I think it is down to the accompanying sounds, as well as the old style visual interface, that really creates the atmosphere of the 90′s for me in this video. The feeling of nostalgia borne of those multi-modal intertextual references gave me a laugh anyway. If you’re my age, then you’ll probably enjoy this as well.
10
Mar 12
What are news values?
Criteria for deciding on news values are all very well for the beginners, but how about some digestion of tried and common formulae for TV news styles in the form of parodies of easily recognised formats? One of those TV news formats that is easily parodied – because it has its own easily recognisable style or identity – is that of CNN.
Our first parody, and my personal favourite, is CNNN, courtesy the ABC and the Chasers. You’ll note that these clips are from the archives, and that the news that they report on is now almost ten years old (and don’t the Chasers look young and sweet as well. For more recent Chaser material, the War on Everything is recommended). Nevertheless, the idea of what CNN considers as new values can be recognised from that period – items which are either very local and minor, or both distant and touching a patriotic nerve at the same time….
…and if that one left you wanting some more, then I have embedded another example of CNNN for further distraction from any real data-gathering you may have felt you were going to do:
Of course, some people might prefer an American perspective on both parody and CNN. For this you’ll need to go to The Onion – a very respectable online news parodying institution, which now presents some of its work in video format:
04
Mar 12
Google’s new ‘privacy’ regime
Well, we’re being tracked – we most of us have known this for some time. But it seems that Google’s new policy on what and how they are going to gather data on your every online move – and offline move using GPS data – has changed slightly this week so that they can keep and cross-reference it much more conveniently for them from now on. The writing has been on the wall, or at least on the top right hand corner of the screen for a few weeks at least now. Maybe months. That little box which says “Google is changing its privacy policy – these things matter”. Or something to that effect.
I admit that I did not read it – nor did I ‘dismiss’ it either. In fact, the idea of ‘privacy’ (a cover-all term for the way that many institutions public and private have been watching and collecting information on us for many years) has been on my mind since I first signed up for an online account in the mid-90s. And even before that, after watching a BBC TV program in the late 70s detailing how many places the government had our personal information on files even back then. It was on my mind so much that I began writing my little dystopia in 1999. As these things go, I never did finish it. The pace of technological change in some of the aspects I imagined for my brave new world seemed to be being outpaced by my own ability to write it down fast enough. For example, it was not going to be Microsoft that became its own fiefdom throughout the world, but Google and the unknown at that time Facebook. And so, Google telling me that ‘these things matter’ seemed a little stale.
In any case, I saw a recent TV discussion on the topic, from the US, which does bring out some of the issues with some clarity. Google depends on our use of their ‘product’ for their own ‘product’. And in this day and age, the Googlisation of the world is something we now actually take for granted. The discussion is worth listening to. As Googles tells us, ‘these things matter’…
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
03
Mar 12
Guardian UK’s ad for open journalism project
embedded here for convenience….
and, from the archives, a link to a couple of TV pieces spoofing the PR industry – or rather, spoofing the lack of proper fact-checking and professional journalism in the era of ‘openness’ and the need for speed…
18
Feb 12
Mother and Son
Last night, here in Sydney, we attended a small rally at UTS: Don’t shoot the messenger. But the room they booked clearly wasn’t big enough to hold all the (what looked to me like typical Greens supporters) audience interested in hearing what the speakers had to say…
Humphrey McQueen started with a short history of how the powerful like to keep their workers and lower classes in the dark, and in Assange’s case, certainly about the many awards he’s been given, including one by retired CIA officers.
WIKILEAKS, ASSANGE & DEMOCRACY with Humphrey McQueen from CaTV on Vimeo.
Scott Ludlam then brought us up to speed on how the government has reacted in Australia.
WIKILEAKS, ASSANGE & DEMOCRACY – with Senator Scott Ludlam from CaTV on Vimeo.
Then, Jennifer Robinson told us about the legal case in the UK and what actually constitutes legal and illegal in the actions of those bringing these actions against Assange. She compared the behaviour of the PM in the case of drug smugglers and pot smokers in Bali with that of the PM’s reaction – and then non-action – on Julian’s behalf.
WIKILEAKS, ASSANGE & DEMOCRACY with Jennifer ROBINSON from CaTV on Vimeo.
Finally Assange’s mother told her story, a story of her campaign to bring her son’s plight to the attention of parliamentarians – initially interested, and then: silence. The brief compiled by Jennifer Robinson regarding the Assange case was tabled at that meeting. Interesting reading, if one is concerned about the facts. And btw, how ‘Mama Julian’ has had to go into hiding herself…
Listening to Christine last night
Julian Assange has been targeted by the US ever since his organisation passed on, or made public, certain documents and videotapes that proved what we all suspected – but were not privileged enough to see previously. Senator Scott Ludlam began his short talk by asking whether anyone could source the quote: Dissent is allowed unless it becomes effective… and this underlined the theme of the night for me – that those in power allow anyone to say or do anything unless it threatens their power – in which case they get nervous enough to wield it. They use their power to control the media – we are kept docile with stories of important celebrities, fantasy dramas, and 24 hour vague lightweight ‘news’ – and then these powers (the so-called 1% one suspects) control the law itself.
And, we have the issue of large global corporations – MasterCard, Visa, PayPal – effectively cutting off funding to WikiLeaks and thus making it difficult to support Assange in any financial way. What international politics cannot do quickly, big business can undertake to help out – while campaigns of misinformation, slander, and outright breaking of the law can be carried on: in this case, in relation to Julian Assange. Meanwhile, our own government and media – under duress one would imagine – refuses to mention or report anything on the present trumped-up case against Assange, and certainly do not make any reference to the burgeoning assault being planned by the USA as a type of overkill pay-back: How dare this guy pass on OUR secret messages!
It may be that these leaks are embarrassing for the US government, but if ‘embarrassment’ is the key word, then the charges and methods being arrayed against him seem to far outweigh his misdemeanors. Apologists for US high-handedness mention redactions, but the US was actually asked to look in and advise on this score. OK, so they could see this wasn’t in their interests either.
The world has become a dangerous place if we value freedom of speech, access to certain kinds of information with which we can make informed judgements, and if we value our own privacy or control over our own data – one starts to feel that it would be dangerous to say or do anything that might be ‘effective’ in showing up or highlighting how the wealthy and powerful control and subjugate our lives – by feeding us bullshit and keeping us in the dark as the saying goes…
Assange has not yet been convicted of a crime, and so far the publishing of documents secretly passed on has not been made a crime… but it may be soon that even laws will change to enable Assange and any organisation like his to be more easily silenced. And of course, while we lowly vassals will have our secrets freely available to be passed on without notice, once anyone dares to show anything negative about those whose wealth& power depends on our compliance – they should be very afraid.
*photo courtesy of prrwhite
13
Dec 11
How SOPA will work – globally
A combination infographic: flow chart with extra source. Something for the visually-inclined, and the anxious about internet censorship…
27
Sep 11
Too bad I don’t live in NYC
Conference on coloUr in print and elsewhere, happening next week in NYC, Print’s Color Conference.
Looks like it’s set up for the industry rather than the academe, with big media and industry players in the speaking gallery as well as providing sponsorship. but for those with an interest in design and identity in the new media world, looks like some of the sessions could be a great ideas bed.
Here’s one of the abstracts from the conference website as a taster:
You don’t need thousands of colors, just the good ones. In this session, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia’s Chief Creative and Editorial Director, Gael Towey, shares a sneak peek at Martha Stewart Living’s special color-themed December issue celebrating 20 years of photography and design. You’ll learn how Martha Stewart Living uses color to evoke a time, place and season in its stories. Find out how color seduces, organizes and entertains, how nature inspires the palettes in MSL’s craft and decorating projects—and how color ultimately has become a branding tool MSL uses to create demand (via the magazine) and then fulfill it (via retail products). Attend this session from a branding icon and discover how color can be an essential branding tool for you as well.
27
Oct 11
who is Whaley and what is he for?
Here’s a slide show from hypothes.is explaining what is up with comments in online media now, and how websites might be better arranged for real peer-reviewing.
They claim pseudo-anonymity will be part of the package they are proposing, and that’s the only way I can see it being beneficial. But at the same time, in order for ‘comment-fraud’ to be avoided, the set-up will need (I assume) to limit each commenter to one identity. This is not going to be easy to do – nor is the notion of one identity either advantageous or even ‘healthy’ for flesh&blood individuals to perform, much less be necessary as a prerequisite to have your voice heard online.
But I’m open to the idea, especially when mention of stance and arguability come into the picture: these affordances are what we have lost with web forums, and what we used to have with old style email discussion lists, something that was particularly valuable for those of us who prefer discussion over mere sound bytes.
Plus, as a discourse analyst focussed on identity online, what they are proposing, e.g. sentence-level annotation, certainly piques my interest in a big way.
Hypothes.is Intro from Hypothes.is on Vimeo.