The landscape of the workforce has significantly changed since the days of the industrial revolution. With the advent of Web 2.0 came the opportunity for increased involvement in, and working with new media. Gill (2007) stated in a study regarding those who worked in new media that: “People working in new media have an extraordinary passion and enthusiasm for the field.” Eleanor reiterates this in her blog when she stated that it is also a body made of millions of employees who live their lives everyday within New Media.

New media is not limited by geographic location, and is generally less expensive, because many tasks are completed by the same person. However Leong (2011) stated in her week seven lecture that this can lead to potential exploitation, as employers don’t have to follow the same minimum wage laws of the real world. Examples of the exploitation possible when working with new media have arisen in the video game and journalism industry, which have a strong culture of user generated content. Green & Jenkins (2006) claim that in the past, video game producers embraced the sharing culture and had no plans to go after fan fiction sites as long as they didn’t intend to make money out of them. However now companies want to profit from content fans had historically circulated for free. In the journalism industry, debate surrounding whether citizen journalists should be paid for their contributions came to light following the recent sale of the Huffington Post. Its content relied mostly on the contributions of bloggers, and according to an article in The Guardian (2011); the $315 million sale price will be split among shareholders, with “no indication that the unpaid bloggers will benefit from the deal”. These cases underline the implications of working in new media, and substantiate Zittrain’s (2009) notion that we must consider whether is it wise to trust the all players on the internet to act as a collaborative community who instinctively do the right thing.

With this said, new media is still in a developmental stage, it is reasonable to assume that over time the power will shift towards the audience and the workers in new media as user generated content becomes more relevant and viable in its own right.

Gill, R. (2007). Informality is the New Black. In Technobohemians or the new Cybertariat? New Media work in Amsterdam a decade after the web. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures: 24-30 & 38-43.

Green, J & Jenkins, H. (2009). The Moral Economy of Web 2.0 : Audience Research and Convergence Culture. In Holt, J & Perren, A (Eds) Media industries : history, theory and method (pp.213-225). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Leong, S. (2011). KCB206 New Media: Internet, self and beyond: Week 7 [Lecture Notes]. Retrieved from http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_74007_1%26url%3D

Zittrain, J. (2009, November 16). Jonathan Zittrain - Minds for Sale [Video File] Retrieved from http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_74007_1%26url%3D

There has been much discussion about the dangers of turning to the internet for heath matters. The term ‘cyberchondriacs’ has been coined when referring to those who medical information via the internet.

 Some contend that the increasing trend in searching for health information online is leading to an “epidemic of misinformation” (Lewis, 2006). Andrew reflects this view point in his blog when he questions how healthy the flow of information available online really is. Casey expands on the impact of misinformation, citing the ease at which people can misdiagnose based on health information found online. Acording to Eysenbach and Kohler (2003);

“Google reports 150 million searches per day on all regional partner sites combined, which means 6.75 million health related searches per day in Google alone.”

 A serious drawback inherent in online health information is the informality, and lack of integrity of the information. This is based on the assumption that the internet is an unruly, unregulated space marked by a plurality of claims to knowledge and authority (Reed, 2002). This in turn means that there is no “gatekeeper” ensuring that consumers are receiving correct and accurate information.

 However this media panic relies on the assumption that every search made pertaining to health and wellbeing is then taken as gospel, and people are no longer seeking the advice of medical professionals. This is a classic media common sense assumption, and completely disregards the fact that society today has a high level of digital literacy, and is capable of decoding and thinking critically about the media they consume. So while the magnitude and accessibility of health information online should be viewed with caution, it is important to acknowledge that health information online does also have many benefits and shouldn’t be completely disregarded immediately. 

References 

 Eysenbach and Kohler. (2003). How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Retrieved April 10, 2011 from  http://www.bmj.com/content/324/7337/573.abstract

Lewis, T. (2006). Seeking health information on the internet: lifestyle choice or bad attack of cyberchondria? Media, Culture & Society, 28(4): 521-539

Reed, L. (2002).  Governing (Through) the Internet: The Discourse on Pathological Computer Use as Mobilized Knowledge.  European Journal of Cultural Studies (5): 131–53.

For most media audiences, their sense of self, and the social and cultural context in which they live, is dependent on their use of various media technologies. Deuze (2007) reiterates this, stating that “media should not be seen as somehow located outside of lived experience, but rather should be seen as intrinsically part of it. Our life is lived in, rather than with, media – we are living a media life”. The Bell (2006) reading puts this theory into the context of mobile phones, claiming that they are more than just technologies; they are sites of cultural production.

This acceptance of the ‘media life’ opens debate around the issue that our lived reality can not be experienced separate from, or outside of media (Deuze 2011). However this is not a new panic, in 2005 Kimmel predicted that “the future of television will be an environment in which the lines between entertainment and promotion have not just been blurred, but have been almost completely removed”. While television isn’t the only environment effected, he was right in the sense that audiences participation is at its peak in the online world; user generated content, fan fiction and citizen journalism run deep through the veins of mainstream media.

Camille’s attitude towards new media aligns with my own, she believes that new technologies are blurring the boundaries between the producer and the consumer, where the content is produced by the ‘players’ themselves.

Bell, G. (2006) The Age of the Thumb: a Cultural Reading of Mobile Technologies from     Asia. Knowledge, Technology, & Policy, 19 (2), 41-57.

Deuze, M. (2011). Media Life. Media, Culture & Society, 33(1), 137-148.

Deuze, M. (2009). The people formerly known as the Employers. Journalism, 10(3), 315-   318.

Kimmel, A. (2005). Marketing communication: new approaches, technologies, and            styles. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

In January 2001, millions of Filipinos protested evidence being withheld in the trail against their corrupt president. This seems to be a perfectly ordinary way to ensure their opinions were heard; however in this case there was a very distinctive difference, the protest was organized largely via text messages.

“The event marked the first time that social media had helped force out a national leader.” (Shirky, 2011)

 Following the success in the Philippines social media has been used by civilians numerous times to organize protests; the Spain in 2004, and Moldova in 2009 (Shirky, 2001). 

 According to Howell (2011), “During an emergency many people will use Facebook or Twitter to get up-to date information”.  A large majority of this information would probably be available on government websites, however people choose to rely on the information of friends and acquaintances. Social media has also played another crucial role during natural disasters, locating and sharing information on the circumstances of loved ones. Innovative Activity posted a blog after the Chile earthquake, recounting a real life story of a woman who used social networking to find her family.

“Social Media, especially Twitter, turned out to be a really helpful tool in this disaster to create a vital communication channel that not only spread facts but also helped people come together and learn about the situation of loved ones.”

But caution must be exercised, because as Hamelink (2006) stated, the “digital computer creates a virtual reality in which truth and lies, real and unreal, can no longer be distinguished.” A highly publicized instance of such deception was the story of Australian parents who believed their daughter had died in the Japanese tsunami, as the result of an internet hoax (The Australian, 2011). Hamelink (2006, 115) believe that “lies and deceit are important tools in our social and personal communications”, and perhaps to some extent they are, however when it begins to harm others you must really question the motives behind such deceit. Emma discusses another element of online deceit, false identities in online gaming situations.

Hamelink, C.  2006. “The Ethics of the Internet : Can We Cope With Lies and Deceit on The Net?” In Ideologies of the Internet, 115-130. New Jersey: Hampton Press Inc.  

 Mumbrella. 2011. “UWS launches study into social media use during natural disasters.” Accessed March 27, 2011. http://mumbrella.com.au/uws-launches-study-into-social-media-use-during-natural-disasters-42026

Shirky, C. 2011. “The Political Power of Social Media”. Foreign Affairs (90). Accessed March 27, 2011. http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ehost/detail?sid=0c025223-0a41-4f03-998e-9551b1d37359%40sessionmgr14&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=afh&AN=56624549

 The Australian. 2011. “Hoaxers telling parents their children have died in Japan tsunami.” Accessed March 27, 2011. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/9017663/hoaxer-tells-parents-daughter-died/

Steven Levy’s insight that ‘playlist is character’ and that the music we listen says a lot about our personality is not a new notion. People have always judged by on many personal aspects, choice of music being one of them, and the iPod has given a platform for people to broadcast their preferences. However the question Levy poses is; do we really want to broadcast at all?

Based on Levy’s account of the ‘iPod wars’ it would appear that generally speaking, those most willing to share their playlists are those who are confident of the ‘coolness’ of their music. Whether it be filled with small, unknown bands, or an ode to classic hard core rock, or simply songs that were never released to the public and therefore almost impossible to possess, the publicizing of ones playlist is an example of “musical exhibitionism” (Levy 2006).

A trait once reserved for the scensters of the L line, politicians soon discovered the advantages of publishing their playlists. Bush adopted this technique in an attempt to appeal to younger voters.  Levy stated that an eclectic and knowing collection raises your opinion of the collector (Levy 2006), an assumption which sports people, celebrities and politician alike began to rely on.

A person’s playlist can be a very personal thing, handing your iPod to a friend or stranger leaves you wide open for judgment, and after all, people are not only defined by the music they listen to, but their playlist defines how they are perceived by society.

Levy, S. (2006). Identity. In  The perfect thing: how the iPod shuffles commerce, culture and coolness. (pp. 21-41). New York, Simon and Schuster paperbacks.

Madhur Singh’s article commentates on the digital progression Bollywood is undergoing. For many years the industry has been plagued by piracy losing up to 33% of profits due to delayed DVD releases (Singh 2008). The article goes on to outline what measures the industry are taking to counter the piracy losses. Two of the major studios have turned to internet downloads, with great success. In the first attempt of a simultaneous theatre release and internet download option they found that a quarter of their revenue came from internet downloads (Singh 2008). This shows that the entertainment industry is finally discovering a way to give the public the entertainment they crave in a way that suits their highly digital lifestyles.