Obviously, the main concept found in Jenkins is that of convergence, "the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who will go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want" (Jenkins 2). Jenkins states on page 16 that convergence is not an endpoint but a process, I found that to be an interesting take on it. In a way it reminded me of Weinberger and the constant organization that goes on in the digital world compared to the first and second order of order. Adding tags constantly in order to find things keeps modifying the way an item is organized.
At one point Weinberger talked about who was in charge of organization; Jenkins goes over the fact that corporations or individuals associated with said corporation have more power, he writes on page 3 that "not all participants are created equal". I'm writing about this in another class so this jumped out a me. On page 17 he does mention that the public taking the media into their own hands can lead to both positive and negative results.
One key aspect of Jenkins article is the way he links convergence and the media. He writes that "in the 1990s, rhetoric about a coming digital revolution contained an implicit and often explicit assumption that new media was going to push aside old media, that the Internet was going to displace broadcasting, and that all of this would enable consumers to more easily access media content that was personally meaningful to them" (Jenkins 5).
First of all, I like the implicit/explicit part, connection to Weinberger in the form of the writing if not the meaning behind it.
Second, the comment about "easily access media content that was personally meaningful to them" is exactly what we are doing with tagging, with the way Weinberger organized thing, it made items easy to find, easy to store, easy to share.
Continuing along the line of new and old media, I think this is one of the important key points from Jenkins, the way new media is replacing old media but the old media will always remain. Jenkins writes "history teaches us that old media never die-and they don't even necessarily fade away. What dies are simply the tools we use to access the media content" (13), he then goes on to define what a delivery technology is, making the distinction between the product we use to get our media (tape player, ipod) and the actual media being produced. I liked his example when he says that the cinema did not kill the theater and the TV did not kill the radio, that was a great way to make his point.
Jenkins defines what media is, it helped me apply his concepts a bit better: "a medium is a technology that enables communication [...] a medium is a set of associated 'protocols' or social and cultural practices that have grown up around that technology" (Jenkins 13).
To link Jenkins ideas of convergence and media back to Weinberger, they both state that things have to be available to everyone in a fast-paced manner, lag is becoming more and more unacceptable as we get used to Facebook and Twitter.
So to make it even simpler, from my take on Jenkins, the important thing to understand is that convergence is constantly transitioning, therefore the media we use is being transformed and "replacing" the old media we've been using, and could potentially still use.
As a side note, I really liked the term "tele-cocooning" =)
At one point Weinberger talked about who was in charge of organization; Jenkins goes over the fact that corporations or individuals associated with said corporation have more power, he writes on page 3 that "not all participants are created equal". I'm writing about this in another class so this jumped out a me. On page 17 he does mention that the public taking the media into their own hands can lead to both positive and negative results.
One key aspect of Jenkins article is the way he links convergence and the media. He writes that "in the 1990s, rhetoric about a coming digital revolution contained an implicit and often explicit assumption that new media was going to push aside old media, that the Internet was going to displace broadcasting, and that all of this would enable consumers to more easily access media content that was personally meaningful to them" (Jenkins 5).
First of all, I like the implicit/explicit part, connection to Weinberger in the form of the writing if not the meaning behind it.
Second, the comment about "easily access media content that was personally meaningful to them" is exactly what we are doing with tagging, with the way Weinberger organized thing, it made items easy to find, easy to store, easy to share.
Continuing along the line of new and old media, I think this is one of the important key points from Jenkins, the way new media is replacing old media but the old media will always remain. Jenkins writes "history teaches us that old media never die-and they don't even necessarily fade away. What dies are simply the tools we use to access the media content" (13), he then goes on to define what a delivery technology is, making the distinction between the product we use to get our media (tape player, ipod) and the actual media being produced. I liked his example when he says that the cinema did not kill the theater and the TV did not kill the radio, that was a great way to make his point.
Jenkins defines what media is, it helped me apply his concepts a bit better: "a medium is a technology that enables communication [...] a medium is a set of associated 'protocols' or social and cultural practices that have grown up around that technology" (Jenkins 13).
To link Jenkins ideas of convergence and media back to Weinberger, they both state that things have to be available to everyone in a fast-paced manner, lag is becoming more and more unacceptable as we get used to Facebook and Twitter.
So to make it even simpler, from my take on Jenkins, the important thing to understand is that convergence is constantly transitioning, therefore the media we use is being transformed and "replacing" the old media we've been using, and could potentially still use.
As a side note, I really liked the term "tele-cocooning" =)
I also found it fascinating how he says that media never dies, just the technology that transmits it. I had never thought about it that way. I also found his Black Box Fallacy interesting, considering we have often have one object, the IPhone for example, that does anything from calling someone, playing music or starting your car. But there is no single black box that is out there and I have to agree that there probably would never be a single one, since competition between companies would be gone if there were.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, really smart and interesting connections. I was going to bring up what Leigh did here, the black box fallacy. I think your post sort of does good work in that it goes against the fallacy (illustrating that convergence isn't JUST about technology, but moreso about what we DO with technology). Just make sure not to equate convergence solely with technologies, in that it's also, as Jenkins describes, something that is "within our brains."
ReplyDeleteThis post is really well done. i was looking at your post after the reading and you really helped clear up a few aspects for me. so thanks for that. I really liked how you used the example from his, "tv not killing radio" quote. That was one of the most interesting aspects of this reading for me. I completely believe that new medias dont "kill" old medias, they improve and converge with new technologies/
ReplyDelete