Major Argument #4 - DRAFT.

To share my digital media production, I had originally wanted to create a post on my photography page on Facebook. My photography page would have been the ideal setting because I already have over 500 followers and it would have reached a lot of people who are interested in photography, especially my photography (which I use in my production.) Having my production within my Facebook site would have been perfect, but when I went to type a “note,” however, I learned that I could only attach one picture to a note, and my production had several pictures, and relies on each of those pictures for a very functional purpose. So clearly, that wasn’t going to work.

I needed a place to house my digital media production that could hold several photos with a post, so I decided that creating a blog and posting my production as a blog post would be a fitting location.

First and foremost, I had been contemplating creating a blog for my photography for quite some time (hyperlink), but just hadn’t gotten around to it. So I decided this production would be a great starting point for me to use as the beginning of a new photography blog. It serves the purpose of introducing myself and my business to the blogging sphere by sharing my ethical beliefs on the use of photography editing programs. This can set a context for the viewers to view all my photos that I’ll post on the blog as time goes along and that context will help station me as a reliable, moral photographer who clients can trust. For logical reasons, my production serves a purpose on my blog and therefor makes the blog a fitting location.

Aside from my logistical reasons, my blog is a fitting location for other reasons as well. A blog can be considered a form of Web 2.0 because of its interactive nature. People can comment on my post, share my blog, be linked or directed to other websites, and ultimately “be in the flow” of the information my blog creates. The article, “Streams of Content, LimitedAddition: The Flow of Information through Social Media,” says, “The goal is not to be a passive consumer of information or to simply tune in when the time is right, but rather to live in a world where information is everywhere. To be peripherally aware of information as it flows by, grabbing it at the right moment when it is most relevant and valuable, entertaining or insightful. Living with, in, and around information.”  

For many functions on my blog, a gmail account is needed, (since Blogger is owned by Google.) My blog I created to host my production/my photography is linked to my Michigan Tech email, so any viewer can navigate from my photography blog to my blog for Digital Media class with ease. If a viewer were to find his way to my Digital Media blog, he would find insights of mine that helped create my digital media production, and would have an even further context as to how to read my production, and blog as a whole. Blogger’sTerms of Service states that, “You may need a Google account to use some of our services.” A person wouldn’t need an account to view my blog, but an account is necessary to comment on a post. Having an account gives a level of credibility to the person making the comment, because anyone can use that account to see what else that person has commented on other things.

Bloggers who read my blog will have the opportunity to interact with my website, and through their comments, can be considered editors of my blog, in the same regard that I can be considered its author. I am not creating information for the audience to just take at my word. I am, through my blog and digital media production, merely posting something that should spark discussion and/or thought, and the comments along with my production (and not the production alone) are what make my website dynamic and participatory. My blog may be a creation that I made, a “do-it-yourself” concept, but it cannot be considered a “complete” or “whole” blog unless I have audience interaction of some kind. After all, if I’m not reaching anybody through my blog, I might as well not have a blog at all. Because as Jenkins said in his article on Participatory Culture, “Do It Yourself” rarely means “Do It Alone.”

Resources so far:

Why Participatory Culture isn’t Web 2.0
Streams of Content…
Blogger’s Terms of Service
(I still need two more…)

Response to Gaming Systems

My family received our first gaming system ever three years ago for Christmas. It was a PlayStation 2. Yes. A PS2. In 2009. We were a little out of the loop. And in those three years we've owned that PS2, my whole family (my younger sister, my parents and I, combined) have probably turned the machine on forty times. If I'm being generous. So needless to say, I don't have too much of a back-history with the concept  of video-gaming.  But before we owned our PS2, I spent a great deal of time at my cousin's house, and my cousin owned every gaming system ever made to date, and nearly every game and expansion pack to go along with those systems. When I was there, I loved to waste my time creating outfits and houses for my Sims characters (I couldn't care about the characters lives, I just liked designing.) And my Zoo Tycoon amusement parks were always the most architectural and creative I could make them given the allotted budget (which was always unlimited ;)  My favorite computer game was (and still is) Diner Dash and its related spin offs. And every year for Christmas, my grandma's gift to the grandkids was a years subscription to the Disney themed role playing computer game, ToonTown. (I was a duck named Daisy and I had leveled  up to a level 130 and had defeated all the Cogs!) And, when I get the chance, I still love to play Animal Crossing on my sister's Nintendo DS.

So, clearly, my favorite games (or aspect of games) have always been the open-ended, non-stressful and non-combative games (well, except for beating those Cogs...)  for me to 1) express a need to create/invent and to 2) ultimately be myself/explore the virtual worlds/ create my digital identity!

I had never thought of gaming as a new way of teaching creativity to children, but upon reading the articles, it totally makes perfect sense, and I've noticed it play out perfectly in my life, in retrospect. 

I can't say much for the combative games, but the other kinds are an absolutely wonderful way to slowly/secretly implant a free-thinking, problem-solving, creative and expressive mind into children, all while they think they're "wasting time." 

HTML5 vs Apps

So I know literally nothing about HTML5 (or HTML at all, really) but I saw this article on Business Insider about HTML vs Apps, the future creation of those platforms, and which will be more successful, while browsing the web and recognized the concepts from class yesterday, so hopefully by next week, I'll be able to read the article and understand it!

Response to Web 2.0

Wow, it's been a long time since I've blogged!

Today's articles were all pretty interesting (I especially liked "Streams of Content, Limited Attention: The Flow of Information through Social Media" and "Why Participatory Culture Is Not Web 2.0: Some Basic Distinctions.") and they seemed to wrap up what we've been talking about all semester into one concept (which is fitting, as the semester comes to a close.) Here are my notes I took while reading:

The way we view/receive news and information is switching from a model of attention to a model of distribution. Now, instead of being fed little bits of information that we were assumed to pay attention to, because there was no alternative, we have the ability to access virtually any information about any subject at any time, and it is up to us what we can pay attention to/what we ignore. Also, with this vast stockpile of information, the readers are invited and encouraged to add to the information/discussion, share the information and ultimately attract new viewers.

Within this "model of distribution" are four concepts that look at why certain people take in the information they do:
1. Democratization - how is content distributed among all viewers? (people are attracted to things in their language, therefor Chinese written e-documents will eventually be the most viewed - theoretically.)
2. Stimulation - attention to educational/informational info isn't always as attractive as "pointless", fun, mindless information. (Note: Can be addictive and harmful to a person's well-being if not allotted for in moderation. A balance is needed.)
3. Homophily- people naturally want to connect with people similar to them. This can be great for the furthering of knowledge on topics among people with similar interests. This can become dangerous when used in a bigoted, prejudiced way of segregation on the web. It can be easy to ignore the facts/opinions we don't want to hear and the fact that the web allows for both opinions to be voiced and yet ignored can enforce social divides and leave little room for open-minded discussion
4. Power - access alone is power. The view holds the power to command attention to himself, influence other's opinions, and to traffic information. We also give power to companies/people when we give our attention to them (marking them as worthy)

Within this Web 2.0 model of information distribution, the viewer is invited to take part in the making and sharing process of information. As quoted in Why Participatory Culture Is Not Web 2.0..., 

“The latest evolution of the Internet, the so-called Web 2.0, has blurred the line between producers and consumers of content and has shifted attention from access to information toward access to other people. New kinds of online resources– such as social networking sites, blogs, wikis, and virtual communities– have allowed people with common interests to meet, share ideas, and collaborate in innovative ways. Indeed, the Web 2.0 is creating a new kind of participatory medium that is ideal for supporting multiple modes of learning.”