What IS new media? A review of Manovich’s “eight possible concepts
of new media” (2003, p. 16) leaves me
thoughtful but wanting something that I can conceptualize, or use as a working
definition. From the readings and past courses
in the MACT program, my sense is that new media is: digital, online, interactive,
democratic (for those who can access it), and users are also producers of
content (Axel Bruns’ concept of produsage) . It can be audio, video, still
images or design, text, or some combination of these. It can be mixed and remixed.
It is constantly changing. It can
represent truth or reality or someone’s conception of fantasy. It can create or
destroy. It can be bad or good. It
connects us; it is social. Ultimately it
is, as Michael Wesch states in his video, it is us… the “machine is us.”
When first presented with the notion of Wikipedia; its vast wealth of human knowledge; its
constantly changing and changeable content, I was, well, flabbergasted—to think
that it could be close to the sum of (current) human knowledge. Even more
mindboggling is that it is never perfect, but nears perfection or “truth” (whatever
that is) through its sheer volume of editors. If this is not a feat of new
media, then what is?
As for “transdisciplinarity,” this is a simpler concept to
grasp. It only makes sense to take a holistic, multi-perspective view of the
subject at hand to full understand it. My question is – which disciplines
are those that we will view and study our topic with? What are the “established
disciplines” that Mark Linder speaks of?
Barb
Manovich’s “eight possible concepts of new media” speak to what we are constantly doing - redeveloping the great concepts of the past. This first struck me in Spring 2010 cohort as we looked at telegraphs and texting - not so different! I found Manovich’s presentation of images being "reused" while text being restricted to basic application interesting. True text is not "re-rolled" but the New Media of Search engine does act as a way to interact with text out of its complete context.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Jarett,
DeleteHere is a link to a Spark episode about Mobile Money in Kenya; where people use their cell phones to transfer money, pay bills etc. (http://www.cbc.ca/spark/2011/02/spark-139-february-27-march-2-2011/)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBarb - thanks for posting. Mark Linder, being in archeology, usually refers to "archeology, painting and sculpture" as disciplines. (See here: http://books.google.ca/books?id=Q5rdQxckelMC&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=Mark+Linder+established+disciplines&source=bl&ots=DRiuDi2sWs&sig=WGkrvf3zxk-Rw3cwQQ4M28zkIoE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DFAST4fKC-aMiALXoZWmDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Mark%20Linder%20established%20disciplines&f=false on page 2). But of course, disciplines themselves are quite fluid or at least have fuzzy boundaries so the idea of transdisciplinarity perhaps really just emphasises those loose borders.
ReplyDeleteRe: your drive for a conceptual definition of new media, I like the one I used in my Ph.D thesis, that new media is really about being "born digital"; something that is created online to be consumed online rather than just a CD which is digital but not...really new media.
What do you think?
I assume the disciplines involved in the study of new media will be different than those of archeology. According to Wikipedia, there are no less than 44 academic disciplines ("An academic discipline, or field of study, is a branch of knowledge that is taught and researched at the college or university level.") Scanning the list I suspect that a good number of the humanities, social sciences, professions and applied sciences could be tapped in our study of new media.
ReplyDeleteCertainly your definition is simple and clear - born digital and created/consumed online.
I am just about to read the Bolter and Grusin article, but wonder how remediation (which uses re-uses old media will fit!)