MUSIC SHARING ONLINE
With the younger generation being brought up through all this new technology and availabilty to access material, we have new ways of consuming it. With people like ourselves being associated with the internet and music, there are new ways in which we combine the two together and share our interests. By doing this process if music listening and downloading, it is having a massive change in the way we consume new material. The day of the CD went out of the window a long time ago, but we are already seeing an impact on the world of download such as iTunes. The only reason as people don't won't to pay 79p per track. So with people downloading dozens of tracks a week, they want to save money and share music with their friends.
One of the major advantages these sites and social sites have, is that we are seeing more and more bands starting their days off on them. Such as on Myspace mostly (but also on Facebook now) bands can upload their songs for all to hear at no cost. This sees more music agents signing new bands via this process. One prime example would be the Artic Monkeys. Starting with a number one download single, the band has turned into a huge success.
This change in music consumption has had it's advantages. More and more people are being introduced to new music through this process. It also allows us to gain access and download the content must faster than having to wait for it to be released in the shops.
These changes may be changing a lot of the media industry, but we will still need these companies for the future. It's not also a chase of need but also want. For instance the development of iTunes and the iPod, consumers have the chance to download new music, videos and films to their portable devices such as their iPod's. From this iTunes gives them that opportunity. It may be at a small price, but it ensures a decent quality and risk free.
Sunday, 15 February 2009
Week 4 - Topic 2
User Generated Content And Social Networking Sites
User Generated - In this modern age of technology and the internet, I'd say that I use user generated sites less than social networking ones. The two I'd say I use the most are YouTube and Wikipedia. However even when I do visit these sites, I'm only a user and never contribute to them. For instance I have a account on YouTube but have never uploaded a video, the only useage I get from the site is listening to music (or watching the video) and watching comedy shows or clips.
When it comes to Wikipedia, I use it more less, especially in the past year or two. I would use it constantly in college as if i'm honest, I didn't realise that the site is created by the everyday internet user and has the danger of displaying incorrect information so it's an unrealiable site. This would be in relation to the 'dangerous material' as Kollock's describes. People have the freedom to include information they want. The site may have officials who check the updated information, but still has the chance of confirming incorrect data.
Social Networking - Also known as the centre form of my life! Only joking. But it seem that (and i'm sure i'm not the only one) they seem to crop up everyday in our lives. When I think about it I can't remember what I did before these sites were around when I was bored.
I'd say that especially Facebook has been my 'virtual settlement' where I keep in contact with my friends back home and also those who are on the other side of Lincoln as I can't be arsed to walk 10 minutes down the road!
I'm not a fake person were I'd display false facts about myself, but Facebook really is the place were people can learn the most about me. With general things about me such as interests, my profile has it all!
However I like to and think most other people should just calm it down on these sites. With people checking their profile three or four times a day, we are losing sense of real community and communication. The internet may be taking a global turn on businesses and other asspects, but it is becoming a real concern that it is taking over our lives and becoming an obsession.
User Generated - In this modern age of technology and the internet, I'd say that I use user generated sites less than social networking ones. The two I'd say I use the most are YouTube and Wikipedia. However even when I do visit these sites, I'm only a user and never contribute to them. For instance I have a account on YouTube but have never uploaded a video, the only useage I get from the site is listening to music (or watching the video) and watching comedy shows or clips.
When it comes to Wikipedia, I use it more less, especially in the past year or two. I would use it constantly in college as if i'm honest, I didn't realise that the site is created by the everyday internet user and has the danger of displaying incorrect information so it's an unrealiable site. This would be in relation to the 'dangerous material' as Kollock's describes. People have the freedom to include information they want. The site may have officials who check the updated information, but still has the chance of confirming incorrect data.
Social Networking - Also known as the centre form of my life! Only joking. But it seem that (and i'm sure i'm not the only one) they seem to crop up everyday in our lives. When I think about it I can't remember what I did before these sites were around when I was bored.
I'd say that especially Facebook has been my 'virtual settlement' where I keep in contact with my friends back home and also those who are on the other side of Lincoln as I can't be arsed to walk 10 minutes down the road!
I'm not a fake person were I'd display false facts about myself, but Facebook really is the place were people can learn the most about me. With general things about me such as interests, my profile has it all!
However I like to and think most other people should just calm it down on these sites. With people checking their profile three or four times a day, we are losing sense of real community and communication. The internet may be taking a global turn on businesses and other asspects, but it is becoming a real concern that it is taking over our lives and becoming an obsession.
Week 4 - Topic 1 (Blanchard)
Right, I'm just going to keep to the basic points which are relivant as not to bore you with an essay style post!
CMC's, Online Communities? - When we see these sites where people interact with each other such as the global obsessions with Facebook and MySpace, it's pretty hard wether to class them as community sites. They may hold some of the characteristics the average community should have, such as discussions and interaction with each other. But at the end of the day, these sites only involve us sitting at our computer screens typing away for hours of the day or week. I'd probably classify these sites as fake communities. We don't interact the same as we would do in real life and only se these community groups are networks as an image on our profiles.
'Virtual Settlements' - In Blanchards reading on this issue, the term of virtual settlement can be seen as an important one. With Jones stating that this settlement is where we find the virtual place in which we interact. So this can be seen as an important side to out virtual communication as with out this settlement, we would have no interaction with other people. So you could say that my virtual settlement would be these networks relating to the uni and college I went to where I interact with friends I go and have been to.
A Sense Of Community? - To relate back to my first point I made, I find it hard to classify these online sites as a community. However this is only a person opinion. When related back to McMillan and Chavis theory, I can understand how we can get that sense of community. Such as the feelings of membership, influences and emotional connection.
'Lurkers' - When we think of the term 'lurking', we think those who 'stalk' other people through the net. However when we think of those who just have a quick read of people's posts or profiles, can we class they as a lurker if they don't write something back. It's a fine line issue as we all post details about us, such as favourite music, films etc. So why do we do this if we dont want people to read this material?
CMC's, Online Communities? - When we see these sites where people interact with each other such as the global obsessions with Facebook and MySpace, it's pretty hard wether to class them as community sites. They may hold some of the characteristics the average community should have, such as discussions and interaction with each other. But at the end of the day, these sites only involve us sitting at our computer screens typing away for hours of the day or week. I'd probably classify these sites as fake communities. We don't interact the same as we would do in real life and only se these community groups are networks as an image on our profiles.
'Virtual Settlements' - In Blanchards reading on this issue, the term of virtual settlement can be seen as an important one. With Jones stating that this settlement is where we find the virtual place in which we interact. So this can be seen as an important side to out virtual communication as with out this settlement, we would have no interaction with other people. So you could say that my virtual settlement would be these networks relating to the uni and college I went to where I interact with friends I go and have been to.
A Sense Of Community? - To relate back to my first point I made, I find it hard to classify these online sites as a community. However this is only a person opinion. When related back to McMillan and Chavis theory, I can understand how we can get that sense of community. Such as the feelings of membership, influences and emotional connection.
'Lurkers' - When we think of the term 'lurking', we think those who 'stalk' other people through the net. However when we think of those who just have a quick read of people's posts or profiles, can we class they as a lurker if they don't write something back. It's a fine line issue as we all post details about us, such as favourite music, films etc. So why do we do this if we dont want people to read this material?
Week 4 - Topic 1 (Lister)
Sorry this is very late in the week, but it's better late than never doing this blogging business
Online Community - Empowering/Disempowering? - Of course like many of us when we think of online communities we think social networking etc. So I'll refer to the simple site which we're all familiar with (yes, it is Facebook!). As a whole, this and other sites like it, are empowering as it gives that sense of freedom. As Manuel Castelles mentions the internet is 'the fabric of our lives'. In my opinion I agree with this statement but can see it in two ways. First is that seeing the internet as the fabric of our lives says we dress ourselves using the it to create an image of our choice and that we can use it to design things of our choice. Which would refer to statements I made last week in that we create new images and identities of ourselves and so on.
Internet As A 'Public Sphere' - The internet has always seem to be a sphere in which everyone is connected to each other. As with social networking people all over the world can talk to each other whenever they want. The same with blogs and also forums. With also the availability of picture sending and web cams, it's changes dramatically in the past few years from the simple text messages we send to one another like the form of these blogs we type. The interaction is on a much higher level. But as the saying goes, the more advanced and complicated something is the more chance of it breaking and leaving you at risk. This use to be more of a threat, but with more security measures taken on sites and the wide availability of security software protection, we can be at ease more from the dangers that face us on the net.
'Dangerous Materials' - Of course with the use on the net, comes the risk of viruses and the ever annoying spam messages popping up on our screens daily! So these items maybe people promoting something of themselves but of course the freedom of the net is not always positive.
Producers Of Culture On The Net - With the internet being a place where anything can happen, such as being the person we wish to be, to fighting mythical creatures with a sword of destiny or whatever, than the opportunity to create new cultures is always a possibility. Anyone can express opinions or interests which are different to everyone else, to which other people respond to. If this keeps building, you can have a group of people who are the same to you but different to everyone else which may lead to a new culture. One prime example is the ever expanding world of online gaming. As the name suggests is started on here and has turned into a multi million user sub culture in only a matter of few years.
Online Community - Empowering/Disempowering? - Of course like many of us when we think of online communities we think social networking etc. So I'll refer to the simple site which we're all familiar with (yes, it is Facebook!). As a whole, this and other sites like it, are empowering as it gives that sense of freedom. As Manuel Castelles mentions the internet is 'the fabric of our lives'. In my opinion I agree with this statement but can see it in two ways. First is that seeing the internet as the fabric of our lives says we dress ourselves using the it to create an image of our choice and that we can use it to design things of our choice. Which would refer to statements I made last week in that we create new images and identities of ourselves and so on.
Internet As A 'Public Sphere' - The internet has always seem to be a sphere in which everyone is connected to each other. As with social networking people all over the world can talk to each other whenever they want. The same with blogs and also forums. With also the availability of picture sending and web cams, it's changes dramatically in the past few years from the simple text messages we send to one another like the form of these blogs we type. The interaction is on a much higher level. But as the saying goes, the more advanced and complicated something is the more chance of it breaking and leaving you at risk. This use to be more of a threat, but with more security measures taken on sites and the wide availability of security software protection, we can be at ease more from the dangers that face us on the net.
'Dangerous Materials' - Of course with the use on the net, comes the risk of viruses and the ever annoying spam messages popping up on our screens daily! So these items maybe people promoting something of themselves but of course the freedom of the net is not always positive.
Producers Of Culture On The Net - With the internet being a place where anything can happen, such as being the person we wish to be, to fighting mythical creatures with a sword of destiny or whatever, than the opportunity to create new cultures is always a possibility. Anyone can express opinions or interests which are different to everyone else, to which other people respond to. If this keeps building, you can have a group of people who are the same to you but different to everyone else which may lead to a new culture. One prime example is the ever expanding world of online gaming. As the name suggests is started on here and has turned into a multi million user sub culture in only a matter of few years.
Friday, 6 February 2009
Week 3 Topic 2 - Yes That One!
I only want to keep this one sort and rise a couple of key points when expressing ourselves online.
To Show Or Not To Show Our Identities?! - As the are showing our identities in the first place on these blogs/social networking sites, we should be at liberty to portray ourselves as we want. I mean there isn't exactly a law saying we have to be exact in our describtions. If I was a ballet dancer (this is an example by the way!), i can choose whether i want to share that with everyone.
Full Names? - Should we have to show our full names? No. I don't think anyone does as in general we prefer our nick names. It keeps the whole experience more casual than making it look very formal and business like. There sites are here for our enjoyment and entertainment. Even on this very blog I've put myself down as Drewseph instead of Andrew John Oliver as it's more social and easier to remember!
To Show Or Not To Show Our Identities?! - As the are showing our identities in the first place on these blogs/social networking sites, we should be at liberty to portray ourselves as we want. I mean there isn't exactly a law saying we have to be exact in our describtions. If I was a ballet dancer (this is an example by the way!), i can choose whether i want to share that with everyone.
Full Names? - Should we have to show our full names? No. I don't think anyone does as in general we prefer our nick names. It keeps the whole experience more casual than making it look very formal and business like. There sites are here for our enjoyment and entertainment. Even on this very blog I've put myself down as Drewseph instead of Andrew John Oliver as it's more social and easier to remember!
Week 3 Topic 1 - Continued
Online Identities - With more and more online social networking taking over our lives (especially with us younger generation) it gives us a chance to be the better person we want to be in real life. For example even having the choice to display ourselves with a different name, it creates a whole new image for us.
It may be seen as a small risk to take, but if any a good risk as we can create that person we really want to be inside. As an example, in the film Fight Club we see Edward Norton become the person he wants to be rather than the boring one he lives day to day in a dead end job. This is what we are doing today, but instead of a mental case, we do it through technology/the internet. Plus as it's technology, we have the choice of how far we want to portray ourselves differently, the only danger we have is of ourselves.
Representation Of Selves - In this post-modern age, the issue of people's backgrounds has taken a back seat as we can express ourselves as freely as we want. If we take social networking into account again, individuals are aloud to 'promote' their backgrounds etc. With pages and sites devoted to their needs or interests.
Cyberidentities - As I have already mentioned we play with our identities online and tend to make new ones up, so of course our 'cyberidentities' are an alternative to our real ones. One of the reasons for people to do this maybe as a comfort zone. For example if someone was a shy person in real life, they can come off as a loud one online. So these new identities have benefits which may lead to being passed off into their real life ones?
Online/Offline Relationships - I understand I have been speaking on a personal level with these topics, however this can be the best way as it may differ from Lister's views. So with relationships we have with people on and offline, I'd say that they can differ quite a lot.
Again as we can portray ourselves differently online, we may communicate with people better through the Net. We may find more confidence through using the keyboard than our words which may suit some people. However face to face relationships will always be better, of course if the other person is on the other side of the planet, in a jungle somewhere haha.
It may be seen as a small risk to take, but if any a good risk as we can create that person we really want to be inside. As an example, in the film Fight Club we see Edward Norton become the person he wants to be rather than the boring one he lives day to day in a dead end job. This is what we are doing today, but instead of a mental case, we do it through technology/the internet. Plus as it's technology, we have the choice of how far we want to portray ourselves differently, the only danger we have is of ourselves.
Representation Of Selves - In this post-modern age, the issue of people's backgrounds has taken a back seat as we can express ourselves as freely as we want. If we take social networking into account again, individuals are aloud to 'promote' their backgrounds etc. With pages and sites devoted to their needs or interests.
Cyberidentities - As I have already mentioned we play with our identities online and tend to make new ones up, so of course our 'cyberidentities' are an alternative to our real ones. One of the reasons for people to do this maybe as a comfort zone. For example if someone was a shy person in real life, they can come off as a loud one online. So these new identities have benefits which may lead to being passed off into their real life ones?
Online/Offline Relationships - I understand I have been speaking on a personal level with these topics, however this can be the best way as it may differ from Lister's views. So with relationships we have with people on and offline, I'd say that they can differ quite a lot.
Again as we can portray ourselves differently online, we may communicate with people better through the Net. We may find more confidence through using the keyboard than our words which may suit some people. However face to face relationships will always be better, of course if the other person is on the other side of the planet, in a jungle somewhere haha.
Week 3 Topic 1 - The Interweb Thingy! As An 'Open Architecture'
Open Architecture - After having a cheeky look through Lister's reading and a couple of people's blogs, I think that the term 'open architecture' can be summarised as what the title suggests. The Internet is an open service of which any fool can log onto and talk whatever.
As a quote stated says 'it's intended to facilitate and exchange flow of data'.
In terms of architecture, it does seem to suggest that the internet is almost a project on which we build on. With Lister refering to facts on the topic, from 1969 the world saw 4 servers (but not surprising as they would consist of the ones at NASA) which grew to 200,000,000 by 2002.
As a quote stated says 'it's intended to facilitate and exchange flow of data'.
In terms of architecture, it does seem to suggest that the internet is almost a project on which we build on. With Lister refering to facts on the topic, from 1969 the world saw 4 servers (but not surprising as they would consist of the ones at NASA) which grew to 200,000,000 by 2002.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
