This weeks reading is about how people are able to represent themselves, or actively market there identity. Allison Hearn looks at how people establish themselves as a brand and how this branded self is not actually a true reflection of an individual but rather a synthetic presentation something they are attempting to project. “Self branding involves the construction of a meta-narrative an meta-image of self through the use of cultural meanings and images drawn from the narrative ad visual codes of the mainstream cultural industries.”

“Branding works to fix cultural meanings around consumption.” We attach social status and particular qualities to consumable objects that people use. When we see someone using these items we associate these qualities to the person using them. Certain items have different meanings attached to them, but often these qualities are not exclusive to the item they actually stem the company or brand producing them. And in recognising this brand our perception of the item or individual using it is affected. “A brand no longer refers to a simple commodity but to an entire ‘virtual context’ for consumption.”

People’s identity’s can also be considered a brand name. “People are able to The brand self is a commodity sign; it is an entity that works and at the same time, points to itself working to striving to embody the values of its working environment.” Hearn draws from Michael Foucault’s theories that “nothing in man – not even his body – is sufficiently stable to serve to serve as a basis for self-recognition or for understanding other men.” Meaning we are all products of how others see us, and what we have to do to be seen this way.

In the reading Hearn uses the example of reality television as an obvious example of self-branding. Competitors create their own brand and actively market it to persuade the audience and other competitors of their worth. Big Brother, The Biggest Loser, Survivor all shows where there are no required skill or qualifications, a contestants value is based on his or her image or “brand”. This image is created from a collaboration of the individuals actual behaviour and how the shows producers wish to present it. The participants on the show are involved in what Hearn calls ‘immaterial labour’, that is, labour that produces the cultural content of the commodity. Competitors create the cultural content of the brand Big Brother giving it value that the viewing public can relate to and invest in. “Participants on reality television function both as image entrepreneurs, as they work to produce branded versions of themselves, and as unpaid labourers for the networks.”

Our personality is “a form of outer-directed self-presentation which trades on the very stuff of lived experience in the service of promotion and profit”. This profit can be financial or social, but either way, it is something that is generated from what we do, what we buy and what we present to others.

Castell’s article is about network society’s and how they are integral to any social group in our contemporary age. Castell is trying to show how that the traditional way of looking at social structures should no longer be considered something with an assumed hierachy, but instead as a singular entity made of multiple constituents working together, sharing information and knowledge to sustain itself and achieve very specific goals.

Castell defines a network society as “a society whose social structure is made of networks powered by microelectronics-based information and communication technologies”. Where a “network is a set of interconnected points called nodes”; it has no centre, just nodes. The technology available at the time dictates how and when the network can be accessed. Castell illustrates the correlation between technology evolving and the networks following suit. Technology provides the infrastructure through which networks are able to operate. In today’s society the internet is probably the most commonly used infrastructure for networking. On top of email and online forums, the internet also hosts independent network societies.  Popular examples are Facebook, Twitter and Myspace. Sites like Facebook allows users (who may also be considered as nodes) to communicate and share information where they might otherwise be unable to do so. Again, there is no formal or structured hierarchy of power in this network society, rather each user is has the same privileges as each other.

This new social structure has is best examined with an understanding of the space of flows and timeless time. These are ways of appreciating space and time.
Space of flows – Where the information can be stored and accessed. This space is affected by the nature of its application (science, politics, finance, etc.)
Timeless time – Time converging into a singular instance, dissolving the boundaries between past, present and future. “disordering the sequence of events and making them simultaneous, thus installing society in structural ephemerality”

So Castell’s main concept is that the driving force of any society’s development which was previously orientated around knowledge and information have progressed into a one that is centred in Networks, thereby establishing the notion of a “network society”. The globalised and “interdependent” social structure in which we exist today.

When i consider my own experience with networks, I can’t really see any form of established heirachy. The only thing i might think of a position of power is the network providers capitalizing off me accessing the resources within the networks. I use facebook, have a mobile, ans i regularly use public transport which are all forms of network infrastructure connecting me to my peers  (other nodes). I regard each as very precious and integral parts of my life.

This weeks article examines the ways in which the media is able to communicate ideas and perspectives to consumers through the conscious placement of particular words in articles beacuse of the different meanings that are attached to them. In this case, Kate Clark chooses to focus on the Newspapers (the British Newspaper “The Sun”) and the effects of the language they have opted to use in their articles about Violence and women.

The means by which the newspaper are able to communicate blame are looked at through 2 different frameworks. The first is Naming analysis, “a powerful ideological tool” that uses various words to label the same person or thing. Each word has varying  connotations or meanings that alter a persons perception of what or who it is labelling. For example the assailant of a crime could be described as a beast, monster, or maniac to dehumanize them, thereby making it easier for a reader to dissassociate themselves from him and in doing so make them less apealling to the public. Alternatively the same methodology is used to excuse the behaviour of these criminals, for instance, the papers mght choose to print a criminals name, age, and occupation, which in some cases may serve to award them some social stature, which shifts the focus from the crime onto them as a person, and may alliviate some of the blame, becuase people are more ready to identify with them.

The second framework Clark outlines is Transitivity. Which describes langauge broken down to 3 clauses:

i. The Process – material, mental, verbal or relational
ii. The Participants of the process (the people involved)
iii. The Circumstances of the process (the consequences of the event)

“In this thoery the most relevant [elements] to the reports studied are material processes and participants”, which can otherwise be recognised as Agent and Goal. The Agent is the one instigating the process and the Goal affect, or person affected by the process.

I think that this could be best reflected through the recent headlines circulating about Mathew Johns Sex Scandal. All of the the titles are orientated around Mathew Johns. Under Clark’s ideas it could be infered that this is because he is the man in the crime and therefore the paper and public alike are more responsive to stories about men and less concerned with women. But as she really only chooses to point the finger at The Sun I am tend to beleieve that is due to the fact that that is the name they can bank on. As he is a public figure, people are more aware of him, and want to know more. It definitely beats hearing solely from the victim of the whole debaucle, who is really an (lesser) annonymouscitizen and of no real or marketable concern to us the public.

In this weeks reading the author Henry Jenkins writes to outline the meaning and value behind his concept of affective economics in media. His argument is that media convergence is a necessary tool which must be used by marketers and producers alike, if they want to retain their livelihood in an increasingly fragmented and diversified market. Consumers now have what seems like a limitless choice of what media they want to consume, they can not only choose preferable content, but also what platform they will access it on. Because of this producers must engage their audiences more conscientiously to ensure  on going subscriptions. Jenkins uses shows like American Idol and Survivor as the perfect example of this, “[the] first  killer application of media convergence”.

Under these principles, people who watched the show we’re encouraged to use their other forms of media, there mobile phones for example, in order to sway the direction of the contest that was being broadcasted. By doing this they were investing time, money and emotion into a the show, thereby increasing there interest and commitment. Marketers looking to overcome the indifference of an audience flooded with choice realised the value in this commitment and the results speak for themselves. “FOX boradcasting company was recieving more than 20 million telephonecalls and text messages per episode casting verdicts on American Idol contestants…Forbes ranked American Idol as the most profitable of all reality series, estimating that the network had netted more than $260 million in profit by the end of its third season.

Jenkin’s qualifies the success of these programs largely on the adaptation of reality television into our daily lives. As the content is broadcast to such a wide audience it gives people common ground to communicate. This communication not onl adds value and quality to a relationship bewteen people but it also add value to the show itself. People want ot be able to talk to one another about what happen on the show, so they watch, increasing the commitment value of the program to the producers. In on of the interviews noted by Castello a woman says “[Watching ‘American Idol’] helps me to relax because it gives me something to talk about with friends that doesn’t effect our lives in any big way; therefore it is an easy thing to discuss”.

Idato explains that the perceived threat of television becoming obsolete as a media entity is not as credible as we may expect to be. Television is still a very popular and widely accessed across the world. The problem is that the content distributed over this medium is being engaged through other platforms, ones that allow for a more developed interaction for both the users and media users.

Now personally, I prefer to use my laptop for watching different programs. I know that if I download something I want to watch I am able to exercise a certain amount of control over my viewing experience. For instance, sometimes I won’t be able to watch a full program in one sitting, when I use my laptop to download these programs I can watch them at my own leisure and am free to pause it at any point and finish it later. When we consider that the traditional conventions and rituals associated with normal Television viewing, they fall short in this area. I would have to forfeit this control and stay in front of the t.v. until the program finished.

One of Idato’s interviewees, David Mott, Channel 10′s Chief Programmer, comments on this concept of time restraints depriving television of a fully committed audience. He concedes that “people are time poor” and he recognises, even celebrates the fact that content accessibility is becoming so diverse. His most important point is that all of this content has to come from somewhere, and that origin is television. This practice of different media platforms amalgamating to enrich an audiences experience is the defining quality of the week 7 lectures on Convergence.

One genre in television founded firmly on this concept, that is Reality television. Theorists agree that its wide spread success is most probably due to its ability to involve its audience and overcome the once more defineable boundaries posed by space and time. These days however, it is not mobile phone technology that is being consumed with television viewing, there has been a shift that has seen computers adopt a role in the existing relationship.

Idato reports that the industry is not collapsing around itself rather facing the inevitable and radical restructure, forcing bigger companies to really cut the fat out of their existing business practices. Television is still attracting very real and viable audiences, it is so intrinsically embedded into social and cultural identities that it will never be completely phased out by other platforms.

In Ito’s case studies, the mobile phone was used as a means of undermining the restrictions of more traditional communication methods concerning the phone.  Typically how and when teenagers could talk on the phone was controlled by parents setting the rules on the home phone. These days mobile phones give the teenagers a separate identity, something they are able to control themselves instead of having to go through their parents to use the home phone, which was ties back to the family a collective entity.

Mobile and electronic communication has replaced physical interaction in many aspects of life. People now prefer to interact which one another over a medium that they can control. Different modes of communcation have made it possible for people to remain in constant contact without invading another persons world continuously. Ie. Text messgaging, which was develped from beepers and re-applied as an acceptable and discreet means of communication. An alternative to taking personal calls in public, which could otherwise be offensive.

The mobile phone therefore has superseded its definition of an extension or tool for a user.  It’s versatility and dynamic applications have made us reconsider a mobile phone user as a mobile media entity. Capable to accessing of broadcasting, recieving, and conciously interpretting information from other mobile media entities in real time. When we consider mobile phones in this way it is easy to execpt the way a mobile compacts and reorganises space, both physical and virtual.

In this reading Moores eleborates on the concepts put forward in last weeks reading on Dailiness by Scannell, about the idea of a double reality being created and experienced through the use of specific media technologies. I found this article more relevant to my experience with media compared to past readings as Moores was more concerned with the mediums that i frequently use in my day-to-day. i.e. television, mobile phones and the internet.

Moores contextualizes the idea of ‘media’ as a medium through time and space that establishes and supports cultural relationships. He is concerned with how the applications of media technologies change how space is socially organized and perceived by media users. He suggests that mediated interaction breeds a second reality for the media users. One in which they are able to exist, or experience without displacing them from their immediate physicality, essentially doubling their experiential consciousness.

“In todays world the media settings are increasingly regarded as a valued as a viable overlaying reality”. The fact that you are not in the actual locale of an event or place does not completely restrict you experiencing it. People can still feel proximate while still geographically distant. Media usage allows this to happen, the most noticeable examples i can think of would be the weekly broadcast coverage of sporting events and websites such as Google Earth. Both of these mediums allow remote viewers to experience the digital translation of an instance or place that may be too far away for them to access physically. Both of these mediums create channel the atmosphere of a remote locale, and make it accessible for different users. We are now able to interactively visit and in some cases participate in world’s and places we do not physically occupy. The fact that we cannot physically connect with this second world does not detract from its validity in our existence. Instead we are more prone to project ourselves into it.We’ve all seen it, the atmosphere from a rugby game on t.v. being so completely accepted by those watching that they begin to yell at the players/referee as if they were right next to them. Becoming so emersed in the event that they accept it ontop of there immediate surroundings.

Article: O’Shaughnessy, Michael, and Jane Sadler. ‘What do the media Do to us? Media and Society: An Introduction, Third Edition. South Melbourne, Vic: Oxford University Press, 2005, 31-58

The article attempts to define the dynamic that exists between the media, media devices and the society’s in which they exist. By exploring the relationships that are established between these entities O’shaughnessy and Salder show how media has been so intricately integrated into our day to day life and the processes and methods it must adhere to keep so profoundly assimilated. They suggest that the particular moral valuesn and ideologies held by communities influence how media is presented to the public and similarly, recognise its potential to instinctively create or alter social opinion.

Media is described as a tool or stage for public forum. This stage was previously reserved for the “small and elite” group of media producers who were put in a position of power through the exclusive and authoritative nature of their influence. However in more recent times, with particular technological advances such as the internet phenomena this stage is accessible by anyone wanting to share there perspectives. Yet because just anyone is able to create media for these mediums, established and credible media producers are challenged to make products which are more acceptable and accessible  “to sell themselves successfully to large numbers of the population… in order to be economically viable and survive”.

The arguments and evidence put forward in the text though compelling and in many ways still relevant, are perhaps a little outdated. In the world of today we must realize that this dynamic has evolved beyond the more conventional mediums of televison and print (which are the main examples used) and become something far more complex and intimate. The introduction of the internet into almost every facet of day to day life has altered the medias relationship with its users as it is far more interactive. Users can instantaneously respond to new information and even create there own, the two most prevelant example i can think of being the Facebook and Youtube sites.

This article really made me evaluate the power struggle that exists between the media and society. Whilst i have always recognised the dominance that commercial media has in a consumer driven society, i have never really considered the media’s reliance on the public to reaffirm its own value. The media cannot exist with out an audience, the audience and media alike are intertwined in a symbiotic relationship each supporting the other.  While exploring this idea that both are propelling and being used by the other, the question put forward by the writer is which is the dominant force. And from my point of view i would argue that it is the media who ultimately have the upper hand, as from their perspective they are affecting change in the masses.

J

F12A