Enter World: exploring mediated cultures

Monday, May 14, 2007

Everything Bad is Good for You, by Steven Johnson

Overall the concept is a breath of fresh air, someone finally looked at media impact from a new angle.

As one example, he discusses TV shows with complex narratives and social webs that encourage audience interaction with the stories. Johnson points to cognitive challenges in modern dramas, and states that the good ones don’t “talk down” to audiences (referring both to the removal of blatant hints and the inclusion of technical jargon). However, he also refers to some of this language as above the audience when he discusses the “willingness to immerse the audience in information that most viewers won’t understand” (p.80). It is precisely this information that interests me. While Johnson covers social and technical skills honed by complex media environments, he overlooks the potential for learning specific information. That was an intentional separation for the purpose of this book, but something I’d like to see explored further in relation to the concepts Johnson presents.

These same shows that subject the audience to new information could be aiding the audience in understanding professional and academic fields as well as in developing their cognitive skills. All of the major networks seem to have more shows with problem solving by professionals or academics than sitcoms. Forensics, forensic anthropology, psychology, medicine, mathematics ... these are all fields that have played the background role of nerd or geek in past shows and are now the key roles. (Excepting computer science, which seems to still be represented by an off-beat character kept within the confines of the office to solve those truly complex technical issues.) By following these characters as they solve complex puzzles, the audience is introduced to the scientific process as well as specific terminology.

I read a wire story a while back that said Americans are more science literate now than ever before. It accredited improved understanding to the requirement of basic science classes in universities. But I would argue that the interest in science, and the willingness to read science news, also lies in the popularization of these fields through characters in television shows and the transformation of research from rigorous academic reading into hip, colorful, and fun formats such as Wired, Seed, and boingboing. Science information has become more accessible to the public through these popular media formats. And while hearing fictional doctors spout out medical terminology on TV is no substitute for studying anatomy or pharmacology, it does open interest in the field and make more people comfortable with the jargon.

Maybe Johnson’s assumption that it’s all in the way we think still holds true: it’s not so much which words the audience remembers or that they will be able to mimic the actions presented, but that they can wrap their minds around it and find it interesting. Just don’t throw out the message completely.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

An article today claims email is dying. And even though I use it daily, I say a hearty hooray.

One point I must argue against is the final question about whether millenials (yet another annoying generational term) will be forced to use email once they start working ... hell no. I see so many reasons we should move away from email in business, even as I use email to create this post.

IMs and SMSes are perfect for instant short info and I tend to use emails for cataloging longer pieces of information ... like organizing information so that I have access to it later from anywhere and my business partner receives a copy. But email is not ideal for that, I end up sending 5 emails on one topic with rewrites in later ones. My reliance stems from current lack of a better option.

So what is replacing email? That’s something that goes beyond IMs and text messages, beyond social networks like Twitter, MySpace, FaceBook, and SecondLife. (Beyond company names someday I hope, but that’s another post for another time.) And most likely the things that do replace email will interact with email. Tasks programs are still developing, they tend to be clunky and slow. But something like journal entry software would be ideal. Backpackit.com has a Mac widget that comes close, but it still only allows updating of existing pages rather than full feature control.

The point is, I don’t want to linger in email dependency. I don’t like spam, I don’t like getting sidetracked with listservs and personal notes when I have a mission to accomplish. I know there is another way. I also don’t want to open up a site and wait for all that loading, I’d rather just type directly into a program that syncs with a site. It needs to allow for full creation, editing, and notification controls. And yes, some of the notices may be through email—but take a note from Twitter here and let the receiver choose the medium.

So I may not be a “millenial,” or any of those other cutsie terms, but I’m all for living beyond email.

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

There’s something very Jennifer Government about the way universities can sign up multiple students with the same last name attached to their RL first name. Jenny Fielding gives me the creeps, but probably only because of that book.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Amazon Feed Generator

Monday, August 28, 2006

An article in the Boston Globe yesterday about changes in marketing techniques due to changes in media reminded me once again of product endorsement in textbooks. I was not able to find any articles or research on that when I looked last, it might be time to search again. It’s pretty common knowledge that the products in major motion pictures were sold those spots, it’s even been the target of comedy in movies. However, in this world obsessed with protecting the child—why is no one concerned with the statistics textbook that talks about Camel cigarettes in its word problems?

Saturday, July 22, 2006

Back in March of 2005 I wrote about the mass media’s emphasis on male bloggers in Who’s afraid of the white male blogger?. Today I ran across a Pew study that backs up my assumptions that the blogospehere is not male dominated.

This excerpt from WIMN’s Voices sums it up rather well:

Listen up, corporate journos: time to stop reporting on all those “here’s a photo of me on a picnic with my pet fluffy and a Photoshopped Lindsey Lohan” stories about bloggers. There’s a more socially relevant story to be told. A small but growing (blog readership and blog ownership have increased dramatically in recent years, Pew shows) army of young, racially diverse, fact-checking bloggers - half of whom are women, and a nearly a third of whom are politically motivated - are engaging the public debate every day.

This Pew study doesn’t only shed light on the demographics of the blogosphere - it raises some very basic questions about the demographics of sources quoted in corporate news reports about blogs. If bloggers are approximately 50% female and are racially diverse, why are white men still the majority of bloggers quoted and discussed in print and broadcast reports about blogs (that is, reports not focused on porn, or on predatory threats to girls with MySpace accounts)?

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

In a criticism of updated content in Wikipedia, CNN details a play by play of changes to information on Kenneth Lay’s death. What they fail to mention is that open-source journalism in formats such as IndyMedia encourages readers to take self-responsibility in fact checking—something we should all do with corporate media as well. The benefits to open formats for such information ARE the changing, the fluidity, and the multiple sources. These are not downfalls ...

However, that it was the encyclopedia rather than the “news” being updated is strange.

But the real question is ... did he fake it?

Friday, June 09, 2006

There is something excessive in the wording of this: MEDIA SAFETY A Guide for Parents from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

While the effects of media have been studied for years, using the term safety makes it all seem more of a scare tactic than a genuine attempt to help people become literate. Granted, violence and fear are hot topics. Why not play on them for the purpose of promoting all things while it’s trendy? If that’s what you’re after ... 

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Media Sustainability Index 2005

My first reaction to the Media Sustainability Index that I received in the mail from Fielding was eagerness to delve into it and excitement that such a thing existed. Reading through the executive summary had me wishing to be a part of the project in some way, but I also began to question some points. For example, while the study centers on indendent media, I could not locate a working definition of independent and/or independent media. The closest I came to unearthing such a definition is in the final sentence of the exectuvie summary:

… a robust media system that promotes governmental transparency and accountability and brings citizens the information they need and deserve.

Still, my questions were minimal compared to the excitement at apparent growing independent media sustainability in eastern europe and the evidence to follow in country-specific chapters. Until I read the methodology.

When I envision independent media, I think of indymedia.org, grassroots groups, blogs, ‘zines, and in-depth reporting overlooked and under-funded by mainstream, corporate media. These groups are revolutionizing the U.S. media.

Unfortunately, the objectives and indicators included in this study seem to base healthy journalism on steroetypical and out-dated U.S. paradigms. Systems that are being challenged by academics and the masses. Systems that are leading to new definitions of journalism and experimentation by major universities in attempts discover how to research, present and distribute information in this age where trust (of journalists) is waning and information is always available.

Why hold emerging media to flawed visions when they have the potential to show us new opportunities?

My main complaint about the criteria used in the study are the Business Management Indicators. These require that media be profit-generating businesses, use advertising, and use market research to “enhance advertising revenue"… What about media supported by audiences? Media that refuse to play by the rules of advertisers as well as government? This is an especially important question when taking into account the concern by MSI panelists in various countries about “commercialization.”

With domestic and foreign investors seeking solid returns on their capital, many criticize media for seeking the lowest common denominator as they peddle scandal, entertainment, and gossip at the expense of news and public affairs.

Objective 1 covers free speech. In light of the concentration on corporate/for-profit media, a new concern arises. The summary for this section is that “legal and social norms protect and promote free speech and access to public information.” While this in and of itself is a positive objective, leaving out the possibility of corporate control of speech when business has such a prominent place in the objectives and indicators leaves a large gap in judgement. For an example of this, look to Fox News’ suffocation of the bovine growth hormone newscast in Florida (due to an advertiser complaint) that led to the termination of employment for the two reporters involved as well as suppression of the information.

Simply having multiple, non-state media outlets does not guarantee free speech nor variety of content.