Monthly Archives: September 2013

Mindframe

This week in ‘Journalism Ethics and Regulations’ some people from ‘Mindframe’ came to talk to us. Mindframe is an Australian Government initiative which provides guidelines for reporting on mental illness and suicide in mass media. It was interesting to learn of the link between suicide deaths and the way stories are reported.

Repeated coverage of suicide deaths can normalize this behavior. It can also trigger this behavior. For this reason, journalists should not provide the method and location of suicide deaths. The more ambiguous you are, the less likely someone is to copy the behavior.

Given the distribution of mass media, someone will always identify with the characters in your story. By using images of individuals who have committed suicide and their funeral, journalists are sensationalizing suicide. Instead, journalists should show images of the grieving families and communities. This illustrates to individuals that they would be more of a burden if they were to commit suicide.

There are also many stigmas attached to suicide and mental illness, and journalists can unknowingly promote these. For example, journalists often make links between mental illness and violence.

Mental illness and suicide are sensitive topics that need to be reported as such. Journalists should also include the information of national and local helplines in their coverage.

Watts Chu Talkin’ ‘Bout?.. Networks

Watts looks at networks and their history in ‘Six Degrees.’ He writes that “the networks we will actually be dealing with can be represented in almost comical simplicity by dots on a piece of paper, with lines connecting them.” He concedes that some of the complexities regarding certain connections will be lost but “we can tap into a wealth of knowledge and techniques . . . that we might never have been able to answer had we gotten bogged down in all the messy details.”

Watts also takes a look at the ‘six degrees of separation’ theory. This theory proposes that everyone is six steps away from any other person in the world. ‘It’s a small’ world is one of those sayings I first heard used by my parents, now I am guilty of using it. It is true though. Every time a family member or friend goes away, they bump into so and so who went to school with . . . so and so whose best friends with my old neighbour . . . so and so who knows my orthodontist’s brother in law etc. You get my point don’t you? It seems that wherever you are in the world, there is someone who knows someone you know. I can’t help but wonder, with the onslaught of communication technology, are people even three steps away from each other? It is infinitely easy to connect with people, even those you haven’t seen in fifty years or who live on the opposite side of the world. In this new age of technology, our network of relationships is larger than ever before.

This was a long, but straightforward read. Watts poses many questions and provides limited answers, he forces you to think. For more: http://vogmae.dropmark.com/133224/2272418

the long tail

chris anderson makes some interesting points about networks and audience in ‘the long tail’

“the future of entertainment is in the millions of niche markets”
anderson contends that your focus shouldn’t be on reaching the largest audience, instead it she be on reaching a specific audience and forming a connection with them

anderson believes people wrongly assume that “if people wanted it, surely it would be sold”
entertainment or whatever else you are providing needs to be accessible. it needs to be affordable and people must know how and where to find it. otherwise you won’t get an audience 

“we live in the physical world and, until recently, most of our entertainment media did”
anderson is highlighting the power of the world wide web to connect people and cross geographical boundaries. entertainment media now has a much larger reach 

check it out: http://vogmae.dropmark.com/133224/2255470

Week 6 Symposium

Week 6’s symposium debated the question, ‘Do you think the digitalisation of literary texts and the use of the E-reader will eventually replace the physical book completely?’ Adrian stated that ‘the book’ is 400 years old and “to think it’s going to hang around for ever is incredibly naïve.” He believes the book is a temporary technology and texts are already dead.

As mentioned in my previous post Douglas, I don’t believe that books are dead or will become dead. Yes, I can concede that most books will adopt a digitalised form. This makes practical sense for large texts, like manuals and VCE books. Additionally, digital books will minimise environmental impacts and that is oh so trendy. But, there will always be a place for books.

Books will most likely become a more boutique thing. They will become more beautiful, more of a collector’s item as with coffee table books. This will only increase the cultural value of books. For centuries, we have identified books as symbols of knowledge. We value them as gifts and give them to children as soon as they are born. All over the world, there are huge libraries which house books. These structures and their contents are often protected under heritage listings. This and the value society places on them, means they will not disappear.

As mentioned by Brian, the E-reader is only a small transformation and it is still early days. There will no doubt be other transformations, but E-readers will not be the demise of books. He provides the example of music and its many different forms – vinyl, cassette tape, CD, iTunes, YouTube etc. – to highlight how a technology can evolve and adapt. The same goes for theatre which DID NOT disappear with the advent of film. On a side note, can you imagine a Priest and their congregation reading scripture from E-readers rather than the Bible? Somehow this seems unlikely.

If reading for pleasure, I cannot fathom why anyone would choose an E-reader over a REAL book. I love the smell and feel of books. I love receiving them as gifts, and finding a note written in the title page. Wherever I live, I always have a large bookshelf. It’s decoration, a talking piece, somewhere I can see memories. I love lending books to others, and having them scrawl comments or definitions throughout the pages. I love the look of old, worn-out books that have been read again and again or passed down through generations. But, I also love buying new books and the thrill I get from bending back the front cover and creasing the spine. I will NEVER EVER curl up next to the fire with an E-reader, how unromantic. Some things are best left unchanged.