:)

Blogging and Online Journalism: New Media, New Challenges, New Ethics

2005-11-07T21:09:00.000-05:00

> The Institute for Applied and Professional Ethics at Ohio University
> and the E. W. Scripps School of Journalism announce "Blogging and
> Online Journalism."
>
> On April 7 & 8, 2006, BOJ will bring together a small group of successful, highly motivated
> students with some of the leading figures in journalism and media
> ethics for an intimate, in-depth two-day exploration of one of the
> most interesting and dynamic areas in applied ethics today. After a
> daily keynote address on a topic of general interest, participants
> will break up into workgroups. These workshops will feature
> presentations by invited scholars and by student participants, with
> discussion and critique of the presentations.
>
> Presentations and workshop summaries will be published on the
> Institute website.
>
> Participation is limited to 25. Students interested in participating
> should send contact information and a brief paper on one of the
> workshop topics to ethics@ohio.edu by January 20, 2006. Participants
> will be selected on the basis of the paper they submit. Please visit
> the "STUDENT CONFERENCE" section of ohio.edu/ethics for submission
> requirements.
>
> Travel grants (travel, room, and board) are available for a limited
> number of participants. Students interested in applying for travel
> support should indicate this in their application.
>
> Keynote speakers:
>
> Dan Gillmore (author of "We, the Media")
> Clifford Christians (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champlain)
>
> Workshop topics and leaders:
>
> Friday, April 7
> Martin Kuhn (U North Carolina): Blogging Ethics
> Fernanda Viegas (MIT MediaLab): Privacy and Accountability in Blogging
> Jan Boyles (U West Virginia): Rhetoric of Political Bloggers
> Sandeep Junnarker (Columbia University): Blogging investigative
> reporting: The Videoblog
>
> Saturday, April 8th
> Mark Deuze (Indiana University): Typology of Online Journalism
> Bob Benz (Scripps Company): Reality Constraints of Online Journalism
> Bernhard Debatin (Ohio University): Online Journalism Ethics
>
> -------------------------
> Kathleen Evans-Romaine
> Assistant Director
> Ohio U. Inst. for Applied and Professional Ethics www.ohiou.edu/ethics
> office: 740 593 9802
> cell: 740 590 2410

New Journal

2005-11-06T20:25:00.000-05:00

Thought I would share this with everyone, especially Heath who cannot seem to get away from the artifact idea! ;)

CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Artifact - a new journal from Routledge

Artifact is a new international, peer-reviewed academic journal
treating the impact of computerization on design.

VISION

The computer has had a profound impact on the look, feel, and
function of our everyday world. As a tool, the computer has
become indispensable for the design professional, profoundly
changing the design process. As a design material, the computer
is extremely versatile, enabling intelligent objects and processes.
As a medium, the computer transforms our understanding and stores
our experiences. The combined impact of these forces is changing
the relations between humans and our technology in unprecedented
ways.

Artifact does not draw an artificial line of demarcation between
the virtual and the physical. It strives to illuminate the problems
and possibilities in their interaction. The journal does not frame
digital design as a design discipline such as industrial design or
graphic communication. The unique role of the computer as tool,
material, and medium, makes digital design an integrated element
of almost any design project today, with designers in all fields
and disciplines using digital design in some way.

Artifact assumes an open position. The journal strives to promote
transdisciplinary design research. It will not create or maintain
disciplinary boundaries. Rather, Artifact will encourage cross-
fertilization, interconnections, and crossbreeding among different
scientific disciplines, the design industry, and the arts.

PUBLICATION

The journal appears in both a print version and a digital version.
The journal is published using a 'Web first' concept. Each issue
is first published on the web. The year's issues are gathered
together into a full paper volume published at the end of the year.
In some cases, web technology will mean that the web version
supports special interactive features and links that can only
appear in the print volume as illustrations and references.

SUBMISSION

We welcome contributions which seek to understand and reflect the
different aspects and impacts of virtuality within the field of
design from theoretical or applied perspectives. Artifact brings
contributions in the form of academic articles, book reviews,
design case post mortems, and design company profiles.

To point to possible directions, we have selected themes for the
first four issues of Artifact:

- Volume 1, issue 1: What is an artifact?

- Volume 1, issue 2: Soft artifacts. Tracing 'soft movements'
in several creative domains, notably architecture and
digital film.

- Volume 1, issue 3: The third place? The ontological status
of objects and events in computer games.

- Volume 1, issue 4: Digital design processes. What impact
has digital technology had on the design process?

The themes are not meant to be exhaustive. We hope they will
trigger ideas and encourage submissions from a range of
disciplines.

Deadline for the first issue of Artifact is 18 November. Articles
will be published 1 March 2006. However, contributions addressing
the theme of the first issue may be published on-line at a later
date and appear in the print volume.

Please send submissions and queries by e-mail to Ida Engholm at

or to Charlie Breindahl at

.

Articles should be sent as attachments in Microsoft Word .doc format
or as PDF files. Please send articles with a cover letter containing
full author information. Articles should be prepared for double-
blind review using anonymous format and full references in APA
style. In addition, we welcome suggestions for design case post
mortems, book reviews and designer profiles.

Heath's "Porn" Site

2005-11-03T19:37:00.000-05:00

http://myweb.usf.edu/~hhooper/

Smell these words

2005-10-20T15:41:00.000-04:00

"Simply put, as media lose their material specificity, the body takes on a more prominent function as a selective processor of information." (22)

Of course, nothing seems "simply put" in Hansen's discussion of what constitutes truly "new" media. From what I gather, Hansen seems to be arguing that our bodies are crucial to the new media experience because they help fill in the gaps. Because the medium is not tangible like a piece of paper or a canvas on the wall, new media calls on the body "to furnish the potential for action within the 'space-time' of information." (23)

OK, I'm confused again. It seems that Hansen struggles with the idea of a digital medium. He finds the digital medium "flexible" because it can produce several representations of the same data (visualizers in music playing software, such as iTunes and Winamp, come to mind here). This is tricky because it means we can experience the art not only with the senses the author intended for us to use (in the musician's case, the ear), but with other senses as well. In the case of visualizations, the eyes experience the music (Hansen calls this "synesthesia").

"Hey Daisy! Did you see that new Franz Ferdinand song? It's so great! I've been looking at it all day!"

In this way, digital art (he includes video), doesn't have its own "apparatus," and "requires bodily activity to produce any experience whatsoever." (24) My question is this: What form of art, digital or otherwise, doesn't require bodily activity to formulate experience? I mean, I guess I'd be really intrigued watching a boxing match with the boxers digitally removed from the video (so intrigued, I searched the Net for 30 minutes trying to locate the thing), and I guess my mind would be forced to fill in the gaps, but doesn't my mind work in the same way when I stand in a gallery and look at Picasso's "Nude Woman"?

All I know is my mind does great when interpreting various media, new and old alike. When it tries to interpret Hansen, however, it melts.

Flicker Films

2005-10-20T12:35:00.000-04:00

If you weren't familiar with the "flicker films" as discussed in Hansen, you can check a few of them out here, as well as learn a quick history of the practice.

English 'must reflect technology'

2005-10-20T11:14:00.000-04:00

We've got another report on our side! While I am a proponent of teaching writing to students with and without an emphasis on technology--whatever meets their needs and gets them to think critically about what they read and experience--it looks like the UK schools are acknowledging that "schools should take advantage of the range of texts now available to teach the language, including online." Full BBCNews article is here.

That might be obvious to some of us who rely heavily on technology as students and teachers, but it's always good to have the big name reports behind you. Hawisher and Selfe's work has been advocating technological literacy in the US for years now but this looks like a national curriculum change in the UK. And it's a curriculum that describes its aims as to give "'substantial weight to personal, social and emotional education,' and value knowledge which falls outside traditional subject boundaries." Can we say party hearty time for the narrative? ;)

What I found interesting, especially with Ryan and me being in a course in the History of Rhetoric, is that "the report also said English needed to take account of the higher profile of the oral language in society. Speaking and listening skills are vital at work and should no longer be given second place." I sure as hell know that I didn't receive much training in speaking, so I would have loved this, although I kind of prefer winging it in an extemporaneous setting rather than giving a formal presentation.

Anyway I thought it was a good news piece to share on the blog because it brings us back to a pragmatic discussion. All of the readings we've done have emphasized the theories of new media and [a la Zuboff’s Smart Machine], how the computer “has now become a universal media machine—a tool used not only for production, but also for storage and distribution” (Manovich 4). This BBC article is evidence of the education system paying attention and reacting to this “media machine,” so I am looking forward to more of those types of discussions tonight!

Brain Juice -- The Power of Mediation

2005-10-13T17:28:00.000-04:00

"The kind of interactivity allowed by new media is such that it takes us further and further away from our bodies, while telling our brains that the digital objects that we interact with are the same as analog objects. At what point do we leave the analog bodies behind for digital ones?"

I know what you mean, Heath. To a certain extent, I think I experience this personally all the time. I wind up getting consumed in whatever mediating device I am using (computer, car, mp3, television), and suddenly it becomes "the thing." Four hours later, I look at the clock, realize I haven't eaten, or realize it's 4 in the morning. I get this feeling of "What just happened?"

I think we are mediated by something most of the time, be it by lense of your eyeglasses, a web browser or the windshield of car. I think today, we have internalized so many of our technologies that we don't see them as technology anymore. We are more highly mediated than we have ever been as a result.

And I admit, sometimes it feels great to be "unmediated". A game of flag football, a walk on the beach. But if I had to choose bewteen more mediation or less, I think I'd choose the former.

My brain needs juice to keep me happy, and my body sure as hell won't supply that juice on its own.

And then I read something else.

2005-10-13T16:39:00.000-04:00

So, now, Manovich seems to be confirming many of the things that Hansen was saying. Sure, the death of the artifact, the reality of representation, etc. etc.

However, what seems to be emerging, (and this is rightously creepy) is the death of the mediator, rather than the medium. What Manovich's analysis proposes, I think, is that in a post-symbolic world, mediation will not be necessary. But it is this mediation that creates human subjects, right? So what we're really talking about here is the (edit: potential) death of the human subject?

The kind of interactivity allowed by new media is such that it takes us further and further away from our bodies, while telling our brains that the digital objects that we interact with are the same as analog objects. At what point do we leave the analog bodies behind for digital ones?

Ahh, I don't know. It all sounds a bit too William Gibson to me. Still, it's kinda scary.

Why does it matter?

2005-10-13T16:15:00.000-04:00

So it's all become clear to me. Well, sort of. While I was reading Hansen, I was thinking about how hard it is for me to read for long periods of time on the screen. I looked at the introduction and saw that it was 18 pages long, so I figured that printing it would not be a problem. Copying and pasting the piece of text wouldn't be a problem either. I am, after all, seeing pages on the screen. Hansen argues that the artifact is becoming less and less relevant. He's saying that the .pdf's we are reading for class that I am printing on real pages and trying to copy and paste onto this blog have become the artifact. Except here's the problem: while we're all looking at these .pdf's as actual (virtual) pages, it's taking a lifetime for my .pdf to print out because the computer is reading the .pdf as an image and sending it to the printer in that format. My copying and pasting is not happening because the .pdf is an image and not a piece of text. It really doesn't matter whether or not we "see" these new artifacts because the computer is not processing them that way.

And another thing

2005-10-13T14:22:00.000-04:00

Rebecca Blood's brain works better than mine. I want to go back and edit posts as new ideas come to me, 'cause this way it's just going to be a jumble.

First, Hansen uses big words that confuse me. Second, I wish I had discovered this earlier. Sorry that my understanding's subject to evolution as I read.

Anyway, so I was thinking about what I was thinking about before, and that tablet PC (Which, I was told this weekend, is NOT the future. I think they were jealous.) really jumbles things up with the ability to write on pages. Now, from what I can tell, you're not really writing *on* the digital page-photograph, but instead on top of the page in a program that attaches itself to the page-thing. That's just really messing with me.

But how does the embodiment of a digital image differ from the embodiment of analog image? It goes through one more step of mediation, yes, but does this change the actual mechanism of embodiment? Am I really missing something here? Probably.

Help me out. Sometimes this sounds like McLuhan on steroids, that the medium is the only thing and even its message is fuzzy, and other times it sounds like as long as we think of an image as something (i.e. a book page) then that's what is.

Now, wait a minute. Maybe that makes sense. So we think of a digital object as a thing and interact with it as such, while the medium has a subtle effect on who we are as human subjects. The medium effects us while we look the other way, processing the (insignificant?) images.

And voila! Everybody's right. Cog. Psych and Philosophy skip happily down the lane with one another.

Wow. I think I just completly mischaracterized Hanson to suit my own needs.

Links from the weekend

2005-10-13T14:18:00.000-04:00

Here are two links from I guy I met this weekend that I thought were nifty. One, you've probably already heard of:

www.narratives.org

The other is what one of the guys from the above site is doing.

www.roanoke.com/multimedia/crooked/interactive.html

So, yeah, about this death of media stuff

2005-10-13T13:53:00.000-04:00

Hi everybody. Sorry I've not been able to post more. Much, much to say about this weekend, but I guesss that'll be more approoriate for class.

Anyway, I'm sitting here reading some of the pieces that have been posted, and I can'[t get over the fact that we're reading copies of actual books in a digital form. Were we to print them, we'd be printing out not copies of actual pages, but instead digital photographs of book pages.

This strikes me as freakishly odd for some reason. Of course, this kind of thing is about to blow up, what with digital libraries and whatnot. Also, with the ability to search .pdf's, these digital copies become far more convienient that hard copies.

But I can't get over the idea that something's being lost in the transition. This would be the introduction of the impurity of perception, if I'm reading all this right.

Ok, so, if a tree fall in the forest, it makes a sound. The sound waves are created, etc. etc. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but what Bergson's saying is that the sound only takes on the meaning of "tree falling" if we hear it and assign it that meaning. However, in doing so, we lose out on what the actual sound itself embodies, that being the unmediated moment of the creation of the actual sound. Or the unmediated moment of the tree falling. Or something. I think my brain just melted.

Back to the digital book page. So, we've got the 010011010 version of the page, which is not an actual copy of the page, but instead a photograph of the page, and a digital one at that. So, like, a representation of a representation and on and on and on. Does this mean that the digital copies takes on the properties of a photograph, with all that that entails, or that it remains a page? Would Bergson say that we percieve it as a page, when instead we should be looking at it as a photograph? Or a string of code?

So what does turning something into a .pdf do to it, and does it matter?

What do you guys think?

Second Life

2005-09-29T17:39:00.000-04:00

I'm regretting letting my reading go to the last minute, as there have been some really interesting things posted here in the last few days. I've been bogged down in Classical Greece lately.

Anyway, looks like someone beat me to the punch with that online virtual community thing. Oh well. I signed up. I'm going to try it out and then report back to the group. It's free, apparently.

My problem with cyborgs

2005-09-29T14:47:00.000-04:00

I know I'm about to get slaughtered on this post, but i really can't see the creation of "cyborgs" as this great shift toward equality. From what I understand in the Haraway piece, cyborgs can help us break the tyranny of Western dichotomies, right? I disagree. I can't see how we're ever going to break free from the constraints of the linguistic structure that sets up and allows for the dichotomies. Identities are shifting, sure, but their shifting from one thing to another. Hybrids simply take old things and sew them together.

Think about the T-1000 in The Terminator 2. He had the potential to change into anything, but could actually only shift into something he had *touched.* I think that's very telling.

I'm starting to think of major structural/identity shifts as something akin to Stephen Jay Gould's concept of evolution. I know I'm dumbing it down, but from what I understand, Gould thinks that a whole bunch of change occurs all at once due to radical environmental stress, out of which some modifications stick and move forward.

I think the same thing happens to our cultural structure. A radical event happens, such as the invention of the printing press, or the Internet, which sets the stage for change. So far, so good, and I doubt the left would disagree with me so much. However, I seriously doubt they'd agree with this: Whatever change happens occurs in spite of our best efforts, and is quite possibly accidental.

Sure, the printing press allowed for people to more easily disseminate ideas and increased literacy, thus setting the stage for the Enlightenment. But I think we only understand the mechanism in hindsight. I think it just kind of happened. As McLuhan would say, the medium changed things, not the message. I'm not entirely sure how much control we have over what "cyberculture" will do to us, and if we're thinking we're in control, we may do ourselves harm.

The thing about cyberculture that really bothers me (as you can see in previous posts) is that we're essentially at the mercy of programmers. Those who know, understand, and can manipulate the code are the ones in control. Computer code is the new Latin (or French, depending on your epoch.) And there, probably accidentally, is where I think the next major structural shift will come from. It's probably already happening, but we won't know the results for the next fifty years or so.

Where does this leave us? I have no idea. But I think, if I want to stay true to the stuff I just typed, maybe I should go back and start studying Pong.

See y'all in class.

NPR pieces

2005-09-28T22:39:00.002-04:00

I just listened to the NPR things. I was reminded of something Ryan said last week, that we only have room in our brain for around 30 close people. Once our 'noggin starts getting crowded, we start kicking things out, I guess. Apparently, our brain isn't the limitless supercomputer we thought it was.

I find it interesting that we choose acting in a virtual world over something important to survival. Don't we experience pain so we know when something bad is happening to our bodies? I wonder what makes the brain short-circuit the survival mechanism to give over processing power to something pleasurable?

I also wonder how this fits in to the "only depressed people overuse the internet" idea. People stay in a virtuall world to avoid the pain of the real world? OK, that's overly simplistic (and trite) but still, there seems to be something there.

Finally, is anyone out there bother by the fact that in a virtual world we need not really fear a potentially benevelont God, but instead fear the all-to-human programmers?

BTW - Second Life: http://www.apple.com/games/articles/2005/07/secondlife/

Second Life, Part Deux

2005-09-28T22:05:00.000-04:00

Funny that you mention Second Life. I noticed that the other day when I was trolling through the apple site and thought the same thing. It's a free community now, and somehow, there is an exchange rate for currency earned in the game. I'm not entirely sure how it works, other than that the programmer is a god within an environment of many gods.

Somebody other than me should check this thing out. From what I understand, it's free to download as well as play. Sadly, I cannot run it on my year-old computer. What is this world coming to?

Games as medicine

2005-09-28T17:53:00.000-04:00

Guys:

I'm just getting ready to go to class, so I wanted to post this really quickly. I just listened to this article on NPR about using video games for pain management in children's wards in hospitals. One line that I thought was fascinating is when they present the idea that interactivity greatly reduces the study subject's ability to tolerate pain. Fascinating, really.

Here's the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4865321

Second Life

2005-09-28T12:34:00.000-04:00

I got this from Rocketboom. Remember what Ryan was talking about last week, how it would be cool to have an online house you can invite people to? Second Life does just that. I haven't gotten a chance to play because it costs money, but basically you can create business in this world, make friends, live in your community. It's like the sims but you're playing with real people. Here's the link to the Web site http://secondlife.com/

For information about it go to http://www.idealworldmovie.com/

Reporters Without Borders on Blogging. This is really neat!

2005-09-23T00:31:00.000-04:00

A friend of mine sent this link to me from Reporters Without Borders. Supposedly, it has helped dissenters in China get their messages out.

Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-Dissindents

Something else

2005-09-22T17:03:00.000-04:00

Has anyone ever heard of Machinima? I remember reading about it a few months ago. It's where you take a game, such as Unreal Tournament of The Sims, and use it to create animated movies. Check it out @machinima.com, it might be fodder for discussion as well as a springboard for critique.

What happens when game narratives are translated into other kinds of narrative? With Tomb Raider, could always see Lara Croft onscreen, so in the translation, there are certain visual techniques that could be used to connect the game and the film. However, what about something like Doom? There is a film of this coming out. Does there necessarily have to be first-person shots in the film?

I'm sure there will be, but what I want to know is this: Does there have to be these first-person, POV shots for the film to be satisfying for those who have played the game?

Also, regarding Ms. Pacman: Anyone remember the cartoon for the game? Or the Pac-Man Cereal? If kids are eating the ghost/marshmallows and sugar-pop dots, does that make them Pac-Man? What if they eat the pac-man marshmallow? Does that make them ghosts?

Finally, what about the Pac-Man game where people actually became the Pac-Man, eating virtual dots on a real world overlay by walking through them? Again, specifics are fuzzy, but I think some kind of VR glasses were used.

Stuff I think about before class.

Anyone else get the impression that nobody really knows what's going on in the game world?

Using games to report the news

2005-09-22T16:53:00.000-04:00

After reading Frasca's Videogames of the Oppressed, I started looking all over the Web for news sites that used games to report certain news events. The closest I came was with sites that created great non-linear stories that allowed the user to pick and choose how he wanted to experience the story.

Frasca argues that videogames are not trivial, but rather, they can be educational. However, he says, not all narratives should be turned into games. The story of Anne Frank, for example, would be a terrible game since the users ability to play the game well would be a determining factor in the life or death of Frank. But the non-linear approach where the user decides where he wants to take the story and how he wants it to develop will ultimately create a more engaged and educated news consumer.

Here are a few examples I found:

Washingtonpost.com
"Eyes on the War" is the story of 24 journalists who photographed the American invasion of Iraq. The narrative comprises photos with voiceover by the photojournalist. The user can pick who he wants to view in a little menu on the right. This story is not as flexible as most, but the user still has the chance to pick and choose which photojournalist's story he wants to hear and see.
Eyes on the War

The New York Times

"Asia's Deadly Waves" is a non-linear, interactive story that dealt with the December 2004 tsunami. The story opens with a map of Asia. As you click on different locations, a narrative about population and what happened there appears along with an option to view a slideshow. Also, at the top, there is a menu listing different countries with photos from each one.
Asia's Deadly Waves

PBS

"From Brooklyn to Pristina" is so cool! The story takes the surfer from Murfreesbro, Tennessee, where a gun is LEGALLY purchased, to Kosovo, where that same weapon is used in guerrilla warefare. The story also takes the form of a world map, and user clicks different destinations on the map to see how the gun gets from the U.S. to Kosovo. Text, video and photos are used to tell this story. From Brooklyn to Pristina

Zimmerman and Game Theory

2005-09-22T15:57:00.000-04:00

Eric Zimmerman's Narrative, Interactivity, Play and Games: Four Naughty Concepts in Need of Discipline frustrated me at first. I was reading along, largely agreeing with his notion that the four terms that comprise his title are ill-defined in relation to game theory. So I'm reading along, enjoying myself, when Zimmerman says this:

"What kind of story is it? It’s a narrative about life and death, about consumption and power. It’s a narrative about strategic pursuit through a constrained space, about dramatic reversals of fortune where the hunter becomes the hunted. It’s a narrative about relationships, in which every character on the screen, every munchable dot and empty corridor, are meaningful parts of a larger system. It’s a narrative that always has the same elements, yet unfolds differently each time it is experienced. And it’s also a kind of journey, where the player and protagonist are mapped onto each other in complicated and subtle ways. This is a narrative in which procedures, relationships, and complex systems dynamically signify. It is the kind of narrative which only a game could tell."

Surely, he must be talking about the latest bottom-up, MMORPG? In fact, Zimmerman was describing Ms. Pacman. At first, I was befuddled ("It’s a narrative about strategic pursuit through a constrained space, about dramatic reversals of fortune where the hunter becomes the hunted." C'mon! It's Pacman!), but, thankfully, I decided to keep reading. What Zimmerman is calling for in his article is not a discussion on whether games are narratives, but a discussion on HOW games are narratives. This distinction may seem subtle, but the definition of narrative is inclusive enough that we can now focus on how games can create new types of narratives that aren't possible in what Zimmerman calls "linear" media (novels, movies, TV).

This leaves room for meaningful discussion on just what type of narrative a game like The Sims employs. People create bottom-up structures and new narratives emerge. Couple that with the online communities that develop around these types of games, where people upload their sim-worlds for others to play God with, and what you have is narrative written by humans that is perhaps more complex than any other narrative conceived before it.

games and ludology

2005-09-22T15:49:00.000-04:00

If you know anything about me, you know that I don’t play games. Perhaps it was my early start in ballet school when I was 6 that led me to never take part in organized sports or have the time at home after school to play video games. I vaguely remember playing Atari with my friends Rose and Adrianna, but Pac-Man, Kaboom!, and Space Invaders seem so straightforward and innocent compared to The Sims or any of the other games discussed in First Person. Maybe I don’t like rules, although ballet and folk dancing have their own techniques to master, but I’m sure that might be the reason I also liked the Ludology chapter. The intro to this section simply states that these researchers “want to work toward an understanding of new media text on its own terms rather than as a reflection of the already understood.” They want their own discipline to emerge and why shouldn’t it? Isn’t that shiny newness what we like about technology in the first place? And if games are the new entertainment, and cyberdramas the new novels, why shouldn’t we create new theories rather than rely upon others? Of course, that might be me being lazy, antitheoretical, and ahistorical, but because I don’t play games, I don’t know what narratives they might spin or what agency, immersion, or transformation that can occur when sitting on a couch. I don’t mean that to sound as snooty as it does and while I understand remediation as much as the next person, I really like the distinctions Murkku Eskelinen’s makes among the following:
A sequence of events enacted constitutes a drama, a sequence of events taking place a performance, a sequence of events recounted a narrative, and perhaps a sequence of events produced by manipulating equipment and following formal rules constitutes a game (37, emphasis mine).

I could problematize these distinctions, though, and ask can we not consider the act of writing a “game” with its own equipment and formal rules, but I am at work and need to ponder on this a bit more before class. See you soon!

Something I thought you folks might be interested in.

2005-09-19T22:04:00.000-04:00

Facade, the interactive one-act play that Michael Mateas and Andrew Stern built, is available at www.interactivestory.net. Sadly, it is not yet available for Mac. However, I've seen a version of it up and running, and, while the idea holds promise, the reality falls far short of what I think he's trying to do.

It seems to do exactly what he warns against. The interface is awkward, due to the constraints of the keyboard and mouse. The story-arcs, upon replay, become repetitive. The whole thing feels very forced, and the AI engine simply can't keep up with the ambiguity of everyday language. I know that he addresses the difficulty in the text, but that doesn't change the fact that his program suffers from the very problems that he outlines.

Also, I'm unable to get the Myth/Structure thread that ran through last week's readings out of my head. I'm not so sure I follow Mateas' argument. These structures that he complains about seem to be the very thing that we like about games. If we really wanted open-ended ambiguity, if we preferred that over structures, then why play games? Or read books, or watch films?

Insofar as agency is concerned, do we really want to be in total control? I don't think so. I think we like to trick ourselves into thinking we're all-powerful psuedo-gods, but we do so knowing that, ultimately, we're not really responsible for our actions. Our ability to act is really already pre-determined by the programmers, and I believe that this back-of-our-mind knowledge of a lack of true agency may be part of a game's appeal.

Also, I think something very similar happens in the cinema, but that's just me. It's been a long while since I visited Aristotle, so if I'm misreading anything, please let me know.

News and Narrative

2005-09-15T17:58:00.000-04:00

I found the "Myth, Chronicle and Story" piece interesting in that I can relate my own experiences as a journalist to this theory, and, in turn, perhaps elucidate it a bit.
The basic concept here is that news stories are homogenized along the same line as several very basic narrative forms. And it's not just news stories, of course, it's novels and movies and plays and other forms of storytelling-based entertainment as well.
With journalism, the implications are different, however, because there is an expectation that a transmission of facts will result from reading a news story. With these narrative forms in place, I have experienced a syndrome I bet most reporters can identify with: fishing for quotes.
This is a situation where, say, you arrive at the scene of an accident or a crime, and you wish to talk to the victim. In some instances, the victim does not, during the course of the interview, speak as a victim SHOULD speak. Perhaps they are not sorrowful or angry. As a reporter, this means trouble from a narrative perspective, because not including that element ruins the story to a certain extent.
"Fishing for quotes" also has a pesky little brother I would like to call "Quoting out of context." Here, a reporter has gone fishing but has not caught anything. Instead of relaying the intent of the speaker (which usually is clear to the reporter), the reporter will isolate the portion of the speech which suits the narrative structure most effectively.
And that is why most people hate the media. But, you see, we can't help it. Cinderella stories, tragedies, corruption and shocking accidents are too ingrained to be ignored. Plus, if news is a "mythological narrative," as stated by Bird and Dardenne, that is consumed not for the purpose of ascertaining facts but for the ritualistic purpose of enjoying stories, what obligations do journalists really have?
How can we be truthful and tell stories at the same time?

late blogger

2005-09-15T17:40:00.000-04:00

OK i had bookmarked the wrong link for our course site and kept wondering where everyone's posts were. Oops!

I will add more later as I took a ton of notes but a crazy work week has kept me from typing them up, but here's a lil blurb for now. And i have to say that, like Ryan, I've had kairos on the brain.

Having taken a (Creative) Nonfiction course last Spring, I could not help but think of that experience when reading a few of these works on autobiography. In that class we were assigned various prompts and did not necessarily have to write about our own lives, but the idea that Bruner states near the end of his essay couldn’t summarize my time in that class better. He writes, “I persist in thinking that autobiography is an extension of fiction, rather than the reverse, that the shape of life comes first from imagination rather than from experience” (55). This emphasis on imagination also supports the points made in Bird and Dardenne’s work on the narrative qualities of the news. While journalists may struggle to maintain his/her code of ethics when trying to write a story that still uses their imagination in a way to attract readers, a struggle nowhere better portrayed than in the film Shattered Glass, this essay’s focus on the cultural and social factors that influence the writer’s available framework was most interesting to me, especially since I have spent the last few weeks relying upon print/online sources for coverage of Hurricane Katrina rather than televised reports. Who and what has been the focus of various television networks and the stories that have been repeated more than others prove Bird and Dardenne's point that "news stories, like myths, do not 'tell it like it is,' but rather, 'tell it like it means" (71). Of course, having had friends send me first hand accounts of their evacuation stories and tales of their returns to the city to save pets also offers me quite a different picture than what the media tends to focus on, and that is where the concept of citizen journalism--what I take B&D to call for in the "media reshaping" they mention on 82--may come in, but more on that later.

Heath's thoughts.

2005-09-15T16:55:00.000-04:00

So, since this is a blog, I’m going to assume that the posts will be rather informal. Should this not be the case, please let me know and I’ll tidy things up a bit.

Moving on. Regarding the use of myth in the construct of identity, I kept thinking about my Friendster profile. It is, technically, autobiography. It’s me writing about me. Yet what the profile says about me is far different from the text that I wrote.

First, it says that I’m the kind of person who doesn’t mind spilling my likes and dislikes all over the Internet. Next, it says that I’m reflexively sarcastic, someone who takes very seriously the need to appear that I’m not taking things too seriously. It also says I like Sesame Street, though not overtly.

That’s not me. That’s who I want to be. A “possible self” if you will. But then again the possible self that I’m imagining myself being when I’m writing this isn’t nearly as narcissistic as the “now” self that’s actually doing the writing. At least that’s what I tell myself.

And I’m still not sure about the manipulation of myth as described in the Zapatista piece. I’m not sure if Sub-commander Marcos is really manipulating the myth in some kind of genius post-modern magic show. I have to wonder if the myths are instead manipulating us. Perhaps now we’ve got a new myth -- the postmodern myth – that’s just another institutional archetype playing with us while we think we’re playing with it.

As far as Rocketboom goes, I think the very structure of the show perpetuates myth far more than their actions. The Anchor behind a desk as authority figure, the remote correspondents, it all plays into pre-established archetypes. I think the power of myth resides in its unobtrusiveness, in our inability to see it on first glance.

Rocketboom, I think, would be more effective if it really played on its structure, using an archetype to subvert the assumptions associated with the archetype. I think the Situationists and the Culture Jammers are on to something in this respect, mythbusting from within.

In any case, these are my thoughts.

(Ed. Note. Sweet mother of pearl. I see that Ryan just posted a behemoth of a commentary that blows my little musings out of the water. Hmm. I’ll have to dig through it and post more later. Also, I don't know how to link stuff yet, so you're going to just have to look up the Situationists and Culture Jamming on your own until I can ask one of you. My Friendster identity shall simply remain my own.)

How Old Theory Informs New Ideas

2005-09-15T16:20:00.000-04:00

It seems to me that two of the readings from this week, though they originate from different fields, can be tied together. I find one particular piece from the beginning of "The Presentation of Self" quite relevant to "Adolescents' Identity Experiments on the Internet", because even though Goffman was addressing physical communications, the application of his theories to the virtual world are almost seamless.

"Sometimes the individual will act in a thoroughly calculating manner, expressing himself in a given way solely in order to give the kind of impression to others that is likely to evoke from them a specific response he is concerned to obtain." (Goffman 6)

This point seems to translate well into online communities, if we are to lend merit to the results of Valkenburg et al., who conclude that online identity experimentation runs parallel to adolescent cognitive theory. Individuals that express themselves in "thoroughly calculating" manners may very well be exhibiting the ingratiating, intimidating and self-promoting behaviors Valkenburg et al. describe in their report.
Of course, one needn't look any further than a well-populated discussion forum to see ingratiation, intimidation and self-promotion. When new users join an established discussion forum, they are often referred to as "newbies," and the information they provide is usually subject to greater scrutiny. Members chide and sometimes humiliate new members, much like the new kid in school gets picked on when he first comes into class.

(Click the image below to make it bigger)

Similarly, forums generally contain seasoned members (oldies?) that have earned trust with other members. A common practice to prove a member's trustworthiness is to utilize the search function of a forum and call up previous posts of a given member in an attempt to prove whether he or she is legit. A user, for instance, will read a post by an older member that on the surface may seem unbelievable. The member might be announcing information regarding a band's new album that has not been released publicly yet, for instance. A common response would be for another user to search for this member's previous posts, determine if what this member has said in the past did in fact hold true, and then post the results back to the main thread. Whenever one writes in a discussion forum that archives threads, what they say is on the record forever.

As forum software has evolved, many forums have come up with ways to indicate seniority and/or authority. Beneath user names there might be a field that includes how long the member has been part of the forum, how many posts he or she has, and what kind of "status" he or she has been granted (ie, Newbie, Junior, Senior). Thus, when entering a new community, Goffman's notion that individuals will "intentionally and consciously express (themselves) in a particular way, but chiefly because the tradition of his group or social status require this kind of expression," becomes all the more important. The inclusion of status symbols on the surface level means that new members must put forth a "good face" if they are to be taken seriously, lest they risk being ignored until their post count has reached a certain level. Responses to posts can also be catered to a more specific audience. A new user will likely respond more carefully to a member with 6,000 posts than he or she would respond to a member with 100. Thus, the presentation of self would seem unique in this type of format, and the ability to not just experiment, but also rely on alternate types of discourse would seem important.

Feeding of a discussion from Dr. Noonan's History of Rhetoric, the more and more I think about it, users of large discussion forums mirror the concept of "kairos" as they communicate online. As they navigate different threads and sub-forums, they don different masks, adopt different demeanors and cater to varied audiences. The presentation of self online then encourages users to play with identity, and at the same time gives them the opportunity to recognize the "kairotic" moments we writing instructors can't seem to get them to recognize on paper. Sheesh.

OK, blogs shouldn't be this long. I'll stop now.

Myth, Chronicle and Story on Rocketboom

2005-09-15T14:57:00.000-04:00

The vlog Rocketboom does so much to perpetuate myths about the left through their construction of narrative in their daily newscasts. Bird and Dardenne argue that news “conveys an impression of endlessly repeated drama whose themes are familiar and well-understood.” (73). Just in today’s newscast, anchor Amanda Congdon and producer Andrew Barron furthered the viewpoint that the Bush administration does not care about the victims left by Hurricane Katrina. “…and to top that off, ladies and gentlemen, a never-before-seen apology from George Bush,” Congdon said. The statement precedes her almost daily request to impeach the president. Not only does Congdon further the myth that liberals care about the poor, she also furthers the myth that lefties are nothing more than bleeding hearts who care nothing about the way the law works.

Dardenne and Bird argue that in every news piece there must be a hero and a villain. Going through Rocketboom’s archive there is a pattern: The right beating down the poor, the disadvantaged and the minorities. The way they construct their narrative is not so different from the way Bill O’Reilly, Lou Dobbs and Nancy Grace do. In each case, the newscasters follow a pattern: In Rocketboom’s case, it is the right’s conspiracy to destroy the poor and their total disregard for the law that dictates the way most of their stories are told.

Sources: Bird, E. and Dardenne, R. “Myth, Chronicle and Story: Exploring the Narrative Qualities of News.”

Rocketboom

Turkle article on online identities

2005-09-11T00:46:00.000-04:00

You can click the link below to download the Sherry Turkle article.

Cyberspace and Identity (PDF)

Also, I made all of you admins, per Rita's request.

Online Communities and Identities

2005-09-08T20:40:00.000-04:00

This space will be used to discuss the nature of online identity and community. Discuss.