Mary Macken-Horarik discusses in her article “A Telling Symbiosis in the Discourse of Hatred: Multimodal New Texts about the ‘Children Overboard’ affair the effect media discourse has played in shaping the public’s attitude in this area by analysing multimodal texts that include the written word, headlines, layout and accompanying imagery.

Sensational headlines and the moment being capture in a picture is what sells newpapers. When people are time poor they will simply scan the ‘dailies’ taking on the headlines and checking out the photographs. Equally, it is those items that draw readers in and it will be those elements that make them buy the paper.

The ‘children overboard’ media coverage was extensive, vivid and sensationalised. Designed to create an element of fear that our boarders were insecure, Macken-Horarik believes that that the multimodal coverage had bearing on the outcome of the 2001 election and also long term it has had bearing on our policies regarding refugees and asylum seekers.

Therefore it is easy to see why Macken-Horarik is suggesting that linguists have the responsibility to deconstruct the multimodal communications and evaluate the impact of the components and suggests this can be done through a categorisation process, Genericisation and Specification, Categorisation and Role Allocation. Her analysis is thorough and obviously skill linguists can decipher what is truth and what is fiction, fabrication and sensationalism but the ordinary person is firstly not skilled in this area and therefore how her processes will impact the reporting of these types of situations or the long-term outcomes of this type of coverage. Certainly within an academic/educational structure, a better understanding of multimodal test and the effect each component has may provide skills to journalists but in saying that will it give them greater power to manipulate public discourse.

Ben
Z3289141

Bibligraphy: Macken-Horarik, M. “The Children Overboard Affair” Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. 26.2 (2003), 1-16.

• Authenticator: Help the audience figure out what to believe, what can they trust
• Sense-maker: Help the audience derive meaning from what is happening in the world
• Navigator: Help the audience find their way around a story, point them to the “good stuff”
• Forum-leader: Help the audience engage in a discussion in a knowledgeable way”

For a reporter, to perform any or preferably all of the roles Rosenstiel suggests, they must be highly skilled in the tools of their trade, ie language and grammar, and have a clear understanding on the impact and importance that word and phrase selection/structure may have in allowing their audience to achieve what is outlined above.

Annabelle Lukin in her article ‘Lessons on grammar’ highlights how the media reporting on the War on Iraq has varied greatly. She uses several examples of a human-interest story to show how language selection can influence the audience interpretation of events. She carefully unpackages the few sentences of each example grammatical and explains the impact. Several of the examples are almost identical and then she uses the final example to demonstrate her point.

The key point of her article is that by careful selection of grammar and language, reporters are able to ‘spin’ a story. In her example of the War in Iraq, reporters are able to support government policy/properganda when public opinion might be is against involvement. Reporters are able to dehumanise the carnage of war. For example “a missile obliterated his home” not the fact that a soldier or person pushed the button that dropped the missile. An object rather than a person caused this devastation. Therefore involvement for the audience is more acceptable/palatable.

A skilled journalist will be aware that every word selection has a meaning behind it. However, with modern media technologies, journalistic skills are not limited to those who are ‘professionals’ and therefore in some instances, which Lukin eludes to is that not everyone is aware of the impact their liguistics skills will have on their audience.

After reading this article, I think I may be more critical in analysing what is being written and question whether the journalist fulfilling their role or are they ‘spinning me in a certain direction”.

Ben
Z3289141

Bibligraphy: Lukin, Annabelle. “Lessons in Grammar: how ideology shapes the report writing of war.” Education Links 66/67 (2003), 18-20.

Haddon’s first point relates to boundaries.  Geography and cost were the once main boundaries with early forms of communications.  However, Haddon uses examples to suggest that our interaction with these technologies could be considered as shaping use or an “expanded definition of ‘use’”. Her examples of early British computer usage supports the trend of convergence in that computing experience incorporates more than time just in front of the screen.

Another example of boundaries and who is actually in control is that on many occasions audiences forced to use a communication process, even though it may not be your preferred option. A simple example is telephone billing. Some providers now email your account to you.  Whilst yes, you have to provide an email address, which accounts for opting in, your only alternative is an additional charge for a service previously provided if you don’t. Another example is many schools channeling school communications via an SMS/internet.  The old paper copy of the school newsletter in the bottom of the school bag is ‘dying out”, replaced by e-newsletters. Who is setting the boundaries? Who is driving the communication pattern? Sender or receipient!

She then examines the importance for researchers to understand continuities. She suggests that we need to think of it as a ‘continuum of uses’.  It is certainly true, that much development, in any area is based on historical data.  What has or hasn’t worked; what needs are not being met.  There is the notion that new technology is the continuum of the old.  This raises the question does it replaceor do they co-exist eg. The fixed line phone vs mobile; the greeting card vs email.  I think at this stage, they do co-exist, but for how long?  For example, “Western Union announced the discontinuation of all of its telegram services effective from 31 January 2006 when only 20,000 telegrams were sent in 2005, compared with 20 million in 1929.”

The third area Haddon examines is the most interesting.  Her reference to our choice being a repertoire of communication and that we have moved from ‘being a user of communications to being a manager of communications” is very apt. As a manager, all aspects need to be considered including effectiveness, financial and technical when selecting the most suitable mode of communicating.  I would not send a birthday email, or text to my grandmother, but would ring her landline or post a card.  Despite the fact that an email or text may be more efficient and cheaper, it would be less effective in that she does not use these modes and therefore the communication would be ineffective.” Haddon gives examples of how email may be ineffective, yet this mode of communication has certainly displaced the internal memo in the business world.  I think when examining usage and communication patterns you must also understand that what drives the change will depend on personal preferences of both the sender and the intended audience.

Haddon finally considers how long term changes to communication patterns may affect balance and how the emerging communication may have significant social and economical impacts. By researchers monitoring patters and addressing the areas Haddon raises of boundaries, managing repertoire, changes to choice and evolution of repertoire, society will have a better understanding of communication behaviour and will be able to place for the social and economic impacts of that behaviour.

Ben
Z3289141

Bibligraphy: Haddon, Leslie. “Research Questions for the Evolving Communications Landscape.” In Ling, Rich and Pedersen, Per, Eds. Mobile Communications: Re-negotiation of the Social Sphere. London: Springer – Verlag, 2005, 7-22

Teresa Rizzo’s article, ‘Programming Your Own Channel’ in essence, states that the scene described above is a thing of the past. By using three different examples, Foxtel IQ (PDRs), YouTube and iPhones, she explores the role of ‘play-lists’ and the implications they have in our ability to exercise greater choices in our viewing patterns and how the viewing experience has now become mobile, spontaneous and interactive. By using the case studies, Rizzo reinforces her position that the ‘playlist’ personalises viewing experiences and presents new challenges to broadcasting institutions in relation to flow.

PDRs such as Foxtel IQ have created a shift viewing habits from ‘temporal’ (tuning in at a specific time to view a certain program’ to ‘spatial’ (the multi-channel platform offering a smorgasbord of entertainment for you to choose. No longer do commercial breaks offer viewers an opportunity to get a snack or take a bathroom break, PDRs offer the ability to ‘fast forward’ through what you don’t wish to view.

The ‘YouTube’ platform takes personalisation to the next level. Whilst PDRs such as Foxtel IQ and TiVo enable greater choice through a large network of channels, than free-to-air television, statistics for YouTube are

• 70,000,000 – number of total videos on YouTube (March 2008)
• 200,000 – number of video publishers on YouTube (March 2008)
• 112,486,327 – number of views the most viewed video on YouTube has (January, 2009)
(source: http://www.socialmedia.biz/?tag=youtube)

youTube allows users to not only view a much broader range of media, but it is provided from an enormous source of providers. When an interesting ‘clip’ is found, it is often shared through ‘social networking’. Access to this type is not static, in that you are centralised in the family home but provided there is access to internet, personal viewing can proceed. This leads to Rizzo’s third case example, the iPhone and mobility.

Rizzo’s point that “mobility is an ever-increasing aspect of viewing” could not be more true. Devices such as the iPhone have most certainly provided users a much greater opportunity to personalise their viewing patterns. My own experiences can attest to this notion. It is common for me to watch television through my iPhone, when I am out and about. The ability to view episodes of my favourite sit-comes, not yet released in Australia is always enticing.

The key concept of Rizzo’s article is to discuss how new technologies and view patterns have affected flow.

Rizzo draws on her case studies and suggests that whilst the previous model of flow suggested by Williams (‘a specific arrangement of and approach to timing, organisation and viewer experience’) may still be relevant, a different model of flow is required to meet the needs of the digital environment.

Deleuze and Guattari’s model perhaps embraces ‘new technologies’ somewhat in that they suggest flow is ‘when different types of ‘machines’ form connections”. The world wide net has provided an avenue for different connections and different flow patterns.

Finally, I come back to Rizzo’s concept of the ‘play-list’. Essentially this is not something that is new. We have more or less been creating our own ‘play-lists’ since the advent of broadcast television, in our right to choose what we watch, albeit, on a much simpler level. The simple process of ‘ratings’ has always given the viewer some level of control over broadcast television.

However, in the highly competitive market entertainment media, and the perception that viewers want the opportunity to personalise and become interactive with broadcast media, the Rizzo’s concept of the ‘playlist’ and flow will need to be considered by the media giants in order to meet the needs of all the stakeholders (viewers, broadcaster, advertisers).

Ben
Z3289141

Bibliography: Rizzo, Teresa: “Programming Your Own Channel: An Archaeology of the Playlist”. In Kenyon, Andrew, Ed. TV Futures: Digital Television Policy in Australia. Carlton, VIC: Melbourne University Press, 2007, 108-134

At any given moment, particularly via cable television, you can tune into a reality show covering any a wide range of topics and interests, finding love to loosing weight, being the next business tycoon to the next singing/dancing star, conquering the elements to overcoming terrifying situations and at the end of the show, the pot of gold, the prize.

Reality television is the new format for modern day game shows and everyone wants to be the winner, including the networks and sponsors.  If the show attracts good ratings, the ability to entice the advertising dollar is much easier for networks however in this day and age, with technologies such with remote controls, IQ television and the habitual behaviour of channel surfing:  Is commercial advertising reaching its intended audience.  It has been quoted that only “18% of TV ad campaigns generate a positive ‘Return on Investment’.”

The notion of convergence is explored by Jenkins in this article using the successful reality show, American Idol. ‘Idol’ incorporates more than just a one-hour time investment on a weekly basis. In some cases reality shows tmonopolise air time (eg. Big Brother capitalised on media saturation). They evoke (or try to) an emotional journey for the viewer.  They often incorporate behind the scenes or background so the audience has empathy for the contestants. They offer viewers many opportunities become emotionally involved or attached.  They link shows with interactive websites, incorporating competitions, videos, instant progress updates and the ability to ‘blog’.  Partnerships are established with radio networks to interview contestants, therefore keeping the show at the forefront of viewer’s mind.  Reminders to vote are regularly flashed across the television screen.  The more attached, or emotionally involved the more inclined a viewer is to exert their power in the voting process.

In order to participate, in most of the alternate forums subscription/registration is required and from this point, the marketing arm kicks in and in ‘reality’ you have just placed yourself on a electronic mailing list.

Jenkins also discusses is that there is a distinction between types of viewers.  He calls them ‘Zappers, Casuals and Loyals. He that American Idol has successfully appealed to all types of viewers.  This is certainly true for my own experiences.  I also agree with Jenkins in his comments regarding gossip and convergence.  Again my own experience is not that I share and episode of a scripted sitcom or drama show with my friends over coffee or msn, but I have and will engage in commentary regarding outcomes and injustices of reality shows.

Ben
Z3289141

Bibliography: Jenkins, Henry. “Buying into American Idol: How we are being Sold on Reality Television” In Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide”.New York, NYU Press, 2007, 59 – 92.

Even though the article draws on two sets of data, in both cases the sample sizes are small with 24 participants. The methodology involved keeping a communication diary for either seven or two days and an interview. The accuracy of the information is impossible to validate in that it relies on the vigilance of the participants. However, I agree that it would be a useful tool and more valid than recall at the point of interview.

Mobile phones and ‘text messaging’ has been totally embraced by youth culture in the developed world. It is the way to stay ‘connected’ with peers. The mobile phone would be classified by most as a ‘basic essential’ for teenagers and young adults. Without a mobile, there is a perception of disconnectedness, isolation and a risk of social ‘leprosy’. The convenience of this form of communication anywhere, anytime affords this generation the opportunity of immediacy. No longer are arrangements made long in advance, they can be made or changed with ease.

What is interesting and has not been discussed in this reading is the impact that socio-economic status plays in a youth’ s ability to interact via this medium. How is their connectedness affected if they “do not have the right phone” or have insufficient ‘credit’ to interact, controls enforced for most youths by ‘power geometries’ (parents).

The level of control that ‘power geometries’ exert is dependent on a number of factors. In everyday life, the acceptance or defiance of any boundary, rule, or law, comes down to an individual’s choice. Whilst ‘power geometries’ may set up a code of practice for a school (teachers), or home situation (parents), ultimately each user will choose whether they conform. What is interesting is that it could be argued that ‘power geometries’ come at different levels and there is even defiance by other ‘power geometries’ eg. we see everyday, people (not just youths) texting and talking on mobile phones while they are driving. Cultural factors may also impact the effectiveness of ‘power geometries’. Japanese people present as orderly, disciplined and respectful, therefore the impact ‘power geometries’ have on their youth culture may be more effective than that of a western culture, eg USA, Australia.

The mobile technologies might very well connect youth culture, however, in some respects, it can equally disconnect. For example, the central home base was a place to use static communication devices to liaise with friends, usually within earshot of parent. For this generation, the mobility and portability of connectivity in some ways erodes that central base and to some extent less contact, control from geometries (parents).

Ben
z3289141
Bibliography: Ito, Mizuko. “Mobile Phones, Japanese Youth, and the Replacement of Social Contact”. In Ling, Rich and Pedersen, Per, Eds. Mobile Communications: Re-negotiations of the Social Sphere. London: Springer-Verlag, 2005, 131-148.

He uses three examples, a television broadcast, a chat room experience and a mobile phone conversation, to explore the concepts of ‘doubling of place’ ‘interruption to routine’, and time-space arrangement and social relationships through electronic media.

Moore states “public events now occur simultaneously, in two different places: the place of the event itself and that in which it is watched and heard”.

This is not a new realisation yet it is definitely more prolific in the modern era via “new media” technologies. Whilst he sites the broadcast of Princess Diana’s funeral, as a ‘stop the nation’ event, many public events prior to this had a similar impact. For example, our parents would have crowded around a black and white television in the 50s to watch the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II or even further back our grandparents huddled around the family radio listening to the declaration of war via BBC broadcasts. These other examples would have ‘doubled the place’ for those audiences. The genre of film can equally have the effect of ‘doubling of place’ for its audience.

What is changing is more people are able to experience a ‘doubling of place’. Visual media makes it easier for the audience to feel part of the event, it leaves less to the imagination, and now this is more readily available in portable forms such as via laptops and mobile phones. No longer is it necessary to run home to watch the television or be in your car to hear the radio. ‘New media’ has made the ‘doubling of place’ immediate.

Moore then examines the interruption of routine with new media technologies. It is true that major public events, either planned (eg. royal wedding) or unplanned (eg. natural disaster) draws huge human interest and this allows the interruption to daily routine. What is interesting is that the portability of devices should reduce the interruption by not having to be in a set place to view however, this is not true because the portability means we can witness things at any time in any place therefore causing more interruption. Other forums such as the Facebook, mobile phones and Twitter have actually exacerbated the interruption. It doesn’t matter if you are updating Twitter to inform or reading Twitter to be informed, the interruption is constant. The mobile phone works in a similar manner, as a constant interruption to regular routine.

Interestingly, I wonder with the advent of Twitter, is this another example of ‘doubling of place’? Are these users, in two places, that of their own lives and those they are following? Are they in fact tripling or quadrupling place?

Ben
z3289141

Bibliography: Moores, Shaun. “The Doubling of Place: Electronic Media, Time-Space Arragements and Social Relationships”. In Couldry, Nick. and McCarthey, Anna., Eds. MediaSpace: Place, Scale and Culture in a Media Age. London: Routledge, 2004, 21-37.

He cites examples of how our everyday lives are intertwined with the publication of media at regular intervals and if those intervals are altered how the rhythm of life can become unbalanced.

His analogy of a wavelength representing high and low frequencies of media is particularly fitting in that he likens news reporting to a short high frequency wavelength, (i.e. immediate release, short life-span of interest, mass circulation) and other forms of public writings then take a place on a continuum, eg. mid frequency include monthly magazines, books, television series whereas low frequency (long wavelength) includes classic novels, inscriptions, rock art.

Hartley emphasises the relationship between the content and the level of frequency, and questions the long-term value of high frequency reporting. What will history remember – the inspirational inscription or the sensationalised reporting?

The article also delves in frequencies in other media and each of his examples indicate that the more modern innovation is high frequency, eg television show, pop single, photography, t-shirt and at the other end of the spectrum low frequency examples include classic drama, symphonic music, oil masterpiece, academic gowns.

Hartley cautions that technology has increased the frequencies of public writings/media and at its highest level the credibility and integrity of content can be compromised in order to achieve the that instant, news breaking story.

Is it only technology driving media frequencies or does the audience demand it. There is a public fascination for news stories that change our lives and shape our history, eg 9/11, the recent presidential elections, natural disasters?

It could be argued that there is a demand for the most detailed and intimate coverage of news journalism. We want to see, here and feel the most graphic details as soon as they happen and therefore it is the readership (market) that has driven the pace of the media and the technology has been the vehicle to meet the market.

In this article Hartley categorises types of media to a level of frequency without arguing for or against either of them. Whilst the emphasis leans towards high frequency, the value of low frequency cannot be underestimated. Time will be the judge of how high frequency writings withstand the test of time. Low frequency writings have already proven their worth.

Ben
z3289141

Bibliography: Hartley, J. (2004). “The Frequencies of Public Writing; Tomb, Tone and Time” In Jenkins, H. And Thornburn, D. (Eds) Democracy and New Media. MIT Press, USA, PP 247-269.

He summaries the distinct differences in the teaching of the more traditional Media 1.0 studies compared to the new approach in Media 2.0 studies. In summary, Gauntlett states that Media 1.0 encompasses ‘expert’ opinion, traditional forums such as print, radio and screen and that the media is the voice of authority. He  categorises the audience as “receivers” who are influenced by this ‘greater’ authority not to be questioned.

In comparison, Media 2.0 studies engage a wider and more diverse audience, embraces the use of alternate technologies in particular the internet, and that the audience is not only a ‘receiver’ but the media is now interactive with the audience actually contributing.

Gauntlett does not profess that one teaching method is better than the other but acknowledges the importance of the content in Media 1.0 and states “we need to take the best of previous approaches and rework them to fit a changing environment, and develop new tools as well.”

With the constant evolution of online communication, audiences have come along way from a nightly radio/television broadcast and one edition of the daily newspaper to 24/7 updating via the internet and portable devices. The audience now demands more of their media coverage and are no longer content to be ‘receivers’. They have also become far more sophisticated and are unwilling to accept that the Media ‘knows all’. They are demanding to be involved and expect the media to react to that involvement. Consequently, media studies need to be able to interpret the needs of the audience and respond.

Gauntlett states ‘The spirit of ‘Web 2.0′ is that individuals should open themselves to collaborative projects” and cites Wikipedia as an example. A word of caution should however be entertained in that the ‘integrity’ of the media must be maintained and with interactive online forums this can be dubious.

The very fact that this course embraces online readings, blogging and reflective responses to media posted by students, is proof that Media Studies courses are embracing Gauntlett’s suggestions and have adopted new approaches.

Ben
z3289141

Bibliography: Gauntlet, D “Media Studies 2.0”. Available at http://www. Theory.org.uk/mediastudies2/htm