OSP Introduction: Clay Shirky - End of audience blog tasks
Media Magazine reading
Media Magazine 55 has an overview of technology journalist Bill Thompson’s conference presentation on ‘What has the internet ever done for me?’ It’s an excellent summary of the internet’s brief history and its impact on society. Go to our Media Magazine archive, click on MM55 and scroll to page 13 to read the article ‘What has the internet ever done for me?’ Answer the following questions:
1) Looking over the article as a whole, what are some of the positive developments due to the internet highlighted by Bill Thompson?
Connects us to other people
Great source of information
draw attention to abuse and fights for human rights
can be used for campaigning and political action
Great use for gaming and education
People can make money
2) What are the negatives or dangers linked to the development of the internet?
lots of bullying and abuse
lots of bullying and abuse
pornography that you don't want to see
illegal images of child abuse
extremist and radicals influencing others to join
fraud, scams, ripoffs and malicious software
dark web= eg. illegal activities like selling drugs
3) What does ‘open technology’ refer to? Do you agree with the idea of ‘open technology’?
That if we want an open society based around principles of equality of opportunity, social justice and free expression, we need to build it on technologies which are themselves ‘open’, and that this is the only way to encourage a diverse online the culture that allows all voices to be heard.
It could be regulated, managed and limited network, of the sort being constructed in China and Libya.
Access to dissenting or distinct voices could be limited and managed.
We could choose the apparent safety of a closed network and a closed society.
I believe it should definitely be regulated to a certain extent so no illegal activities or spread of miss information can be done however I believe there was more control to the internet the information will be biased and distorted to the advantage of whoever has control over it.
Clay Shirky: Here Comes Everybody
Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody charts the way social media and connectivity is changing the world. Read Chapter 3 of his book, ‘Everyone is a media outlet’, and answer the following questions:
1) How does Shirky define a ‘profession’ and why does it apply to the traditional newspaper industry?
2) What is the question facing the newspaper industry now the internet has created a “new ecosystem”?
3) Why did Trent Lott’s speech in 2002 become news?
4) What is ‘mass amateurisation’?
Essentially, 'mass amateurisation' is when the power of the digital revolution is such that everyday users can procure the same kind of celebrity status that was once the sole preserve of cinema. television and radio.
Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody charts the way social media and connectivity is changing the world. Read Chapter 3 of his book, ‘Everyone is a media outlet’, and answer the following questions:
1) How does Shirky define a ‘profession’ and why does it apply to the traditional newspaper industry?
A profession exists to solve a hard problem, one that requires some sort of specialization. Driving a race car requires special training-race car drivers are professionals. Driving an ordinary car, though, doesn't require the driver to belong to a particular profession, because it's easy enough that most adults can do it with a modicum of training.
The question that mass amateurization poses to traditional media is "What happens when the costs of reproduction and distribution go away? What happens when there's nothing unique about publishing any-
more, because users can do it for themselves?"
Lott's comment was important, explains the dilemma this way: "[T]here had to be a reaction" that the net-
work could air alongside Lott's remarks, and "we had no on-camera reaction" available the evening of the party when the news was still fresh. By the following night, he adds, "you're dealing with the news cycle: twenty-four hours later-that's old news."
Essentially, 'mass amateurisation' is when the power of the digital revolution is such that everyday users can procure the same kind of celebrity status that was once the sole preserve of cinema. television and radio.
5) Shirky suggests that: “The same idea, published in dozens or hundreds of places, can have an amplifying effect that outweighs the verdict from the smaller number of professional outlets.” How can this be linked to the current media landscape and particularly ‘fake news’?
With the current media landscape on the internet, any information can be widely spread out and due to the high numbers of distribution, anyone could believe it.
6) What does Shirky suggest about the social effects of technological change? Does this mean we are currently in the midst of the internet “revolution” or “chaos” Shirky mentions?
7) Shirky says that “anyone can be a publisher… [and] anyone can be a journalist”. What does this mean and why is it important?
8) What does Shirky suggest regarding the hundred years following the printing press revolution? Is there any evidence of this “intellectual and political chaos” in recent global events following the internet revolution?
6) What does Shirky suggest about the social effects of technological change? Does this mean we are currently in the midst of the internet “revolution” or “chaos” Shirky mentions?
7) Shirky says that “anyone can be a publisher… [and] anyone can be a journalist”. What does this mean and why is it important?
If anyone can be a publisher,
then anyone can be a journalist. And if anyone can be a journalist, then journalistic privilege suddenly becomes a loophole
too large to be borne by society. Journalistic privilege has to be
applied to a minority of people, in order to preserve the law's
ability to uncover and prosecute wrongdoing while allowing a
safety valve for investigative reporting.
9) Why is photography a good example of ‘mass amateurisation’?
Cameras are available everywhere and can be easily found or brought. This means people can do photography without needing any form of training.
10) What do you think of Shirky’s ideas on the ‘End of audience’? Is this era of ‘mass amateurisation’ a positive thing? Or are we in a period of “intellectual and political chaos” where things are more broken than fixed?
The positive side the mass amateurisation is more people will have the ability publish and consume content and if there are more people then the media landscape will be more diverse allowing anyone no matter their budget or power to create/consume content.
However, this will mean less need in professionals (which would mean less job demand in that area) and the media landscape could be chaos because not everyone who creates this content trained to create it.
Comments
Post a Comment