Dom’s View on Hypertext

Posted on August 19, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Readings

Dom has a great post about Hypertext. He starts by providing multiple examples of ways hypertext can be used. He links to other people blogs, other photo’s and uses words and images as the link.

He looks at the way’s in which people use hypertext today and explains how this weeks reading by Landow examines electronic linking and how it can also be used within e-books. He goes on to explore how this allows readers to navigate a text with ease and efficiency, such as skipping to a specific chapter of a novel at the touch of a button. Or, in some instances, to other texts entirely.

I find it interesting how these links create an intricate world of endless interconnected texts. It allows a more three dimensional world, branching out from traditional print literacy to an existence of networked literacy.

This post was helpful as I focused on the second reading instead by Jay David Bolter about writing space.

This weeks summary

Posted on August 19, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Readings

Dominic Chambers has a great example of hyperlinks in his blog and also has a brief rant about the readings, I must admit I often have a similar sense of frustration when I open up the readings. Simone Lau has a good summary of this weeks reading about Hypertext by George Landow, Hypertext 3.0: Critical Theory and New Media in an Era of Globalization.

Writing as Technology

Posted on August 18, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Readings

This weeks reading was a chapter in Jay David Bolter’s Writing Space and was titled Writing as Technology.

Bolter believes that the role of writing is for “collective memory, for preserving and passing on human experience”.

I for one really enjoy this definition and idea of writing. I love to look at the world around me, listening and looking for potential blog post ideas. I believe that everyone draws from experiences in their own lives as inspiration to write a new story, or create a film. The best emotions spring from life experiences, love, hate, vengeance and happiness, these raw feelings are the building blocks to great writing.

Writing enables us to “arrange verbal thoughts in a visual space”. Writing is definitely therapeutic. Ask anyone who owns a diary. Putting your feelings out of your brain and onto some paper is one of the best methods organising thoughts. It’s not only calming but largely productive. Thoughts ping around our minds, doing loops, circles and often disappearing entirely, only to pop back up again at 3am and proceed to keep us awake all night. By writing things down our minds can settle and our thoughts won’t end up lost in the depths of our minds.

This reading suggests that the power of writing and more importantly the power of words is so vast it can transcend time.

It’s encouraging to think that even though our writing technologies and publication methods are changing our writing can have an everlasting impact. The idea that what I am writing this very second will one day be read. Whether it be tomorrow, next week in class or at my eulogy. Even in 200 years time. Who knows. But it’s a pretty exciting thought.

The Propaganda Model- Now who do we trust?

Posted on August 18, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Random, Symposium

As briefly discussed in my early blog post the propaganda model tries to explain media behavior by looking at certain pressures that influence and limit news content.

Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky first introduced the model in 1988 in their book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.

The propaganda model argues that news passes through five filters before the population sees or reads about it. These filters control what events are deemed ‘newsworthy’, how they are covered, where they are placed within the media and how much coverage they receive.

In today’s climate of online news I find it interesting to see how this model has changed and if it still applies today. It gives another interesting perspective on the question are online media sources less trustworthy, or has the news always been untrustworthy? Sorry once again for my cynicism, I really need to be more of a glass half full person.

These are the five filters:

1. Ownership

Concentrated ownership (think Rupert Murdoch in Australia) of mass media firms share common interests with other sectors of the economy, and therefore have a real stake in maintaining an economic and political climate that is favorable to their profitability. They are unlikely to be critical of policies that directly benefit them. Therefore these money hungry media owners (aka Rupert) click their fingers and anything that is not conducive to them and their money making ventures will not appear in their publications.

2. Funding/ Advertising

Advertising is a primary source of funds for media outlets. It would be against the interests of these news outlets to produce content that might provoke advertisers. For example if a large company, that has an advertising contract with a certain media company, does something that would usually be considered ‘newsworthy’ (for example an oil spill), it may not be covered by news sources at the risk of losing the advertising contract and the consequential funding.

3. Sourcing

This refers to a reliance on information provided by “expert” and official sources. Elites, such as business leaders, politicians and government officials are typically viewed as credible and unbiased sources of information. This pool of reliable sources are often needed for news stories and to report something negative that would affect these sources would be to risk losing them as an ally.

4. Flak

Flak refers to negative commentary to a news story that can work to police and discipline journalists or news organizations that stray too far outside the consensus. Flak includes complaints, lawsuits, petitions or government sanctions.

5. Anti-communism and Fear

This filter calls to the public’s need of an external enemy or threat. Although called anti-communism, this filter still applies today, especially since the events of 9/11 and consequential war on terror. This filter directs the population against a common enemy, for example terrorism, while demonizing adversaries of state policy as unpatriotic or as being ‘in bed’ with the enemy.

This model really confuses my opinion on trustworthy news sources. In my previous blog I had come to the conclusion that we can’t trust anything that we read on the Internet as any Joe Blogs can write something and call it ‘news’. Now I feel as though I can’t trust anything we read in mainstream mass media, thank god for the era of the blogger.

So I’m once again signing off my blog as being confused. University is once again hurting my brain.

Internet and trust. The “it’s complicated” relationship.

Posted on August 18, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Symposium

During this weeks symposium the question was raised about how can we truly judge the validity of things we read on the Internet?

For me this is an interesting point. I am the first to admit I scan my Facebook or Twitter feed as my primary news source. Often being dragged in by sites such as Gawker and Buzzfeed (the epitome of ‘non-news news’, aka trashy gossip). With tag lines such as “today’s gossip, tomorrow’s news” I really should look elsewhere. But there is just something about articles titled Woman Arrested For Smuggling Cocaine in Her Fake Boobs and Woman Cited for Climbing into Giraffe Pen, Getting Kicked in the Face that really drag me in.

As a typical Gen Y, I am easily bored. Sites such as these amuse me. Simple. But just how trustworthy a news source are they? I have absolutely no idea. And this is the worrying fact.

Today more and more people turn to online news. They want the news, they want it quick and it needs to be entertaining. These sites, call them gossip, call them news, it doesn’t matter, they simply cater to the growing needs of the consumer. They generate ‘polls’ and articles at an astonishing rate, pumping out masses of text hourly. With the consumer constantly demanding the most up to date news at all times, can we hardly blame them for publishing the odd lie or ’embellishment’ to make a viral article or make it on to a ‘trending now’ list?

To push this idea further Adrian asked how can we trust the validity of anything anyone says? Most large news sources today are censored to a degree. In fact, it could be true to argue that everything we read is tainted. Either by the views of government, business or an individual. It’s difficult to truly believe that any transparent news source exists today. Call me cynical, but even in the content that we choose to write or not write is considered a form of censorship.

An interesting theory, called the Propaganda Model looks at this idea of media censorship in more depth. The model attempts to explain how people are manipulated by the press through five different filters.

During the symposium Adrian asked the panel about how they judge the validity of news. Some common answers were ‘how many people are saying it’, ‘what platform is it on’ and ‘who’s writing it’. I would agree with these, as I also use similar filters.

It was then interesting when Betty mentioned KONY2012. This campaign was viewed on Youtube over 99 million times and endorsed by celebrities, journalists and even some of my closest friends. Surely I can trust them? Major news sources covered the viral sensation and KONY2012 stickers began appearing in my local area. Yet the whole campaign was proven to be untrue and largely out of date and exaggerated.

So it really does come back to the point, how can we trust anything we read?

Online Self

Posted on August 12, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Readings

In David Weinburger’s piece, Small Pieces Loosely Joined he looks at the way we depict ourselves online compared to how we present ourselves in real life. Do we really have an online personality?

Weinburger talks about this online anonymity that allows users to create their own profile, often one that exaggerates or completely re-creates our real offline personality.

I don’t think any Internet user, especially those that use sites such at Facebook or Twitter can claim they haven’t slightly altered there online form to be more appealing. Even the content we choose to share or not share impacts the way others view them online. We choose to share the positives and choose to not share the negatives. I argue that this creates an ‘online personality’.

However, having said this, it’s true that humans also present different versions of the self in the physical world. The way you act when interacting with your family at the dinner table compared to how you act when having some drinks with your friends on the weekend will be vastly different! I think the point is though that the internet makes us actively think about self representation by giving us the tools to easily construct who it is we want the world to believe we are.

Monkey Selfie and Copyright

Posted on August 11, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Random

After last weeks readings and symposium I thought this was really interesting.

A photographer set up a camera in front of this monkey but the monkey actually pressed the button.

So now the question has been raised, who owns this photo and whose rights are being breached under copyright laws?

This world has gone bananas.

Symposium, enjoyable?

Posted on August 11, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Symposium

This weeks symposium was focussed around three main questions based on this weeks readings.

I found the whole Q&A style, aka the non-lecture, to be an informative and interesting way of conveying information. The deconstruction of the traditional form of a lecture really allowed for a more two-way communication, ultimately I found the symposium to be enjoyable! I know, not the normal describing word associated with the idea of a university ‘lecture’.

Through answering and exploring the three main questions, Adrian assisted my understanding of copyright laws, although I must admit that I am now 100% more terrified that I will break these laws throughout my career. I guess sometimes ignorance is bliss.

We discussed the idea of critiquing the work of others, giving an almost green light, in the eyes of copyright law. This was an interesting point and as long as we can back up our opinions with reliable information, we should be covered.

I was interested to hear that copyright infringements are often not followed up as copyright laws fall under civil law. It’s therefore often not worth the time and money to follow up these infringements.

Overall, a very interesting symposium. I hope this style of ‘lecturing’ becomes more widespread throughout the university, hopefully sometime before I graduate.

Les Miserables

Posted on August 5, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Uncategorized

And people say theatre is a dying art form. I went to see Les Miserables last week. Such an incredible production with a flawless cast.

I feel as though today we all live in such a artificially produced media sphere. We often forget the importance and effectiveness of personal human emotion.

An avid fan of the film adaptation of Les Miserables I was expecting the live show to be entertaining but certainly not better than the film. I could not comprehend that a staged performance could outdo a perfectly edited and enhanced film production.

I was happily proven wrong.

Yes Russell!

Posted on August 5, 2014 by Carlie Welsh under Random

A very interesting video of Russell Brand and his view on the Palestine/Israel conflict.

This devastating conflict has be seen and critiqued from many angles. Sadly certain media outlets force their personal agenda’s on the consumer.

In my perspective it is this very idea of media censorship that sends social media to the forefront of news consumption. Through social media devices every view can be heard without the constraints of censorship. One of the true victories for modern news reporting.