Annotated Bibliography // Networked Media // Assignment 1

Blog Index

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Annotated Bibliography

Lister, M 2009, New Media: A Critical Introduction. Routledge, New York pp 163-169, 197-200, 204-209, 221-232.

The article above documents the beginnings and inner workings of the web, particularly during the transition to Web 2.0, and the changes it brought to the landscape of big media. Lister talks about the beginning of the web, and about the endless possibilities it had during the conception of Web 2.0, with its limitless potential to change the way society thinks and approaches concepts like digital ownership, creation and distribution. Ultimately, Lister argues that this format was perfect for advertisers, and how marketing on the web, ‘once it was stable’, would be ideal.

A strength of the work is Lister’s comprehensive study and history to back himself up on points raised without this article. He refreshers readers of the ‘dot com bubble’ and other significant historical moments, which give his points of a shaky and unstable internet a larger sense of credit as he juxtaposes web certainty with incidents that were thought to completely dismantle the world wide web as people knew it. However, Listers writing does get a little tiresome, with passages seemingly repeating themselves as they go on. Furthermore, another potential limitation of this reading is its publication date. Being published in 2009, Lister and others are not up to date on the latest developments in the web and social media as a whole, especially since this content is before Instagram entirely.  Nevertheless, Lister raises two crucial points during the passages of this article, the first being ‘The Long Tail’ theory. The theory suggests that with the market for advertising drastically changing with the expansion of the web, the need to market safe and to large groups exclusively is no longer necessary. The interconnectedness to the web has made marketing to smaller, niche groups, more effective and profitable in the long term. Gone are the days of mass spread marketing, hoping something sticks. Companies are able to advertise and market to who they want, where they want, how they want. Another idea raised by Lister in this reading was the idea of the ‘Perpetual Beta’. That applications and services can be always updating and evolving, as no relevant product in new media is ever stagnant in process.

Both these terms and ideas raised by Lister are applicable to the course outlines and prompts of the class. An easy example is how the idea of the ‘Perpetual Beta’ is ever present in Instagram’s model, as well as many other social media platforms. Furthermore, Lister’s application of Anderson’s ‘The Long Tail’ theory can be used to analyse how Instagram uses advertisers and algorithms. Some of the main affordances of Instagram is its simple user interface and ability to hide ads within your feed. While this is not necessarily a positive affordance for consumers, it definitely is for corporations. Instagram is able to utilise your browsing data to identify your preferences and purchases, suggesting paid content throughout your feed seamlessly, attempting to make you associate it with the commonplace content from friends, celebrities and family. This knowledge and understanding of how advertisers market to small target audiences is shown in how Instagram distributes paid marketed content onto their site.

 

Norman, D 1999, ‘Affordance, conventions and design (Part 2)’, Nielsen Norman Group, http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/affordance_conv.html

In the article, Norman discusses and documents his extensive history with affordances, and how his perception of the concept has evolved over time, when relating it to his own work and practices. Norman is somewhat of a pioneer when it comes to affordances, even after previously stating that he ‘originally hated’ the idea. His discussion and recollection of his time with affordances covers the main basics of the concept, such as the difference between perceived and actual affordances and the constraints and conventions of affordances.

There are a large number of initial strengths to this piece. Norman is well written and researched, having an extensive understanding of affordances on both a macro and micro scale. He utilises a variety of digital and content specific phrases and terms, allowing readers to familiarise themselves with the inner workings of both affordances and their various constraints Furthermore, the layout of the article is very neat and well organised, with subheadings, and a relatively short and concise length, making it a very digestible read that can be easily repeated. Throughout these subheadings, Norman discusses key ideas of affordances. His language and use of examples when explaining an idea are all really helpful as a reader. Norman is able to relate a concept very easily to a physical or graphical example, such as when discussing the ‘physical affordances’ of computer and graphical content, such as scrolling and mouse clicking commands. Adding to that, the author discusses constraints in relation to the affordances with the same format, always relating the theory to an aspect of computer design and interface, such as how the physical constraint of having the mouse not be able to move ‘outside the screen’ on a typical one screen monitor setup keeps the user with the content. However, while Norman’s examples of constraints and affordances in this article always relate to technology, some basic groundwork examples of physical objects would make comprehending these somewhat complex theories easier to understand. For example, when outlining the main constraints of an objects affordance, using his classic example of a chair’s affordances and constraints could have helped new readers to the content get a grasp on these ideas sooner.

Nevertheless, Norman’s ideas and examples in relation to a programs perceived and actual affordances relates directly to the affordances and constraints of the social media platform Instagram. The perceived affordances of the developers of the platform originally would have been on a much smaller scale. However, with the mass marketing and publicity, user interactions and influencer activity, the perceived affordances of Instagram are drastically different to what the actual affordances of the application are in 2019, with a business and user integration focus, using a flow of hashtags and sponsored posts to boost both the clout of an ‘Instagramer’, as well as the products and businesses the platform is associated with it. However, there are cultural constraints to this idea, such as how the application itself is banned in China. These concepts of affordances and constraints of a digital product, specifically Instagram, are outlined clearly in the Norman article above.

 

Hinton, S & Hjorth L 2013, Understanding Social Media. Sage Publications, London 2013, pg. 1-31

In the digital copy of the book above, Hilton and Hjorth detail and outline the evolution and a brief history of Social Networking Sites (SNS). They begin this first with a general overview of Web 2.0, moving through to iconic social media services, the control and power of SNSs, then a brief overlook at how the world of social games has evolved alongside traditional messaging services. All these ideas come together to form the article above, and lay the groundwork for the authors’ overall points on ’empowerment and control’ as well as the new found way of intimacy after the adaptation of social networking sites into the everyday lives of consumers.

The book itself is quite poetic in many ways. Hinton and Hjorth open the first chapter with a visually stimulating scenario, which outlines their main point in that while SNS ‘were just for the young’,  during the time of publication in 2013, these services were becoming everyday applications for people of any age. The structure of the book itself is very digestible and well set out, with the rest of the first chapter detailing what the following passages would contain, with a brief synopsis of each, allowing the reader to ‘cherry pick’ between them, or read the book as a whole. The range of content they discuss as well is extensive, the authors ensure the reader is caught up on everything they talk about, going back as far as Web 1.0, ensuring you are well versed before discussing the nuances of Web 2.0. Their main argument, however, is this idea of control, stating that the ‘term “user” has two connotations: controller and controlled’. Hinton and Hjorth question our idea of control within a digital space by bringing up the addictive natures SNSs have integrated into their platforms, such as the ease at which a user can continuously swipe down a feed for hours and how the ‘typical teenager’ can feel lost or out of place without the aid of their mobile and social services. They target Google specifically, suggesting that while their motto is to ‘focus on the user’ and their experience, they really see us as products with data that need to be marketed and sold.  While there is nothing major to fault about this book, it does suffer by being somewhat dated when looking through a contemporary lens. While the content is not irrelevant in 2019, a lot more can be said and discussed in relation to this idea of control, and a revision by Hilton and Hjorth could garner a further read and look into the underbelly of SNS and services.

The two authors main ideas about control and addictive tendencies can definitely be related to the course prompt and Instagram as a platform. Bringing it back to affordances, a key affordance of Instagram as a platform for screentime is the ease at which users, new or acquainted, can scroll and interact with the service. The application is built around the idea of users continuously scrolling, stopping to like and comment every other post, only to continue scrolling once again. Furthermore, users can very easily develop an emotional connection to their Instagram, feeling a need to upload or stay active to keep followers and likes up. This related back to Hinton and Hjorth’s example of the ‘lost’ teenager, away from the online emotions and connections.


I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration – https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/support-andfacilities/student-support/equitable-learning-services.

 

Controlled over Control // Networked Media // Week 4

This week in the lecture, we learnt about the role social media plays in the world of affordances, and where it fits in this the concept of new media. I loved thinking about new media as this jar, and social media as the roots of a plant, growing inside this jar, only able to spread as much as the container allows. Then there are the fruits of this plant, the leaves. These are the individual social media services (SMS’s), and they can grow and live, or fall and die. Just a really nice and simple analogy.

The main aspect of this weeks content that I really enjoyed pondering and discussing came from the Hilton and Hjorth reading. ‘the term user has two connotations: controller and controlled’ (Hilton, S & Hjorth, L) to me is a very poetic and interesting way to address the evergrowing concerns about privacy and addiction when it comes to social media and the web as a whole. I think everyone has felt that they were being manipulated by social media services, whether that be through addicting and compelling interaction loops, or having self-esteem deteriorate as you scroll through feeds of meticulously crafted falsities.

However, one of the ways social media sites and the web as a whole can manipulate and damage you is our need to have access to it, and up until now, I hadn’t thought about how intensely this actually was, and how much of our lives revolve around the web and social media. Its affordances are too beneficial to our society. Some families communicate solely through the use of SMSs, and while I could definitely live without it, the affordances of Instagram allowing me to easily keep up with what friends are doing, as well as easily and aesthetically document events in my life and my photos and videos of them.

The reading definitely put it best, while Google always states that it is a user-focused company, it doesn’t really see us as users, it sees us as products, investors, dollar signs (Hilton, S & Hjorth, L).

Oh well, as long as I can still have my Instagram stories, I’ll be happy!


Hinton, S & Hjorth L 2013, Understanding Social Media. Sage Publications, London 2013. (Section: pp. 1-31.)

My Love for The Florida Project // Small Things // Assignment 1 – Part 3

The Florida Project was released in 2017 and was directed by Sean Baker, best known for his breakout indie hit Tangerine (2015), and stars Bria Vinaite as Halley, the mother of Moonee, played by Brooklyn Prince. The film is set in and around the motels near Disneyland in Florida, and is told through the perspective of Moonee, a child below the poverty line living in a low star hotel, oblivious to the misdeeds and debauchery that her mother gets up to just to pay the rent and live her lifestyle. The beautiful thing for me about this film for me, and what makes it one of my favourite films of all time, is how these heartbreaking situations these kids face can be told in such a human and relatable way that you can’t help but engage with it, and enjoy every second of it. How real everything feels. There are many reasons for this, but the two I am going to touch on today are the small perspectives and small castings  (see what I did there, see how I related it to Small Things).

The Florida Project is mainly told from the perspective of Moonee. This is explicitly told through her screentime in her film, and how we always come back to her for key plot points and moments. However, this is told implicitly through low angles and how the camera is framed around her and other kids. The story is told from the eyes of little people, children. The camera is always intentionally low in scenes of The Florida Project, keeping a tight frame around Moonee at her eye level, and often cutting off the torsos and heads of adults. An example of that is shown below.

This is representative of the innocence and ignorance of a child during adult and intense situations like the ones in the film. In the scene above, Halley is trying to sell a family pass to Disneyland to a passing stranger. During this scene, we mainly sit at this angle, following Moonee as she dances around, mimicking what her mother says, feeling like she is helping. We don’t see the full frame, because Moonee doesn’t see the bigger picture. She doesn’t know that what her mother is doing is illegal, and she certainly doesn’t know what we find out later in the scene, which is that Halley stole these from a client when she used her property to prostitute herself. We, like Moonee, are left down in the unknown, wondering what is going on, like when the ‘adults are talking’, that blissful ignorance so apparent in a child’s life.

Furthermore, Baker does an incredible job highlighting how big and magical the world is for a child, and how even the more depressing and dreary of places to an adult seem like wonderlands to a child. A great example of that is in the shot below.

We can barely make out the kids, walking alongside this massive store, with such a vibrant and enticing exterior. This sense of scale shows how small these kids really are, both physically and metaphorically in the grand scheme of this world. What is a tacky Orlando gift shop, ripping off Disney product in an attempt to profit off their properties is seen as a grandiose and larger than life attraction in their lives.  This sense of a smaller perspective is heightened in the casting for the film.

 

Sean Baker makes the characters in The Florida Project feel so real, relatable and small scale through his casting choices. This was both Bria and Brooklyn’s breakout films, and the story of how Bria came to be in this film is really quite inspiring. Baker was searching throughout Hollywood to find someone to play Halley, this full of life teenage mother who embraced the more childlike aspects of her personality, which in this film, become a detriment to her. He was unimpressed with what he had seen so far, but was in awe of how the attitude of a relatively small influencer on Instagram was so similar to that of his imagined character. This personality was Bria Vinaite, and with what started as a small exchange, ended up being the breakthrough of her career, landing her various gigs post the film’s production. This lack of emphasis on stardom makes the characters of Moonee and Halley feel so real. We haven’t seen these people play anything but these characters. We believe they are these characters through masterful writing and structure. From small and humble beginnings, rose masterpieces.

The Florida Project to me is one of the most influential pieces of media when I think about how I want to make films. Its story is told through short and small interconnected scenes, fleshing out these characters and the world around them. And it wouldn’t be anywhere without its’ small things.


The Florida Project. (2017). [film] Directed by S. Baker. USA: A24.

THE LIGHT!!!! MY EYES!!! // Small Things // Assignment 1 – Part 2b

Exposure is not your friend on set, I learnt that the hard way.

So this was our (Tessa, Belinda, Astley, John and I, featuring Alyssa and Leslie’s) second attempt at the now infamous “Lenny 4” script, feat the box. Before we went on set, we sat down and decided what we wanted to change in this shoot compared to the previous one. Quality of quantity in regards to shots was a unanimous decision that was reached, as well as wanting to be more conscious of shot and story continuity, with characters entering and exiting frame in a way that would make sense when in the editing booths.

Shooting went well overall. We cut down on the number of shots on average we had for a scene, sticking closer to the script and important aspects, such as getting a close up of the box in scene 2 with Sharon. A big issue/worry we had while on set was the exposure, and whether the shots would look overexposed in Premiere. While I think this is a fault with me rather than the equipment, I feel like I really struggle to get a clear idea of what shots are truly going to look like from the camera viewfinder or screen. My eyes see everything with a tint of blur and compression, which means I really don’t get a clear sense of what the shot looks like until I get to see it up on a monitor, especially with exposure.

While I know a bit about the zebra lines, and last class really did help with that, specifically where you want the exposure lines, this is all still a learning process for me. We played around with a bunch of the camera’s settings on the day, adjusting the aperture and flicking between ND filters, but I personally couldn’t get a feel for the shot, I just had to trust it.

When it came down to the edit, it wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be. My biggest fear was the shot I open my edit with. I love the framing and how Lenny stumbles down the stairs, but the amount of light that comes down through the windows behind him really made me nervous. You could barely see a lot of Lenny, and it looked super overexposed. After a bit of colour correction over the top of the B&W filter, I was able to have Lenny clearly visible whilst not being insanely dark.

Exposure is one of those things I am bound both crack and never crack, I just gotta trust my eyes, maybe get some glasses too.

Too Many Shots // Small Things // Assignment 1 – Part 2a

Sometimes, there can be too many shots.

This was our (Tessa, Belinda, Astley, John and I’s) first attempt at tackling the “Lenny 4” script, and our first real shoot for the Small Things studio. While on set, we really meticulously planned out what shots and angles we wanted for this project, marking camera positions and creating a succinct shot list. Once shot, we felt really happy with what we had captured in the limited time and prompts given, and uploaded the footage onto Google Drive for editing to commence.

I felt really good about my rough draft of the edit, scenes were coming together and while they didn’t make too much sense in the grand scheme of the story of the script (but that might have more to do with the actors forever switching), I was enjoying watching through it. However, once reviewing the rough assembly the next day, I realised. There were too many shots.

Scenes of 10 seconds would have upwards to 3 to 4 cuts to different shots within them, which became jarring and incoherent with ever watch. For example, in scene two, the script states that Sharon walks through a laneway, looking up and around anxiously as she walks with the box for Lenny. Adapting the laneway to a hallway, we took 3 different shots of the scene. A wide shot of Sharon walking, a mid shot with way too much headroom and a close up of her feet in motion. In my edit, I decided to use all 3 in my rough cut, with the shots switching between each other at such a pace that a viewer would struggle to understand what was going on in the scene, whether these were all Sharon, and if the box they only saw for a second had any significance.

This abundance of incoherent shots definitely gave us more insight into how to shoot when we reshot the scenes the following week, focusing on the shots that worked and if they would make sense when cut and spliced together.

Why I Chose Small Things // Small Things // Assignment 1 – Part 1

There were many different reasons and factors as to why I decided to put the Small Things studio as my first preference for semester 3 in 2019. Originally, I knew a few people who took it as their first studio last year, and seemed to have thoroughly enjoyed it. Furthermore, I knew that Paul Richards ran the course, and after having him in Media 1, I felt a sense of security and familiarity joining a studio already being on good terms with the tutor.

However, after reflecting on the selection process while writing this piece, I realised that my biggest draw to this studio was to make ‘small things’. I absolutely cherish and will never forget the unique, out of the box and compelling filmmaking and storytelling techniques I learnt and constructed in the Seeing the Unseen V2 studio with Hannah, but I felt this yearning to make something simpler. To start small and work my way up incrementally, and I have a feeling that Small Things is going to scratch this itch.

The studio home page on canvas prompts the idea that building on ideas piece by piece, with constraints, stimulates better products and outcomes. To evaluate on that mess of a sentence, basically, does gradually making small products, with different goals and guides, make you a better and more thought out filmmaker? I hope so, otherwise, this studio would be for nothing!

I jest, but this idea of making ‘small things’ fascinates me. On the presentation night for last years Small Things studio, I got to see some final products from the class, both from peers and strangers. I loved the vision behind all these products. Contained and simple stories with such visual and creative flair that it didn’t even matter that they were only a couple minutes long, they were enjoyable, and some visually striking. While I don’t necessarily want to make the same things as the last semester, I do want the next couple months of creation to influence an idea that I will be really proud of, however small the thing may be.

 

 

I Really Dig Thinking About Affordances // Networked Media // Week 3

I never wanted to be too broad with these blog posts, but I don’t really know where to start with my interest in affordances and constraints. Everything about this is so interesting. I love discussing and thinking about what the ‘perceived affordances’ (Norman, 1999) of a product were, and comparing them to what we actually use the product for. I find the idea of constraints so fascinating, how the semantics of an object or design are always teaching us how to use other objects. These are obviously not new concepts to my brain. I have always known that a chair can be thrown, sat on, stood on and flipped, but the psychology of it and the constraints of a chair are having scholarly terms and being something we study is really exciting to me!

I’ve now started thinking about how these ideas of affordances and constraints relate to social media and technology as a whole. I’ve loved reading about the history of programs, and how in the early days of computers, there were lots of constraints that disrupted user-use. Programs were being created with an expected programmer level of computer knowledge, rather than being user-experience forward (Norman, 1999). This reminded me of the transition between Web 1.0 to Web 2.0, and how the change brought a focus on user-creation and friendliness.

With my relatively amateur understanding, Instagram seems to push on user-focus affordances. While the original intention of Instagram seems to have been a relatively small scale image sharing service, mainly between your friends and followers, the platform has grown to push for posts reaching for the hundreds of thousands of likes, with a focus on hashtagging and appealing to the larger demographic. While that might not be correct or true, this idea of affordances and constraints is really interesting, and a little birdy told me it will be S U P E R helpful later in the semester.

(Seth Keen is a little birdy)


Norman, D 1999, ‘Affordance, conventions and design (Part 2)’, Nielsen Norman Group,  http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/affordance_conv.html

 

The Ever Evolving World Wide Web // Networked Media // Week 2

In class we discussed the differences between Web 1.0 and its evolution into what we have today, Web 2.0. The main takeaway I got from both the reading and the discussions is that Web 2.0 focuses more on community and co-creating. A collaborative web. This idea of collaboration is also everchanging, from the early days of Wikipedia edits and suggestions, to now, where groups can work together to control video game streams, using the chat comments to control the movements and inputs of the characters on screen. And while in both cases, intentional errors and trolling occur, the internet is better off with this level of mass involvement and creation.

Digressing a little, in the reading ‘New Media: A Critical Introduction”, Lister talks about the idea of The Perpetual Beta being a big change when Web 2.0 came to be, which is something that I had never really thought the internet lived without, but makes total sense to be a feature in the self-proclaimed ‘(or maybe I’ve dubbed it as the) ‘collaborative age of the web’. This idea of applications, software, firmware all updating and receiving feedback on what the community wants and doesn’t want is a perfect encapsulation of this idealistic user moulded web, and while many people feel like big companies don’t always listen to what users and the community want, I’m sure it’s really that developers can’t help but hear what we have to say.

Instagram in particular is heavily in a ‘perpetual beta’, with updates seemingly coming week in week out. And while it’s usually just for bug and crash fixes, the developers are always on the lookout to make the platform better for the users (and the shareholders)

The idea of an ever-growing Web 2.0 makes me excited for what is to come in the future for this user-driven, collaborative world wide web. Will this ‘Big Media’ relationship continue? Will we be enslaved to our tablets and fully integrate and collaborate with the internet? Who knows! All I can hope is that Grammarly learns to autocorrect my individual ‘i’ to ‘I’, cause:

(I’m really sorry for that ^^^^^)

 


Lister, M et al 2009, New Media: A Critical Introduction. Routledge, 2009

Digital Cultures and Vernacular // Networked Media // Week 1

The most interesting aspect of Sabine Niederer’s Networked images: visual methodologies for the digital age was this idea of  “digital cultures” (Niederer 2018, p.9)and while the idea of that term isn’t foreign to me, the term was until now.

When I think about a culture, I think about a collection of ideas, beliefs and people coming together to celebrate and connect. Cultures have their own religious beliefs, sense of humour, likes and dislikes; things that people can identify with.

The idea of a digital culture works the same way. Groups of like-minded individuals coming together on the web to embrace their similarities, whether that be on social media, forums or other areas of the internet. And within these cultures, internet or otherwise, comes a similar vernacular, often built within the community.

Niederer discusses how specific social media sites contain their own vernacular and language, such as how people who use Twitter operate within a ‘visual language’ of ‘in the moment’ conversations and quips (Niederer 2018, p. 23), and have invented and popularised terms such as Tweeting and Reposting. In our split class discussions, we pondered if the term tweet was intended to blow up by the creators of Twitter, or if the audience and users of Twitter embraced the term way beyond the expectations of the creators. A little off topic, but just something I found super interesting.

Now that I am familiar with the term, I feel like I’ve been heavily involved with digital cultures and their vernacular and language throughout my life. I vividly remember late nights at home playing Minecraft with friends over Skype when I was younger, and the terms we would use such as ‘no griefing zones’ and ‘mod ban’ that meant literally nothing to anyone but us and our server.  Or the group chats my friends and I have with nicknames and inside jokes that only we can make sense of because of a niche moment in our lives.

Digital culture and vernacular dominates our society, whether we consciously know it or not, and I think this idea of social media specific terms and phrases will be crucial in discussing the class prompt later on in the course.


References

Niederer, S 2018, Networked images: visual methodologies for the digital age. Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam. (read pp.1-20)