Font nonchalant

The Sub (-stitute, not marine)

Being the scrawny incubator of all things germy, meant that in week nine while everyone was patting each other on the back, high fiving and presenting their pitches; I was lying on my back, high fevering and presenting everything I’d consumed in the previous 5 days.  So instead of telling you about what I think happened, I’m going to share with you my other major work.  Not the one about the fever.

Over the course of Spring 2009, I’ve also been enrolled in a Media and Communications subject that covers many of the similar themes discussed in DIGC202.  BCM301 takes more of a historical approach however, and tends to focus more so on the idea of digital imprints as historical records.  I feel that there is a fair bit of overlap here, as I recall earlier conversations with Wilson and Moore from long, long ago where the idea of an archaeology of new media was presented.  In weeks two and three of DIGC202, we discussed earlier forms of communication paths (such as The Spice Route) and when I applied this approach to research to BCM301, found some interesting pieces of information. Flew (2006, 108-109) references the Hutchins Commission on Freedom of the Press (1942) and points out that the media’s role is to allow for discussion and critique.  Flew argues that the failure of media to fulfil this function has allowed for the development of participatory new media as an alternative.  In a totally anti-McLuhan-esque viewpoint, I feel that our current fascination with participatory media online has developed out of Flew’s argument of the failure of traditional media.

This notion has shaped the way in which we approached the major work.  What we ultimately created was a digital archive that presents, discusses and investigates several key ideas surrounding the notion of user-generated histories.  The purpose of “History2.0 Histories” (http://usergeneratedhistories.tumblr.com/page/5) was to provide a site that bridged the academic and the everyday, in an easy-to-understand format, that would provide a platform for further engagement and research.  While there are several concepts that are explored in much greater detail in the site, one of my favourite is the notion of fixity.   Our everyday, ordinary, whimsical web choices, status updates and tweets are permanently stored in an archive fashion, yet are not permanently fixed in one spot and can disappear with a single click.  The day of the Sydney red-dust storm was a fascinating case study for us to dissect.  The continual status updates on the situation actually lead to the web community to provide more information than the news on television.  This particular point is reminiscent of the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004, where Rosenzweig (2006, 136) mentions that the Wikipedia community had a greater grasp on the situation as “news” than traditional news media.  He also points out that the lack of fixity of this ever-changing web-community actually allows for more accurate and up-to-date reporting.

While there is not enough scope to fully examine all of the key points surrounding this topic area, it is well worth having a look at the collaborative archive we developed to gain a better insight into our major work.   Our overall objective was to help bridge the gap between BCM301, the academic world, the virtual sphere, and our own lives.  Hopefully our interpretation of the concept History2.0 may shed a little light on this fascinating area of study.

References:

Flew, T, 2008.  New Media: An Introduction (3^rd ed.), Oxford University Press, Melbourne, Australia

Moore, C, 2009.  Personal Communication

Rosenzweig, R, 2006. ‘Can History Be Open-Sourced? The Future of the Past’, The Journal of American History, Vol. 93, No. 1, 117-146

Wilson, J, 2009.  Personal Communication

A Review of DigC202

Honestly, hands down, best work yet.  The bar has been raised yet again in the DigC major.  After last session’s gaming presentations, I thought the group would be hard-pressed coming up with innovative and new ways of pitching ideas.  Very, very wrong!  This class is a great example of the way in which new media can facilitate learning, changing the old-school lecture format and actually having students participate and engage with the material.  It reminds me of Rheingold’s (2009) ‘Participatory Pedagogy’ article and the way in which participation and the skills in digital literacy are simultaneously being taught at the same time as the subject material.  When I was at high school, I had a number of subjects that I knew I would never pursue later in life and saw as completely redundant.  The answer from my teacher was that I was correct, I would probably never pursue a career in physiological sciences, nor find myself in the situation where I needed to quote the third verse from The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner (which by chance, I did find myself in that situation recently, thank you Ms Carmichael).  What I was learning was how to learn, discipline and methodology.  The content was largely irrelevant (although fabulous for trivia).  In no way am I suggesting this session’s work has been irrelevant, far from it.  It’s the most relevant course I’ve come across in my tertiary academic education.  But what have been even more significant are the skills that I have amassed along the way.  I feel that I have a competent level of digital literacy (Rheingold, 2009) after finishing this session.

The projects were all outstanding.  Not one group disappointed.  The boys’ presentation on Xbox Live was amazing.  Their use of TinyChat for a web conference worked really well and highlighted how the medium could be viably used in gaming. The YouTube group’s analysis of the company from a commercial aspect in the form of a documentary was very engaging.  I particularly liked the linking of research material and group commentary.  The third group, Globama, were exceptional.  The approach that they took to dissecting the entire campaign was new and gave a new perspective on the campaign.  Analysing past president’s media use was a very clever idea, and the theoretical foundations that underpinned it gave a solid foundation for the presentation.  Our group’s presentation successfully delivered all the concepts and ideas we wished to address.  Part of this came from the fact that our project actually succeeded far beyond what we imagined.  In our pitch, things were looking a little shaky, largely because we had very few visitors to the site Film Voir and couldn’t comment on user behaviour.  Upon checking today, Film Voir has had 653 visitors, with users still signing up to the fan page on Facebook.  Having data to work with made our presentation far easier and provided us with fresh new material to discuss.  Our choice to build a media kit stemmed purely from the very media-oriented nature of our web-celebrity project.  We had so much fun shooting the ‘mockumentary’ and are all really proud of the work we produced.  We may have just opened up an entire new can of worms though, with the assignment looking like a really solid preliminary basis for next year’s major works.

References:

Rheingold, H, 2009.  Participative Pedagogy: for a literacy of literacies, http://freesouls.cc/essays/03-howard-rheingold-participative-pedagogy-for-a-literacy-of-literacies.html, accessed 31/10/09

Google

“Eric looked at Larry and Sergey and said, ‘You idiots.  You spelt Googol wrong’.  And that was the last mistake Larry and Sergey ever made”. ( BBC doco reference).  Ever?  Forever ever?  Ahh bless these entirely objective film-makers.  For all the anti-Google sentiment to be found on the web, there would appear to be an enormous amount of supporters (both employed by Google and otherwise) proudly waving the Google flag.  Or rather, proudly riding the Google Wave.

There are a number of issues to be unpacked in exploring the Googleocracy/ Googlearchy debate.  Not least of which is the disdain I feel when noticing these terms don’t register as spelling mistakes in Microsoft Word; however folksonomy and mashup are apparently incorrect.  The primary concern of individuals with an interest in the developing Google drama; centres on the notion of whether Google is in fact democratising access to information or creating a dictatorship/monarchy of information, guiding us towards its favoured choices of history.  It is commonly understood that Google uses a page-rank system, by which the most popular pages are produced first in a Google search.  On face value, it would appear that smaller, perhaps independent sites stand little chance of competing against corporate media giants; however, Hindman (et al, 2003, 10-12) finds that competitor sites to Google (aggregators of information) employ almost identical methods of page-rank, meaning this accusation of inequality should be applied to all sites that aggregate content.  With 83% of searches conducted on the internet being performed by Google (Nielsen NetRatings, 2003) it becomes apparent that the largest company will receive the most criticisms.   But is this justified?

While the companies’ “Don’t Be Evil” (Google, 2009) slogan indicates its intentions are largely altruistic, nagging little puzzle pieces found in the End User License Agreement and other legal documentation leaves the inquiring user with a very sour after-taste.  Its altruism can only be considered minimal when considering the profit Google stands to make on its Google Books digital library collections (Naughton, 2008).   Moore (2009) acknowledges that all content in Google’s Gmail application is owned by Google and can be used in any context or published by Google at any given time.  This technically permissible access to private information raises a number of concerns, rigorously debated within the third year UOW class, History of Media and Communication301.   One particular group worth mentioning created a Facebook group to discuss the topic area and gain feedback from students.  ‘Our Google generation, are you using google or is google using you?’ (Verschuer, 2009), challenges students understanding of Google’s EULA and rights to their private information.   Members of another group (Wright, 2009) developed an interesting short film and survey based on the topic “Is Google making us dumb?”.  This is yet another area is which academic debate is divided, with some arguing that Google is nurturing an inquisitive pattern of behaviour, while others argue that it is making us lazy and inept at cross-referencing (with 83% of internet users using Google as their first site for research- Nielsen Net-ratings, 2003). 

 In an informal survey, our personal habits within the DIGC202 group have been unanimously to consult Google as the first option.  If Google doesn’t have the answer, then you’re not typing the question correctly.  Although tertiary educated and always willing to cross-check our findings, the mere assumption that Google provides answers is frightening.  As Batchelor (2009) points out, Google doesn’t actually provide answers.  It’s not a content provider, just an aggregator.  Our technological utopianism regarding Google would appear to be far more ingrained than initially perceived, and begs the question, Googleocracy or Googlearchy?

References

Batchelor, Bob 2009, 2009, ‘Google and the End of Wisdom’, PopMatters, http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/107954-google-and-the-end-of-wisdom, accessed 17/10/09

Google, 2009, ‘Corporate Information’, Google, http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html, accessed 17/10/09

Hindman, Mattew, Tsioutsiouliklis, Kostas, Johnson, Judy, A. 2003, ’ “Googlearchy”: How a Few Heavily- Linked Sites Dominate Politics on the Web http://seneca.uab.es/antropologia/jlm/ars/googlearchy—hindman.pdf, accessed 17/10/09

Moore, C, 2009, Personal Communication

Naughton, J, 2008, “Google Pays Small Change to Open Every Book in the World”, The Guardian UK, http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/02/google-books-scanning-libraries, accessed 17/10/09

Nielsen-Netratings. 2003a. ‘Nielsen NetRatings Search Engine Rankings’. Technical Report.

Search Engine Watch,  http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/netratings.html, accessed 17/10/09

Vershuer, R, 2009, ‘Our Google generation, are you using google or is google using you?’, BCM301, http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/group.php?gid=124981177308, accessed 17/10/09

RAWA and the Democratic Potential of the Net

In looking at how Non-Government organisations utilise the internet for their various campaigns, it becomes obvious that there is a strong argument that favours the democratic potential of the internet.  The group RAWA (Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan) is an Afghani women’s liberation group that far exceeds the caliber of most online activist groups.  RAWA meets Schuler’s (1996, in Bickel, 2006) criteria for a truly active participatory group through its allowance for users to leave comments, accountability to the people and clarity of purpose (Bickel, 2006).  RAWA’s primary purpose is to gain media attention to their cause and to collect donations to fund their various poverty, literacy, education and health projects.  Users of the website can join the organisation’s Facebook or Twitter sites, fundraise in their local community or donate directly to the organisation.  RAWA (2008) states that without the internet, it would have no means of distributing and disseminating its ideas, as the fundamentalist regime under which they operate renders the group immobile and powerless.  RAWA is fighting for secular democracy and achieving major milestones in their quest that can only be attributed to the online identity they have created.  Given the totalitarian environment within which they exist, RAWA operates under a cloak of darkness which the internet affords, with the internet being their only office. 

RAWA has a very broad user appeal, although its target audience would appear to favour women and westerners (through its graphic images of women and children in a war-torn environment).  This is clearly an international appeal, with RAWA seeking the assistance of people and organisations outside of Afghanistan to help them fight against their own countries’ regime. The site administrators are obviously very fluent in English and a number of other non-Latin based languages, with the option of translation into several other languages. After US icon Oprah Winfrey did a story on the organisation in 2004, it is conceivable that the group would now have a significant amount of help from outside the group and Afghanistan.  However; the website is still reasonably under-developed, with a very early GUI look about the page.  Links are not clearly displayed and the text tends to resemble a long letter or newspaper article.  This may, however, be a deliberate choice to not over-commercialise the group or exploit its cause.  The technology that administrators are working with in Afghanistan may also not be capable of sophisticated graphics and web2.0 applications.  The site itself allows for a reasonable level of interactivity, with online petitions and mailing list subscriptions clearly presented on the site.  The overall direction of the site is somewhat complicated, with the organisation appearing to seek participation from ordinary users to influence government bodies.  It also appears to try and tackle government bodies at the same time.  Crabtree (2003) makes the excellent point that the most effective use of the internet in political e-democracy is by using it as a tool to connect users to help each other.  This would appear to be the main objective of RAWA, but peripheral side objectives clutter its primary purpose.  It is plausible to suggest that RAWA are trying to connect to several different networks to create a viable conflict within the discourse (Ippolita and Rossiter, 2009).

RAWA utilises the democratic potential of the internet to bring attention to their cause.  Bickel (2006) argues that the internet is giving a voice to a highly oppressed group that would otherwise have no means for entering the public sphere.  Through their online campaign, RAWA has effectively created new discourses and online identities (Bickel, 2006).  RAWA can be seen as joining what Kellner (2000: 313-315) describes as a “developing network of solidarity” who are “…interested in the politics and culture of the future [who] should be clear on the important roles of the new public spheres and intervene accordingly…”.  In developing new discourses and online identities, RAWA is entering the new public spheres that new media has helped create and championing democratic change within their community.  More than this, RAWA is “taking advantage of the internet’s contested terrain” (Bickel, 2006) and creating democratic change in a global context, with all of its publicity and support coming from foreign national powers (RAWA, 2008).  It is yet to be seen whether RAWA will achieve its democratic goals in Afghanistan; however, it is undisputed that the major milestones RAWA has created in terms of women’s health, protection and education in Afghanistan has been due to its utilisation of new media technologies.  New media has given a voice to the oppressed organisation of RAWA to enter the public sphere and set democratic agendas that can shape the way a nation is governed and it’s standing in a global political context.

References

Bickel, B, 2006, ‘Weapons of Magic: Afghan Women Asserting Voice via the Net’, Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, Vol. 8, No. 2, Accessed 12/9/08, Wiley Interscience Database

Crabtree, J, 2003, ‘Civic Hacking: A new agenda for E-Democracy’, openDemocracy, http://www.opendemocracy.net/media-edemocracy/article_1025.jsp, accessed 1/11/09

Ippolita, Geert L, Rossiter, N, 2009, ‘The Digital Given- 10 Web 2.0 Theses’, Network Cultures, http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/geert/2009/06/15/the-digital-given-10-web-20-theses-by-ippolita-geert-lovink-ned-rossiter/, accessed 1/11/09

Kellner, D, 2000, ‘Globalization and new social movements: Lessons for critical theory and pedagogy’, In N. Burbules C. Torres, Globalization and Education: Critical Perspectives (pp. 299–322), Routledge, New York, in Bickel, B, 2006, ‘Weapons of Magic: Afghan Women Asserting Voice via the Net’, Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, Vol. 8, No. 2, Accessed 12/9/08, Wiley Interscience Database

RAWA (Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan), 2009, Accessed 30/10/09, http://www.rawa.org

Schuler, D, 1996, New community networks: Wired for change, MA ACM Press and Addison-Wesley, in Bickel, B, 2006, ‘Weapons of Magic: Afghan Women Asserting Voice via the Net’, Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, Vol. 8, No. 2, Accessed 12/9/08, Wiley Interscience Database

Neglect

Proving again why I cannot be trusted with the care of children, pets, boyfriends or potplants, I have neglected and abandoned this blog like the true (neo) teenager that I am.  The dates between posts say it all. I won’t lie, I got distracted.  But on a brighter note, that’s not to say I didn’t THINK about new media and digial communications…

Through the looking glass of ACP

Given the nature of our major assignment (web celebrity) and its focus on large scale advertising, I’d chosen to examine ACP (Australian Consolidated Press) as an adjunctive research project that feeds directly into our own project.   Prior knowledge of the company led me to understand that ACP is owned by PBL Media, which was largely a Packer family empire.  Further investigation shows that PBL is actually co-owned by two companies, CVC Capital Partners (with a 99% share) and Consolidated Media Holdings (with a 1% share).  Further research and personal communication with Wilson (2009) shows that the Packer family is largely exiting the media industry to focus on the gaming industry with CMH being a Packer business.  Little is known about CVC Capital Partners, therefore for the purposes of this research I will focus on CVC as the parent company of ACP.

CVC is a large-scale investment company focusing on investments in companies with 250 million- 10 billion euros worth of enterprise value, among a number of other attributes (CVC Capital Partners).   The first offices were opened in the UK and Europe in 1981 and by 1993 CVC was wholly owned by its partners.  It now has 19 offices across Europe, the UK and Asia, including an office in Australia.  CVC count PBL as one of its biggest companies in Asia.  Essentially CVC are offering investment services and portfolio management advice.  The diagram showing how the company works from the inner-core is very interesting and leads to more points to be discussed regarding influence over investments.  On the CVC website it states that there are 31 managing partners and it would appear that the company is English owned, with Corporate Headquarters being in London. 

On a domestic front, in 2002 Adrian MacKenzie was appointed managing director of CVC Holdings Australia (PBL Media, 2009).  In an interview MacKenzie states that he has no interest in power or influence, his major concern is with profit margins and success (Murray, 2007).  With MacKenzie being based in Scotland prior to his Australian placement, he is unlikely to have well-developed ties to political influence within Australia, meaning he would have relatively few people to answer to (apart from within the company).  He is also very young, and at 36 may inject new life into the company.  Already several PBL heavyweights have left the company and MacKenzie has made it clear that he has no interest in the day-to-day running of PBL, unlike previous proprietor Kerry Packer.  The companies’ strengths are based on MacKenzie’s detachment from PBL; however in 2008, amid speculated financial problems, MacKenzie was replaced as chairman but kept on the Managing Board of Directors (Steffens, 2008).  A broader examination of this could be seen as a reaction to the GFC and the enormous debt accumulated by PBL due to the Packer’s management.  The $4.2 billion (Verrender, 2008) debt left by the Packer management, threat of competitive Australian media and changes in the Australian media landscape all serve as threats to CVC Holdings.

References 

CVC Capital Partners, 2009. CVC Capital Partners, http://www.cvc.com/Content/EN/OurApproach/OurApproach.aspx, accessed 22/10/09

Murray, L, 2007. ‘Channel Nine’s Reluctant Frontman’, Sydney Morning Herald, http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/snapped-channel-nines-reluctant-new-frontman/2007/06/06/1181089150821.html?s_cid=rss_smh, accessed 22/10/09

PBL Media, 2009.  ‘Board of Directors’, PBL Media, http://www.pblmedia.com.au/Board_of_Directors.htm, accessed 22/10/09

Steffens, M, 2008. ‘Debt Test for New PBL Chairman’, http://www.smh.com.au/business/debt-test-for-new-pbl-chairman-20080923-4mk9.htm, accessed 22/10/09

Verrender, I, 2008. ‘Amid the Bloodbath, Warren Caught a Startled Rabbit’, Sydney Morning Herald, http://www.businessday.com.au/business/amid-the-bloodbath-warren-catches-a-startled-rabbit-20080924-4nep.html, accessed 22/10/09

Touring Production Company Positions

The job that I’m seeking upon graduating from university centers on event management/production management. I’m not entirely sure of what position I would ultimately want, however I understand in this industry it’s very much about starting at the bottom and working your way up.  Whether I join a company and work from its headquarters in a particular city or join a touring company and travel, I’m also unsure of just yet.  Jobs in this industry generally aren’t advertised, and it’s more or less a case of not what you know, but who you know.  For this reason, it’s really difficult to ascertain salaries, working hours etc.  Having worked in conjunction with a music production company for the last few years, I have a fair idea of the type of work involved in concert tour management and event coordination.  Workers are generally on contracts for the duration of a particular artist’s tour (within Australia).  They work incredibly long hours and don’t leave until everything is finished (this is often 3am in the morning).  They are constantly contactable and have to be extremely flexible in their lifestyles i.e. not ideal for families, partners, mortgage etc.  A general assistant tour coordinator’s salary is somewhere in the vicinity of $40-$50K p.a.  Given the somewhat “behind closed doors” nature of the job, there are no internet forums or sites that I could find that discussed work in the industry.  There is a Facebook group that’s for the general media industry; however this applies more to workers in film and television rather than music.

Some of the companies that I would be interested in working for are Frontier Touring Company, MC Productions and RoundHouse Entertainment, however none of these companies advertise positions.  Roundhouse is the only company that uses volunteer workers at events, so this may be an opportunity to gain work experience.    Frontier Touring Company has an interesting section on their website outlining job positions and profiles.  Most of the profiles state that employees have no degree and were basically in the right place at the right time, emphasising personal relationships over CVs. 

Two advertised positions that appealed to me were city based, however both required a portfolio of coordinated events and strong existing relationships with clients.  These jobs would be more appropriate in several years once I have a strong body of work behind me and have tired of travelling.  The first is for an events company, advertised through seek.com, however the company name was with-held.  The salary was $75K p.a. plus super which is obviously not an entry level position.  A strong background in business was also required, with arts/commerce degrees looked favourably upon (which is refreshing!).  It’s apparent that without a degree, one can only go so far in this industry.  The second job has just been de-listed, however it was for the position of events manager for Film Victoria- which would be my ideal job.  I have a strong background in film and would love this Melbourne based position.  This job was also advertised through seek.com but with-held all details of salary, starting date, contracts, working hours etc. In looking at jobs in this industry it’s clear that I need to start gaining experience now.  This means volunteering (free labour) with several companies to build a broad base of experience.  In terms of the New International Division of Labour, this position is indicative of where labour in this country appears to be headed, with workers changing positions frequently, working extremely long hours, being always contactable (the division between home and work eroding) and working to rigid and inflexible contracts that promise flexibility and diversity in the role.

DIGC202 Fourth Tumblr Post

This week in DIGC202 examines the role of labour in global networks.  Wilson discusses the global division of labour, immaterial labour vs. material labour, precarity, white collar workers and free labour.  These are issues that until now, I’d never really given much thought to.   I had previously visited all these concepts in an academic sense; however I’d never really applied them to my own life and post-university career.  In reading Deuze’s article, it becomes clear that the type of work, duration of work and lifestyles that accompany work in the years to come will change dramatically from what we have previously known.  In class, Ellen and I compared this essay to an article in the Daily Telegraph about a homeless man who makes approximately $400 a day begging.  There are 192 comments posted on this article and the majority of them are quite negative.  This aligns with Deuze’s argument that working appears to be the normal human condition and not working is unusual.  Deuze further adds that those who do not work are either pitied or loathed.

The amount of work that we will take on in the future is also analysed this week in DIGC202.  Gregg looks at the flipside to the most prominent effects of communication technologies; that being constantly contactable isn’t necessarily a good thing.  Gregg states that while a positive discourse surrounds the “flexibility” or being able to work anywhere, anytime, this is often exploited and workers feel obliged to work for longer hours and more continuously.  The distinction between home and work is becoming less defined.  Caitlin also made the point that we are conditioned to do this from an early age (in Australia), where the concept of homework is instilled in us throughout our whole education.

The Bill Moyer’s interview with David Simon is a particularly interesting transcript.  An entire post could be dedicated to that interview alone.  Simon’s views on the social pyramid and larger political systems that dictate how we work, live and engage with each other (in the t.v. show “The Wire”) are indicative of larger political practices that seem to be endemic in western culture.