This weeks reading was ‘Minds Viewed Globally: A Personal Introduction’ in Five minds for the Future, written by Howard Gardner. This reading was a hard one to wrap my head around, mainly because there is a lot of information that you have to sift through. At least the first two pages just seem to be Gardner displaying all of his achievements which in context isn’t worth more than a paragraph to the reading. Once you get into it though you find a few themes emerging. He talks about mind-sets and how, if we are to progress as  species we must cultivate certain types of minds. He first turns to the education system stating that things need to change because as far as “cultivating minds” go, the education system is lacking in a few areas, areas that they seem to dismiss entirely. Which isn’t really news, everyone learns differently and the education just isn’t equiped to help those minds that don’t fit into their moulds. He then goes on to review science and technology, stating that in todays age they are both closely knit and one can not proceed too far without the other, makes sense I guess. Just as I was going to raise the argument about the creative mind, as in science and technology would be nothing without someone to conjure up creative ideas such as: how could a human fly, Gardner asserts my point of view, we also need creative minds. Finally he talks of globalisation and how as a world wide community we need to work together as a worldwide community but also as a local community, pretty straight forward.

My only problem that I have with this theory is that like the education system he is talking about, he is trying to mould minds of the future, isn’t it better to steer them where their own mind wants to go, not try and categorise them? In such a large world with such complex networks in place surely the answer to disruption is be fluid and ever changing along with it.

Ironically enough, as it comes closer and closer to the end of my schooling, where things are building up and I find I have less then enough time, this weeks reading is all about time management. Before I started I found myself say “I don’t have time to read this!” But I persisted.

This reading by Judy Wajcman, entitled “Finding time in a digital age”, is all about how technology is making us more harried for time instead of what was predicted where technology would solve our work time problems leaving us with plenty of leisure time. A few Problems are determined from the advances of technology. For instance, in the past there was a definitive line between work time and home time, now that technology has become so interactive and specially freeing, the line between work and home has been erased, if we take the smart phone as the key example: now, thanks to the smart phone you can check your work emails whilst you’re in bed. It’s a good idea in theory but in reality, this keeps us constantly connected to our work lives, which results in us constantly working.

Another point that I’d like to bring up that was mentioned was the fact that society has been trained to take up their time. Someone who is busy is considered lucky and wealthy and a characteristic to be proud of; whereas, if you have a lot of spare time and spend most of your time on leisurely activities then you’re considered lazy, which, when you think about it is really unhealthy.

Wajcman does consider taking things slowly but as she mentions there just isn’t enough time to do so, either the whole world goes slow or you just have to try and keep up.

The line to be drawn is one through speed and hurriedness. Speed is good, if you can do things quicker you can fit more into your day, but if you’re harried your frantic and that is unhealthy. In the end Technology is there to help you and only works under your own constraints so at the end of the day, it is really up to you how much you work.

Let me just start off by saying this reading is a breath of fresh air. I can’t quite put my finger on it but I was intrigued by what Cal Newport, in his chapter “The Clarity of the Craftsman” in So Good The Can’t Ignore You: Why Skills Trump Passion in the Quest for Work was saying. I would’ve happily continued reading, this is by far is the most interesting reading I’ve read in a long time!

Newport takes this chapter to introduce a theory that there are two approaches to working on your career, the first and most popular in society is the “Passion Mindset” and the other one that Newport supports is the “Craftsman Mindset”. Newport argues that the passion mindset, where we are taught to find our passion in life and follow that, leaves us in a somewhat ambiguous stage of our lives questioning ourselves “is this really my passion” “do I really enjoy doing this work”. He explains that this is a very self absorbed way of thinking, believing that the world owes it to you to give you something to be passionate about. The Craftsman mindset puts passion to the side and is based on the person just putting their head down and getting on with it. Newport takes a quote that started this whole idea from an interview with Steve Martin. When asked how he became a success Martin says “Be so good, they can’t ignore you”. And from this the craftsmen mentality rose, its not about what the world is giving you, but what you can give to the world. Newport visits a budding musician with a similar mentality and admires the fact that he practices his profession by himself in a tiny room and pushes himself to the extreme to constantly better himself. He’s not focusing on creating the next hit song, he’s focusing on getting better skills in his profession, this is how people become successful.

There is something about this idea that I can really relate to. I have definitely felt times when pursuing a career in media where I wondered whether this was my true passion but having it laid out like this it makes me feel like its up to me to create the passion, its up to me to use it to make the world better and not wait for the world to make me better. There is something quite invigorating about putting your head down and just getting on with it, the Craftsman Mindset is definitely something I would recommend thinking about next time you concerned about your future career. This reading has definitely inspired me to become so good that they can’t ignore me.

This weeks reading of ‘Work’ in The Informal Media Economy, Written by Ramon Lobata and Julian Thomas, discusses the problems faced with media Practitioners who work on a freelance or short term contract basis, those that are more entrepreneurial. There are arguments for this being a good thing as there is more bargaining terms between the employer and the employee; however, this article mainly seems to be warning future practitioners of the dangers of being underpaid and over worked due to the changing climate of the industry. Kodak was used as an example: Kodak was the leader in everything Photo related for many years and the employed thousands of people, now kodak is obsolete and the main photography related company is instragram who only had 7 people when it was actioned off for millions of dollars.

There is also problems with the type of work people want done, the work is very basic and anyone cane do it which means that someone who deserves more because they have a higher skill set isn’t being utilised.

Although I feel that there is some truth in all of these findings I do feel this article is a bit doomsday related. The thing that sets the good from the bad is the quality. If a company is looking for good quality work then they will be willing to pay for someone who can deliver that high quality. I know many freelancers who love doing it that way because they can choose there own hours and charge a more substantial rate then what they could in house.

I believe that the fact remains: good quality is king.

This weeks reading was “A World of Differences” by Chris Lederer and Megan Brownlow for Price WaterHouse Cooper. I an attempt to predict the future of the Entertainment and Media industry and help those companies trying to navigate it they divide their findings in 5 separate categories to consider. Shift 1: Demography: Youth will be served, Shift 2: Competition: Content is still king, Shift 3: Consumption: the Joy of bundles, Shift 4: Geography: Growth Markets, and Shift 5: Business Models: Transforming with Trust.

Each section explains what the future might hold as we look back on the trends that happened in the past, which at the end they actually go against as they explain it is a disruptive environment and really everyone should just be ready to make changes to stay afloat.

One thing that I intend to hold onto is one section about Globalisation and localisation. As they look at their numbers it seems to be that Even though the Global (which they assume is American Content) isn’t doing too well globally, the Local production of media is being far more supportive in their homeland. Australia was used as one of these examples where the local television was getting a lot more attention than American programs. This is assumed because of their sharing the characteristics of the viewers more closely then something filmed and pre-recorded on the other side of the world. In this case it is unfortunate for America because apparently the “Local” American Media is Also “Global” Media so it doesn’t gain as much of a differences as other communities but I guess thats what you get for calling America the Global industry.

It is also interesting how China is apparently going to take over in the leading revenue of some forms of media even though they have such tight restrictions on their media and what is allowed to be consumed. It is stated that because it is restricted it allows the local media production to expand as it doesn’t have to contest with the global media and thus creating a richer economy growth within its own borders. . . I wonder if Australia cut off its ties to American content would Australia’s media industry thrive?

When reading through the pages of The Fourth Industrial Revolution (world Economics Forum) – Klaus Schwab 2016 – I couldn’t help but reminisce over movies such as the Matrix, I-Robot, Terminator, Enemy of the State etc, (the list could go on). For some reason reading all of these predictions about the future use of robots in society and the constant threat of everyday surveillance for the future seems like theses movies predicted it quite a while back.

This piece basically shows the predictions of the future and how things like advances in biomedicine, engineering and the digital world are going to impact the human race.

The thing that I found most interesting was the discussion of how the social structure changes due to the internet which has created a Global community, one that traverses country borders. As a media Practitioner this is quite a profound concept that is already in affect today. If we take the film industry as an example; it is widely assumed that the majority of films are created in America, a multitude of studios and practitioners are based in America. However in recent years, thanks to technology and the global market, Film studios are now filming all over the world and are employee people from wherever they happen to be shooting. Australia has seen some great opportunities in this market, mainly specialising in the post production phase which the internet and digital technology has allowed them to do.