...well maybe exciting isn't the right word, but hopefully the title caught your attention.
For my final project I am taking a more in depth look at how the citizen media interacts with the mass media when it comes to news reporting. I will be looking at it from a scholarly standpoint, applying the readings and lectures from class as well as conducting a qualitative analysis based on public opinion. According to James Suroiecki the inclusion of citizen media into the mass media’s news reporting really began after the Tsunami. He says in THIS video clip that this is the time when the “public sphere came of age.” I intend to find out how much this change effected the traditional news reporting practices by the mass media conglomerates.
I am still collecting empirical evidence right now, and given the nature of the topic, it seems fitting that I am using a form of citizen media to inform you all of my project. I would really appreciate if as many of you as possible would take this quick survey to help me understand how we as a society view this change. The survey is only two little questions long and completely anonymous. Feel free to let me know what you think in comments on my blog as well.
Thanks in advance for your help :)
Friday, March 26, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Hacktivism
This weeks topic on hacktivism and digital activism is increasingly relevant to a contemporary change in politics and counter culture. Everett says that, “it is my contention that the recent “dot-com bust” or “meltdown” occurring in the high- technology sector of Wall Street represents an important reprieve for the grassroots’ organizing efforts aimed at democratizing the Internet in ways that existing mass media corporate interests disallow” (Everett, 2002).
Those who participate in hacktivism in my mind have always been linked to some sort of mischief, accompanied by poor morals with the intention of causing problems for the rest of us. After the topic was brought up in lecture this week I was inclined to look further into whether this conception of the activity is accurate or not.
As it turns out, I am most definitely not the only one with these preconceptions in my head, but there are a wide variety of interpretations. Many respected newspapers and public figures have involved themselves in the discourse surrounding the topic, many participating in increasing the moral panic that surrounds it. Terrorism has been a prevalent topic in modern discourse and so, of course, it has been assessed that the terrorists are participating in hacktivism. The LA times is quoted to have stated that, “from charismatic clerics who spout hate online, to thousands of extremist websites, chat rooms and social networking pages that raise money and spread radical propaganda, the Internet has become a crucial front in the ever-shifting war on terrorism."
On the opposite side of the spectrum of opinion, the U.S Department of State’s 2009 Human Rights Report discusses the topic from a different angle. The report assess that use of the internet and the public domain as being highly important to democracy, freedom, and human rights. The report states that “Despite official monitoring and censorship, dissidents and political activists continued to use the Internet to advocate and call attention to political causes such as prisoner advocacy, political reform, ethnic discrimination, corruption, and foreign policy concerns”
A site that considers itself an expert on the topic is called thehacktivist.com. The writers of this page state that, “both hacking and activism, and thus hacktivism, are loaded words ripe for a variety of interpretation” and that, “hacktivism is a continually evolving and open process; its tactics and methodology are not static.” When discussing this topic in the future we should step back from a technological deterministic point of view and remember that no technology is inherently bad, it is up to the individual or group as to how they will use it. In the case of hacktivism, there have been instances in which it has been used for good and evil.
Those who participate in hacktivism in my mind have always been linked to some sort of mischief, accompanied by poor morals with the intention of causing problems for the rest of us. After the topic was brought up in lecture this week I was inclined to look further into whether this conception of the activity is accurate or not.
As it turns out, I am most definitely not the only one with these preconceptions in my head, but there are a wide variety of interpretations. Many respected newspapers and public figures have involved themselves in the discourse surrounding the topic, many participating in increasing the moral panic that surrounds it. Terrorism has been a prevalent topic in modern discourse and so, of course, it has been assessed that the terrorists are participating in hacktivism. The LA times is quoted to have stated that, “from charismatic clerics who spout hate online, to thousands of extremist websites, chat rooms and social networking pages that raise money and spread radical propaganda, the Internet has become a crucial front in the ever-shifting war on terrorism."
On the opposite side of the spectrum of opinion, the U.S Department of State’s 2009 Human Rights Report discusses the topic from a different angle. The report assess that use of the internet and the public domain as being highly important to democracy, freedom, and human rights. The report states that “Despite official monitoring and censorship, dissidents and political activists continued to use the Internet to advocate and call attention to political causes such as prisoner advocacy, political reform, ethnic discrimination, corruption, and foreign policy concerns”
A site that considers itself an expert on the topic is called thehacktivist.com. The writers of this page state that, “both hacking and activism, and thus hacktivism, are loaded words ripe for a variety of interpretation” and that, “hacktivism is a continually evolving and open process; its tactics and methodology are not static.” When discussing this topic in the future we should step back from a technological deterministic point of view and remember that no technology is inherently bad, it is up to the individual or group as to how they will use it. In the case of hacktivism, there have been instances in which it has been used for good and evil.
Since the topic of remix culture was brought up to me, I seem to see it everywhere. The more I think about it, I can see the extent to which this aspect of culture has grown and evolved in our recent history. Lessing says that, “they (or at least the “young people of the day”) add to the culture they read by creating and re-creating the culture around them” (Lessing, 2008).
As I have previously pointed out, the copyright laws are the only aspect of this culture that havent evolved at all. In recent conversation with my roommate on the topic, she brought to my attention the extent of the punishment for ‘piracy.’ After dedicating a little bit of time to google on this topic, I came across this article. The author discusses the topic using satire, but it does bring up some serious points. According to the article, to date, the largest sum of money that has been handed out as punishment for ‘piracy’ is $2 million US dollars, for the 24 songs she was found guilty of downloading from Kazaa. The money is to go to the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) to makeup for the damages caused by her actions.
It seems to me that there were zero or at leas extremely minimal damages to the recording industry, so I have to agree with the defendants analysis that these fines are "excessive shocking and monstrous.” The decision to uphold this heavy fine was later supported by the federal government as they felt it was necessary because “actual damages are hard to quantify, the government wrote, “furthermore, in establishing that range, Congress took into account the need to deter the millions of users of new media from infringing copyrights in an environment where many violators believe that they till go unnoticed.”
I must go back to Lawrence Lessing for a concluding thought, he states that, “the twentieth century was the first time in the history of human culture when popular culture had become professionalized, and when the people were taught to defer to the professional’ (Lessing, 2008). In response to that I ask, isn’t it time that the laws reflect contemporary culture, and stop trying to destroy it?
As I have previously pointed out, the copyright laws are the only aspect of this culture that havent evolved at all. In recent conversation with my roommate on the topic, she brought to my attention the extent of the punishment for ‘piracy.’ After dedicating a little bit of time to google on this topic, I came across this article. The author discusses the topic using satire, but it does bring up some serious points. According to the article, to date, the largest sum of money that has been handed out as punishment for ‘piracy’ is $2 million US dollars, for the 24 songs she was found guilty of downloading from Kazaa. The money is to go to the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) to makeup for the damages caused by her actions.
It seems to me that there were zero or at leas extremely minimal damages to the recording industry, so I have to agree with the defendants analysis that these fines are "excessive shocking and monstrous.” The decision to uphold this heavy fine was later supported by the federal government as they felt it was necessary because “actual damages are hard to quantify, the government wrote, “furthermore, in establishing that range, Congress took into account the need to deter the millions of users of new media from infringing copyrights in an environment where many violators believe that they till go unnoticed.”
I must go back to Lawrence Lessing for a concluding thought, he states that, “the twentieth century was the first time in the history of human culture when popular culture had become professionalized, and when the people were taught to defer to the professional’ (Lessing, 2008). In response to that I ask, isn’t it time that the laws reflect contemporary culture, and stop trying to destroy it?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Copy left or right?
Remix seems to be a common trend in modern North American society. The most common forms of it that we think of is in music and video with people gaining worldwide popularity from honing their craft, such as Dj Dangermouse and Girl Talk. Passionate debate ensues not on the fact that this behavior is happening, or even that is increasing. The feverish discussion surrounds the topic of legitimacy, is it stealing the work of others or creating something new entirely?
The one side which can identified as those in favor of copyrighting, believe that intellectual material should be protected the same as physical property, with strict ownership laws and restriction of use. On the other side is the ‘copyleft’ believe in less restrictive uses of intellectual property, where open sharing of materials is allowed and even appreciated.
In order to fully understand where I stand on the issue I thought about my uses of creative content. For the most part, my tendencies are not to be on the side of creating new intellectual material, I don’t sing or play and instrument successfully enough for anyone to want to use my material. However as a communications student its possible that one day I come up with an amazing idea at work, like a successful advertising campaign or promotional concept. If the stars align and I come up with something thats genius, I would expect to be the one to profit from my work. As unfortunate as this is going to sound, our capitalist society is profit focused and many of the great intellectual property of our time has been created for the purpose of making money, if one doesn’t stand to profit from his ideas they might no longer exist, some might not put their time and effort into creating genius intellectual property without it.
I suppose the way to get the two sides to coexist surrounds the idea of intent. How does the ‘pirate’ or ‘remixer’ intend to use the intellectual property of others? As Sousa points out, the content should be legally used to display ones creativity and passion, just as cover-bands or a musician with a guitar around a campfire use songs they don’t own. I agree with the laws that stop others from using others intellectual property to profit, in the cases where the profit is averted from the rightful owner.
An example of this is the 'pirate' that leaked the movie ‘The Dark Knight’ before its official release date. The perpetrator has just recently been sentenced for his 2008 crime, and stands to serve two years in prison for attempting to sell the film on counterfeit dvds. Since the sale of these counterfeits takes away from the possible profits of those who own the intellectual property behind the movie then it his punishment seems rational, and I think Lessing would agree. There is no doubt that the current laws are outdated, but the direction and extent of the new laws is still largely unknown territory.
The one side which can identified as those in favor of copyrighting, believe that intellectual material should be protected the same as physical property, with strict ownership laws and restriction of use. On the other side is the ‘copyleft’ believe in less restrictive uses of intellectual property, where open sharing of materials is allowed and even appreciated.
In order to fully understand where I stand on the issue I thought about my uses of creative content. For the most part, my tendencies are not to be on the side of creating new intellectual material, I don’t sing or play and instrument successfully enough for anyone to want to use my material. However as a communications student its possible that one day I come up with an amazing idea at work, like a successful advertising campaign or promotional concept. If the stars align and I come up with something thats genius, I would expect to be the one to profit from my work. As unfortunate as this is going to sound, our capitalist society is profit focused and many of the great intellectual property of our time has been created for the purpose of making money, if one doesn’t stand to profit from his ideas they might no longer exist, some might not put their time and effort into creating genius intellectual property without it.
I suppose the way to get the two sides to coexist surrounds the idea of intent. How does the ‘pirate’ or ‘remixer’ intend to use the intellectual property of others? As Sousa points out, the content should be legally used to display ones creativity and passion, just as cover-bands or a musician with a guitar around a campfire use songs they don’t own. I agree with the laws that stop others from using others intellectual property to profit, in the cases where the profit is averted from the rightful owner.
An example of this is the 'pirate' that leaked the movie ‘The Dark Knight’ before its official release date. The perpetrator has just recently been sentenced for his 2008 crime, and stands to serve two years in prison for attempting to sell the film on counterfeit dvds. Since the sale of these counterfeits takes away from the possible profits of those who own the intellectual property behind the movie then it his punishment seems rational, and I think Lessing would agree. There is no doubt that the current laws are outdated, but the direction and extent of the new laws is still largely unknown territory.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Do you youtube?
In ‘The Cord’ newspaper’s New Years edition there was an article that discussed the most influential technologies of the last decade. I remember when I read it I was surprised by how many of the items that we use daily, that most of us couldn’t imagine our lives without, had only been developed and gained popularity in the past ten years. Two social networking inventions that were specified were Facebook and Youtube, both of which you’d be hard pressed to find a student who doesn’t use one or both of these websites in some capacity each and every day.
The discussion in class on February first questioned how we use youtube, how often, and for what purposes. These questions would be different for all of us, but the class all agreed that we had all used both facebook and youtube at least once that day. The magnitude of this realization is important to understanding our socio-political culture.
Depending on who you ask, youtube was released in either 2005 or 2006 ... only 4 or 5 years ago! One thing we all agree on however, is how quickly it was included into our society and the extent of its popularity. Mcquire would point out, we should not understand it to be a result of technological determinism, technologies don’t change things, we do by how we use them. This brings me back to the questions about how I personally use youtube. I guess I would be considered a passive user. I don’t “broadcast myself,” add to the discourse on other peoples uploaded videos, or even spend much time searching for videos.
Michael Wesch demonstrated in his video that youtube broadcasts about 9000 hours everyday, and that 88% of that is new and original. And also that my age group is one of the top contributers, so I perhaps Im behind the times. Now that Im a blogger perhaps I’m on my way to advancing the scope of my involvement in the public sphere even further.. I’ve already decided that if I do decide to participate, I want to join the “global mixer” and do the numa numa dance!
The discussion in class on February first questioned how we use youtube, how often, and for what purposes. These questions would be different for all of us, but the class all agreed that we had all used both facebook and youtube at least once that day. The magnitude of this realization is important to understanding our socio-political culture.
Depending on who you ask, youtube was released in either 2005 or 2006 ... only 4 or 5 years ago! One thing we all agree on however, is how quickly it was included into our society and the extent of its popularity. Mcquire would point out, we should not understand it to be a result of technological determinism, technologies don’t change things, we do by how we use them. This brings me back to the questions about how I personally use youtube. I guess I would be considered a passive user. I don’t “broadcast myself,” add to the discourse on other peoples uploaded videos, or even spend much time searching for videos.
Michael Wesch demonstrated in his video that youtube broadcasts about 9000 hours everyday, and that 88% of that is new and original. And also that my age group is one of the top contributers, so I perhaps Im behind the times. Now that Im a blogger perhaps I’m on my way to advancing the scope of my involvement in the public sphere even further.. I’ve already decided that if I do decide to participate, I want to join the “global mixer” and do the numa numa dance!
Bloggers have it right?
This class is my first encounter with blogging and my first time contributing in any meaningful way to the public sphere. Perhaps it is for this reason that I continue to be surprised by the dedication of some bloggers to their ‘work’ and the social influence they can have. It makes perfect sense that I have been naive to the importance of the blogosphere as the majority of the information I am surrounded with comes from mainstream news outlets. As was demonstrated in this weeks presentation through the use of a political youtube clip about why a candidate dropped out of the running, blogs are often immediately discredited in the ‘Liberal Media.’
I had not previously considered the relationship some bloggers have to the public discourse they contribute. The case of the Hilary Clinton supporters from the blog ‘The Daily KOS,’ blogging to some people has increasingly been viewed as an important Since we live in a capitalist, economy based society one would expect obtaining capital would be at the heart of all labour intensive avocations. The fact that one could strike from a self imposed past time is an interesting concept. Usually when we hear of a strike it is a union or a group of people who want more money, as has been far too many times in my educational career. With the absence of money prompting this strike it made me wonder what is driving this level of dedication. Without monetary distractions bloggers focus often shifts towards more meaningful purposes. Maybe they’re on to something?
I had not previously considered the relationship some bloggers have to the public discourse they contribute. The case of the Hilary Clinton supporters from the blog ‘The Daily KOS,’ blogging to some people has increasingly been viewed as an important Since we live in a capitalist, economy based society one would expect obtaining capital would be at the heart of all labour intensive avocations. The fact that one could strike from a self imposed past time is an interesting concept. Usually when we hear of a strike it is a union or a group of people who want more money, as has been far too many times in my educational career. With the absence of money prompting this strike it made me wonder what is driving this level of dedication. Without monetary distractions bloggers focus often shifts towards more meaningful purposes. Maybe they’re on to something?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
My First Blog
In class we’ve been looking at the changing role of journalism in our society. Historically, the role of broadcasting was to educate the masses, and inform them of issues that might pertain to them. This has always been considered an important aspect of a democratic society, as an informed public can participate in the government. After reading the article by Mcquire, I was made aware that I have a dystopic view of modern day news broadcasting companies. It seems to me that somewhere along the way they forget this important role that we rely on them for, and put a greater emphasis on the bottom line.
The media conglomerates in Canada and the United States kept their costs down by relying heavily on public relations personnel and government spokespeople. With the bias so intrinsic in the information given by these individuals, the general public seem to have began looking elsewhere for more accurate and complete information on important topics.
In light of this change, this course seems incredibly relevant right now. Although I’ve never been a blogger before, or participated whole heartedly in citizen media, I look forward to participating. As Habermas is quoted to have said, “It is no accident that these concepts of the public sphere and public opinion weren’t formed until the concepts of democracy. Public opinion can be formed only if a public engages in rational discussion.” With this in mind, I begin the undertaking to be critical of questionable material I find in the blogosphere and have others hold me accountable to the information and opinions that I post as well.
The media conglomerates in Canada and the United States kept their costs down by relying heavily on public relations personnel and government spokespeople. With the bias so intrinsic in the information given by these individuals, the general public seem to have began looking elsewhere for more accurate and complete information on important topics.
In light of this change, this course seems incredibly relevant right now. Although I’ve never been a blogger before, or participated whole heartedly in citizen media, I look forward to participating. As Habermas is quoted to have said, “It is no accident that these concepts of the public sphere and public opinion weren’t formed until the concepts of democracy. Public opinion can be formed only if a public engages in rational discussion.” With this in mind, I begin the undertaking to be critical of questionable material I find in the blogosphere and have others hold me accountable to the information and opinions that I post as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
