Entertain Me! Who makes your entertainment? Institutions, audiences & participatory culture (Week 3)

Vidding & Fanfic

Ok, I'm just going to say it: I dislike fanfic; I'm more tolerant of vidding.  Possibly because what I've seen of fanfic is awful, cheesy, cliched, bares no resemblance to the integrity of the creator's craft or is just not very good (in my opinion).  It is great that the creator is passionate about the text or topic of choice.  

Having started to explore what programs or software I might use to create my remediation (reference - themed dictionary to video) I appreciate that producing videos are particularly labour intensive and the fan would have to be passionate to want to produce something.  One of the videos mentioned a fanvid newbie learning from someone who has done it and 4 hours later having a vid (techtv.mit.edu  :Collaboration and Community).

So, I guess I tend to stay away from anything that I think might annoy me.  I wonder whether I'm more tolerant of fan created homages that are based on video texts that interest me - Buffy the Vampire Slayer, LOST, The West Wing, Serenity/Firefly, Harry Potter - and seek out producers (video, writing, creativity).  With the exception of Harry Potter, the others tend to have more cult-like followings, particularly the Joss Whedon and Damon Lindelof, Carlton Cuse stuff.  They seem to have been more open to collaborating with their fans outside of the main text.  And is it possible that the sorts of people attracted to these shows who would want to create fan products are more likely to produce something I find acceptable, or be like-minded?  Perhaps I'm being a fan-snob.  The reason I find them more appealing may be because we have both engaged with the same text.

It's possible that this is related to how good the fan perceives their work to be.  For me it is a paradox:  I want to encourage people to learn new skills, experiment with tools and broaden their knowledge, which means the likelihood of their work being less-than-ordinary is high.  But, they can't be perfect from the start.  I don't mind plays on words or creative mashups where the meaning of the text has been changed (eg. comixed.com), but, this may not be limited to fans, rather inspired creative typse.  eg. Star Trek and Harry Potter. 

Who makes my entertainment?

Media has the potential to engage in so many different ways.  LOST was a terrific example where the viewer could just watch each episode on tv and would get a standard television experience (with the exception of the cryptic, fantasy storyline).  Having said that, I believe the viewer's experience would've been enhanced by exploring some of the additional LOST material. The creators ran a, mostly, weekly podcast where they discussed a few things around the episode that had just aired, but they encouraged questions from fans, and creative speculation from fans. Lindelof and Cuse clearly enjoyed playing with their fans via Twitter.  They created additional videos that added to, but not necessary to, the story.  Fans got together on discussion boards and shared bits and pieces they had discovered, or theorised about what could be happening.  Some of the cast made their own podcasts ('Hurley'/Jorge Garcia).

So, in pondering all of this I stumbled across Lostpedia which is a wiki created by LOST fans.  Lost challenged the viewer's assumptions, raised questions and created an environment where they needed to debrief (many episodes ended with the viewer exclaiming 'what the?' and hopping online to chat with fellow fans).  The wiki creates a central space than changes as new information is found and pooled by the masses (

Assigned reading

Interactive Media Texts

There has been discussion on the uni discussion boards about various interactive media texts:

Choose your own adventure series of books - I grew up with these.  A relatively simple concept, possibly very trick to write, where the reader makes the choice of a particular character at the end of a section and then turns to a page where the outcome is revealed and another choice needs to be made.  I suspect they may have appealed more to a non-reader as the portions were small and broken up the reader having to think about the decision.  It reminded me of a game series I didn't play, called Fabled Lands, which was a role playing, single-player game, where you made decisions and progressed through the games based on the outcome of your decision.  A couple of years ago a friend of mine recreated these as an online version and became part of an online fan community.  While he's done most of the work, some fans have contacted him to get involved, others have just expressed their gratitude for them driving it.  He has also liaised with the creators about using images and material.  I believe they have permitted it, as long as it's not for profit and it's the out of print material.  It's amazing how supportive these communities are.

Role Playing Games (platform or PC) have expanded from being interactive as single player to multi player online with other people.  In fact, even traditional games have become broader in that you can play with anyone around the world in an instant.  I've played UNO with three others, in the US, UK and Europe.  It's quite a strange feeling when pondered.  Many of my friends have continuous Scrabble-like games through apps on facebook, speaking of which, there's another interactive media text.  Facebook keeps us just a few keystrokes away from our social contacts.  Friends of mutual friends end up conversing that may not ordinarily.

Cucco - The promise is great: blockbuster and the Hollywood economy

The first major shift in the way media is/was consumed appears to be in movie advertising on triggered by the adverising of movies on television; while not the first film to use this strategy Cucco uses Jaws as an example which was showed in cinemas while being advertised on television, and the film was multi screened across a number of theatres on the opening weekend.  He then mentions the secondary market now - videos/dvds, subscription television, and eventually free-to-air television.  I think it's worth noting that people can own copies of movies or television series very easily, and the secondary market provides a second chance for films or series that were considered flops by the copanies that aired them.  Eg Firefly/Serenity was a failure on television but has a cult following and led to the making of the film and its success.  Fans got together online to promote it, possibly going to see it multiple times, then owning a copy of it.  Being a regular watcher of At The Movies on the ABC, I was amused by the power of the fans to get Serenity to number 38 in the ABC My Favourite Film, beating classics like Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Alien, The Wizard of Oz, Kill Bill: vol. 1 and Back to the Future.  I'm not sure how reliable lists like this are now that fans of a specific media text can mobilise and skew results.

Another point that Cucco makes is that the blockbuster is a means to generate massive income.  This creates profits for the studios that make them, but, it also provides money to underwrite other non-blockbuster types.  Avatar springs to mind for me.  The rumours for the cost of making that range from $200M to $500M.  But the technology that James Cameron used to make it was groundbreaking and makes that sort of technology more attainable for movies that follow.  So, we've gone from traditional film production roles like directors, camera operators, sound operators, set designers, actors, distributors, consumers to include other skill sets in graphic design, computer programming, technology designers (eg for the 3D component).  This technology get used in areas other than cinema, eg. the London Eye.  Cucco also states that the motivation to make a blockbuster is to sell their product ("pack in the public") rather than creative merit (although he contradicts this in a paragraph a little later).  There may be something in what Cucco's saying but in Avatar's case the technology and creative vision were very marketable components of this blockbuster.  Perhaps marketability and spectacular nature are what makes a blockbuster a blockbuster rather than just the budget, rather than just commercial success.

All of this becomes marketable outside of just showing the film - you get food outlets purchasing a licence to brand some it's products and market in sync with the showing, and other merchandise.  Maybe even a sequel or four, eg. Shrek.  I was going to say Harry Potter here, but I deleted it and thought about it a bit more.  I would consider HP a blockbuster - it has commercial appeal, but it contradicts Cucco's argument again about the artistic side.  I think that side of things has been extremely important in its success, and the movies are better for it.    Perhaps Cucco's points were accurate when he wrote this paper in 2009.  I guess it illustrates how quickly the way we consume media is changing.

Other observations about who produces our media

In reflecting on makers of film I was thinking about who makes them now.  Not the studio, but the actual people behind them; the individuals.  There seem to be a lot more people who were or are known as actors moving into the directing producing roles - Drew Barrymore, Sean Penn, Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood, George Clooney.  I will see anything that Clooney has a hand in, in front of or behind the lense.  Accessibility to finding out who makes our media has made me more selective about what I choose to engage with.

Favourite Media Text

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV Series) 
I wouldn't say that this media text is particularly interactive.  However, its creator, Joss Whedon, approached the subject with specific ideas and the show grew from that.  It could be that because the movie that it spun from was a flop there was less pressure (or opinions) from the big companies and they left him to it.  Still, I was suprised by the number of companies involved in the series - production: Mutant Enemy, 20th Century Fox Television, Kuzi Enterprises and Sandollar television; distributors include: 20th Century Fox Film Corp. and 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, Warner Bros, BBC, 20thC Fox Japan, MTV, Sky One; Special Effects - visual, make-up include: Almost Human, Area 51, Optic Nerve Studios; as well as translaters - V & J Translations, post-production Sound - Todd-AO Studios, cast and star trailers - Movie Movers; film laboratory - 4MC Laboratory.  It also looks like that as well as filming at Universal Studios some filming was done on various private locations for Buffy's house, California Stat University Northridge, Castle Green Apartments, Torrance High School, Walt Disney's Golden Oak Ranch.

While I haven't considered it interactive there are plenty of fan sites for collaborating with and sharing the Buffy joy.  Fan fiction sites, where fans write alternative stories about the characters from the TV series, such as Fanfiction.net, Every Six Seconds or The Bloodshed Verse; wikis like Buffyverse or Wikiquote, where fans pool their knowledge to create a reference for other fans or curious onlookers. There are plenty of fan vids on youtube as well.

Cucco, M. (2009). The promise is great: the blockbuster and the Hollywood economy. Media, Culture & Society, 31(215), 215-230. doi: 10.1177/0163443708100315 

Company credits for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118276/companycredits 

Technical specifications for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118276/technical  

Filming locations for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118276/locations

The medium is the message: when media converge (Week 2)

Four Puzzles from Cyberspace

Borders
What's interesting about borders is the replication of real life - there are physical property borders in the online life, and then borders within which participants function.  In real life, though, amending the function border is a lot more difficult than online.  When Martha and Dank are negotiating they are not talking about real flowers, dogs or land.  However, while there is emotional attachment to what they've built, when an online action or item affects the solutions can be a little more unorthodox or unrealistic.  In Martha and Dank's cases they suggested (or argued) solutions that were simple enough online even if not in real life - so the constraints are different and to function in a virtual world online the participant must think differently.

Governors
Geography has changed the rules - geography doesn't matter in cyberspace.  Something can be banned in one geographical location, but if the operator is savvy enough they can still operate that same business out of another geographical location.  Online technology has made it far easier to operate 'virtually'.  It has changed the regulability of online activities.

Jake's Communities
I connected with the identity issue and the matter of attribution.  Jake could be a writer in the real world, write the things he did, have them published and he'd just be a writer (albeit a very genred one).  Other novel writers write some horrific stuff but they're not scrutinised as much as those online.  Television crime shows frequently show graphic violence towards women.  This particular story raises all sorts of ethical issues about what and who is online.  But back to the attribution.  Jake was arrested based on his email exchange with one of his readers.  And, as the story states, there was no evidence that what Jake said was anything but fiction.  So, was the crime wrongly attributed to Jake instead of the fellow who was reading the material and saying he was going to re enact the crime?  There's a number of issues here - firstly, the 16yo reader's father, who, if he hadn't recognised the university tag probably wouldn't have pursued the author.  Secondly, should the news sites have more security or warning to readers before they get to explicit or graphic material?  Thirdly, should Jake have been using his work hardware/software to access this material?  Fourthly, does the father have a responsibility to put a net filter on his daughter's computer when they're so readily available?
This story also illustrates the vessel that online publishing becomes for those who have a love of a craft.  There was no money involved in this - Jake just produced online media because he liked to do it.

Worms
What you don't know can't harm you, right?  I'm a firm believer in the end never justifies the means - only the means justifies the means.This particular section of Lessig's paper centres on privacy.  Allowing a worm to inspect a random anyone's computer just incase they have something illegal is no different to searching someone's house without their knowledge or a warrant (maybe I've watch too many crime shows - do they have warrants in real life?).  It's important that the technology exists to deal with any criminal activity, given that online activity can be particularly hard to trace. Because the web is global, privacy from another governing body (outside your own country) is not guaranteed and any web user is at risk.

These four stories in the Lessig book talk about the undefined nature of rules (boundaries) and the way that rules can be challenged in a ficticious virtual world, management or governance, identity and issues of privacy.  This technology has moved so quickly that I'm sure the global nature of the internet means that we (entire web community) will ever be able to come to some sort of consensus on how these four issues should we.

Jenkins on Participatory Culture

Here Henry Jenkins briefly talks about the way media is used now and the way that we have become contributors, participators rather than observers; active rather than passive.  Later we'll look into copyright laws in more detail, but Jenkins mentions the domination by a few large organisations and that they used to have the ability to manage their product.  Now, with online media and software the consumer can easily take portions of their product and give it their own gaze, meaning that the producer loses control over their product.  They still have creative control, but it's more difficult to manage third parties.  So, just because we have the means to take a snippet (or a little bigger .... ) and use it creatively to produce something else does that mean we can or should?  I guess that's one aspect of this debate.

In addition, the observer can now be a storyteller.  Particularly in news media - we're not limited to the side of the story.  Earlier this year Adelaide experienced a minor earthquake.  Within minutes the information about where and the intensity of it was being shared on Twitter.  People were talking to other people that they would never have been likely too.  In countries where internet is regulated, online technology savvy users can get around it and have a voice to the world.  Sites like CrowdVoice crowdsource info about protests and events or activism around the world.  It's much easier to find up to date information if you can quickly establish credibility.

Collective intelligence - more complex explanations or ways of information gathering to get a more accurate picture than the limitations of one person or group's knowlege.

A favourite media text

I really struggle to narrow down a favourite - it changes regularly, each time I watch, listen, read something new that I love it builds on all the others.  So, for the sake of this exercise I'll go back a few years to Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV Series).  I think the reasons why I love this so much are the writing and production - Joss Whedon is a genius.  This started before online stuff became accessible to the masses - I was working in an office that had one shared admin computer and we checked the email manually 3 or 4 times a day.  There was no internet - data was too costly and too slow.  Whedon's wit was incredible and his team of writers were clearly on the same page.  He crosses many genres with this fantasy-teen series, and plays with everyday realities of life. 

As for consumers, probably not so much involvement initially but as online media became more accessible fansites would have popped up, discussion boards or newsgroups (like the browncoats for his Firefly series) and possibly fan fiction (maybe Comi-con).  I can't say I ever sought it out, but I follow Jane Espensen (regular writer) on twitter.  It's also interesting following the other projects various contributors to that series have done, including actors, writers and directors.

Jenkins, H. (2008). Henry Jenkins on Transmedia. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/4672634
Lessig, L. (2006). Four puzzles from cyber space. In L. Lessig Code version 2.0  (pp 9-30). New York: Basic Books.

How does the media engage you? How do you engage with the media?

Major changes in the move from old to media and the impacted on – access, audience, production, consumption, media institutions, economics

One of the significant new media changes has been the move from a observer to participant in the web. While Jenkins (2009a) states that participatory culture is not the same as O'Reilly's Web 2.0, Web 2.0 has made participation in web media accessible to a much wider audience. The term 'new media' goes beyond the media itself to accessibility; when something becomes accessible/usable by a diverse group of people it makes itself new.  Digital cameras have been around for many years, but good cameras mainly used by professional photographers due to affordability.  Functional digital camera can now be bought for under $100, which makes this media available to an exceptionally broad group of people.  But, what makes this more than just camera technology is the ability to then link in with software.  The availability of open source software for image editing (GIMP) and tools for video editing give the consumer the ability to become producer and participator.  In addition to this, the Web as a platform for delivering an array of tools for users to express themselves:  Flickr, Product reviews, Blogs (Wordpress, Blogger, Livejournal), Forums, personal websites, video publication (Youtube, Vimeo), video production (PrimaryAccess), fanfiction, social media (Facebook, Google+, Tumblr, LinkedIn, Twitter), reference (wikis) and gaming (Second Life, Eve Online).

In addition to this, software (and hardware) has become more affordable to the home user - as a student I can buy a package of website creation, image and video production/editing and software for $500 instead of its commercial price of $4000.

Jenkins

• Agency and structure -
• Media reform
• Fear - privacy, intrusion, safety.  Interesting separation of sexual fear - boys just as much targets, so why is that not mentioned?  "develop strategies for decreasing the role of ignorance and fear in public debates about new media"
• The speed with which we can communicate with one another, quickly spread the word when we want comrades to rise up, is immediate.  Ask columnists who are the target of vitriol from the cultural warriors Jenkins talks about. On Monday night ABC aired an Australian Story on David Hicks and followed online many and diverse comments from the general online public about his actions.  Behind a pseudonym people can be pretty horrible.  (Although, pseudonyms have their place too).
• Wisdom of the crowd, collective intelligence, citizenly engagement - people pooling their knowledge and self-governing.
• Mapping of social networks in cyperspace
• Redefining web practices - fair use.  Youtomb does acknowledge that some videos that may be Fair Use will be innocent victims of its automated program.  So, the key is in educating users about their rights.  I think there'll be a shift in this over time - the instinct to take something you receive or see online at face value can be rewired to question and be given the tools to work out how they find out whether they need to be concerned.  I'm reminded of the 'fear' emails about muggings in shopping centres that get mass forwarded; however, if they'd done a quick search they'd have found that it's been doing the rounds for a long time and there is little evidence to support that something happened, not to mention the gaps in the science of the incident.

My Use of media

It can be hard to engage sometimes.  I was discussing distraction with a friend and how easy it is to get distracted with continuous access to the internet.  It has become second nature to instantly go and check something as we think of it; to grab a computer, tablet or smartphone and check something as we are watching tv.  It takes particular concentration now to resist the urge to do that, not just on computer but attending to everyday things, such as tasks around the home.  So what do I use?

Web - reading blogs/shopping/researching, social networking - Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Yammer, Bookmarking - Delicious, email, Skype, mobile phone - calls, sms, browsing, tv - digital hard drive to watch what I want when I want to, digital radio, itunes (ipod), ipad, the Saturday newspaper (The Age) and maybe some online news each day (ABC for real news and Adelaide 'Tiser for local).  I'm contactable and online most of the day, most of the time.


References
Jenkins, Henry. 2009a. Critical Information Studies For a Participatory Culture (Part One). accessed on Sept 4. http://henryjenkins.org/2009/04/what_went_wrong_with_web_20_cr.html
Jenkins, Henry. 2009b.  Critical Information Studies For a Participatory Culture (Part Two). accessed on Sept 4.  http://henryjenkins.org/2009/04/what_went_wrong_with_web_20_cr_1.html 
O'Reilly, Tim. 2005.  What is Web 2.0. Accessed on Sept 10.  http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html?page=1