Jenkins talks about convergence which is happening in everyday life now. I did my term paper on cassettes and how the evolution of music has occurred. I used to think every new technology is invented to replace the older because of people’s new needs and desires. However, Jenkins discusses how such substitution is moving to convergence due to digitalization. People’s needs and desires do not get transformed until the new technology is available for us to use. For example, initially the iphone fingerprint function seemed so wow, but now after using it for so long, I wonder how I lived with the inconvenience of having to key in my password everytime I wanted to use the phone. Now it is so naturalized.
This is linked to how Botler and Grusin would discuss remediation with the co-existence of immediacy and hypermediacy. Immediacy in a sense that we don’t question how that tiny home button recognizes my fingerprint everytime I use it. The whole technical representation and knowledge is seen as transparent. At the same time, there is hypermediacy because if I use an older model of the iphone, I would realize that it is not a given-thing, Apple has included certain technologies into that phone.
I also like how Jenkins mentions how there is not only a technological shift now but a cultural shift. For example, I would often exclaim that I want to watch a particular movie after watching the trailer when I’m in the cinema. That trailer is produced by the movie company, and I bought it and wanted to watch the movie. However, when the movie is officially out, there is often a tendency to google that movie and lookout for reviews about it. And if the reviews sucked, often I wouldn’t watch it anymore (at least not pay to watch). So we are in a sense no longer just consumers, but producers of a produced. And often, our daily habits are now shaped due to the convergence of media which Jenkins talks about. For different people, I use different messenger applications, but in fact they all serve the same purpose – messaging and communication. Therefore, there’s no point discussing why 1 application is better than the other. I would see it more as an issue of preference.
Inthaxai Maxly
In this week, the reading did provide the information of old and new media in case of reading three articles from individual writers and different contents of old and new media in the convergence of media histories.
Kittler began his article by expressing in the history of communication media as in the form of information media. His providing of the context area as good reason to analyse communication systems in the same way as information systems is the ultimately as communication that depends on the control signals and he gave the information theory in case of being reformulated, so there are three ways.
‘’Firstly, message are essentially commands to which persons are expected to react.
Secondly, as systems theory teaches, persons are not objects but addresses which ‘make possible the assessment of further communication’.
Thirdly, as ethnology since Muass and Levi-Strauss has taught, goods represent data in an order of exchange between said persons.’’
Thus, in term of the information that he did mention, I think that the data in the usage can make possible the operation of the storage, to transmit the information as an information system.
Another Kittler mention that I think he explained in the good position as composing the history of the literate cultures as medium in the writing session and printing as the context did provide. As the last content in the reading on Kittler, in technical media, he acknowledged that ‘’ self- evidently there must also have been technical media because of any sending of signals using acoustic or visual means is in itself technical.” That is the conception of features abilities in the digital technology according to the history of media that kittler did mention.
For the contents of the convergence culture that seek the information to connect with the circulation of media. Jenkins defined as the ‘’ convergence instead represents a cultural shift as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content.’’ Thus, the circulation of media is definitely across with the difference of media systems, competing media economies, and national borders, which all depend on the heavily on consumer’s active participation and the reading on the convergence is a process with involves in the way media consumed and produced.
I think the central message for this week’s lecture was that new media does not make old media obsolete it is more a matter of a convergence, a space where they collide. Kittler says ; to the extent that the content of a medium is always another medium’. It cannot be said that old media uses analog technology and new media uses technological media because technological media existed in the past, it is the form it assumes when it deals with new media that is new. Scale comes into play here. For example, in the past there were smoke signals that sent signals using visual means (hence technical) however now the interface looks like analog (everyday language) but beneath it is technical media (the downloaded song example.)
These changes have brought with it a related socio-cultural shift as people interact differently to new technology. One such change would be automation which renders human interaction obsolete. An example of this is how you can put your tumblr feed on queue so it posts stuff even when you are not directly using the computer. This does something to the notion of time, people will be under the impression that at 3am you felt hungry because you posted a slew of pictures of food when in fact you felt hungry at 10pm.
Lastly for Botler and Grusin, immediacy (deny or pretend remediation doesn’t happen. Technology disappears from the users consciousness) and hyperimmediacy (combination of random access with multiple media, transparency of remediation) must exist together. I think Running Man is a good example for the latter. It assumes the status of a reality TV show and yes, although audiences know that reality tv shows are not actually real, the TV show usually pretends to be, their intention is you ignore that part of your brain telling you this is not real. A good example of this would be Geordie Shore which shows you people pissing themselves and so you think that has to be real because no one would want that shown on tv. However with Running Man, the cast make direct comments to the director while the show is being filmed. Furthermore, there are times when they tell another member to get out of the way because they are blocking the camera’s view of him. This makes one wonder what their intention is from doing this.
Stanley Wong
This week’s readings talks about television as a medium, and like most weeks, they do not discuss the content it broadcasts and its implications, but talks about television as a technology and its influence on social life instead.
Williams specifically addresses this in his article, where he approaches television as directly influencing how humans relate to each other, and addresses the unintended consequences of the usage of television, where people use it for purposes outside of its intended one. He also traces the history of the television, arguing that its emergence was brought about by a few processes. Firstly, he argued that television was not “invented” as it is; it is simply an assemblage of various technologies. This brings up the question of why it is assembled; there must be a need to fulfil if it was to be invented. This correlated to the development of society after WW2, where men returned to the workforce, and women were needed at home. This led to the (re)emergence of the family as a unit. Seen this way, the television can be seen as a furniture, that is a standard furnishing for all homes and families. Seen this way, the television becomes a supporting logic for the formation of the family. At the same time, television, considered “new media” at that time, relied on logics of the old media to work, which is broadcasting. This is already seen in radios. Seen this way, TVs are founded on existing technologies and old media, which supports the formation of certain social order.
TV is also seen as unifying and creating an imagined community. This is brought about by the concept of “live” broadcasts. The notion of watching the same thing together is a private yet public experience. We watch it in our homes, yet everyone experiences the same thing, creating a sense of collectivity and social bonds between viewers. Seen this way, it redefines social membership; we do not have to be physically present to experience something and feel like it is part of it; we can feel this sense of membership by just watching it and feeling part of it. This is probably what McCarthy means by TV transcends space in the creation of group membership.
Lastly, Ernst talks about the functions of television. Unlike the Frankfurt school, which argues that mass media serves ideological function, he sees television as ambient; we do not pay attention to the content it delivers all the time. It recedes into the background while we go about our everyday lives, becoming ambient sound. Indeed, I often leave the television on while reading my books, or doing something else, paying attention when something interesting comes up. At the same time, Ernst’s argument that TV acts as a social lubricant can be combined with McCarthy’s concept of TV rewriting space and place; in this case, it serves to smooth social interaction between social actors.
Sasha Kaur Dhillon
Kittler provides an interesting link between information and communication systems. One of the examples that he uses to display this link is the medium of language. In language, ideas would seem to form the information system and the process of using language to convey these ideas would be reflective of the communicative element in the latter system. However, it is not possible for the ideas to take precedence over language and instead the reality lies in ideas manifesting through language. This basically means that information systems fall under the larger subset of communication systems and not vice-versa. This leads him to form the basis of his information theory – which comprises of three elements :
. 1) Messengers are essentially commands – that is to say that without being acted upon, these messengers are simply idle commands that have no shape. Thus the dimension of action and activeness is crucial to the information network.
. 2) Persons are not objects but addresses – this to me at first seemed a tad absurd, because I felt as though people were literally being diminished in value to mere addresses and nodes in a wider network. But, the example provided by Prof re-affirmed this notion – though I’m not sure if the socio-cultural aspect of my first thoughts are still relevant. The example given was that the ERP system sends the fines to our houses once and immediately when we violate road rules. They do not identify us as a wholesome individual but rather just a stop to which bills had to be mailed to. We are probably identified with our home addresses rather than our names in this instance.
. 3) Goods represent data – all objects are ascribed or achieve some value. They cannot be value-free. Also these data have different significance to us and also to machines. We interpret our songs as a medium but our songs are megabytes or gigabytes that form a greater process for the computer to engage in.
Kittler also places a notable emphasis on the evolution of media and the cultural shifts that come with it. This has to do with a certain sense of materiality and is aptly portrayed in the example of scripts and papyrus, which noticed changes in the types of paper. These changes were rather precise but it did showcase that with different paper forms people interacted and did things differently. This is reflective of socio-cultural changes that evolve out of and alongside material changes.
Next, Bolter and Grusin talk about the two logics involved in remediation – immediacy and hypermediacy. Immediacy is the denial of the presence of mediation and it strives for technology to completely or to a significant extent, disappear from the user’s consciousness. This is to say that technology appears to be self-existing and naturalized. However, this whole notion of immediacy and the desire for the eradication of the medium is not new. It was also present in old media such as painting where every stoke of the painter had to change or cover the canvas to achieve immediacy.
Hypermediacy focuses on the process rather than the product. It encompasses multiplicity in that it creates a collective whole from different fragments. This is seen in movies where there is sound, lighting, speech and everything else rather than just one dimension that is captured.
Also, hypermediacy and immediacy MUST co-exist and they are mutually depend on each other. This is the double-logic of it all – that they rely on each other and cannot always exist in solidarity.
Lastly, Jenkins brings forth the idea of a convergence culture. This is a collective meaning making process that changes the way we see things. Consumers are actively involved in showcasing their opinions about consumer products, for instance and thus there is a heightened degree of importance of social relations over technological shifts. This happens because content flows across different media and this is termed “ extension”. Jenkins juxtaposes this with “ synergy” which is the control of different manifestations that emerge out of the extension process.
There is also a sort of power relations that exists in the content making process. For one, not every consumer has the same ability to change the media. There is a democratization of content, but not totally for markets pitch ideas to people who they deem profitable and able to proliferate their ideas via their marketing power.
Also, there is an emphasis that one should not focus on old media being replaced ( to use the term loosely) by new media but instead on its relations. The medium will always be there but the delivery technologies will change. Also, hardware never converges because then the conglomerates would not make money selling one media object that can do everything – it is an economically detrimental idea. This is also showcases that although that might be possible it will not be allowed to take place because in a consumerist and capital economy the ideologies of economics will triumph over that of ideal possibilities.
There is also a tension with this new media because there is an increasing expectation for quality consumption and with this comes the ability to hold accountable those who violate quality laws, this needs to be reconciled.
Kerri Heng Yi Ping
JENKINS: CONVERGENCE CULTURE
Extension: This refers to industries’ “efforts to expand the potential markets by moving content across different delivery systems”. With content available for public access in multiple places/platforms all over the world, extension represents the increased agency available to the general population. The power to produce media no longer lies solely in the hands of the govt, religious authorities and corporations, but also in the hands of the “masses”. Examples of this increased agency include social media (Tweeting/Face-booking), writing and designing our own HTML coded websites with software such as Adobe Dreamweaver and of course, blogging about our lives, thoughts and opinions 🙂 Thus, with extension, we consumers now have a larger voice.
Synergy: Media companies and producers come together in convergence culture to try and take control of the media market. They do this via franchises, shared deals, etc. These franchises can be global and far-reaching, such as the release of music albums and new singles. For instance, a pop singer’s songs can be sold in digital formats online via iTunes. She can then have her digital album (with music videos) released in physical shops worldwide. Then come the press functions, glitzy promotional events and posters (advertising industry) which come in to help sell the album. And then the physical logistics of world tours for the singer will be scheduled in major cities in various continents. Lastly, the black market can also take advantage by sharing the file with worldwide Internet users for free on file sharing networks, like pirate bay 🙂
Convergence culture may bring greater access to many people around the world, but we must not forget that convergence can also privilege certain groups, for instance, the media literate and the middle classes (who can afford round-the-clock Wireless access in their homes, etc). Agency may not be available to everyone. For instance, software such as Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Final Cut Pro video editors, etc) are really expensive and out of reach for most of the working class. Students in universities can use the software, courtesy of their schools, industry experts have access to it for work, and wealthy ppl can purchase and experiment with it. But what about the common person on the street?
That said, I remember reading an article (from a few years back) about this homeless woman (in the USA) who blogged about her experience living in her car. She was barely surviving on ad hoc jobs, and she did not go to live with her parents, as that went against social norms. She would stop her car at public libraries and use their public computers during opening hours, to blog about her day-to-day struggles for money and food. Thus, the poor and homeless can have some degree of agency, but it is limited by their social and physical environment too. For instance, the woman would need to be in a place where she can access public computers.
Regarding the black box fallacy, I would argue that smartphones are a form of mobile black box, where we have music, video, photos, social media, lifestyle apps, time, radio, texting, calling, notes, email, web browser and many other functions on-the-go. But I agree that there would never be one single item to meet all our media needs, and this is in part due to the profit-oriented goals of Capitalism, as discussed in tutorial today 🙂 We’d have to buy charging cables, memory cards and accessories for our smartphones, for instance. It’s about buying add-ons to enhance our devices (and that is how companies make money). Even for Apple, they’ve different products of different sizes (iPads, iPods, iPhones, Macs, MacBooks, etc) to meet our different consumer needs. Or rather, these items have shaped our consumer culture today, the big businesses somehow construct particular needs and market them to us. (Release of the Samsung S5 publicity event, etc)
KITTLER: HISTORY OF COMMUNICATION MEDIA
Advancements and shifts in communication media also changes social and cultural life. The way we interact with each other has no doubt changed. As discussed during tutorial, we can ask ourselves questions about access and scale: who can connect today, and how can they connect?
I was scrolling through Instagram today and I ‘hearted’ an image posted by Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee. Hw was at a global political conference: held in a large hall with big screens, and each country’s delegate had individual tablets to keep in touch with and interact in the conference. The fact that it was a photo of a multi-media conference posted on Instagram brings to mind McLuhan’s concept of a medium within a medium, which is kinda like the Russian Doll effect. Also known as Remediation, the representation of one medium within another medium.
New Media vs. Old Media, Passive vs. Interactive: it is widely believed that old media breeds passivity and new media breeds interactivity, and this is true in many ways.
However, with increased interactivity comes greater responsibility too. As consumers-turned-producers of media, we have to watch what we put online. For instance, citizen journalism website STOMP is rave with an influx of ‘newsy’ posts, some of which can be defamatory and irresponsible (EG: STOMP posts that border on hate, xenophobia, stereotyping and blaming). With the agency to have our voices heard by everyone else, I feel that as we express ourselves more freely, we’ve to, at the same time, understand that what we post can have implications (negative and positive) on the people who come across it.
BOTLET AND GRUSIN: REMEDIATION
Immediacy is that which that denies the presence of mediation,;it pretends that the medium doesn’t exist. Interesting examples would include virtual reality (as mentioned in the class readings), Live TV, and iPads. By being able to swipe and enable digital commands with our fingertips on the iPad, the hindrances of the mouse/scrollbar/keypad are removed. A sense of immediacy and a sense of power comes upon the user, who immerses herself in an exciting app game 🙂
(I read somewhere that devices and computers do give a sexy sense of power to its users. This power is sexy in the sense that users can control and command basically everything within their devices (iPad, etc), and their devices have no choice but to obey their every whim and fancy. (Kinda like a submissive sexual relationship, in which the user dominates the device.)
Hypermediacy makes us “hyper-conscious” of the medium(s). It’s about having content on multiple media platforms at the same time, and a combination of media forms in one (or more) media objects. The reading’s example of multiple window screens on the desktop is a self-evident example of hyper-mediacy. This doesn’t make us forget about the medium, but it is valuable too. For instance, multiple tabs and running apps on a single laptop screen enables us to multi-task and fulfil our entertainment and work-related needs.
Double logic of remediation refers to the irony that both Immediacy and Hypermediacy rely on each other. Yuan Ting in class gave an exciting example of 4D Films, where users immerse themselves in a virtual-and-physical reality of a 3D film broadcast and the 4D experience of water/sand/movement together with the characters in the film. (Sentosa has a 4D AdventureLand for users to forget reality and enter an experience of Immediacy, at a fixed price). However, as we immerse ourselves in Immediacy, we also note that highly advanced media technologies are bringing us this experience; a complex network of hypermedia works to bring us Immediacy. So both I and H go hand in hand 🙂
We can also being reminded of hypermediacy within our experiences of Immediacy. For instance, during a seamless PowerPoint presentation on a large screen, the flow is sometimes broken with a Skype notification. It appears annoyingly in a text box and comes with a ‘ping’ sound, on the large screen. Viewers watching the presentation will momentarily snap out of their immersive experience and remember that this is just media technology at work, when they see the annoying Skype alert.
Thank you for reading this 🙂
Cheryl Chern
Kittler’s work talks about the history of communication technologies and centers on both the communication system and information system. Because the historical transition from orality to the written word as well as the transition from writing to the technical media meant the decoupling of interaction and communication, we have this process of evolution that allows us to view the history of communication media in two parts: the history of writing and the history of technical media.
Bolter and Grusin recognize how society today appreciate the double logic of remediation – immediacy and hypermediacy. These two logics, though they exist together in digital media today, are mutually dependent. Immediacy refers to the diminishing of virtual reality and denying the mediating presence of the computer and its interface. On the other hand, hypermediacy is best represented by the windows that we find in computers, which allow for multiple representations that are made visible to the viewer.
Jenkins focuses on convergence where old and new media interact instead of replacing each other, where an old concept takes on new meanings. With convergence, we find the reshaping of pop culture today and there have been changes to the relationship between media audiences, producers and content. Media convergence is thus more than a technological shift since is alters the logic by which media industries operate and by which media consumers process news and entertainment. We are now consuming media in a different way as opposed to the past and as such convergence is both a top-down corporate-driven process and a bottom-up consumer driven process.
Sherilyn Tan
Kittler discussed the history of media communication technologies. He suggested adopting information systems as a way to analyze and view communication systems since both are used to process, store and transmit messages of different media. Kittler argued that the historical transition from orality to writing resulted in a separation of information and communication and that writing has since transited to technical media, leading to further decoupling. He went on to view the history of communication media as the history of writing and printing, and technical media.
Writing which comprises the use of script, allows for the easy communication of information and messages, and allows for easy storage and ease of learning – for instance the alphabetical system. Previous authors we read, for instance, White and Ong also emphasized the importance of the alphabetical system that allow for representations of different sounds to form and string words and sentences, even if the alphabetical symbols themselves do not hold inherent meanings. Kittler also posited that writing surfaces/materials was imperative to the ease accessibility and storage of information and knowledge as well. New media also does not make old media obsolete. For example, print amplified the effects and impacts that writing brought about. The mediatisation of the printed word also enabled the spread of democracy and literacy to the masses. No longer was reading and writing exclusive to the elites solely. Next Kittler elaborated on the history of technical media that allowed for the speeding up of processes of communication. For instance, the development of telegraphy, telephone, film and gramophone. The rise of digital technology and automation could replace human intervention.
Jenkins discussed the concept of convergence, which can be defined as the flow of content across different media platforms. This would make information more accessible to a wider audience. For instance, news can be read online, on SNSes, instead of the traditional print medium. Thus, the spread of information and knowledge is instantaneous and transcends international boundaries. There is also engagement at the grassroots ground-level. For instance, real-time Twitter “live” feeds and updates provide information about what is happening at events around the world and can even be used as a tool for political activism in some cases. For instance, recently, Turkey tried to block Twitter, on grounds that it was being utilized by protest organizers to stir unrest. Sometimes, official media coverage only depicts narratives that are in line with the interests of those in power and SNSes can function as an alternative media platform that gives the masses a voice. This gives rise to a participatory culture of the audience, who are no longer passive spectators. This leads to a gathering of collective intelligence from the pooling together of knowledge and information that the masses get to contribute to. Convergence is also evident in that old and new media interact in more complex ways, instead of old media being replaced by new media. Digitalization enabled and set the conditions for convergence, new media technologies allowed for the flow of content to different mediums and assume varying forms at the point of reception. For instance, the same advertisement can be played on the television, on the internet and on huge billboard screens and it may produce different effects on the consumers.
Jenkins also mentioned Gitelman’s take on medium through which media works. Apart from enabling communication, medium also entails recognizing the cultural and social practices and effects associated with it. The Black Box Fallacy also arises. Convergence does not mean that all media can be condensed into one simple “black box”. Instead, although the media content may essentially converge, the hardware and the technology through which we get the content, has since multiplied. For instance, we use our laptops, smartphones, tablets etc to surf the internet and the information we can get off the internet through either of these devices is the same, yet, there are many devices that can basically serve similar functions. Hence convergence is an ongoing process which effects relations between existing technologies, consumers and industries. It also affects the ways in which people consumer media. For example, many things can be done on one’s laptop or smartphone concurrently, through that one device. Jenkins concluded that convergence is an interplay of both a top-down corporate driven process as well as a bottom-up consumer driven process – as consumers are increasingly empowered with the ability to participate actively and decide what they want.
Evon Thung
I suppose the main issue in this week’s reading is on the emphasis of the convergence between old and new media. Media has changed and now we are living in a convergence culture as argued by Jenkins. He defined “convergence as a cultural shifts as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content.” As such, the circulation of media content depends heavily on consumers’ active participation which brought about participatory culture. In Jenkins’s reading, his emphasis lies in explaining how the convergence between old and new media came about and how such convergence impact media and consumers. He argued that old media never die and what dies are simply the tools to access media content, delivery technologies obsolete and are replaced while media evolve. Therefore, old media are forced to coexist with the emerging media where their functions and status are shifted by the introduction of new technologies which lead to the convergence culture. Jenkins emphasised that “media convergence is more than simply a technological shift. Convergence alters the relationship between existing technologies, industries, markets, genres and audiences. Convergence alters the logic which media industries operate and by which the media consumers process news and entertainment.” Hence, convergence is a process which involves both a change in the way media is produced and consumed.
Bolter and Grusin followed the same argument of Jenkins whereby they argued that new media refashioned the earlier media to achieve their cultural significance. Such a process is defined as “remediation”. As a result of remediation, earlier media are imported into a digital space. Since digital media strives for transparency and immediacy which has the desire to get past the limits of representation so as to achieve the real, such would mean that the representation is being taken as real. As remarked by the authors “remediation is the mediation of reality because media themselves are real and because the experience of media is the subject of remediation.”
As for Kittler, his goal is to outline a scientific history of media, he argues that media have their own autonomy. He discussed the history of communication technologies comes up against methodological problem of defining communication in relation to certain times and spaces and practical problem of the documentation of the history of communication technologies itself. Kittler seems to reinforce the importance of historicity in his piece of writing as like the precious authors read in the course.
Jenkins talks about convergence which is happening in everyday life now. I did my term paper on cassettes and how the evolution of music has occurred. I used to think every new technology is invented to replace the older because of people’s new needs and desires. However, Jenkins discusses how such substitution is moving to convergence due to digitalization. People’s needs and desires do not get transformed until the new technology is available for us to use. For example, initially the iphone fingerprint function seemed so wow, but now after using it for so long, I wonder how I lived with the inconvenience of having to key in my password everytime I wanted to use the phone. Now it is so naturalized.
This is linked to how Botler and Grusin would discuss remediation with the co-existence of immediacy and hypermediacy. Immediacy in a sense that we don’t question how that tiny home button recognizes my fingerprint everytime I use it. The whole technical representation and knowledge is seen as transparent. At the same time, there is hypermediacy because if I use an older model of the iphone, I would realize that it is not a given-thing, Apple has included certain technologies into that phone.
I also like how Jenkins mentions how there is not only a technological shift now but a cultural shift. For example, I would often exclaim that I want to watch a particular movie after watching the trailer when I’m in the cinema. That trailer is produced by the movie company, and I bought it and wanted to watch the movie. However, when the movie is officially out, there is often a tendency to google that movie and lookout for reviews about it. And if the reviews sucked, often I wouldn’t watch it anymore (at least not pay to watch). So we are in a sense no longer just consumers, but producers of a produced. And often, our daily habits are now shaped due to the convergence of media which Jenkins talks about. For different people, I use different messenger applications, but in fact they all serve the same purpose – messaging and communication. Therefore, there’s no point discussing why 1 application is better than the other. I would see it more as an issue of preference.
In this week, the reading did provide the information of old and new media in case of reading three articles from individual writers and different contents of old and new media in the convergence of media histories.
Kittler began his article by expressing in the history of communication media as in the form of information media. His providing of the context area as good reason to analyse communication systems in the same way as information systems is the ultimately as communication that depends on the control signals and he gave the information theory in case of being reformulated, so there are three ways.
‘’Firstly, message are essentially commands to which persons are expected to react.
Secondly, as systems theory teaches, persons are not objects but addresses which ‘make possible the assessment of further communication’.
Thirdly, as ethnology since Muass and Levi-Strauss has taught, goods represent data in an order of exchange between said persons.’’
Thus, in term of the information that he did mention, I think that the data in the usage can make possible the operation of the storage, to transmit the information as an information system.
Another Kittler mention that I think he explained in the good position as composing the history of the literate cultures as medium in the writing session and printing as the context did provide. As the last content in the reading on Kittler, in technical media, he acknowledged that ‘’ self- evidently there must also have been technical media because of any sending of signals using acoustic or visual means is in itself technical.” That is the conception of features abilities in the digital technology according to the history of media that kittler did mention.
For the contents of the convergence culture that seek the information to connect with the circulation of media. Jenkins defined as the ‘’ convergence instead represents a cultural shift as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content.’’ Thus, the circulation of media is definitely across with the difference of media systems, competing media economies, and national borders, which all depend on the heavily on consumer’s active participation and the reading on the convergence is a process with involves in the way media consumed and produced.
Henry Jenkins shall enlighten us for <6 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJaqXVaOaI
I think the central message for this week’s lecture was that new media does not make old media obsolete it is more a matter of a convergence, a space where they collide. Kittler says ; to the extent that the content of a medium is always another medium’. It cannot be said that old media uses analog technology and new media uses technological media because technological media existed in the past, it is the form it assumes when it deals with new media that is new. Scale comes into play here. For example, in the past there were smoke signals that sent signals using visual means (hence technical) however now the interface looks like analog (everyday language) but beneath it is technical media (the downloaded song example.)
These changes have brought with it a related socio-cultural shift as people interact differently to new technology. One such change would be automation which renders human interaction obsolete. An example of this is how you can put your tumblr feed on queue so it posts stuff even when you are not directly using the computer. This does something to the notion of time, people will be under the impression that at 3am you felt hungry because you posted a slew of pictures of food when in fact you felt hungry at 10pm.
Lastly for Botler and Grusin, immediacy (deny or pretend remediation doesn’t happen. Technology disappears from the users consciousness) and hyperimmediacy (combination of random access with multiple media, transparency of remediation) must exist together. I think Running Man is a good example for the latter. It assumes the status of a reality TV show and yes, although audiences know that reality tv shows are not actually real, the TV show usually pretends to be, their intention is you ignore that part of your brain telling you this is not real. A good example of this would be Geordie Shore which shows you people pissing themselves and so you think that has to be real because no one would want that shown on tv. However with Running Man, the cast make direct comments to the director while the show is being filmed. Furthermore, there are times when they tell another member to get out of the way because they are blocking the camera’s view of him. This makes one wonder what their intention is from doing this.
This week’s readings talks about television as a medium, and like most weeks, they do not discuss the content it broadcasts and its implications, but talks about television as a technology and its influence on social life instead.
Williams specifically addresses this in his article, where he approaches television as directly influencing how humans relate to each other, and addresses the unintended consequences of the usage of television, where people use it for purposes outside of its intended one. He also traces the history of the television, arguing that its emergence was brought about by a few processes. Firstly, he argued that television was not “invented” as it is; it is simply an assemblage of various technologies. This brings up the question of why it is assembled; there must be a need to fulfil if it was to be invented. This correlated to the development of society after WW2, where men returned to the workforce, and women were needed at home. This led to the (re)emergence of the family as a unit. Seen this way, the television can be seen as a furniture, that is a standard furnishing for all homes and families. Seen this way, the television becomes a supporting logic for the formation of the family. At the same time, television, considered “new media” at that time, relied on logics of the old media to work, which is broadcasting. This is already seen in radios. Seen this way, TVs are founded on existing technologies and old media, which supports the formation of certain social order.
TV is also seen as unifying and creating an imagined community. This is brought about by the concept of “live” broadcasts. The notion of watching the same thing together is a private yet public experience. We watch it in our homes, yet everyone experiences the same thing, creating a sense of collectivity and social bonds between viewers. Seen this way, it redefines social membership; we do not have to be physically present to experience something and feel like it is part of it; we can feel this sense of membership by just watching it and feeling part of it. This is probably what McCarthy means by TV transcends space in the creation of group membership.
Lastly, Ernst talks about the functions of television. Unlike the Frankfurt school, which argues that mass media serves ideological function, he sees television as ambient; we do not pay attention to the content it delivers all the time. It recedes into the background while we go about our everyday lives, becoming ambient sound. Indeed, I often leave the television on while reading my books, or doing something else, paying attention when something interesting comes up. At the same time, Ernst’s argument that TV acts as a social lubricant can be combined with McCarthy’s concept of TV rewriting space and place; in this case, it serves to smooth social interaction between social actors.
Kittler provides an interesting link between information and communication systems. One of the examples that he uses to display this link is the medium of language. In language, ideas would seem to form the information system and the process of using language to convey these ideas would be reflective of the communicative element in the latter system. However, it is not possible for the ideas to take precedence over language and instead the reality lies in ideas manifesting through language. This basically means that information systems fall under the larger subset of communication systems and not vice-versa. This leads him to form the basis of his information theory – which comprises of three elements :
. 1) Messengers are essentially commands – that is to say that without being acted upon, these messengers are simply idle commands that have no shape. Thus the dimension of action and activeness is crucial to the information network.
. 2) Persons are not objects but addresses – this to me at first seemed a tad absurd, because I felt as though people were literally being diminished in value to mere addresses and nodes in a wider network. But, the example provided by Prof re-affirmed this notion – though I’m not sure if the socio-cultural aspect of my first thoughts are still relevant. The example given was that the ERP system sends the fines to our houses once and immediately when we violate road rules. They do not identify us as a wholesome individual but rather just a stop to which bills had to be mailed to. We are probably identified with our home addresses rather than our names in this instance.
. 3) Goods represent data – all objects are ascribed or achieve some value. They cannot be value-free. Also these data have different significance to us and also to machines. We interpret our songs as a medium but our songs are megabytes or gigabytes that form a greater process for the computer to engage in.
Kittler also places a notable emphasis on the evolution of media and the cultural shifts that come with it. This has to do with a certain sense of materiality and is aptly portrayed in the example of scripts and papyrus, which noticed changes in the types of paper. These changes were rather precise but it did showcase that with different paper forms people interacted and did things differently. This is reflective of socio-cultural changes that evolve out of and alongside material changes.
Next, Bolter and Grusin talk about the two logics involved in remediation – immediacy and hypermediacy. Immediacy is the denial of the presence of mediation and it strives for technology to completely or to a significant extent, disappear from the user’s consciousness. This is to say that technology appears to be self-existing and naturalized. However, this whole notion of immediacy and the desire for the eradication of the medium is not new. It was also present in old media such as painting where every stoke of the painter had to change or cover the canvas to achieve immediacy.
Hypermediacy focuses on the process rather than the product. It encompasses multiplicity in that it creates a collective whole from different fragments. This is seen in movies where there is sound, lighting, speech and everything else rather than just one dimension that is captured.
Also, hypermediacy and immediacy MUST co-exist and they are mutually depend on each other. This is the double-logic of it all – that they rely on each other and cannot always exist in solidarity.
Lastly, Jenkins brings forth the idea of a convergence culture. This is a collective meaning making process that changes the way we see things. Consumers are actively involved in showcasing their opinions about consumer products, for instance and thus there is a heightened degree of importance of social relations over technological shifts. This happens because content flows across different media and this is termed “ extension”. Jenkins juxtaposes this with “ synergy” which is the control of different manifestations that emerge out of the extension process.
There is also a sort of power relations that exists in the content making process. For one, not every consumer has the same ability to change the media. There is a democratization of content, but not totally for markets pitch ideas to people who they deem profitable and able to proliferate their ideas via their marketing power.
Also, there is an emphasis that one should not focus on old media being replaced ( to use the term loosely) by new media but instead on its relations. The medium will always be there but the delivery technologies will change. Also, hardware never converges because then the conglomerates would not make money selling one media object that can do everything – it is an economically detrimental idea. This is also showcases that although that might be possible it will not be allowed to take place because in a consumerist and capital economy the ideologies of economics will triumph over that of ideal possibilities.
There is also a tension with this new media because there is an increasing expectation for quality consumption and with this comes the ability to hold accountable those who violate quality laws, this needs to be reconciled.
JENKINS: CONVERGENCE CULTURE
Extension: This refers to industries’ “efforts to expand the potential markets by moving content across different delivery systems”. With content available for public access in multiple places/platforms all over the world, extension represents the increased agency available to the general population. The power to produce media no longer lies solely in the hands of the govt, religious authorities and corporations, but also in the hands of the “masses”. Examples of this increased agency include social media (Tweeting/Face-booking), writing and designing our own HTML coded websites with software such as Adobe Dreamweaver and of course, blogging about our lives, thoughts and opinions 🙂 Thus, with extension, we consumers now have a larger voice.
Synergy: Media companies and producers come together in convergence culture to try and take control of the media market. They do this via franchises, shared deals, etc. These franchises can be global and far-reaching, such as the release of music albums and new singles. For instance, a pop singer’s songs can be sold in digital formats online via iTunes. She can then have her digital album (with music videos) released in physical shops worldwide. Then come the press functions, glitzy promotional events and posters (advertising industry) which come in to help sell the album. And then the physical logistics of world tours for the singer will be scheduled in major cities in various continents. Lastly, the black market can also take advantage by sharing the file with worldwide Internet users for free on file sharing networks, like pirate bay 🙂
Convergence culture may bring greater access to many people around the world, but we must not forget that convergence can also privilege certain groups, for instance, the media literate and the middle classes (who can afford round-the-clock Wireless access in their homes, etc). Agency may not be available to everyone. For instance, software such as Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Final Cut Pro video editors, etc) are really expensive and out of reach for most of the working class. Students in universities can use the software, courtesy of their schools, industry experts have access to it for work, and wealthy ppl can purchase and experiment with it. But what about the common person on the street?
That said, I remember reading an article (from a few years back) about this homeless woman (in the USA) who blogged about her experience living in her car. She was barely surviving on ad hoc jobs, and she did not go to live with her parents, as that went against social norms. She would stop her car at public libraries and use their public computers during opening hours, to blog about her day-to-day struggles for money and food. Thus, the poor and homeless can have some degree of agency, but it is limited by their social and physical environment too. For instance, the woman would need to be in a place where she can access public computers.
Regarding the black box fallacy, I would argue that smartphones are a form of mobile black box, where we have music, video, photos, social media, lifestyle apps, time, radio, texting, calling, notes, email, web browser and many other functions on-the-go. But I agree that there would never be one single item to meet all our media needs, and this is in part due to the profit-oriented goals of Capitalism, as discussed in tutorial today 🙂 We’d have to buy charging cables, memory cards and accessories for our smartphones, for instance. It’s about buying add-ons to enhance our devices (and that is how companies make money). Even for Apple, they’ve different products of different sizes (iPads, iPods, iPhones, Macs, MacBooks, etc) to meet our different consumer needs. Or rather, these items have shaped our consumer culture today, the big businesses somehow construct particular needs and market them to us. (Release of the Samsung S5 publicity event, etc)
KITTLER: HISTORY OF COMMUNICATION MEDIA
Advancements and shifts in communication media also changes social and cultural life. The way we interact with each other has no doubt changed. As discussed during tutorial, we can ask ourselves questions about access and scale: who can connect today, and how can they connect?
I was scrolling through Instagram today and I ‘hearted’ an image posted by Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee. Hw was at a global political conference: held in a large hall with big screens, and each country’s delegate had individual tablets to keep in touch with and interact in the conference. The fact that it was a photo of a multi-media conference posted on Instagram brings to mind McLuhan’s concept of a medium within a medium, which is kinda like the Russian Doll effect. Also known as Remediation, the representation of one medium within another medium.
New Media vs. Old Media, Passive vs. Interactive: it is widely believed that old media breeds passivity and new media breeds interactivity, and this is true in many ways.
However, with increased interactivity comes greater responsibility too. As consumers-turned-producers of media, we have to watch what we put online. For instance, citizen journalism website STOMP is rave with an influx of ‘newsy’ posts, some of which can be defamatory and irresponsible (EG: STOMP posts that border on hate, xenophobia, stereotyping and blaming). With the agency to have our voices heard by everyone else, I feel that as we express ourselves more freely, we’ve to, at the same time, understand that what we post can have implications (negative and positive) on the people who come across it.
BOTLET AND GRUSIN: REMEDIATION
Immediacy is that which that denies the presence of mediation,;it pretends that the medium doesn’t exist. Interesting examples would include virtual reality (as mentioned in the class readings), Live TV, and iPads. By being able to swipe and enable digital commands with our fingertips on the iPad, the hindrances of the mouse/scrollbar/keypad are removed. A sense of immediacy and a sense of power comes upon the user, who immerses herself in an exciting app game 🙂
(I read somewhere that devices and computers do give a sexy sense of power to its users. This power is sexy in the sense that users can control and command basically everything within their devices (iPad, etc), and their devices have no choice but to obey their every whim and fancy. (Kinda like a submissive sexual relationship, in which the user dominates the device.)
Hypermediacy makes us “hyper-conscious” of the medium(s). It’s about having content on multiple media platforms at the same time, and a combination of media forms in one (or more) media objects. The reading’s example of multiple window screens on the desktop is a self-evident example of hyper-mediacy. This doesn’t make us forget about the medium, but it is valuable too. For instance, multiple tabs and running apps on a single laptop screen enables us to multi-task and fulfil our entertainment and work-related needs.
Double logic of remediation refers to the irony that both Immediacy and Hypermediacy rely on each other. Yuan Ting in class gave an exciting example of 4D Films, where users immerse themselves in a virtual-and-physical reality of a 3D film broadcast and the 4D experience of water/sand/movement together with the characters in the film. (Sentosa has a 4D AdventureLand for users to forget reality and enter an experience of Immediacy, at a fixed price). However, as we immerse ourselves in Immediacy, we also note that highly advanced media technologies are bringing us this experience; a complex network of hypermedia works to bring us Immediacy. So both I and H go hand in hand 🙂
We can also being reminded of hypermediacy within our experiences of Immediacy. For instance, during a seamless PowerPoint presentation on a large screen, the flow is sometimes broken with a Skype notification. It appears annoyingly in a text box and comes with a ‘ping’ sound, on the large screen. Viewers watching the presentation will momentarily snap out of their immersive experience and remember that this is just media technology at work, when they see the annoying Skype alert.
Thank you for reading this 🙂
Kittler’s work talks about the history of communication technologies and centers on both the communication system and information system. Because the historical transition from orality to the written word as well as the transition from writing to the technical media meant the decoupling of interaction and communication, we have this process of evolution that allows us to view the history of communication media in two parts: the history of writing and the history of technical media.
Bolter and Grusin recognize how society today appreciate the double logic of remediation – immediacy and hypermediacy. These two logics, though they exist together in digital media today, are mutually dependent. Immediacy refers to the diminishing of virtual reality and denying the mediating presence of the computer and its interface. On the other hand, hypermediacy is best represented by the windows that we find in computers, which allow for multiple representations that are made visible to the viewer.
Jenkins focuses on convergence where old and new media interact instead of replacing each other, where an old concept takes on new meanings. With convergence, we find the reshaping of pop culture today and there have been changes to the relationship between media audiences, producers and content. Media convergence is thus more than a technological shift since is alters the logic by which media industries operate and by which media consumers process news and entertainment. We are now consuming media in a different way as opposed to the past and as such convergence is both a top-down corporate-driven process and a bottom-up consumer driven process.
Kittler discussed the history of media communication technologies. He suggested adopting information systems as a way to analyze and view communication systems since both are used to process, store and transmit messages of different media. Kittler argued that the historical transition from orality to writing resulted in a separation of information and communication and that writing has since transited to technical media, leading to further decoupling. He went on to view the history of communication media as the history of writing and printing, and technical media.
Writing which comprises the use of script, allows for the easy communication of information and messages, and allows for easy storage and ease of learning – for instance the alphabetical system. Previous authors we read, for instance, White and Ong also emphasized the importance of the alphabetical system that allow for representations of different sounds to form and string words and sentences, even if the alphabetical symbols themselves do not hold inherent meanings. Kittler also posited that writing surfaces/materials was imperative to the ease accessibility and storage of information and knowledge as well. New media also does not make old media obsolete. For example, print amplified the effects and impacts that writing brought about. The mediatisation of the printed word also enabled the spread of democracy and literacy to the masses. No longer was reading and writing exclusive to the elites solely. Next Kittler elaborated on the history of technical media that allowed for the speeding up of processes of communication. For instance, the development of telegraphy, telephone, film and gramophone. The rise of digital technology and automation could replace human intervention.
Jenkins discussed the concept of convergence, which can be defined as the flow of content across different media platforms. This would make information more accessible to a wider audience. For instance, news can be read online, on SNSes, instead of the traditional print medium. Thus, the spread of information and knowledge is instantaneous and transcends international boundaries. There is also engagement at the grassroots ground-level. For instance, real-time Twitter “live” feeds and updates provide information about what is happening at events around the world and can even be used as a tool for political activism in some cases. For instance, recently, Turkey tried to block Twitter, on grounds that it was being utilized by protest organizers to stir unrest. Sometimes, official media coverage only depicts narratives that are in line with the interests of those in power and SNSes can function as an alternative media platform that gives the masses a voice. This gives rise to a participatory culture of the audience, who are no longer passive spectators. This leads to a gathering of collective intelligence from the pooling together of knowledge and information that the masses get to contribute to. Convergence is also evident in that old and new media interact in more complex ways, instead of old media being replaced by new media. Digitalization enabled and set the conditions for convergence, new media technologies allowed for the flow of content to different mediums and assume varying forms at the point of reception. For instance, the same advertisement can be played on the television, on the internet and on huge billboard screens and it may produce different effects on the consumers.
Jenkins also mentioned Gitelman’s take on medium through which media works. Apart from enabling communication, medium also entails recognizing the cultural and social practices and effects associated with it. The Black Box Fallacy also arises. Convergence does not mean that all media can be condensed into one simple “black box”. Instead, although the media content may essentially converge, the hardware and the technology through which we get the content, has since multiplied. For instance, we use our laptops, smartphones, tablets etc to surf the internet and the information we can get off the internet through either of these devices is the same, yet, there are many devices that can basically serve similar functions. Hence convergence is an ongoing process which effects relations between existing technologies, consumers and industries. It also affects the ways in which people consumer media. For example, many things can be done on one’s laptop or smartphone concurrently, through that one device. Jenkins concluded that convergence is an interplay of both a top-down corporate driven process as well as a bottom-up consumer driven process – as consumers are increasingly empowered with the ability to participate actively and decide what they want.
I suppose the main issue in this week’s reading is on the emphasis of the convergence between old and new media. Media has changed and now we are living in a convergence culture as argued by Jenkins. He defined “convergence as a cultural shifts as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content.” As such, the circulation of media content depends heavily on consumers’ active participation which brought about participatory culture. In Jenkins’s reading, his emphasis lies in explaining how the convergence between old and new media came about and how such convergence impact media and consumers. He argued that old media never die and what dies are simply the tools to access media content, delivery technologies obsolete and are replaced while media evolve. Therefore, old media are forced to coexist with the emerging media where their functions and status are shifted by the introduction of new technologies which lead to the convergence culture. Jenkins emphasised that “media convergence is more than simply a technological shift. Convergence alters the relationship between existing technologies, industries, markets, genres and audiences. Convergence alters the logic which media industries operate and by which the media consumers process news and entertainment.” Hence, convergence is a process which involves both a change in the way media is produced and consumed.
Bolter and Grusin followed the same argument of Jenkins whereby they argued that new media refashioned the earlier media to achieve their cultural significance. Such a process is defined as “remediation”. As a result of remediation, earlier media are imported into a digital space. Since digital media strives for transparency and immediacy which has the desire to get past the limits of representation so as to achieve the real, such would mean that the representation is being taken as real. As remarked by the authors “remediation is the mediation of reality because media themselves are real and because the experience of media is the subject of remediation.”
As for Kittler, his goal is to outline a scientific history of media, he argues that media have their own autonomy. He discussed the history of communication technologies comes up against methodological problem of defining communication in relation to certain times and spaces and practical problem of the documentation of the history of communication technologies itself. Kittler seems to reinforce the importance of historicity in his piece of writing as like the precious authors read in the course.