Wednesday 25 November 2015

Blog #4 - November 25, 2015

3P18 - Audience Blog #4

Nov. 11, 2015

Hello again!
This week I will be discussing media fandom - a spectrum that ranges from content ('content', as in 'pleased with') consumers of popular culture, all the way to obsessive 'super-fans' of of subcultures that might be too strange and upsetting to mention.
People often refer to themselves as fans of certain things, or they refer to others too, as fans. If you live within 100km of Toronto, chances are you're a 'fan' of these guys (sometimes, in a heartbreaking, bitter-sweet kind of way):


If you're someone with moral values who knows even the slightest bit about recent history, you're probably not a 'fan' of this guy - to put it very lightly:


But what is a 'fan'? These above examples would suggest that to be a fan of something, one must appreciate its nature and standing, and one must feel that whatever it may be deserves idolization - to any extent - and is a worthy representation of the individual fan's own values and virtues. This is often accompanied by emotional and intellectual involvement. We 'like' the Toronto Maple Leafs because they are one of the oldest teams in the franchise, and because their home is the biggest city in Canada (Toronto - Population: ~2.7 million). We are 'fans' of the Leafs; some recontexualize and display their involvement as such:

  
On the other hand, we very much dislike or (deservedly so) even hate Adolf Hitler because he represents the most repugnant level of elitism and intolerance that humanity has ever devolved to, and is personally responsible for the Holocaust (which new findings show may have claimed the lives of up to 20 million people, or ~7x more than the population of Toronto). To mock this Oedipal infant, certain people have altered historical images:


This is very obviously about as extreme an example that can be offered, but it serves to prove an important point. People seek things (other people, objects, franchises, etc.) to be fans of, because these things most often represent an ideal for not only the individual fan in relation to their own self image, but for the society or world which they would prefer to live in. In other words, there will always be things to avoid, or look down upon, or hate, but 'fans' usually become fans of the more promising and virtuous things.

I am a huge fan of Cinema, possibly even a 'super-fan' (I am loyal to cinema, I have acquired a large movie collection, I am sure to have an answer to most cinema-related trivia, and I even make movies - it's what I want to do for a living -, though I remain a "petty-producer"). That being said, if my level of fandom - high as it is, relatively - were to be compared to a movie ticket, then Quentin Tarantino's level of fandom would encapsulate the entire theatre and everyone in it, and probably more. Here is a featurette on the lengths Tarantino has pushed to honour the legacy that is epic cinema:


In a sense, Tarantino 'crowd funded' this 70mm projection. Not among general audiences, but by offering passioned and inspired argument to his producers, who eventually succumbed. He did this by creating a spimatic conception of the product - a 'master idea', existing immaterially through communication, which convinced the producers to green light the idea. Now, the 70mm projection exists only as a spime to general audiences - a promise of select theatres projecting the film in 70mm that is being hyped through advertising.


Nov. 18, 2015

Hello, 
The internet, and all of the seemingly endless possibilities attributed to it, is something which seems to have a place in almost any modern discussion - as it should. Anyone with access to an online computer will invariably be reminded perpetually that they have more power than just about any civilian in history.
Here is an example. In a world were the months November through January are politically now referred to as the "Holidays" (to be inclusive of any and all ceremonious religious affiliations that may take place during this time), these YouTube stars have chosen to create a specifically "Christmas"-themed music video... 


... Which is great, because while it is wholly important to be inclusive and accepting of everyone's disposition in this glorious multicultural country, it is also very important to remain loyal to those elements of your own culture and tradition that are unique and representative of something inside the assimilated whole - and as much of a 'mosaic' Canada is, there is no arguing that the condensing of all cultural traditions under the banner is assimilationist and immature. Each respective tradition that takes place in the coming months deserves equal attention. 

Imagine living in this exact moment, but in a reality where the general population is unable to produce anything on the internet. It is very possible that 'holiday' material would be homogenized and bland - end of discussion, zero external expression. That is what past audience participation was like. Nowadays, because we do have participatory access to the internet, people can produce and share just about anything they please. Because it's digital, it can efficiently and instantaneously be shared repeatedly to anyone with an internet connection. But this doesn't mean that this ability is something inherent and ascribed. It is a privilege, and one that can potentially be taken away.
The internet operates according to a hierarchy, where the internet mainframe itself sits at the very topmost position. If it crashes, then nothing else attributed to it online will function. Below this, despite net neutrality existing, lies powerful governmental organizations (or powerful civilian units like Anonymous) which have prophesied their own responsibility for intervention in dramatic circumstances. Unfortunately, despite the superlative responses to Anonymous, recent intel shows that their advances against ISIS are much less effective than originally purported:


    
Beyond this, on the hierarchy of power-holding of the internet, lay the major website platforms themselves (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) These corporations function by audience participation, yet content uploading is strictly monitored and ultimately rests under the priorities of the platforms. These corporations have even fostered a type of 'panoptic environment' where every single person who participates is monitored in terms of their online activity. In essence, people are providing free labor - their use of social media sites, for example, is prime real estate for advertisers - in exchange for their participation.  
In the end, even though we feel very much in charge of our online functions, they are nothing more than the allowance of limited and strategically formulated participation which demands certain trade-offs, like personal information for advertising tracking. Our online presence can be revoked, and in my case, those iMDB "Greatest Movies" lists created in my first year at Brock could cease to exist - and then no one that  I don't know would ever be able to argue with me that "The Dark Knight Rises" is better than "The Dark Knight"... I could lose that precious and valuable discourse, and worse, my identity as a unique and precious snowflake. A cynical, disappointed snowflake that would leave a bitter taste on one's tongue.

I'm done. 
Peace.

Signed, 

D-Money.






















Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday 11 November 2015

Blog #3 - November 11, 2015

3P18 - Audience Blog #3

Oct. 28, 2015

Greetings! Please have a look at one of the greatest comedians of all time performing at his pinnacle:


This is Louis CK. In the scope of his career the only thing which matches his popularity is the criticism he has received by perturbed audience members. Like all great comedians, Louis CK stands to aggressively expose his audience to elements of their lives which they would otherwise choose to neglect out of respect, fear, or taboo societal conceptions. This is precisely why his routine is important; the emotional magnitude of audience reception only confirms this. By a hegemonic type of rhetoric - a 'let me remind you about reality by offending your jaded sensibilities' act - Louis CK enlightens people. His satire, even when it is not recognized as 'satire' by his audience, retains persuasive power, for basic moral principles are prodded in a focused manner, allowing the audience to use their affective reaction to form an opinion. If the satirical rhetoric is composed in a logical and irrefutable manner then this opinion is likely in accordance with the purpose of the speaker. 


Watching this segment of Louis CK, I realized for the first time just how complex his method of encoding rhetorical information is - it is certainly more complex than the average audience member's ability to decode it without serious contemplation. But this is actually a very good thing, because while the audience registers his syntax (his selection of information presented) to a certain degree, the paradigm (the arrangement of syntactic information) in all its nuance is not as obvious. This allows CK to progress his routine from seemingly disconnected ideas until the meaning or affect of the sum transcends the parts. The audience typically receives CK's routine from a negotiated position, where they begin their decoding by relating the information to a dominant ideology, while looking for its contradictions and developments.  

Nov. 4, 2015

I will never forget the archaic type of love I had for the appropriation of my primitive first cellphone. I must have been somewhere between 11 and 13, old enough to have experienced the internet in its earliest form - but I had not yet in my life ever sent a text message. My pocket heavier and woefully indiscreet with the outline of a rectangular plastic block, I found myself possessing greater freedom. This phone, however, with its limited to nil online capability only eased my conversion to strong implicated and reliant usage of cellphones in general, and did nothing to build social capital the way my newer iPhone does. Smart phones open the proverbial doors to online possibilities, and I am now able to facebook, tweet, insta-insta, and blog at will... Of course, that doesn't imply that I'm going to.


Several years later I remember making the upgrade to HDTV, replacing the now far outdated CRT television set. Our new TV was objectified much in the same way as the older model: placed in a TV cabinet in our living room. It is interesting to note in particular the continued inclusion of the cabinet housing. Remaining located in the living room implies that viewing television was to continue its role as a leisurely family activity - but the fact that the new TV was forced into the coffin-like housing of the old is more important. It suggests that although the new TV has high definition capability, its allure had not earned it the ability to be constantly exposed, as it would be on a modern wall mount. Obviously the ability to shut the TV away from view, and occasionally even lock the doors, proves upon inspection to be a method of keeping us from excessive viewing. 
*shudder* I feel so repressed...
The organization of the TV in the living room has no gender-specific implications, for both men and women are equally free to waste their time under my roof. As you can probably tell, my parents never intended for my home to be an ahead-of-the-curve-tech-testing-haven, so our devices and usage were limited. Our consensual (high conversation, high conformity) home placed more value on activity and verbal interaction. As a result my initial tendencies to communicate online were conservative.





   
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday 20 October 2015

Blog #2 - October 21, 2015

3P18 - Audience Blog #2

Hello again, audience member. The last few weeks in Canada have been wrought with emotional and groundbreaking events, which yielded some of the most passionate audiences in recent memory. 

Week of Sept. 23, 2015

This was an interesting week for me, as I travelled (for the second weekend in a row) to Toronto to be the Assistant Director on the set of a short film that I also wrote ("DYSPARE"). 
The Assistant Director is not a role that tends to be warmly welcomed by the cast and crew, being that its very nature is to 'corral' people and keep them from getting too distracted by irrelevant stimuli. Regardless, it is an indispensable role and it allowed me to take on an authoritative role to a certain degree, which at times made the cast and crew my 'audience'. This was a small unmediated (save for any mediated cellular, walkie-talkie, or internet-based communication) audience that generally remained very active in their response to my requests/demands. 
My role as Assistant Director undoubtedly frustrated some, but the shoot remained on schedule for the most part and thus people were more or less happy. But when it came time for me to leave early for my journey back to Brock U, my departure left some disheveled. I needed to bring my equipment back with me - equipment that they were currently about to use (and had been 'on the brink' of using for about 2 hours...) My demands changed the nature of this audience momentarily, for they transformed from being calm and goal-oriented to annoyed and slightly confused as they began considering replacement equipment.
My departure may have stirred this audience, but they quickly resumed and were back on track achieving their necessarily pedantic goals.

Behind the scenes, "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"

In terms of the equipment used on set, it was interesting to note that we were creating something specifically for audiences, yet the creation itself demanded exploration of a strand of 'Uses and Gratifications'. By this I mean that, just as an audience member choose certain types of media for certain types of consumption, we had to do the same in the production of the material so that each stratum was achieved with maximum effect. Each department took part in this - each of my 'audience' members. It's all very meta...

I wrote "DYSPARE" in the Thriller / Drama genre due to an extension of Cultivation Theory. Just as viewers who watch violent news, for example, will begin to perceive the world as more violent, I (as an audience member) anticipated that people enjoy Thrillers and Dramas, so I designed the script around this elaboration of Cultivation Theory. The reading by Bartsch et al. provides and overview of the NFA (emotional stimulation) of certain viewers. I made "DYSPARE" for those with a high NFA, because those are the best kind of people.

Week of Sept. 30, 2015

In class we discussed the '4th Wall', and how it originally didn't exist since the audience would regularly participate. Later, norms and technology like dimmed lighting created a barrier between audience and presenter. Once again, however, performers will occasionally break the '4th Wall'. Some, like John Oliver, constantly, almost exclusively, break the '4th Wall':


John Oliver addresses the significant Migrant Crisis, and as usual his strong doses of satire ('comedy news' as referred to by Kowalewski) make for a very entertaining and convincing argument. Kowalewski confirms that 'hard news' is more effective for those who already agree with the topic, whereas 'comedy news' is better at changing opinion. In essence, it is more persuasive. 
The 'audience' for John Oliver is never seen, and may in reality only be a laugh track. In that sense they are very complacent and attentive. But the real audience here emerges in the comment section on YouTube (even though the show airs on HBO). People debate and form/propagate opinions here, reflect on Oliver's rhetoric, and monitor each other's actions. It is very much interactive. The show is extremely popular; the audience has the power to keep these important segments rolling. Their consumption has determined not only what Oliver addresses, but how long he will last. 
Modern communications technology is responsible for this immediate and detailed feedback; which is far superior to simple broadcast television. YouTube is undoubtedly 'the place' to watch programmes like John Oliver.

Week of Oct. 7, 2015

Tying-in the above is the assertion from Neilson that "Twitter lets you see the future of TV". This is based on the same principle of mediated audiences converging over social media sites. Twitter, like any other major player, is a place for people to share their opinions - and form public opinions, which is even more important for content producers. Whether this is a result of Agenda Setting Theory (that news outlets control what events are covered, thereby they control what is known/believed), or actual influences Agenda Setting in itself is debatable. Most likely the two work in unison. 

Imdb ranks "The Walking Dead" as the most popular TV show at the moment. Whether this subconsciously has anything to do with the current migrant crisis, or multicultural fears, is anyone's guess, but both the show and migrant news coverage are often in the spotlight... Food for thought. 
The 'Spiral of Silence' theory pertains to this, in that a great majority of Canadian people wish to help the Syrian refugees because it seems like the right thing to do. But save for the 'Hardcores', most who believe that the crisis is not our problem and should not be acted upon by Canada will keep this opinion to themselves out of fear of public shaming and persecution. 

On another note, there was a 'Super Moon' lunar eclipse recently, which had social media and news outlets buzzing. It was a spectacular event that drew a massive crowd, and fostered many images.

  
However, many comments on certain sites were complaints regarding advertisements obscuring the primary material of interest. These ads had a high degree of 'viewability' - they were very noticeable. This was covered in the article by Sebastian, M. Many companies who pay for digital advertisements are concerned with the amount of 'viewability' their ad receives. Common problems include showcasing of the ad without attentive viewership (thereby going unnoticed), or 'flash' ads which appear for less than 1 second at times and therefore communicate no valuable message and hardly create awareness of the product/service. 

Finally, I would like to briefly talk about my Thanksgiving dinner. It was a record-breaking turnout, about 15 people, I believe. There was the usual mingling and recounting recent events that may or may not be interesting to whomever is listening at any given moment, and there were alcoholic beverages to calm the nerves and dull the senses for the inevitable roundtable verbal giving of thanks. This was the highlight of the night from an audience perspective. Each person sitting at the table was given undivided attention as they expounded on what they were thankful for this year. It was a great, occasionally insightful, short-lived bit of tradition. But it was very important. Maybe it didn't seem so at the time, but rarely do so many blood-relatives and in-laws with entirely different life experiences get a chance to share something 'genuine' that pertains entirely to themselves in a non-selfish way. 

Thank you, and take care. 













Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday 22 September 2015

Blog #1 - September 23, 2015

3P18 - AUDIENCE BLOG #1


Greetings, audience member. While I have your captive attention for the remainder of what amounts to as my first ever blog post, I wish to provide personal reflection on the discourses and recent events pertaining to the examination of audiences.

There are almost endless definitions of 'audience', such as this one from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/audience : a. A group of viewers or listeners of a work of art or entertainment, especially those present at a performance.

John Sullivan's "Media Audiences: Effects, Users, Institutions, and Power" posits that there are two primary conceptions of audience. First is the "Information-Based" audience, which focuses on the relation between the sending of a message and the content of the message itself. This, of course, is similar to Shannon & Weaver's model of communication, stating that every act of communication involves a sender and a receiver (the audience) through some sort of channel. In the space between sending an receiving, there is always some sort of noise (whether physical static, for example, or subjective (mis)interpretation) which affects the message in minute or major ways, depending on the pervasiveness of the noise. Sullivan also references the "Meaning-Based View" of audience, whereby the communication between the sender and the receiver of a message is continuous, and since any number of factors can affect and change the message, the message itself is de-emphasized over the interpretation of the message (however false or correct it may be) by the receiving audience.

Please take a moment to watch, in whatever amount you desire, this video:
There are multiple audiences here residing along a endlessly variably spectrum of passivity or active standing. The riot police themselves are an audience, witnessing and the anarchistic rebellion of displeased Greeks. The rioters are audience members as well. Some are more violent and active than others, physically attacking the police, whereas many function more as bystanders - bystanders who, through the psychological shift to a 'mob mentality' may be assured, simply through observation, that a more aggressive stance must be adopted. The individuals who decided to record video evidence are audience members who made a choice to remain behind the lens of a visual capturing device rather than participate in any other way that the people on screen are behaving (at least for the time they are recording and observing). Perhaps most interesting is that we, an audience across the Pacific Ocean, in a continentally and culturally divided country are able to view the event with as much verisimilitude as anyone else who views the video. Activists across the world may - and do - respond by sending relief funds. This type of aid has a much greater chance of materializing when one is able to observe the event through a temporally continuous visual medium as opposed to, say, news print. Still, there are others who perhaps formed prejudice against the Greeks, deeming them 'animalistic' or 'uncivilized', based on the brief and insufficient documentation of a profoundly complex issue. 

As you can see, audiences are not simply 'one thing or the other', in truth. Definitions invariably must simplify and condense the identification of anything to a quickly digestible bit of text. This isn't enough, but if I were to offer a modestly satisfactory description of 'audience', it would be something along the lines of: "Those who, on a conscious or unconscious level, absorb, and therefore participate in, the reception of some sort of communicated information".

This definition, I believe, exists outside of time. Audience conventions, reception, and behaviour has changed a great deal through my life time. When I was born, the internet was not yet commonplace in every home. Television, radio, and news print were the primary sources of media reception - and individual response to the any of these outlets proved to be incredibly difficult; there was no reciprocity. Audiences were, to no fault of their own, more naive and less involved with the production or criticism of media texts. Now, due to the internet and the privilege of 'net neutrality', there is a far greater deal of reciprocity. Audiences are now able to transcend the 'barrier of reception', and respond, criticize, or make demands of the Senders.

Here is a passage from Press & Livingstone's article regarding audience research in the age of newer, more complex forms of media. I believe that it encapsulates the importance of both what it is directly addressing (audience research) and the indirect function of audiences within technologically complex media frameworks:
In an age of new information and communication media, why persist with a theory developed in the age of mass broadcasting? The reason is, primarily, that we find huge existing strengths in theory, method and findings. These strengths are essentially two-fold, together accounting for the recent successes of audience research:
  1. (a)  the introduction of the ethnographic tradition into the field of media and communications – the advantages of this work include its interdisciplinarity, the richness of its data and insights, its ability to integrate the study of text and viewer, contextualization, and the development of a critical tradition of media studies, particularly in integration with a program of empirical studies; and
  2. (b)  the substantive arguments developed within audience research and their critical intervention into theories of dominant media power, which are largely based in either or both of political economy and textual studies, theories including the theory of media imperialism, globalization discussions, etc. 
An interesting "scandal", and subsequent audience criticism that has recently arisen is the Volkswagen emissions disingenuity. The German car company was recently discovered to have long been hiding an insidious software feature that tunes the engine function to a more 'environmentally sound' output during emissions testing, which then of course disengages to a less efficient and more polluting function after testing. Here is a link to the article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/volkswagen-has-made-a-fool-of-its-customers-with-emissions-scandal/article26463892/
Volkswagen has made no attempt to deny the allegations, and in fact has pulled the culprit models from distribution in both the United States and Canada. This, in part, is due to the strong criticism received not only from the press, and government environmental protection agencies, but from angry Volkswagen owners who publicly express their contempt and feelings of betrayal on forums, news comment sections, and social media. This "scandal" is a perfect example of how a modern audience can immediately receive, critique, and distribute/contribute their opinion (which quickly becomes a mass consensus) to reform or address an issue.  

Thank you. You may now relinquish your attention.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)