6.1 Think of a CofP to which you belong (or have belonged) explain in your seminar forum how your example fits into Wenger's model:
One Community of Practice which I believed I was a member of was whilst I was working as a receptionist for a company called Codian based in Langely which made video conferencing software.
This company was divided into different sections based on function, however also being a fairly modern company you were encouraged to feel like a valued member of the team through various social functions and a “common room” with a pool table and a Wii in allowed people to socialize more freely.
The CofP I believe I was a member of involved me as the receptionist, the Office Manager Emma, the ex-receptionist who’d got a promotion, Anita and Jake, I’m not quite sure how he came to fit into it, possibly because he worked in accounts and his desk was next to Emma and Anita’s…
A reason that I believe it was a CofP is that as Jake wasn’t really involved by his official job description, he was still undoubtedly a member. This therefore follows that “The membership involves whoever participates in and contributes to the practice.” (p. 4, Wenger). Also, it was “defined by knowledge rather than by task” (p. 4, Wenger) in that rather us working together on one task only, it would be more ongoing and we would gain knowledge about each other and the different ways in which we’d go about getting things done.
The joint enterprise of the CofP I believe was organizing the smooth running of the office on a daily basis. For example, we tended to do tasks together, like collecting the food delivery on a Thursday morning and office related other tasks of a similar nature.
We had mutual engagement in that we were all responsible for the same thing, and if something were to have gone wrong we would be jointly responsible (excluding Jake as he tended to help out off his own back, his official role being in accounts).
The shared repertoire of communal resources would have been the things we tended to do, almost unwritten rules of how we “did things”. For example, we would normally help ourselves to left over food we’d order in for conferences, and we’d usually have a game of Mario Kart on the Wii after a particularly taxing task.
I would suggest that our relationship to the official organisation was “Unrecognised” in that we did not have an official role, rather relationships were created as I would spend lots of time with Anita, in that she helped me take over from her and knew a lot about my job, and Emma was my superior. Jake had a good relationship with both Emma and Anita and this is how we came to work together for a lot of tasks. I think a challenge of this type of relationship was that as we all had different official responsibilities, sometimes there would be a mis-match between tasks which “officially” were our responsibility, and those we would do together. Therefore we’d have to individually prioritise and this could mean that sometimes tasks which were part of our job description had to be pushed back.
Friday, 27 February 2009
Friday, 20 February 2009
5.3 Jezebel
5.3 Find some well read blogs outside of the New Media Cultures community that impress you and analyse how the author respondents use the blog as a forum to represent themselves and share ideas.
One blog I have recently stumbled upon is Jezebel. This blog is targeted at women and the tag line reads “Jezebel: Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women”. It very much reminds me of a magazine in the type of stories it blogs about and the informal tone it uses which I would say appeals to women, giving the impression that it is fun and light hearted.
One thing which I think is particularly interesting about this blog is that it has a regular post called “Reader Roundup” where there is a summary of the best and worst comments made on the blog of that day. This sort of acts as a way by which appropriate and inappropriate comments are deemed, and therefore gives a good indication of the “way things are done” in this blog.
Whilst I think that lots of the comments can be a bit bitchy on this blog, lots of the stories also have the same bitchy tone, for example, “Kate Bosworth Is Happy To Be Attacked By Appliqué" and "We're Just Not That Into This Month's Marie Claire". To me it seems as if that in order to be fit in with this blog you have to have strong opinions and not be afraid to tell people about them, especially when it comes to fashion and beauty. People tend to present themselves as having strong opinions, which I think often boarders on bitchy and often disagreements often immerge.
One blog I have recently stumbled upon is Jezebel. This blog is targeted at women and the tag line reads “Jezebel: Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women”. It very much reminds me of a magazine in the type of stories it blogs about and the informal tone it uses which I would say appeals to women, giving the impression that it is fun and light hearted.
One thing which I think is particularly interesting about this blog is that it has a regular post called “Reader Roundup” where there is a summary of the best and worst comments made on the blog of that day. This sort of acts as a way by which appropriate and inappropriate comments are deemed, and therefore gives a good indication of the “way things are done” in this blog.
Whilst I think that lots of the comments can be a bit bitchy on this blog, lots of the stories also have the same bitchy tone, for example, “Kate Bosworth Is Happy To Be Attacked By Appliqué" and "We're Just Not That Into This Month's Marie Claire". To me it seems as if that in order to be fit in with this blog you have to have strong opinions and not be afraid to tell people about them, especially when it comes to fashion and beauty. People tend to present themselves as having strong opinions, which I think often boarders on bitchy and often disagreements often immerge.
5.2 Girl With A One Track Mind
5.2 Do some online research into blogs as a new media genre: their origins, development etc. and share your findings in your entries. What forms of expression are they really good for?
A quick google of popular blogs quickly led me to the “Bloggies”, annual awards given out to popular blogs. From here one blog which particularly grabbed my attention was “Girl With a One Track Mind” , which won the award of Best British or Irish Web Blog in 2006 and 2007.
This blog originally was used by author Zie Margolis to discuss the ins and outs of her sex life, often in graphic detail. In her biography she says she wrote the blog because “A sexist double-standard about male vs. female sexuality still exists, and which chastises women if they express sexual wants and needs; I hoped my blog would provide a counter-balance to this old-fashioned attitude.” The blog was intensely popular, with 6 million visitors over the last four and a half years and averaging 150,000 a month.
I would argue that using a blog in order to update this old-fashioned view was incredibly effective, in that the sheer volume of views she had led people to see that female attitudes towards sex were vastly different to how everyone had assumed they were. And Zoe’s blog provided an outlet for this new more empowered attitude to become more mainstream, and for other women to not feel like they should be ashamed for sharing attitudes which would usually be considered to be more masculine with men when it comes to sex.
Other mediums would be extremely difficult to put this view across, as the anonymity of the Internet is what made Zoe feel like she were able to share these feelings online, and the anonymity meant that people were less afraid to admit they agreed with her. Zoe went to great lengths to ensure that no one would find out her identity, and although in the end she was “outed”, I cannot think of other mediums which would have allowed her to continue to share these stories for so long and in such an honest and open manner.
A quick google of popular blogs quickly led me to the “Bloggies”, annual awards given out to popular blogs. From here one blog which particularly grabbed my attention was “Girl With a One Track Mind” , which won the award of Best British or Irish Web Blog in 2006 and 2007.
This blog originally was used by author Zie Margolis to discuss the ins and outs of her sex life, often in graphic detail. In her biography she says she wrote the blog because “A sexist double-standard about male vs. female sexuality still exists, and which chastises women if they express sexual wants and needs; I hoped my blog would provide a counter-balance to this old-fashioned attitude.” The blog was intensely popular, with 6 million visitors over the last four and a half years and averaging 150,000 a month.
I would argue that using a blog in order to update this old-fashioned view was incredibly effective, in that the sheer volume of views she had led people to see that female attitudes towards sex were vastly different to how everyone had assumed they were. And Zoe’s blog provided an outlet for this new more empowered attitude to become more mainstream, and for other women to not feel like they should be ashamed for sharing attitudes which would usually be considered to be more masculine with men when it comes to sex.
Other mediums would be extremely difficult to put this view across, as the anonymity of the Internet is what made Zoe feel like she were able to share these feelings online, and the anonymity meant that people were less afraid to admit they agreed with her. Zoe went to great lengths to ensure that no one would find out her identity, and although in the end she was “outed”, I cannot think of other mediums which would have allowed her to continue to share these stories for so long and in such an honest and open manner.
Moderation
When collaborative sites have moderation functions to prevent a ‘free for all’, does this defeat the purpose?
There are obviously pros and cons to moderation. In my opinion, I would say that although it can be seen to be limit how “free” the Internet and produser content can be, it is a necessary evil. If it weren’t for moderation many of the evils which have arisen on the Internet would go un-noticed, such as hacking, flaming or spam.
Whilst on the one hand it can be seen to limit the extent to which the Internet allows us to execute our right to free speech, one of the key advantages of the Internet, as well as being viewed as a way by which certain opinions and content which is deemed by one individual as inappropriate is not made free and open to the masses, a very subjective view point.
However, if looking at moderation based on the assumption that the moderator is able to decide precisely what is appropriate for all, which of course he/she is not, it serves an important function in protecting individuals from offensive or distasteful content. An example of this would be when flaming or spam starts in a produser content for example a forums. The moderator I would assume, as they are often selected as they have a thorough knowledge of how the particular forum or whatever the case may be, operates and the type of content which would be suitable, is able to judge whether the majority of the users would find the content of any value.
Although to some extent this of course defeats the purpose of collaborative sites, in that content is being mediated by the moderator and therefore selectivity is an issue, it is a necessary evil in order to protect users of any harmful content, and as far as I can see there isn’t a more logical alternative.
There are obviously pros and cons to moderation. In my opinion, I would say that although it can be seen to be limit how “free” the Internet and produser content can be, it is a necessary evil. If it weren’t for moderation many of the evils which have arisen on the Internet would go un-noticed, such as hacking, flaming or spam.
Whilst on the one hand it can be seen to limit the extent to which the Internet allows us to execute our right to free speech, one of the key advantages of the Internet, as well as being viewed as a way by which certain opinions and content which is deemed by one individual as inappropriate is not made free and open to the masses, a very subjective view point.
However, if looking at moderation based on the assumption that the moderator is able to decide precisely what is appropriate for all, which of course he/she is not, it serves an important function in protecting individuals from offensive or distasteful content. An example of this would be when flaming or spam starts in a produser content for example a forums. The moderator I would assume, as they are often selected as they have a thorough knowledge of how the particular forum or whatever the case may be, operates and the type of content which would be suitable, is able to judge whether the majority of the users would find the content of any value.
Although to some extent this of course defeats the purpose of collaborative sites, in that content is being mediated by the moderator and therefore selectivity is an issue, it is a necessary evil in order to protect users of any harmful content, and as far as I can see there isn’t a more logical alternative.
DIY News
Are those who want to make DIY news online, best thought of as part of an alternative culture (that also exists offline) or is it more diverse than that? Think of examples beyond Indymedia.
I think that DIY news is an interesting concept, in that it is left for what would previously be considered the reader to now create the news, or fill the void on their own terms. I think this links back to the concept of the ‘produser’ as the notion of “news” is now what one wants to make it, rather than what happens to be shown on the 10 o’clock news. In this way, news can be tailored to suit the individual’s needs to a greater extent in that I can exclusively read about “news” which I would consider to be most relevant to me and my personal tastes and interests.
For example, if I had more interest in news exclusively about technology, I am able to filter this news out of all of the events which have recently occurred. An example of this for me would be that as I have an interest in graphic design, I can keep up to date with trends and techniques in this field by using the website http://psd.tutsplus.com/ I agree that in this way myself and other members of my generation are able to create our own media networks in order to fulfill the needs of our DIY news.
I think this again links back to the idea that via the Internet we are able to reduce the “only gay in the village” syndrome, as for me certainly, as I know very few people with an interest in this field IRL, I am able to view this web-site and see others who are equally as interested in it, leading to less of a feeling of being isolated in my liking for this topic. In this way I believe that creating DIY news online is part of an alternative culture, as it is more niche than the tastes of the mass culture, and the ideologies that go along with it are more fitting to your own beliefs.
I think that DIY news is an interesting concept, in that it is left for what would previously be considered the reader to now create the news, or fill the void on their own terms. I think this links back to the concept of the ‘produser’ as the notion of “news” is now what one wants to make it, rather than what happens to be shown on the 10 o’clock news. In this way, news can be tailored to suit the individual’s needs to a greater extent in that I can exclusively read about “news” which I would consider to be most relevant to me and my personal tastes and interests.
For example, if I had more interest in news exclusively about technology, I am able to filter this news out of all of the events which have recently occurred. An example of this for me would be that as I have an interest in graphic design, I can keep up to date with trends and techniques in this field by using the website http://psd.tutsplus.com/ I agree that in this way myself and other members of my generation are able to create our own media networks in order to fulfill the needs of our DIY news.
I think this again links back to the idea that via the Internet we are able to reduce the “only gay in the village” syndrome, as for me certainly, as I know very few people with an interest in this field IRL, I am able to view this web-site and see others who are equally as interested in it, leading to less of a feeling of being isolated in my liking for this topic. In this way I believe that creating DIY news online is part of an alternative culture, as it is more niche than the tastes of the mass culture, and the ideologies that go along with it are more fitting to your own beliefs.
Friday, 13 February 2009
Online Distribution
Of late there has been a trend for bands to initially ‘get noticed’ exclusively via online mediums. Obviously this has a number of advantages for the consumer, as they are for the first time able to dictate to the industry rather than the other way around.
To take the Arctic Monkeys as an example of this new type of marketing, the band initially began to be noticed after handing out CDs at gigs. From here, they placed tracks free for download on their web-site where fans were able to recommend to others and discuss their favourite tracks. The band very much made a name for themselves ‘underground’, until eventually there was enough of a buzz around the official release of their album that it was highly anticipated, and Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not became the fastest-selling debut album in UK chart history, selling in excess of 360,000 copies in its first week and outselling the rest of the top 20 combined.
I think that one of the advantages of this extremely organic method of promotion is that is isn’t seen as an intrusion in so much as an e-mail from a band you’re assumed to be interested in based on other bands you listen to would be. In this form, marketing can be very pushy, and nowadays I definitely think that this is to the bands detriment. On the other hand, a recommendation through an e-mail to look at a band’s myspace, because that person genuinely thinks the band are good, is much more likely to get my attention as it’s a far more honest and open way of promotion. In this way I think that the Arctic Monkey’s success was also down to the fact that they were plain and simply good. You cannot force an online buzz to happen around something which no one believes in, it’s too forced and not likely to gain any momentum. On the other hand if that band were genuinely making good records, a buzz naturally occurs which takes off off it’s own back.
To take the Arctic Monkeys as an example of this new type of marketing, the band initially began to be noticed after handing out CDs at gigs. From here, they placed tracks free for download on their web-site where fans were able to recommend to others and discuss their favourite tracks. The band very much made a name for themselves ‘underground’, until eventually there was enough of a buzz around the official release of their album that it was highly anticipated, and Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not became the fastest-selling debut album in UK chart history, selling in excess of 360,000 copies in its first week and outselling the rest of the top 20 combined.
I think that one of the advantages of this extremely organic method of promotion is that is isn’t seen as an intrusion in so much as an e-mail from a band you’re assumed to be interested in based on other bands you listen to would be. In this form, marketing can be very pushy, and nowadays I definitely think that this is to the bands detriment. On the other hand, a recommendation through an e-mail to look at a band’s myspace, because that person genuinely thinks the band are good, is much more likely to get my attention as it’s a far more honest and open way of promotion. In this way I think that the Arctic Monkey’s success was also down to the fact that they were plain and simply good. You cannot force an online buzz to happen around something which no one believes in, it’s too forced and not likely to gain any momentum. On the other hand if that band were genuinely making good records, a buzz naturally occurs which takes off off it’s own back.
Shultz
From reading Lister this week something which seems to be a prominent topic is the idea that online communication is able to generate democracy. For example, in the case of web journalism, Shultz suggested that the ability to leave a comment about a news piece on your favourite newspaper’s web site marked a change from passive consumption of mass media, to more active participation. (p. 177) Shultz argued that this gives us the opportunity to speak back to the media and have a more participatory role in debate.
However, in a study conducted by Shultz he found that journalists paid little attention to reader online forums, so the ability to comment on news pieces merely created the illusion of being able to participate. I would argue that whilst this may mean that the readers opinions and responses weren’t being used by the journalists themselves, this does not necessarily mean that they are completely redundant and it is not worth contributing at all. Rather, the ability to comment and leave a response means that people are becoming used to more actively consuming the news and offering an opinion about it, rather than not forming an opinion on it at all.
In addition, web journalism does mean that the public are able to gain unadulterated access to documents which previously they would have only seen through the media, in a more condensed and edited form. Therefore giving them the ‘real deal’ without having to wade their way through the changes made by journalists which would inevitably involve a change in the slant of the document in varying degrees.
However, in a study conducted by Shultz he found that journalists paid little attention to reader online forums, so the ability to comment on news pieces merely created the illusion of being able to participate. I would argue that whilst this may mean that the readers opinions and responses weren’t being used by the journalists themselves, this does not necessarily mean that they are completely redundant and it is not worth contributing at all. Rather, the ability to comment and leave a response means that people are becoming used to more actively consuming the news and offering an opinion about it, rather than not forming an opinion on it at all.
In addition, web journalism does mean that the public are able to gain unadulterated access to documents which previously they would have only seen through the media, in a more condensed and edited form. Therefore giving them the ‘real deal’ without having to wade their way through the changes made by journalists which would inevitably involve a change in the slant of the document in varying degrees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
