Are any of you discussing ideas about the future of journalism? This is pretty important at the moment especially with the scandals in the UK with the News of The World and Murdoch. However there is also an ongoing discussion about the worth of social networking and online journalism. Here's an interesting article about this
http://m.thenextweb.com/thenextweb/#!/entry/225438
July 29, 2011
May 18, 2011
Film makers: New ways to distribute films
Investigate the following link to see how Australian filmmakers are really changing the conventional ideas of how to distribute films. You can go to this link for the copy and view the video below
Australian filmmakers using BitTorrent
Many thanks to Sonya Walters at Southland Girls for the link!!!
Australian filmmakers using BitTorrent
Many thanks to Sonya Walters at Southland Girls for the link!!!
November 13, 2010
New Media and Talent
In a previous post, I talked about lip-sync star Keenan Cahill and questioned attitudes to copyright and how these are changing in our online world.
It seems Keenan has hit the big-time! over 30 million views on his YouTube channel and now he is starring alongside one of the biggest artists in the world right now - 50 Cent. But Keenan isn't starring in 50 cent's video - 50 Cent is in Keenan's video!!!
So it begs the question. What does talent mean? Is your talent judged by the size of your audience - think Susan Boyle... How does someone with Keenan's 'talent' get 50 Cent (whose agents and marketing team spend undoubtedly a fortune on creating the perfect look) to come and perform alongside him - using only an iPod and a webcam in the teenager's bedroom - not props, no staging, very little choreography if any...
Where does this leave us as an audience?! Where does it leave the music industry? Do we still know how to recognise 'talent' or do we now appreciate fame over talent (ie. Paris Hilton)
It seems Keenan has hit the big-time! over 30 million views on his YouTube channel and now he is starring alongside one of the biggest artists in the world right now - 50 Cent. But Keenan isn't starring in 50 cent's video - 50 Cent is in Keenan's video!!!
So it begs the question. What does talent mean? Is your talent judged by the size of your audience - think Susan Boyle... How does someone with Keenan's 'talent' get 50 Cent (whose agents and marketing team spend undoubtedly a fortune on creating the perfect look) to come and perform alongside him - using only an iPod and a webcam in the teenager's bedroom - not props, no staging, very little choreography if any...
Where does this leave us as an audience?! Where does it leave the music industry? Do we still know how to recognise 'talent' or do we now appreciate fame over talent (ie. Paris Hilton)
October 1, 2010
Journalism in the Age of Data
This is a fascinating documentary that explores the information landscape we now exist within and what that means for the future...
What key message do you take from this video? What does it mean for you? How does it fit within your current thinking about the future of Media???
Journalism in the Age of Data from Geoff McGhee on Vimeo.
What key message do you take from this video? What does it mean for you? How does it fit within your current thinking about the future of Media???
September 23, 2010
Do 3-D Movies Have A Future?
Because NCEA Media Studies Scholarship is very much about future gazing--understanding and speculating about significant shifts and trends in the production/distribution/consumption of the media--it is perfectly acceptable to question the inevitably of such changes. Three-dimensional (3-D) film, for the past 2-3 years, has been touted as the salvation of mainstream (Hollywood) film but, more recently, some doubts have started creeping in, in respect of placing so much faith in technology (not 'new' technology in respect that it is a revival of a similar attempt to rescue film from the doldrums, in the face of the spread of television in American homes in the 1950s).
There is American film critic Roger Ebert's broadside "Why Avatar is bad for the movies" as the cover story of Newsweek (May 10, 2010), where he opens with the following, "3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood's current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. Fior some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $[US]5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standards 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for." (35)
More recently, the US business source Bloomberg reports ('Hollywood Presses 3-D even if profits aren't jumping off screen' www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15) that expected profits from 3-D films post-Avatar haven't really been forthcoming. and '2012 may see a smaller number as studios...become more selective'. The surcharge for 3-D films has helped cover added production costs but "attendance [in the USA?] has fallen 1.6 percent this year even as the 3-D surcharge has boosted revenue'.
So, does this suggest that 3-D film is not going to be the salvation the US film industry has been hoping for? Or only a partial solution? How longer will patrons be willing to pay extra for admission, if the quality of films decline? Is "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" the best we can hope for in 3-D releases?
For a savage attack on 3-D film, I recommend a recent piece (September 21 2010) in the Sydney Morning Herald by Dean D'Angelo, http://smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/
Geoff Lealand, Screen & Media Studies, University of Waikato
There is American film critic Roger Ebert's broadside "Why Avatar is bad for the movies" as the cover story of Newsweek (May 10, 2010), where he opens with the following, "3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood's current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. Fior some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $[US]5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standards 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for." (35)
More recently, the US business source Bloomberg reports ('Hollywood Presses 3-D even if profits aren't jumping off screen' www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15) that expected profits from 3-D films post-Avatar haven't really been forthcoming. and '2012 may see a smaller number as studios...become more selective'. The surcharge for 3-D films has helped cover added production costs but "attendance [in the USA?] has fallen 1.6 percent this year even as the 3-D surcharge has boosted revenue'.
So, does this suggest that 3-D film is not going to be the salvation the US film industry has been hoping for? Or only a partial solution? How longer will patrons be willing to pay extra for admission, if the quality of films decline? Is "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" the best we can hope for in 3-D releases?
For a savage attack on 3-D film, I recommend a recent piece (September 21 2010) in the Sydney Morning Herald by Dean D'Angelo, http://smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/
Geoff Lealand, Screen & Media Studies, University of Waikato
Copyright - it's all changing
As Media students you need to have an understanding about the way copyright law is shifting and changing... Watch this video and see what you think - is pretty awesome - it's only 5 mins.
So what do you think? Is copyright law really any different today than it was say 20 years ago? Is copyright law still relevant? How do you feel about using other people's media? How do you feel about other people using your media? Is it ok for big companies to borrow from amateurs? Because most people think it is ok for things to happen the other way ie. students 'borrowing' an artist's music to make a music video or to add a sample of a track to their short film or documentary...
What do you think about 'creating a culture of opportunity' as is talked about in this video?
So what do you think? Is copyright law really any different today than it was say 20 years ago? Is copyright law still relevant? How do you feel about using other people's media? How do you feel about other people using your media? Is it ok for big companies to borrow from amateurs? Because most people think it is ok for things to happen the other way ie. students 'borrowing' an artist's music to make a music video or to add a sample of a track to their short film or documentary...
What do you think about 'creating a culture of opportunity' as is talked about in this video?
September 20, 2010
Some pretty neat applications of new media - on old media
We have amazing power in the ability to digitise our old content and restore it so it can be accessed forever.
Trove is an Australian website to help people access documents, files, images from the depths of the web.
They make available archives of newspapers and images. But the best part is, you can interact with them. So the users of the website are adding to the old information. For example, people are able to help in the translation from scanned text to digital text of old newspapers - which means the content can then be searched and easily found. So editors and contributors do so usually because they are interested in and have a personal connection with the information they have accessed. For example, you might find your great-grandparents' wedding notice or an article documenting an event your family were involved in - so you add your comments to it and help with the translation. You are adding to the old information in a format that will be there for generations to come.
Trove is an Australian website to help people access documents, files, images from the depths of the web.
They make available archives of newspapers and images. But the best part is, you can interact with them. So the users of the website are adding to the old information. For example, people are able to help in the translation from scanned text to digital text of old newspapers - which means the content can then be searched and easily found. So editors and contributors do so usually because they are interested in and have a personal connection with the information they have accessed. For example, you might find your great-grandparents' wedding notice or an article documenting an event your family were involved in - so you add your comments to it and help with the translation. You are adding to the old information in a format that will be there for generations to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)