Monday 28 June 2010
Friday 25 June 2010
Friday 18 June 2010
A Case Study from Pete Fraser: Fans
I shall suggest ways in which the work of Henry Jenkins writing particularly in 'Convergence Culture' (2006) could be useful in the exam using fan videos as a case study.The conventional image of the fan, as portrayed in fictional representations, is of a deranged fanatic, endangering the life of the fan's hero. Examples would be Robert De Niro as Rupert Pupkin in King of Comedy (1982) or Kathy Bates as Annie Wilkes in Misery (1990).
Henry Jenkins' work on fan fiction challenges this view as simplistic; in Convergence Culture he looks at a number of case studies to suggest that fans are engaged in quite a range of cultural activity. His chapters consider:Survivor and ‘spoilers’- the ways in which fan groups online collaborate to find out about upcoming episodes and circulate information about them or 'spoilers'; American Idol and ‘democracy’- the first US programme to use mass text voting, a way in which some would suggest that the audience participate in a form of limited democracy to choose their winner. The Matrix and ‘transmedia’ looks at the ways in which a text can be produced in a number of different forms- the films, animations, comic books, each of which adds a different element to the jigsaw of the story and which cannot be fully understood on their own. Star Wars and fan film production- of which there are many thousands on the net, some of massive technical prowess and Harry Potter- kids as writers and activists, where Jenkins looks at the ways in which young Potter fans have become involved in political movements based upon how they have interpreted the stories applying to real life issues.
Jenkins argues that the web has created ‘knowledge communities’ where fans meet together online to share interests and discuss them in depth. He sees fansites as having a sort of 'collective thinking' and sets of rules and credentials, where some things can and some things can't be said and where individuals can gain kudos for their knowledge as expert contributors in the same way as they would in the academic world- for example site admins or the most regular posters often have special status in fan groups and forums compared to newbies.Jenkins' definition of convergence is wider than the generally used definition around technology and the digitalisation of media content, as he looks also at the ways in which the integration of media industries into conglomerates represents an economic convergence but perhaps most importantly how the online age creates a social and cultural convergence too- with audiences coming together socially online from all over the globe and start to make things which they share online.This cultural production by fans of fiction that extends beyond the original text has been around since long before the web, but the distribution of it has become significantly easier since the online age began. If you want to use fan production as a case study in the exam, here are some starting points. have a look at the videos and click on the youtube link so you can see the user comments and also the videos to which they relate- other fan production. Some are examples of what I would call 'acting out', some involve extending the story, one is a celebration of other fan art to explore the relationship between characters in a story, some involve re-mixing and mashing them up, but all involve distribution of fan production and sharing amongst an online audience, often starting with a 'knowledge community'.
Tuesday 8 June 2010
Some of Nicola's thoughts and useful quotes
"Thanks to web 2.0, companies are beginning to conceive, design, develop, and distribute products and services in profoundly new ways.............companies can increasingly source ideas, innovations, and uniquely qualified minds from a vast global pool of talent". Taken from Wikinomics - Don Tapscott & Anthony D. Williams (2006). This idea can be applied to many media areas for instance the film industry - students making their own films and uploading them to Youtube, people making mash-ups and putting them online - the same goes for music videos. MP3 has enabled unsigned artists/bands to record and upload their music to social networking sites such as Myspace.
Music Video: Unsigned Band
Mash Up
Dan Gilmor outlines in his book We Media how anyone can be a journalist because converging technology means that events can be filmed and uploaded to Youtube, social networking sites - think about the first footage of 9/11 or the woman whose car was pushed down the motorway by a lorry (filmed by a civilian in a passing car). What about how advterising is personally directed to us following the information we have about ourselves on our facebook page or how personal recommendations are emailed to you from amazon after you've purchased a product.
Andrew Keen discusses a darker side of web 2.0 and he suggests that the new form of "online collectivism" is threatening our culture and our economy. He argues that authentic talent is disappearing as amateur media is banded all over the Internet. He refers to the death of the newspaper (readerships declining) whilst Youtube videos of skateboarding capture the nations eyeballs. Michael Moore supports this notion when he discusses the dumbing down of western society by multinational capitalist conglomerates.
Would a Marxist think that mass collaboration on the Internet is good? Anyone can be a media producer and have their work viewed by millions of people (hence limiting the profits of large capitalist organisations - think about musicians leaving major labels and setting up on their own - simplyred.com). However, some critics argue that online collaboration and sharing is promoting a "free economy" where unpaid volunteers are exploited by corporations. Taken from Wikinomics - Don Tapscott & Anthony D. Williams (2006);
I really like some of the ideas of Charles Leadbitter in his book "We Think" (2009). He outlines two counter arguments "Will the web promote democratic collaboration and creativity? Or will it be a malign influence, rendering us collectively stupid by our reliance on what google and wikipedia tell us being true, or, worse, promoting bigotry, thoughtlessness, criminality and terror?" He goes on to discuss how the emergence of web 2.0 has allowed us to express ourselves and as charles Chenung would state self-represent. Leadbitter acknowledges the active nature of the audience and states that the web is not just for producing but it also encourages surveillance, "not just by the state and corporations , but also by our peers and friends". Think about Facebook for instance and how people constantly view and comment on peoples status - or even how companies have used status updates and wall posts in disciplinary cases. Leadbitter states that any move we make on the web can be tracked and ultimately come back and haunt us.
Furthermore, he offers that economically the web destroys just as much as it creates - think about the music industry and how illegal downloading is costing the industry billions of dollars. What about the death of newspapers? The death of TV advertising and how potentially advertising will go all together as TV viewers move online or watch on demand (sky plus). Will it be replaced with product placement instead? That way brands names will still be associated with and aimed at certain audiences but consumed whenever the media text is? I have the book in the classroom if you want to pursue his ideas in more depth.
Music Video: Unsigned Band
Mash Up
Dan Gilmor outlines in his book We Media how anyone can be a journalist because converging technology means that events can be filmed and uploaded to Youtube, social networking sites - think about the first footage of 9/11 or the woman whose car was pushed down the motorway by a lorry (filmed by a civilian in a passing car). What about how advterising is personally directed to us following the information we have about ourselves on our facebook page or how personal recommendations are emailed to you from amazon after you've purchased a product.
Andrew Keen discusses a darker side of web 2.0 and he suggests that the new form of "online collectivism" is threatening our culture and our economy. He argues that authentic talent is disappearing as amateur media is banded all over the Internet. He refers to the death of the newspaper (readerships declining) whilst Youtube videos of skateboarding capture the nations eyeballs. Michael Moore supports this notion when he discusses the dumbing down of western society by multinational capitalist conglomerates.
Would a Marxist think that mass collaboration on the Internet is good? Anyone can be a media producer and have their work viewed by millions of people (hence limiting the profits of large capitalist organisations - think about musicians leaving major labels and setting up on their own - simplyred.com). However, some critics argue that online collaboration and sharing is promoting a "free economy" where unpaid volunteers are exploited by corporations. Taken from Wikinomics - Don Tapscott & Anthony D. Williams (2006);
I really like some of the ideas of Charles Leadbitter in his book "We Think" (2009). He outlines two counter arguments "Will the web promote democratic collaboration and creativity? Or will it be a malign influence, rendering us collectively stupid by our reliance on what google and wikipedia tell us being true, or, worse, promoting bigotry, thoughtlessness, criminality and terror?" He goes on to discuss how the emergence of web 2.0 has allowed us to express ourselves and as charles Chenung would state self-represent. Leadbitter acknowledges the active nature of the audience and states that the web is not just for producing but it also encourages surveillance, "not just by the state and corporations , but also by our peers and friends". Think about Facebook for instance and how people constantly view and comment on peoples status - or even how companies have used status updates and wall posts in disciplinary cases. Leadbitter states that any move we make on the web can be tracked and ultimately come back and haunt us.
Furthermore, he offers that economically the web destroys just as much as it creates - think about the music industry and how illegal downloading is costing the industry billions of dollars. What about the death of newspapers? The death of TV advertising and how potentially advertising will go all together as TV viewers move online or watch on demand (sky plus). Will it be replaced with product placement instead? That way brands names will still be associated with and aimed at certain audiences but consumed whenever the media text is? I have the book in the classroom if you want to pursue his ideas in more depth.
Revision Blog
Here's a link to a revision blog written by a teacher from another college. It's recommended by the chief examiner but it's a social networking site so you'll have to access it from home.
http://musicindustry.posterous.com/ - This is useful for any AS music industry resit and media in the online age.
http://musicindustry.posterous.com/ - This is useful for any AS music industry resit and media in the online age.
Feedback on section A and tips on improving
REFER TO THE MEDIA STUDIES BLOG FOR A DETAILED ESSAY PLAN BY THE CHIEF EXAMINER FOR SECTION A.
After reading your mock exams I have the following points for you to consider and incorporate into your work;
For question 1a.
1. DO NOT just describe how your skills have developed. You need to say how these, developed, skills have benefit ted your production. For the mock - how did it make your product more creative? Did you challenge anything? Did you push boundaries? Did you create and incorporate something unique (your own style?)
2. How did you develop the skills? What benefit did you get from online tutorials? Using blogspot? Using Youtube to watch clips and gain inspiration?
3. Did the nature of the brief allow you to develop your skills? e.g. the prelim was very prescriptive hence you couldn't exercise a great deal of creativity........the A2 brief was much broader allowing for more creative scope.
This question must be about reflecting on your skills and how these skills have developed and ultimately improved the products you've made. Be specific and provide specific examples from your work.
For question 1b.
You needed to oultline in you introduction that you know what narrative theory is - what do theorists say? (look at alisonmedia.net, text books - go to the library and find some quotes from media theorists) Think about what Roland Barthes wrote about narrative, Todorov, Propp, Strauss and other structuralists. Top grade students would research structuralism in their own time to provide added depth to their work.
Then you need to discuss how you product is sturtcured - how is your product usually structured? why? what's it's purpose? does it depart from Todorov's structure? Why? What story is your product telling? How is that apparent to the viewer? Are their narrative expectations confirmed? Do you use typical narrative set pieces? Is your text built around the expected binary opposition (strauss)? Or does it challenge this? Have you used archetypal characters? Do they fit Propps theory of character types?
How does the audience make sense of your narrative - look up Roland Barthes (on the narrative powerpoint). Think about how media texts are ploysemic (Stuart Hall) and can be interpreted in a variety of ways (as according to him audiences are not passive). Does your text rely on a point of cultural reference? (Barthes).
In short....you must answer the question directly it was asking about how you used narrative and how would your audience make sense of it.
After reading your mock exams I have the following points for you to consider and incorporate into your work;
For question 1a.
1. DO NOT just describe how your skills have developed. You need to say how these, developed, skills have benefit ted your production. For the mock - how did it make your product more creative? Did you challenge anything? Did you push boundaries? Did you create and incorporate something unique (your own style?)
2. How did you develop the skills? What benefit did you get from online tutorials? Using blogspot? Using Youtube to watch clips and gain inspiration?
3. Did the nature of the brief allow you to develop your skills? e.g. the prelim was very prescriptive hence you couldn't exercise a great deal of creativity........the A2 brief was much broader allowing for more creative scope.
This question must be about reflecting on your skills and how these skills have developed and ultimately improved the products you've made. Be specific and provide specific examples from your work.
For question 1b.
You needed to oultline in you introduction that you know what narrative theory is - what do theorists say? (look at alisonmedia.net, text books - go to the library and find some quotes from media theorists) Think about what Roland Barthes wrote about narrative, Todorov, Propp, Strauss and other structuralists. Top grade students would research structuralism in their own time to provide added depth to their work.
Then you need to discuss how you product is sturtcured - how is your product usually structured? why? what's it's purpose? does it depart from Todorov's structure? Why? What story is your product telling? How is that apparent to the viewer? Are their narrative expectations confirmed? Do you use typical narrative set pieces? Is your text built around the expected binary opposition (strauss)? Or does it challenge this? Have you used archetypal characters? Do they fit Propps theory of character types?
How does the audience make sense of your narrative - look up Roland Barthes (on the narrative powerpoint). Think about how media texts are ploysemic (Stuart Hall) and can be interpreted in a variety of ways (as according to him audiences are not passive). Does your text rely on a point of cultural reference? (Barthes).
In short....you must answer the question directly it was asking about how you used narrative and how would your audience make sense of it.
Answering the exam question
Plan written by Pete Fraser (Chief examiner) and expanded on by myself.
At the top of the paper, for all topics, there is an instruction that you need to refer to the past, contemporary media and future possibilities and that you should use case study examples to support your arguments. You also need to have some reference to media theory and to refer to examples from at least two media areas. Since 20 of the marks are for explanation, argument and analysis (EAA), twenty are for use of examples (EG) and 10 are for use of terminology (T), you can see that this is not an easy task.
In this post, I am going to try to show how you can make the most of your material to do a good answer.So how would we go about answering these questions?
Step 1: Identify what the question is about. Exam questions are often written to a bit of a formula- 'to what extent...' 'how far...' '...discuss' - you'll see these a lot in G325. what they are all doing is asking you to consider a debate and to look at both sides of something, not just to prove a point. So when Q.8 asks for a discussion of whether the impact of the Internet is revolutionary, it is not setting it as a statement of fact, but asking 'how far' this is true. Similarly, q.9, which refers to distribution and consumption, is asking whether the Internet has made these things very different. So there are similarities between the two questions, though the second one gives you more to tie your answer to, where the first one is quite open. In both cases, though, what you use for case studies is really open to your choice!
Step 2: decide which of the two questions to do
Step 3: note down a plan, with the main points you want to cover and the examples you want to use. Break this down so you cover all the areas needed
At the top of the paper, for all topics, there is an instruction that you need to refer to the past, contemporary media and future possibilities and that you should use case study examples to support your arguments. You also need to have some reference to media theory and to refer to examples from at least two media areas. Since 20 of the marks are for explanation, argument and analysis (EAA), twenty are for use of examples (EG) and 10 are for use of terminology (T), you can see that this is not an easy task.
In this post, I am going to try to show how you can make the most of your material to do a good answer.So how would we go about answering these questions?
Step 1: Identify what the question is about. Exam questions are often written to a bit of a formula- 'to what extent...' 'how far...' '...discuss' - you'll see these a lot in G325. what they are all doing is asking you to consider a debate and to look at both sides of something, not just to prove a point. So when Q.8 asks for a discussion of whether the impact of the Internet is revolutionary, it is not setting it as a statement of fact, but asking 'how far' this is true. Similarly, q.9, which refers to distribution and consumption, is asking whether the Internet has made these things very different. So there are similarities between the two questions, though the second one gives you more to tie your answer to, where the first one is quite open. In both cases, though, what you use for case studies is really open to your choice!
Highlight and annotate the questions what are they asking you to do.....what examples could you use. Identify the key words.
Step 2: decide which of the two questions to do
Step 3: note down a plan, with the main points you want to cover and the examples you want to use. Break this down so you cover all the areas needed
Examples
Media areas x2 or more
Which theory/critics to reference- it just means whose ideas do you want to mention
Main arguments
Past?
Present?
Future?
terminology
If you run out of time, the examiner can at least give you credit for where you would have gone.
remember, you could answer this section before you do 1a and 1b if you want.
Step 4 Write an Intro - keep it short and simple. Ensure you reword the question to show the examiner that you understand what is being asked of you. for example;
'In this essay I shall consider how far web microcosies and Internet memes demonstrate the changing nature of distribution and consumption of the media' -
This intro already uses two bits of terminology (microseries and memes) and shows you are going to address the question (distribution and consumption).
If you know that you are going to use the ideas of contemporary critics, you could go on to say
'I shall refer to the ideas of David Gauntlett to consider whether the arguments he makes about Web 2.0 really do suggest that the media has changed dramatically.'
Step 5 get on with it:
case study 1 - this is where you discuss your first example- Draw upon theory to support or challenge any of the points that you make. Ensure you discuss the past, present and future of this study. e.g. where did we used to get our news from - any issues with this ie. newspapers are instantly out of date as soon as they've been printed. Then discuss how online media has revolutionised the news e.g. Dan Gilmor and citizen Journalism (but argue the case just because you take a picture, upload it and leave a comment are you a journalist? What would Michale Moore say about this?) - then lead this discussion of web 2.0 and converging technologies into a discussion/ debate about social networking and David Gautnlett (collaboration) - twitter vs. Jan Moir and Internet memes(outline the good and bad). Murdoch now wanting to charge online subscription fee. Michale Moore offers alternative view that it's capitalist greed that's caused the death of the newspaper as they've dumbed down the nation (this could bring in uses and gratification and why people use the news and how - how has online media made it easier for people to dip in and out of the news?). Then what do you think will happen in the future - where will the news go next?
Step 6 case study 2 - your second example- Define any terms, outline some examples and bring in any relevant theory to support or challenge any of the points that you make. Again Ensure you discuss the past, present and future of this study. For instance if you were going to talk about the music industry you could discuss how music used to be produced (signed to a major label and recording in a large studio - CD's made and sold - issues can only buy albums or buy singles for a lot of money and usually can only buy mainstream in high street stores (was that limiting?)). With the rise of MP3 (smaller file sizes although worse quality) people can record in their own room and upload to social networking sites and offer downloads - (leaving majors - setting up online indie labels). What about file sharing and peer to peer sites? Issues both for and against? Major reaction to illegal downloads? Apples solution - rise of Itunes (can purchase singles) - Chris Anderson's theory of the 'long Tail' selling more niche products as Internet has endless supply (self space in high street stores). Technological convergence means that we can now have our entire music collection in the Palm of our hands.
What about anybody being able to be a music producer? Think about uses and gratifications. Mash-up's? unsigned acts? David Guantlett - creativity and happiness - take a look at Don Tapscott and his book wikinomics - he states that mass collaboration is revolutionising the way people and business operate. He offers that because of web 2.0 meida companies are beginning to conceive, design, develop and distribute products and services in profoundly new ways - youtube, spotify, podcasts etc. However, Andrew Keen suggests that there is a dark side to web 2.0 and that the rise of amateur creativity on the web will drown out authentic talent. He states that "if you democratise media then you democratise talent". - kind of the same argument that Michael Moore has regarding the dumbing down of the nation by multinational capitalist conglomerates.
Step 7 pull your ideas together, preparing for conclusions... an attempt to ensure that you explicitly address past, present and future and that you argue with the critics rather than just accepting their view. (Relating to January's question) - Make some points about the audience changing - we spend more time online, informal distribution of media is growing via social networks and e-mail, maybe some of us make stuff ourselves to distribute (as Gauntlett suggests). Maybe speculate that this could grow even further in the future. But... the sting in the tail is that Tv is still going strong, these online communities we belong to are still owned by big companies and much of what is being consumed is actually just transferred from one medium to another; Wesch argues that it is all getting more democratic, but is contributing to memes really democracy in action or just a form of play with no wider significance? Gauntlett's 'the media were like Gods..' - has that really changed? were audiences ever as passive as his model characterises them? Are they really that much more active now? isn't it just a tiny percentage who actually make stuff to put online?
This is just one essay model . You could take a totally different approach, using other posts as a starting point- for example talking about collaborative texts as a new role for audiences or about the changes to the music industry illustrated. Or you could answer the question about revolutionary change by reference to technology and consider whether it makes any difference at all. Remember- your choice of case studies is up to you. What you know about them and how you are able to relate them to ideas is where the marks come in!
Here are January's questions;
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)