Topic 2.4 Notes on play, games and media

In the ilecture Woods stated when speaking about the history of games “TV killed gaming innovation because the companies that produced games … started remaking them with a new image on the box… this hasn’t really changed much” (Woods 2011). While this is true of board games (a quick Google search will find loads of different versions of monopoly including “make your own Opoly” where you can customize the board game to suit your own interests) I am not sure that it applies to video games in the same way.

While the reason for buying the Star Wars version of Monopoly, hopefully is because you are a fan of Star wars – playing the game of monopoly is not something overly representative of the movies themes or storyline. Video games on the other offer a greater flexibility in representing the initial text - be it in graphics, storyline or characters voice and appearance. In fact the media companies that creates the movie also create the game ensuring a harmonious branding across all platforms. For example Sony – a company that makes televisions and electronic equipment is actually a group of companies. One branch of the group is Sony Pictures who make movies and television shows. Another branch of the Sony group make the Sony PlayStation and PlayStation games (Sony Global - Sony Global Headquarters  2011). Therefore when Sony pictures make a blockbuster movie with a lot of graphics and special effects, a game can also be produced at the same time using the same graphic styles and is instantly recognizable to consumers.

Games are popular and in an article about the future of video games Mawer suggests a few reasons why this is the case. His first reason once again, is in the production value – he states that games have “story lines that are gripping, full of suspense, action and adventure which are supported by some stunning visuals, amazing sound effects and a stirring soundtrack to accompany the hero” (Mawer 2011) and his second reason in purely financial “but the movie is over within a few hours while the video game plays for a whopping 50 hours” (Mawer 2011). So the games have all the story line and production value of a movie, but offer better entertainment value by allowing the consumers to extend the time they spend interacting with their favorite media texts.

Professor Thomas De Zengotita’s theories on the effects of media evolution could give further insight into the popularity of games. In an interview about fame and celebrity he speaks about something he calls an act of “fundamental robbery” that has been created by a fame driven media system. The fundamental human need is acknowledgment and he believes that our media society takes this away from the average person stating “the evolution of media of all kinds, in large scale societies (should be seen) as taking the fame or acknowledgement that used to be everybody’s and some how reassigning it to only a few people” (Genier 2011) . With this in mind video games could be seen as way of placating this need to be acknowledged as in the game the player becomes the central focus, their existence within the game is acknowledged and their actions instantly rewarded.

This could explain why adult gamers feel they need to rationalize their game playing to others. Research conducted by Helen Thornham discovered that while many adults play games, many still feel there is a social stigma attached to it and therefore tend to rationalize their game playing as a logical pastime – such as socializing. Those who admitted to playing games regularly and by themselves were often ridiculed, seen as geeky, and their sexual orientation questioned.  Thornham put this reaction down to a cultural issue in the structured adult life that mimics “working lives where every hour has meaning or purpose” (Thornham 2009). Gaming offers a form of escape from the everyday that is seen purely as entertainment, it is therefore unproductive (in the work life sense) resulting in gamers defending their actions through rationalizations.

Finally Jenkins offers further insight into the role of gaming in society. He notes the roles that moral panics have played in the multiple stigmas attached to video gaming – such as violent games producing violent people. He counters this argument by advising that gamers have the ability to distinguish the real from the virtual stating that people “tend to dismiss anything they encounter in fantasy or entertainment that is not consistent with what they believe to be true about the real world”(Jenkins 2006). Unlike Thornton who sees games purely as escapist and fun, Jenkins sees games as a meaningful way to spend time. He sees games as a place for learning about society, a way for people to escape and blow off steam, a way to generate new thought and a way of improving social ties and bonds. All meaningful if not conducive to the production of a commercial goods.

Teenage Paparazzo. 2011. SBS FIlm,  http://www.sbs.com.au/films/movie/10426/Teenage-Paparazzo (accessed 23/10/11).

Jenkins, H. 2006. The War Between Effects and Meaning: Rethinking the Video Game Violence Debate. In Digital generations, ed D. Buckingham. Massachusetts. http://edocs.library.curtin.edu.au/eres_display.cgi?url=dc60263484.pdf (accessed 19/10/11).

 Mawer, K. 2011. Video games - the media of the future. http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/uncategorized/video-games-the-media-of-the-future (accessed 25/10/11).

  Sony Global - Sony Global Headquarters. 2011. http://www.sony.net/ (accessed 25/10/11).

Thornham, H. 2009. Claiming a Stake in the Videogame : What Grown-Ups Say to Rationalize and Normalize Gaming. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies: 445-462. http://con.sagepub.com/content/15/2/141 (accessed 19/10/11).

Woods, S. 2011. Play with Me. In MCCA104-Engaging Media. Perth. Curtin University of Technology.

What social elements are deployed by gamers? What does this tell us about the ways in which games are integrated into everyday lives?

In society it is perfectly acceptable for children to play games to learn that have no real end goal or agenda (Woods 2011). They mimic the actions of adults, playing house or having tea parties and in doing so play out activities they are not allowed to do in real life – such as drink tea and coffee or pour hot drinks.

As Jenkins notes in his article,  online gaming enables adults to play with the restrictions placed upon them in every day life, in turn “encouraging ethical reflection” (Jenkins 2006  p28). He gives the example of Grand theft auto where people can steal cars and wreak havoc on a city if they want to - allowing players to test boundaries and witness the consequences of their actions through a games mediated environment. As an adult it may be socially acceptable to drink hot caffeinated beverages, but it is not socially acceptable to steal a car and rob a shop and this games gives insight to the dangers of a life of crime from perspective of the perpetrator.

Games allow people to play with social elements such as laws, rules, thoughts, opinions, histories and social norms that make-up the society they live in and govern their every day lives.

Jenkins, H. 2006. The War Between Effects and Meaning: Rethinking the Video Game Violence Debate. In Digital generations, ed D. Buckingham. Massachusetts. http://edocs.library.curtin.edu.au/eres_display.cgi?url=dc60263484.pdf (accessed 19/10/11).

Woods, S. 2011. Play with Me. In MCCA104-Engaging Media. Perth. Curtin University of Technology.

2.4 Activity 1: Are online games escapist, serious, or both? Justify your answer.

Jenkins refers to an Salen and Zimmerman's idea of “the magic circle” when speaking about gaming. An idea he describes as letting “go of one set of constraints on our actions because we have bought into another set of constraints – the rules of society give way to the rules of the game” (Jenkins 2006 p.25). Therefore gaming could be seen as a temporary escape from the rules and monotony of every day life.

However, Jenkins also notes that the two worlds are not exclusive; stating “Two players may be fighting to death on screen and growing closer as friends off screen” (Jenkins 2006 p.25). In this scenario the game offers and escape from the everyday while simultaneously re-enforcing and strengthening bonds in real world.

The point Jenkins makes is that escapism has a very real, meaningful and some could say serious role in society. Playing games can create the opportunity learning, reflection and questioning of real world constraints in an interactive way.

Jenkins, H. 2006. The War Between Effects and Meaning: Rethinking the Video Game Violence Debate. In Digital generations, ed D. Buckingham. Massachusetts. http://edocs.library.curtin.edu.au/eres_display.cgi?url=dc60263484.pdf (accessed 19/10/11).

ASSMNT 1 2.3: Audience and Context of Remediation Project

I have been thinking about this weeks readings Pop Cosmopolitanism: Mapping Cultural Flows in an Age of Media Convergence, Fans bloggers and gamers: exploring participatory culture and Indigenous, ethnic and cultural articulations of new media in terms of my remediation project. The TV series Gavin and Stacey was created in the UK for a UK audience so what is it about the show that had drawn me – an Australian, to the show? Who will my remediation project be aimed at? And are my interpretations of the shows themes, when viewed in the Australian context different from the intentions of the original producers?

Why am I drawn to the show?

In the terms of Jenkins – I guess you could say I was originally introduced to the show by a “Grassroots intermediatory” (Jenkins 2006)

 – My husband who was born and raised in Wales (which is where part of the show Gavin and Stacey is set) and now lives in Australia. He not only keeps up to date with the goings of friends and family at home, but also likes to keep up to date with music, TV shows and news. Gavin and Stacey was a hit in Wales and box sets promptly posted over to us upon release in the UK.

One of the themes of the show is based on the idiosyncrasies of different cultures – that being of the English and the Welsh or to be more precise of Barry in South Wales and Essex in England. I can in some ways relate to the humor based on these idiosyncrasies as I compare my own experiences of living in Wales, being married to a Welsh man and becoming part of a Welsh family and as such also recognize the character traits and stereotypes presented. This would then make me part of what Srinivasan describes as an “imagined community” (Srinivasan 2006) made up of not only U.K. viewers who inherently understand the humor, but also of other cultural outsiders who have joined families from these two parts of the world, and so too can relate the humor based on cultural difference.

I initially chose to remediate Nessa’s storyline due to time constraints but after this weeks topic I think it could also be because I understand the character. She is an over exaggerated welsh stereotype that I can recognize more easily than other stereotypes presented in the show such as Smithy from Essex. I have learnt about Smithy’s stereotype through others telling me about it but can see elements of Nessa’s persona in people that I have met or worked with in the past and as such feel I am better equipped to retell her story than other characters in the show. Nessa also in some ways appeals to my sense of “Pop Cosmopolitanism” (Jenkins 2006)

  - My ties to Wales now see me wanting to keep up with the current affairs of the country, and a lot of Nessa’s stories tie into current day events. Nessas stories are littered with UK pop culture references and to piece them together is something like a treasure hunt.

Who will my remediation project be aimed at?

As an understanding of Nessas stores and humor comes from an understanding of UK popular culture and current media events  - my remediation project will be aimed at those who are not up to speed on such things. Using blog to recreate Nessas little black book (a list of all the people Nessa claims to have had a relationship with throughout the show) allows me to link the real life media stories to the stories Nessa tells. In other words when she claims to have slept with John Prescott I can hyperlink his name to real life press articles about John Prescott – linking the story to the pop culture reference.

This media format also works within the current day context of viewing the show. Gavin and Stacey is no longer being produced – so if one was to watch the show today the pop culture references will all be old, and possibly forgotten even by those residing in the UK – they will be old news so to speak. Therefore the little black book will not only inform those who were out of the loop in the first place, but will refresh the memories of those who are watching or re-watching the series again – appealing to my entire “imagined community” (Srinivasan 2006).

Does this change of context change the meaning?

Having never met the writers and producers of the show I cannot say what the original intention of this part of the story line was, but in creating an online hyperlinked little black book I will not be changing it. I will merely be changing the way in which the story is presented. Time itself has changed the context of this storyline, but the recreation of it in an online media form will bring it back closer to its original time, preserving rather than altering the meaning.

 Jenkins, H. 2006. Pop Cosmopolitanism: Mapping Cultural Flows in an Age of Media Convergence, Fans bloggers and gamers: exploring participatory culture: New York University Press.

Srinivasan, R. 2006. Indigenous, ethnic and cultural articulations of new media. International Journal of Cultural Studies 9: 497. http://ics.sagepub.com/content/9/4/497 (accessed 15/10/11).

2.3 Activity 4: What is pop cosmopolitan?

In Pop Cosmopolitanism: Mapping Cultural Flows in an Age of Media Convergence Jenkins makes the distinction between “Locals” and “Pop cosmopolitans” that I found helpful in defining the phrase. He states:

“locals care little about diversity per se but want to hold onto their own traditions. The cosmopolitans recognize that they will not get the diversity they crave “unless other people are allowed to carve out special niches for their cultures and keep them” (Jenkins 2006 quoting Hannerz p.162)

I am not sure I agree that a Pop Cosmopolitan craves media from cultures other than their own because its cool to be different. This could be one extreme but Jenkins also notes the role media institutions play in the generation of “cool” content. He gives the example of Japanese media companies breaking into the American market by targeting their animations to children and running a tight marketing system to expose their audience to other forms of consumables such as comics, movies and merchandise (Jenkins 2006) with great success. Therefore the Americans craving for Japanese animation could be said to have been generated by good target marketing . It could also be said that Japanese animation would no longer be seen as cool and underground by American kids – but as cool and popular, maybe even a little bit mainstream.

Jenkins repeats the idea of access again when he speaks about “Grassroots intermediaries” - another term for people who moved and live in a new country. These people keep links to home,  including  links to their favourite media and as Jenkins states “they play a key role in shaping the reception of those media products” (Jenkins 2006 p.162). In other words your friends or family from other parts of the world introduce you to the media of their country or culture. You like it and seek it out not because its cool to be different but because you enjoyed watching it, and your friends and family enjoy it . It is a sociable experience and finds a common ground between two cultures.

I don’t think Pop Cosmopolitanism happened in vaccume, but is a natural part of life in a multicultural society.

 Jenkins, H. 2006. Pop Cosmopolitanism: Mapping Cultural Flows in an Age of Media Convergence, Fans bloggers and gamers: exploring participatory culture: New York University Press.

2.1 Activity 1: what is a fan? How are fans different to regular viewers/listeners/readers? What types of activities define fans?

In the iLecture Dr Leaver discusses some of Jenkins theories on media audiences. He describes them in three different categories:

Zappers – who basically channel surf

Casuals – people who have a few media texts they like and try to watch or read them when they can

Loyals – people who really connect with their media text of choice and watch or read it religiously, buy all the books and DVDs etc

He states that the Loyals and fans are quite similar but not the same

After reading about fanfiction and vidding I would say that fans go further than people who are loyal to a particular text by creating communities around it. Fans feel a real emotional connection to the characters or people in the text, they form groups to discuss characters and create artworks (such as vids) to express their emotional connection and to connect to other fans. They further the story lines and through fan fiction and want to have input into how the story progresses.

Leaver, D. T.(2011). The Horrible Future of Entertainment Media? MCCA 104: Engaging Media - Lecture 2.1 Retrieved from http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/lectopia.lasso?-MaxRecords=50&-SkipRecords=0&-Op=bw&ut=2908&CallbackID=c9abfe8d9710a2f9e3b4ac53998a2578&usr=15055147

Vidding.(2008). Organization for Transformative Works Retrieved from http://transformativeworks.org/node/579

Fanfiction.(2011). Fanlore Retrieved from http://fanlore.org/wiki/Fanfiction

1.2 Notes: Henry Jenkins on Participatory Culture

This short film features Henry Jenkins who discusses participatory culture, convergence culture and transmedia. For me it really made it easy to see that we are are currently at the centre of a cultural shift - going back to the days of when story telling was pastime for all and not just limited to major media corporations. Here I have outlined the central points Jenkins raises and followed up with an example below.

Key Points about participatory culture:           

• Prior to the 20^th Century we lived in a participatory culture, telling and retelling stories.  The stories or folklore belonged the people or “folk”
• The 20^Th Century saw large companies monopolise folklore, by claiming ownership of the stories, placing them under copyright to prevent the stories being told by others
• 20^th Century media technology allowed for stories to be told to a maximum audience but without involvement from them.
• Limited access to 20^th Century technology meant that only a few large companies could tell stories.
• New forms of media technology such as the internet and mobile phones allow people once again participate in the telling of stories without the inclusion of large media companies.
• New forms of media technology are accessible to the general public and not monopolized by industry
• We are returning to a participatory culture, but on a large scale using media and technology
• Those who are repressed can tell their stories
                                                                                                                              (Jenkins 2009)

Key Points about convergence culture:

• It is where multiple modes of media are used to tell a story including old media (such as reporting for a newspaper) and new media (such as citizen journalism – reporting events on Facebook)
• It is also where groups of people come together to create media content through “collective intelligence” – pooling their information piece together the story
• It is where different media technologies are used to tell a story (e.g. using the internet, TV, comic books, movies to tell the one story)
• It is not limited to large corporation but relies on input from all walks of life
• Obama used convergence culture in his political campaign, advertising his message on all forms of media to reach maximum audience and allowing participation by others by uploading his speeches on YouTube along side mashups, fan videos and protest videos.
• Challenges the validity of copyright law, as people reclaim the principles of folklore by reusing and recontextualising the stories put under copyright by large companies and create new meanings
                                                                                                                             (Jenkins 2009)   
  
  
  
• Example: The Woman to Drive Campaign on Facebook and YouTube
  
  Under Saudi Arabian religious law the woman of Saudi Arabia are banned from driving. Using social media sites such as Facebook and YouTube they are protesting the ban to a global audience (AlJazeeraEnglish 2011) in a way not possible using traditional media sources. This is an example of participatory culture allowing the repressed to tell their stories as they now have access to the technology for recording and distribution. It is also and example of convergence culture - as demonstrated with the below movie the story has now been picked up by traditional news media and has appeared in newspapers, on television and in other online environments (such as this blog). The message of the campaign is spread through different media sources (old and new), subsequently raising awareness of the issue to the largest possible audience.
  
  
  
  
  
   

Favorite Quotes from Jenkins:

“We are definitely in a moment of transition. A moment when an old media system is dying and a new media system is being born” (Jenkins 2009)

“We take control of the media as it enters our lives and that’s the essence of convergence culture” (Jenkins 2009)

AlJazeeraEnglish. 2011. Saudi woman driving for change. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEETb3SOuc4 (accessed 4/10/11).

HDCMediaGroup. 2009. Henry Jenkins. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJaqXVaOaI (accessed 13/9/11)

Pereira, N. 2009. Henry Jenkins on Transmedia. http://cinematech.blogspot.com/2009/05/great-video-w-henry-jenkins-on.html (accessed 13/9/11).

1.1 Notes: Critical information studies for participartory culture (part 2) (Jenkins 2009)

Henry Jenkins blog post discusses digital media and the everyday persons involvement with the creation of content (e.g. news or entertainment etc). His post stems from discussions from the University of Virginia conference regarding issues surrounding digital media that are seen to block a "more participatory society" (Jenkins 2009).

Main main points I have taken from this article are:

•  Fear - the internet like anywhere else has its dangers but these dangers are often amplified through the media and create a sense of fear which can prevent some people from participating in online society. Jenkins states that people need to be educated in the dangers of online communication and  need to be made aware of their "ethical responsibilities" (Jenkins 2009) when participating in digital media. Some wise words when you think about this in the context of cyber-bullying as education could only be helpful for not only children (being told what it is,  why not to do it, and who to tell if its happening to you) but would also be a great help to parents.
  
• The Digital Divide - This was always a term I associated with a lack of access to computers or a lack in computer literacy but as Jenkins points out it also about people feeling entitled to participate in online society. For example I know many young people who ban their computer literate parents from joining social media sites such as Facebook as they do not want to mix the family and social spheres of life together. This for me brings up further issues regarding identity, relationships and  and ideas about privacy which are all skewed slightly in the online environment. Do we all need to present out whole selves to everyone we have ever met just because we are friends in the online environment? Or should we be allowed to present the parts of us that are most relevant to the social situation we are in as we do in real life? (such as a professional demeanor for work colleagues, and more relaxed demeanour around friends)
  
• Reasserting Fair Use - corporations are having a "crisis of copyright" while citizen groups are having a "crisis of fair use" (Jenkins 2009). What this boils down to is that while we may have access to content and the ability to manipulate it, change it and reuse it we do not necessarily have permission from the copyright owners to do so which ultimately ends in litigation. I agree with Jenkins when he states “struggles over intellectual property may be the most important legal battleground determining the future of participatory culture” (Jenkins 2009) as this will determine if ones creativity is a criminal offence should they choose to reference the media influences of their lifetime.

Many other points were covered here too such as the role of collective intelligence in our education system, allowing social media in schools, the role of citizen journalism and its effect on traditional news media industries, segregation of social groups in the online environment, the construct of a global society and online governance and activism. The three points fear, the digital divide and fair use have been the ones I have been most drawn to.

 Jenkins, H. 2009. Critical Information Studies For a Participatory Culture (Part Two). http://www.henryjenkins.org/2009/04/what_went_wrong_with_web_20_cr_1.html (accessed 5/9/11).