Thursday, February 7, 2008
Mandy
P. 170. Media literacy--not just enough to consume, we must express. Hugely important. Read Mandy's blog to see her comments on this. Parental skill? Will there be a gap when people in the class are of the age to participate in whatever cultures digital media will make possible then? Will we become our parents in terms of obsolescence? (LBB answers, "yes, but"; see my comment on Mandy's blog). Davidson: US one of the only places she's visited that charge for Internet access. China (sometimes censored), Africa, Latin America, Japan--free. What does our culture say about itself by preserving stratification? Capitalist model of consumption. Mandy will blog more on convergence culture, a la Davidson talk. Lexi will comment on Wissoker's talk on the book.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I should say first of all that I am incredibly confused by the current blogging system, but so as not to be left behind I've decided to leave comment regarding my own thoughts. I find Jenkins' chapter 6 very interesting. Most importantly, the section titled "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised." Jenkins says that at one time, television made the public dumb and disengaged. Now, he says that the internet "expands access to innovative or even revolutionary ideas" (210). But this is where it gets interesting and coincides with Mandy's points taken from Davidson's lecture; Jenkins follows the above quote by saying: "at least among the growing segment of the population that has access to a computer" (210). Later he asks: " Is there any place on the web where the whole world is watching?" (211). Well, the answer is NO! The new "grassroots expression" taking place on the internet is not the same as the grassroots expressions of the 60's. Computers and the internet are selective (that is if you have no access to public libraries). It's not as easy as painting signs and marching outside public/civil buildings; yet, the internet must be a place where MORE people are watching. What excites me most is Jenkins reference to the new "adversarial relationship" between bloggers and corporate media (217). At present, big media decides which protests to air or whose stories to tell. Thanks to blogging's grassroot movements, someone somewhere can can dig up their own story.
So, while not everyone has access to the new grassroots movement (aka the internet and blogging), the few who participate in this adversarial relationship with big media can cause enough stir so that corporate media has to defend their actions by digging deeper for the truth. In this light, it seems that even the little guy will win.
First, Leah, our blogging "system" is evolving. I don't think anyone has yet come up with the best scheme for the class so we'll take this up again tomorrow. 2 a week and I'll look for them anywhere I have time to go.
That said, your comment here is very interesting in the light of some reading I've been doing for an article I'm writing. Marshall McLuhan wrote a lot about television and other "new" media in the 50s and 60s, and he, too, was not expecting a social revolution from television. More people are participating in Internet "global villages," but there are so many of them that we (at least I) don't know where to look to be sure that I'm keeping up with current events, books, films, politics. I read the NY Times on Sundays, the Advocate every day, as well as novels, nonfiction, and blogs almost daily, but I don't make the rounds daily to all the novels I have going or blogs to which I contribute. It feels fragmented, but empowering at the same time--for this little guy/gal, anyway. --Dr. L
Post a Comment