Posts Tagged: week 6

In Chapter 11 of Applied Mass Communication Theory, the authors discuss the concept of supply and demand. But in today’s society where the majority of media people utilize is free, how has supply and demand changed. In what ways do we supply and demand in the social and interactive media emergence?

What is the possibility that social media will become a monopoly? Can we envision a day where we will actually pay to use this social media tools such as Facebook and Twitter?

Do we see interactivity and the Web in general as horizontal or vertical integration (255)? What are some examples of horizontal integration in interactivity today? Vertical integration?

1. In response to my first question, I believe that consumers turn into producers when they are able to take it and turn it into an item that is different from the original works context. In today’s culture, which supports amateurization, I believe that computers and the Internet provide users a new sense of manifest destiny that needs to be explored, and which enhances users creative inspirations. Many artists, like DangerMouse and GirlTalk, are able to take what is already available and use these new devices. They are able to develop new meanings and produce new perspectives within use of the original pieces and are able to juxtapose them on different mediums and/or in new ways. Therefore, I do believe that these artists are not imitators, but however are indeed radicals. They attempt to step out of the boundary lines, and rather than simply absorbing a piece of work, they take it and attach deeper levels of meaning or a new spin on it. Hence, you now see many parodies and play-offs of pop culture now on YouTube and other various outlets. You know have writers using similar characters and plots to develop stories like “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” by Seth Grahame-Smith that incorporate other elements from other genres. Personally, I find it inspiring that constant development can spawn on not just the “original” themes and ideas, but from the cycle of itself. I believe that allowance of creation that can occur with use of other’s original works speaks something about freedom of ideas and innovation.

2. My second question is in regards to younger generations and the RW culture. Although our culture is becoming more and more a Read/Write culture thanks to the Internet, I do believe that there are some users out there that use the Internet for other purposes that stray away from this RW culture. I guess this can go for any mediums source in retrospect. It’s all in how you use it. Although the Internet gives access to billions of people, it is also used for purposes other than those prescribed by the RW culture. Many people, especially younger generations, are still just passive consumers of RO culture on the computer. Lessig statistics state that most teenagers spend more time playing games and using a computer for leisure purposes rather than informational purposes. Luckily, through increasing interactivity on websites that are being produced more and more today, I am hoping that these statistics will change. Younger generations require a significant amount of stimuli to stay interested. So as news sources and websites begin to produce more interactive content in this developing digital age, I am hoping that younger generations will take more of an interest in partaking in the RW culture by becoming active creators, whether it be in video production or blogging. Especially, considering that the Internet has made it easier to develop content as an amateur in a field.

3. In response to my third question, I feel that people would not want to move from an “All Rights Reserved” copyright to a Creative Commons “Noncommercial” license because that would take away the monetary gain component that people need in this market based society. Many people still want the ability to own and sell their ideas. In an ideal world the “gift economy” supported by the noncommercial license would be optimal, but it is not fathomable in the real world where markets override. A balance, however, would be in need. I do agree with Lessig that if more people knew about the Noncommercial license, there may be more works out there that would be available to the general public. This, would then, hopefully inspire more creational works. For example, I didn’t know about the Creative Commons licensed works until just last week. I’m not sure if I’m just out of the loop or why this is exactly. Therefore, if there is a reasoning behind this, then it needs to be explored in detail so more people have the opportunity to use this and institute more of a “sharing-type economy”, as Lessig says.

1. In Chapter 1, Lessig immediately discusses, on Pg. 25, the idea of society becoming more and more the consumers of culture, rather than the producers. In a previous response to one of my questions last week, I discussed how it seems that remixes of remixes are becoming more and more prevalent and newly generated content is becoming less and less. With this being said, I am beginning to rethink my response after reading this. However, when do consumers turn into producers by consuming material and generating new content using this material in an RW culture? Can this still be considered new and innovative, despite its take on an original version of something? For example, Can Gregg Michael Gillis of GirlTalk, who uses thousands of tracks from other artists to create his songs, truly be considered a contemporary artist or rather a radical imitator? Or is there something in examining whats out there and spinning new contextual meanings upon them that is beneficial in, and of,  itself?

2. In the book, Lessig discusses the advantages of living in this digital age in regards to generations having more and more capabilities to connect to and put our content out in the world thanks to the Internet, whether it be media files or text files in the nature of blogs. However, in a consumer-based society, is this RW culture really becoming a RW culture? On Pg. 69, Lessig states that “individuals age 15 to 19 read for an average of 0.1 hour (7 minutes) per weekend day and spent 1.0 hour playing games or using a computer for leisure. It makes me question whether or not the Internet is truly helpful when it allows access to numerous gateways.While younger people are using it more and more for passive tendencies and recreational habits, such as video game playing and social networking, despite its incredible capacity as an informational engine, could this potentially be considered another form of learning in this digital age?

3. On Pg. 226, Lessig discusses the Creative Commons “Noncommercial License” as an alternative to the “All Rights Reserved” copyright and implies that this type of license encourages a sort of “gift economy”. As people’s motivates to get and give are put into question, in all reality, what is the likelihood of the gift economy will be as successful as that of he corporate economy? How has the digital age made it possible that content producers are willing to, under certain conditions, allow others users to freely access and use their content? And will people actually obey those wishes, considering many out there rarely obey strict copyright law?