Social networking and digital gaming media convergence : Classification and its consequences for appropriation

Abstract Within the field of Information Systems, a good proportion of research is concerned with the work organisation and this has, to some extent, restricted the kind of application areas given consideration. Yet, it is clear that information and communication technology deployments beyond the work organisation are acquiring increased importance in our lives. With this in mind, we offer a field study of the appropriation of an online play space known as Habbo Hotel. Habbo Hotel, as a site of media convergence, incorporates social networking and digital gaming functionality. Our research highlights the ethical problems such a dual classification of technology may bring. We focus upon a particular set of activities undertaken within and facilitated by the space – scamming. Scammers dupe members with respect to their ‘Furni’, virtual objects that have online and offline economic value. Through our analysis we show that sometimes, online activities are bracketed off from those defined as offline and that this can be related to how the technology is classified by members – as a social networking site and/or a digital game. In turn, this may affect members’ beliefs about rights and wrongs. We conclude that given increasing media convergence, the way forward is to continue the project of educating people regarding the difficulties of determining rights and wrongs, and how rights and wrongs may be acted out with respect to new technologies of play online and offline.

Media convergence

"The book brings together experts from Media and Communication Studies with Postcolonial Studies scholars to illustrate how the two fields may challenge and enrich each other. Its essays introduce readers to selected topics including »Media Convergence«, »Transcultural Subjectivity«, »Hegemony«, »Piracy« and »Media History and Colonialism«. Drawing on examples from film, literature, music, TV and the internet, the contributors investigate the transnational dimensions in today's media, engage with local and global media politics and discuss media outlets as economic agents, thus illustrating mechanisms of power in postcolonial and neo-colonial mediascapes."--Publisher website

Regulating journalists? The Finkelstein Review, the Convergence Review, and News Media Regulation in Australia

This paper identifies two major forces driving change in media policy worldwide: media convergence, and renewed concerns about media ethics, with the latter seen in the U.K. Leveson Inquiry. It focuses on two major public inquiries in Australia during 2011-2012 – the Independent Media Inquiry (Finkelstein Review) and the Convergence Review – and the issues raised about future regulation of journalism and news standards. Drawing upon perspectives from media theory, it observes the strong influence of social responsibility theories of the media in the Finkelstein Review, and the adverse reaction these received from those arguing from Fourth Estate/free press perspectives, which were also consistent with the longstanding opposition of Australian newspaper proprietors to government regulation. It also discusses the approaches taken in the Convergence Review to regulating for news standards, in light of the complexities arising from media convergence. The paper concludes with consideration of the fast-changing environment in which such proposals to transform media regulation are being considered, including the crisis of news media organisation business models, as seen in Australia with major layoffs of journalists from the leading print media publications.

Globalization, media policy and regulatory design : rethinking the Australian media classification scheme

This paper considers the debate about the relationship between globalization and media policy from the perspective provided by a current review of the Australian media classification scheme. Drawing upon the author’s recent experience in being ‘inside’ the policy process, as Lead Commissioner on the Australian National Classification Scheme Review, it is argued that theories of globalization – including theories of neoliberal globalization – fail to adequately capture the complexities of the reform process, particularly around the relationship between regulation and markets. The paper considers the pressure points for media content policies arising from media globalization, and the wider questions surrounding media content policies in an age of media convergence.

Media classification : Content regulation in an age of convergent media

This article outlines the key recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission’s review of the National Classification Scheme, as outlined in its report Classification – Content Regulation and Convergent Media (ALRC, 2012). It identifies key contextual factors that underpin the need for reform of media classification laws and policies, including the fragmentation of regulatory responsibilities and the convergence of media platforms, content and services, as well as discussing the ALRC’s approach to law reform.

Convergent media policy : the Australian case

This chapter considers the implications of convergence for media policy from three perspectives. First, it discusses what have been the traditional concerns of media policy, and the challenges it faces, from the perspectives of public interest theories, economic capture theories, and capitalist state theories. Second, it looks at what media convergence involves, and some of the dilemmas arising from convergent media policy including: (1) determining who is a media company; (2) regulatory parity between ‘old’ and ‘new’ media; (3) treatment of similar media content across different platforms; (4) distinguishing ‘big media’ from user-created content, and: (5) maintaining a distinction between media regulation and censorship of personal communication. Finally, it discusses attempts to reform media policy in light of these changes, including Australian media policy reports from 2011-12 including the Convergence Review, the Finkelstein Review of News Media, and the Australian Law Reform Commission’s National Classification Scheme Review. It concludes by arguing that ‘public interest’ approaches to media policy continue to have validity, even as they grapple with the complex question of how to understand the concept of influence in a convergent media environment.

New media [Fourth Edition]

This is the fourth edition of New Media: An Introduction, with the previous editions being published by Oxford University Press in 2002, 2005 and 2008. As the first edition of the book published in the 2010s, every chapter has been comprehensively revised, and there are new chapters on: • Online News and the Future of Journalism (Chapter 7) • New Media and the Transformation of Higher Education (Chapter 10) • Online Activism and Networked Politics (Chapter 12). It has retained popular features of the third edition, including the twenty key concepts in new media (Chapter 2) and illustrative case studies to assist with teaching new media. The case studies in the book cover: the global internet; Wikipedia; transmedia storytelling; Media Studies 2.0; the games industry and exploitation; video games and violence; WikiLeaks; the innovator’s dilemma; massive open online courses (MOOCs); Creative Commons; the Barack Obama Presidential campaigns; and the Arab Spring. Several major changes in the media environment since the publication of the third edition stand out. Of particular importance has been the rise of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, which draw out even more strongly the features of the internet as networked and participatory media, with a range of implications across the economy, society and culture. In addition, the political implications of new media have become more apparent with a range of social media-based political campaigns, from Barack Obama’s successful Presidential election campaigns to the Occupy movements and the Arab Spring. At the same time, the subsequent developments of politics in these and other cases has drawn attention to the limitations of thinking about the politics or the public sphere in technologically determinist ways. When the first edition of New Media was published in 2002, the concept of new media was seen as being largely about the internet as it was accessed from personal computers. The subsequent decade has seen a proliferation of platforms and devices: we now access media in all forms from our phones and other mobile platforms, therefore we seen television and the internet increasingly converging, and we see a growing uncoupling of digital media content and delivery platforms. While this has a range of implications for media law and policy, from convergent media policy to copyright reform, governments and policy-makers are struggling to adapt to such seismic shifts from mass communications media to convergent social media. The internet is no longer primarily a Western-based medium. Two-thirds of the world’s internet users are now outside of Europe and North America; three-quarters of internet users use languages other than English; and three-quarters of the world’s mobile cellular phone subscriptions are in developing nations. It is also apparent that conducting discussions about how to develop new media technologies and discussions about their cultural and creative content can no longer be separated. Discussions of broadband strategies and the knowledge economy need to be increasingly joined with those concerning the creative industries and the creative economy.

Academics in the policy process : engagement with Australian media policy inquiries 2011-2013

This paper critically evaluates the series of inquires that the Australian Labor government undertook during 2011-2013 into reform of Australian media, communications and copyright laws. One important driver of policy reform was the government’s commitment to building a National Broadband Network (NBN), and the implications this had for existing broadcasting and telecommunications policy, as it would constitute a major driver of convergence of media and communications access devices and content platforms. These inquiries included: the Convergence Review of media and communications legislation; the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) review of the National Classification Scheme; and the Independent Media Inquiry (Finkelstein Review) into Media and Media Regulation. One unusual feature of this review process was the degree to which academics were involved in the process, not simply as providers of expert opinion, but as review chairs seconded from their universities. This paper considers the role played by activist groups in all of these inquiries and their relationship to the various participants in the inquiries, as well as the implications of academics being engaged in such inquiries, not simply as activist-scholars, but as those primarily responsible for delivering policy review outcomes. The paper draws upon the concept of "policy windows" in order to better understand the context in which the inquiries took place, and their relative lack of legislative impact.

Convergent Media Policy

This chapter considers the implications of convergence for media policy from three perspectives. First, it discusses what have been the traditional concerns of media policy, and the challenges it faces, from the perspectives of public interest theories, economic capture theories, and capitalist state theories. Second, it looks at what media convergence involves, and some of the dilemmas arising from convergent media policy including: (1) determining who is a media company; (2) regulatory parity between ‘old’ and ‘new’ media; (3) treatment of similar media content across different platforms; (4) distinguishing ‘big media’ from user-created content; and (5) maintaining a distinction between media regulation and censorship of personal communication. Finally, it discusses attempts to reform media policy in light of these changes, including Australian media policy reports from 2011-12 including the Convergence Review, the Finkelstein Review of News Media, and the Australian Law Reform Commission’s National Classification Scheme Review. It concludes by arguing that ‘public interest’ approaches to media policy continue to have validity, even as they grapple with the complex question of how to understand the concept of influence in a convergent media environment.

Media futures: A review essay on'The Future of Reputation','TV Futures', and'The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'

In his 1987 book, The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT, Stewart Brand provides an insight into the visions of the future of the media in the 1970s and 1980s. 1 He notes that Nicolas Negroponte made a compelling case for the foundation of a media laboratory at MIT with diagrams detailing the convergence of three sectors of the media—the broadcast and motion picture industry; the print and publishing industry; and the computer industry. Stewart Brand commented: ‘If Negroponte was right and communications technologies really are converging, you would look for signs that technological homogenisation was dissolving old boundaries out of existence, and you would expect an explosion of new media where those boundaries used to be’. Two decades later, technology developers, media analysts and lawyers have become excited about the latest phase of media convergence. In 2006, the faddish Time Magazine heralded the arrival of various Web 2.0 social networking services: You can learn more about how Americans live just by looking at the backgrounds of YouTube videos—those rumpled bedrooms and toy‐strewn basement rec rooms—than you could from 1,000 hours of network television. And we didn’t just watch, we also worked. Like crazy. We made Facebook profiles and Second Life avatars and reviewed books at Amazon and recorded podcasts. We blogged about our candidates losing and wrote songs about getting dumped. We camcordered bombing runs and built open‐source software. America loves its solitary geniuses—its Einsteins, its Edisons, its Jobses—but those lonely dreamers may have to learn to play with others. Car companies are running open design contests. Reuters is carrying blog postings alongside its regular news feed. Microsoft is working overtime to fend off user‐created Linux. We’re looking at an explosion of productivity and innovation, and it’s just getting started, as millions of minds that would otherwise have drowned in obscurity get backhauled into the global intellectual economy. The magazine announced that Time’s Person of the Year was ‘You’, the everyman and everywoman consumer ‘for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game’. This review essay considers three recent books, which have explored the legal dimensions of new media. In contrast to the unbridled exuberance of Time Magazine, this series of legal works displays an anxious trepidation about the legal ramifications associated with the rise of social networking services. In his tour de force, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet, Daniel Solove considers the implications of social networking services, such as Facebook and YouTube, for the legal protection of reputation under privacy law and defamation law. Andrew Kenyon’s edited collection, TV Futures: Digital Television Policy in Australia, explores the intersection between media law and copyright law in the regulation of digital television and Internet videos. In The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It, Jonathan Zittrain explores the impact of ‘generative’ technologies and ‘tethered applications’—considering everything from the Apple Mac and the iPhone to the One Laptop per Child programme.

Documentary practice in a participatory culture

Debates concerning the veracity, ethics and politics of the documentary form circle endlessly around the function of those who participate in it, and the meaning attributed to their participation. Great significance is attached to the way that documentary filmmakers do or do not participate in the world they seek to represent, just as great significance is attached to those subjects whose participation extends beyond playing the part of eyewitness or expert, such that they become part of the very filmmaking process itself. This Ph.D. explores the interface between documentary practice and participatory culture by looking at how their practices, discursive fields and histories intersect, but also by looking at how participating in one might mean participating in the other. In short, the research is an examination of participatory culture through the lens of documentary practice and documentary criticism. In the process, however, this examination of participatory culture will in turn shed light on documentary thinking, especially the meaning and function of ‘the participant’ in contemporary documentary practice. A number of ways of conceiving of participation in documentary practice are discussed in this research, but one of the ideas that gives purpose to that investigation is the notion that the participant in contemporary documentary practice is someone who belongs to a participatory culture in particular. Not only does this mean that those subjects who play a part in a documentary are already informed by their engagement with a range of everyday media practices before the documentary apparatus arrives, the audience for such films are similarly informed and engaged. This audience have their own expectations about how they should be addressed by media producers in general, a fact that feeds back into their expectations about participatory approaches to documentary practice too. It is the ambition of this research to get closer to understanding the relationship between participants in the audience, in documentary and ancillary media texts, as well as behind the camera, and to think about how these relationships constitute a context for the production and reception of documentary films, but also how this context might provide a model for thinking about participatory culture itself. One way that documentary practice and participatory culture converge in this research is in the kind of participatory documentary that I call the ‘Camera Movie’, a narrow mode of documentary filmmaking that appeals directly to contemporary audiences’ desires for innovation and participation, something that is achieved in this case by giving documentary subjects control of the camera. If there is a certain inevitability about this research having to contend with the notion of the ‘participatory documentary’, the ‘participatory camera’ also emerges strongly in this context, especially as a conduit between producer and consumer. Making up the creative component of this research are two documentaries about the reality television event Band In A Bubble, and participatory media practices more broadly. The single-screen film, Hubbub , gives form to the collective intelligence and polyphonous voice of contemporary audiences who must be addressed and solicited in increasingly innovative ways. One More Like That is a split-screen, DVD-Video with alternate audio channels selected by a user who thereby chooses who listens and who speaks in the ongoing conversation between media producers and media consumers. It should be clear from the description above that my own practice does not extend to highly interactive, multi-authored or web-enabled practices, nor the distributed practices one might associate with social media and online collaboration. Mine is fundamentally a single authored, documentary video practice that seeks to analyse and represent participatory culture on screen, and for this reason the Ph.D. refrains from a sustained discussion of the kinds of collaborative practices listed above. This is not to say that such practices don’t also represent an important intersection of documentary practice and participatory culture, they simply represent a different point of intersection. Being practice-led, this research takes its procedural cues from the nature of the practice itself, and sketches parameters that are most enabling of the idea that the practice sets the terms of its own investigation.

Cultural Science and Methodological Challenge!

The processes of digitization and deregulation have transformed the production, distribution and consumption of information and entertainment media over the past three decades. Today, researchers are confronted with profoundly different landscapes of domestic and personal media than the pioneers of qualitative audience research that came to form much of the conceptual basis of Cultural Studies first in Britain and North America and subsequently across all global regions. The process of media convergence, as a consequence of the dual forces of digitisation and deregulation, thus constitutes a central concept in the analysis of popular mass media. From the study of the internationalisation and globalisation of media content, changing regimes of media production, via the social shaping and communication technologies and conversely the impact of communication technology on social, cultural and political realities, to the emergence of transmedia storytelling, the interplay of intertextuality and genre and the formation of mediated social networks, convergence informs and shapes contemporary conceptual debates in the field of popular communication and beyond. However, media convergence challenges not only the conceptual canon of (popular) communication research, but poses profound methodological challenges. As boundaries between producers and consumers are increasingly fluent, formerly stable fields and categories of research such as industries, texts and audiences intersect and overlap, requiring combined and new research strategies. This preconference aims to offer a forum to present and discuss methodological innovations in the study of contemporary media and the analysis of the social, cultural,and political impact and challenges arising through media convergence. The preconference thus aims to focus on the following methodological questions and challenges: *New strategies of audience research responding to the increasing individualisation of popular media consumption. *Methods of data triangulation in and through the integrated study of media production, distribution and consumption. *Bridging the methodological and often associated conceptual gap between qualitative and quantitative research in the study of popular media. *The future of ethnographic audience and production research in light of blurring boundaries between media producers and consumers. *A critical re-examination of which textual configurations can be meaningfully described and studied as text. *Methodological innovations aimed at assessing the macro social, cultural and political impact of mediatization (including, but not limited to, "creative methods"). *Methodological responses to the globalisation of popular media and practicalities of international and transnational comparative research. *An exploration of new methods required in the study of media flow and intertextuality.