10/25/16

In the article “Game Theories”, written by Clive Thompson, I find it interesting that once the character Thompson writes about Edward Castronova decides to himself he has no important role in reality, he turned to alternate reality. But then he still found a way to connect the two, even if he didn’t mean to. Castronova found he could do what he planned on doing in the real world (be a successful economist) in the game, EverQuest. In a way, this could reflect how in reality there are an acknowledged set of rules of ‘how things work’ driven permanently into your mind by society. Steps that are set up in order for you to ‘follow the status quo’; for example after graduating high school, you go to college, then you get a good-paying job, then you get married, and then you start a family. This system doesn’t work for everyone, including Castronova, since he didn’t do too well in school and he didn’t really fit in to any group in is reality as he says, “I’ve always been an outsider. I’ve just been floating around outside communities”, however in EverQuest he was one of the best of his field. He didn’t follow the ‘status quo’ but he still succeeded on his own terms.

Another point in this article where society is mentioned is during the change in interest about the video game and others of the medium; “Experimental online worlds had been kicking around for years, but they took a leap forward in 1997, when Ultima Online- a medieval fantasy world similar to EverQuest- launched, and quickly amassed a hundred thousand users. The idea of having a second life online suddenly didn’t seem so geeky, or, at the very least, it seemed a profitable niche; companies like Sony and Microsoft swarmed online”. The shift from video games being ‘geeky’ to ‘profitable’ and popular with “more than fifty active games worldwide, and anywhere from two to three million people playing regularly in the U.S.” shows a predictable, yet only potential, change in society’s opinion about playing video games coming. However there are those who are still dead against people playing video games, more specifically their children. Concerned parents provide a big voice against violent video games and argue that the games will eventually communicate to their children that violence is alright to take a part in reality. My question is, are these concerned parents taking into account all of the adults who have played video games since childhood and are not violent in any way in real life? There are even studies that they could look at, like with Edward Castronova, who while not a ‘rule-abiding’ citizen or fitting into the ‘status quo set up by society, experienced success, and has no record of violence of any kind. I have more questions as well; like are these parents upholding and ‘rule-abiding’ citizens in society? And would they feel so strongly against (violent) video games if they were not?

Game Theories by Clive Thompson

Advertisements

Applied Media Analysis

The Walking Dead is an American horror-drama Television program set in a post-apocalyptic zombie run world. The AMC networked show has been popular ever since it started running in 2010, and in 2012 the season 3 premiere became the most watched basic cable episode ever. The show follows a large amount of characters (some we’ve been following since the very beginning of the show and some are newer), but it varies because the show kills off a lot of characters in order to keep it corresponding with the plot.

The much anticipated seventh season of The Walking Dead premieres on cable TV on October 23rd, 2016. This particular season has been talked about a lot through social media since the sixth season’s final episode in April of 2016, because of a certain critical and evil character being introduced, named Negan. In the last few minutes of the suspenseful season finale, Negan brutally killed off one of the major characters, but the camerawork was careful to make sure that the audience (and even the actors) did not know who was killed. This is behind the reason the suspense for the premiere has slowly been building up for fans, and the fact that the fan base has taken it upon themselves to argue their personal theory of who Negan killed and why- using supposed easter eggs from the finale episode to build their argument.

In “Peak TV and The Problem with Our Addiction to ‘More'”, the article by Steven Hyden that we read for class, he discusses how the media is becoming increasingly accessible to the point that consumers can’t get enough and don’t necessarily care whether or not the things they are consuming is pleasurable. He says, “I’m more interested in how “Peak TV” affects the average viewer. I think it’s turning us into addicts.” I think this really applies to the show The Walking Dead, because of the “addiction to more” argument, which could apply to how cable shows with large enough fan bases can expand to creating their own presence in other (social) media. Like for example, The Walking Dead TV series is ultimately based on a comic book, or graphic novel, written by Robert Kirkman and artist Tony Moore (now replaced by Charlie Adlard). And that is definitely not the extent of TWD‘s media presence. Once TWD really started becoming popular in the media as well as pop culture, AMC’s network decided to start other shows that were similar yet independent. To start, they added a show that airs immediately after TWD, which is called Talking Dead, and is dedicated specifically to discussing the details which just took place in that episode of TWD, in an entertaining way. The network also added an almost equally popular spin-off show called Fear the Walking Dead, with it’s own characters and specifically it’s own separate timeline from the original show. During the live airing of the show there is also ‘live tweeting’ that is encouraged so viewers can be even more involved; The tweets that discuss what is happening during the show are done through the app Twitter, and are occasionally shown through commercial breaks. There’s even multiple video games made specifically to allow the user to ‘be a part of the show’ where they can be essential characters and kill all the zombies they want.

Things like this are only possible because of the huge fan base The Walking Dead has created, or as they go by, Spoil the Dead, and the large amount of fans who are interactive with the show across multiple media. Hyden’s argument about “addicts” has a point, in that the show’s popularity could be other than just the content, but that it could also be because of the huge rate of availability and demand for ‘more’ from consumers. The franchise of The Walking Dead is still increasing because of how much it gets talked about through the media, which is looked at by the network company, thus ‘more’ is provided so more money can be made. The show itself is still airing new seasons, in order to provide ‘more’ to the consumer-base. It’s interesting to think what could be next, since at this point the consumers might not even realize what they really want, just that it’s ‘more’.

 

The Walking Dead

 

 

Project Proposal

I will be working alone to produce a web 2.0 story consisting of a timeline detailing how we made the move from film to “new media” digital cameras, specifically focusing on the film industry. I plan on discussing the differences in the process of how each camera operates (during filming and viewing), and the difference in the end product as well. I will be presenting critic’s views on both as well, positive and negative, ones that prefer film and ones that prefer digital. I also plan on presenting actual facts, and not just opinions, about potential advantages and disadvantages for using both, through articles from websites.

By the time I complete the project, I hope to raise awareness to others of the differences, or advantages and disadvantages, between making a film using film or with digital.

Resources: computer and Internet. I will use Prezi, which will allow me to present my project through text, still pictures, screenshots of cited websites with reinforcing opinions or facts, audio from a mic, and even video.

10/11/16

“Restricting youth to controlled spaces typically results in rebellion and the destruction of trust. Of course, for a parent, letting go and allowing youth to navigate risks is terrifying. Unfortunately, it’s necessary for youth to mature.”

It’s said in the reading how restricting youth from reaching out online is discouraged, yet they very briefly admit that some teenagers are restricted, specifically from using Myspace. While Boyd does establish good positive and negative points about the effect of social media on youth, he doesn’t really touch on the point I’m trying to understand. I’m wondering how big of a difference the effect is on teenagers who constantly use social media, use it and get banned, or have never used it. I’d like to talk about more specific examples for each of these in class.

Q: Restricting youth from using social media. How big of a difference does it make between restricting teenagers who constantly use social media, teenagers who use it and get banned, and teenagers who have never used social media?

http://www.danah.org/papers/AAAS2006.html

Essential Media List

These are 5 specific media texts that I consider essential for myself:

Snapchat:

  • This social media text allows me to communicate with either one person, a select few, or over 100 people with a simple picture. I regularly check the app on my cell phone around 4 times per day, but sometimes more than that. I like how it also has ‘filters’ you can use, even on videos.

Spotify:

  • This is music app is made free to users, however has advertisements constantly interrupting the flow of music, and thus offers a ‘premium’ option which costs money per month. They also offer a ‘student’ option which is really nice and costs much less money per month than the premium option. I listen to a variety of music, depending on my mood, every day through Spotify.

Us Weekly Magazine:

  • I was made a victim of losing my money through an online shoe shopping site during the summer, and while I got most of money back, they tried to make it up to me by giving me a free yearly subscription to a magazine I did not want. So now I get an issue every month from Us Weekly, a gossip magazine that mostly looks at celebrities’ lives and discusses their outfits, with the occasional story on a particular “hot topic” couple (like Kim Kardashian and Kanye West or Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt). While I didn’t want the magazine in the first place I’d be lying if I said I didn’t appreciate getting something in my mailbox every now and then.

Netflix:

  • I am literally always using Netflix; It is open on my computer when I go to sleep and often when I wake up. Since my Freshman year of college (when I actually started using it) it has been my main source of viewing films and TV shows. I really like how huge the variety is and how accessible it is.

Google extensions:

  • The verb “just Google it” has become a casual saying nowadays for finding something out for you, near you or even through your phone for you so you don’t have to spend an excess amount of time trying to find it. This has gotten even easier, for me, by using Google Maps, to find directions to some place, Gmail, my main email other than the school email, finding out the weather, or using “Ok Google” which is like “Siri” on Iphones. It allows me to do things in my life easier  and with one or two simple swift moves with my finger on my phone screen.