Just a quick one…

‘Facebook Killed the Private Life’ made some strong points. I myself use Facebook regularly to keep in touch with friends and post photos for friends. What really hit me the most was that fact that anyone can see what your doing. I haven’t changed my setting’s to private as I meet new people all the time and they will have trouble finding me on the site if I kept my profile private. I’ve found it hard to find people set to private, and I have needed to speak to them urgently in some cases.

I wouldn’t have minded the possible intrusions so much (from strangers), if it wasn’t for the fact that I have posted some of my own work up on there, so others could easily save the files to their computer. This means that my photos can be easily taken by anyone, and that’s quite upsetting and shocking.

After watching that, I will now be more careful with what I post on Facebook, and only share important and valuable information when absolutely necessary.

Sousveillance vs. Surveillance

Are they watching us or are we controlling what they watch?

As an art lover, I quite like the idea of ‘sousveillance’. I have seen different applications of this in the art world and generally it is quite interesting to see.

For example, Bansky often makes political and social statements through his graffiti art, based on his own views of the world.

This particular piece is aimed at the media and their intrusion into the real world. You can see that he clearly thinks that concerning a world crisis, all the media want is a good sob story, and are preventing the sufferers from actually getting help. From Banksy’s perspective, the media is only watching through a lens (surveillance), rather than seeing it from the sufferers point of view (sousveillance).

This leads nicely onto surveillance and whether or not is holds the same view.

People are forever going on about living in a ‘big brother’ nation where we can’t walk around a corner without being recorded and monitored. I so find this true, and don’t go a day without seeing at least 5 variously placed camera’s on my travels.

They are ultimately there for good intentions, such as crime prevention, traffic monitoring etc. but how much is to much? Sometimes, particularly in busy areas, we can feel almost stalked by them. I have actually felt unsafe seeing so many before. Once it made me think ‘Is it that dangerous round here they need that many?’ and I’ve feared that I will actually be attacked, resulting in my walking away form the area to a more probably dangerous area with less camera’s. I have also felt like I am being watched.

I always see camera’s have been vandalised and wouldn’t be able to see anything due to the spray paint or chewing gum covering the lens. It’s silly. Even when they haven’t been vandalised, usually the picture quality is so bad you can’t see who the criminal is in the first place. Cameras are not always preventing crime and catching the criminals, so why have so many?

Overall, I feel sousveillance is more powerful than surveillance. It gives the viewer a closer connection, and they can start to really see and feel the same as the person who’s perspective it is. Surveillance is just an overview with no real angle or grip on the situation. This is probably why it works so well in the world of work, keeping things organised and structured. The person on the other side can’t connect so they will make an objective discision and no mistakes are made.

We the Media

Dan Gillmor’s article, althought based on future journalists, makes some very valid, and important points on convergence. He states that there were essentially 2 means of communication within the past 150 years – one-to-one (telelphone, letters) and one-to-many (newspapers, radio). He also states that internet now allows us to communicate few-to-few and many-to-many (thanks to convergence).

Dan Gillmor’s article tries to emphasise how quickly technology is advancing, and how much easier it it getting, hence this ‘few-to-few’ and ‘many-to-many’ approach. He says that ‘technology moves so quickly that before long it will also seem natural’, a bold statement which I touched upon in my last blog. It does pose the question, ‘what is next?’.

Dan also goes on to talk about mobile connected cameras and invasions of privacy. The convergence of these 2 different devices (the next step?) has lead to ‘The barring of mobile phones with cameras from health-club locker rooms’ showing that technological advancements are getting more intrusive and more personal, and misuse is present. This leads on to the idea of a ‘big brother’ state, constantly being watched wherever we go. Is this right? Surely this sort of thing goes against our human rights, yet is happening all the time, half the time controlled by the government (cctv, speed cameras etc.).

However the same can be said about missuse on the other side – in the form of peer-to-peer. This sort of communication leads to copyright infringement and causes a lot of problems with the entertainment side of media. They, of course, want this to stop as it means they lose out on money. Yet it is hard to track and find the route of the problem which is why it’s such a successful way of sharing things.

I am now lead on to think, who is right and wrong? Are both parties equal or both in the wrong? Is there even an answer?

History of the WWW

To help us understand a bit more about the web an how its got to be such a huge system, we were given a brief history of it.

From the article ‘As We May Think’ by Vannevar Bush, you can see that the initial ideas behind ‘Memex’ was just for basic connection and file sharing, to make work a bit easier and allow people to look at other works and possibly expand on their ideas. Is was clearly about making things a little bit easier and quicker to do in the world of work.

Who would have thought that now, the internet and computer technology is a fundamental part of life. Not only does everybody seem to ‘need’ it to carry on with life, they are consumed by it. Most people can’t seem to go a day without going on their blogs to update their personal life to the world. If a system in which people could do this had been suggested at the time of Vannevar Bush’s article, it would have seemed laughable. Why concentrate on that when you could use the technology for much more important, life changing purposes (as innitially proposed).

This is just a clear example of how fast the technological world is moving and it’s quite scary trying to think of the ‘next step’. What other advances can be made? How much more involved can we get? This question cannot be answered simply. Some would argue we are already at a peak. We seem to be entirely consumed already, we use it in every way we could think possible and the only advancement’s we could make would be for it to live our lives for us.

Is that what is next?

This of course will not happen. Technology excites us. It’s always remained ‘new’ and ‘different’ with each advancement. It will always stay this way and we will always want (to know) more. However, we still like our independence and freedom, we still want to make our own names known and technology can only be used as a platform for us. It can not actually BE us.

Music Industry & Web 2.0

After reading and discussing bit about the music industry and ‘Total Music’, I went on to look at Andrew Dubber’s blog. I wanted to read up a bit more on the music industry and look for things that isn’t widely known by the ‘average joe’. I felt Andrew Dubber’s blog allowed me to do just that, in particular reference to his ebook which gives a basic, yet detailed introduction into music online.

He makes a valid point over music and Web 2.0, which sounds so simple, but isn’t immediately obvious. He basically tries to emphasise that the audience don’t want to just see what you want them to see, much like a ‘brochure’ or ‘spamming them’ as he kindly puts it. They want you to interact with them and sell yourself, not just your product. This also applies to other media.

There are literally millions of the same products trying to be sold to someone. It makes sense that they would rather know more than just the shiny, polished version that the seller wants us to see. If they can’t get to any other information on it (such as buyer/fan feedback, background information, tips and advice etc.) they can’t trust it, and therefore will go with an option that does provide that little bit extra.

This may have not been such an important factor several years ago, before the age of Web 2.0. Internet users could only provide information using basic coding, such as HTML. Internet wasn’t a major importance and so wasn’t used so strongly to promote music etc. This, in turn, meant that ‘buyers’ didn’t use the internet for that sort of information. However, now that they can use better coding systems such as XML, they can provide and receive more information, ‘interact’ and generally make it easier to communicate. Therefore, the consumers expect MORE back, hence this demand for selling yourself, not just the product. Now it CAN be done, we WANT it done.

Convergence in the Music Industry

We are all aware of declines in the music industry, mainly over record sales (suggestively caused by illegal downloading). The decline seems to be ever increasing, and is causing problems within the industry. Personally, I disagree with illegal downloading as I like to support a band by purchasing their music. I feel that downloading means struggle for up and coming bands as they can’t make money to go further. We could be missing out on so much talent due to this.

However, on reading about the Guilt Upon Accusation law ‘Section 92A’ that calls for internet disconnection based on accusations of copyright infringement without a trial and without any evidence, I started thinking about my own views on the matter.

Personally I feel that this law is harsh and unfair on the internet user. If falsely accused, this internet ‘ban’ could cause great difficulty to a persons life, and may even stop them from being able to work/learn etc. This may lead to more serious implications in their future, such as losing their job, effecting their education 0r even simply stopping them from doing their day to day routine which requires internet usage.

Then again, you could argue that you’ve taken the chance, so now should have to pay the price.

I felt very intrigued by the artical about a ‘free’ music service (Total Music) that has been proposed. I am yet to make up my mind on whether it will help the sales of the music industry, as there are still ways to obtain music without paying a penny. People still choose to download illegally, even with a safer system (iTunes) they can use, simply due to the fact that it saves them money, especially now with the credit crunch.

The main issue with this proposed new service is that people are not going to want to pay a monthly subscription fee. Another issue is that once someone has obtained all the music they require for themselves (and most likely their mates also), which would not take longer than a month, they may take the music, cancel their subcription, return the device an walk away with hundreds of songs for the bargain price of that subscription fee.

The only sales pitch which may work on a customer is the fact that it will play on all devices. Then again, there is nothing from stopping them from putting it onto one device and saving it to all their friends computers (who will not need the device or a subscription if their friend can do it for them).

Over-all, I can see a major struggle for Doug Morris and ‘Total Music’. Its yet again another way of trying to get money from music lovers and it wont work. Just as Napster failed, so will this.

Statistical Slideshow Ideas

During the lecture’s we discussed artists/photographers who present images to get certain statistical facts across. The person who seemed to really stand out was Chris Jordon.

He used photography in an extreme way which highlighted some quite shocking facts about the world. For example, in ‘Skull With Cigarette’, he has photographed cigarette packets on a large scale to highlight the amount of American citizens who die every 6 months from smoking. He has based his image on a Van Gogh painting which makes the image seem more like an artistic copy, and its not until you zoom in and realise what it is representing that you experiece the full effect.

 Although I liked Chris Jordon’s idea, I felt more engaged with these 2 presentations, which included internet and computer statistics.

The Machine is Us/ing Us by Dr. Michael Wesch

Did You Know 3.0 by Karl Fisch & Scott McLeod

As an internet user, I felt I could relate a lot more to the subject matter. I also liked its use of screen shots of Google etc. so the audience knew what the presentation’s were talking about. This created the basis for my idea and I went on to do my own research into this area, creating my own screen shots based on the statistics I found.

Data Visualisation

Hans Rosling Data Visualisation

The exercise on child mortality rate’s showed an obvious prejudice from the start. When first looking at the lists of pairings, I did guess the intentions behind it. However if I had have seen the pairings on their own, I honestly would not have gone for all the obvious, wrong answers. When seeing the pairing with Russia and South Africa, I already had previous knowledge of high population and problems surrounding the countries.

The excercise did, however, highlight ideas of prejudice and how it could link in with the covergent media module. Its showed how someone could take an idea and make it available to everyone, thanks to technology.

Hans Rosling managed to find a very simple way to display really important imformation using the media.

What makes me happy?

After looking at Stefan Sagmeister’s lecture on what makes him happy, I began to think of what makes me happy.

He himself made a point that most of his were to do with design, a key part of his life – which I found fascinating. I then made a mini list myself of what has actually made/makes me happy:

1. Flying on planes
2. Sewing/knitting as a child
3. Getting good grades in my favourite subjects
4. Sleeping
5. Taking photographs/filming/creating/making things
6. Driving
7. Dancing (badly)
8. Reading

I realised that apart form the few social/relaxing ones, half my list were based on my creative side and my passion for all things creative and imaginative. Although media isn’t directly on the list, I find this is my biggest passion. I seem to pool together the rest of my creative side, which in turn, creates the passion for media. The happiness I get from making/filming things can be shifted to filming for a media project. I feel most pleased when I have done well on a media project than all other subjects. When I read, I visualise the whole book as if it were a movie, thinking of how i’d film and edit certain parts to make it the best film it can be. When I have a deadline or am doing a project for media, I like to drive and think along to music to get my inspirations.

Stefan Sagmeister’s definatly has a point of doing what makes you happy, and if your not happy whilst doing it, then its not for you.

I thought  i’d share some of my own work that I have done over the years, all of which has made me happy to do and have been happy whilst creating:

Media Work

“Coventry People – Muscle Man”

“My Place”

Photography

Artwork

Bert is Evil

This lecture was based on convergence coming from unexpected sources and in unexpected ways. The focus was on a boy named Dino Ignacio who created a site for his friends to view and be entertained by. On this site were many images of Sesame Streets character Bert ‘photographed’ with famous ‘bad guys’ so to speak. These images were created by photoshopping Bert onto photographs he found.

This website found itself causing a lot of trouble, becoming headline news after one of the images was used on a poster to an ‘anto America’ campaign. Legal action was then threatened by Childrens Television Workshop after seeing this on the CNN. Henry Jenkins says that this highlights concern for the exploration of three concepts: media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence.