Category Archives: New Media

The fashion industry gets it right

Sporting organisations might be struggling to get their head around new media but at least the fashion industry seems to understand it. Organisers of Australian Fashion Week paid for some ‘elite’ bloggers to travel to Sydney to cover the event last week. According to Rachel Wells in The Age:

‘We’ve invited some of these guys here because our role is to get people talking about Australian fashion. And when you’ve got bloggers that provide immediate commentary within hours, even minutes, of a show finishing, and they are communicating to hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people around the globe, why wouldn’t you get them here?’ says Australian Fashion Week founder Simon Lock.

One of the bloggers invited, Bryanboy believes that the power of the blogger lies in the ability to give uncensored, unedited fashion commentary to a global audience. As he says, ‘I think readers trust us because they know we don’t have a vested interest…We don’t have editors or advertisers to please like magazines and I think that gives us a lot more cred. We tell it how it is and people really value that’.

The thing to note about the fashion industry is that its media coverage is different to that of sport. It relies on monthly magazines like Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar to get its products out in the public domain – so blogging is a god-send for the industry because now it has almost immediate access to its consumers. Sport quite self evidently has never had this problem but it could still learn from Bryanboy’s point – fans appreciate a view where there is no vested interest. And making content exclusive on the web as in the case of the IPL does not encourage citizen journalists to cover sporting events.

A defence of collective intelligence in media making

Collective intelligence is a hotly debated topic amongst those of us interested in new media. In its basic form, it is the idea that everyone has a contribution to make, and when combined those contributions can create a quality product. It is the idea that is the basis of Wikipedia, an open source encyclopedia that has been the subject of much controversy in its short lifespan. Wikipedia controversies arise when the pages of political figures are hacked to contain inaccurate and sometimes scandalous information. But its biggest controversy arose when an analysis in Nature found that Wikipedia’s scientfic articles were nearly as accurate as those in Encyclopedia Britannica.

The insult to Britannica was that their articles are usually written by the foremost experts in the field, whereas the articles in Wikipedia are written by anyone who feels that they have a contribution to make to such an article. To those who supported the idea of collective intelligence in media making, this finding supported their contention that this approach can produce quality products. There are many others who remain unconvinced.

Jaron Lanier is unimpressed by the chaotic nature of collective intelligence. He believes that consensus is never reached in making media products this way; instead the products produced are in a constant state of flux and cannot be relied upon as being 100 percent accurate. Likewise, Terry Fisher warned of the lack of stable cultural reference points that might exist in a society that openly embraced the idea of making media through collective intelligence.

To my way of thinking, these commentators miss the point on collective intelligence. Collective intelligence also exists within the production of computer software, and is known as open source. In the open source software community, developers from all around the world form teams and work cooperatively on developing software. The best example of open source software is Linux, an operating system that contains many of the same features as found in Windows and OSX, as well as some that aren’t.

This is the freedom that open source software has – nobody expects it to be perfect. So features that might be too risky for a commercial application like Windows to include can be tried out in the open source software world. Mozilla Firefox is an open source web browser, and was the first application of its kind to feature tabbed browsing. The idea of tabbed browsing caught on and now the commercial browsers, Internet Explorer and Safari feature it as well. Likewise, OpenOffice is an open source alternative to Microsoft Office and pioneered the use of an XML based file format. Now Microsoft has followed suit in the latest versions of their office suite, because OpenOffice proved that it could work well first.

The same relationship could exist between Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica, or between the collective efforts of citizen media and the mainstream media. Citizen journalism has already proved that it can cover some issues more effectively than the mainstream media, mainly because of the limited time and space that the mainstream media can devote to any one issue. Likewise content can be developed in a collective and if it proves popular and workable, be developed into a stable product within the mainstream media. Consequently the mainstream media could leverage the advantage that collective media initiatives give them – a testing bed for new content and a forum for extending the coverage of issues; letting amateurs with an interest in the issue run with it.

Just as proprietary software producers like Sun and Novell encourage the efforts of hobbyist software developers to create new products that they can later refine and release commercially, mainstream media organizations could foster the efforts of citizen media makers in an effort to bring more innovation and diversity into the ‘stable’ world of the mainstream media. Jaron Lanier suggests that citizen journalists need leadership from a strong independent press, but this isn’t about the mainstream media leading citizen media makers. This is about amateurs and professionals working in a symbiotic relationship to create quality media products.

Blog-testing

New media’s role in political protesting isn’t new, not by far. It’s not even new when it comes to inciting violence. You only have to look at the examples of the Philippines and Cronulla, right here in Australia.

In 2001 thousands of protesters were mobilised by text messages received on their phones to bring down the government of President Joseph Estrada. In 2005, a text message that was passed around incited racial violence on the beaches of Cronulla as Anglo-Australians moved to reclaim the beaches from Lebanese Australians.

Now Chinese bloggers are revealing their anger towards Tibet, where unrest has led to the deaths of seven Tibetan protestors. One Chinese blogger has been quoted as saying;

‘If you behave well, we’ll protect your culture and benefits…if you behave badly, we’ll still take care of your culture..by putting it in a museum.’

Using new media as a means for political agitation is something that interests me, because it is so well suited for it. Blogs are unedited and uncensored (unless they belong to Olympic athletes) and mobile phones can be used to create networks that bypass government control and any censorship that might come with that. But as new media becomes increasingly prevalent, will government agencies look to find ways to control what happens within the blogsphere and other supposedly private new media networks?

New Media Mogul has already thoroughly presented the case study of the IOC and blogging athletes at the Beijing Olympics, but there is news that the Indian government wants access to the email network of Research In Motion (RIM), makers of the popular Blackberry mobile emailing device. Apparently the encryption used by RIM is too strong for security agencies to hack into a user’s Blackberry email and the Indian government wants them to lower it because they are concerned that terrorist activity is taking place and they need to stop it.

The point is that the use of new media is ever increasing, and at a rapid rate too. So is this move by the Indian government just the beginning of a movement to try and control new media sites of dissemination like blogs, and mobile networks? It is difficult to discern what the ultimate possibilities of an increasingly unregulated media landscape will bring us, but certainly an opportunity for greater free speech is one of them. And while free speech may not always be positive, it is the sign of a healthy democracy.

The other point is that the sheer volume of information flowing on these networks is surely too much for any media regulator to cope with. This is an issue that New Media Mogul will continue to watch, and it will be interesting to see what develops in this area.

The Ties That Bind?

I was listening to the Huey Lewis song ‘Happy To Be Stuck with You’ and the line that goes ‘We share the same phone number, all the same friends and the same address’ got me thinking. Couples who are living together are really not so inexorably linked as they once were – they might still share a landline number and a physical address, but almost certainly they will have their own mobile phone number, their own email address and individual access to other communication services such as social networking sites. I don’t actually know whether there is any research that demonstrates the effect of this move towards communication infrastructure that is individualised and unshared on how people form relationships and maintain them, but it seems interesting to me.

It’s also a segueway into a discussion about what is happening to the media landscape. Just as couples sharing a house used to be limited to sharing the same communications infrastructure, and as Huey Lewis suggests, this made them happy to be stuck together, perhaps it was also true that these same people were happy to be stuck with the services of various media companies because there were so few alternatives. Now that there are alternatives, it will be interesting to see how fickle the loyalties of media consumers will become, and how fractured the media landscape will become, as large operators are replaced with a myriad of small operators.

We’ve already seen The Bulletin shut its doors for the last time, and reading between the lines, it seems that the fickleness of media consumers was to blame for the demise of this once extremely influential publication, with PBL Media citing falling circulation numbers as more and more people turned to the Internet for their news and opinion. It begs asking this question then – what are people looking for in their media and is continued excellence in production of innovative and original content the key to survival in the digital media age?