3.2: What is News?

In her article Blogs of War,  Wall quotes Carey as stating “News is the media’s interpretation of events”, quotes Stephens as stating “news is about a subject of some public interest that is shared with some portion of the public” and MacDougal and Reid as saying news is “timely, it concerns the nearby, it involves the well know and the prominent” (Wall 2005 p.154).

Wall also notes that traditionally news reported to the general public was about primary institutions within society but since its commodifiation – news items have been subjected to an editorial process (Wall 2005 p.155) in order to boost sales figures. Therefore news does fit Stephens definition of being “about a subject of public interest” but could also be said to control the subjects the public are interested in by only reporting on certain news items.

Blogging adds another sector - as it allows people to comment on news stories, to add opinion, to critique reporting or to add more information. Therefore news as it stands today could be seen not only as “the medias interpretation of events” but also includes the public’s interpretation of the information presented.

One thing that can be said is that news is timely. Blogging and other forms of social media allow companies and and the general public alike to report news stories quickly and efficiently. While news today doesn't necessarily concern the nearby (as we are now a more global community thanks to the internet) it does usually involve the well known and prominent  (be it a heiress of a hotel chain or a politician) so maybe MacDougal and Reid sum it up best.

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).

ASSMT 1: 3.1 Notes on News Media

The ilecture this week by Mingnon Hardlow really opened my eyes to the role news media plays in a democracy. Hardlow states that the four estates that make up a democracy are the Judiciary, the Government, the Executive Government and Free Press who plays a watchdog function and keeps the general public informed (Harlow 2011).

With such an important role in society, I started to wonder about the credibility of news sources. It has long been known that magazines pay people for interviews and report gossip and rumor - often referred to as tabloids but does this cross over into the world of news? Especially online news, where anyone with an internet connection can become a reporter, quickly and easily uploading video, photos, sounds and text at any given time.  Who controls it? Who reads it? And does anyone believe it?

The power and control of traditional news sources was discussed by Harper in his article Journalism in the digital age where he notes that “many online publications depend on major brand names as the primary sources of information” (Harper 2003) inferring that while we may be able access news in more places than ever, it is likely that what we are reading online comes from the traditional media sources. This certainly rings true for me. I tend to read the smh online rather than blog posts and if news is ever reported by friend on facebook I will usually go to traditional news sites to validate it or seek further information.

Harper also outlined the power of editors in the news world who act as gatekeepers – determining which stories are newsworthy enough for publish, and therefore controlling the issues that are thought about and discussed by the general public. Prior to the internet there were not many alternative ways to find out about news stories not presented in the press and although online news is still dominated by traditional media there are alternatives. For example twitter allows people to follow multiple new sites, celebrities and friends from all over the world – a news item published in one country can circulate via social media and become public knowledge before publishing by traditional sources as was the case of the Occupy Wall Street protests (Gruen Planet: Episode 6  2011).

Then comes the issue of money. As much as free press is good for a Democracy it is also a business so who pays for online newspapers? Harlow advised that traditionally classified advertising paid for newspapers. Upon flicking through the October 28 edition of the Daily telegraph I found nothing more that 5 pages of classifieds - 3 of which were dedicated to jobs, cars, real estate and obituaries and the other 2 solely decided to "personals" (Classifieds  2011) . Classifieds in newspapers it seems are no longer popular, and with the benefits of online sites such as my career and eBay its not hard to see why,  although there were also sections that mixed journalism with commercial products such as the card guide. 


Harlow also stated that some online news sites are part of larger conglomerates that also own online classified sections with the online newspaper works as branding for their other products (Harlow 2011). This is certainly the case with the new site for The West Australian who belongs to a group of companies owned by 7 west media. 7 west media also own channel 7 and Yahoo 7 (The West Australian  2011)and their products, services and media entertainment area advertised heavily on the site. A look at three other news sites found:

·      Crikey.com uses a pay wall model to make money from their news content. While some stories are published on the site viewers need to subscribe to unlock access to even better ones (so they say) at a cost of $185 per year. Subscribers then get the extra privilege of providing content if they wish. (Subscriber Help  2011).

·      Perth Indi Media wholly operates on citizen journalism but stories added to these site still go through a gatekeeper who monitors them against the sites criteria. This site runs off donations and covers local community issues (About Indymedia Australia  2011).

·      Finally the Huffington Post website is owned by a big corporation AOL and gets its content from anywhere its free – liking to the blog sites of others and combining the days blogs into one new site. This site also involves readers by having them comment and rate stories. This site is huge and has multiple strands not just in news but also entertainment and sport etc. AOL sells adverting on the Huffington post site. (The Huffington Post  2011)

SO the main points to remember this week are that:

·      Online news media raises challenges the profitability of news and new ways to raise revenue are being trialed

·      Online news sites are often another branch traditional news media companies which are trusted by many users

·      Online news sites can target niche markets and source news for free from citizen journalists and bloggers

·      Online news allows Journalists to link their reports to other news reports and source documents

·      Online news allows people to research news reports therefore ethical journalism is important

·      Gatekeepers still exist in the online environment (see gatekeepers blog entry for further info) controlling and monitoring the stories and comments uploaded

 About Indymedia Australia. 2011. http://www.indymedia.org.au/about (accessed 7/11/11).

Classifieds. 2011. The Daily Telegraph, 119 - 124  (accessed 7/11/11)
Gruen Planet: Episode 6. 2011. http://www.abc.net.au/tv/gruenplanet/pages/s3354190.htm (accessed 8/11/11).

Harlow, M. 2011. Inform me! News Media. Week 8. http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/lectopia.lasso?-MaxRecords=50&-SkipRecords=0&-Op=bw&ut=2908&CallbackID=928d2167f0cc56656c84409b4f366e45&usr=15055147 (accessed 8/11/11).

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).

  The Huffington Post. 2011. http://advertising.aol.com/brands/huffington-post (accessed 8/11/11).

  Subscriber Help. 2011. http://www.crikey.com.au/about/subscriber-help/#nuts1 (accessed 8/11/11).

  The West Australian. 2011. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/ (accessed 7/11/11).

ASSMT 1: 2.5 Notes on games, ARGs and digital commons

The topic of Alternate Reality Games (ARGs) was an interesting one this week that I think fits well with my remediation project and essay. Although I have chosen to remediate and write an essay about the sub plot of a television series - the way in which the characters story intertwines with real life scenarios is similar to the way in which ARGs are operate.

Örnebring states: "Alternate Reality Games (ARGs) are a form of internet-based mystery game in which participants are immersed in a fictional world and engage in collective problem-solving" (Örnebring 2007 p. 445).

And they work by:

  "Events and things mentioned in the episodes of the TV series itself will also provide clues. Bit by bit, these clues form a separate narrative set in the fictional world" (Örnebring 2007 p. 446).

In the TV show Gavin and Stacey - Nessa's back story is never fully told and she remains somewhat of a mystery. A series of clues are dropped by Nessa in her stories that reflect upon past conquests involving famous people from the real world. If viewers choose to investigate these clues they will find that these stories not only reference real life people but also real life scenarios that have been reported in the press. Nessa turns out to be someone that has escaped the limelight while being involved in a great deal of scandal.

Therefore the TV show follows a similar line to ARGs in that:

• A mystery is created
• Clues are given
• Clues can be investigated by audiences
• Clues link to real world people and scenarios through press reports

My remediation project sets out to join these clues together through a blog that presents Nessa as if she is a real life person and further the idea that the stories are true. Unlike a game there is no puzzle solving winning at the end, it is merely a site for investigating clues and filling in the back story - a kind of virtual reality blog based on a virtual reality storyline in a TV show.

In this regard my blog could be seen as an example cultural labor  described by Fiske and quoted by  Örnebring as " ‘filling in the syntagmatic gaps in the original narrative’ (Örnebring 2007 p. 451 quoting Fiske, 1992). In other words the blog pieces together a back story that enriches the characters in TV show. Örnebring believes that this type of culture labor supports marketing for television shows (as does other fan created content) - as it stays within the storyline and concept of the show rather than changing it, and disseminates to a wider audience

This same idea was covered in our second reading about Digital Commons - especially in the sections about mods which are fan produced modifications for games. The point was made here too that modders stick to the boundaries of the originating text source as per the following quote:

"most mods are thematically conservative, undertaken by technically accomplished fans who love a particular game and want more of it – more weapons and monstrous opponents for shooters, different campaigns and battles for war games – in variants that don’t stray far from the spirit of the original" (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007).

Both readings link fan culture, virtual reality and media institutions all of which relate to my remediation project. As the blog is aimed at fans and new watchers of the show Gavin and Stacey -  this topic would be good to cover in my essay.

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).

Örnebring, H. 2007. Alternate reality gaming and convergence culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies 10: 445 - 462. Sage Publications. http://ics.sagepub.com/content/10/4/445 (accessed 20/10/11).

Topic 2.5 What is an alternate reality game? Have you played one?

I haven’t played and alternate reality game but Örnebring defines one as an “internet-based

mystery game in which participants are immersed in a fictional world and engage in collective problem-solving” (Örnebring 2007 p.445). The games are created by media companies (usually for marketing purposes) or by fans in order to further explore and interact with their favorite media text.

ARG’s link to particular media texts such as movies, songs, books or TV shows but this link is not always something that is made clear to participants. Örnebring demonstrated this with his example of the ARG created for the movie AI: Artificial Intelligence - called the Beast. This ARG created a buzz surrounding issues covered in the movie yet did not directly reference the movie, its storyline or its characters (Örnebring 2007 p.446). Other ARGs require participants to collect clues from the originating text and use the collective intelligence of the group in order to progress through the game.

Regardless of its form, the purpose if an ARG is to allow the consumer to actively participate in a fictional word that intertwines with reality – participants must suspend belief in order to interact with the game and the media text as if it were a real.

Örnebring, H. 2007. Alternate reality gaming and convergence culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies 10: 445 - 462. Sage Publications. http://ics.sagepub.com/content/10/4/445 (accessed 20/10/11).

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.

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).

ASSMT 1: 2.2 Notes on Laws that strangle creativity (Lessig 2007) and Creative Commons (CC)

Larry Lessig on laws that choke creativity | Video on TED.com

“We can't make our kids passive again, we can only make them pirates . . . is that good?” (Lessig 2007)

 

In this presentation Lessig describes the 20th century as a time where creativity was displaced. Historically our society was based on a "Read Write" culture but in the 20th Century we evolved into a  "Read Only" culture - a culture where we consumed media content but do not participate in the creation of it. (Lessig 2007)

In the 21st century we see this Read Only culture challenged by new media which allows for a return of the Read Write culture or in the terms of Jenkins a "Participatory culture" where we not only consume media but we also create it. We not only "Read" but we also "Write" and we do so by creating user generated content and distributing it through social networking sites such as YouTube. (Lessig 2007)

As Lessig points out, Copyright law blanket covers all unauthorized use of content as criminal and as such dampens the creativity of a generation who creates art from snippets of other peoples content (such as creating vids, mashups or remix). While he acknowledges that copyright law has its place it should be changed to allow for this form of expression and suggests Creative Commons as a pathway towards decriminalization. (Lessig 2007)

In Australia the creator of a work is the copyright owner, (unless there is a signed contractual agreement that states otherwise) - copyright is not something that is applied for, but is something that exists at the time of creation (Ownership of copyright  2006). As such works cannot be copied, reproduced or reused without the creators permission.

There is a Fair Dealings clause that allows people to use snippets of copyrighted material 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) but this is a legal defense that can be used if sued, it is not a legal right to prevent one from being sued (dangerousnerd 2007).

As Collins states in his article – fair use can be manipulated by large companies who use their media presence and financial advantage to send a message to the general public about sampling their products (Collins 2008). They do so by suing samplers who then need to fork out money to defend themselves under the terms of “fair use”. The large sums media companies sue for put fear into samplers – they can either take down content before it goes to court, or face the possibility of loosing great sums of money in the court system.

Creative Commons on the other hand takes the guess work out of using other peoples content as allows the creator of material to stipulate whether or not it is OK for people to copy, sample, re-use or reproduce a work. It succeeds where fair use fails as it clearly communicates the terms of which the works can be used. There are 6 standard licences, which vary in restrictions. The most relaxed licences allow people reuse, alter and distribute works for both private and commercial purposes while the most restrictive allows only for the sharing of a work. All licences stipulate that the originating creator must be acknowledged (About the Licenses). A comprehensive list can be found on the creative commons website.

Overall I believe creative commons to be a good thing but it is a voluntary system that applies only to those who are willing to share. It does not address the issues of media companies hording content or their manipulation of the legal system to prevent creative re-use of it. Therefore participation by media institutions seem unlikely due the the economic benefit they receive from their current business model.

Although the TV show I am going to remediate (Gavin and Stacey) does not fall under creative commons licensing I should be able to avoid infringing copyright due to fair use. Dangerounerd states in their YouTube video “You cant copyright an idea…you can only copyright the form an idea takes”(dangerousnerd 2007) therefore I am free to remediate the storyline. I can also use small snippets of dialog from the show and change their form from spoken word to written text so long as I reference the source (as you would when writing an essay). Overall I am creating the remediation for educational purposes, which falls within the guidelines of the Fair dealing exceptions of Australian copyright law. If Baby Cow productions (owners of Gavin and Stacey) do try to sue me I should have grounds to win  - so long as I can afford the legal fees in the first place!

About the Licenses. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ (accessed 9/10/11).

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).

 dangerousnerd. 2007. A Fair(y) Use Tale. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UycH2HvBRd4 (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

Lessig, L. 2007. Larry Lessig on laws that choke creativity. TED.

Ownership of copyright. 2006. Australian Copyright Council Information Sheet G58. http://www.copyright.org.au/find-an-answer/ (accessed 9/10/11).

2.2 Notes: A fair(y) use tale

“A fair(y) use tale”:  where the rules of copyright are discussed through a mash up of Disney movies and an explanation of copyright issues spoken through their characters. This clever little film made some very clear points such as:

• Copyrighted materials can only be used by copyright owners
• It is illegal to use copyrighted material without permission from the owner
• You can pay for copyright permission (but it can be expensive)
• Books, plays, music, dance, movies, and pictures can be copyrighted
• You cannot copyright and idea, but the FORM the idea takes can be copyrighted (very important in terms of my remediation project)
• Copyright did only lasts for a fixed time of 14 years which was considered enough time for the owner to make money out of it.
• Now copyright lasts for the authors lifetime plus 70 years, preventing works from entering the public domain for free use by people in the same lifetime it was produced
• Fair use allows people to use small parts of copyrighted matierial for parody, critical comment, or education but validity depends on the nature of the work, the amount used, and commercial impact
• Fair use is not a right and is only a legal defense position (in the USA). The fact that it isn't a right allows large media companies to use intimidation to control their commodity.

(dangerousnerd 2007)

So it seems I caught the wrong end of the stick in my last post 2.2 Notes: Recovering fair use (Collins 2008). In it I ask why it is it is OK to quote parts the words or another author in your own writing, but it is illegal  to do this with other forms of media? (e.g. using a line of music from one song to create a new song). The film “A fair(y) use tale” proves that YOU CAN use snippets of other forms of media. ITS NOT ILLEGAL …. Well at least this particular work is not illegal – not today anyway – its murky water to say the least.

So how does it work?

 As dangerousnerd states -  copyright lasts well over 100 years - so the snippets of Disney films used to create A Fair(y) use tale would be well within the confines of copyright law.  This kind of film slips through the net by only using small parts of many different many films, the use of which does impact financially on the originating owner, and the film is for educational purposes - not only educating people through its commentary but also working as an example of what can legally be created out of someone else's content.

This film could also be said to fall under the title of "critical comment" - critiquing perhaps the impact  of  the Walt Disney Corporation on copyright legislation. Ellam's documentary RIP: A remix manifesto states that in 1998 the USA Government granted the Walt Disney Corporation copyright terms of "the life of the author plus 70 years" or plus 95 years if it was a corporation  (Ellam 2009). This precedent means that any media created now, will not enter the public domain and be free for use within our lifetimes. We cannot legally draw upon, extend, remix and remake using the influences of the modern day (unless of course we pay to do it).

A critical  point to make I think.

 dangerousnerd. 2007. A Fair(y) Use Tale. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UycH2HvBRd4 (accessed 28//9/11).

RIP: A Remix Manifesto (part 5). 2009. YouTube,  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfSiQjFmcZw (accessed 6/10/11).

2.1: Gavin and Stacey - list of individuals, organisations and technolgies involved in the production, delivery and consumption of the show

This is a list comprised of the individuals, organisations and technology that goes into the production, delivery and consumption of the official TV series Gavin and Stacey. It does not include any of the fan based media texts that make up a large part of the way consumers interact with the characters and storyline of the original text.

Individuals:

According to the website IMDb (International Movie Database)  the Gavin & Stacey cast and crew was made up of over 100 people who worked on the series over its lifetime. The cast and crew were made up of:

• directors, writers, cast, producers, cinematographers, film editors, casting, production design, art directors, costume design, makeup, production management, assistant directors, art department, sound department, stunts, camera and electrical department, costume and wardrobe department, editorial department and "other" (Full cast and crew for "Gavin & Stacey").

As full list of names can be found here: Gavin & Stacey full cast and crew

Organisations: 

Produced by:

Baby Cow Productions (Company credits for "Gavin & Stacey") who are part of a group that also consists of Baby Cow Animations, Baby Cow Films and Baby Cow Radio. The group was created by comedians Steve Coogan and Henry Normal and is part owned (25%) by BBC Worldwide Baby Cow Productions). BBC Worlwide owns the following channels: BBC America, BBC Entertainment, BBC HD, BBC Knowledge, BBC Lifestyle, BBC World News, CBeebies, UKTV (Australia), has a joint venture with BBC Canada, BBC Kids and 10 Virgin Media Channels ( Channels)

  Distributed by:

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) (UK)  (Company credits for "Gavin & Stacey") who own BBC Worldwide  (What is the BBC?  2011) and Comedy Central (Netherlands) (Company credits for "Gavin & Stacey")

Accommodation: Access Bookings GB (Company credits for "Gavin & Stacey")

                                                                                           

Aired on:

BBC1, BBC 2 BBC 3 (in the UK), BBC entertainment and BBC America (USA), BBC Canada, Channel 7, 7two, ABC2 and UKTV (Australia),  Acht (Belgium), HOT V.O.D and Yes Stars Comedy (Israel), RTE Two (Ireland), RTL 8 (The Netherlands), Stoo2 (Iceland), TV One (NZ) and RTP2 (Portugal) (Gavin &Stacey)

DVDs and Box sets can be purchased from:

Amazon, BBC Online, ABC bookshops and online, JB HI FI, Sanity. Digital copies can also be purchased form iTunes (Gavin and Stacey, Series 1), and Amazon (Gavin and Stacey Season 2)  

Websites:

There is no one official site for the show, but it does have a sub-site that appears on the parent website of the particular network it is currently being aired on. Some sites include:

BBC ONE

BBC America

Apps:

Gavin and Stacey Apps can be  purchased through the itunes store (Gavin & Stacey Soundboard)  

Technologies:

Consumers can watch the series on TV, computer or mobile devices such as iPads or phones. The websites can also be accessed through this medium. The official apps can only be accessed through iPhones.

   

Baby Cow Productions. http://www.babycow.co.uk/babycowproductions.html (accessed 5/10/11).  

Channels. http://www.bbcworldwide.com/channels.aspx (accessed 5/10/11). 

Company credits for "Gavin & Stacey". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0908454/companycredits (accessed 5/10/11).

Full cast and crew for "Gavin & Stacey". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0908454/fullcredits#cast (accessed 5/10/11).

Gavin & Stacey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_%26_Stacey#International_broadcasts (accessed 5/10/11).

  

Gavin and Stacey Season 2. http://www.amazon.com/Episode-1/dp/B003ZHOWT0/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1317786523&sr=1-1 (accessed 5/10/11).

Gavin and Stacey, Series 1. TV Shows > Comedy (5/10/11)

Gavin & Stacey Soundboard. http://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/gavin-stacey-soundboard/id385944743?mt=8 

What is the BBC? 2011. http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/purpose/what.shtml (accessed 5/10/11).