Monday 28 September 2015

NDM News case study: Audience and Institution

What are the benefits for audiences and institutions from the changes new and digital media have had on the news industry?

What are the downsides for audiences and institutions as a result of new and digital media in news?

------


1) Ofcom 2014 report on the consumption of news in the UK - key statistics relating to the influence of new and digital media:
  • 95% of UK adults follow the news 
  • 75% of UK adults claim to follow the news by television (78% in 2013)
  • 41% use internet/apps for news (32% last year) - (16-34 age group -- 60%)
  • 28% stated BBC One as the most important news source to them personally
  • BARB figures show that each adult watched an average of 115 hours of national and international news on television 
  • When asked which topics they considered to be news, UK adults nominated crime (53%), worldwide current affairs (53%), UK-wide current affairs (51%) and UK-wide politics (49%).

2) An institution that has benefited from the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry and how new technology has helped the institution:

Sky News has benefited from the changes derived from advancements in NDM as they have successfully exploited these changes in order to support their own news reporting integrally. This has been demonstrated through their 2015 annual report, which is reflective of the developments in their online streaming services of news via their website, which is linked through from their social media presence on platforms inc. Twitter and Facebook.

3) An institution that has suffered as a result of the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry and how it had a negative impact:

The Guardian has incurred a loss as of 2015 as detailed in their latest financial report. This can be attributed to the fall in demand for newspapers due to the immediacy of news accessibility via online news which is better optimised on rival news sites such as news.sky.com and telegraph.co.uk. 

4) Answer the following question in a mini-essay on your blog:

Who has benefited most from the changes new and digital media have had on the news industry - audiences or institutions?

Changes in new and digital media have developed an established abundance of immediately accessible news from a wider array of news sources than ever before. This raises questions regarding the level of benefit this inflicts onto the 'recipient'. Taking notice of the inverted commas, the basis of this debate relies on the autocracy and literacy of the audience member. 

It is evident that the general public as a collective audience isn't media literate, and hence relies heavily on the news they are accustomed to being a recipient of. Therefore, it can be argued that audiences suffer by being informed in a manner which is curated to the beliefs represented by the particular news institution in question.






Friday 25 September 2015

Weekly New/Digital Media homework 2

Some stand with Ahmed

" many are noticing that people who target them often victimise blacks and others as well, and that their own struggle against discrimination is intimately connected to that of other minorities. Rather like some Jewish activists of previous generations, some young Muslims are concluding that the surest way to secure their rights is to see that they are upheld for everybody: as Mr Safi puts it, “to be able to breathe easily in America, it is necessary for everyone to.” Some have become involved in protests against police violence in Ferguson, Baltimore and elsewhere"

Disclaimer: This is an issue which raises fascinating issues of democracy, privacy and representations which I cannot provide sufficient justice to in a brief paragraph. 


While it is arguable that the primitive concern of the school was safety, it is irrefutable to acknowledge that the authoritative figures felt threatened by the fact that a student of ethnic minority had brought in what could be potentially an explosive - only as a consequence of socially prevalent negative stereotypes systematically implemented within Americans as a means of prejudice against ethnic minorities succeeding the 9/11 attacks as well as multiple other freak scenarios. From a wider perspective it can be speculated that this is a clear example of Islamophobic conduct as the media convinces mass American audiences that Muslims are more frequently responsible for terrorism instead of those from a white Christian background. Whilst this is statistically proven to be false, it is evident that the general opinion is greater influenced by the media's dominant representation of those who are of Islamic faith. 



A female cosmopolitan commutes through the streets of Manhattan in daytime transitioning to the evening and night and encounters over 100 occasions of interaction by other men. In my opinion my views differ from the statement of the campaign as I wouldn't denote the exhibited acts as harassment, as the majority of instances were civil. However, some of those were legitimate for the cause and should be socially addressed. It is noteworthy to acknowledge the controversial reception this campaign received via social media inc. Twitter. 

NDM Baseline assessment - learner response

Feedback

34 = B 

WWW
- There are brilliant moments in this essay that are definitely at an A grade. However, as a whole we need a little more work...

EBI 
- More focus on the question, you drift away from empowerment in places.
- Explore both sides: there's so much more you could say about the media's role in exposing corruption and challenging the establishment 
- Definitely need more media theory and wider range of examples
- Consider institutional aspect and this impact on audiences (is quality reduced?)

LR 
- Edit a few of your paragraphs, having read the examiner's report and copy them in to your blog post with this feedback

-------------------------------------------------------

Knowledge is power. In the light of this statement, global access to a wide variety of views and values via new technological advancements would surely empower an audience. However, with this great power comes a burden of responsibility which producers of content may not willingly uphold with the consideration of moral aspects of publicised content such as taste & decency as well as the ethical cohesion of a media product. The stated issue serves as one of the arguments which dispute claims of the prominence of new & digital media in today’s ‘digital era’ being an empowering force for audiences. While there are reasons for either side of the debate, the empowerment of audiences by the functionality of new & digital media can be simply deemed with accordance to the way in which the delivered product is consumed and interpreted, thus stating that audiences are empowered to the extent of their own understanding of new & digital media standards.

Liberalists will propose the wide range access to views and values today as a revolutionary notion which is a form of positive change empowering audiences. Accessibility is at its highest point today with the intricate integration of platforms such as digital applications on smartphones and even smart-watches, delivering news immediately alongside other content of entertainment and information. Social media platforms on the internet such as Twitter encourage people to voice their opinions publically and Twitter has thus been repeatedly demonstrating a democratic system due to the absence of censorship in user generated content on social media. Moreover, with the introduction of Snapchat, audiences are consistently provided with live video and audio coverage from not only their ‘friends’ but also news institutions including DailyMail. This is positive as audiences are consistently learning about their environment, which fundamentally makes a human being better adapted to their living, consequently resulting in a large-scale society of highly advanced humans. While this is idealistic, (assuming all content is valid and beneficial) it is also noteworthy that exposure to political issues of race and gender is higher today than ever, which becomes something less susceptible to slander and disregard due to its profoundness in social debate. Due to this, audiences of various demographics are seen to benefit from the widely accessible content available on new and digital media.

However it is often forgotten that producers of content are not always striving to report the truth, let alone issues of reliability. British newspapers, inclusive of The Guardian and The Sun, are usually representative of a particular political angle and will therefore report news which benefits the party of favour. This was demonstrated during the General Election of 2015 as segments of the UK press developed and distributed media content in a way to exploitatively fuel their favoured political campaigns. The curation of content is not only exclusive to this as it is inevitable for us to communicate ideas of text, visuals and audio in a way that corresponds to our own beliefs and motives. The concept of citizen journalism is more profound than ever today with the rise of technology, enabling people to report video and audio immediately to millions of people. This is found to be the case with the ‘follow’ system on social media platforms including Instagram and Twitter which grant the cyber presence of a user with the power of choosing which views and values are shown to them, as well as encouraging many users to gain their own followers so they can themselves present produced content in the form of photos and tweets to a subscribed followership. Many online users become opinion leaders in matters as wide as possible and bring attention to ideas which audiences may never have been exposed to before, which serves as informative but also naturally manipulative in the sense that the way in which content is presented will be developed for the perception of that viewpoint being correct and favourable by the audience. While this is a deterministic statement, the concept of free-will is applicable as ever because new and digital media also provides access to what can most simply be concluded factual. Informative websites including encyclopaedias are at a fingertip’s reach of audiences so it eventually comes down to the initiative and inquisition of audiences to discover the validity of information they come across.

With the availability of higher bandwidth broadband and internet access, streaming music and video content has become the norm. Institutions had identified and have now profitably developed from this with the prevalence of music streaming platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music and even Tidal. These institutions compete vigorously among one another to gain the largest subscription list of music listeners, a competition which should allegedly enhance the consumer’s experience. However, this has proven otherwise due to cases such as Apple Music’s exclusive deals with musicians including Taylor Swift and Dr. Dre, leaving the availability of music from these artists solely to the Apple platform. Such exclusive deals are ranged across the three competitors and leave audiences having to sacrifice (or not) listening to a favoured artist for a better deal with a lower price and better technical accessibility. This concludes for the audience as a battle of sacrifices which is irrational and disputes claims of better value for money, hence not being empowering at all.

New & digital media proves to be a force against political corruption, which is empowering for audiences as illegitimate authorities of power are exposed. This has shown to prove since the Watergate scandal many decades ago and henceforth in the essence of celebrity lives, as socially unacceptable acts such as rape, murder and drug abuse are exposed via the media and often dealt with justifiable actions.  The results of this produce a society which is closely under surveillance by itself which draws a debate between the balance of privacy and safety/social compliance. Arguably however, news reporting institutions may have less resources today to be able to investigate corruption with the same vigour as they may have been able to once upon a time. Many critics accuse this consequential lack of revenue disposable to investigating major political news stories on the uprise of new and digital media, with the inclusion of social media and the internet which can be perceived as a more effective substitute for the reporting function which was once wholly fulfilled and reliant on major newspaper institutions such as The Times and The Daily Mirror. As a result of this, the extent of empowering audiences is debatable between: the scale of positive externalities derived from new and digital media and alternatively, the resistance to corruption put into foundation by news institutions. 

The discussed issues scratch the surface of a complex debate which blurs between philosophical and sociological analysis of the media’s effects in the digital age we live in. Cases of availability of wide ranged views and values propose that the empowerment of audiences relies most profoundly on the understanding and education of the audience members, which is associated and complicated considerably by a phenomenon of ‘uncommon sense’ as the wide range of opinions ultimately create binary oppositions in social beliefs, both sides of which are presented passionately and resultantly leave the audience by themselves to filter the content consumed. 

Monday 21 September 2015

The impact of Google

The impact of Google

1) Why has Google led to the decline of the newspaper industry?

Google has been receiving revenue from companies who are now wishing to post online advertisements via Google instead of traditional methods of advertising via newspapers. 
2) Do you personally think Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs? Why?

Google have inevitably contributed to such declines as the newspaper industry has been reported to lose billions comparatively to what they may have projected to generate a decade ago before the prominence of Google.3) Read the comments below the article. Pick one comment you agree with and one you disagree with and justify your opinions in detail.

 "Obviously, Google is not to blame. I don’t think it’s about blame. I think the Internet is incredibly poorly designed. Rather than being free, everything on it should cost something in order to compensate creators. We have a proven system for doing this through organizations like ASCAP and BMI. The principal of royalties for profiting from the content of others is well established. Google came along, and, at least in the case of Youtube, knowingly robbed content creators for years in order to build up the business. The ideal system would be one in which every click resulted in a nano-charge on your phone bill, maybe 1/1000 of a cent for a news story, for example. Sites like Google that link to other sites could also pay in very tiny increments." 

I disagree with the proposed argument as I believe online institutions have created a fair and systematic way of capitalising, and it has also been lucrative for many online content creators who have started as 'the guy in his apartment'. 

"Well, if the Google duo aren’t smart enough to invest in content, they’re going to be joining the buggy-whip makers in the dustbin of history. A temporary anomaly has given great wealth to the people who invented the digital equivalent of the printing press and the library card catalogue. The actual value being exploited resides in the underlying information that the Internet “prints” and Google indexes; Google does not actually own any of that information. Regardless of how nimble Google leaders are, they cannot indefinitely continue to control and reap the vast majority of the profit from assets they do not own"

Technically accurate, and understands the sheer fact of importance in the digital world given to accessibility and content in their distinct respects. 


Weekly New/Digital Media homework

Hillary Clinton revealed to have over a million fake Twitter followers - more than any other presidential hopeful


Hillary Clinton Has More Than a Million Fake Twitter Followers. What Does It Mean?

The sheer fact that outlets such as Yahoo! Tech and DailyMail report about the quantity of followers attained by Hillary Clinton, among other presidential candidates, highlights the profound influence that social media has on something as important as the election responsible of determining the most powerful figure of the free world. Statistics are closely examined on this matter and those with more followers are deemed as more viable candidates for the campaign, the leader of which is currently Donald Trump. 

Straight Outta Compton's viral marketing on digital media was something which us all have encountered while surfing the web or scrolling through beloved social sites. This is confirmed in the embedded article as it runs the readership through the numerous corporate decisions made in the dawn of the premiering of the Universal biopic. Residue of this viral campaign still exists due to the personal aspect provided to the 'Straight Outta ---' trademark. 






Monday 14 September 2015

NDM: News institutions

News institutions

The major players in terms of UK news providers
  • The Guardian
  • BBC; The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is the publicly funded media service of the United Kingdom. The Corporation comprises 8 UK-wide Television Channels, 10 UK-wide Radio Stations and a network of more local television and radio stations throughout the UK. It also has a raft of International Interests and Commercial Enterprises. 
  • Sky News; Sky News is a 24-hour international, multi-media news operation based in Britain. It provides non-stop rolling news on television, online, and on a range of mobile devices – as well as delivering a service of national and international radio news to commercial radio stations in the UK.
  • Press Gazette
  • The Mirror
  • The Sun
  • Metro
  • The Evening Standard
  • Mail Online
  • Times 
  • The Independent 
  • The Telegraph 
  • The Financial Times
The impact of Google
1) Why has Google led to the decline of the newspaper industry?

2) Do you personally think Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs? Why?

3) Read the comments below the article. Pick one comment you agree with and one you disagree with and justify your opinions in detail.