3.4: In what ways are virtual worlds different from the 'real world'? In what way are they the same?

From what I understand of the Malpas reading it is incorrect to think of the real world virtual worlds as separate entities as virtual worlds are depended upon and based upon the structures of real life.

Malpas states  “There is thus only the one world, and the virtual is a part of it”  (Malpas 2009 p.136)

He notes that real and virtual worlds share similarities such as

o   Communication models

·      Linguistics:  the same languages are used in and out of virtual worlds for people to communicate

·      Reading of content: we attach and associate meaning with objects in the real world and these associations are reflected in the virtual world

o   Relationships

·      The basis of a virtual relationship relies on “honesty trust and respect” (Malpas 2009 p. 138) which are the same things we value in face to face relationships

o   Ethics and Law

·      Virtual life is still answerable to the laws of real life e.g. you still have to sign legal terms of agreement to play a game of join Facebook, these are laws made in the real world

·      The ethical beliefs of people in the real world are reflected in the virtual

The difference between the real world and the virtual are

·      That the virtual world cannot operate without the infrastructure that exists in the real world – the real world can operate without the virtual

·      Virtual worlds can be constrained by “genre-specific frameworks”(Malpas 2009 p. 138) and as such do not offer as much diversity as the real world.

Malpas, J. 2009. On the Non-Autonomy of the Virtual. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 15 (2): 135-139. http://con.sagepub.com (accessed 16/11/11)

3.3: Are you worried about surveillance on or through Facebook? Why? Why not?

“Teens today grow up in a state of constant surveillance where there is no privacy. So they can’t really have an idea of it being lost. The risk of the government or a corporation coming in and looking at their MySpace site is beyond their consideration” (Westlake 2009 p. 32 quoting Berton 2006:A1).

My days of being a teenager are long gone, but I am also not worried about Facebook surveillance. I am aware that Facebook is in many ways a public place and, as with any public place, I understand that I do not have full control over what happens in it. I can only control what I submit to the site.

I could be filmed on CCTV when walking down the street, or be filmed on security cameras when entering a shop. I assume someone, somewhere is keeping a record of my credit card transactions, phone calls, TV shows I watch through pay TV,  tax returns, when I pay my rent, travel overseas, get a parking fine or visit the doctors. Be it they are different government departments and different businesses monitoring all these things that make up daily life but they are still monitored. Facebook to me just feels like an inevitable extension of this. I am not sure if its right, but it is reality.

 I am fine with Facebook collecting my data, as I am with other businesses and government departments doing the same thing, but in the same regard I don't want it used for immoral, unethical or illegal purposes. Facebook surveillance seems to me to be a big issue when put into the context of surveillance in every day life.

Westlake, E. J. 2008. Friend Me if You Facebook Generation Y and Performative Surveillance. Project Muse 52 (4): 21-40. https://auth.lis.curtin.edu.au/cgi-bin/auth-ng/walkin.cgi?url=http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/the_drama_review/v052/52.4.westlake.pdf (accessed 14/11/11).

3.3: Can you really build a community on Facebook or is it all just a bit meaningless? Give me some examples of Facebook communities.

I think now more than ever Facebook offers a huge scope for creating communities.

My personal Facebook account follows along the same line as Westlake discusses when she states  that the "online world of Facebook reflects the local, “on ground” life of its specific users" (Westlake 2008 p. 23). My account is made up of friends I have met face to face, its a little community of people in my life.

Facebook today also allows users to create pages based on common interests and themes such as
"Local Business or  Place", "Company Organization or Institution", "Brand or Product", "Artist, Band or Public Figure", "Entertainment", or "Cause or Community" (Create a Page 2011) so the commonality that people form communities around no longer needs to mimic outside social circles and personal relationships. I imaging this type of pigeonholing of interests makes good business sense - as a way of collecting and packaging data for resale, but it still does allow communities to form while it performs this function.

 Create a Page. 2011. http://www.facebook.com/pages/create.php?ref_id=20531316728 (accessed 15/11/11).

Westlake, E. J. 2008. Friend Me if You Facebook Generation Y and Performative Surveillance. Project Muse 52 (4): 21-40. https://auth.lis.curtin.edu.au/cgi-bin/auth-ng/walkin.cgi?url=http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/the_drama_review/v052/52.4.westlake.pdf (accessed 14/11/11).

3.2 - Notes on Networks or Information

In the ilecture this week Dr Tama Leaver discussed the evolution of blogs, stemming from the creation of blogging software (such as the one I’m using Blogger.com) that made publishing on the net accessible to the average web surfer. In terms of news, Leaver states that the amalgamation of media companies in the past means that the majority news corporations are owned by a small few, and as such the content they publish is viewed by the general public with a sense of skepticism (Leaver 2011). Therefore news blogs have become a popular part of today’s media landscape, as a way for people to seek differing points of view, or to read or add opinions about news items. As discussed in the readings for this week, Blogs too have issues with credibility.

Reading 1: Blogs of War by Melissa Wall gave an overview of the history of Journalism including those who create news-based weblogs. War believes that blogs offer society a new form of Journalism that is forms a symbiotic relationship with traditional media sources. As Wall states “news blogs typically don’t generate original content but rely on other sources for their links as inspiration for commentary”(Wall 2005 p. 156) meaning that blogs rarely uncover new news items but do critique, comment on, offer opinion and new information to news items  from existing sources such as a traditional newspapers. Wall states that while although bloggers are not journalists in the traditional meaning of the word, they do gain credibility by providing links to their sources of information, and through their more personalised, opinionated writing style.

Reading 2: The Mobile Phone and the Public Sphere by Janey Gordon looked at how mobile phones are used to report news and circulate information focusing on the relationship between citizen journalists and the gatekeepers of information. Gordon's research into the reporting of the SARs epidemic in China found that despite the general public having access to the technology to broadcast news to the world , the exchange of information can be controlled by governments via laws and firewalls the prevent information getting through. Her  research into the London bombings found that citizen journalism by victims and witnesses supported the traditional news institutions by operating as an source of information and images that they then used as a part of their coverage (Gordon 2007).

A ted talk on the creation of wikipedia by Jimmy Wales discussed the virtues of collective intelligence through his creation of a free encyclopedia of which content is added to entirely by volunteers. Wales has managed to harness the peoples desire to participate in the way history his told. His talk revealed that there are gatekeepers within wikipedia, volunteers who vote, administrators that hold more wight than voters and himself, the “monarch” who makes the rules. Although Wall states the information on wikipedia is a credible and reliable source he encourages people to test it for Quality assurance.

The task this week was to note the blogs I visit and what attracts me to them, I read a lot of trade blogs but no news blogs so decided instead to take a look at one news items across multiple platforms – blogs owned by newspapers, a weblog about news and wikipedia to see which one I found more credible. The news item I chose was the News of the World Phone Hacking Scandal which I found interesting as it questions the ethical collection of information by large media corporations in order to sell news as a commodity.

The Daily Telegraph:

Searches on this site brought denied access to articles with headlines that looked to have the potential to shine the Murdoch's in a poor light such as Murdoch accused of false blame shifting. The first news article I could actually access was entitled James Murdoch denies knowledge of hacking . While the author does acknowledge that the article was written for a paper that is owned by the same parent company involved in the scandal, to me it is not a credible news source. A news company embroiled in legal scandal over ethical reporting is not the one I turn to for the facts.

 

ABC NEWS:

This is a source I feel I can trust, mainly because it is government owned although I am now a questioning my judgment as isn't the role of journalists to report on the running of government? How does this work when it is owned by government? Anyway in regards to the phone hacking scandal, the ABC uploaded a short clip from a news bulletin called “A quick guide to thephone hackingscandal”. This clip reminds me of educational lectures from university which is perhaps why I trust it and proves Walls theory of credibility through the style in which information is presented. I feel as I have been educated after watching this, not as if I have had the wool pulled over my eyes.

 

LSE Blog:

Well I think Ive just found a blog to read that discusses news topics. LSE is the The London School of Economics and Political Science and I think proves that not all blogs are uneducated one sided drivel. The post entitled Phone-hacking and press reforms: British journalism needs anew sense of ethics but politicians should not be allowed to move the goalposts stands back from the sensationalist headlines and places the phone hacking scandal in the context of politics and law to reveal more sides to the story. I like the wider angle view point and the idea that the information presented is not done so as part of a mud slinging match between news corporation and news corporation. Hyperlinks is what gives this story credibility as I can access the writers (Charlie Beckett) biography, other blogs, books etc which brings as sense of trust due to his willingness to be accountable for the information presented, and not posting anonymously.

 

Wikipedia:

There is a lot of information in the wiki post called News International Phone Hacking Scandal, and to be honest too much to read. I tend to follow up on information presented on Wikipedia, it could be credible but as there is no one person accountable, I find it good to check the facts they present. For this news story alone it is a great resource to find articles about the phone hacking scandal (there are 288 references at this point in time) and it is great having links to all people involved, but in my mind is not credible information on its own.

 

Gordon, J. 2007. The Mobile Phone and the Public Sphere. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 13 (3): 307-319. http://cvg.sagepub.com (accessed 9/11/11).

Leaver, D. T. 2011. Networks of Information: Blogging, citizen Journalism & collective intelligence. Curtin University of Technology.

Wall, M. 2005. Blogs of war: Weblogs as news. Journalism 6 (2): 153 - 172. http://jou.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/content/6/2/153.full.pdf+html (accessed 8/11/11).

online journalism stands to alter dramatically the traditional role of the reporter and editor" (Harper, 2003, p. 272) Do you agree? Why?

I think this question boils down to the trustworthiness of the reporter.  The online environment allows for anyone with an internet connection to become a citizen journalist and report news – be it on a blog, Twitter, Facebook or submitting an article to the Huffington Post. But does having the ability to broadcast news necessarily make you a trustworthy news source?

The Media Alliance Code of Ethics describes the fundamental principles of journalism as the “respect for truth and the publics right to information” and that journalist commit themselves to “honesty, fairness and independence”. Their 12 bullet points on what makes an ethical journalist cover things such as “striving for accuracy”, “giving a fair opportunity for reply”, “attributing a source” and not allowing “personal internet, or any believe, commitment, payment, gift of benefit, to undermine accuracy, fairness or independence”(Media Alliance Code of Ethics  2005). All of which relate to the gathering of information and the telling of a story, not on medium used to present it to a wider audience.

Harper also touches on this in the reading quoting computer consultant Leah Gentry as saying “It took a while for radio and TV journalists to discover how to use the strengths of their particular media to tell stories. On the web, we have the same challenge” (Harper 2003)p 276. Here Gentry doesn’t see role of the journalist as different in the online environment, the underlying fundamentals remain the same.

Therefore overall I would say that I don’t agree with the above statement as it is still the role of reporters (be it journalist or citizen journalist) and editors to gather information and check facts in order to present news to an audience. The online environment doesn’t change this; it just means that there are more places for news to be consumed and more opportunity for ethical journalists and editors to rise to the top as trustworthy sources of information.

Harper, C. 2003. Journalism in a Digital Age. Democracy and new media: 271-280. lms.curtin.edu.au/@@59FE5910C5E0F0C6A9542F9A2E4F0BF9/courses/1/312160-Vice-Chancello-935083018/db/_2975043_1/embedded/Christopher%20Harper.pdf (accessed 7/11/11).

  Media Alliance Code of Ethics. 2005. http://www.alliance.org.au/information-centre/media/view-category (accessed 8/11/11)

Unpack the tenuous and complex tensions between game pirates and games companies.

According to Coleman and Dyer-Witheford Game Pirates can be categorized as follows:

Black Market Centers:

·      Businesses that produce high volumes of copied games for sale and profit. They run factories in “Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p.938) that are professional and sophisticated and mimic the business model of legitimate games producers but within a criminal syndicate.

Warez Groups:

·      Peer to peer file sharing. Warez groups believe that once they have purchased a game that they own it and have a “right to redistribute it” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 938) to other games lovers. They see laws that prevent redistribution as part of a “greedy corporate order” and therefore “gift” games to others within the group without seeking financial reward. The Warez economy works on sharing games and payment comes in the form of “thrill of technological accomplishment” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 938) and a good reputation within the group.

Other:

·      People making the odd copy of a game, sharing them in small groups, businesses copying the odd game to restock their shelves, and games lovers uploading out of production “retro” games online – keeping them in existence which in some ways can be seen to support the gaming industry through the dissemination of gaming culture (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 940).

In the eyes of copyright law all three types of piracy are seen as equal in severity and no distinction is made between them despite their vast differences. As Coleman and Dyer-Witheford point out, the games industry was founded on the back of hackers who shared, improved and redistributed games for the fun of it. This was not an illegal activity until big business commodified games, turning their originating producers into criminals (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 937).

Further tensions arise within the gaming community when the games industry seeks to recoup their financial losses due to piracy by increasing the sales price of their games, effectively punishing their law-abiding customers while black market groups continue to copy. Furthermore the addition of “anti-coping” technology to games software aimed at reducing piracy has, in the past, reduced the quality of the product – resulting in law suits for the gaming industry (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 940) and again punishing the customer base rather than the black market criminal. 

Coleman, S., and N. Dyer-Witheford. 2007. Playing on the digital commons: collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. Media Culture Society 29:  Sage publications. http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/934 (accessed 26/10/11).

2.5 What are commons? In our current consumer/capitalist framework is it possible to even have commons in this context? Is the online environment a digital commons?

Coleman and Dyer-Witheford describe commons as:

“resources that all in a specified community may use, but none can own. They contrast with commodities, exchanged for profit on the basis of privatized possession.” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007)P934

In this context I believe that we do in some ways have commons in our current consumer/capitalist framework although they are more likely to be referred to as public areas and are not for the exclusive use of a “specified community”. We have parks, national parks, roads, and footpaths, crowned land, a water supply, libraries, and public beaches. Although it could be argued that governments own these resources – the governments are voted in by the general public who fund the upkeep of these resources through the paying of taxes. Therefore these resources could be said to be owned by all or none, depending on how you would like to look at it.

There are laws and regulations that govern our public resources or commons: such as speed limits on roads, fire safety guidelines in national parks, summer time water restrictions and laws that stop you staking out your own private little piece of Bondi Beach but they are put in place to preserve the commons, to ensure fairness, and to keep the general public safe when on common ground. Could we have common land without rules and regulations? I would have to say no. Our capitalist society works by one person taking ownership of a resource and trading for the resources of others. We do not live in a society where we only take what we need to survive; we take what we think we can profit most from. Therefore in this day and age our commons are legislated to prevent profit based on “privatized possession”.

Much like the offline world I believe the online environment is largely privatized but there are small chunks of it that could be thought of as commons. The world wide web is one example – this system of hyperlinks and urls enables us to make use of the internet and it is free – anyone can learn and use the code needed to make a website, but putting the website online is once again privatized through ISP’s charging for domain names. If anything Coleman and Dyer-Withefords article shows is that digital commons are not cut and dry. Companies own the intellectual properly rights to code, characters and the visual style of games. They may embrace the public playing on their turf or they may forbid people from using their code or characters to create new content entirely. In either case the companies still have IP rights over the content, and can choose to litigate at any time they see fit which sends mixed messages, blurring the line between commons and profitable privatization.

Coleman, S., and N. Dyer-Witheford. 2007. Playing on the digital commons: collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. Media Culture Society 29:  Sage publications. http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/934 (accessed 26/10/11).

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).

2.3 Activity 2: How can digital media offer disempowered communities control over their own images and stories? Provide some examples if you can.

Srinivasan’s article touches on the possibilities new media can bring to disempowered communities when the technology is appropriated to meet their own “cultural, political and social visions” (Srinivasan 2006 p. 497). He demonstrates the role social media can play in preserving “cultural histories”  through the sharing of “native languages, songs and rituals” (Srinivasan 2006 p. 507) through social media environment. His example Tribal PEACE is described as a bottoms-up project where members of 19 geographically dispersed Native American Reservations control the content submitted to an online space specifically designed for the purpose of teaching and preserving cultural heritage. The content submitted is chosen by a committee made up of reservation members and access to it controlled through a password protected website (Tribal PEACE an Inter-tribal Educational Initiative).

This example shows how new media can empower communities to keep their cultural identity alive through a controlled purpose built learning environment that operates outside that of educational institutions. It does not however mean that these cultural stories and images are in some way protected from use by others. The cultural stories of the Native Americans can still be told through movies – and altered and changed to suit the largest possible audience in a cross-cultural mingling that Jenkins refers to as “corporate hybridity”(Jenkins 2006 p.167). It does not stop stereotypical representations by other forms of media; it does however provide a space where members of disempowered communities can share cultural information without restriction or influence.

 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).

  Tribal PEACE an Inter-tribal Educational Initiative. http://www.tribalpeace.org/ (accessed 17/10/11).

2.2 Notes: Recovering fair use (Collins 2008)

This article looks at how the  blending of “media consumption with media production to create new works” (Collins 2008) and  subsequent internet mediated distribution is challenging current copyright laws in the US. The article focuses on “Fair Use”  - a doctrine that is part of the United States Copyright Act 1976 which allows for a certain amount of flexibility when using copyrighted material if it is deemed “fair”. This doctrine, Collins states, is being “systematically eroded” by harshly enforced copyright legislation -  and is something that Collins would like to see re-instated to ensure our cultural and creative expression is not stifled.

Collins begins by pointing out that copyright and distribution of text have always walked hand in hand - with the originating law being granted in order to allow for the exchange of money in return for access and use of texts. It was created in the interest of society, in the interest of learning and education, and to promote creativity and new thought by exposing people to new ideas through books (Collins 2008). 

The system of using another's work without permission but ensuring the originating source is always quoted or cited is a system still used today in writing, and I tend to wonder why it has not evolved to include other forms of media. Should I choose to write a book and publish a string words written by another author I can do so as long as its referenced. Should I choose to make song, and use a line of melody from another song it is illegal. As an example - take a look at the band Men at Work - sued for using a line of melody from "kookaburra sits in the old gum tree". I wonder if they sang the reference would they have avoided a court case? I also wonder is free speech limited now only to the written word? 

.... Hang on I haven't reference the title of that bird song! I'm probably looking down the barrel of a law suit right now. Here I am ... playing with fire - much like that other, less fortunate Kookaburra....

The article goes on to give two examples of when "fair use" has been successfully used to defend  people in court who have used songs without the copyright owners permission. One  - where a mother posted a video on YouTube of her baby dancing to a song by Prince, and the other where 15 seconds of a John Lennon song was used in a documentary. While both cases were acquitted I tend to wonder if fair use is the way forward - as it is a court appointed process that relies on the everyday person fighting against large media institutions who have greater financial resources, and therefore greater power in the courtroom. Court cases cost money, and the average person may find it easier to take down their content rather than trying to fight for their right to display it. The playing field here is not level, despite the laws created to make it so.

Australian copyright law does not contain a fair use clause but does have “fair dealing” exceptions which allow copyrighted material to be used for “research or study, criticism or review, parody or satire, reporting news, or professional advice by a lawyer, patent attorney or trade marks attorney”(Fair Dealing  2008). Yet even if a work is used for educational purposes it is still up to the courts to decide if the use was fair and it is this that worries me. What constitutes as a fair learning experience? Will work created in an effort to self educate be seen as any more or less fair than works created when attending an established education institution? Is one form of learning more legal than the other?

The idea of fair use and copyright may be a good thing to base my remediation project on as I am not sure that copyright law works in the best interest of the everyday person. If anything it seems copyright has the ability to make criminals out of just about everybody. Kookaburras included.

Collins, S. 2008. Recovering Fair Use. M/C Journal 11 (6). http://lms.curtin.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2fwebapps%2fblackboard%2fexecute%2flauncher%3ftype%3dCourse%26id%3d_43148_1%26url%3d (accessed 28/9/11).

Fair Dealing. 2008. Australian Copyright Council Information Sheet G079v05: 6. http://www.copyright.org.au/find-an-answer/ (accessed 28/9/11).

2.2 Overview

The theme for this weeks topic is

"Don't touch that! Copyright, ownership and institutional control"

The main objectives are:

• To discover the limitations of user-production
• To get a better understanding of copyright and ownership in the new media environment
• To get to grips with the idea of Creative Commons licencing

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).