As I sit here typing my Blog, I am one of two things. I am a producer, creating the content that is being streamed and published for you the reader. But at the same time, I am a user, using the medium of Blogs to further my education. The difficultly of classification now prevails, which one am I? And from an audience perspective, can an audience that is active with the content they use still be called simply an audience? The concept of audience implies some sort of passive consumption, a speaker (producer) sending out messages (products) to the masses (consumer), and there the link stops, or at most is reciprocated. So why is everything now more about the experience and interaction? I think the change started with the growth of the services industry, when marketers realised it was not a tangible product craved, but a wealth of intangible experience.
Since the conception of the internet the world has been awed, but what everyone craved was the chance to make their own mark, and now it is possible. The internet as we know it was not pumped out from raw materials by a conveyor belted manufacturer, instead million of users sitting in their offices, their loungerooms, in the park (on WiFi, of course) or in any other imaginable, and occupiable place has (or at least has the opportunity) to add to the building blocks creating the network of information that is the World Wide Web.
So here content in, equals content out. And the producer equals the consumer. The end result is of course the "produser", a term coined by Axel Bruns (2007), which accurately describes the dual functionality of the active consumer. But the process does not stop here. Each and every consumer adds to the content or information, building on and validating information. We are thus creating a collective knowledge base, maintained and improved by the users without centralised control (CSE 2008). The collation and re-communication of information was once thought of as the "bottleneck" that strangled information sharing. No more. The internet and its produsage capabilities have exponentially increased the ways that we can communicate and coordinate information, and at minimum has overcome the physical barriers blocking progress. The intellectual barriers are still to be addressed (CSE 2008).
So where is produsage actually operating in the real world? Take the social networking site that is SecondLife. Users of this software operate under an avatar, and their interactions within this online community build and enrich a virtual society. Effectively SecondLife is a funtioning and by all means legitimate community. The possibilities of what users can do is only limited by their imaginations and what they can actually create. And here lies the beauty of produsage, whilst all users are not equally skilled, they all have an equal opportunity to utilise and add to the community/system/project (Bruns 2007).
So, next time you log onto a web page, and have the chance to modify or add your own content; DO IT. Experience the produsage phenomenon. Chances are you already have. The consumer has always been right (so the saying goes), now the consumer can be king.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Passively progress through this thought if you dare!
Some random thoughts:
Mindlessness, that's the way I feel lately. Is mindlessness even a feeling? I mean it has no effect on the senses, and in fact if the senses were being stimulated it wouldn't be mindless now would it? Anyway where am I going with this? Probably nowhere so either bare with me or skip on to the next thought. Your choice. Ah, choice, what a grand concept. It gives us so many options yet simultaneously closes so many others. But choice implies thinking, and thinking implies use of the mind. So back to my mindlessness.
I had a revelation the other day, nothing that emancipates the soul, or achieved a Buddha like enlightenment for me, but a revelation none-the-less. I'm a passive progressive. (Axel gets his term, so this is my concept).
Contemporary life is so fast-paced nowadays that it seems to follow Moore's Law, as computer power doubles capacity every 18 months life itself seems to struggle to keep up. And when we try to slow ourselves down we inadvertently find ourselves living in the dark ages, and behind the times. So with all the new capabilities and wonders that are easing the stress of our lives are we actually achieving the opposite? With the capability to cram more into life, we do! Living life to the most we call it. But this has been my downfall, my brain, intrinsically linked to that of the apes (evolution, look it up!), simply cannot be upgraded, it does not run at a gigahertz speed and my memory is absolutely shot. I mean it certainly is Random Access Memory (RAM), but not in terms that electronics use... simply put it is random, not necessarily accessible. The pressures of life have overloaded my wires, and thus now I rely on my phone planner, my Facebook 'events', my digital calendar, and electronic alarm clock to keep me running. Half (or so it seems) of my life is stored on a USB 'nerd-stick' that takes up less space than a folded-up photograph. So I have become passive in my life, I live through my gadgets, they dictate what I do and where I go, when I go and how I work out how I'm getting there. My life is progressing passively. I'm a passive progressive, and finding the reigns again seems like a daunting task. I'm scared that the car speedo will no longer read as Km/h, but in volts or terahertz. I'm scared that my photos are stored as millions of 1's and 0's, and not on fading sepia-tone paper.
So am I bagging out technology here? NO! let me make that clear. The wonders that we are achieving are fantastic, and indeed life is improving, but we cannot do it all. Try, yes; but achieve not so much and perhaps this is the concept I need to understand. It is me, the monkey, controlling the keyboard, not the keyboard controlling the monkey.
Mindlessness, that's the way I feel lately. Is mindlessness even a feeling? I mean it has no effect on the senses, and in fact if the senses were being stimulated it wouldn't be mindless now would it? Anyway where am I going with this? Probably nowhere so either bare with me or skip on to the next thought. Your choice. Ah, choice, what a grand concept. It gives us so many options yet simultaneously closes so many others. But choice implies thinking, and thinking implies use of the mind. So back to my mindlessness.
I had a revelation the other day, nothing that emancipates the soul, or achieved a Buddha like enlightenment for me, but a revelation none-the-less. I'm a passive progressive. (Axel gets his term, so this is my concept).
Contemporary life is so fast-paced nowadays that it seems to follow Moore's Law, as computer power doubles capacity every 18 months life itself seems to struggle to keep up. And when we try to slow ourselves down we inadvertently find ourselves living in the dark ages, and behind the times. So with all the new capabilities and wonders that are easing the stress of our lives are we actually achieving the opposite? With the capability to cram more into life, we do! Living life to the most we call it. But this has been my downfall, my brain, intrinsically linked to that of the apes (evolution, look it up!), simply cannot be upgraded, it does not run at a gigahertz speed and my memory is absolutely shot. I mean it certainly is Random Access Memory (RAM), but not in terms that electronics use... simply put it is random, not necessarily accessible. The pressures of life have overloaded my wires, and thus now I rely on my phone planner, my Facebook 'events', my digital calendar, and electronic alarm clock to keep me running. Half (or so it seems) of my life is stored on a USB 'nerd-stick' that takes up less space than a folded-up photograph. So I have become passive in my life, I live through my gadgets, they dictate what I do and where I go, when I go and how I work out how I'm getting there. My life is progressing passively. I'm a passive progressive, and finding the reigns again seems like a daunting task. I'm scared that the car speedo will no longer read as Km/h, but in volts or terahertz. I'm scared that my photos are stored as millions of 1's and 0's, and not on fading sepia-tone paper.
So am I bagging out technology here? NO! let me make that clear. The wonders that we are achieving are fantastic, and indeed life is improving, but we cannot do it all. Try, yes; but achieve not so much and perhaps this is the concept I need to understand. It is me, the monkey, controlling the keyboard, not the keyboard controlling the monkey.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Internet Salesman, but wait, theres more...
I was going to take an advertising perspective within this blog, but it soon turenoud out that my tastes are so eclectic in this subject that the matter simply kept getting pushed aside. So here are some really interesting links to look at. They encompass the future of advertising as the world of promotion collides in an spectacular way with the world of the internet via convergence. Enjoy.
Web 2.0 and how YOU can advertise and win! Try YUWIE -its members get paid... A radical new age take on how to earn money, and how advertisiers are aware of decreasing foot-traffic, but increased 'click-traffic'.
Yuwie-Info.com, How to Make Money on a Social Network!
A professionals ideas on what Web 2.0 advertsing does for a business.
Boost your Business with Web 2.0 Advertising
Web 2.0 and how YOU can advertise and win! Try YUWIE -its members get paid... A radical new age take on how to earn money, and how advertisiers are aware of decreasing foot-traffic, but increased 'click-traffic'.
Yuwie-Info.com, How to Make Money on a Social Network!
A professionals ideas on what Web 2.0 advertsing does for a business.
Boost your Business with Web 2.0 Advertising
This one is my favorite. I think it absolutely epitomises the effect of internet not only on culture but also advertising. A look at the real strategies that promoters can take in our new media world. An eye opening look at the future, Highly Reccomeneded.
Leo Burnett / Arc Predictions, Future Trends in Advertising
Not only did these give me some opitimism, they also spawned some pessimistic views aswell, which I hope to address at a later date, so unitl then. This is me signing out.
The Long-Tail, not to be short lived!
Do you like the hits? Do they dominate your playlist? Is the latest hit the only thing you care about? If you answered yes to all of the above then read no further, but you may be disappointed if you chose to stop now.
I am willing to bet that there is at least one song in your collection that falls outside the mainstream. Am I correct? Then if so read on and I shall explain the future of marketing, advertising and retail that is bound to get your attention.
Just this week I purchased a DVD that I had never heard of, and probably never would have, had it not been for a recommendation. But this recommendation came not from a friend, instead Amazon.com informed me that "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought". Intrigued I clicked and read on. Low-and-behold my vast DVD viewing experience horizons have broadened, and this is only because Amazon.com allowed me to dig through the bargain bin of hits, to reach the bottom of the pile. There are countless other ways that the "long-tail" operates.
So what explains this process?
It is the futuristic concept of a "long-tail" which exists within almost all products of popular culture and consumption. In basic form, the "long-tail" comprises of the misses which never got recognised by the masses. The never reached No.1 status and as such were overlooked and under supplied, but does this make them any less consumable, or of lesser quality or worthiness? No, it most certainly does not. The lack of recognition is merely a loss to the mass market, but the niche market opens up an entirely new realm to deal with. Chris Anderson has been a pioneer in the exploration of the 'Long-Tail'.
According to Anderson, the hit driven market requires shelf space and market prominence. So, it is perhaps the internet which allows the "long-tail" to operate at its most effective. Without the need for shelf space, maintenance, sales promotion and lacking in actual physicality; digital commerce expands our choices immensely. The internet has a capability that is only dreamt about within the physical realm. The vast collating and databasing capacities of the internet links everything. So now you or I can say "I like this, this and this", the data is collated and virtual 'tastes' are created. People can now be informed of what others who liked this product, also liked. So the virtual world is limitless, or at least in conceivable terms. There is a plethora of content on the internet, essentially a click away, and if the right mechanism directs us down the correct path, we find the products we probably weren't looking for but we want, or at least are interested in. We find our own niche.
So back to my original example on the music community. The masses are not to be the dictators any more, the eclectic and non-average consumer is king. The demand for the obscure has always been there, but only now do we have a platform to service that demand. Whilst the bricks-and-mortar retailers deal with the masses, the "long-tail" handles the rest, and the rest is a big market, whilst sales volumes may not be high for each item individually, on aggregate the misses match and sometimes even outsell the hits. Does this make them Number 1? Quite possibly.
I am willing to bet that there is at least one song in your collection that falls outside the mainstream. Am I correct? Then if so read on and I shall explain the future of marketing, advertising and retail that is bound to get your attention.
Just this week I purchased a DVD that I had never heard of, and probably never would have, had it not been for a recommendation. But this recommendation came not from a friend, instead Amazon.com informed me that "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought". Intrigued I clicked and read on. Low-and-behold my vast DVD viewing experience horizons have broadened, and this is only because Amazon.com allowed me to dig through the bargain bin of hits, to reach the bottom of the pile. There are countless other ways that the "long-tail" operates.
So what explains this process?
It is the futuristic concept of a "long-tail" which exists within almost all products of popular culture and consumption. In basic form, the "long-tail" comprises of the misses which never got recognised by the masses. The never reached No.1 status and as such were overlooked and under supplied, but does this make them any less consumable, or of lesser quality or worthiness? No, it most certainly does not. The lack of recognition is merely a loss to the mass market, but the niche market opens up an entirely new realm to deal with. Chris Anderson has been a pioneer in the exploration of the 'Long-Tail'.
According to Anderson, the hit driven market requires shelf space and market prominence. So, it is perhaps the internet which allows the "long-tail" to operate at its most effective. Without the need for shelf space, maintenance, sales promotion and lacking in actual physicality; digital commerce expands our choices immensely. The internet has a capability that is only dreamt about within the physical realm. The vast collating and databasing capacities of the internet links everything. So now you or I can say "I like this, this and this", the data is collated and virtual 'tastes' are created. People can now be informed of what others who liked this product, also liked. So the virtual world is limitless, or at least in conceivable terms. There is a plethora of content on the internet, essentially a click away, and if the right mechanism directs us down the correct path, we find the products we probably weren't looking for but we want, or at least are interested in. We find our own niche.
So back to my original example on the music community. The masses are not to be the dictators any more, the eclectic and non-average consumer is king. The demand for the obscure has always been there, but only now do we have a platform to service that demand. Whilst the bricks-and-mortar retailers deal with the masses, the "long-tail" handles the rest, and the rest is a big market, whilst sales volumes may not be high for each item individually, on aggregate the misses match and sometimes even outsell the hits. Does this make them Number 1? Quite possibly.
Facebook faux par!
To truly understand the context of this rant I suggest you read Axel's Snurblog:
Social Networks on Ning: A Sensible Alternative to Facebook
And the comments attached.
I'm noticing a trend with Axel and Facebook, he hates it and its popularity, and he believes that there are many better alternatives out there... Ok, yes that is probably true and a very valid argument has been made. By no means do I mean to sound cynical of Axel's argument. But in-fact at first I did indeed disagree quite strongly with his viewpoint. I felt that he simply was not 'into' the whole social networking scene, and therefore did not appreciate the software for what it is. But since my first viewing Elyse has fronted the issue of Facebook friendship, much in the same manner that I too would have tackled the issue. She posted the comment that I was too busy (perhaps read gutless) to do. But, and here is the clincher, I was not prepared for the come-back that Axel would post. He is right. Facebook simply is not the 'best' out there, it's damn close, but still it misses the mark. I am sure that other issues like limited profiles, and friend groups and the likes all come into play but it simply doesn't reach the mark of where we want to be. But can you blame it, I mean really both Facebook and MySpace are really fledglings in the great online social networking sphere, so who are we to get angry at them. Instead it is us the merely need to develop the better alternatives or additives that these programs need, ahh the beauty of open software and web 2.0. Anyway I could rant for hours here and this is not where I first imagined this blog taking me, so now I digress to maybe one-day come back and finish this part... another one of the great capabilities of produsage and the internet... its never finished! So how do we know when we're done?
Anyway what I really wanted to bring to light here is what I think is the main reason behind the success of Facebook and MySpace, and the failure of the rest (that I am sure are out there). They lack flair! Attention and marketability. Sadly that is what everything is about nowadays, unless its marketable, then sorry it ain't gonna sell. No way will anything unmarketable find its way into the hearts and minds of those who care. Sad but true; or so it seems. Facebook and MySpace have it made, they don't need to identify the niche markets, we do it for them! Our demographics are plainly and nakedly laid out for the corporate promoter to purvey, and exploit as they see fit. And the great thing is they know it is going directly to their identified target market. Any social networking site that doesn't have this, the ones that are truly designed for the users, are left in the 'bargain bin'. They are perceived as cheap and inferior quality alternatives that should be avoided in case they carry germs. Without promotional backing, sheer prominence cannot be achieved.
People, it's time! I love my Facebook and my MySpace, but perhaps it is time to start searching for greener pastures. Lets just hope the sheep-like promoters don't follow.
(Can anyone else notice the irony here, especially given that I am an advertising student???)
So yes I feel to avoid claims of hypocrisy, YES, I do also think this is an amazing advancement in the advertising world, and if, and only IF, it is used correctly, I think this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship... Do you accept?
Social Networks on Ning: A Sensible Alternative to Facebook
And the comments attached.
I'm noticing a trend with Axel and Facebook, he hates it and its popularity, and he believes that there are many better alternatives out there... Ok, yes that is probably true and a very valid argument has been made. By no means do I mean to sound cynical of Axel's argument. But in-fact at first I did indeed disagree quite strongly with his viewpoint. I felt that he simply was not 'into' the whole social networking scene, and therefore did not appreciate the software for what it is. But since my first viewing Elyse has fronted the issue of Facebook friendship, much in the same manner that I too would have tackled the issue. She posted the comment that I was too busy (perhaps read gutless) to do. But, and here is the clincher, I was not prepared for the come-back that Axel would post. He is right. Facebook simply is not the 'best' out there, it's damn close, but still it misses the mark. I am sure that other issues like limited profiles, and friend groups and the likes all come into play but it simply doesn't reach the mark of where we want to be. But can you blame it, I mean really both Facebook and MySpace are really fledglings in the great online social networking sphere, so who are we to get angry at them. Instead it is us the merely need to develop the better alternatives or additives that these programs need, ahh the beauty of open software and web 2.0. Anyway I could rant for hours here and this is not where I first imagined this blog taking me, so now I digress to maybe one-day come back and finish this part... another one of the great capabilities of produsage and the internet... its never finished! So how do we know when we're done?
Anyway what I really wanted to bring to light here is what I think is the main reason behind the success of Facebook and MySpace, and the failure of the rest (that I am sure are out there). They lack flair! Attention and marketability. Sadly that is what everything is about nowadays, unless its marketable, then sorry it ain't gonna sell. No way will anything unmarketable find its way into the hearts and minds of those who care. Sad but true; or so it seems. Facebook and MySpace have it made, they don't need to identify the niche markets, we do it for them! Our demographics are plainly and nakedly laid out for the corporate promoter to purvey, and exploit as they see fit. And the great thing is they know it is going directly to their identified target market. Any social networking site that doesn't have this, the ones that are truly designed for the users, are left in the 'bargain bin'. They are perceived as cheap and inferior quality alternatives that should be avoided in case they carry germs. Without promotional backing, sheer prominence cannot be achieved.
People, it's time! I love my Facebook and my MySpace, but perhaps it is time to start searching for greener pastures. Lets just hope the sheep-like promoters don't follow.
(Can anyone else notice the irony here, especially given that I am an advertising student???)
So yes I feel to avoid claims of hypocrisy, YES, I do also think this is an amazing advancement in the advertising world, and if, and only IF, it is used correctly, I think this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship... Do you accept?
Monday, April 21, 2008
The Hyper(active) Local
The neighbourhood was once a network of streets. Then telephony bridged the gaps and brought us closer. Then the internet. And now with Wi-Fi capabilities there is no single section of the grid that has been left untouched, or inaccessible. Alex Iskold (2007) notes that users now interact with their local environment in ways never thought possible. They will blog about what it "feels" like to be in a particular locality, people will record "countless hours" and bytes of photography and video of their surroundings.
The content is uploaded and something very peculiar is happening with it. Users are tagging their information, geotagging to be precise, and very precise it is. Information can now be pinpointed down to its exact latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates. The national news no longer covers our thirst for local information; the newspaper is too broad also. So locals are now turning to information that is truly local, hyperlocal in fact. This hyperlocalisation of information possesses one particular quality that other information simply cannot mimic. Relevance. And it is this capacity which is seeing its surge in popularity through the wires.
Advertisers too, have noticed the relevance factor of hyperlocal information. Iskold (2007) notes that the humble classified adverts have long joined the local community, but the online world is fast catching up; it applies these principles to not only sales, but information, image, video, and text alike. Information now reaches the community who most need it, or find it relevant. The process is now taken even further still, and with the capacity to include vertical lines of research, linked to the data we are looking at, hyperlocalised information is our one-stop-shop.
With the creation of local media, there must of course be the local network of creators and users adding to the log of available data. But these creators no longer wish to operate in isolation. And so we have sent he rise of social networking sites; but these too are now hyperlocal, and rather than connecting the masses, they connect the proximate community. Take StreetAdvisor for example; users are able to rate their street and neighbourhood, exposing their thoughts, and be notified of events. They are truly involved in their community. Gone are the days of the bickering and private neighbour, and here is the day of the active and localised citizen.
Boyles (2008) recognises that the traditional sender/receiver communication model has been redefined, and that this is to do with the blurring of the lines between the “publisher, producer, distributor, consumer and reviewer”. No longer are these separate entities but individuals one in the same. Bruns (2008) describes the rise of the active consumer as “produsage”; the trend for consumers to create the content that they wish to use and interact with, which lies at the heart of the hyperlocal media surge.
As the globalisation phenomenon continues, the networks proliferate, and data and information is consistently barraged to the online environment. But with the spread of our connections, comes the hyperlocalisation of media. We crave what is relevant, we crave proximate information, and we crave localised involvement. So as technology breaks down the walls of geographical segregation, we maintain at least figurative boundaries, tying ourselves and our information to a specific geography. Becoming hyper(active) locals.
The content is uploaded and something very peculiar is happening with it. Users are tagging their information, geotagging to be precise, and very precise it is. Information can now be pinpointed down to its exact latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates. The national news no longer covers our thirst for local information; the newspaper is too broad also. So locals are now turning to information that is truly local, hyperlocal in fact. This hyperlocalisation of information possesses one particular quality that other information simply cannot mimic. Relevance. And it is this capacity which is seeing its surge in popularity through the wires.
Advertisers too, have noticed the relevance factor of hyperlocal information. Iskold (2007) notes that the humble classified adverts have long joined the local community, but the online world is fast catching up; it applies these principles to not only sales, but information, image, video, and text alike. Information now reaches the community who most need it, or find it relevant. The process is now taken even further still, and with the capacity to include vertical lines of research, linked to the data we are looking at, hyperlocalised information is our one-stop-shop.
With the creation of local media, there must of course be the local network of creators and users adding to the log of available data. But these creators no longer wish to operate in isolation. And so we have sent he rise of social networking sites; but these too are now hyperlocal, and rather than connecting the masses, they connect the proximate community. Take StreetAdvisor for example; users are able to rate their street and neighbourhood, exposing their thoughts, and be notified of events. They are truly involved in their community. Gone are the days of the bickering and private neighbour, and here is the day of the active and localised citizen.
Boyles (2008) recognises that the traditional sender/receiver communication model has been redefined, and that this is to do with the blurring of the lines between the “publisher, producer, distributor, consumer and reviewer”. No longer are these separate entities but individuals one in the same. Bruns (2008) describes the rise of the active consumer as “produsage”; the trend for consumers to create the content that they wish to use and interact with, which lies at the heart of the hyperlocal media surge.
As the globalisation phenomenon continues, the networks proliferate, and data and information is consistently barraged to the online environment. But with the spread of our connections, comes the hyperlocalisation of media. We crave what is relevant, we crave proximate information, and we crave localised involvement. So as technology breaks down the walls of geographical segregation, we maintain at least figurative boundaries, tying ourselves and our information to a specific geography. Becoming hyper(active) locals.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Round one is Web1.0 vs. Web2.0!
So this time the question posed is: How is Web 2.0 different to Web 1.0? And this time the question is not posed by me, but to me, and instead I shall endeavour to explore an answer.
Perhaps first of all we need to define a way to think about the two variables. Web 1.0 is better considered a delivery medium, something we can sit and passively consume. Web 2.0 on the otherhand is an environment, in every definition of the word. Web 2.0, as the numbering system suggests, is the next level in Web interaction and development. Rather than being user-read information, Web 2.0 supports the concept of "user-led content content creation" (Bruns, 2008). Axel Bruns terms this interactive relationship we have within the Web 2.0 environment "produsage", meaning that we, as consumers and users, are also the producers of the content. A specifically useful example is that of social networking software such as Facebook and MySpace, the content is created purely for the use and consumption of their users, by their users. Web 2.0 is a platform for development, so to speak, entrusting creation to the users, and merely provides the functions for them to do so. It is widely believed that such collaborative mediums have germinated the spread of creativity and information sharing. Jenkins (2008) believes that such platforms are leading to the collective intelligence of society.
At essence Web 2.0 stands above Web 1.0, not merely in numerical ranking, but also in usability. Web 2.0, we truly do use, that is we interact and create AND consume, not simply consume. The debate that 2.0 is not a new World Wide Web, but simply utilises the technology and concepts of 1.0 are warranted; this is essentially true, but in doing so Web 1.0 has slipped into the world of the obsolete. Web 1.0 is dead, as a new media medium anyway. It serves merely the purpose to deliver our Web 2.0 capabilities to us. Long live the possibilities of 2.0, and oh the possibilities that Web 3.0 could deliver should it ever be considered and conceived.
Perhaps first of all we need to define a way to think about the two variables. Web 1.0 is better considered a delivery medium, something we can sit and passively consume. Web 2.0 on the otherhand is an environment, in every definition of the word. Web 2.0, as the numbering system suggests, is the next level in Web interaction and development. Rather than being user-read information, Web 2.0 supports the concept of "user-led content content creation" (Bruns, 2008). Axel Bruns terms this interactive relationship we have within the Web 2.0 environment "produsage", meaning that we, as consumers and users, are also the producers of the content. A specifically useful example is that of social networking software such as Facebook and MySpace, the content is created purely for the use and consumption of their users, by their users. Web 2.0 is a platform for development, so to speak, entrusting creation to the users, and merely provides the functions for them to do so. It is widely believed that such collaborative mediums have germinated the spread of creativity and information sharing. Jenkins (2008) believes that such platforms are leading to the collective intelligence of society.
At essence Web 2.0 stands above Web 1.0, not merely in numerical ranking, but also in usability. Web 2.0, we truly do use, that is we interact and create AND consume, not simply consume. The debate that 2.0 is not a new World Wide Web, but simply utilises the technology and concepts of 1.0 are warranted; this is essentially true, but in doing so Web 1.0 has slipped into the world of the obsolete. Web 1.0 is dead, as a new media medium anyway. It serves merely the purpose to deliver our Web 2.0 capabilities to us. Long live the possibilities of 2.0, and oh the possibilities that Web 3.0 could deliver should it ever be considered and conceived.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
We're all online, and we are a community, so we've socially networked right?
It was a funny realisation I had today, and that is that we have created an online community here in blogger.com. The KCB201 class has been duped, and in a very clever way. MySpace offers a section for us to post a blog and it never took off, but here in a community where we are forced, or at least guided to embrace the technology, we thrive. Strange. What has made us so adept and quick to sift through the billions of bytes flying around on blogger.com to come together? I think it's because the electronic networking gene has symbiotically attached itself to our DNA, and that has created this phenonmenon. Or perhaps we just like to see what everyone else thinks. Will blogger.com now takeover Facebook etc???... Doubtful, but the possibility is there, and scary all at the same time. How quickly we appropriate a technology for our own means. Ahh the beauty of the online-kingdom. That's all I have, it's just an observation.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Is it all about laziness?
So once again I open with a question. Is it all about laziness?
What? I hear you ask. The social-networking phenomenon comes my reply.
I was having some thoughts while lunching, so here comes another purely personal opinion theory post. I promise the academic posts will come soon.
But back to my point. Social networking sites. MySpace and Facebook. Laziness I tell you. That's why we love them. The academic arguments often focus on the new media aspects, creative and participatory nature of these platforms, but this is not what has caused their worldwide success. NO. Sure we love what we can do on these things but more on that later.
Everyone craves the attention and interaction of friendship, in some form or another. And in modern times we have the classical face-to-face, mobile, email, telephony and many, many other means of communication. But why use these when we can simply stay in the one place and accomplish it all. Humans at essence are lazy, and this boils down to economics (not the monetary, but the time based economics). The computer, it's the multi delivery platform. Who needs to move from that one magic spot in front of the widescreen flat panel monitor, when here you have it all at your fingertips, literally? Why order takeout over the phone, online ordering and delivery eliminates being put on hold and annoying message repetition and confusion? Why go find the mp3 player, or switch on the radio, when it streams directly and your hard drive holds some 200GB of song which can play for weeks without repeating a single song, not even once? Why watch TV at the times set by the station? Just YouTube it, or stream you favourite program over the net.
Anyway to come to my main point why SMS your friends (that's somewhere in the vicinity of 20cents your spending right there), or calling them (either on the mobile, or the landline - more money and time)? Why webcam them, putting up with the lag and embarrassment?
WE DON'T! No need to anymore, the social networking site has covered it all. We can keep our butt firmly planted in the highback leather chair that is our throne infront of the portal. With a simple click we are part of our friends lives. Don't really feel like talking? Don't worry, send a pre-programmed message, emoticon, picture or anything. Forget having to exert yourself. Update your status and let them know how you feel and what's going on in your head. All the while we can multitask, do the homework, book some flights, listen to a new album (from iTunes of course) and watch lasts nights episode of the current popular TV series. We haven't even moved from our desk, or wherever we so happen to be with our laptop. And do our friends care, NOPE. They are happy you used that small amount of effort to contact them, and when they could be bothered they'll get back to you. A beautiful relationship, don't you think? And don't forget we do still have face-to-face contact whenever we want, so the love is definitely not lost. But as busy individuals, laziness prevails.
Any why? Time poverty, that why. Who has enough time*?. But I also ask you this. If I gave you 10 words to associate with social networking sites, what would those words be? I'm willing to almost guarantee that 'youth' and perhaps 'student/university' fit into these words, if not explicitly then at least via association with one of your choice words. That's right we are the lazy-busy generation. An oxymoronic mix of time guided individuals. We need ways to stay in touch.
* See my theories on time in "Brendam's Theorem of Consideration"
Sure, the new ways we can communicate on these things are all amazing and cool, but in the end they are just a bright and shiny new toy. What really grabs us, what their drawing card is, is their ease of use and time saving capabilities. We can expose ourselves, or who we want to be, and interact when the time suits us and when we could actually be bothered. And then even if we couldn't be bothered why not do a generic "Hi, how are you?" and 'send to all'. There everyone is happy. I just hope the happiness prevails.
I hope this did not come across overly pessimistic, for that was not my intention. It was just a crazy thought that popped into my head and I wanted to express it. (Therefore I have completely ignored my own theory on laziness). I took time out to complete this. But nonetheless I think laziness fuels our addiction. And soon the cliche interview reply will be "Don't call us, we'll MySpace you".
What? I hear you ask. The social-networking phenomenon comes my reply.
I was having some thoughts while lunching, so here comes another purely personal opinion theory post. I promise the academic posts will come soon.
But back to my point. Social networking sites. MySpace and Facebook. Laziness I tell you. That's why we love them. The academic arguments often focus on the new media aspects, creative and participatory nature of these platforms, but this is not what has caused their worldwide success. NO. Sure we love what we can do on these things but more on that later.
Everyone craves the attention and interaction of friendship, in some form or another. And in modern times we have the classical face-to-face, mobile, email, telephony and many, many other means of communication. But why use these when we can simply stay in the one place and accomplish it all. Humans at essence are lazy, and this boils down to economics (not the monetary, but the time based economics). The computer, it's the multi delivery platform. Who needs to move from that one magic spot in front of the widescreen flat panel monitor, when here you have it all at your fingertips, literally? Why order takeout over the phone, online ordering and delivery eliminates being put on hold and annoying message repetition and confusion? Why go find the mp3 player, or switch on the radio, when it streams directly and your hard drive holds some 200GB of song which can play for weeks without repeating a single song, not even once? Why watch TV at the times set by the station? Just YouTube it, or stream you favourite program over the net.
Anyway to come to my main point why SMS your friends (that's somewhere in the vicinity of 20cents your spending right there), or calling them (either on the mobile, or the landline - more money and time)? Why webcam them, putting up with the lag and embarrassment?
WE DON'T! No need to anymore, the social networking site has covered it all. We can keep our butt firmly planted in the highback leather chair that is our throne infront of the portal. With a simple click we are part of our friends lives. Don't really feel like talking? Don't worry, send a pre-programmed message, emoticon, picture or anything. Forget having to exert yourself. Update your status and let them know how you feel and what's going on in your head. All the while we can multitask, do the homework, book some flights, listen to a new album (from iTunes of course) and watch lasts nights episode of the current popular TV series. We haven't even moved from our desk, or wherever we so happen to be with our laptop. And do our friends care, NOPE. They are happy you used that small amount of effort to contact them, and when they could be bothered they'll get back to you. A beautiful relationship, don't you think? And don't forget we do still have face-to-face contact whenever we want, so the love is definitely not lost. But as busy individuals, laziness prevails.
Any why? Time poverty, that why. Who has enough time*?. But I also ask you this. If I gave you 10 words to associate with social networking sites, what would those words be? I'm willing to almost guarantee that 'youth' and perhaps 'student/university' fit into these words, if not explicitly then at least via association with one of your choice words. That's right we are the lazy-busy generation. An oxymoronic mix of time guided individuals. We need ways to stay in touch.
* See my theories on time in "Brendam's Theorem of Consideration"
Sure, the new ways we can communicate on these things are all amazing and cool, but in the end they are just a bright and shiny new toy. What really grabs us, what their drawing card is, is their ease of use and time saving capabilities. We can expose ourselves, or who we want to be, and interact when the time suits us and when we could actually be bothered. And then even if we couldn't be bothered why not do a generic "Hi, how are you?" and 'send to all'. There everyone is happy. I just hope the happiness prevails.
I hope this did not come across overly pessimistic, for that was not my intention. It was just a crazy thought that popped into my head and I wanted to express it. (Therefore I have completely ignored my own theory on laziness). I took time out to complete this. But nonetheless I think laziness fuels our addiction. And soon the cliche interview reply will be "Don't call us, we'll MySpace you".
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Brendam's Theorum of Consideration
Well what to write here?...
That is a most interesting question!
As I sit here the possibilities race through my mind. Do I start with the boring old introductory stuff that seems to pre-empt an AA meeting, like, "Hi my name is Brendan and I'm a first time blogger"...
Or do I begin with something smart, witty and cool? So that you feel the need to read on, and develop an addiction for the fantastic words coming out of my mouth, via the keyboard. Or any other number of weird and wonderful things that could just crazily pop into my often bipolar and eclectic mind.
Then of course there is the consideration of relevance, do I run with something about my mundane life-chores, and perhaps convert it to a small screen epic? Which of course you as the reader may find interesting at most and completely utterly boring and lost time at the least.
Then again I could of course become all nerdy and answer the questions of life, or at least something academic, analysing and developing theories (which could be conspiracy in nature) and discussing their relevance, credence or trash worthiness.
But alas I still sit here and wonder, why can I not seem to find anything to write when the possibilities are endless. The medium is here and teasingly offering to be the vector to convey my messages. Is it because this is part of a university assignment (yep you read correct), and I as a 'creative industries' student feel bound by rules and parameters? Or is it merely writers block, have I lost the drive and passion once felt? I guess this is something only uncovered from delving deep into the subconscious fogs of my mind through self-analysis, or extreme therapy! Preferably an option that should be avoided at all costs. Is it that the timing is just not right yet for inspired written word?
Time, its an interesting concept. Does it only exist because we as humans need a basis to organisational structure. Is it an all guiding phenomenon and pursuasive power that either pushes us into the inescapable forward motion of the future; never allowing for an exit on any enjoyed platform, a one-way eternal train ride running express? Or is it a mean presence, stealing from us the opportunity of something that could have been done or enjoyed or experienced, for if this is not the case, then why do we have time wasted?
But now i digress, and the mind once again fall into blankness. What is blankness of the mind? Does the mind (different to the brain) actually momentarily stop working, like a surge in the power grid? Or is it a state of uncertainty, a moment of seemingly perpetual confusion? This I suppose is a debate of personal opinion, and therefore limitless in its answers.
So now I ask, how like you this?
Was this in fact that 'something' that I longed to write about? But how could you answer 'yes', when it is mere consideration of what to write, and without actually reaching a conclusive point? Does that not make this all speculation, and something that the mind works through in preparation of actually writing that 'something'? Surely we cannot consider poignant deliberation a worthy entry? For writing about what to write does not actually achieve that written thing. Therefore is this a pointless process? I hope not, but the answer is somewhat ambiguous.
Ambiguity. Can anything actually be ambiguous? Because we as readers, or responders depending on the format, draw our own conclusions. Generally we successfully acknowledge the point of where the messenger is heading. That implies clarity does it not? Yes, though the process is longer it is certain clarity in the end. Or am I talking crap? That is another consideration of personal contemplation. Without social comparison we lack the confirmation we desire to gauge accuracy. Once again I have digressed, which brings other questions... These I think are far more easily answered and considered.
Through contemplation of what to write; we digress and find other things to mull over. Are these in fact what the mind wants us to explore, and thus we have found our muse, though we consciously ignore and miss these signs? I think yes. But the mind is complex, and at times distracted, so relevance often lacks, which is why we miss these flashing and fluorescent indications, ignorance of distraction sifts this as useless information.
So in what was supposed to be a small introductory offering to you, the reader, I think I have exceeded guided word limit by at least 300 words, one of those pre-mentioned parameters, stunting creation. And yet I never did reach an actual conclusion of a worthy topic for this, nor did I actually introduce myself. You may have made assumptions about me but they were never confirmed, and after all this could all simply be an act. For all you know I am a monkey locked in a room randomly hitting letters on a keyboard; who through sheer luck of probability is creating readable data . Only further blogs may expose the entity on the other side of the digital wall separating us, and only then the information is what I choose to expose, thus is it my true self that you get to know? We shall have to wait and see. So having ignored the purpose of this activity does that mean I have failed?
Failure, is this interpretation of knowing how people should interpret, and thus, answer a question? Now that is something that opens many more questions... Questions... Are these all I shall offer? I guess that is something that will be answered as time goes by... Whatever time is of course.
That is a most interesting question!
As I sit here the possibilities race through my mind. Do I start with the boring old introductory stuff that seems to pre-empt an AA meeting, like, "Hi my name is Brendan and I'm a first time blogger"...
Or do I begin with something smart, witty and cool? So that you feel the need to read on, and develop an addiction for the fantastic words coming out of my mouth, via the keyboard. Or any other number of weird and wonderful things that could just crazily pop into my often bipolar and eclectic mind.
Then of course there is the consideration of relevance, do I run with something about my mundane life-chores, and perhaps convert it to a small screen epic? Which of course you as the reader may find interesting at most and completely utterly boring and lost time at the least.
Then again I could of course become all nerdy and answer the questions of life, or at least something academic, analysing and developing theories (which could be conspiracy in nature) and discussing their relevance, credence or trash worthiness.
But alas I still sit here and wonder, why can I not seem to find anything to write when the possibilities are endless. The medium is here and teasingly offering to be the vector to convey my messages. Is it because this is part of a university assignment (yep you read correct), and I as a 'creative industries' student feel bound by rules and parameters? Or is it merely writers block, have I lost the drive and passion once felt? I guess this is something only uncovered from delving deep into the subconscious fogs of my mind through self-analysis, or extreme therapy! Preferably an option that should be avoided at all costs. Is it that the timing is just not right yet for inspired written word?
Time, its an interesting concept. Does it only exist because we as humans need a basis to organisational structure. Is it an all guiding phenomenon and pursuasive power that either pushes us into the inescapable forward motion of the future; never allowing for an exit on any enjoyed platform, a one-way eternal train ride running express? Or is it a mean presence, stealing from us the opportunity of something that could have been done or enjoyed or experienced, for if this is not the case, then why do we have time wasted?
But now i digress, and the mind once again fall into blankness. What is blankness of the mind? Does the mind (different to the brain) actually momentarily stop working, like a surge in the power grid? Or is it a state of uncertainty, a moment of seemingly perpetual confusion? This I suppose is a debate of personal opinion, and therefore limitless in its answers.
So now I ask, how like you this?
Was this in fact that 'something' that I longed to write about? But how could you answer 'yes', when it is mere consideration of what to write, and without actually reaching a conclusive point? Does that not make this all speculation, and something that the mind works through in preparation of actually writing that 'something'? Surely we cannot consider poignant deliberation a worthy entry? For writing about what to write does not actually achieve that written thing. Therefore is this a pointless process? I hope not, but the answer is somewhat ambiguous.
Ambiguity. Can anything actually be ambiguous? Because we as readers, or responders depending on the format, draw our own conclusions. Generally we successfully acknowledge the point of where the messenger is heading. That implies clarity does it not? Yes, though the process is longer it is certain clarity in the end. Or am I talking crap? That is another consideration of personal contemplation. Without social comparison we lack the confirmation we desire to gauge accuracy. Once again I have digressed, which brings other questions... These I think are far more easily answered and considered.
Through contemplation of what to write; we digress and find other things to mull over. Are these in fact what the mind wants us to explore, and thus we have found our muse, though we consciously ignore and miss these signs? I think yes. But the mind is complex, and at times distracted, so relevance often lacks, which is why we miss these flashing and fluorescent indications, ignorance of distraction sifts this as useless information.
So in what was supposed to be a small introductory offering to you, the reader, I think I have exceeded guided word limit by at least 300 words, one of those pre-mentioned parameters, stunting creation. And yet I never did reach an actual conclusion of a worthy topic for this, nor did I actually introduce myself. You may have made assumptions about me but they were never confirmed, and after all this could all simply be an act. For all you know I am a monkey locked in a room randomly hitting letters on a keyboard; who through sheer luck of probability is creating readable data . Only further blogs may expose the entity on the other side of the digital wall separating us, and only then the information is what I choose to expose, thus is it my true self that you get to know? We shall have to wait and see. So having ignored the purpose of this activity does that mean I have failed?
Failure, is this interpretation of knowing how people should interpret, and thus, answer a question? Now that is something that opens many more questions... Questions... Are these all I shall offer? I guess that is something that will be answered as time goes by... Whatever time is of course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
