“The Future Hold for the Mobile Industry”

1. How does the mobile phone in today’s communication market illustrate digital convergence?

        Mobile phones today have become a major facet of our society. Convergence has taken place because we have been able to bring together a phone, a music player, a web browser, and deeper integration of our social media sites and web pages. Smartphones are the epitome of digital media, and it combines the best of what we want out of the Internet, and really communication in general to everyone in the world. Because of all this integration, we are able to communicate to anyone from anywhere in the world at any given time, with just the touch of a button or application. It seems that even the term "mobile" is becoming a term that is not being used as much, as it seems that it's not just mobility, but integration as well as ease of access.

2. Why is mobility the future of digital communication? Please use the two media technology theories in the article “The Song of the Alphabet in Cyberspace” to explain the mobility.

        Mobility is the future of digital communication because it will enable us to widen our horizons and reach a larger amount of people quicker and more efficiently. In McLuhan's writing, he talks about hot and cold media, and how "hot" media is from a singular source, and really limited source of interaction. Mobility would eliminate that, and would allow a greater amount of interactivity with our environments. Mobility a "cold" media environment, meaning that there is more opportunities to interact and alter what you see to your like; a more personalized experience. McLuhan also talked about an acoustic environment, or direct content with the source of our information. Mobility would eliminate that as well, as there wouldn't be as much of a need to be in direct contact, but would rather have the ability to be away from our televisions and computer, and would be able to use that media in other places.

3. How does the possible integration of the mobile technology with the biological sensors create new opportunities for digital media communication in the future according to the digital media experts in the article? What are the possible ethical concerns?

        Possible integration of the mobile technology with the biological sensors are creating new opportunities for digital media communication in the future because we are able to use it for a more medical sense, as Howard Rheingold said in the article:

"We’re already seeing blood-sugar sensors for diabetics that plug into phones, sensors for environmental pollution, and I think we will rapidly see the growth of body-oriented sensors as part of the “quantified self” movement. Remote sensing of the chemical composition of the blood and even simple imaging devices will contribute to the growth of medicine and again, smartphones plus sensors in the body and sensors in the environment will lead to a new medium unlike smartphones as we know them today." 

      Despite even the medical sense of mobile phones, Dr. Max Schleser stated in hie theory that mobile media should be seen, and should strive to establish stronger connections between people and communities:

"In this context one should not only consider mobile media as screen media like TV or desktop computers, but a social interactive and multi-nodal network media that links to communities, provides new insights through visual communication, while providing access in many respects for a global audience. The notions of sociability and connectivity are and will be key in the future of mobile media."

        Ethical problems would be more aimed towards the question of where the jurisdiction of what can be used to advance technology. Will it come to a point where it is interwoven with our bodies? Our Clothing? Who knows. But when it comes to that point where physical devices are no longer enough, that will be time where the ethical issues arise.

4. Why are sociability and connectivity the important key for the future of mobile media?

       Sociability is what allows us to be more active in communication with friends and families from almost anywhere. It is becoming more and more crucial this day and age to have more socially oriented media. Connectivity allows us not just to be more interwoven in other's lives and activities, but allows us to expand into different communities and peer groups, sharing our ideas, and creating a greater sense of collective intelligence. Without these two elements of sociability and connectivity, the whole sense of having a personal, electronic experience, is lost, and the idea of having technological mobility is gone, losing its appeal. Those two elements are the two important keys to the sustainability for the future of mobile media. 

Digital Music Is Destroying the Industry, One Download at a Time

        Everyone has downloaded music illegally. It just seems like too much of a hassle spending money on something when you can simply get for free and have it be just a click away. Nowadays people are downloading music illegally, and having no shame in taking things what they want without having to pay.

        All the whole industry is paying for it.

        Digital Music has practically eliminated the cassette and other forms of old media. Buying CDs simply takes too long now, and downloading things in the comfort of our own homes is just easier and the number one option for music. As a result, artists make the majority of their money on tour rather than launch CDs because the risk of losing money is higher than ever.

        30 billion songs were illegally downloaded between 2004-2009, which means it's probably exponentially higher now than then. Of course as a result of this, it has led to loss of profits in the music industry, and since Napster in 1999, sales have gone down 47%, nearly an entire half of the money made, gone, just like that.

        That's not even the worst of it. Free music has cost the industry $12.5 Billion in losses, including a loss of 71,000 jobs. This is a major problem, and the music industry knows it. Now, labels feel the pressure of continuing with established artists instead of going out and finding new talent, which can gather larger audiences faster, bringing in more money as quickly and effectively as they can.

        Of course, like all crises, things were put into the law's hands. In 1999 the RIAA sued Napster, which at the type was the main source of illegally downloaded files and music. There was so much money put into an 8 year period, that it caused Napster to go bankrupt. After it was all said and done,
it changed file sharing laws forever.

        No matter how you look at it, digital downloads have had an overall negative effect on the music industry. But will it diminish it forever? Perhaps not. But the concept of the digitization to the music has been both a blessed curse, and an all too apparent curse.

       

Communication Journalism

Podcast:
http://www.buzzsprout.com/admin/episodes/86257-communication-journalism

RSS Feed:
http://www.buzzsprout.com/10676.rss

Twitter Killed All Journalists!

There has been a media murder, and the image above is the prime suspect. 

What was once a one-way street in the world of Journalism, has now become an overwhelming force where everyone can contribute, and have twitter to thank for that.

Many believe that journalism has been killed, and maybe it has, but more in the traditional sense. Twitter as well as other social media sites have allowed a greater sense of citizen journalism, making anyone able to share information that they obtain and distribute it to anyone, from anywhere in the world. But where does that leave the traditional journalists who are getting paid for what they do?

The short answer; referee. Or more specifically, they are used more and more as those that can correct people on the internet, keeping the credibility of the information intact, that way, no matter who puts out an image, or a link, or a video, there will always be someone who can verify it as fact.

Personally, I see this concept not as a deletion, but an evolution. The traditional journalist is dead, but the act of being a journalist is alive and well, maybe more so than usual. It's simply the medium and where it's obtained that makes it different.

A man by the name of McGuire at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication wrote about this topic, and stated:

"Twitter offers just as equal a chance for journalists to destroy credibility and ruin any potential connections with readers for an entire organization."

But that doesn't mean that people should be afraid of Twitter, that companies should cower in fear at the site of normal average citizens stealing their jobs simply with a camera phone. If anything, they should be embracing this evolution, and using this to further their Journalism careers, and understand that this craft has become a global enterprise.

When someone posts a tweet with an iPhone image and shows some major event, and posts links to other sites where they can get more information, don't be mad that he beat these mass journalists to the punch in broadcasting their information, be proud.

Because ultimately, it's them that's going to be the ones that give us up to date information when we want it. It is also up to the traditional journalists to make sure that the information is truthful and accurate.

Will you be part of the Journalist Revolution?



McGuire Article
http://cronkite.asu.edu/mcguireblog/?p=158

Are Twitter and Social Media Ruining Journalism?
http://jfbarclay.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/twitter-and-social-media-ruining-journalism/

Introduction to Podcasting

1.  How does podcasting fit into the organizational communication in business, non-profit, and academic contexts?

Podcasting fits into organizational communication because it is essentially streamlined, allowing the audience you’re reaching out to see a catalog of your content, and is essentially a universal medium. It allows anyone, no matter who they are, to start a podcast, and begin to create content that people may want to listen into and subscribe to. Anyone from businesses, non-profits, and academic contexts can be represented in the form of a podcast.

2.  Why does the speaker say that podcasting extends message?

The podcasts is able to educate. It is able to teach people. It needs to be able to teach people something and keep them wanting more. You’re going to want an audience that wants to hear your content everyday, and wants to keep coming back for more. It is able to extend the message beyond the conventional conversation, but is able to reach an ever-expanding audience and are able to get great feedback form them.

3. How does podcasting encourage participation culture according to the speaker?

It encourages participation culture because it allows people to participate in listening to it and enjoy your content. It also allows people to look at the rest of your content and become interested in what you have to give them. This encourages the feedback from your audience, almost instituting a form of collective intelligence, which can improve your podcast and content as a whole.

4. What are the three critical elements of development for a successfully media when the speaker talks about email, blogging, and online ad? Why does podcasting have the three elements?

The three critical elements of development for successful media are important, being able to keep content fresh and interesting, and keeping the audience wanting more on a daily basis. Podcasting has these three elements because they are essential to obtaining an audience and maintaining that audience that is always engaging and entertaining.

5. How does the concept of digital media convergence get applied in podcasting when the speaker discusses the compounding media?

Digital media convergence gets applied in podcasting through the availability of links that take you to other forms of media. Being able to access different social media sites, web pages, video, and even additional audio, that expands the content in the original podcast. It allows different types of mediums and media to come together towards a common objective, which is to better the podcast.

8 Principles of Web Design: Good and Bad

        One site that I felt was a good example of some of the 8 principles of web design, was Pandora Internet Radio. Immediately I saw that this was a cite that had a few of the criteria done. Similar to what was shown in the article with Spotify, Pandora meets the parameters of Fitt's Law, which says 

"the time required to move to a target area (e.g. click a button) is a function of the distance to the target and the size of the target. In other words, the bigger an object and the closer it is to us, the easier it is to use it." 

This was again evident, as the play/pause button is made so that it is slightly bigger than the other buttons on screen. There is also not a lot of clutter on the screen, allowing a more comfortable viewing of the page, and meaning more accurate readings, It's more streamlined, as shown in Hick's law, which says:

 "with every additional choice increases the time required to take a decision...So in order to provide a more enjoyable experience, we need to eliminate choices. The process of eliminating distracting options has to begin from the get go of the web design and should be carried on throughout the design process."

 I also noticed a little bit of the Rule of Thirds, as the main part of the page has one third for the selected artists, neatly organized, and the second third shows the main play, pause, fast forward and rewind buttons, meaning that this third is the most important in the whole page. Then the third section is for the person's account, and more personalization to their profile. All in all, there were enough of the 8 principles of sound web design met that makes this a well made web page.

        Then there's this site. This is TeacherXpress.com. While this does have the Rule of Thirds down, It has completely forgotten about Hick's Law, despite the fact that it has some poor level "organization". The main reason for this site not being well made is because it's far too busy. Right off the bat, you notice that there are way too choices for the viewer to look at at any given time. This needs much more organization and filtering, and could even use more Visual Hierarchy, as everything seems to be on even ground, which in web design terms is not necessarily best.
        Although you do see a little of both Laws of Proximity and Similarity, they don't help to aid the viewer in gaining more of an understanding of what to look for and where. There needs to be some sort of main graphic to draw people in, and then have a more simplified, organized way of showing all of the links that this site has to offer. Too busy in this case is terrible for the site, as even though there is tons of information here, there is just no one that will be able to go through all of, or any of it, really.



Links:

Teacher Xpress Main Site:
http://web.archive.org/web/20101225204203/http://teacherxpress.com/


Pandora: Internet Radio Main Site
http://www.pandora.com

Video Games Being Blamed for School Shootings

                                         Obama's Gun Control Announcement- January 16, 2013



        The tragic school shootings in Newtown, connecticut will resonate to us forever. Poor defenseless children gunned down for no reason by the hand of a maniac. Adam Lanza, age 20, was the culprit responsible for shooting and killing 26 people, 20 of them under the age of 7, and 6 female staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Because of this horrific event, the conversation of gun control has yet again saturated the TV screens and has been a hot button topic on the Internet. While there is some reform being instituted now by President Barak Obama, something interesting has surfaced. Vice President Joe Biden has apparently visited the video game industry to talk about controlling the violence and use of guns in games that are distributed to the public. In short, video games are being said to have a direct link to the violent shootings that have plagued this country since they originated.
        With the new gun control policies that President Obama is trying to pass, this would mean that there would be a stricter hold on those that are trying to purchase firearms. This is a very good thing, as there will finally be more background checks, in theory reducing the number of people "unsuitable to have a gun" from actually possessing one. This is the biggest gun control push since Reagan, and would hopefully be a more welcome reform, even though the NRA may have other ideas about it. But regardless, the fact that Video Games are still being under fire and being blamed for horrific massacres in the real world, is absolutely ludicrous and absurd.
        Frankly, this whole argument needs to stop. You can't expect this to really catch on as the source. How is it that virtual, unreal bullets are taking  responsibility for the damage done by real ones? According to Forbes, Joe Biden is meeting with "representatives" of the video game industry to talk about a solution to the violence of the games themselves. They stated:

"the idea that these two are remotely even close to equally responsible for mass shootings is ludicrous, as evidenced by countries like Japan with die-hard gaming populations but nearly zero mass shootings. What they do have? Much more restrictive gun laws, and far fewer firearms."

        Is the solution really that simple? Have the government take responsibility for their own actions and flawed regulation of the distribution of firearms? Why does Washington insist on blaming things that they don't have a stranglehold on? The gaming industry has made many different strides to preventing underage kids from getting their hands on violent video games. from "M" rated games, to explicitly telling parents NOT to buy those games for their 10 year old son, what else can they possibly do? The video game industry is merely a scapegoat for the misgivings of the government, and it's sad.
        CBS gave insight as to president Obama's policies for gun control, and it does seem to be much more aggressive than we've seen towards gun control in recent memory.

1. Assault Weapons Ban

There was a 10 year ban on 19 military grade weapons in the US in 1994, but since then has not been reinstated. Obama has tried to make an even more aggressive push to having it reinstated, and have it be an even tougher ban that the expired ban in 2004. However, because of the strong opposition from the NRA, having it passed will be easier said than done.

     2. Ban on High-Capacity Magazines

There is still some legality regarding the amount of rounds allowed per magazine, as there can essentially be dozens allowed without reloading. There is a major push now, especially since the summer shooting in Aurora, Colorado, and now with the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, to have a 10 bullet cap on magazines, a dramatic decrease from what is allowed now.

     3. Universal Background Checks

According to CBS, there is a very interesting statistic in the world of gun laws,

"Currently, criminal background checks are required only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which according to the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) account for only 60 percent of gun sales in the United States"

That means that there is 40% of gun transactions that are not licensed and do not have extensive background checks.

            The list goes on. But throughout all of this regulation, why is video games going under fire? Why is Newtown burning violent video games, when there has never been a direct link between the games themselves and the violence of those that play it? Adam Lanza is one of MILLIONS of people that played games, yet not everyone is going out and shooting up a school. The real reason? The man was insane. He had a chemical imbalance in his mind that made him believe that what he did was right. And yet, video games is the reason for that? Maybe it's the parents that should finally step up and take responsibility for the fact that they buy their children games that are far too mature for them. The argument is ridiculous and should be thrown out immediately, because the government is trying to blame something that they know nothing about, shocking I know. What do you think about the new gun laws that may be implemented soon? Do you blame video games for all the shootings and gun violence in the real world? Or do you think that there should be responsibility taken by the parents and how they monitor their kids? Please comment below and tell me what you think


Joe Biden and Video Game Industry "representatives" Meeting:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/01/10/joe-biden-meeting-with-video-game-industry-about-gun-violence/

CBS lays out Obama's plan for Gun Reform:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57564192/what-are-obamas-gun-control-proposals/

Video Games Being Scapegoated for Sandy Hook Shooting
http://www.policymic.com/articles/23298/gun-control-debate-video-games-are-being-scapegoated-for-the-sandy-hook-shooting/experts

Bonus Content:

Ralph Nader Speaks Out on Video Games:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/01/21/ralph-nader-calls-violent-video-games-electronic-child-molesters/

Background Information Regarding the Newtown Shooting:
http://www.greenwichtime.com/newtownshooting/article/State-Police-All-26-Newtown-victims-shot-with-4220548.php