What's the Australian media really up to? See what people are saying, see what the media is saying! What does the theory tell us, you might be surprised!
November 5, 2009
-
@haileywood
- Stephen Hawking is amazing. Have you read anything about his 'string theory'? I think it's about trying to integrate Newton and Einstein kind of, he writes a lot about black holes as well. I read about it in a National Geographic a while ago, it's really interesting.
-
found this on twitter, posted by Mike Wesch - The Golden Age of Video Mashup
-
omg - epiphany - i think! And it’s 4amish, my favourite epiphany hour!
Structuralism and post-structuralism seem to work as a system both inside society and also within culture in praxis (which would make sense because culture in praxis is remnants of previous societies’ paradigms). Second Life reflects this, this is what Boellstorff was saying and that’s why that crazy deoxy space rings reminded me of SL. In SL we have both replicated scientific paradigm but also represented SL as just another recurring reality because it’s saying people are subconsciously aware of other paradigms and cultural ‘luggage’, we know that we carry a portmanteau, we have ‘portmanteau awareness’. SL shows the hybridity of theory and practice and shows also that we are aware of it. Lag, AFK, presence and immersion represent mind, body, theory and practice, again the binaries and the quadrant!
Also, structuralism and post structuralism work both inside and outside society. It’s like two balances or tipper scales within and without. This is what we were doing in digc102 with that group work. The tipper scale within our own research methodology and then there was another tipper scale between the three methodologies within the group. We need balance within society and we also need balance between society and culture in praxis because if everyone ended up in academia then society would collapse. This is the function of agency. Ethics works here also because it’s saying ‘what if we all did this?’ Hence the importance and function of instilling fear & guilt in too much self indulgence and the positive that society places on an altruistic approach to life. But now we have the focus on the empowerment of ‘I’ in society. (Marketing plays a substantial role here but will have to think about all this ‘individual bit’). The digc102 group work was showing that there is balance within practice just like there is balance within the theory. After I get over how amazing this all is I’m thinking ‘this is all neat though!’ Is this what Stuart Hall was working on with the students? It’s patterned!! I’m evidently on the ‘practice from a theoretical’ perspective path! Creativity within structure. Reminds me of that crazy bloody wiggles on the stand great silver sculpture at uni across from western carpark, the Flugelman, creativity supported by structure!! Gosh, I understand this now. Have been trying to understand that sculpture for so long!
Gosh am so awake now, going to watch a Murder She Wrote rerun. I love a bit of ‘inductive’ indoctrination within a feminist theory framework, this is marketing at its best, tying to sell us a locked-in paradigm within a culture in praxis framework, talk about trying to get us back to broadcast viewing, that Murdoch and his henchman are a pack of crafty devils!!! I still love this show though, but it’s ok, I’ve got my portmanteau packed!!
November 4, 2009
-
@dreamingofbubbles
- Those exam results are hilarious!
-
Classified Footage of Moon Landing
-
digc101 final reflective essay & web project
Brian Arthur discusses the concept of ‘lock-in’ technology and refers to how the QWERTY typewriter for example can embed limits on the impetus and means for new technology (Reference Publications 1996). This idea of ‘lock-in’ can also occur in societies where a particular paradigm can become ‘locked-in’ by encompassing features that either limit the awareness of citizens or serve as a distraction, or both, and produce barriers to change (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p602). Technology, as a cultural artefact, however, can be ‘read’ and reveal meaning and information about people (Flew 2008, p47) both within society and yet concurrently from outside a particular paradigm. In this way, culture is like a portmanteau that works both within and independently of the present, carrying ‘luggage’ within certain periods and societies whilst also over time and throughout much longer periods of history (Bauman1999, pxxiv). These cultural remnants are passed on through generations and become reproduced through technology enabling reflection and a means to escape the confines of what may be considered an otherwise ‘locked-in’ paradigm (Deoxy 2009). Online new media content such as online page ranking systems (OutLaw.com 2002), mobile phone use (First Monday 2001) and folksonomies (Murray 2008, p147) reflect these issues and represent a means and a desire for change outside current societal constraints. The web project ‘FriendsAtSea’ explores these ideas in the form of a collaborative news, views and information site by challenging what we define as newsworthy and as legitimate knowledge, exploring what meaning technology can reveal, and investigating the advantages of a hybrid approach to theory and practice (FriendsAtSea 2009). Further, recent primary research conducted reveals the limitations of theory used in isolation and shows the benefit of a combined approach to research (McQuilty (a) 2009).
Thomas Kuhn coined the word ‘paradigm’ and used it to explain his analysis of science in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Kuhn stated that Western society was currently within a particular scientific paradigm which he explains ”consists of a set of beliefs shared by a group of scientists about what the natural world is composed of, what counts as true and valid knowledge, [and] what sort of questions should be asked” (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p602). A paradigm is a complete theory and framework which guides how and what type of data is collected for analysis by scientists and states that scientists will only tend to look for data which supports the paradigm. Kuhn believes that scientific ‘methods’ vary throughout history and that each paradigm has a community of scientists committed to a particular view of the world and a vested interest in continuing to think in this way. Consequently, scientists may ignore particular evidence that doesn’t seem to fit the paradigm and this explains how societies can become locked-in to a particular way of thinking (Van Krieken et al. 2006, pp602-603).
Similarly, Howard Garfinkel discusses this idea more generally in his theory of The Documentary Method. Garfinkel doesn’t speak specifically of scientific paradigms but talks about how we can become blinded to the structures that we have created. He suggests that subconsciously we create structures and accept knowledge that we are already familiar with and which will only further validate and authenticate what we already believe to be true. We perceive of certain things ‘fitting’ into an underlying pattern whilst simultaneously see them as evidence to support the pattern, each is used to elaborate and validate the other (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p662). He also discusses the idea of indexicality which states that a particular context can frame legitimacy on a situation. He gives the example of research being conducted on a group of students stating that the medical locale of a psychologist’s office lent a legitimacy to the research that may otherwise have been unconvincing (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p663). A comparison can be drawn here between how science has become reproduced in a subconscious metanarrative throughout social science theory thereby fulfilling its own patterned assumptions and in turn social science theory coheres with science to ‘index’ legitimacy. Jacques Derrida also discusses this idea with his notion of ‘hauntology’ (Boellstorff 2008, p117). However, Garfinkel states that this idea of the locked-in paradigm has depicted people as ‘cultural dopes’ and he suggests that ethnomethodology more accurately reflects society by depicting individuals as more than just products of a constrained society (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p663).
The search engine Google and its method of page ranking on searches is an example of how structures can produce barriers to change. The page rank system places the most popular pages at the top of each search. Similarities in the barriers discussed above can be evidenced here in terms of the information which remains circulated, understood and ‘known’ while other information at the lower end of the search slowly become less visible, still available but seldom if ever viewed. Gradually the information being viewed on Google will steeply narrow (OutLaw.com 2002). Google is a ubiquitous search engine so in terms of knowledge generally and the broad use of the internet, these concerns could become quite palpable over time. On the other hand, Web 2.0 both provides and reflects the means and desire for society to produce an entirely diverse array of perspectives, beliefs, values and opinions and provides the opportunity to re-establish social collectivity and local ties in a society otherwise largely informed by broadcast media (Marshall 2004, p26).
The web project FriendsAtSea provides a point of comparison between traditional forms of broadcast media and the more recent forms of online citizen journalism. The site challenges the viewer to consider media forms like citizen journalism and blogs as having equal value and legitimacy as broadcast media and as being a valuable alternative. The site also promotes broadcast rural, local, indigenous and ethnic news alongside broadcast urban, city and white Australian news. The focus is on diversity and including a more comprehensive view of the Australian mediascape (FriendsAtSea 2009). There are also links to independent online media sources such as Indymedia (Indymedia.com 2007), crikey (crikey 2009), NewMatilda.com (NewMatilda.com 2009) and Slashdot (Slashdot 2009). The site also includes search engines such as ask (ask 2009), Gigablast (Gigablast 2009) and hakia (hakia 2008) in order to promote a more broad cross-section of the information available on the internet and also includes ‘view an unpopular Google (Google 2009) webpage of the week’ in order to revive some of the sites that have settled to the bottom of the Google system. A link is included to the Creative Commons (Creative Commons 2009) site connecting to a vast array of music, video and images which can be reproduced online with the permission of the author. Attention is also drawn to the ubiquity of television as an Australian broadcast media form in a blog on the site, ‘wotsonthebox’ (tumblr McQuilty, 2009), which is a satirical critique of the TV Guide. The site also displays the caption ‘MediaWatch – you’re watching us!’ which serves to question the function and integrity of traditional offline media. The site extends an invitation to be monitored by the public while it monitors the media in an effort to overcome this problem. A link on the site also invites feedback and suggestions. Links are also included to information and sources about Australia’s recently proposed internet filtering program including an industry report, a get active section with a link to vote against the filtering scheme (FriendsAtSea) and links to Technorati (Technorati 2009) blogs which cover internet censorship generally. Internet censorship is a vital issue surrounding the connectivity and continuation of Web 2.0 culture in the face of broadcast hegemony and represents the ability of society to reproduce culture and knowledge without constraint (Marshall 2004, pp24-25).
Derrida also addresses the power of structures through language with his idea of under erasure where he suggests that by discussing issues we further solidify and embed them into cultural practice. For example, even to reprove issues contributes to their continued reification. In this sense then, Derrida refers to certain words and concepts under erasure which signifies an awareness of how we attach meaning to language and phenomena. He suggests that it is an awareness of the capacity of language to carry meaning which will minimise it’s onward impact by way of detaching the meaning from the word, in turn providing a means of escaping an otherwise locked-in paradigm. In this instance, Derrida is acknowledging the power of the meaning we attach to words to reproduce reality (Deoxy 2009). Similarly, technology as an artefact, not only has the power to reproduce reality in this same way but is embedded with cultural text which can be read to reflect meaning (McQuilty (b) 2009).
Mobile phones are a technology which reveal data about culture reflecting an historical desire for social collectivity and connectivity over information and news. Andrew Odlyzko outlines the current demand for short message service (SMS) on mobile phones over access to web content on 3G networks. He states also that even on the internet people are attracted to the connectivity of email over the content provided by the web. Odlyzko provides an historical account of society’s preference for connectivity over content resulting from a desire to rise above societal constraints. He discusses how in the 1840’s the United States government consistently attempted to communicate with citizens through mass media such as newspapers by suppressing person-to-person communication between citizens via letters. Regardless, the postal system was found to profit with delivery of letters but had to be subsidised by the government for the losses incurred on newspaper deliveries. Similarly, Odlyzko discusses the invention of the telephone and subsequent plans by the government to use this device as a means for broadcasting information to the population. Again however, the telephone emerged as a point of person-to-person communication rather than as a means for broadcast (First Monday 2001). The reading serves to demonstrate that our use of technology, often in ways for which it was otherwise intended, can reveal cultural meaning that is not made visible through traditional social scientific theory (McQuilty (b) 2009). FriendsAtSea reflects this theme by providing mostly links and connections to other sites acting as a conduit rather that focussing on content as such (FriendsAtSea).
Not only does the site seek to challenge traditional assumptions about news and knowledge and to show that the use of technology can reveal meaning, but also endeavours to highlight how technology both reflects society and provides a means for culture in praxis to be elucidated and ‘read’ (Bauman 1999, pxxiv). Traces of knowledge outside the present paradigm run as undercurrents through culture but because they are often not commensurable with the current paradigm they appear invalid, inconsequential or can remain invisible (Van Krieken et al. p602). Culture resides in the praxis between the individual and society and inadvertently floats to the surface in the practice of everyday life (Bauman 1999, pxxxiv). This is where reflexivity of the current scientific paradigm is located, a perspective both from the past and yet at the same time ‘beyond’ science. A meta form of data ‘tagged’ in the larger spectrum encompassing history, the present and the future, no paradigm ontologically greater or lesser than any other (Van Krieken et al. 2006, p603). But what is hoped for is to work toward greater fairness and equity. Academia performs the function of maintaining, promoting and continuing this meta knowledge that runs concurrently through and beneath societies over time.
Online digital communications encompass traditional structures of knowledge combined with more collectively constructed approaches to information. For example, folksonomies challenge the hegemony of established hierarchies of knowledge dictated through taxonomies by incorporating user-generated systems of categorising through tags (Not Otherwise Categorised 2009). This theme can be seen in the online delicious (delicious 2009) bookmarking system along with flickr (flickr 2009). Delicious is a webpage bookmarking system which has user-generated content and user-generated tagging. The content in this system is compiled by the public within a structure but rather reflects a more collective approach to indexing information. The system runs within and simultaneous to the greater system of the web which tends to be guided by more traditional library values (Not Otherwise Categorised 2009). Flickr operates under a similar duality by providing search access to images within its system via either commonly agreed tags or by personal word searches. These two methods of searching provide completely different data. Tag searches provide mediated corporate and mainstream media links whereas personal word searches produce direct links to other individuals during their leisure time (flickr 2009).
FriendsAtSea endeavours to reflect these two concurrent themes of access to content and structures by presenting broadcast media alongside systems which tend to reflect culture in praxis and are less about traditional understandings of knowledge (FriendsAtSea). The site displays a delicious (delicious 2009) tag cloud with tags about how the site was compiled and also provides a link to delicious to sign up and begin tagging. This theme can also be seen where media theory integrates with practice in Stace’s Bush Poetry (Blogspot McDonald, 2009) which describes Australian bush life reflected through political issues and digital technology in a cheeky yet articulate prose. Similarly, the web project ‘The A Valley Tribune’ (House in a Valley 2009) incorporates traditional media theory, local politics and everyday life through an imagined community living in ‘A Valley”. The site shows how theory can be better served through the lens of everyday life. The tumblr blog link ‘MediaWatch’ works along similar principles (tumblr McQuilty, 2009). A YouTube video on the site addresses academic integrity (YouTube 2009). Not only is the video about respecting others but also about leaving an accurate and traceable academic account of theory and research for future generations to interpret and understand. Additionally, recent primary research conducted in the form of an online interview about Australian internet censorship confirmed previous content analysis on broadcast newspapers but gave much greater insight to the issue. The interview serves to show how practical research can lend a valuable perspective to already established forms of knowledge (McQuilty (a) 2009). Details are outlined in Appendix A.
Without practical input from everyday lived experience societies can become overwhelmed by their own structure unable to realise that people are always going to represent more than what a particular paradigm can offer. What matters is that culture in praxis does not wane but is encouraged to flourish. Broadcast media hegemony serves to reduce awareness and creativity and contributes to a societal discontent which over time will not be conducive to equality or peaceful times. Technology shows us that people want to have some sense of control over their lives and a certain amount of freedom to express themselves. FriendsAtSea (FriendsAtSea 2009) aims to assist this process and to show how a collaboration of the security provided by structure and the creativity nurtured by culture can contribute to a more equitable way of living.
Appendix A
An attempt at content analysis about Australian internet censorship for the industry report was recently conducted in three Sydney newspapers over three time periods indicated online as pertinent to the issue. The aim was to make a comparison of Australian internet censorship coverage between rival Sydney newspapers in order to isolate and assess any contradictions in the coverage. The exercise, however, failed to produce any stories at all. This in itself elucidated an important aspect of the issue, however, provided no information about what the public understood about the filtering program (Scribd McQuilty, 2009).
An online interview was conducted on 14 October, 2009, the questions appear below, the transcript has been withheld for privacy, however, the research provides much more information about what is understood about the filtering program by the public and why. Only one interview was conducted but multiple interviews over a broad range of respondents would produce much more detail (McQuilty (a) 2009).
Interview Questions on Australian Internet Censorship:
Is Australian society’s inaction over the proposed government internet filtering due to a lack of awareness or due to inactivity or both?
Following is a set of interview questions designed in a semi-structured format ie. each interviewee would be asked the same questions in the same order using the same wording, however, there is allowance for interviewee initiated input also.
The interview would begin with preparing the interviewee about the interview and gaining consent to record the conversation and upload it to the internet.
male/female (circle one)
age: 17-21years, 22-26years, 27-31years, 32-36years (circle one)
occupation:
education:
suburb:
what is your primary source of news?
radio, internet, tv, newspaper, magazines, word of mouth, other (circle one)
how often do you watch the news and for how long approximately?
are there particular times/periods during the year that you would be less likely to follow the news?
have you heard about the Australian government internet censorship proposal? If so where did you hear about it?
have you heard about the government internet filtering pilot? If so where did you hear about this?
how often do you go online often? What type of things generally do you search and which search engine/s do you use?
how do you feel about the government proposal and test pilot for internet filtering in Australia?
do you think that Australia is already highly censored on the internet compared to other liberal democratic countries?
given the opportunity would you utilise an online service designed to increase censorship awareness in Australia? Would you get active and participate in online surveys and partitions about censorship from time to time?
are you currently active in any other organisations/causes?
do you think Australians are generally aware of or concerned about what the government is proposing with internet filtering?
do you think Australian talk about or consider the longer term implications of filtering the internet?
is there anything that you think is pertinent or would like to add?
Results:
The interview was completed in Gmail on Tuesday, 14 October, 2009. The data largely indicated a lack of awareness about both the proposed government filter program and the filter test currently underway. The interviewee indicated that she would be unaware of media events during uni exam periods and stated that she watches the news for about half an hour per week only, mainly SBS, ABC, ABC Radio News and Media Watch. The interviewee suggested that it would be difficult to have an opinion or make comments about the internet filter program if you are unaware that it is occurring and it would similarly be difficult to oppose the type of content which is going to be banned or filtered if you are unaware of what is being filtered. The interviewee indicated that she had seen nothing about the program in broadcast news nor heard the issue discussed generally but would like to opportunity to learn more about the scheme.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ask 2009, Ask, accessed 26/10/2009, http://ask.com/
Bauman, Z 1999, Culture as Praxis, SAGE Publications Ltd, London
Blogspot McDonald 2009, Stace’s Bush Poetry, accessed 29/10/2009, http://ausbushpoetry.blogspot.com/
Boellstorff, T 2008, ‘Place and time’, in Coming of Age in Second Life: an Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human, Princeton University Press, Princeton
Creative Commons 2009, Creative Commons, accessed 5/8/2009, http://search.creativecommons.org/
Crikey 2009, Crikey, accessed 26/10/2009, http://www.crikey.com.au/
delicious 2009, delicious social bookmarking, accessed 2/8/2009, http://delicious.com/
Deoxy 2009, Writing under erasure, accessed 22/10/2009, http://deoxy.org/alephnull/erasure.htm
flickr 2009, flickr, accessed 23/9/2009, http://www.flickr.com/
First Monday 2001, Content is Not King, accessed 09/09/2009, http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/history.communications2.pdf
Flew, T 2008 ‘Approaches to new media’, in New Media: an introduction, 3rd edn, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne
FriendsAtSea 2009, MediaWatch – you’re watching us!, accessed 26/10/2009, http://sites.google.com/site/friendsatsea/
Gigablast 2009, Gigablast, accessed 26/10/2009, http://gigablast.com/
Google 2009, Google, accessed 26/10/2009, http://www.google.com.au/
hakia 2008, hakia, accessed 26/10/2009, http://hakia.com/
House in a Valley 2009, The A Valley Tribune, accessed 26/10/2009, http://houseinavalley.com/the-a-valley-tribune/
Indymedia.com 2007, Welcome to Indymedia.com, accessed 26/10/2009, http://www.indymedia.com/mc/index.php
McQuilty, J (a), email interview, 14/10/2009,
http://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/1231128a31f20550
McQuilty, J (b), Digc102 Observation/Interview/Conversational (User) Analysis Report, 29/10/2009, New Media Technology as Artefact to Assess Methodologies Through Cultural Texts
Murray, S 2008, ‘Digital Images, Photo-Sharing, and Our Shifting Notions of Everyday Aesthetics’, Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp147-163
newmatilda.com 2009, newmatilda.com, accessed 26/10/2009, http://newmatilda.com/
Not Otherwise Categorised, 2009, Folksonomy versus Taxonomy, accessed 3/11/2009, http://sethearley.wordpress.com/2007/02/15/folksonomy-versus-taxonomy/
Out-Law.com 2002, Google sued over page ranking system, accessed 3/11/2009, http://www.out-law.com/page-3040
Reference Publications, 1996, Typing errors - QWERTY typewriter keyboard reform, accessed 3/11/2009, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_n2_v28/ai_18420079/
Scribd McQuilty, 2009, Industry Analysis Report, accessed 24/9/2009, http://www.scribd.com/doc/20052461/Industry-Analysis-Report
Slashdot 2009, Slashdot, accessed 26/10/2009, http://slashdot.org/
Technorati 2009, Technorati, accessed 20/8/2009, http://technorati.com/search?q=internet+censorship&return=sites
tumblr McQuilty 2009, MediaWatch, accessed 15/8/2009,
tumblr McQuilty 2009, wotsonthebox, accessed 29/10/2009, http://wotsonthebox.tumblr.com/
Van Krieken, R Habibis, D Smith, P Hutchins, B Haralambos, M Hoborn, M 2006, Sociology Themes and Perspectives, 3rd Edition, Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest
YouTube 2009, Food For Thought, accessed 10/9/2009, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgTG6PYSTUY
November 2, 2009
-
@tah727
- What about the fictional characters in Second Life, these are imagined and SL represents other versions of reality, what is reality? Second Life is real, but not 'actual'. A Valley is real, but not 'actual'. The Boelstorff reading on Second Life kind of reminds me of the imagined community and the imagined reality of A Valley. A Valley is no less real or legitimate than 'actual reality' really!!
-
(via haileywood)
October 31, 2009
-
(via themarieldavid)
