Tag Archives: technology

Henry Jenkins on Spreadable Media

16 May
Jelly Jam on Bread by Roger's Wife

Jelly Jam on Bread by Roger’s Wife via Creative Commons on Flickr

This is not a blog post about Facebook on toast. Thank the lord. But rather a summary of some interesting points raised by Henry Jenkins on the topic of his new book, Spreadable Media. A well-respected professor of Media at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, his latest research looks into what all internet marketers have striven to find in a magic formula, how and why certain forms of  digital media goes viral on the internet. Less of a masterclass and more of an exploration, here are some of the main interesting points I picked up from his recent talk at the University of Westminster on social media and sharing on the web.

  1. What is Spreadable Media? It’s exactly how it sounds. For Jenkins it’s a study of how media circulates around the web. Some bits of content are ‘sticker’ than others, some get spread far and wide, some stays in one place. One obvious and major example was the  Kony 2012 Youtube video by Invisible Children, with over 1 million views in just 4 days, second only to ripped footage of Susan Boyle, which took 7 days to attain the same number of hits. At time of writing this video was a little shy of 90 million views in a little over two months, the fastest spread video ever online. Why was it shared so much? Because there was a call to action at the end; “Above all, Share this movie online.It’s free.” The act of sharing allows people top put their own personal viewpoint on the content; a personal message in agreement or disagreement, and the contents status changes as it moves through the online space. Sharing is a stepping stone to other politically charged commitments, and socially engaged people are more likely to take part.
  2. Think like a  Dandelion.  Drawing on the ideas of science fiction writer and blogger Cory Doctrow, Jenkins notes if producers want their ideas to fly out into the world, we need to stop thinking like the mammals that we are, who keep their ideas close and are reluctant to share. But if we made our work easily copied and shared, those ideas will spread into the eyes who find it pleasing, and may eventually end up into the right hands where a commercial relationship can begin. Traditional exchange economies are not so valid for artists any more, and must look for other revenue streams.
Mike Arauz - Facebook Friends via lynneluvah creative commons on Flickr

Mike Arauz – Facebook Friends via lynneluvah creative commons on Flickr

  1. Grass-roots communities and Astroturf: Spreadable media to a group is like a grass-roots community, sharing content they are passionate about with each other for a shared experience and want. The first spreadable media form was the ‘zine from the traditional printing press over 150 years ago, sharing homemade fanzines via the post, which is still popular today. Personal opinions on what people think is good and ‘like’ has currency and has gained much ground. Web 2.0 isn’t as participatory as these analogue forms, but rather the friction between producers and users around what is wanted/needed from media that has produced this participatory culture. And what of the new ideas for Facebook users to be paid for sharing content with their friends on the web? Jenkins called this Astroturf, a fake sharing experience which is a sign of a struggle.
  2. Democracy Struggle: For the first time in history, people are able to fully reciprocate and get their voices heard. But it’s a preconception that the new media revolution will create a democracy that we have all been striving for. Instead, as referenced by the ideas of John Fiske, this new freedom is creating new struggles as we try to negotiate and understand this new media landscape. While there are 10 million active  Twitter users in the UK, more than are buying newspapers, there is still a participation gap; some people don’t have access to it, and some are still not using it meaningfully.
  3. A better education: Ending on a point that is often made by academics, Jenkins said that a better education is needed to make people, especially the youth, understand the best ways to make use of these new forms of communication. However, there are many barriers in our way. In thousands of schools and colleges in the UK, many social media sites are blocked to increase ‘productivity and learning’. Children are then forced to learn how to learn to communicate in these online spaces on their own, without any guidance, mentoring, or safe practice guides, which makes them vulnerable. Students need to be encouraged to be participatory online.

Now, when I make some new content, new questions will be in my mind to make me think about how it will be shared around the web. Why would people want to share this? What value can people add when sharing this? Can this idea be developed into something new? All good creative food for thought, which most importantly I’ll have to remember; ‘If it doesn’t spread, it’s dead.’

Thoughts of an Apple Hater

7 Mar 171398958_e03a923309_z

Today Apple are releasing another product, probably an iPad 3. While everyone is making their predictions, I penned this piece about my hatred for anything mac. This post has also appeared on The Huffington Post.

Mac in the Bin - by nathan makan via Flicker

Mac in the Bin - by nathan makan via Flicker

It’s no secret to my friends and family that I loathe Apple and their products. From the evangelical store openings, to the product rumor mill dominating the online space prior to launches, their extremely smart PR campaigns promote Apple as probably the best at what they do. Which is, in my honest opinion, producing shamefulmoney pits. Once you buy an iSomething, you have to buy compatible accessories, you can only buy certified apps, and you better hope water never meets your new baby so you don’t have to kiss goodbye to your warranty. But they do look so good. A lifestyle lubricant for the 21st century, no self facilitating media node would be such a fashionable dickhead without one.

I am fully aware that they are well designed and technically brilliant machines. My boyfriend and I argue about this religiously. ‘Your life would be so much better if you had a Mac!’ he wails. My life would be so much better if people stopped telling me I need a Mac. You want doesn’t equal I need. I now get introduced in social circles as ‘The girl who hates Apple’, which as you can imagine as a lively conversation opener as mentioning the BNP.

“Why do you hate Apple?! What’s wrong with you?” I am met with a look of confusion and terror that I have seen many times before.

“I don’t feel need to prove my importance by walking into Starbucks with an iPad under my arm. There are much less expensive ways to look like an idiot.” This comment is always generally agreed with. One person has once unashamedly confessed to me that he has stuck a Apple logo sticker over the top of a Dell logo to maximise his respect points.

“But you work in online? How can you do your job without working on a Mac?” This generalisation never fails to stagger me.

“I work perfectly fine on a PC thank you.” This statement is always particularly hard to admit, as I do curse repeatedly about working on Windows. But I would rather say this than rant for the next 10 minutes about how fast it is, or shown off my latest Scorsese digital masterpiece on Vimeo, or produced some sound that when processed through some digital synth sounds like an elephant farting, and before you know it I have had my ear bent on how I am totally wrong and they are very right. An unsuspecting loiterer (probably a mac user too, as they always hunt in packs) ask to join the conversation. “Rosie was just trying to convince me how a PC’s are better than Macs.” Errrr, WRONG! I can’t get a word in edge-ways in between your big head and your even bigger Apple shaped ego!

I know crap PC’s can be, and I am not defending them. But when you buy an Apple product, you also buy a special pair of apple-tinted spectacles, that makes you believe that there is no other digital product worth having. I refuse to buy into that cult. They get cracked, they break, and they get bugs and viruses just like any other technological object. It is also bad for people to assume that everyone else as bought into that cult. It’s very painful for digital marketers to admit teenagers phone of choice is the Blackberry for it’s messaging system, not the iPhone. If people are creating content with one demographic in mind, they will run the risk of bypassing certain minorities and alienating in favour of another product that fits their needs better.

So in short, I probably will one day buy a mac book pro. When the market has bottomed out, the price-tag has been slashed in half, and the hipsters have levitated to the next big thing. But until then, show off your Apple love to someone else, cos this Apple-hater don’t wanna know.

Women need more self-confidence to emerge as web heroines in Design and Technology

23 Jan

This post also appeared on The Huffington Post.

It’s a well-known fact that there are not enough women working in the Technology and Design industries today. Women only make up 12% of the workforce, and only 5% of board members at FTSE listed companies are women. However, withs girls outperforming boys in education, with 72% gaining A-C’s against 55% of boys in Sciences and Arts subjects. We have the talent, but it’s not coming through to the industry. With 95% of women seeing the industry as nerdy, more is needed to inspire women to work in this rapidly expanding industry.Web Heroines, founded by successful web designer Keri Lambden in 2011, was set up to celebrate women working in the Tech and Design industries, bringing women together and inspiring others to work in the growing tech industry. Rather than criticise and point fingers at the restrictions, the group’s aim is to showcase and celebrate achievements, sharing opinions, and then investigate potential solutions to the girl gap.

Emerge was a mini conference set up to start that very conversation. The three day event ran during the 16-18th January, starting with webinars by speakers from all over the world sharing their knowledge on a variety of subjects from SASS to juggling a freelancing and a day job, accumulating with a panel discussion in the British Library with four inspiring women all working in the industry. Julie Howell, confidently claimed that she ‘invented social media’ back in 1995 by setting up one of the world’s first online communities; Jooly’s Joint, and has won 5 awards for her influence on accessible design. Sarah McVittie co-founded Texperts, the world’s first text message questioning service, which was sold to KGB in 2008 in a multi-Million pound deal. She has since founded Dressipi, a ‘contextually aware fashion recommendation system’. Sarah Parmenter started her business at 19, and is a completely self-taught UI designer and coder. An early adopter of designing for the iPhone/iPad, she regularly speaks at conferences both in the UK and abroad and recently won .net designer of the year award 2011. Jess Ratcliffe came up with the idea for her video game swapping website, gaboom, when she was just 15. She has recently appeared on Dragon’s Den,and has recently re-launched the website.

The first question posed is was one on all of our lips; why are there so few women working in Tech and Design? Confidence is felt to be the main issue. Julie Howell said there is the talent but people are just not coming forward. Women need to adopt more of an ‘headphones off’ method of working, by talking and sharing ideas with other people and not hiding away. Sarah McVittie agreed and said there are not enough women role models in the industry, more needs to be done to inspire other young women, and as an entrepreneur you have a responsibility to educate others. The panel agreed that there is less of a gender difference in the workplace these days, and women should embrace that they are better at different things, such as nurturing and being empathetic, all qualities of fantastic leaders. As more gender specific products are being built with women in mind, this will hopefully encourage more women into the industry. Sarah Parmenter even said that sometimes being a woman has played to her advantage when winning contracts, such as her work for Breast Cancer UK, and women should not be afraid of playing this to their advantage.
The topic of self confidence kept popping up through the hour long talk, with the panel agreeing that having bags of it and the passion for your idea can be a real driver for your work, but lacking self esteem and even listening to social media backlash can put some on the backfoot. The real issue isn’t that women are lacking talent, but they lack the self-confidence to continue with their ideas. The best thing to do to combat this is to put yourself out there, be it through teaching, mentoring or even taking part in conferences, which will not only boost your own confidence, but will also help inspire others. Emerge was a successful event, and hopefully this is the start of many more conversations to get more women into the tech sphere.

Sherry Turkle at the London School of Economics: Alone Together

3 Jun

Last night I attended another fantastic talk at the London School of Economics by MIT professor Sherry Turkle. I was already familiar with her work from my university studies, but she was here in London to discuss the major themes in her latest book; ‘Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less from Each Other.’ Much of her work looks at the human relationship with computers and technology from a psychological perspective, with her earlier works identifying the persona we create using technology and the internet as the second self.

But 15 years ago, before commencing the research for this book, which focuses on the American family and cultural attitudes to technology in the social sphere, she admits that she didn’t expect our public technological personas to exist simultaneously with our private self. This is seen now more than ever, as we spend more time communicating with each other on social networks, avoiding any face-to-face contact with our nearest and dearest. As technology has improved our lives and created simpler modes of communication, we seem to communicate less, in short 140 character messages, and in turn dumb ourselves down also. She argues that our increased reliance on technology it putting the ‘self’ in conflict.

Through technology we enter ‘a zone’, removed from real life. Developers ‘plug in’ to a zone when they are coding. We log in to facebook to connect with others. We are fearful of being disconnected with the world as we know it, if we leave our phones at home we feel naked and without the internet we can not function in our everyday lives. Being forever connected with each other via technology promotes the idea that we can not survive our own solitude, although physically we are alone. People don’t even want to talk to each other in person. I don’t want to talk to people in person half most of the time, so much of these themes she discussed rang true with me.

Some people don’t have a problem with this. For some, the internet persona that we create is a much safer world to exist, where we can control our image by photoshopping our profile pictures and construct our identities through likes and links; “I share, therefore I am”. While this technology is seductive, and some would say is addictive, Turkle argues that it is in fact our perspective of the internet that is actually distorted, particularly as use the online sphere to experiment with our personalities more. We believe what we want to believe, thinking technology will solve our problems, choosing to ignore that the internet in it’s relatively infant state can be easily manipulated can actually cause more harm than good to it’s users. We need to moderate our relationship and dependencies with technology, and some of us defiantly need to have a diet.

Turkle listed many examples to back up her point, such as the World of Warcraft and a 15-year-old’s birthday party, but for me these ideas perfectly echo the themes of the film Catfish. In the film Yaniv, a photographer, by chance builds an online friendship with Abby, who sends him paintings. From this he forms a bond with her sister, who in reality *SPOILER ALERT* turns out to be Abby’s  mother. Angela builds this online life as an escapism is tragically intertwined with the solitude that she feels in her real life, projecting the feelings and the relationship she wants to have with Yuri. Together, they are very alone. The self is in crisis, and has to connect to others to feel safe.

While we may not know it, our relationship with technology allows others to take advantage of our basic human rights. The idea of privacy is a relatively new one, but is grounded by the ideals of democracy. Turkle finished by telling an anecdote of a recent webby award party, where a web luminary used Bentham’s panoptican to argue that privacy is a negative in today’s world as nobody should have anything to hide – which sounds suspiciously like the Zuckerberg school of thought. This is wrong. Everyone should be able to have private ideas and actions as this is what makes us free, and allows us to experiment and grow as people. Assuming people have something to hide criminalises people into self-regulation and is not the basis of a democracy, but a forced dictatorship. With society is forcing it’s own dependency on technology this is breeding ground for a potentially dangerous situation.

While her views may some strike some as dark and gloomy and portrays herself as a luddite, Turkle thinks her views should be seen as refreshingly distant from the utopian interpretation we view on technology. Her book isn’t to say that everything is wrong, but that something has gone a-miss, and we need to take urgent steps before our children have their personal freedom taken away, before it they even knew it existed.

For a better explanation of the ideas described here, check out Turkle’s recent TED talk.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,255 other followers

%d bloggers like this: