Media and Convergence

The way media is produced has changed vastly since the in the past 30 or so years. Since 1982, we have seen the introduction of the Internet, which has revolutionized the way we consume media. The internet itself has come along was since its conception in 1982, and we now look at the World Wide Web in three forms – Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web 3.0.

Web 1.0 is the first generation of internet websites. They were mostly text with some pictures and links. Advertisements bordered the pages and this was pretty much it.

The more recent introduction of Social Networking pages such as MySpace, Facebook and Twitter has revolutionized the web again, creating Web 2.0. Web 2.0 is a far more interactive experience, allowing its users to produce content as well as create it. This has seen the term ‘prod-users’ coined by many in the media today. As the internet has become widely used all over the world, these social sites are rampant.  Pews Research Facility in Washington has found that 75% of Generation Y (or ‘millennials’ as they are referred to in the states) in America have their own social networking page. Their research also states that ‘One-in-five (millennials) have posted a video of themselves online’.

As we continue into the future, we will continue to develop Web 3.0,which has already started coming into effect. At the moment, social networking sites such as Facebook use technology that mean that all our internet usage is divided into machine-readable packets of information – to see what we are accessing online and our recent searches so they can tailor content and advertisements to us each individually. This can be a very useful tool for advertisers, but there are potential flaws in this – possibly in the future, Internet users could completely lose their awareness of the world around them if the content is always tailored specifically to their usage.  Web 3.0 is in its early stages as we speak, and hopefully the people with the power to yield this tool will do so sensibly, avoiding the dangers of media tunnel vision.

Today’s media has converged in other ways aside from the way we format the internet – the introduction of smart phones, tablets, kindles and various other devices has changed how we access our media. This enables us to be able to access a lot of ‘Old Media’ (Television programs, radio shows and films) on the internet and through these new devices. This has sparked a revolution in how we view our news, which has meant disaster for the print newspaper – less people are subscribing to their print editions as they turn to the internet as a source for news. The internet is a globalisation tool, enabling us to get any information from anywhere at anytime.

Media and platform use over time

Media companies such as Fairfax and News Ltd now need to learn how to harness the internets’ power to their advantage – they need to learn how to monetise it. Newspapers such as The Australian have started charging for online content as well as print subscriptions, and there are many news sources such as Crikey, which is only available online to a subscribed audience.  I believe as time goes on, as more websites will charge for content and user subscription will increase once more.

Comparatively to our Gen X counterparts, we consume news in a very different way. We can access our news at anytime, not just at 6pm when the local anchorman begins to read the teleprompter. The days of Ron Burgundy – the ‘Legend’ of San Diego – are over. We are the generation most comfortable using the internet (Again, this Pew research states so) and the most comfortable with technology. As we move into the future and technology continues to change, our news will continue to change. We are just beginning to catch up with the changes that have taken place in the past 30 years, and hopefully we can keep it that way.

Bust on Cannibalism Ring in National Park

Local Gisela Bäcker, Head of Cannibalism/Child Slavery Ring

Police were called to Berchtesgaden National Park this morning where they were met with a strange crime scene. A house made of gingerbread and assorted cakes had been constructed within the national park – but even more curious (and sombre) was what was found inside.

Local hiker Aldelbert Neumann - eye witness and the person who called the police – described the scene as “…cruel and frightening”.  Whilst hiking in the early hours of the morning he was alerted to the scene by shouting coming from within the strange structure. “I crept up to the window of the gingerbread house, and peered inside. What I saw inside was an old woman and young girl arguing, whilst hanging above was a cage – it’s captive: a young boy. The boy could barely stand up in his tiny prison!” A horrified Neumann has told the press.

To his shock, he watched as the young girl then pushed the old woman into the oven, burning her alive.

Gretel Schröder, a missing local girl, was arrested at the crime scene and is currently in being held in custody at Berchtesgaden Police Station under charges of murder.

Bone fragments belonging to the old woman were retrieved from the oven. However, these were not the only bones retrieved from the crime scene. Along with supporting documents and letters from other members, it appears that the old woman – DNA testing has confirmed her to be local woman Gisela Bäcker – was the head of an underground cannibalism ring, specializing in the market of young children for slaughter. 34 people from all around the country have been arrested under the charges of cannibalism, grievous bodily harm and murder. Bodily remains such as bones and uncooked, frozen limbs have been found within of the homes of those charged.

The young boy, Hansel Schröder was returned to his relieved father, dehydrated but otherwise healthy.

Why The West Must Be Won

Over the past week Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott and their respective parties have toured through the suburbs of Western Sydney on something that looked remarkably like a political campaign.  They have shaken hands, kissed babies, and rubbed shoulders with the everyday, blue collar migrant.  But why the sudden interest in Western Sydney?

For an area that covers less than 0.01% of Australia’s landmass, it has 8% of the federal parliamentary seats. Out of the 12 seats in Western Sydney, Labor holds 8 of them by a 9% margin. According to recent polling, most of these seats – like Werriwa, which has been a Labor seat since 1931 – will be making the transition from Labor to Liberal.  

For Tony Abbott these small margins represented a chance like no other. There is nowhere else in the whole country that he could seize so many Labor seats whilst doing so little footwork. And what’s good for Tony is bad for Julia - she is in Western Sydney in a purely defensive role, fiercely trying to prevent the Coalition from commandeering some very valuable seats.

At first sight, the battle for Western Sydney appears to be one of individual seats. But in a hung parliament – such as the current one where the parties’ margin is only one seat - these electorates have become commodities of monumental value. Both parties will fight tooth and nail to win over any seats they can, as every time one party wins an electorate from the other, their influence in the House of Representatives increases by two seats.

The stakes are higher than they have ever been before.  Will Labor manage the impossible (according to these figures, anyway) and take the trophy for a third time? Or will the pressure of the Liberals snapping at their heels prove too much? As Round One draws to a close, The Labor party limps back to its corner of the ring, still the least favoured party by 9%. For now it seems Julia’s effort to retain the approval of Western Sydney has failed – But we still have six months to go. Let the Battle Royale begin.

Commercial Vs. Public Media

 In Australia, three media companies monopolize the industry – commercial organisations Fairfax and News Limited, and the publicly owned Australian Broadcast Corporation. However, the ways in which they operate are quite different. As commercially run organisations, Fairfax and News Ltd rely on sponsorship from advertisers and ratings to turn a profit. The taxpayer-funded ABC does not. 

This funding knowledge is an important fact of Australian media, and the effect of it reverberates throughout all content produced. It becomes obvious what the driving force is behind which companies, and therefore the differences between public and commercial media.

Commercial media divides its audience – it refers to them as ‘consumers’ – into demographics. It then decides what content is aimed at what demographic and tailors it to fit that category. It is then broadcast, supposedly maximizing ratings and therefore profits. They use advertisement slots to sell products to their consumers, using demographics to ensure their product is marketed to the right kind of consumer – the right customer that will buy, buy, and buy. Commercial media pummels us with advertisements, and it appears to be getting worse. Perhaps this is the smell of desperation as newspaper sales begin to decline. How else are they to turn a profit?

If a news story will not boost ratings or advertisers backings, it is likely that it will wind up on the editorial room floor, as it isn’t financially viable. Musician Jack White, One half of American band ‘The White Stripes’, has stated previously “A lot of people in the media, and some everyday people, really aren't in search of the truth. They're in search of something worse than that. Money, yeah. I think the media's the kind of a thing where the truth doesn't win, because it's no fun. The truth's no fun.”

Commercial media views us not as an audience, but mindless consumers that divide evenly into stereotypes placed on us. It is this attitude that commercial media fails us as a society. It tells us what we should think, what we should be worried about, and what is newsworthy (although only if it is profitable). Commercial media does not seem to trust its viewers to make these decisions on our own, and so instead we are left with media reeking of bias.  If it cannot find anything newsworthy, it will attempt to create news for the sake of ratings – you can tune into any current affairs program to witness this.

Commercial media has even created a new type of program to boost ratings and to provide consumers with news – The ‘infotainment’ program. In these programs they aim to entertain their audience whilst discussing the hot topics of the day – and they sometimes miss. Often, these programs are heavy on the ‘tainment’ part, and scant on the ‘info’ through shallow journalism, failing to delve into any detail or anything that wouldn’t be considered directly entertaining. 

I really shouldn’t be too critical. Commercial media has blessed us with many entertainment programs, which allow us to tune out and relax. The major issue here is the monopoly that Fairfax and News Ltd hold over Australian media. It is said in politics that if you have the media against you it is impossible to win an election. Should anyone one corporation have that much power? Or can they trust the population to make up their own minds?

The ABC certainly thinks so. Instead of having to conform to what is profitable, they spend more time focusing on quality programming, trusting their audience to make up their own minds on a variety of topics from all political points of view. ABC news programs are far more in depth than commercial media, and public television isn’t afraid to go against the majority.

Tim Dunlop, of ABC’s ‘The Drum’ states on his blog “But the ABC has always operated in the area of market failure. It has earned its central position in our institutional landscape in part by providing a news service that commercial providers have always been reluctant to involve themselves with, either by broadcasting to regions where private companies were unable to turn a buck, or by dealing with subjects of minority interest.”

Understanding the business models behind these companies helps us as an audience to navigate through the stormy seas of commercial and public media. Understanding the agenda behind what they do enables us to make informed decisions about what we watch and ‘consume’. It is this knowledge that helps us find a balance in our lives for their consumption.

Does Size Really Matter?

“Dawn of a new era” was the phrase emblazoned on every news stand in Sydney yesterday morning. Fairfax issued their first ever copies of the new ‘compact’ format (commonly known as ‘tabloid’ format, though Fairfax has attempted to separate itself from negative connotations and its competitors by coining this new term) which will replace the traditional broadsheet SMH. At Southern Cross station in Melbourne’s CBD, Fairfax’s marketing team strategically placed an actual newspaper crier, proclaiming to all morning commuters that they can ‘roll up, roll up and get ‘The Age’”.

Cleverly enough, SMH has published a comment article from both Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott praising the new format, and so far, the change has been generally praised by the Average-Joe, receiving compliments such as ‘it will be a lot easier to manage on the train’, and ‘they should have made this change years ago’. Yet some newspaper 'traditionalists' have taken to Facebook to air their complaints. Pat Johnston posted on SMH’s Facebook page "A headline like ‘Brangelina to adopt another child’ can fill up the entire front page. Your size shrank, like your standard of journalism."

Fairfax CEO Greg Hywood says the size change is a response to reader feedback, and that this is a new ‘modern format, for modern times’. However, Eric Beecher (former editor for the SMH) rejects the claim that this is anything but a thinly veiled attempt to boost sales and subscriptions as newspaper sales dwindle everywhere due to the inevitable shift to news online.  80 or so newspapers in other parts of the world have made the same shift – only to find that it did not boost sales on a long-term basis.

 

The internet has caused significant problems for all newspapers – news is now widely accessible (and updateable) online, at any time day or night. This is steadily making the traditional newspaper irrelevant in today’s society. To someone like myself -a journalist-in-the-making- this is a scary thought, but it has been a fact of life in the media for a long time. One day, maybe not too far away, the newspaper will die. The downsize from broadsheet to compact is just one more nail in the coffin of the terminally-ill newspaper.

 

Only time will tell if the change to the new, 64 page format will have long term positive effects. Will advertisers stick with it? Will Fairfax’s Journalists will be able to keep up with the pace? For now, I’m just glad I don’t have to do this on the train anymore

 

References:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3703213.htm
http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/03/04/the-verdict-is-in-as-fairfax-goes-compact-smh/?wpmp_switcher=mobile http://www.smh.com.au/comment/taking-on-change-but-staying-true-to-quality-journalism-20130303-2fe9z.html http://www.smh.com.au/comment/struggling-journal-became-a-great-newspaper-of-record-20130303-2fe9x.html http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-business/advertisers-watching-fairfax-compact-debut-20130304-2fg0o.html?skin=text-only
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1742954/Readers-praise-compact-Fairfax-papers 

The Contemporary Journalist – Ever-changing by definition.

This past week has been a plethora of the new – new faces, new classes and questions, the most compelling of which seems to be the question with no answer. What is Journalism?

In the past, one would imagine a journalist to be a nosey, inquisitive gentleman wearing a tipped hat. He might interrogate his subject, noting everything on his notepad in shorthand, ink staining his fingers.  He would then type it all out on his typewriter; keys clicking away while he chain smokes his way through to his deadline. Finally, he would hand in his article in - and all is well again, until his next deadline is due a week later.

60 years ago, this stereotype may have been accurate. But gone are the days of journalists resembling the optimistic, mystery solving comic book characters like Clark Kent and TinTin. Today, the public deems journalists to be unethical, untrustworthy and nosey people willing to destroy lives in order for the newest, hottest sound bite.

The role has also changed significantly – the Internet has revolutionised how we communicate with the world, and subsequently, how we receive our news. Defining the modern journalist is a complex task; however Mark Deuze from The University of Amsterdam gives it a good go. He offers a pragmatic contemporary definition of Multimedia Journalism to be “the integrated (although not necessarily simultaneous) presentation of a news story package through different media, such as (but not limited to) a website, a Usenet newsgroup, e-mail, SMS, MMS, radio, television, teletext, print newspapers and magazines”.

Deuze’s words suggest that today’s journalist needs to be a news all-rounder – able to change, adapt and constantly update for the sake of any story.  Despite the ever changing face of media, and the various and flexible attributes required of the journalist of today, one thing is for certain – a journalist needs to be curious, inquisitive and persistent. They must be keen, ready for anything, to be constantly updating and pushing for the new story and the newsworthy truths. The tasks that befall a journalist is no easy undertaking, it requires all of one’s time and it is not a job that clocks off at 5pm on Friday.  

I look forward to what this new path throws my way, and if I have learnt anything from our class discussions and attempts to define journalism on our own – this career choice will be a challenge in the face of ever-changing adversity… but Helen Keller is famously quoted as saying “Life is either a daring adventure or nothing at all” - and if she can learn to communicate successfully in this world, then so can I.


Sources:

What is Multimedia Journalism? - Mark Deuze (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

The Open Door (1957) – Helen Keller
or http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Helen_Keller