When looking at media change, we must first outline and understand the term 'media'. Throughout my degree as a media student, there have been a number of different explanations and slightly varying definitions but I think I will use the one that stuck with me the most. When attempting to understand such a broad term we look at the roots of the word 'media' as part of the English language.
The word media stems from, or is the plural, of the word medium which tells us that in general media are a vessel or channel. in contemporary society it is a vehicle or avenue for communication, where the stereotypical use of the word media is given to the news and reporters whose main job is to communicate to the masses. Media change is the way in which both this definition and the way in which we communicate as a species has evolved over time.
When looking at change, and more specifically media change, I like to break it down into the who, what, where, when, why and how. Firstly, when looking at the 'who' (not the band) the evolution of media is quite obvious. From the first signs of written language (which is a media form in and of itself) media and communications quickly and easily became the primary source of information and learning, making it easy for royalty to control those with little to no education. Fast track to today's day and age and we see what is coined as 'media 2.0' where once professionals were the sole publishers and disseminators of information, almost anyone is able to both access and publish virtually whatever they like; and if you like the quote 'knowledge is power' by Francis Bacon we can see that there has been a shift in informational power in favour of the public.
The 'what' of media and media change, in my opinion, can be whittled down to Mcluhan's famous quote 'the medium is the message', where what you use to convey your message or the medium or 'media' is just as important if not more important than what you wish to communicate. This has obviously become more prevalent with increasing methods of communication technology.
The 'when' of media change has fast become a question of both speed and permanency. Spoken language was and perhaps still is the fastest way of both conveying and understanding a message, however it suffers in the fact that it is often not remembered. Written language which came later was able to counteract this by being a much more permanent medium, however, suffered in the areas of understanding and speed of communication. This brings us to today's combination of almost everything to create the most reliable, quick, understandable and permanent mode of communication to date, creating boundless possibilities as seen on the internet.
The 'where' of media change I have already slightly covered when looking at the shift from those in power to the general population. Perhaps also under this heading is the discussion of the origins and relative power of the spoken language indicating the rise and fall of empires, however this is a much lengthier topic.
The 'why' can be seen as the reason behind media change, basically why new technology and methods of communications have been put in place. Again, this has already been covered by the 'when', where the need for faster and more permanent communication methods was basically where the money was. (Knowledge is power and money is power thus by simple math knowledge = money).
The 'how' basically arose from the need for a better way to exchange ideas and so the printing press and then computers and the internet were evolved. It can be argued these media inventions created the information ages that followed, however, I like to think of it as the other way around, where these inventions arose from need and were inevitable in the evolution of human kind.
Thursday, 6 June 2013
Week 12 (social organisation/generative)
This week's topic on art (as usual when talking about art) became a philosophical discussion on 'what is art'. My personal view on this is just to label literally everything as art, from sculptures and paintings and other "high art" right down to something as mundane as a blank wall (although it seems this is now classified as contemporary art). This stems from the fact that every person in the world has different experiences and interactions with the world creating billions of unique views on the concept of art; where your pencil case may just be an object to you, to someone that designs pencil cases for a living it could be an art form in their eyes.
I held this view through this weeks readings (even though all the examples were actually intended as art pieces) and found some of the artworks to be relatively enjoyable compared to previous weeks. Perhaps my favourite reading this week, Intimate Transactions combined a both technology, media and art to create an experience unique to each "audience member" or "viewer"; much in line with my views on art. It took a direction contemporary art trends seem to be following, utilizing new media technology to stimulate much more than one or two of your primary senses, but rather has your entire body encounter the artwork. This is very similar to the augmented reality artwork discussed in one of my previous posts (Projection Mapping) which also uses new media technology to create an experience for others. The difference here, however, is the artists are trying to convey their own view of the world to their audience. I guess what I am trying to get at here is that art is predominantly a medium or vessel to convey the message of the artist or creator and so we can say all art (in one form or another) is media. This, in conjunction with my earlier views on art leads me to believe everything can be seen as media.
In this new digital age where everyone can and is a 'publisher' or 'artist', people have come to 'subvert' (in a sense) the use of certain types of media, creating and sharing their own perspectives and experiences publicly. One prevalent example is the use of screenshots or 'photographs' in video games, also known as video game tourism. This is possibly a new direction for both art and media, where the primary use of video game media (which can also be classified as art itself) has been changed into creating artworks that most people overlook when visiting their respective virtual worlds.
Main References:
The transmute colelctive & Partners (2003), 'Intimate Transactions stage 1', Available online at <http://embodiedmedia.com/homeartworks/intimate-transactions>
I held this view through this weeks readings (even though all the examples were actually intended as art pieces) and found some of the artworks to be relatively enjoyable compared to previous weeks. Perhaps my favourite reading this week, Intimate Transactions combined a both technology, media and art to create an experience unique to each "audience member" or "viewer"; much in line with my views on art. It took a direction contemporary art trends seem to be following, utilizing new media technology to stimulate much more than one or two of your primary senses, but rather has your entire body encounter the artwork. This is very similar to the augmented reality artwork discussed in one of my previous posts (Projection Mapping) which also uses new media technology to create an experience for others. The difference here, however, is the artists are trying to convey their own view of the world to their audience. I guess what I am trying to get at here is that art is predominantly a medium or vessel to convey the message of the artist or creator and so we can say all art (in one form or another) is media. This, in conjunction with my earlier views on art leads me to believe everything can be seen as media.
In this new digital age where everyone can and is a 'publisher' or 'artist', people have come to 'subvert' (in a sense) the use of certain types of media, creating and sharing their own perspectives and experiences publicly. One prevalent example is the use of screenshots or 'photographs' in video games, also known as video game tourism. This is possibly a new direction for both art and media, where the primary use of video game media (which can also be classified as art itself) has been changed into creating artworks that most people overlook when visiting their respective virtual worlds.
Main References:
The transmute colelctive & Partners (2003), 'Intimate Transactions stage 1', Available online at <http://embodiedmedia.com/homeartworks/intimate-transactions>
Thursday, 16 May 2013
Week 10 (Open Science)
Science in general is a topic that goes way over my head. Learning chemistry and biology in high school was already an immensely difficult task for me to even comprehend, however, understanding how research papers are submitted and published is a different matter.
I find it conceptually quite interesting how scientists have utilized technology (most of which they create themselves) to further their knowledge through collaboration. From the evolution of language to the printing press, science has seen jumps in production the same way media has been effected by major inventions like the printing press or even (to a lesser extent) television and radio. It can be seen quite clearly the effects of (somewhat) open and free data, with the example of geneticists in the 80's (Pisani, 2011) revealing the great leaps and bounds people can make when working together. Perhaps something politicians could learn from.
These teachings are furthered when looking at the systems put in place when attempting to publish a formal research paper. The peer-reviewed system put in place by most if not all scientific journals and magazines is, in my opinion, one of the most legitimate forms of publishing; where, much unlike the internet, people who take their jobs and the papers submitted seriously are brought into the position of being able to accept or reject your findings. One of the best features of this process is the critique they give when rejecting a paper allowing for proper amendments that usually make the paper (in general) better. My point here is that the scientific community, while not the fastest mode of publication, have put into practice for a number of decades, a system that the rest of the world could learn from. Websites like Wikipedia have popped up in the last two decades or so which follow a very similar process of peer-reviewed submissions, and have revealed great results.
That is not to say the scientific world could not learn a thing or two from communications experts, with research papers going through an overzealous and tedious process which seems to be achievable in much fewer than three years (as required by Gavin of the realclimate blog) if more widely distributed to reviewers. Overall, I think that if scientists completely utilized the communicative abilities of the internet they could develop a system accepted by the entire world.
Main References:
Pisani, Elizabeth (2011) ‘Medical science will benefit from the research of crowds’, The Guardian, available online at, < http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/11/medical-research-data-sharing >
Schmidt, Gavin (2011) ‘From Blog to Science’, RealClimate, available online at < http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/02/from-blog-to-science/ >
Seed (2011) ‘On Science Transfer’, Seed, available online at < http://seedmagazine.com/content/print/on_science_transfer >
I find it conceptually quite interesting how scientists have utilized technology (most of which they create themselves) to further their knowledge through collaboration. From the evolution of language to the printing press, science has seen jumps in production the same way media has been effected by major inventions like the printing press or even (to a lesser extent) television and radio. It can be seen quite clearly the effects of (somewhat) open and free data, with the example of geneticists in the 80's (Pisani, 2011) revealing the great leaps and bounds people can make when working together. Perhaps something politicians could learn from.
These teachings are furthered when looking at the systems put in place when attempting to publish a formal research paper. The peer-reviewed system put in place by most if not all scientific journals and magazines is, in my opinion, one of the most legitimate forms of publishing; where, much unlike the internet, people who take their jobs and the papers submitted seriously are brought into the position of being able to accept or reject your findings. One of the best features of this process is the critique they give when rejecting a paper allowing for proper amendments that usually make the paper (in general) better. My point here is that the scientific community, while not the fastest mode of publication, have put into practice for a number of decades, a system that the rest of the world could learn from. Websites like Wikipedia have popped up in the last two decades or so which follow a very similar process of peer-reviewed submissions, and have revealed great results.
That is not to say the scientific world could not learn a thing or two from communications experts, with research papers going through an overzealous and tedious process which seems to be achievable in much fewer than three years (as required by Gavin of the realclimate blog) if more widely distributed to reviewers. Overall, I think that if scientists completely utilized the communicative abilities of the internet they could develop a system accepted by the entire world.
Main References:
Pisani, Elizabeth (2011) ‘Medical science will benefit from the research of crowds’, The Guardian, available online at, < http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/11/medical-research-data-sharing >
Schmidt, Gavin (2011) ‘From Blog to Science’, RealClimate, available online at < http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/02/from-blog-to-science/ >
Seed (2011) ‘On Science Transfer’, Seed, available online at < http://seedmagazine.com/content/print/on_science_transfer >
Thursday, 2 May 2013
Week 8 (Data/Transversally)
Before I start this blog, I just want to first say that my view of politics in general, and especially Australian politics, is one of not quite disgust or hatred but something close to both of them. This will probably show throughout my blog as I have a somewhat bleak and cynical view of how the government and people in power are "helping" the country.
The main topics for this week surrounding old and new media in politics, I find, aligns with my views as stated above. The first article "Against Transparency" by Lessig really outlined why I personally feel that the politics involved with people in power are almost completely untrustworthy and without an ulterior motive. Just one of the many examples Lessig gives, where he states "For more than three decades we have known the names of everyone who gives significant amounts to a federal campaign. Or at least we have "known" them". He continues "to this day, practical matters work against practical access.", furthering this with the example of the Senate's (U.S.) way of reporting this to the FEC through print, then electronically and then print again. What I'm trying to get at is that when looking at the government closely, which is already overly difficult, they seem to make a number of overly stringent rules for redundant areas completely halting any attempts at efficiency as well as the numerous signs pointing to corruption making it difficult to believe anything they say or reveal to us as truth.
On to Lessig's main point in the article against transparency (sorry but lame pun intended), he questions whether we truly want to see what lurks behind the shadows of politics, and "do we really want the world that they righteously envisage?". His example of the "climate bill" where committee members who voted yes received an average of about ten times as much as those who voted no, highlights the nature of those that govern us. The modern government has seen a dramatic change with the introduction of transparency laws, made easier with the current advancement of networking technologies like the internet. There have been numerous accusations, inquiries and "political deaths" throughout the course of increased transparency, and it remains to be seen whether the "transparency movement" will truly result in a 'better' government as well as a cleaner one.
Main References:
Lessig, Lawrence (2010) ‘Against Transparency: The perils of openness in government.’, available online at < http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/against-transparency?page=0,0 >
Styles, Catherine (2009) “A Government 2.0 idea – first, make all the functions visible’, available online at < http://catherinestyles.com/2009/06/28/a-government-2-0-idea/ >
The main topics for this week surrounding old and new media in politics, I find, aligns with my views as stated above. The first article "Against Transparency" by Lessig really outlined why I personally feel that the politics involved with people in power are almost completely untrustworthy and without an ulterior motive. Just one of the many examples Lessig gives, where he states "For more than three decades we have known the names of everyone who gives significant amounts to a federal campaign. Or at least we have "known" them". He continues "to this day, practical matters work against practical access.", furthering this with the example of the Senate's (U.S.) way of reporting this to the FEC through print, then electronically and then print again. What I'm trying to get at is that when looking at the government closely, which is already overly difficult, they seem to make a number of overly stringent rules for redundant areas completely halting any attempts at efficiency as well as the numerous signs pointing to corruption making it difficult to believe anything they say or reveal to us as truth.
On to Lessig's main point in the article against transparency (sorry but lame pun intended), he questions whether we truly want to see what lurks behind the shadows of politics, and "do we really want the world that they righteously envisage?". His example of the "climate bill" where committee members who voted yes received an average of about ten times as much as those who voted no, highlights the nature of those that govern us. The modern government has seen a dramatic change with the introduction of transparency laws, made easier with the current advancement of networking technologies like the internet. There have been numerous accusations, inquiries and "political deaths" throughout the course of increased transparency, and it remains to be seen whether the "transparency movement" will truly result in a 'better' government as well as a cleaner one.
Main References:
Lessig, Lawrence (2010) ‘Against Transparency: The perils of openness in government.’, available online at < http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/against-transparency?page=0,0 >
Styles, Catherine (2009) “A Government 2.0 idea – first, make all the functions visible’, available online at < http://catherinestyles.com/2009/06/28/a-government-2-0-idea/ >
Thursday, 18 April 2013
Week 6 (Augmented)
Data is everywhere, inclusive of the smallest movements or
habits we have to the encompassing the world and even the universe. The only
problem is collecting such vast amounts of data and presenting them in simpler
understandable graphics; and with the rise of technology, most of which is
focused on this issue, we have seen an explosion of data sets and infographics
in our everyday life. This has become so prevalent in our everyday life, with
graphs and graphics becoming an essential tool in presenting information, it
has become commonplace and taken for granted, sometimes even overlooked.
These tools, however, are very useful in that they help us
understand the ridiculous amounts of data that are produced and recorded every
minute. It helps us both understand and thus produce our own perspective of
what can be seen as a recorded version of reality. The most obvious instance of
this is virtual reality programs such as the ones discussed in my previous blog
post (the IDEO Labs video and the virtual hand experiment) as well as in
slightly more obscure uses like data of human movements and habits which are
used in virtual gaming worlds as well as personalised advertising and a host of
other examples involved with creating patterns and inferences based on recorded
data.
The examples given in Gary Wolf’s article “The Data-Driven
Life” (while on the more extreme end of the spectrum) really exemplify the modern
use of recording and using data in everyday life to better understand our
habits. This is where media comes in, with personalised profiles being cross
referenced with internet history, companies like Google and Facebook have quite
easily been able to produce search results and advertising tailored to each and
every one of our wants and needs (although the computer often gets it wrong). While
this may seem an invasion of privacy, it has also produced incredibly good
results with companies like Dunhumby Ltd which use data to predict when and how
people will shop, reporting a massive rise in profits.
There are, however, still a number of instances where data
has perhaps been overused, resulting in irrelevant or arbitrary data being
presented. A more personal example (and one of my pet peeves) is in sport
commentating (mainly in American sport) where ridiculously overglorified stats
that have no meaning or bearing are used to create completely baseless
inferences. These examples are becoming happening a lot less now, it seems as a
result of developing technology and experience with data; I guess it remains to
be seen whether we can properly filter the huge amounts of information we can
now record and how far this data can impede in our lives.
Main References:
Rogers, Simon (2011) ‘Data journalism at the Guardian: what is it and how do we do it?’, The Guardian, Datablog, available at < http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/28/data-journalism >
Quilty-Harper, Conrad (2010) ’10 ways data is changing how we live’, The Telegraph, available at, < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/7963311/10-ways-data-is-changing-how-we-live.html >
Wolf, Gary (2010) ‘The Data-Driven Life’, The New York Times, available at < http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/magazine/02self-measurement-t.html >
Friday, 12 April 2013
Week 5 (Meta Communication/Experience)
My first memory of virtual reality came from the arcade where my older brother stuck his head into a machine and started to move as if in his own world, which he was. However seven year old me had no clue what was happening and so just stood there and watched as he moved left and right responding to prompts unseen by the "real" world.
As virtual reality technology has improved, from books to movies to graphic work and art, so too has my interest in it, with a whole host of fantasy and online games creating new imagined worlds. It is quite interesting to think about these virtual "realities" and their impact on the world. One example that immediately comes to mind is an online game called "second life", very similar to 'the sims' however, much more in depth and immersive. Countless people have invested ridiculous amounts of time and money into this game, treating it as a higher priority than the 'real'; it had become their 'reality'. When looking at this example, I find myself leaning much further towards a technological determinist view where technology has literally taken over our lives.
This view was furthered when watching a number of the videos in the lecture where the virtual or augmented reality technology had completely ingrained itself into the subjects mind like in the Virtual Hand Illusion in which subjects felt as if the virtual hand was actually theirs. This video, along with the IDEO Labs 3D Immersion Technology video really hit me with the realisation that while the human body can adapt to perceptual changes quite quickly, it seems the mind can be very easily tricked; reality as I know it may not be 'real' but my perception of real.
On a more entertaining (and less existential) note, augmented reality has become the next big thing in the gaming world with consoles like the Wii and Xbox Kinect focusing on real world action translating to virtual reaction. This is slowly picking up in the mobile gaming world too, with games like Ingress which requires you to physically move to areas displayed on your mobile phone GPS to allow you to do actions in the game. There are also a number of features of augmented reality, like projection mapping, which have taken off in the art world. These conceptual artworks attempt to frame our senses and perception of the world we live in and attempt to make us question the way in which we view what reality is compared to the real.
Main References
Anon. (n.d.) ‘Augmented Reality’, Wikipedia Available online at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality >
Havens, John (2013) ‘The Impending Social Consequences of Augmented Reality’, Mashable, Available online at <http://mashable.com/2013/02/08/augmented-reality-future/ >
Luttik, Dane (2012) ‘Augmented Reality—Projection Mapping’. Available online at < http://vimeo.com/43385747 >
Mendes, Jeremy & Allison, Leanne (2012) Bear 71 Available online at <http://bear71.nfb.ca/#/bear71 >
As virtual reality technology has improved, from books to movies to graphic work and art, so too has my interest in it, with a whole host of fantasy and online games creating new imagined worlds. It is quite interesting to think about these virtual "realities" and their impact on the world. One example that immediately comes to mind is an online game called "second life", very similar to 'the sims' however, much more in depth and immersive. Countless people have invested ridiculous amounts of time and money into this game, treating it as a higher priority than the 'real'; it had become their 'reality'. When looking at this example, I find myself leaning much further towards a technological determinist view where technology has literally taken over our lives.
This view was furthered when watching a number of the videos in the lecture where the virtual or augmented reality technology had completely ingrained itself into the subjects mind like in the Virtual Hand Illusion in which subjects felt as if the virtual hand was actually theirs. This video, along with the IDEO Labs 3D Immersion Technology video really hit me with the realisation that while the human body can adapt to perceptual changes quite quickly, it seems the mind can be very easily tricked; reality as I know it may not be 'real' but my perception of real.
On a more entertaining (and less existential) note, augmented reality has become the next big thing in the gaming world with consoles like the Wii and Xbox Kinect focusing on real world action translating to virtual reaction. This is slowly picking up in the mobile gaming world too, with games like Ingress which requires you to physically move to areas displayed on your mobile phone GPS to allow you to do actions in the game. There are also a number of features of augmented reality, like projection mapping, which have taken off in the art world. These conceptual artworks attempt to frame our senses and perception of the world we live in and attempt to make us question the way in which we view what reality is compared to the real.
Main References
Anon. (n.d.) ‘Augmented Reality’, Wikipedia Available online at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality >
Havens, John (2013) ‘The Impending Social Consequences of Augmented Reality’, Mashable, Available online at <http://mashable.com/2013/02/08/augmented-reality-future/ >
Luttik, Dane (2012) ‘Augmented Reality—Projection Mapping’. Available online at < http://vimeo.com/43385747 >
Mendes, Jeremy & Allison, Leanne (2012) Bear 71 Available online at <http://bear71.nfb.ca/#/bear71 >
Saturday, 23 March 2013
Week 3 (Machinic)
This weeks readings on Media Ecology confused me quite a lot
with the various European and American readings combined with the multiple
theorists like Guattari, Mcluhan and Ong and their many critics. However, I feel
the easiest way for me to grasp even an inkling of this vast theorem is to
focus the North American perception which is more in line with McLuhan’s “the
medium is the message” which builds upon last week.
What particularly interested me this week was the way
McLuhan split history into four periods, the tribal, literate, print and
electronic ages. This somewhat simplified look that brought the focus to our
five primary senses beginning with hearing slowly making way to sight
throughout history, slowly ending in a convolution of almost all the senses in
the electronic age. When I mulled over this concept I found that technology
itself has not only become extensions of our human selves but also grown their
own senses. From buttons to heat sensors, the smart phone in particular has
grown to encompass both hearing and touch.
Think about Siri for a second; while coming with a number of
frustrating drawbacks, namely accent detection, it is perhaps one of the
earliest globally commercialised voice command technologies that is sure to evolve
in the future. This ‘app’ essentially gave the “living” sense of hearing to a
technology that was perhaps the sole outcome of convergence. Furthermore, the
smart phone and more recently the tablet PC, has hijacked the sense of touch.
Today, communication isn’t about how we ‘feel’ (asin touch), but rather, how we
obtain results by satisfying the devices sensors. It is as if humans have
become the ‘tools’, where, if your friend can’t use your touch screen it is
always the friend’s fail and not the devices.
When looking at all four of McLuhan’s ages, it seems the
next (or perhaps only) step is to cover the senses of smell and taste. This is somewhat
already in effect with a number of artworks (some of which are electronic) incorporating
smell as well as marketing campaigns for internet taste testing, for example
Pepsi’s somewhat failed attempt at a midcalorie soda the “Pepsi NEXT internet
taste test”. While in its infancy, these technologies are sure to evolve and
bring the senses of smell and taste streaming into our media governed world.
Main References:
Levinson, Paul (1997) ‘The First Digital Medium’ in Soft Edge; a natural history and future of the information revolution London: Routledge:11-20
‘Media Ecology’, Wikipedia, available at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology >
Anon. (2008) ‘The Three Ecologies – Felix Guattari’, Media Ecologies and Digital Activism: thoughts about change for a changing world. Available at <http://mediaecologies.wordpress.com/2008/10/07/the-three-ecologies-felix-guattari/ >
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)