Download
1 / 17
E N D
This online learning tool was born of a panel discussion by the same name—Public/Private Intersections in New Media—hosted by the Northeastern University Libraries and the Departments of Journalism and Communications, and concerning the impact of new media on both public and private sectors. Participants included NU faculty members Dan Kennedy, Craig Robertson, and David Marshall, as well as international new media expert Axels Bruns, from the University of Queensland in New Zealand. • For more information, please contact Amanda Folk (alf38@pitt.edu) or Maria Hudson Carpenter (m.carpenter@neu.edu) .
Is there anything different about new media? • Craig: • Yes, but…the discourse of “new media” is not so new • The promotion of new digital media, and the on-going debates about their social and cultural consequences, has continued to make use of the ideas and discourses that have defined the development of media in the US from at least the telegraph in the middle of the nineteenth century.
Is there anything different about new media? • Dan: • The conventional wisdom is that the Internet is revolutionary because of its many-to-many architecture and DIY soul. • Blogs may be the new media that get the most attention from people like us. But they’re not necessarily the most important. • Targeted satellite TV, DVDs, music videos and even below-the-radar uses of direct mail may prove to be more influential.
Is there anything different about new media? • Axel: • New media enable • Interactivity • Intercreativity • Intercreative uses • Break producer/consumer dichotomies • Turn users into producers of content • This is a new hybrid practice: produsage
Is there anything different about new media? • Meagan: • important to distinguish between different types of “new media” • production-oriented New Media (i.e.: Digital video equipment, website creation software, etc.) - allows more people to create content • cell phones, iPods - private consumption of medium in public sphere • internet (i.e. blogging, networking websites (facebook, myspace) -disclosure of sometimes traditionally private info • -a site for subcultures to meet in virtual space – across locations, time, etc.
How has the public sphere changed in this era of new media? • Dan: • Bloggers challenge the dread “MSM,” bringing down major figures such as Trent Lott, Howell Raines and Dan Rather. • The positive: News organizations are being forced to lower their gates and engage in a conversation with the public. • The negative: The economic basis for neutral, in-depth reporting is giving way to blogland’s emphasis on voice and attitude.
How has the public sphere changed in this era of new media? • Axel: • Produsage is participatory: • More active involvement in the public sphere • Multiple perspectives represented • Produsage of democracy? • Traditional mediated democracy has passive audiences • Produser-media democracy can be more deliberative
How has the public sphere changed in this era of new media? • Craig: • Discussions around it have always located the emergence of media in on-going debates about what is public and what is private • “The people” have always had only a represented voice in the public—the public never exists unless it is represented • Tension between the hope that advances in media technology will produce a healthier democracy, and the concern that the commercial organization of electronic media is eroding democratic values became more acute.
How has the public sphere changed in this era of new media? • Meagan: • Created more separated public spheres that are falsely perceived as more private • The architecture of new media - how are the boundaries drawn • Thefacebook.com
Should we be worried? • Craig: • The developing on-line community is increasingly reliant on the economic value of information gathered through sophisticated interactive communication technology. • This involves an increased acceptance of what in other contexts we call surveillance that seems less intrusive in a world where authentic personal experience has become self-disclosure. • Reality TV produces a subjectivity that equates submission to comprehensive surveillance with self-expression and self-knowledge.
Should we be worried? • Axel: • Yes: • More potential for surveillance • Long-term effects of ‘ephemeral’ communication • Current climate of fear breeds homogeneity No: • Everyone is dirty • Potential for sourveillance • Backlash has started
Should we be worried? • Dan: • Google, Yahoo!, Amazon and other large sites collect information that could be matched up with records kept by ISPs. • Surveillance with a smile: We willingly hand over our personal data to make for a better online experience. • Two differences: (1) The commercial nature of modern-day surveillance; and (2) the theoretical level of effectiveness.
Should we be worried? • Meagan: • Importance of education on these new media technologies • Monitors in a very subtle way - some people are unaware of the extent
Changes to everyday life • Meagan: • Positives • They have given people new ways to express themselves • Convenience • New ways to “connect” with people Negatives • Separating people in physical public spaces b/c of a private medium consumption (i.e. cell phones, iPods, etc.) • Excessive disclosure - could be dangerous if uninformed of the possible consequences
Changes to everyday life • Dan: • The good: A journalist, especially one with a blog, is no longer bound by the production cycle or limitations on time or space. • The bad: You’re always on. If you haven’t responded to a major news story within an hour, people wonder why. • The ugly: A journalist’s potential for making a fool of him- or herself increases exponentially, especially with unedited blogs
Changes to everyday life • Axel: • Negative • Always on, always at work • Intrusive and interruptive • Traceable and open to abuse Positive • Personal expression and networking • New forms of (collaborative) creativity • Bottom-up produsage instead of top-down production/consumption
Changes to everyday life • Craig:
