—is now being usurped by a new age, which he refers to as the ‘Systems Age.’ In this ‘Systems Age,’ we are “sensing, collecting, and manipulating data in near real-time with little to no human supervision” (Dodson). As a result, this means that the entire concept of publishing has transformed as well. Anyone with a smartphone, iPad, laptop, or any other way of accessing the Internet has the power to publish, or distribute, information. But is this move from a broadcast media holding a monopoly on information, to a networked media distributing and sharing data a good thing or a bad thing? Let’s look at two different viewpoints:
In his book “Making is Connecting,” author David Gauntlett argues that with the advent of Web 2.0 and explosion in social media platforms, people have been given the wonderful ability to create, share, and connect more so than ever before. He argues that in order for society to flourish, “it is absolutely essential…that people get the opportunities to make and share things, rather than be mere consumers of things.” Basically, he endorses people being “creative participants within their own lives” (Gauntlett). This is why he so blatantly supports online, new-media platforms, because they allow the publics to be more open and connected, which in turn enhances the social. Essentially, in his eyes, if someone shares a tweet or status update, they are generating a connection with the world around them; this is because by sharing their thoughts or ideas, they engage with others and thus foster relationships. Making these connections is what we live for, which would easily explain the incredible popularity of social media platforms today. Rather than accept what is made or told by media professionals (which used to be the case before Web 2.0), now people can create and distribute their own things, ideas, etc. in the world; as a result, they socialize and engage with the world, because “making” is at the root of “connecting!” Gauntlett encourages sharing because he believes that it is integral to developing relationships and is crucial to the function of a vibrant, healthy society. Therefore, Gauntlett sees the countless online platforms that have emerged in a positive light, as they offer us limitless ways to share and connect, through distribution and aggregation. Even hacking, which is a practice frequently looked down upon, ultimately “create[s] the possibility of new things entering the world. Not always great things, or even good things, but new things,” which Gauntlett would likely approve of (Wark [004]).
On the opposite end of the spectrum, sociologist and researcher Danah Boyd finds that this move from a broadcast media to a networked media only encourages us to connect with like-minded people, and that if we aren’t careful, we will end up consuming content that is narrow-minded and ultimately not valuable for ourselves or for society. She thinks that these online platforms encourage us to live in our own worlds–where we engage with people who share our values and interests—effectively reducing our ability to see beyond our little ‘bubbles’ of aggregation. As mentioned in lecture, this is because we are ‘cyber’ hunters and gatherers of information, because we collect what is important or relevant to us, while discarding and ignoring the rest. Boyd additionally speaks of the idea that we are “living in the stream: adding to it, consuming it, directing it” (Guillaud). This ‘stream’ she speaks of broadly refers to the aggregation of distributed information. In this new ‘Systems Age,’ nearly anyone has the ability to influence this stream and change the direction in which information flows. While Gauntlett might argue that a site like Facebook, for example, is advantageous because it allows us to connect with long-lost friends, share witty thoughts in our status updates, share pictures from our last vacation, and ultimately bring us closer to people, Boyd would claim that this is not the case. Instead, she says, “the information ecology we live in today has twisted this whole thing upside down…sociologists call [it] parasocial relations: on Facebook, you can turn your friends into celebrities, without actually gaining the benefits of social intimacy and bonding” (Guillaud).
Social media has become so prominent in our lives that it has taken a dominant role even in the arena of employment. In fact, entire jobs and internships are often dedicated to and created around one’s ability to use various online platforms, gather followers, etc. However, as mentioned in the article “Know Your Product: Online Branding and the Evacuation of Friendship,” genuine online identities and online friendships are put at risk as a result of social media’s interference in the workplace. People are often forced to ‘like’ certain things, make certain status updates, or add certain people as friends for work purposes. People are also compelled to monitor their online behavior, because the extreme visibility of sites like Twitter and Facebook make it so that potential employers (and even current ones) can see your profile and posts. Essentially, though it is often wonderful how social media and work can overlap, unfortunately there is a “divide emerging between those who [can] afford to have their Tweets remain whimsical banalities and those for whom the platform [is] becoming just another part of the job” (Gregg 117). This article made me think about the crucial question, how distributed or aggregated am I? Particularly because I am graduating Uni in one year, I need to start thinking about my future employment. I am frequently reminded that if an employer sees photos of you drinking on Facebook or making inappropriate Tweets about a wild night out, your chances of being hired will be hurt. Therefore, I am making an effort to censor my profile and make private as much of my content as possible. This week’s readings essentially wised me up to the fact that every time I distribute information, it becomes aggregated and can be easily searched on Google by a future employer; as a consequence, this might harm my chances of landing a job.
secret word: platforms
Resources:
Gauntlett, David. “Making is Connecting: the 4-minute presentation (2012).” Online video clip. YouTube. 10 Jan 2012. Web. 07 november 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA-IYHM7u6A&hd=1&noredirect=1&gt;.
Guillaud, Hubert. “What Is Implied by Living in a World of Flow.” Truthout. N.p., 6 Jan. 2010. Web. 07 november 2014. <http://archive.truthout.org/what-implied-living-a-world-flow56203&gt;.
Dodson, Wesley. “Dawn of The Systems Age.” ScienceBlogs. N.p., 28 Dec. 2009. Web. 07 november 2014. <http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2009/12/28/dawn-of-the-systems-age/&gt;.
Gregg, Melissa (2011) ‘Know your product: Online Branding and the Evacuation of Friendship’ in Work’s Intimacy Cambridge: Polity: 102-118
Wark, McKenzie (2004) ‘Abstraction’ in A Hacker Manifesto Cambrdige, MA; Harvard University Press: paragraphs 001-023 (8 pages)

Visual Media and Visualisations

This week’s readings looked at three different kinds of visualization, which I will discuss separately below: visualization in scientific research, visualization in the communication of science within the “public sphere,” and the “real-time,” interactive visualization in VJ-ing. In general, visualizations are beneficial in that they can re-assemble complex, confusing, or otherwise inaccessible information/data into visual representations, usually done so in a clear, colorful, and engaging way. In this sense, visualizations make information–that otherwise may not be–easy to understand. Today we see the frequent use of ‘real-time’ data visualizations, in which the interactive visualizations are constantly updated to provide the viewer with relevant, of-the-moment data that responds to the constant change. Instead of data or information being collected and then published in scholarly or academic journals/textbooks, in the case of scientific data on climate change, for example, we are seeing visualizations created that take that information and re-assemble it in a way that is visually appealing and easy to access for the average person.
VISUALIZATION IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH:
On the Information is Beautiful website, the image comparing global warming skeptics to the scientific consensus, serves as a visualization in scientific research (as well as a visualization of the skeptics’ side of the argument) in an easy-to-understand, simplified fashion. Creating visualizations of scientific research is important, because it allows the public to access information that might otherwise only be published in scientific journals/textbooks or circulated in scientific academia circles. This visualization was assembled using publicly available web sources, to provide simple, easily accessible graphs and other types of visualization, accompanied by words to further enhance the viewer’s understanding. In fact, the author notes that he “deliberately chose not speak directly to any climate experts or leading scientists in the field…[and] used only publicly available web sources…because [he] wanted to simulate what it’s like for people trying to learn about climate change online. [His] conclusion is ‘what a nightmare’…the majority of the writing on [most websites] is so scientific and so technical, it makes the website nigh on useless to the casual, curious reader” (McCandless). Here, the author makes a point of saying that he knows how difficult it can be for the average person to access scientific research, which is why visualization of scientific research has such merit and importance for our society in terms of acquiring knowledge.
NASA’s Scientific Visualization Studio serves as another example of visualization in scientific research, as it makes information that we might not normally be able to access, visible. The “Excerpt from Dynamic Earth” visualization shows the direction and number of ocean currents in the Gulf Stream through several visuals, as a way of showing us how the radiation energy from the sun “feeds swirling wind and ocean currents as cold air and surface waters move toward the equator and warm air and water moves toward the poles – all in an attempt to equalize temperatures around the world” (“NASA”). This is a phenomenon we might only learn about in textbooks, but by being able to see actual visualizations of this process, NASA’s technology has allowed us a greater, more comprehensive understanding of Earth’s activities.
VISUALIZATION IN THE COMMUNICATION OF SCIENCE WITHIN THE ‘PUBLIC SPHERE':
In the article “Struggling Polar Bears put on the Endangered List,” we immediately see a visualization of a scientific concept, adapted for a public audience in the polar bear photo. The photo depicts a polar bear clinging to a rapidly melting chunk of ice, and is meant to represent the effects of climate change on the Arctic. Even a simple search of “polar bears + climate change” on Google will produce images meant to tug at the heart strings of viewers, with depictions of forlorn polar bears surrounded by lots of water and very little ice, to show that their natural habitat is being destroyed by human effects on climate change. This visualization affects how the reader interprets the article, as words can only do so much to incite an emotional response; hearing that “two thirds of the species – 16,000 animals – could disappear by 2050 as global warming melts the Arctic sea ice” sounds bad but has much less profound an effect than actually seeing a poor polar bear clinging desperately to an ice chunk (Metro News). As the article mentions, “polar bears have become the poster boys of the climate change campaign,” because it has become clear that in this day and age, the public is more highly influenced by visual media than simple text, and physically seeing the effects, aka visualization, is far more powerful than reading about the effect (Metro News). Therefore, this photo serves as a scientific visualization adapted for the public sphere, as it shows the effects of climate change–much like a graph or pie chart might be able to–but in a way that is tailored to inciting public reaction/emotion, rather than focused on conveying scientific data.
Another favorite visualization of mine that is tailored to the communication of science in the ‘public sphere’ is the pie chart from Popperfont that “pretty much says it all,” found here: https://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fpopperfont.net%2F2012%2F11%2F25%2Fthis-pie-chart-pretty-much-says-it-all%2F?tab=people&uname=andersand.
It shows how out of 13,950 peer-reviewed articles, only 24 reject climate change, compiled in an alarming pie chart. This visualization makes scientific information (the number and content of scientific journal articles) accessible and striking in this very memorable and profound visualization, meant to sway the audience into believing that climate change is real, while discrediting the very minute number of skeptics.
THE ‘REAL-TIME,’ INTERACTIVE VISUALIZATION IN VJ-ING
VJ-ing, as discussed in last week’s blog post, involves putting images to sound, effectively making music ‘come alive’ by turning something that is invisible (sound waves) into something visible (image projections). VJ-ing employs the concept of ‘cross signal processing,’ in which one signal is turned into another—aka the music being played in real-time is converted into a visual form, synchronized to play along with it. In this way, the audience is able to interact with and appreciate both the music, as well as the visual landscapes created in response to it. Creating visualizations of music only enhances the experience of listening, by engaging another one of our senses—sight. In fact, VJ-ing has become so popular that almost all DJs—whether playing in small clubs or massive music festivals—use visuals along with their music, illustrating how big and influential VJ-ing has become.
Another new way of working with visual media can be found in the rise of mobile-mentaries, or mobile filmmaking. This has in fact become so popular that there are entire film festivals dedicated to filmmaking done from a simple camera phone. Max Schleser, co founder of Mobile Innovation Network Aotearoa and a mobile filmmaker himself, is a fan of how mobile-mentaries can serve as a new form of visual media. He encourages everyone to support this new form of visual media because it makes you “think about what makes mobile-mentaries different from traditional docs – your mobile can go anywhere (and can be attached to wheels, weather-balloons or wherever you like to go)” (Scott-Stevenson). Ultimately, he says that mobile filmmaking is so revolutionary and special because it “creates new opportunities and challenges for visual communication design. Mobile devices enable us to see the world from new viewpoints and angles” (MINA). This is interesting to think about with regards to interactive visualization and VJ-ing, because both forms of visual media cause us to see and interact with the world in new, revolutionary ways.
In conclusion, visualizations affect the general social body and individual bodily interaction with the media, by assembling information in an easily understood, interactive, and effective manner. Publishing has evolved to include other forms of expression/content besides words, print, and text; now, with different types of constantly changing and evolving forms of visual media/visualizations, there is a shift in visual perception, as well as in publishing and publics. Visualizations help the public understand complex and sometimes otherwise inaccessible information, so that we can come together and form an assemblage, under which we have a common understanding of various topics.
secret word: real-time
Resources:
McCandless, David. “The Global Warming Skeptics vs. The Scientific Consensus.”Information Is Beautiful. N.p., Dec. 2009. <http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/climate-change-deniers-vs-the-consensus/&gt;.
“NASA: Excerpt from “Dynamic Earth”” Scientific Visualization Studio. NASA, 14 June 2012. Web. 07 May 2013. <http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a011000/a011003/index.html&gt;.
“Struggling Polar Bears Put on Endangered list.” Metro News. N.p., 15 May 2008.  <http://metro.co.uk/2008/05/15/struggling-polar-bears-put-on-endangered-list-137306/&gt;.
Scott-Stevenson, Julia. “Mobile-mentaries across the Ditch.” Speical Broadcasting Service. N.p., 31 Oct. 2012. . <http://www.sbs.com.au/documentary/blogs/view/id/127025/t/Mobile-mentaires-across-the-ditch&gt;.
“2nd Mobile Creativity and Mobile Innovation Symposium.” MINA. N.p., 2013. Web.  <http://mina.pro/2nd-mobile-creativity-and-innovation-symposium/&gt;.
https://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fpopperfont.net%2F2012%2F11%2F25%2Fthis-pie-chart-pretty-much-says-it-all%2F?tab=people&uname=andersand

Week 7 - Visualisation

For this week’s blog I thought I’d mix it up by speaking more about my debate topic, seeing as though the blog’s are a preparation for the tutorial.  Within this though, I will try to breakdown how they make the ‘invisible, visible’ and will briefly allude to last week in how it gets our attention as a result.
The debate topic is “whether filesharing is only “piracy” or whether it holds the potential to change the world via a new form of sharing” (I am FOR filesharing, arguing that it has the potential to change the world).  Firstly, filesharing is a part of everyday life through the constant growth of technology especially in recent years.  It can be as simple as communicating through mediums such as Facebook chat or iMessage which is an essential part of how we communicate today.  Because of how we live, we need information up-to-date and easily accessible.  Over a billion people own iPhones alone not including other smartphones, so they are definitely taking over everyday life.  We need to move with the times and as a result filesharing should be greater accepted if we are to move forward.  Everyone is guilty of downloading illegal copies of their favourite show, simpy because we have the access to do so, less room is taken up from DVDs and it costs nothing. Websites such as ‘piratebay.com’ get our attention simply by making the invisible, visible in other words, by making the inaccessible, accessible.
We can’t put a limit to where technology can take us.  We have constantly improved; from VCRs to DVDs to BlueRay and then to computer files that have been downloaded.  We are paying a lot of money for the technology we run it on (smartphone, laptop, tablet, etc), so we should be entitled to greater filesharing that isn’t deemed illegal.  A movie for example still will be making money because people like going to the cinema.  It is traditional and a good day out so it will never waver in the market, but what is changing is how we receive and use content.  Therefore, this ever-evolving technology not only has the potential to change the world, however, it is changing the world as we speak.


References

Gillespie, Tarleton (2014) ‘Facebook’s algorithm — why our assumptions are wrong, and our concerns are right’, Culture Digitally, , <http://culturedigitally.org/ 2014/07/facebooks-algorithm-why-our-assumptions-are-wrong-and-our-concerns-are-right/>
 Rheingold, Howard (2012) ‘Attention’, Prezi presentation, , <http:// prezi.com/dwbns6kt3fza/attention/>

Week 6 - The Commons

My thoughts on how this effects publics and publishing?

The Commons directly effects our notion of publics and our experiences with publishing. When space is privatised it represses the freedom of publishing and the ideology behind a PUBLIC marketplace. I believe within publishing’s origins is the desire to inform the public, unprejudiced by privatisation boundaries. Thus the idea of The Commons should be embraced and heavily implicated in a free thinking and educated society. In regards to attention, the vehicle for information, our quick-fix society disables such intimacy and depth of knowledge. Alarms, widgets, tones and alerts all shock us into a fast paced world. I believe this notion is disappointing as we loose our engagement with each other as a society.

BLOG WORD: Infotension

Sources:

Boyd, Stowe (2010) ‘The False Question of Attention Economics’, Stowe Boyd, <http://www.stoweboyd.com/post/764818419/the-false-question-of-attention-economics>

Goldhaber, Michael (1997) ‘Attention Shoppers!’, Wired, <http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.12/es_attention.html>

Rheingold, Howard (2009) ‘Mindful Infotention: Dashboards, Radars, Filters’,SFGate,<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/rheingold/detail?entry_id=46677>
Walljasper, Jay (2010) ‘The Commons Moment is Now’, Commondreams.org, <http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/01/24-0>

Week 5 - Archive Fever

On to week 5 and this week’s topic is archives again! This week’s blog will have more to do with authority and memory, as well as the cultural and individual theory and practice surrounding this information. Jussi Parikka suggests that archives have always had an interesting aura surrounding them despite being thought of as obsolete and abandoned places, and to some extent, this is true, however, the concept of an archive is changing. Jacques Derrida writes in his piece Archive Fever that different media processes set up different kinds of archives, which often form the basis of cultural activity.
We are able to see archives as a link between memory and experience. Archives allow us to gain both of these through the one piece of information and distribute it through different forms of content and expression. Producers and users (or ‘produsers’ if you will) are able to use archives to both express their experiences and distribute them among different media platforms, allowing this information to feed into each other and flow through other information systems. This is where I believe our designated ‘word of the week’ comes into action, but more of that infotention (or ‘infotension’) stuff later.
Archive fever is able to influence our experience of media, as well as the theory and practice surrounding these topics. Experience depends on the way we deal with these archives, and how they are able to carry our past actions into the present and onto future possibilities. The theory and practice side of archives provides us with the approaches, methods and concepts used by people to link media technologies and techniques back to the archived information. Archives are able to change our conception of the world through theories and practice, and this link between media, theory and culture makes archives one of the three main aspects of publishing. Overall, archives are able to act as a theory and as a technology or technique all at the same time, forming the basis for possible future methods, approaches and practices in the media world.

Infotention – the forms of attentions and distractions that can change our habits, ideas, or even information!

Now, back to my ideas on infotention. Howard Rheingold writes that infotention is the word he has created to describe the particular set of skills needed to find our way online today. He says it is a combination of both attention skills and computer information filters, which I believe is incredibly relevant to online media archives. Take for example my Facebook photo albums, a classic example of the online archive that is able to hold both digital memory and experience. Now while this may be easy for me to upload these photos online, my parents wouldn’t have a clue how to do it. Therefore, you could say that I have the infotention to post an online archive, as I have the necessary skills to carry out the task online, while my parents, although having both cognitive and social skills, lack the technological skill to create this type of archive. Overall, infotention is based around attention and distraction. These forms of thinking are able to influence our habits through media archives, which are often a form of either attention or distraction, depending on how you look at them!
References:
Derrida, J. (1996) Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression, University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Parikka, J. (2013) “Archival Media Theory: An Introduction to Wolfgang Ernst’s Media Archaeology”, in Ernst, Wolfgang Digital Memory and the Archive, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 1-22
Rheingold, H. (2009) “Mindful Infotention: Dashboards, Radars, Filters”, SFGate, <http://blog.sfgate.com/rheingold/2009/09/01/mindful-infotention-dashboards-radars-filters/> [accessed 25/08/2014 ]

Week 4 - Actor Network Theory

Actor-Network Theory (ANT) refers to the relationship between the material and the semiotic and how they come together as a whole. In order to do so, ANT considers the contributions of both human and non-human ‘actants’ to be equal, thus creating a state of generalised symmetry. These actants are described as existing in a network; however, I found it more beneficial to consider these actants as part of a constantly shifting and evolving process that must be performed (delukie, 2009). Once this process stops growing and developing, the individual components can no longer interact and act out their roles, thus causing the entire network to disintegrate.

As with any theory, there has been critical analysis. The main criticism is that intentionality should not be given to non-human actants because that aspect is what distinguishes living beings from inanimate devices. ANT scholar’s response that non-human actants perform agency without intentionality undermines their concept of equal material-semiotic contribution. Sandra Harding in Banks (2011) brings up an interesting argument that through ANT’s equalising concept, social factors such as race, gender and class are considered irrelevant when in fact these qualities are incredibly influential. Thus ANT cannot explain or challenge phenomenon, it merely describes them.

Despite this, ANT is a social theory and research method that has been applied to various sociological fields to encourage new ways of thinking in areas such as politics, history, science and technology. It has also been useful to apply ANT to exploring identity and subjectivity, addiction, feminism, anthropology, economics, health studies and organisational analysis. The material-semiotic approach is highly flexible, therefore allowing various interpretations which allow such widespread application.

In publishing, ANT can be a useful framework for analysing different media, particularly how the relationship between technological advancements and developers has nurtured what publishing is in contemporary society. One example that springs to mind is radio, since it would not be possible for radio content to be published without radio presenters and sound engineers working with recording equipment to transmit messages across airwaves. Another is Twitter, where software developers created a program where individuals could publish short blogs, not expecting that it would evolve into a platform that facilitates debate and social change. The idea could similarly be applied to YouTube, where the creators couldn’t foresee how grassroots media producers could work with video content to establish new ways of information and entertainment dissemination. The possibilities are endless.

References:

‘Actor Network Theory’, Wikipedia, accessed 17 August 2014, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actornetwork_theory>.

Banks, D. (2011), ‘A Brief Summary of Actor-Network Theory’, Cyborgology,

2 November, accessed 17 August 2014, <http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/12/02/a-brief-summary-ofactor-network-theory/>.

delukie (2009) ’Actor-Network Theory in Plain English’, online video, Youtube.com, 16 November 2009, accessed 17 August 2014, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2YYxS6D-mI>.