Liquid Life, Convergence Culture and Media Work

Above is a simple mind map I made based on the gist that the journal is trying to say from my understanding.

Liquid Life = constant change (Flux)

The five (5) issues the author looked at is new capitalism, media in everyday life, new media culture and society, liquid life and media work and convergence culture.

1) New capitalism

Work + family = fundamental shift

Mr Faizal and Ducker states that information and knowledge have become the primary form of capital. I personally agree with this statement. As we know, information and knowledge is power which enables one to be mobile and to be able to help the company climb the ladder or stay on top in terms of politics, societal issues and so on. 

As changes are constant: the only thing permanent is impermanent itself.

2) Media in everyday life

Online love, search engines, weblogs, online games including "meta-gaming, online shopping etc.

Contemporary changes in our economy, politics, society and also technology.

3) New media culture and society

COLLABORATION is the KEY. Collaboration of different media tools will attract the end-users (user-innovation communities)

"The media environment becomes the key site to the changing context of how we live, work and play." Basically what the author is trying to say here is how the media INFLUENCES us.

I agree with this statement the author mentioned in the journal " relevant to our concern is the inter-relationship between work-time, leisure-time & media- time" ( it is a much bigger place then it used to be but at the same time reducing our lifeworld. For example, interact with everyone yet "seeing" no one)

Due to the use of media, we interact less face to face or in person with people, rather we use the media to send out message or to communicate with others without actually being able to see that person "in person".

4) Liquid life and media work

The link between, the rapid-change and the media work.

Media revolution according to the journal means the "key to understanding our increasing opportunity, too see this kind of behaviour as a way for us to make sense of the growing complexity and uncertainty of the world around us."

Who is to blame for this liquid life we live in today? The journal mentions that the consumer culture blames the media as the main culprit. However, I disagree with that. In my person opinion why blame the media when we should blame the people behind the media and rather what we people do to the media tool.

5) Convergence Culture

According to tis journal, it states that the media should have a culture of its own, a LINE between consumption and production, making and using & active and passive spectators.

Like anything in life, too much of something is bed. Hence there must be a line draw to "over" doing something. Convergence culture is the balance between the media and the consumers.

COMMENTARY 

Those days, during my grandfathers generation and before. People used to work to make an ans meat, whereby work was work, it was not everything as it took less time as compared to today.

However, in today's world. Work is life, convergence (merge). Work itself has become your life. 

Modern tool that has facilitated this convergence is the MEDIA. The reason for why our world has changed are due to the two reasons below.

1) Globalisation

2) Competition

Personally I feel what WAS a means has now become an ant itself. More time, energy, effort is spent on work so that you can continue with your life.

With that said, is convergence good?

The power of media

From my reading, having reading all the four journals, personally I feel this is the hardest to really understand what the author is trying to say. 

While I understand work + life has merged. The tools of the media has helped people to interconnect, easy accessibility, mobile and work anywhere and any time.

Good or bad, the media has a very central role in this changing value system of our life!

Apart from that, I would like to state that the author was very kind to say it is a "convergence". As personally, had to agree with him, I would say it is more then a convergence rather it has taken over our life.

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace

Just like have independence of a country, this article speaks about the independence of cyberspace.

Vested interest group = they have their own agenda which might conflict with the true meaning of  independence of cyberspace.

The cyberspace is borderless and belongs to every net citizen of the world. Indeed, separate world of it's own own and it's not govern by any country or authority.

Asserting a right which is similar to the right of Freedom Of Speech found in most constitutions of so called "developed" world.

Just as much as that freedom has been eroded over the years, the new found freedom of expression of  ideas and thoughts in cyberspace may also be restricted by governments. He gives examples, of this developed countries including the United States which have legislation that interferes with the independence of cyberspace.

The author's stand is that these restrictions are result of  vested interest, unfounded fear, ignorance, and outdated values. He is confident that while the human body may subject itself to various forms of restrictions and hardship, the human mind will always remain free especially in the world of cyberspace. This is the gist of Barlow's declaration.

A moral declaration of a purported goal, example of independence of expressions and thoughts. It is very interesting, appealing and challenging idea to all active cyber citizens. The article admits that there are various restrictions and hardships to really enjoy "full" independence.  

One has to agree as pointed out by Barlow that there are in many countries, developed or undeveloped, legislation's that are serious obstacles to this freedom. Malaysia included.

Since it is merely a declaration, Barlow does not claim or give us suggestions how to overcome the many forms of restrictions and therefore truly become independent netizens.

1) No central authority

In our world, we have a lot of different laws to keep us on tract. However, on the internet world, there is not as many laws as we have in our world and the internet laws are very much different from our laws.Due to this, we have more freedom on the internet to do almost or close to anything we want.

2) Different rules/ ways/ ethics

Search engine versus advertising, search engines such as Google, Yahoo, MSN and so on allows us to rearch for information which are valid and mostly accurate too. 

However, for advertising, it is more of a push information as advertising is merely used to advertise a certain product or service whereby the benefits, advantages or unique selling point of the product or service is written on the advertisement.

3) Internet culture

Internet culture to means the culture of the internet citizens. It is a different currently in the internet. There are so share information such as songs, files and so on. Apart from that, there are software application tools too.

4) Transaction & Relationships

With the collaboration between different tools in the media, it is easy for one to get connected to another even if they stay very far from each other.

It is a known fact that the internet can bring people closer or also break peoples relationships. Easy connectivity and excess enables people to get closer to each other. 

5) Virtual identity

Virtual identity could be CREATED AND CHANGED. The internet allows a person to be another person on the internet. As we know, many people are victims of online frauds due to the reason people are gullible and do not stop to think that these people who they don;t know on the internet can create and change their identity according to what they want.   

6) The emergence of new industries and new distributions of wealth

Nowadays, there are online shopping, online gaming, online search engines and so on. Apart from that, you can also apply for new jobs online with websites such as Asiaparttime. Whereby people have the opportunity to search for jobs and apply for jobs online.

Question:

Does the blame sorely rest on the government? Except for some dictatorships and communist governments, most of the "developed" countries have democratically elected peoples representatives who legislate and run governments. Does the buck stop with the citizens who elected the government?

Something to ponder on:

On the other hand, is absolute freedom on cyberspace totally good and will have no negative effects on the society?  Absolute freedom assuming all humans act responsibility. Do we? If so, why then do we need to stop and go on signs, why do we have traffic lights, etc?

Open Culture and the Nature of Network - Information Ecology

To understand this article, one would first need to understand what is "information ecology."?
Ecology is a scientific term used to describe the link or relation of one organisms to another and its physical surroundings. Applying this to Global Network would be the information, network carries from one link or website to another.

                                           (it is a constant flow between these three elements)                      

Integrated environment from the chart I did above refers to the ecology of government and the dynamics.

ORGANISMS = ENVIRONMENT + INFORMATION + NODES

The article talks about the integrated environment which is LINKED to information and institutions/structures which he calls NODES. He also mentions that, the environment he talks about is NOT MATERIAL but intangible flow of information produced and processed by media and the nodes come about where as a result of information of this flows of information.

The author uses the ecology model as in nature to show the nature of the network. 

The flow + nodes = build upon each other (growing) and also provide the stability to the environment. During class, Mr Faizal draw on the board the nodes flow which looks like the below image. 

 AND

I would like to compare the above image of nodes, with a spider web. As the image above and a spider web; one builds upon the other and also the fact that one small change can change the whole structure. 

from the article, I also understand that the nodes and flow of information themselves depend on the dynamic nature of the environment which is NOT STATIC (always in a state of flux - not static). However there is a certain pattern to this constant change, The dynamic nature of this society has four recurring characteristics which are interdependency, change, time-boundness and differentiation.

Interdependency

Interdependent meaning that it can't exist by itself. The network society is continues evolving just like any other society, it also has a "life" of its own. New things come, old things go. It has to be able to depend on each other just like human beings, "no man is an island by himself."

Change

Just like human beings continuesly change due to their surroundings or situations, similarly the nodes also change by being connected from one to another. The only constant thing is change itself! The article mentions that " the mode of survival is adaptation instead of optimization." Meaning to survive we have to learn to adapt to our surroundings, and in order to adapt we need to first change. The same thing happens in the ecological environment.

Time-boundness

Today, mobility is essential to us the human beings as we live in a very fast paced life. With that said the ecological environment, it is essential that the information flows very quickly to supply to our demand.

Differentiation 

The article states that " information is difference and the nodes survive as long as they can make a difference."

Meaning, the more information the nodes produce, the nodes will survive as they are different.

COMMENTARY

While the author says they are stable by themselves, but does not look at consumers of all this information flow. As we know, the gatekeepers can choose and be selective in the type of information they want to flow. There is concerns or worries that these gatekeepers are manipulative. The type, nature and content of the information to the end users. Am I right?


The movie "Hackers (1995)" which Angelina Jolie acted in her younger days, is an example that not only the government can control the information flow in the internet but rather people themselves who has strong knowledge on hacking. These hackers can access P&C information on the network due to their knowledge of hacking. With that said, again I rise the question. Does the information flow on the internet really has its freedom?

This article from Felix Stalder talks about how ultimately society uses it and benefits from it, will depend on the users themselves. Just like any other tool, can be abused. Over dependency may also have long term negative effects where people stop to think for themselves.

Global Network DIGC202

I must admit that this journal "Power does not reside in institutions, not even the state or large corporations. It is located in the network that structure society.." It is mentally challenging as there is no black and white answer to what Manuel Castells writes about as it is constantly contradicting, as what seems logical may not be logical.

First, what is network? Network is a fluid which constantly changes based on common goals or common beliefs from the society. I say this because, if there is no common goal or beliefs then there will be no network as there would be nothing to communicate about. Am I right?

Manuel mentions that we live in a network society, not in an informational society or a knowledge society. I disagree with that statement, as information and knowledge is what creates the network society in my personal opinion.

Current technology is what enables networking, technology tools are what enables communication which is so rapid and constantly changing around the societies become interconnected around the world, while it is by itself - this is what the author is trying to say.

First, network societies expends on a global scale. Powerful people who are sharing the same view (society), they can influence the society.

Second, networked organisations out complete all other forms of organisation. Here the author speaks about organizations can be influenced. For example, the 2008 Elections. The government was behind time and slow during the elections due to our current technology savy people and the network. Therefore this worked towards their disadvantage.

Third, the autor goes on speaking about management crisis. The fourth, where he speaks about civil society is reconstructed at the local and global level through networks of activists...... Here he speaks about NGO. For example would be, Bersih. People around Malaysia shared their opinion through Facebook, SMS and so on.

Fifth, sociability is transformed in the new historical context..... here he talks about individualism and the need for sharing, to understand and influence our view/ideas etc.

Sixth, the author talks about how POWER shapes everything (network society) But where does the power come from? large corporations? like we know from the US as some large corporations control the government due to economy reasons. Or is the power located within us, with our common goals and beliefs?

Finally, yes the author mentions that power changes society, but from where to what? I guess no one can answer this. As communication itself is a two way flow, so it networking as it influences and shapes our society.

In general, the topic "network logic" it self explains that there is no real black and white to the answer and this journal definitely gives room to us to have our own opinion and views about the journal. But what the author keeps saying is that network is shared by common goal or beliefs from people and that network is dominant.

Network rely on technology tools, as without technology network would not exist in my understanding. Hence why there was no network during my parents generation. I think I have wrote alot, enjoy reading and do criticize and give me your opinions :)