Youtube M&C Videos: The Death Of The Internet?

William Gibson & the Birth (& Death?) of Cyberspace

William Gibson & Cyberspace

According to Dr. Stewart’s notes (found at Blackboard Academic Suite):

“The term cyberspace was originally used in a short story (entitled “Burning Chrome”) by the Science Fiction writer William Gibson. In the 1984 novel Neuromancer he develops this idea by describing it as:

“A consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions of legitimate operators, in every nation, by children being taught mathematical concepts...A graphical representation of data abstracted from the banks of every computer in the human system. Unthinkable complexity. Lines of light ranged in the non-space of the mind, clusters and constellations of data. Like city lights, receding..."

Peltola notes that Gibsonian cyberspace has been identified as having four features:

1. It is described with familiar spatial images like cities, buildings etc used as metaphors of social structures;
2. It is made of information, offering great power to those who can manipulate information;
3. Bodiless consciousnesses live there; and
4. It is possible to attain immortality in cyberspace, because there everything is data only.

The classic archetype of Gibson's fiction is the' cowboy'. A cowboy is kind of technologically capable loner-hero who can move about the information of cyberspace as an act of will. This image of pure information and of the lone explorer seem somewhat idealised compared to the current realisations of network computing. However, it is important to note when critically analysing Gibson's description that it was penned in the early 1980s and that it is not a historical account of cyberspace but a work of dystopian fiction.

Barlovian Cyberspace

“In contrast to Gibsonian cyberspace, other commentators have noted another more socially-based model of cyberspace that has come to be known as Barlovian cyberspace. Barlovian cyberspace is name after John Perry Barlow ( the lyricist with the band the Grateful Dead). Barlow is the founder of the Electronic Freedom Foundation. In 1996, he issued 'A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace' - mainly in response to the censorship debate surrounding the US's Communication Decency Act - and in this tract he describes a vision of cyberspace in which:

"We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth, We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence of conformity. In our world, whatever human mind may create can be reproduced and distributed infinitely at no cost. We must declare our virtual selves immune to your sovereignty, even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies. We will spread ourselves across the Planet so that no one can arrest our thoughts. We will create a civilization of the Mind in cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before"

Barlovian cyberspace has been characterised as a free, frontier zone with images that suggest a group of settlers moving into empty, virgin lands much in the image of the films depicting the American Wild West...The Barlovian model is a more social characterisation of cyberspace based on interaction between individuals, in contrast to the informational ideas of Gibsonian cyberspace. Both, however, share the use of spatial metaphors. What Barlow seems to be envisioning is a place with a community with particular and different values existing in cyberspace; not necessarily a nation, but certainly a community.”

A very interesting opinion about the relationship between society and technology is expressed by Neil Postman here:

Myths Of Cyberspace

According to Dr. Stewart’s notes (found at Blackboard Academic Suite):

“Richard Wise noted in 2000 that many of the pioneers of computing made the claim that the widespread adoption of the technology was “an irreversible advance for democracy, community and a decentralised society” (Wise, 2000:38). These claims can be thought of a series of interlocking myths that help to shape society's ideas of the Internet and 'cyberspace'.

The following list is my understanding of these myths.

1. Cyberspace is a place apart, and so not subject to rules that apply to the 'real' world;
2. The technology of the Internet makes it free from control by governments and other non-cyberspace institution so that the internet is borderless and free of constraining factors;
3. The technology of the Internet makes it possible to be anonymous and so free to adopt any identity that you chose on-line;
4. The technology of the Internet will bring about the demise of the nation state;
5. The widespread adoption of the Internet will result in the 'de-massification' of the media;
6. The technology of the Internet is making us more social and helping to foster a new kind of community;
7. The technology of the Internet is bringing about prosperity and well-being based solely on a weightless, 'knowledge-based' economy;
8. We are on the verge of a new political era of computer-mediated democracy;
9. The development of the internet is unique and exceptional in human history and not subject to social forces that characterised the adoption of other important technologies”

The Death of Cyberspace

What do we mean by “Death”? By “Death of Cyberspace” we mean the mix of the boundaries between reality and cyberspace. Nowadays, it is getting more and more difficult to distinguish a real activity from a virtual one. Before now, entering cyberspace was a totally immersive and emotional experience. Nowadays, cyberspace has become a part of our real life and vice versa. As a result of this, the immersive elements of cyberspace are getting lost, so according to Dion Hinchcliffe, the “death of cyberspace” is an emerging term.

On the one hand, I agree with this term, because cyberspace is a part of our everyday life and we use it as an extension of reality but on the other hand, I think that there are many activities inside the cyberspace that can offer an immersive experience. My first thought has to do with virtual communities. Second Life is a wide-spread virtual community and people can participate in a fictional world that offers emotional experiences. So, although virtual communities, such as Second Life, present a completely different environment than the real one and although the user can experience bodiless consciousness, in the end, the illusion of being a part of a real world is created. So, the user starts his “journey” from the real life and ends up to experiencing the illusion of real life, because of the immersive procedure. I don’t know if you would call that “the death of cyberspace” but I would call it the circle of life of cyberspace.

To conclude, the “death of cyberspace”, is, according to my opinion, an existing phenomenon but I think that we have to recognize the fact that technology plays a very important role in our lives, so it may have different forms and shapes that we are not familiar with and that we, still, cannot explain. Virtuality and bodiless consciousness are elements of the cyberspace and, I think, they will always be. It’s for sure that some things will be changing, but there will, always be some functions of cyberspace that will distinguish reality from cyberspace itself and that is happening because cyberspace is reality’s support tool. Cyberspace can imitate reality, it can be incorporated to real life and it can be separated from reality, but it can’t replace reality (but who am I to judge?) .

The Matrix

The movie called “The Matrix” deals with the boundaries between reality and cyberspace. In the movie the reality is the cyberspace and people live in an illusionary, non-existent, fake world, controlled by machines. This movie is a very good example of crossing the boundaries between reality and cyberculture and you can watch a short sample here:

Bodiless consciousness and virtuality

When someone is logged into Second Life or he is talking on the phone or he is reading a book, does he experience the separation between his mind and his body? I believe yes. I know it is not a diplomatic answer but that’s what I believe. I think that, in all these occasions, the user of the media is experiencing virtuality because each image, each spoken word and each written word lead to a virtual environment, different from the one that surrounds us. Imagination helps us “escape” and by “escape” I mean separating the mind from the body and living, just for a while, somewhere else. When we talk on the phone we find it very difficult to control our moves, when we read a book we “escape” to an imaginary world, when we log into Second Life we “live” a second life. So, virtuality and bodiless consciousness have, also, to do with very common things (such as a mobile phone, a TV, a newspaper, a book etc.) and it’s clear that we do not find these two characteristics only in cyberspace, but also in the items we use in our everyday life.

Cheers!

Second Life & CSI NY

(source: secondlife.com)
"What is Second Life?



Second Life is a 3-D virtual world entirely created by its Residents. Since opening to the public in 2003, it has grown explosively and today is inhabited by millions of Residents from around the globe.

From the moment you enter the World you'll discover a vast digital continent, teeming with people, entertainment, experiences and opportunity. Once you've explored a bit, perhaps you'll find a perfect parcel of land to build your house or business.

You'll also be surrounded by the Creations of your fellow Residents. Because Residents retain the rights to their digital creations, they can buy, sell and trade with other Residents.

The Marketplace currently supports millions of US dollars in monthly transactions. This commerce is handled with the in-world unit-of-trade, the Linden dollar, which can be converted to US dollars at several thriving online Linden Dollar exchanges."

For more info and for joining this community visit http://secondlife.com/

The reason that I am presenting the information about Second Life (although I don't like virtual communities) is because the hit TV show CSI NY (an American police procedural television series, which premiered on September 22, 2004) is going to use Second Life to solve a murder. What do I mean? In the fifth episode of the new season (season 4, episode 5, "Down The Rabbit Hole") of CSI NY, a killer on the show will escape into Second Life and he will not return to television until spring. In the meantime, the audience can help investigate the crime online. As a fan of all the CSI series, I find the idea very innovative and intriguing. I am not sure if it is going to be successful, but nevertheless it is very interesting to use the combination of a hit TV show and a virtual community as a way to increase interactivity between the audience and the media. This matter has many aspects and introduces new elements to interactive media. The user becomes the leading actor.

I, also, found some very interesting info about this subject at TVGuide and at Virtual Worlds News and you can also watch the trailer here.



You can download the whole episode from: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000W5LS8Q/ref=atv_dp_series

Johnny Mnemonic, William Gibson & Cyberspace

Johnny Mnemonic is a 1995 cyberpunk movie, loosely based on a short story of the same name by William Gibson, in which Keanu Reeves (Matrix) plays the title character, a man with a cybernetic implant in his brain designed to store information. It portrays Gibson's standard dystopian view of the future with the world dominated by large corporations and with strong East Asian influences.

William Gibson & Cyberspace

The word "cyberspace" (from cybernetics and space) was coined by science fiction novelist and seminal cyberpunk author William Gibson in his 1982 story "Burning Chrome" and popularized by his 1984 novel Neuromancer.

William Gibson : writer - the father of cyberpunk

Bibliography , Biography, Blog etc. - source: William Gibson Official Website

"New" & "Old" Media

According to Dr. Stewart's notes (found at Blackboard Academic Suite): "Firstly, it is important to see beyond a technological determinist perspective of the media and realise that terms like old and new media are rooted in the cultural assumptions of the society using such terms. Secondly, to see that computer-based media are being used in an era already deeply effected by the effects of earlier mediation.Thirdly, to provide a intellectual framework with which to discuss the effects of media (Old and New) and fourthly to argue that what is new ( if indeed anything is new about New Media) has to be considered from many different directions."

So we have to look around us and wonder: is this an "old" or a "new" media? Is the phone an "old" media? What about Internet? "Old" or "New"? I find it very difficult to define what is "old" and what is "new". Nevertheless, there is a yardstick-based model for discussing the binary opposition between ""Old" and "New" Media. According to the notes:

"In all, Leaning identifies about five types of 'yardstick' (considered by many commentators as being applicable to this issue) that could make a meaningful distinction between old and new media.

• Systemic
• Technical
• Aesthetic
• Logical
• Political

Systemic Considerations

Systemic attributes are the ways in which the media are dealt with by the market and by the state.In particular we have to consider

• Ownership - The number, diversity and Sector of the Ownership;
• Regulation - Government, Inter-Government, Industry Standards and 'Social Mores';
• Access- How is easy is it to set-up in a particular media etc.

Technical Considerations

• Electric vs Non-electric - All media identified as new are electric (unlike newspapers). However, not all electric media (e.g. 19th Century Telegraph) are now regarded as new media.
• Analogue Vs Digital - all new media identified are digital, but again this is not an exclusive definition.

By being digital and electric the new media tend have certain other sub-characteristics:-

• Digital media tend to be easy to reproduce (a point that is well made by Richard Wise in his book Multimedia: A Critical Introduction). Information is not copied, but reproduced through a set of instructions. This ease in turn gives rise to a number of cultural phenomena such as 'peer-to-peer' file sharing, with open source software programmers making their code available to one another or music fans sharing of digital music files through file formats like mp3.
• User Control of flow - Digital Media make a virtue of hypertextuality, links and interactivity.
• Relative Ease of geographical distribution. The digital media are examples of what economists have been describing as the 'weightless' economy. They are easy to pass around the world via cables and satellites. However, it is worth noting that just because they are realatively easy to disseminate does not mean they are easy to access or control.

Aesthetic Considerations

It is worth asking the question - Do new media look, sound, taste, touch, smell and act any differently from old media?

Remediation

Bolter and Gruisin, in their book Remediation, propose that new media constantly 'remediate' existing media forms ie: they borrow ideas, convention and images from older, established forms. This is not idea uniquely associated with the new media though, as it is worth noting that the start of the TV news has a series of headlines ( a term and concept borrows from print newspapers). It does, however, mean that interface designers etc. will be subject to conservative cultural forces that will demand that their productions conform 'old' print-based models. Old media informs the look and feel of new media.

[We will come back to Remediation during the course of this module time and again. We will question this theory's applicability, its use and insight. You might be interested to know that there are other theories of the relationship between media - for example Lev Manovitch has recently developed a compex typology that explores the relationship between New Media and Film.]

To quote Leaning:-

" new media will not be dramatically different in look and will constantly borrow and make reference to the styles of the old media"

As we will see this is particularly pronounced with branding and the aspects of corporate culture involved with marketing.

Mediamorphosis

Another author that has considered this question is Roger Fidler in his book Mediamorphosis. Fidler argues for a process of change deeply dependent upon the interactions between media (old and new) and the wider society. Fidler gives a very good account of the development of text systems. In particular, he focuses on the 'failed' new media such as the Prestel 'teletext' system developed and implemented in the UK in the 1980s. The system is still in operation but has never been the success that either the Internet or the Minitel system developed in France has been. One of the key differences identified by Fidler has been the importance of person-to-person communication in the uptake of a new technology. In particular, the chat-rooms, e-mails and other flirting spaces of mintel and the world wide web.

Interaction/Interactivity

Interaction is a key 'buzzword' word in media circles at the moment and a number of definitions of new media centre on struggling with what a meaningful definition and usage of this term might be. I will address this key term in later lecture, however, just for now it is worth considering - what do we mean by interaction, who is interacting whom/what? Is this an exclusive feature of media ( new or old)? Is this the 'holy grail' of the new media project?

Tim Berners-Lee, the computer scientist who developed the world wide web at CERN, for example, wishes to develop the web beyond its current hypertext links and interactive pages to make it a 'fully intercreative medium'.

What does Berners-Lee mean by intercreativity? How this different from "Old" Media.

Logical Considerations

Leanings argues:-"With the new media the user is no longer just a consumer."

The old media needed enormous capital, cultural and technical resources. This is no longer true with new media. It was very, very hard to set up a television station. It is much easier to set up a website. In fact individuals have been able to set-up their own pages. It is easy to become a new media author ( in fact a number of commentators have argued that it is too easy) and to express your views, complete with typing errors, spelling mistakes and factual inaccuracies. This is important for our discussion of late modernity as the state and the corporate sector formerly had sole control over the dominant hegemonic forms of information.

Political Considerations

At this point in the lecture it is worth contexting cyberculture in two other contemporary cultural debates, namely those surrounding globalisation and individualisation. These processes have been described by Manuel Castells ( among many others) in his trilogy The Information Age. In this massive work he describes the economic and social changes that have already occurred as a result of a network society. In particular, the global capital markets, the inter-connectedness of markets for goods and labour and the dramatic effects on corporations of processes such as outsourcing. New media, the technology, its practitioners and the wider culture loosely referred to as cyberculture are the child of this network society and also one of its driving forces. However, this does not mean that new technology automatically guarantees a new world order (as witnessed by the bursting of the dot.com bubble in 2000). The future is never that simple!"

Do we need to distinguish "old" from "new" media? When I am using the internet or the phone does the characterization "old" or "new" media affect my use? Personally, as a user of media, i never thought of characterize the media I use. I never thought it was going to be useful. I still don't, but I am sure that helps in order to understand the procedure of mediation and to be able to develop new techniques and forms of mediation.

Another question that I have is: "New" and "Old" Media or "New" vs "Old" Media? I mean that the media which are considered "old" should help to the development of the "new" ones? Or there should always be a "race" in the field of media about which is the "newest" and which the "oldest" media? I hope the correct answer is "New" and "Old" Media and this is why I chose this title for my post. I would like to see different media to be connected to each other because this connection, firstly, affects the users. The technological gap between people, which is caused by many different reasons (age, geography, economy, gender etc) is getting narrower and, in the end, it will not be the technology that will define people, but people who will define technology.

M&C Websites - The Million-Dollar Page

The Million-Dollar Page
Alex Tew's dollar-per-pixel advertising page that raised over a million dollars in just a few months.
In order to learn its origins and history click here.

What do we mean by Media? What do we mean by Cyberculture?

First of all, what do we mean by Media? What do we mean by Cyberculture?

I think giving a clear definition is very difficult. Nevertheless, there are some basic characteristics that we could use in order to make these two terms clear. According to Dr. Gavin Stewart’s notes (found at Blackboard Academic Suite) from the first lecture:

Classic 20th century discourse on the media focuses our attention on broadcasting and the mass media. It analysized the 'media' in terms of producers of the media (e.g. institutions like the BBC), texts (e.g. TV Sit-coms) and audiences. This approach has meant that 'the media' have been defined as being synonymous with television, radio and newspapers etc. This approach quite rightly focuses on such issues as means of production, governance and regulation as important aspects of modern life.

The computer mediation changed completely the way we look at Media revealing new undiscovered areas, new unique ideas and new hard questions. According to Dr. Stewart's notes (found at Blackboard Academic Suite):

The study of the Internet, as an example of computer mediation, has raised all sorts of issues that have forced media theorists and practitioners to look again at the key questions of Media Studies, namely

1. What do we mean by Media? and

2. Why is Media Studies an important subject to study?

This new approach towards Media gave rise to the “New Media” which we will discuss later.

Personally, I would not like to be asked “What do we mean by Media?”. It is like asking how many stars are in the sky tonight. No one, of course, knows the real answer , but also no one can confirm the answer. A lot of theoritics tried and still try to define Media including all of their aspects, answer to the question “Why Media (plural)?” and which are the Media, “Is telephone a medium?”. Personally, I am very confused about this matter. On the one hand, I, stubbornly, do not care about what we mean by Media, on the other hand, I want to know everything about Media in order to understand how they work, how powerful they are and which are their limitations (if there are any). I believe that the question “What do we mean by Media?” is not going ever to be fully answered, since the technological developments and the new forms of expression will always raise new questions. But these studies will always provide exercise for the brain and a good chance to publish new articles and books.

“What do we mean by Cyberculture?” This is a subject that has been studied by many different researchers (sociologists, philosophists, lawyers etc.) from different angles. However, Cyberculture (according to the notes) “can be thought of as the social and cultural effect of the interaction between humans and digital devices such as desktop computers, servers and mobile phones in a myriad of material, social, cultural and political contexts.”

Next time we are going to analyse the terms “New Media”, “Old Media” in order to get closer to understanding “What do we mean by Media?”. Cheers!

Introduction

My name is Costas Boletsis . I was born and raised on Corfu, Greece. I have a degree in Communication and Media Studies that I gained at the University of Athens.
Currently I am studying Media, Culture and Technology as a postgraduate student at the University of Bedfordshire in Luton. This blog is dedicated to the module “Media and Cyberculture” taught by Mr. Stewart and through it I will try to post useful notes, thoughts, links, photos and videos of subjects related to media and cyberculture. Furthermore, there will be posts about subjects that I am, personally, interested in, such as video games, technological developments and extraordinary websites, since all these are, undoubtedly, part of our culture and part of cyberculture.

Hope you enjoy!