Rich media is a new phenomenon within society that is ever so slowly leaving the perceptually hedonistic realms of the gaming world, and beginning to take on a new commercial viability. The rich media that are coined by the terms of virtuality-( Jaron Lanier), augmented reality and telepresence are but a few of the exciting concepts behind the emerging multisensory super mediums. This blog will address the different aspects of the said terms and their positive and potentially negative aspects with association to the creation of online gambling within the mediums.
The definition of virtual reality is based on concepts of “presence” and “telepresence,” which refer to the sense of being in an environment, generated by natural or mediated means, respectively (Steuer, J. 1993). One such example of virtuality is the popular programmes second life and world of warcraft, in these online worlds end users experience the journey of their avatar, and online expression of themselves. These worlds exist in real time, and involve the convergence of numerous communication models- users are able to converse with other users through their avatars, and see and hear other avatars and the world they are surrounded by. This conglomeration of technologies which interacts with entire “human sensorium” (Brand, J 2009) this is why these media are referred to as rich media, media that immerses the user. “ In a virtual environment our senses, as vision, hearing, haptics, smell, etc., are controlled by a computer while our actions influence the produced stimuli” (Bimber O, Raskar R. 2005).
This quote highlights of all the aspects of the world which engage a higher order of psychological processing for the user, the user feels as though the world is operating in the “present”, because perceptively it is. This makes the boundaries between fantasy and reality blurred for users, the impacts of this later can show the negatives of this in reference specifically to the online gaming industry. The reason there are these impacts on users is because virtual reality can encompass numerous technologies at one time, as stated before. Physical tools such as data gloves, data suits, speech and eye recognition, coupled with simulation that is providing the user with immediately stimulating images that provide suspense and constantly challenge the mind, give the end user a sense of “telepresence”. Telepresence refers to the human experience within the virtual world, the vividness (breadth & Depth) plus interactivity (speed, range, mapping) of the technology affecting the users perceptions.
Another form of rich media is Augmented reality. “In Augmented Reality (AR) systems, real and virtual objects are merged and aligned in relation to a real environment, and presented in the field of view of a end user” (Nillson, S . et al 2009). Examples of augmented reality are present in movies, where goggles of a character bring up information about the surroundings they are viewing. Interestingly augmented reality has entered the commercial world already through an app on the ever innovative I-phone, example below shows the outcome:
Because of the rich hardware of the I-phone, situated simulation is able to converge numerous media- broadband with smart phone, substantial graphics capabilities and GPS positioning features to provide a unique service of rich media (G. Liestøl, 2009.). Whilst augmented reality combines technology to enhance viewing the real world it is far less immersive than virtuality. Virtuality essentially provides the user with a sense of presence and realism which results in the immersion, augmented reality adds to reality creating a new realism for the user.
Whilst there are many positives to these rich media, there are negative possibilities for users who become too immersed in the simulation and suffer from detrimental effects. Such effects include; simulation sickness, time use- more time in virtual world than real world. These effects can affect users emotions, jobs, long term memory processing and motivation in the real world, not to mention the negative physical effects such as weight gain or loss from unhealthy exercise habits.
Within the industry of online or virtual gambling the side effects increase in negativity and quantity. Users can suffer from the general negativities of becoming detached from the real world, and incur additionally, debt which can go unchecked by themselves and others. This of course depends on the types of gambling, virtual pokies and card games would certainly prove detrimental. Additionally those involved in providing the service, could also suffer similar end user effects, having their working environment online, decreasing the personal involvement in real life employment may prove detrimental to social skills. Communication of both sides is consistently virtual and comes with all the negative attributes that extended immersion in virtuality provides.
References
1. Brand, J. 2009. Media Richness & Immersion.
2. Jonathan Steuer , 1993. Dimensions Determining Telepresence, pg 1- 25.
3. Liestøl, G. 2009. Situated Simulations: A Prototyped Augmented Reality Genre for Learning on the iPhone Volume 3, Special Issue 1: "IMCL2009", July 2009
4. Nillson, Susanna. Et al 2009. Hands Free Interaction with Virtual Information in a Real Environment: Eye Gaze as an Interaction Tool in an Augmented Reality System. PsychNology Journal, 2009 Volume 7, Number 2, 175 – 196
5. Oliver Bimber, Ramesh Raskar. 2005. Spatial Augmented Reality Merging Real and Virtual Worlds. Pg 1- 10.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Who's Music Is It Anyway?
Information is a term that broadly encompasses raw data, facts, figures and cognitive expression in a physical or tangible form. A public good is a thing of value shared by all people, however within that categorisation there exists restrictions imposed by law in using some information. In this submission I will be addressing the issue of copyright on information and its effect on music as a public good.
Essentially information is the physical expression of knowledge. Once information enters the creative commons- “A commons of knowledge- a free exchange of ideas and information about how the net, and code that runs on the net, runs.” (Flew T. 2008) it becomes commercially valuable and therefore a public good and copyrightable.
Copyright is a restriction placed upon a public good. The copyright ensures exclusive ownership of the information to the creator, and stops others from using the information unless certain things occur. One alternative is the author is credited for their work , or some form of reimbursement for the use of the information, and example of this is royalties paid in the music industry. Within in the music industry “Copyright protection is free and applies automatically when material is created.” (Australian Copyright Council 2009). Quite interestingly copyright within the music industry can belong to two parties, as the music can be represented in both literary work or the musical work itself, E.g. Songwriter and music artist. The music as a whole once it enters the creative commons becomes a public good. Due to the copyright, the music must either be paid for or referenced to the creator, as previously stated.
Within the music industry, the major watchdog which ensures that individuals within Australia comply with copyright law is the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA). APRA and other regulatory bodies like it monitor the use of music within the creative commons, ensuring that music is paid for by end users. This issue has become quite a controversial issue in modern a time due to the general public perception that music is a public good which isn’t often paid for, with most users ripping or burning music for friends. This essentially taps into one of the central debates surrounding copyright and the creative commons.
It is argued that without reward how can those who create things of public value survive without wealth generation. The opposing argument to this argues that by restricting information within the creative commons, we are inhibiting further creativeness itself, “We as a society should favour the disruptive, they will produce movement toward a more efficient, prosperous economy” (Flew T. 2008). The current precedent is to prosecute offenders, however increasingly this is proving ineffective, as the music has already become a public good and very clearly shared by many people.
Not all creative artists who publish work within the digital commons are adverse to sharing their work. In 2001 the Creative Commons was established created by Lawrence Lessig. Previously there was no avenue for creative people to let people know what work they were willing to share. This not for profit organisation, allows members to exchange information under a few licenses that apply, these licenses are listed below;
Attribution: Whenever a work is copied or redistributed under a Creative Commons licence, credit must always be given to the creator. (Creative Commons 2009)
Non-commercial: Let people use work, but not for commercial purposes. (Creative Commons 2009)
No Derivative Works: Lets others use work but only verbatim copies, not derivative works based upon it. (Creative Commons 2009)
Share Alike: Allows others to distribute derivative works only under a licensee identical to the licensee that governs your work. (Creative Commons 2009)
The creative commons allows for creativity to grow in many industries. An example of this is in the music industry, an individual is able to sample a certain percentage of another person’s work, and remix over the top of it or use it for some purpose for their own purposes. This use of a free public good promotes creativity for the small cost of giving attribution or following one of the other licenses.
Ultimately any form of music recorded and released into the wider community is a public good, copyright has limited influence on the accessibility of this information within the digital commons. This public perception of music as a free public good, may result in the death of the music industry as it is known today.
References
1. Flew, Terry. 2008. New Media an introduction; pg 66-68
2. Australian Copyright Council, www.copyright.org.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
3. Australasian Performing Right Association , www.apra-amcos.com.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
4. Creative Commons, www.creativecommons.org.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
Essentially information is the physical expression of knowledge. Once information enters the creative commons- “A commons of knowledge- a free exchange of ideas and information about how the net, and code that runs on the net, runs.” (Flew T. 2008) it becomes commercially valuable and therefore a public good and copyrightable.
Copyright is a restriction placed upon a public good. The copyright ensures exclusive ownership of the information to the creator, and stops others from using the information unless certain things occur. One alternative is the author is credited for their work , or some form of reimbursement for the use of the information, and example of this is royalties paid in the music industry. Within in the music industry “Copyright protection is free and applies automatically when material is created.” (Australian Copyright Council 2009). Quite interestingly copyright within the music industry can belong to two parties, as the music can be represented in both literary work or the musical work itself, E.g. Songwriter and music artist. The music as a whole once it enters the creative commons becomes a public good. Due to the copyright, the music must either be paid for or referenced to the creator, as previously stated.
Within the music industry, the major watchdog which ensures that individuals within Australia comply with copyright law is the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA). APRA and other regulatory bodies like it monitor the use of music within the creative commons, ensuring that music is paid for by end users. This issue has become quite a controversial issue in modern a time due to the general public perception that music is a public good which isn’t often paid for, with most users ripping or burning music for friends. This essentially taps into one of the central debates surrounding copyright and the creative commons.
It is argued that without reward how can those who create things of public value survive without wealth generation. The opposing argument to this argues that by restricting information within the creative commons, we are inhibiting further creativeness itself, “We as a society should favour the disruptive, they will produce movement toward a more efficient, prosperous economy” (Flew T. 2008). The current precedent is to prosecute offenders, however increasingly this is proving ineffective, as the music has already become a public good and very clearly shared by many people.
Not all creative artists who publish work within the digital commons are adverse to sharing their work. In 2001 the Creative Commons was established created by Lawrence Lessig. Previously there was no avenue for creative people to let people know what work they were willing to share. This not for profit organisation, allows members to exchange information under a few licenses that apply, these licenses are listed below;
Attribution: Whenever a work is copied or redistributed under a Creative Commons licence, credit must always be given to the creator. (Creative Commons 2009)
Non-commercial: Let people use work, but not for commercial purposes. (Creative Commons 2009)
No Derivative Works: Lets others use work but only verbatim copies, not derivative works based upon it. (Creative Commons 2009)
Share Alike: Allows others to distribute derivative works only under a licensee identical to the licensee that governs your work. (Creative Commons 2009)
The creative commons allows for creativity to grow in many industries. An example of this is in the music industry, an individual is able to sample a certain percentage of another person’s work, and remix over the top of it or use it for some purpose for their own purposes. This use of a free public good promotes creativity for the small cost of giving attribution or following one of the other licenses.
Ultimately any form of music recorded and released into the wider community is a public good, copyright has limited influence on the accessibility of this information within the digital commons. This public perception of music as a free public good, may result in the death of the music industry as it is known today.
References
1. Flew, Terry. 2008. New Media an introduction; pg 66-68
2. Australian Copyright Council, www.copyright.org.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
3. Australasian Performing Right Association , www.apra-amcos.com.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
4. Creative Commons, www.creativecommons.org.au (Accessed 11 Nov 2009)
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Collective Intelligence & The Global Village
As I peruse through the landscape of Second Life, trying to gain a grasp on this ethereal digital world, I turn my avatar to another strange looking avatar and ask where we are? Another new member to Second life walks over and explains we are at an information hub; I had obviously accidently teleported into Second Life main land. I make friends with this new avatar named Zerthas1 and decide it’s time to fly and explore the world Linden Lab have created part of, and even observe what others have built themselves into this world and now call their own. Through talking to other avatars I gain insight, a sort of intelligence into what to do, and where to go. Alone this wouldn’t be possible, but with the help of others knowledge I am able to progress faster and a lot easier. This ironically I realise is an example of collective intelligence at work. Welcome to the Second Life I guess..
Second life, like other Information and communication technology (ICT) sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Wikipedia, is an example of collective intelligence and the Global Village. Collective intelligence is a “term used by Levy (1997) and de Kerckhove (1998) to refer to the capacity of networked ICTs to exponentially enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions enabled by communications networks that can generate new knowledge, and the greatly enhanced capacity to codify, store, and retrieve such knowledge through collective access to network databases.” (Flew, T 2008).Alternatively a simple explanation given by Thomas W. Malone “Groups of individuals acting collectively in ways that seem intelligent”. These examples operate under the banner of collective intelligence which I understand as millions of individuals around the world, amateurs and professional contributing to the collected information within social networks and/or Wiki.
The concept of the Global village introduced by McLuhan (1964) which refers to a boundless electronic communication village, again supported by Boorstin(1978), stating nations will be bound into a new form of community can strongly be again supported in a modern context by social mediums such as Facebook or Second Life. Not only do these mediums of collective intelligence transcend country borders in allowing communication by individuals all around the world simultaneously but with the introduction of new convergent technologies such as the I Phone and its applications, these networks break the boundaries of when, where and how this collective intelligence can be shared.
There are a lot of positives to be gained from the presence of collective intelligence and the Global village. One of these ironically enough is the process called Blogging. Blogging, essentially is the impression of peoples thoughts online, adding their amateur or professional views to the collective intelligence of the network society. This form of collective intelligence within the music industry has often been a point of concern as users rip music and place it in blogs to be uploaded for free or place their music for free, cutting out big corporations. Whilst this is positive and negative for some there exists a notably negative relationship between the Global Village and Collective Intelligence.
The Global Village has been argued to represent a modernist western colonial conception which aims at erasing cultural differences and national boundaries. (Zembylas, M & Vrasidas C 2005) Embracing the Global village is for poorer nations essential otherwise they run they risk of isolation and exclusion from progress. Collective intelligence represents one aspect of the mass force of progress, which is arguably the power of the crowd creating progress internationally. In that sense there may lie a negative to some when regarding the global village and collective intelligence. Whilst these negatives possibilities may exist and it is inevitable that social networks and collective intelligence channels exist, there must be vigilance in allowing difference among the conglomeration of knowledge.
Social networking not only transcends geographical boundaries but those of industries. The music industry is one such industry which is heavily entrenched in the Global Village. Social Networking sites are not only platforms for music e.g. MySpace, But they are also marketing tools to reach the audience of musicians. Amateurs and professionals operate technologically on an even scale, being able to use mediums such as You Tube to broadcast themselves and add to the collective intelligence musically. One example of this recently is the story of Susan Boyle, a 47 year old woman who auditioned on “Britans Got Talent” and within days became an internet sensation through the sharing of her performance over You Tube.
Like most music artists Susan will now have a Facebook, MySpace and Twitter, All social networking sites which span the Global Village and are constant sources of collective intelligence. Although these are the major social networking sites, the world of Second life also allows for individuals to add their knowledge to a social networking medium. In Second Life participants can take up any profession, even be a Deejay in a club where they can use their knowledge of music and play music for other avatars. This is an example of individuals using their information or skills which they possess which then becomes the raw material of economic activity within a social network. (Flew, T 2008).
References
1. Flew, Terry. 2008. New Media an introduction; pg 80-105
2. MICHALINOS ZEMBYLAS & CHARALAMBOS VRASIDAS. 2005. “Globalization, information and communication technologies, and the prospect of a ‘global village’: promises of inclusion or electronic colonization?” VOL. 37, NO. 1, 65–83
3. Susan Boyle Audition, www.youtube.com. (accessed 28.10.2009 4:38pm)
4. Collaboration & Collective Intelligence, http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/467
(Accessed 28.10.2009 2pm).
Second life, like other Information and communication technology (ICT) sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Wikipedia, is an example of collective intelligence and the Global Village. Collective intelligence is a “term used by Levy (1997) and de Kerckhove (1998) to refer to the capacity of networked ICTs to exponentially enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions enabled by communications networks that can generate new knowledge, and the greatly enhanced capacity to codify, store, and retrieve such knowledge through collective access to network databases.” (Flew, T 2008).Alternatively a simple explanation given by Thomas W. Malone “Groups of individuals acting collectively in ways that seem intelligent”. These examples operate under the banner of collective intelligence which I understand as millions of individuals around the world, amateurs and professional contributing to the collected information within social networks and/or Wiki.
The concept of the Global village introduced by McLuhan (1964) which refers to a boundless electronic communication village, again supported by Boorstin(1978), stating nations will be bound into a new form of community can strongly be again supported in a modern context by social mediums such as Facebook or Second Life. Not only do these mediums of collective intelligence transcend country borders in allowing communication by individuals all around the world simultaneously but with the introduction of new convergent technologies such as the I Phone and its applications, these networks break the boundaries of when, where and how this collective intelligence can be shared.
There are a lot of positives to be gained from the presence of collective intelligence and the Global village. One of these ironically enough is the process called Blogging. Blogging, essentially is the impression of peoples thoughts online, adding their amateur or professional views to the collective intelligence of the network society. This form of collective intelligence within the music industry has often been a point of concern as users rip music and place it in blogs to be uploaded for free or place their music for free, cutting out big corporations. Whilst this is positive and negative for some there exists a notably negative relationship between the Global Village and Collective Intelligence.
The Global Village has been argued to represent a modernist western colonial conception which aims at erasing cultural differences and national boundaries. (Zembylas, M & Vrasidas C 2005) Embracing the Global village is for poorer nations essential otherwise they run they risk of isolation and exclusion from progress. Collective intelligence represents one aspect of the mass force of progress, which is arguably the power of the crowd creating progress internationally. In that sense there may lie a negative to some when regarding the global village and collective intelligence. Whilst these negatives possibilities may exist and it is inevitable that social networks and collective intelligence channels exist, there must be vigilance in allowing difference among the conglomeration of knowledge.
Social networking not only transcends geographical boundaries but those of industries. The music industry is one such industry which is heavily entrenched in the Global Village. Social Networking sites are not only platforms for music e.g. MySpace, But they are also marketing tools to reach the audience of musicians. Amateurs and professionals operate technologically on an even scale, being able to use mediums such as You Tube to broadcast themselves and add to the collective intelligence musically. One example of this recently is the story of Susan Boyle, a 47 year old woman who auditioned on “Britans Got Talent” and within days became an internet sensation through the sharing of her performance over You Tube.
Like most music artists Susan will now have a Facebook, MySpace and Twitter, All social networking sites which span the Global Village and are constant sources of collective intelligence. Although these are the major social networking sites, the world of Second life also allows for individuals to add their knowledge to a social networking medium. In Second Life participants can take up any profession, even be a Deejay in a club where they can use their knowledge of music and play music for other avatars. This is an example of individuals using their information or skills which they possess which then becomes the raw material of economic activity within a social network. (Flew, T 2008).
References
1. Flew, Terry. 2008. New Media an introduction; pg 80-105
2. MICHALINOS ZEMBYLAS & CHARALAMBOS VRASIDAS. 2005. “Globalization, information and communication technologies, and the prospect of a ‘global village’: promises of inclusion or electronic colonization?” VOL. 37, NO. 1, 65–83
3. Susan Boyle Audition, www.youtube.com. (accessed 28.10.2009 4:38pm)
4. Collaboration & Collective Intelligence, http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/467
(Accessed 28.10.2009 2pm).
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Let Music Tell Your Story
He was born on August 29 1958 in Chicago Indiana, this blog will be one of hundreds of thousands of attempts by end users to gracefully tribute his glistening glove and iconic moonwalk. His story has been echoed, copy pasted, forwarded and e-mailed across all media around the world. The titanic Google perceived a system failure, such was the brutal bombardment of information hungry mourners hoping Michael Jackson was not dead.
The question remains however for many musicians like Michael, Elvis, or more applicably Tupac Shakur, how can they be dead when their story still continues? Their music is still released and their memory still very much alive in the world. Like many artists before them and still to come, their story will be told and retold through digital media, across many mediums and their franchise legacy will continue to procure revenue. There are very simple and rational reasons for this, which stems from the creative minds of our world. One way to explain this may be transmedia story telling.
Traditionally transmedia story telling encompassed the reincarnation of marvel super hero’s or the flicks of sci-fi thrillers such as star wars, another take is to look at the lives of the creative’s among us, the transmedia stories of some of our great creative musical roots. This view must also be valid because the creative industries encompass far more than that. The creative industries encompass;
“Those activities which have their origins in individual creativity, skill and talent and which have the potential for wealth and job creation through the generation and exploitation of intellectual property”
It must then be clear that the music industry is of that calibre, evidence of this exists in;
”The Copyright industries accounted for 7.75% of US GDP” (2002)
Music is a part of this percentage. Its importance lies in its creation of jobs and creators and observers in the music industry which builds upon the transmedia story telling of artists and their worlds. Michael Jackson being the most current example of this phenomenon.
Michael Jackson’s death began what can only be foretold as the further continuation of one artist’s transmedia story. From the constant observations of the world via music, video, documentary and “Jackson wiki’s” , to the memorabilia in blogs and release of a new song mentioned in recent articles in Sydney Morning Herald and other publications globally. Additionally Michaels story continues now in a movie screening around the world showing his last dream, the trailer appearing on you tube and other mediums such his Michael Jackson website. What the camera misses others will add, building the story allowing the public an insight into the life and story of a legend.
Like other greats such as Elvis, there will be more media created about the life and times of Michael, allowing for further generated content, borrowing information from other authors, family and friends. Constantly there are examples of the knowledge community adding their own interpretations of Michaels story, his dance moves or just what they think of him, all part of the user generated media content. Other music artists still living also embrace the techno culture to build their empires and tell their stories. Musicians like Miley Cyrus or as younger generations would call her ”Hannah Montana” . Her interactive transmedia story is one where you can watch her cartoons, movies and television shows, you can play her games and be Hannah herself or dance to her DVD’s. This cross transmedia story adding to the convoluted double life of a young musician, comedian and actress, whose appeal has become increasingly intergenerational and whose story’s are retold across mediums through user generated content.
Another sector of the music industry closely related to that of music artists is the story of the events themselves. The shows and performances, what was once just pure marketing has now become a story for the consumer to observe and immerse themselves in. One example of this is the event Sensation White. Sensation not only releases information about the musical world that will be experienced by those who attend, but it does so with a story, that is told through advertisement, then retold through DVD, twitter, you tube, magazines and documentaries. Below is the most recent story of the Wicked Wonderland that enthralled the entertained in 2009.
This video is a great example of transmedia story telling as it shows the nature of the event through a story similar to what can be seen in movie trailers. The future can only hold exciting things for the growth of transmedia story telling!
References
1. Flew, Terry (2009) New Media an Introduction – 3rd Edition
2. Jenkins (2007) Transmedia Storytelling. Retrieved From:
http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/03/transmedia_storytelling_101.html (20/10/2009)
3. Wikipedia. Retrieved From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson
(22/10/2009)
4. Sydney Morning Herald, Retrieved from: www.smh.com.au (21/10/2009)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
