Variations on the Branded Self, the chapter by Alison Hearn, presents a highly inventive argument through taking an existing concept – the notion of the self as a commodity – and applying it the current day cultural and media landscape. The author effectively recycles John Locke’s conception that the self can be construed as an item of market value, capable of being traded. Hearn argues that people, influenced by dominant cultural ideas, have become objects of self-branding.

The overriding thesis of the article seems to be that as the cultural fabric of society changes, the identities of the people within that society, since those identities have been formed by cultural forces, correspondingly shift. The concept sounds complicated, but is in effect relatively straightforward. For instance, in the 1950s dominant identities of women had their grounding in domestic duties – an identity which was heavily reinforced by advertisements and media promulgated notions of the role of women as homemakers. But comparatively in the 1980s, as media representations and cultural values shifted toward more career focused women, female identities were correspondingly no longer centred around the role of housewife. Today, the cultural precepts promulgated by the media have obviously changed, hence the changes in identity compared to 1950s ideas of the self. Thus it is clear that there has been a strong link between media and the formation of identity, even in the past.

The tone of Hearn’s argument then shifts from the framework of how media and identity are interrelated, to a discussion of how current media and cultural values are actually impacting on the formation of identity in practical terms. A key conclusion is that in our Westernised society, which is based on “constant innovation and flexibility”, identities are consequently becoming flexible and malleable. This is a unique concept which definitely seems plausible when you consider technologies such as Facebook which allow us to change our “identity” or status with the mere typing of a few characters. Though this conclusion seems plausible, the author ultimately offers little evidence to actually support the notion that our identities are becoming more changeable – it remains a theory that we can only speculate on.

 Another key conclusion is that the nature of our current cultural climate, which is heavily based on branding and the linking of brands to particular ways of life, is actually making identity more susceptible to the influence of media and cultural influences than ever. However, as the 1950 example indicates, branding has always been a prevalent strategy – 1950 advertisements exploited depictions of the housewife and linked their brands to particular aspects of female identity extensively. Perhaps a more poignant argument would have been to link the formation of identity to the pronounced shift in the forms of media through which identity is formed. Newer and more interactive media forms are, arguably, compounding and accelerating the formation of identity through cultural influence. In other words, interactive media are more easily enabling people to themselves create their own media influenced identity – such as through the creation of Facebook profiles.

The chapter presents a number of theories derived in Systemic Functional Linguistics and then applies these in the analysis of news photos across several broadsheet newspapers, in order to demonstrate the operation of these theories in practice.  The subject of Economou’s investigation is effectively the ways in which readers are positioned to derive certain meanings from visual texts, and the motivations behind this positioning. Central to the argument is the notion that photos used to accompany feature articles have different intentions and news values than those used to accompany hard news stories. According to Economou, just as writers and editors of feature stories aim to convey certain evaluative meanings, as distinct from objective hard news, the photo editors and layout teams work to convey corresponding evaluative visual meanings. The author speculates that there are 2 major visual evaluative keys (or means of evaluating photos along the spectrum of visual meaning): Visual Record Key (as used in daily news pages) and Visual Interpretation Key (as is more typically used on the cover page of weekly news reviews). This conception that there are differing visual meanings used dependant upon the style of article appears highly legitimate – more emotive articles necessitate correspondingly emotive pictures. Whilst the overarching framework of the argument – the utilization of differing photos to convey differing meanings – is undisputed, some of the author’s evaluations/evaluative tools should be accepted with caution.

Visual Record key is argued to comprise more factually based photos, with an emphasis on objectivity and “the backgrounding of authorial subjectivity”(pg 257). Encouragingly, the author does not claim that photos in Visual Record Key are completely free from expressed values. Rather, though photos in this key aim to represent factuality through adhering to layouts typical of hard news stories and presenting traditional associated meanings, techniques such as sharper camera focus can effectively work to “express an authorial/editorial viewpoint”(pg. 260). The distinction, though this is not made very clearly by the author, is that the authorial viewpoint is not the aim of the photo, but a secondary consideration. Unfortunately, where the author’s argument falls short, is in this failing to make an explicitly understandable distinction between the two visual keys. The visual interpretation key is introduced as the use of visually enhancing techniques – such as zoom and foregrounding – to inscribe more direct and intentional meanings. It is argued that through Visual Interpretation keys, more evaluative and value-laden meanings are embedded in the photographs. However in the author’s discussion and application of these evaluative tools to the photographs in question, it appears that there is a certain degree of value-laden meaning in all photographs – thus there is overlap between the two keys. It seems apparent that there aren’t really two different categories of photos as the author claims, but rather just two ends of the spectrum on which evaluative meaning in photos can be analysed.

Lukin, A. (2003a) Lessons in Ideology: How Grammar Shapes the Reporting of War, Education Links 66/67, pp.18-20

The basic premise of Annabelle Lukin’s two texts, Reporting War: Grammar as Covert Operation and Lessons in Ideology: How Grammar Shapes the Reporting of War, is that in the course of news reporting on events, words, grammar, tense and the use of voice all ultimately contribute to the meaning conveyed. Both articles involve in depth discussions of the impact that various language tools have, whether used consciously or unconsciously, on the representation of facts and overall meaning, specifically in the reporting of war.

 Lukin’s discussion of how the use of effective or middle voice impact upon the meaning conveyed, was highly informative and valid. Lukin argues that the use of middle voice (eg. The milk split) removes the option of naming an agent, thus when reporting on an event in middle voice, the event cannot be recounted as having been caused by “an external agent” (Lukin 2003 pg. 35). Whereas with the use of effective voice, which can either be active (eg. I split the milk) or passive (eg. The milk was spilt by me), an agent is always specified or at least implied (Lukin 2003 pg 240). When using passive voice, it is possible to not nominate a precise agent, such as simply saying “the milk was spilt”, which does not nominate a specific culprit but does expressly imply that there is someone responsible for the action (Lukin 2003 pg 240). The use of different voice can ultimately be used to attribute or allay blame to agents (whether they be people or weapons) and so can have a marked impact on the reporting of events. It is easy to draw, from Lukin’s discussion, an understanding that this language tool can have a marked impact on the reporting of the cause and effect of an event.

Lukin then engages in a detailed analysis of several media sources which reported on the same event (involving an Iraqi boy injured in a missile attack) and identifies the ways in which different language forms have differing effects of meaning (Lukin 2003a pg 242). The purpose of this exercise appears to have been to demonstrate, as opposed to merely discuss, the impact of language on the creation of meaning and the relaying of facts. Though this long-winded analysis does effectively make the point that language is a key force shaping the reality presented by news reports, the author fails to come to any guiding principles on the topic. Perhaps the only broad conclusion she comes to is that the language tools used in the reporting of facts are often unconscious decisions (Lukin 2003a pg 242). However I would argue that whilst many and probably most language decisions are unconscious and are made in the regular course of reporting, there are also very distinct instances of news networks and government media releases employing language tactics for very deliberate and specific purposes. The author’s emphasis on the unconscious elements of language is not qualified by an assertion that in some cases language is used strategically to achieve specific purposes and present the desired version of the event.

Couldry’s discussion is comprised of two main arguments: a) that the composition and nature of audiences has changed and b) that the ways in which we study audiences, must necessarily change too. In turn, he argues that 3 factors – technological, social/spatial and experience based – have changed the nature of audience-hood, and represent the challenges which have emerged for audience research today. Effectively, he claims, “being a member of a media audience is becoming a different experience from what it was in the past” (Couldry 2005 pg. 219), and this necessitates changes in the ways in which we analyse media consumption.

IN WHAT WAYS HAVE AUDIENCES CHANGED?

The basic changes in media experiences for audience members, as discussed by Abercrombie and Longhurst, seem valid. It seems reasonable to argue that the ‘diffused audience’ phenomenon is occurring. As a result of media convergence and the emergence of mobile media, there is arguably a spatial diffusion of audience, in that people can be audiences anywhere, and also a social diffusion in that they can consume media anytime, thus allowing easier integration of media consumption with everyday life. This seems to be self-evident in contemporary society and therefore a valid. These changes in media composition pose various problems for media researchers: for instance, if media is consumed in various places (the home, at work, in public places), where is the best place from which to study the media consumption of the audience members? Or rather, should an overall approach be adopted in which media uses are studied across various social spaces?

Where Longhurst’s argument becomes more unique, is his   discussion of the notion that audience members have simultaneously become performers. Longhurst’s argument does have some basis – for instance we have seen the rise in youtube and reality television, which make the viewer become the viewed. However it is perhaps more reasoned to argue that there has been a blurring of the lines of audience/performer, as opposed to a complete integration of the two concepts. Since in practical terms, viewers are not always performers in contemporary media interactions – there has simply been a trend towards this phenomenon.

HOW SHOULD/HAS MEDIA RESEARCH CHANGE/D AS A RESULT?

The author gives weight to the argument of media researcher Pertti Alasuutaari, who conjectures that we have entered a new phase (incidentally the 3^rd phase) of conducting media research, in which the focus in not on the examination of individual media habits, but pays attention to the emergence of the greater ‘media culture’. Within this frame of research, the previous undertaking of analysing how audiences interact with different programs takes a back seat to an analysis of the emergence of the broader contemporary media culture, particularly the ways in which programming and news is constructed with an awareness that it is being constructed for an audience.

This approach, on the face of it, appears valid from my perspective, since the ‘diffusion’ of media audiences would make it near impossible to analyse individual media practices. Based on the sheer volume of media that people now consume and the difficulty in tracking their media uses across such a multitude of locations, social spaces and times of day, an analysis of broader patterns of media usage seems more effective. However, there are obviously more complexities involved in the use of this ‘media culture’ approach to the research of media practices.

Castells’ central argument throughout the course of the chapter “Informationalism, Networks and the Network Society” is that as a society we have progressed from being an information society to a network society, which is a mode of functioning with very specific implications. Castells’ conception of ‘the network’ as an entity comprised of interconnected nodes which work interdependently to facilitate the functioning of the greater unit, seems reasonable. Castells uses linear reasoning to argue that information flows through the nodes (separate arms) of a network, thus the efficiency of operation of the network is dependent upon communication between the separate arms. Castells fails to give any practical examples of these so called networks so it’s difficult to ascertain what scale he supposes these networks exist upon. Networks could for example refer to small scale arrangements, such as the interconnectedness of the organs of the human body, which work interdependently to facilitate the  functioning of greater network of the human body.

Castells’ writing becomes more relevant for our purposes when he launches into the specificities of what living in a network society entails. His primary argument is that although network societies have been used as the dominant social formation in previous eras, the current network society which we live in is organised around microelectronics based information technologies. Again the author doesn’t give any practical examples of these ICT based networks but there are obvious examples. For instance, newspaper conglomerates, movie studios and mobile phone / telecommunications services are all individual nodes which are interconnected to form the global media network, operating through the use of high-speed information technologies.

The author is also arguing that the dominant social structure which is existent today is a worldwide network of individual arms which are powered by these micro-electronics based technologies – what he defines as the network society. When interviewed by Harry Kriesler from University of California, Berkeley, Castells defined a network society as “… a society where the key social structures and activities are organised around electronically processed information networks. So it’s not just about networks or social networks, because social networks have been very old forms of social organisation. It’s about social networks which process and manage information and are using micro-electronic based technologies.”

 This brings us to the other main argument of Castells, which is that if the overriding social structure is now based around networking, then this social structure is bound to have implications on the social and cultural development of the world. Again it seems entirely and resoundingly valid to suppose that the culture of a society is formed or at least impacted upon by the way in which the society is organised. If we lived in a communist society based on community ownership of property for instance, then we would most expect this to have an impact on the distinctive culture that developed. Castells argues that the most specific cultural impact being felt as a result of the networked social structure is actually the emergence of many distinct and fragmented cultures. Effectively, since a networked society operates from distinct points, rather than a centralised base, the distinct cultures of each arm of the network are retained. Though Castells speaks about the impact of a network society on culture in a general sense, this theory could then be applied on a smaller scale to the effect that networked media has on culture, as distinct from the effect that (centralised) broadcast media has had on culture in the past.

Jenkins effectively uses the tv program American Idol as an ongoing example, throughout this chapter of his book, of the phenomenon popularly referred to as technological convergence. Technological convergence, as a more specialised branch of convergence alongside industrial and textual convergence, refers to the integration of multiple existing technologies into a hybrid technology. Technological convergence can effectively cause older technology(ies) to become obsolete, through fusing old and new technologies to form a crossbreed technology, or simply updating an old technology to incorporate newer, more advanced functions. A simple example would be the advent of text messaging – whereas once there were pagers which allowed you to send a message of several characters , as an alternative to using a mobile phone, through the process of technological convergence mobile phones were released which integrated these functions into one device. Jenkins is correct to assert that American Idol represents a “killer application of media convergence”, since the concept of integrating the tv and phone into an interactive medium which is participated in by tens of millions of people on any given occasion, is obviously on a larger scale than the simple melding of a pager and a mobile phone.   But the concepts are effectively the same – creators invent new forms of media through integrating the functions of existing technologies and therefore creating mediums which function in new ways.

One of the key concepts discussed by the reading is the notion that corporations are utilizing this technological convergence in order to foster brand recognition and in turn generate profits. For instance, the interactive nature of the American Idol franchise creates an emotional attachment between viewers/callers and the program – viewers vote for who they want to stay and then tune in to the program to see if their choice has been upheld, thus there becomes an emotional/personal connection to the show. Technological, or more specifically media, convergence only works to further foster this attention to the program – after viewers call to vote for their favourite contestant they also make calls to friends or relatives to discuss the likely outcome of the votes, thus further propagating this American Idol community or loyalty. Marketers then take advantage of the fact that this integrated media network has created a loyal fanbase by seeking to closely associate their products with the program in order to attract the fans to their products eg. Coca-Cola aimed to do so through sponsorship of American Idol. The reading suggests that the technological advances which have allowed consumers to escape from marketing invading their home (such as the introduction of Tivo allowing viewers to fast forward through commercials), have forced marketers to adapt their marketing strategies. Rather advertising today is trending toward “mass customization and personalisation”, such as the marketing strategy discussed earlier with respect to associating products with popular programming such as American Idol. After reading the article I ultimately came to the conclusion that technological convergence both hinders the ability of marketers to reach audiences (ie new technologies give consumers more control over what they are exposed to), but also provides new opportunities to marketers to make use of hybrid forms of media to reach audiences in new ways. One of the major shortcomings of the article is that while Jenkins sets up this scenario and sets out his findings, he fails to make this significant conclusion on the nature of technological convergence.

Ito’s central thesis circulates around the relationships between the use of mobile phones (by Japanese youth) and the place/space in which this use occurs. Ito presents the somewhat unique perspective that the mobile phone does not infact disassemble existing social norms, but rather uses of the mobile phone are receptive to, and adaptable based on, the place/space in which the devices are being used. According to Ito, mobile phones do not necessarily impinge upon the integrity or ‘social identity’ of a place or space, but rather the use of these technologies is/can be adapted to suit the particular conditions of a place or space and the social proprieties associated with that location.

The author attempts to validate his key argument through providing empirical evidence/examples of the ways in which individuals tailor their mobile phone practices in order to suit their locality. The author puts forward a clear, albeit non-probing, discussion of the various relationships which emerge through the use of the mobile phone in the home, at school and in urban public places. For instance, students surveyed were found to have limited their mobile phone use at school to emailing whilst in class, deeming the use of voice calls inappropriate whilst in class. Thus Ito suggests that the existing social proprieties of the school ‘place’ dictate the ways in which the mobile phone is used, not the other way around. An insightful point raised by the author, in a similar vein, is the idea that in the place of the home, teenagers are more inclined to ring the mobiles of their friends, instead of their home landlines, so as not to disrupt the family and thus to avoid “circumventing the normative structures of the home” (pg. 8). This point seems unfailingly accurate – I myself engage in this very practice and for this very reason. Whilst the issue is also one of privacy, the primary reason is to facilitate interaction with a friend without having to disrupt the entire family who may be asleep or eating dinner etc. Thus the author’s point that the existing power balance and social structure of a private institution influences phone practices appears entirely lucid.

However the issue is complicated when applied to the ‘space’ of the urban public. The author discusses that Japanese citizens typically limit their phone use to text messages whilst aboard public transport, so as not to disturb other passengers with their voice calls. Signs are used to discourage mobile phone use aboard state transport, whilst the author claims disapproving glances will generally prompt people who do engage in conversations on transport, to whisper and ultimately cut their conversation short. In our context this point does not really serve to strengthen the author’s argument that the sociality of place dictates phone practices, since the point is ultimately culturally relative. In Australia there is prolific mobile phone use aboard public transport and any attempts to whisper are arguably over privacy concerns and not concern that they are disrupting others. Thus I am yet to be convinced by Ito that mobile phone use in the public realm is dictated or even influenced by “the regulative and normative force of places” (pg. 9). Though in the private realm there may be consequences of an established social order on phone usage, this is not readily apparent in the public realm of urban space. Perhaps the obvious conclusion that can be drawn is that whilst there may be normative forces at work in defined places (such as the home or school), which work to naturally regulate mobile phone usage, these normative forces are not at work in the more open and undefined realm of ‘space’. Or if they are at work in the abstract realm of ‘space’ they seem to have little or no impact on phone usage, at least in our context.      

z3206387

Whilst reading this article I was constantly disrupted by the incessant sound of helicopters circling around my neighbourhood. When the afternoon newsbreak came on I discovered that they were police helicopters securing the scene where the lawyer of a notorious bikie had been gunned down. Thus I was both in the midst of the action and being informed about it second hand – just one of many examples of Moores’ conception of ‘the doubling of place’. Moores proffers, quite validly, that public events have taken on a dual character – they are actually happening in one instance and are broadcast about in another. Whereas broadcasting historian Paddy Scannel theorized that broadcasting altered the possibilities of time and space for media users, Moores extends on this notion to investigate the effects of the internet and telephone on temporality.

The author offers an evaluation of past media theory which linked media and communication technologies to changes in place and space. Whereas Scannel claimed the ‘doubling of place’ was a by-product of media technologies, Mayrowitz effectively rejects this conception to claim that the electronic information revolution had created a ‘relatively placeless’ social situation. This seems valid when it is considered that concepts such as ‘cyberspace’ and the notion of the online community have emerged – forms of space which are no longer tied to a physical place. However, one of Moores’ key ideas is that place “can be pluralized in and by electronically mediated communication” (Moores, pg.32). In following the ideas of Nick Couldry, Moores argues that media actually multiplies the connections between places. Whilst the point seems plausible, Moore doesn’t offer any examples of how his theory plays out in a practical sense. The act of using a gps system on your phone in order to navigate where you are walking to a business meeting might be an example of this Moores/Couldry thesis on the pluralization of connections between places. However Meyrowitz’ argument that electronic media erodes phyiscal place boundaries remains convincing, and goes largely unchallenged by Moores.

Further, Mayrowitz claims that social hierarchies are being eroded by the emergence of electronic communication which all but eliminates physical boundaries – for instance someone in Kenya has as much power to blog as someone in New York. On a more localised level, an unemployed person in Harlem has the same authority to blog as the CEO of a company in the financial district in downtown Manhattan. Mayrowitz seems to be onto something with his conception of digital media ‘levelling the playing field’, especially in light of the you tube revolution in which people without a voice have been able to reach audience levels which were once reserved only for broadcast. Though Moores claims that this overestimates the effects of digital media, it seems arbitrary to neglect the fact that the emergence of digital media in competition with broadcasting is definitely having some impact on social hierarchies. Moores offers no discussion of the fact that technologies such as facebook create new sub-hierarchies in the social sphere, whilst the emergence of online media shifts the power from the broadcasters to what the individual chooses to click on and read. These are just some examples of the redefining of social hierarchies in the digital media age, a topic which Moores neglects to investigate despite criticising Meyrowitz’s exploration of the topic as too far-reaching.

Hartley, J. The Frequencies of Public Writing: Tomb, Tome, and Time as Technologies of the Public

John Hartley’s article “The Frequencies of Public Writing” is itself a victim of the author’s key theory of the shifting frequencies of public communication in modern day society. Hartley’s pervasive argument is that (journalism) frequencies are consistently increasing- that is new media technologies are facilitating faster journalism, whilst the somewhat lower frequency modes of broadcast and print media are consequently on the decline. These frequency readjustments are occurring in all facets of news – creation; dissemination; and consumption. Hartley validly argues that academic writing is on the same spectrum as news based public writing just lower again down the frequency chain. The author recognises that in mid-frequency academic writing, there is a greater propensity for material to have a ‘use-by-date’: information takes longer to publish and be circulated and cannot be altered once printed. Yet ironically Hartley’s article, written in 2004, is itself visibly laden with outdated assumptions and insights which have been contradicted in the current social context.

For instance, Hartley claims that the internet “is not politically or culturally decisive in the way that a newspaper, a book or even a speech can be”. That statement is, for starters, an unqualified generalisation, and is secondly a highly misguided opinion in the current context of Obama’s Whitehouse. Within the last year in particular, the effect of the internet on the political and social development of the world has been remarkably apparent. The Obama/McCain election was popularly referred to as the ‘You Tube election’ due to the overwhelming utilization of devices such as Facebook groups and You Tube clips to rally support, political blogs and the extensive coverage of the elections by the global online media. Hartley, constrained by the low-frequency of the public medium in which he was writing, was not privy to view the impact of these technologies on the public, at the time in which he was writing. His theory of high frequency public communication overtaking the less frequent (and less instantaneous) versions in relevance, is self-evident in the failure of his writings to keep up with the current dialogue on the extensive impact of ICTs on political and social progress.

Hartley’s primary area of interest is not the technologies themselves, but the effect that these technologies, which facilitate change in the frequencies of public writing, have on the reading public. Does the trend toward higher frequency public writing signal a downward trend in democracy for instance? The author concludes that though the comparatively lower frequency mediums of broadsheet newspapers and broadcast were, 50 odd years ago, the cornerstone technologies of democracy, the new speeds of public communication do not herald an end to democracy. Rather the new technologies act as ‘gatherers’ in another way – instead of contributing to the democratic polis  or community, they are bridging other temporal-space boundaries. In this sense, Hartley predicts that the technologies will have an effect on political life – he just underestimates the speed with which these effects will be felt. In our current context, we are now very much aware that digital media’s impact on political life is, every bit the equivalent of the advent of the television to the Kennedy elections and the Cold War, or the Gutenberg press to the French revolution.    

z3206389