Rebecca Newman's New Media Blog

New Media: Effects on the workplace

This week’s focus has been on New Media’s effect on the work environment. According to Manuel Castells (2010, 2737), the world is now “made up of global networks”, which means there are fewer boundaries on communication. As Andrew Hui comments, “our lives are increasingly revolving around communication” and this is especially true for the workplace. Informal communication in particular plays a significant role in New Media workplaces. Lucy Sweeney explains that it is now commonplace for one to gain a job through acquaintances and networks. This is consistent with research that shows fewer workers in New Media receive jobs via “traditional means” (Gill 2007, 25).

 Because New Media work is mostly short-term and project-based, the work environment also has a higher rate of uncertainty and instability (Neff 2001, 59). Faster-paced tasks mean that employees must constantly be abreast of the latest technologies (Neff 2001, 59). Consequently, a New Media employee must be prepared to be in charge of their own learning (Neff 2001, 59), especially since “some people argue that courses are no substitute for teaching oneself in a hands-on manner” (Gill 2007, 21). Along with this ability to ‘keep up’, it is acknowledged that New Media workers are generally flexible, persistent, innovative, energetic and good at communication as a result of their work environment (Gill 2007, 38-39).

REFERENCES

 Castells, Manuel. 2010. “Globalisation, Networking, Urbanisation: Reflections on the Spatial
             Dynamics of the Information Age.” Urban Studies 47 (13): 2737-2745. Accessed April
             18, 2011. doi: 10.1177/0042098010377365.

 Gill, Rosalind. 2007. Technobohemians or the new Cybertariat? New Media work in Amsterdam
             a decade after the web. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.

Neff, Gina. 2001. “Risk relations: The new uncertainties of work.” Working USA 5 (2): 59.

Image: The Facebook offices

New Media: Impacts on Health & Wellbeing

This week’s focus has been New Media’s effect on health and wellbeing. The user-focused architectures of Web 2.0 mean that finding information is not limited by place or time (Hesse 2009, 140). Also, healthcare is increasingly becoming the responsibility of the individual as people become more ‘medically literate’ (Lewis 2006, 526) and, according to Lucy Sweeney, less inclined to be passive absorbers of information. Consequently, a wider audience is now able to access health information online (Chou et al. 2009).

 According to Tania Lewis (2006, 527), this generates issues of access to too much information and potentially unreliable medical advice. This is because, unlike traditional media, there is no ‘gatekeeper’ to check information published online (Lewis 2006, 527). Also, as Andrew Hui points out, there is a blurred division between content creator and consumer.

A prominent belief is that, even though people are more independently seeking medical information, mediators are still needed to help translate this information into something non-professionals can understand and apply to their own medical situation (Wyatt et al. 2008, 4). Wyatt et al. (2008, 5-6) calls those who fulfil this role ‘infomediators’ and explains that they can also “effect change in the behaviour or actions of those looking for information”. This means that, while some mediators may exist online, there is no actual safeguard against bias in online health information. Ben Parr (2009) suggests consulting multiple sources to reduce the risk of poor advice.

REFERENCES

Chou, W, Hunt, Y M, Beckjord, E B, Moser, R P and Hesse B W. (2009). “Social Media Use
               in the United States: Implications for Health Communication.” J Med Internet Res,
               11 (4): 48.

Hesse, Bradford W. 2009. “Enhancing Consumer Involvement in Health Care.” In Health
              Communication in the New Media Landscape, edited by Dr Jerry C. Parker & Dr                           Esther Thorson,119-149. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Lewis, Tania. (2006). “Seeking health information on the internet: lifestyle choice or bad
              attack of cyberchondria?” Media, Culture & Society, 28 (4): 521-539.

Parr, Ben.  “HOW TO: Use Social Media for Better Health.” Last modified March 14, 2009.
              http://mashable.com/2009/03/14/social-media-health/.

Wyatt, S., Harris, R. and Wathen, N. (2008). Reflections on the Middle Space. In Mediating
              Health Information: The Go-Betweens in a Changing Socio-Technical Landscape, edited by
              Sally Wyatt, Nadine Wathen and Roma Harris, 3-11. New York: Palgrave                               MacMillan.

Image: DrHealthShare.com is a website where health information and experiences are shared, without being edited by health professionals.

New Media: Identity ‘branding’ in a ‘media life’

This week’s focus has been on how New Media is a seamless part of life and how this affects our representations of self. According to Deuze (2011, 137-138), “our life is lived in, rather than with, media”. Andrew Hui (2011) adds that the amount our lives revolve around communication is increasing, especially on a personal level. This supports Deuze’s analogy of The Truman Show (Peter Weir, 1998) where our lives are so intertwined with media that it shapes our interactions (Deuze 2011, 140).

Since reality in a ‘media life’ is constructed (Deuze 2011, 145), it follows that our identities are constructed also – we create our personal ‘brand’. Bell (2006, 51) uses the example of the mobile phone as an “extension of ourselves” because of how we customise them to illustrate our identities to others (Bell 2006, 51; Hills 2009, 116).

Drew Nielsen (2011) says, “…our identity is our performance, and we let the audience see what we want them to see”. This is also true for a ‘media life’ in terms of how we share what New Media we consume. On his blog, Henry Jenkins reflects Deuze’s ideas about constant identity construction by discussing how his film wish list on “Netflix allows me to continuously create and recreate my identity through my movie choices” (Jenkins 2007). Consequently, living a ‘media life’ allows us to constantly create a ‘brand’ for ourselves in New Media, both through our communications and what we consume.

REFERENCES

Bell, Genevieve. 2006. “The Age of Thumb: A Cultural Reading of Mobile Technologies
               from Asia.” Knowledge, Technology & Policy 19 (2): 41-57.

Deuze, Mark. 2011. “Media Life.” Media, Culture & Society 33 (1), 137-148. Accessed April 3,
               2011. doi: 10.1177/0163443710386518

Hills, Matt. 2009. “Participatory culture: mobility, interactivity and identity.” In Digital
               Cultures: Understanding New Media, edited by Glen Creeber and Royston Martin,
               107-121. New York: Open University Press.

Hui, Andrew. 2011. “Identifying the Media Life,” Insights from a Media Student’s
               Perspective, April 2. Accessed April 4, 2011.
               http://mediapot.tumblr.com/post/4274654045/identifying-the-media-life

Jenkins, Henry. 2007. “What’s Coming Next? Self-Definition and Accomplishment through
               the Construction of the Netflix Queue,” Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official
               Weblog of Henry Jenkins, April 16. Accessed April 3, 2011.
               http://henryjenkins.org/2007/04/whats_coming_next_selfdefiniti.html

Nielsen, Drew. 2011. “Week 2: Performing Me: Maintaining Visibility on the Social Stage,”
               KCB206. Accessed April 4, 2011.
               http://drewbot.tumblr.com/post/3842443541/week-2-performing-me-maintaining-visibility-on-the

New Media: New influencers and ethical approaches

This week’s focus has been on New Media’s impact on the dispersion of political information and beliefs. Historically, the printing press initiated the spread of diverse information; a role which the Internet is now playing by spreading media production and consumption (Shirky 2011). However, in contrast to older media, the Internet “speeds up this process through digitisation and universal access” (Silverman 2010).

In addition, the authors are now the ‘gatekeepers’ of information. Content is no longer scanned by editors first, but is presented online in its raw form (Tambini 1999, 312).  However, according to Tambini (1999, 312) “no information is politically neutral, and therefore a degree of power is concentrated in the hands of those that select it”. Consequently, the Internet can give political capital to any content-provider, which raises the question of the moral responsibility of the authors.

Do one’s actions on the Internet require the same level of personal conduct as in the physical world? The general consensus is that they do, especially since rules on professional employee conduct online replicate what is acceptable in the real world (Hamelink 2006, 123-124). Rory Zentilin suggests that the Internet be regulated to protect users, but this can also include ‘self-regulating’; As Ally Atkins agrees, “we need to think before we post”. New Media, therefore, has not created new moral issues, but has inspired new ways of approaching ethical situations online.

REFERENCES

Hamelink, C. J. 2006. “The Ethics of the Internet: Can We Cope With Lies and
           Deceit on The Net?” In Ideologies of the Internet, edited by Katharine
           Sarikakis and Daya K. Thussu, 115-130. New Jersey: Hampton Press Inc.

Shirky, Clay. 2011. “The Political Power of Social Media.” Foreign Affairs 90 (1):
           28-41. Accessed March 25, 2011. http: //web.ebscohost.com.ezp01.library.
           qut.edu.au/ehost/detail?hid=14&sid=c5a11e7d-4972-4e31-8769-
           c23e01f147d6%40sessionmgr11&vid=1&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc
           3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=56624549

Silverman, Matt. “4 Predictions for the Future of Politics and Social Media.” Last
           modified December 29, 2010. http: //mashable.com/2010/12/29
           /predictions-politics-social-media/.

Tambini, Damian. 1999. “New Media and Democracy: The Civic Networking Movement.”
           New Media & Society 1 (3): 305-329. Accessed March 25, 2011. doi: 10.1177/
           14614449922225609.

Image by Laurel Papworth, 2010

New Media: Sharing entertainment for social capital

This week’s focus has been on the affect New Media has on entertainment. Firstly, New Media enables new ways of distributing entertainment, characterised by making content more accessible. For example, on Rajshri.com, Bollywood films are released simultaneously online and in cinemas (Singh 2008). Rajjat A. Barjatya, managing direcor of Rajshri Media, “estimates that about 90% of Rajshri’s online videos are being watched overseas” (Singh 2008), which proves that innovative online distributive models increase accessibility to products.

Enhanced accessibility includes the convergence of different forms of entertainment on a single device, like the iPhone (Jenkins 2006). In addition, Henry Jenkins, on his official blog, notes that this “depends heavily on the active participation of the consumer” (Jenkins 2006). Therefore, New Media creation has led to a rethink of how content is consumed.

 One such innovation in product consumption is the sharing of content as an expression of identity. Showcasing one’s personal taste in entertainment, such as music, creates social and cultural capital since “an eclectic and knowing collection raises [one’s] opinion of the collector” (Levy 2006, 35). Apple’s Ping, a social network focusing on music, promotes the idea that new relationships can be created based on shared personal taste. Therefore, the sharing of entertainment facilitated by new media’s distribution models becomes an expression of identity, creating the means to establish new social ties.

References

Jenkins, Henry. 2006. “Welcome to Convergence Culture,” Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The
                Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins, June 19. Accessed March 20, 2011.
                http://henryjenkins.org/2006/06/welcome_to_convergence_culture.html

Levy, Steven. 2006. The perfect thing: how the iPod shuffles commerce, culture and coolness. New York:
                Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

Singh, Madhur. 2008. “Bollywood’s Viral Videos.” Time Magazine, February 14. Accessed March
                20, 2011. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1713342,00.html

Image by Gary Hayes, 2010

Social Media: Linking identity and social networking

The focus of this week’s lecture and readings has been the concept of Social Media as a very ‘self-conscious’ form of New Media. The authors of the readings agree that building social networks and constructing identity are the central focus of Social Media.

Online, identity is not constricted to the body (boyd and Donath 2004, 73). Instead, social networking sites provide ‘self-conscious’ exploration of identity that can be controlled by the user (Pearson 2009). They also offer a display of identity to others (Pearson 2009). What follows is the ability to create networks with other users based on knowledge of one another’s online identity (Pearson 2009).

In addition, the ability to view someone’s social connections is key in creating more networks since further information about them can be inferred from the kinds of people with whom they have connections (boyd and Donath 2004, 72). Existing connections also act as validation that someone is who they say they are (boyd and Donath 2004, 73). Consequently, the constructions of networks and identities are interconnected; each cultivates the other.

Finally, early study into socialisation found that “individuals construct their identities in reaction to their cohorts” (Pearson 2009), which Pearson (2009) translates to mean that “individuals construct identities relative to their networks” in terms of Social Media. Therefore, Social Media has not introduced a new way to construct identity and social connections, but offers a new platform for doing so in a more self-conscious environment.

References:

 boyd, danah and Donath, Judith. 2004. “Public displays of connection.” BT Technology                         Journal 22 (4):71-82.

 Pearson, Erika. 2009. “All the World Wide Web’s a stage: the Performance of Identity                       in Online Social Networks.” First Monday 14 (3).

Image created using Wordl.