"Hamlet On the Holodeck": Chapter 3 [Post #7]

I really enjoyed how this reading explored the origins of multimedia all the way back to the "birth of cinema" in 1895. Not only does it speak to how far media have come, but it also speaks to how far we've come as media consumers. Once, we were scared of a train moving on a screen. Now, we're interacting with the media in front of us, sometimes convinced that we're controlling it, instead of the opposite, which is more often true.

I was really shocked while reading about "Eliza", the language processing "persona" that served as a digital therapist, created by Joseph Weizenbaum. (Right off the bat, this gave me a really eerie Her vibe, to any of you who might have also made the mistake of seeing that movie!) I can understand how anyone who interacted with "Eliza" could have initially assumed they were in control. However, as human beings, we associate communication with human interaction, even if that may be taking place on a digital platform. That said, despite any previous knowledge of its purely digital existence, communicating with a device that's communicating back could start to mess with your head. This is especially possible considering the idea that with "Eliza", human communication has been broken down and reduced to a mere formula. For me, that really speaks to how we've socially constructed technology in a way that it constructs us right back: "It's surprising how often we forget that the new digital medium is intrinsically procedural...It was designed not to carry static information but to embody complex, contingent behaviors" (Murray). If that's not terrifying, I don't know what is!

 While we create these technologies and facilitate their environments, we also participate in and interact with these media. This is yet another reason why so much emphasis is placed on being media literate in today's culture. The more we know about what we're creating, affecting and inducing, the less we allow it to deceive or misguide us.

"A Creator's Guide to Transmedia Storytelling" : Chapters 7-13 [Post #6]

Having now read more of "A Creator's Guide to Transmedia Storytelling", transmedia seems a lot more clear, and more of a concrete term than a speculated idea. This was clarified mostly through extensive examples (which were much appreciated) in chapters five and six, such as different TV shows and movies. Discussing different examples in class today also helped immensely. Transmedia might be a term best defined by examples instead of a hard and fast definition.

In chapter seven, we're introduced to another term lacking a single definition across the board: story/storytelling. Unlike the typical idea of a story that we're used to thinking of when we hear the term, marketers use "story" to describe a message or image that's conveyed quickly and simply with the intent of evoking a particular response. This seems simple at first, but of course, this general formula could lead to a multitude of results, all dependent on what's being marketed and the "story" that the target demographic needs to hear. As the reading discusses, this story can be a single photo, a quick blurb, or a "full-blown, narrative-based marketing [campaign]" (p. 70).

I think it's really interesting that through learning these terms and concepts, we're forming this media literacy that teaches us not only how to market, but also how we're marketed to. I have to wonder if this will lead to further reluctance to trust the media. I would hope it would lead to a better understanding of what is real and honest, but as we've learned, maybe we're just being told a really convincing story. 

"A Creator's Guide to Transmedia Storytelling" [Post #5]

I found it really interesting (and a little confusing!) that the chapter "What Is Transmedia Anyway?" discussed right away how difficult it is to pinpoint exactly what "transmedia" is. In fact, I felt like the author was going back and forth on different definitions and interpretations throughout the entire reading, which I'm sure is indicative of how many forms transmedia can take, but also makes it hard to apply its meaning to real life scenarios and think of examples.

Most generally (by my understanding of the reading), "transmedia" refers to a story being told across several platforms, with each platform contributing a separate, independent part of that story. The reading mostly refers to movie franchises as examples, such as Star Wars and Avatar, which include storytelling via other media beyond the films, such as books and video games. Initially, this doesn't seem like anything new- nowadays, every big film is marketed across several media prior to its release. However, in this case (one we're used to seeing), each of these platforms aren't contributing different independent parts of the story, which is something we don't see as often. This might be a big reason why so many of us seem to be struggling with the meaning of transmedia!

As for examples, I have to wonder if a TV show with an accompanying video game (like The Walking Dead) would count as transmedia. Even though the video game might follow the same basic premise as the TV show, in a sense, you add your own story through your own experience of the video game. Could be a stretch. However, also along the Walking Dead lines, a much more obvious (also much more possible) example of transmedia would be the comic books and the TV show. While some of the TV show plot line follows the comic books, most of the TV show takes its own spins off the general story told through the comic books. This particular example of transmedia actually causes a lot of fan buzz: fans who are familiar with the comics make certain predictions based on the plot line of the comics, comment when the TV show has strayed from the comics' plot line, etc.

Super Bowl 50: Advertising, Marketing & Social Media [Post #4]

As many of us have already mentioned, both in our blog posts and in real life, the Super Bowl is about so much more than the game. Regardless of who we're rooting for, many of us show up for the snacks and tune in for the ads- at least that's how I'd define my attraction to the Super Bowl! The Super Bowl, as the biggest televised event of the year, has evolved into a culture in itself. Even though the football is what brings us there in the first place, we stick around for everything else: the halftime show, funny and/or moving ads, and of course, the party that usually accompanies all of the above.

Leading up to the Super Bowl, we're hyped up through social media. #SB50 was everywhere over the last couple of weeks, crossing over several networks to bring us all the info, ad spoilers, and snack ideas that have become such a huge part of the big game. Of course, once we turn on our TVs the night of, plenty of built up expectations are coming with that. That being said, I felt like this year was a little lackluster in the ad department. Sure, bits and pieces were fun: Amy Schumer, Ryan Reynolds, etc. (Lots of celebrity cameos this year...perhaps to make up for lack of excitement and creativity in other areas?) But after years of screaming goats, adorable puppies and highly anticipated movie trailers, nothing really jumped out at me this Sunday night. I didn't find myself wanting to talk about any particular moment with friends the next day, and I didn't hear others bringing anything up either. (Would this have turned out differently had I maybe watched the Super Bowl in a larger group? A smaller group? If others were able to point out things I otherwise wouldn't have noticed?)

Instead, I feel like this year's post Super Bowl conversation revolved around the halftime show. Was Beyonce making a political statement? Oh my god Beyonce is going on tour. Might Beyonce be overrated? Why isn't anyone talking about Bruno Mars?!?! Of course, this conversation has primarily played out on social media, in addition to the pre-Super Bowl conversation. And it will probably continue to play out for weeks to come...hence the power of the Super Bowl, even a somewhat dull one. No matter what, it seems like people will always end up talking about something, especially across these social networks that make it so easy and reach so many. 

"Personal Connections in the Digital Age" : Chapter Four [Post #3]

For me, Baym's discussion of the concept of online communities through Chapter Four, "Communities and Networks" was really thought-provoking. Most of the debate that many of us have discussed in our blog posts so far has revolved around questions of reality: what constitutes as real, what makes a relationship, and where do we draw the line between tangible and digital reality?

The idea of online communities adds a whole other dynamic to this discussion. Most people would argue that the truest, realest, most effective relationships in our lives involve face-to-face interaction, physical contact, etc. I would even argue that this is a common standpoint for the social media addicts among us. But I think the real question is, does any of that really matter when it comes to interacting within an online community? I feel like if someone is actively choosing to participate in an online community, they're doing so for a reason. I can't speak from experience, but something tells me these people join these online communities for the exact level of interaction that they provide. For example, support groups like Alcoholics Anonymous or Weight Watchers online revolve around such sensitive topics that members might like the idea of being able to interact with others, gain comfort from these interactions, and become part of a community that doesn't necessarily push to a level of intimacy that meeting in person might push. Either way, these people have the choice of which kind of community they want to be a part of for their personal experiences and needs.

Along the same lines, people part of more casual, social online communities might also be looking for this somewhat limited interaction. For example, kids playing on Xbox or YouTubers posting their vlogs can interact with other members of their communities, and gain exactly what they're looking for on that particular platform: whether it be someone to play a casual game with and maybe chat with briefly, or someone that subscribes to their YouTube channel and comments on their videos. More importantly, they gain all of this without the pressure of forming a deeper, more personal relationship with the other person.