The title of this course, Communication and Technology, accurately describes the sector of communication which is continuing to grow. Most types of communication efforts used in present times are using new media and newer forms of technology to reach their specific targets. Throughout the years, communicators mainly focused on using mass media efforts to reach a large audience. New media has allowed for communicators to focus in on a specific group of people in order to become more relatable. Interactivity plays a large role in this. “At the ideological level, interactivity is understood as one of the key ‘value added’ characteristics of new media” (Lister 20).
The video below is from the Interactive Advertising Bureau annual meeting. The first half of the video is an excellent example of the different online channels communicators are using to advertise.
New media has become a part of our society’s everyday life. Social media is being used by companies to get their names, products, and information out to internet users. Internet users are constantly on social networking sites where information is always being exchanged. This type of culture surrounding new media has developed a cyberspace that people can relate to. The reason why internet users are attracted to social communities in cyberspace is because it makes it simple for people to find one another who have similar interests, beliefs, and points of view. This cyber culture has led to collective intelligence being used to bring people together to communicate. People are coming together in cyberspace to bring little pieces of information to be compiled in a large, collective whole. Collect intelligence can be crucial in creating publicity for companies. Often times television shows slip out a few spoilers for super-fans to decode and collectively bring together. This type of publicity would not be available for companies if it wasn’t for new media and advances in technology.
Technology has changed the way our society communicates forever. The way communicators reach the masses has drastically changed since new media has become a part of our everyday lives. Through the internet, people are able to weed through the clutter and find things that appeal to them. In my opinion, the internet will continue to be the top medium of communication for years to come.
Could even newer forms of media become more effective in targeting specific people like the internet has? Is it possible to target audiences with mass media forms as specifically as it is with new media?
Lister brings up the question of whether we are still in control of the machines we have created. I think this is especially interesting because we live in a society where technology runs most of the everyday things we do. We use technology from the moment we wake up when our alarm rings, to the time we check our email before heading off to bed. So are we still in control of the technology we created?
In my opinion, I think we still are in control of technology. Although these new technologies are “smart” in their own way, they do not have the capabilities of having something as advanced as the human brain. These machines need to be told what to do in order to do them. So, in my opinion, it is foolish for people to think that machines will start to take over our society. The only way that would happen is if we let it happen.
The reason why our society has this fear is because technology has taken away many jobs for people. For example, even at the grocery store many people at the checkout have been eliminated and replaced by self-checkout counters. This comes down to the improvement of efficiency. It is much more efficient and a better financial investment to use a computer or smart machine than to rely on a human to do the job.
I think we have become overly reliant on technology. Face-to-face communication seems too person at times, and a quick text message or a Facebook wall post is perfect if you don’t want to have a conversation with someone. The link below is an article which proves just that. More than half of the U.S. population is spending more time on their computer than with their spouses.
What separates virtual communities from real communities? Is it only the fact that one is on the internet and the other is face-to-face? In Jenkins, Cultural Convergence, he claims that virtual communities come together to participate in collective intelligence and partake in spoiling. Maybe this is happening because the people who are forming these virtual communities, where there is an exchange of information, are the super-fans around the world. Because the people in these communities are from different ends of the world, they draw on their own life experiences to contribute to the spoiling. This is different from a real communities, because physically, it is impossible to have people from different geographical locations in the community. A pro to having a virtual community, rather than a real one, is that because the people in the virtual community do not have similar life experiences, they are able to have more resources and think of situations in a different light than they would if they all were from the same place.
So, why are people participating in putting information together to make spoilers? People innately want to learn and discover things. The idea of researching in order to find answers, in this case, spoilers, are something that may appeal to a large number of online super-fans. Members of the virtual community are coming together, using discussion boards, chat rooms, etc., to share information. Spoilers are especially appealing to members of virtual communities and super-fans because they feel like they are cracking a code. They are trying to discover something that is intentionally hidden from them. According to Jenkins, collective intelligence is the sum total of information held individually by group members. In my opinion, the larger the pool of collective intelligence is, the more powerful the community will be. If everyone is able to bring information to the group from drawing on their personal life experiences, they offer their group a different perspective.
Virtual communities, in my opinion, have the ability to become much more powerful and effective than real communities. Will producers of television shows start making the “code harder to crack”? Will super-fans still be persistent in “cracking” it?
After reading this week’s readings in Scott McClouds’s, Understanding Comics, one question stood out in my mind. Could comics really be considered forms of media?
The word “Comic” comes from the Greek word, komikos, which pertains to comedy. Though initially comics started off as a fun and humorous hobby for people to read, because of the increasing number of political comics, the purpose of comics have changed.
Comics are an old form of art, but in my opinion, are a new form of media. People who write comics are trying to get a message across through their illustrations. Comics are also interactive with the reader. The reader can’t just look at the comic and understand the message like one would with a television or text. Comics are interactive because it requires that the reader is fully engaged and is able to analyze the illustration to fully understand the meaning. The key to understanding comics is in interpretation. Because the exact idea of the comic is not fully laid out, like it would be in text, it is important that the person looking at the comic is able to pick up what the artist was trying to portray.
Should comics be considered new or old forms of media?
With new advances in technology and communication, it has become easier for people around the world to communicate with one another. Because reaching a mass audience is so easy through a globalized society, it is important for people to make sure that the messages being sent are received and understood in the same way. In Jenkins, Convergence Culture: Where Old And New Media Collide, he talks about Bert, from the Sesame Streets, being used as an icon of terrorism. Through advances in technology, this message of Bert as a terrorist was able to reach millions of people.
Advances in technology lead to “new media”. “New Media” has brought on the opportunity to send messages and information across the world. Many companies have use this opportunity as a platform to get their products known in other countries. In order to get messages across, active participation is needed, according to Jenkins. Someone must be looking on the internet in order to find a message. With old media, people were able to sit in front of a TV or radio and listen to whatever was being said. New media requires that the audience is actively engaged in the messages. Though “New Media” is affected our society in a positive way, when people take advantage of it, it can lead to a mass disaster.
As technology advances, will there be more of a fear of terrorist attacks?
The term “New Media”, in my opinion, shouldn’t be used because what is known as new media, isn’t really new. Everything we consider as new media, is actually something that has been done before. Only this time, it is reworked and improved to fit our needs as times change. Things like, digital cameras, blog sites, internet, and networking sites, are considered to be forms of new media. In my opinion, each of these things are advanced and improved versions of older forms of media. An option would be to give “new media” a different term as Manovich suggests in, The Language of New Media. Manovich suggests that the term “digital media” would be a more accurate word.
Old media and new media serve the same purpose. Both of these are used for mass distribution of information. Old media gave little or no opportunity for the audience to interact. The most unique aspect of new media is its ability to be interactive.
It is also difficult to distinguish when old media became old, and where new media started. I think a lot of that varies from person to person. Because there is no defined time period for when new media began, there should be a specific date or event to define it in order to make it easier for people to understand.
Ten years from now, is new media is going to be considered new? Or is an improved form of our current media going to take the name?
