Bulleting boards- these are similar to msn messenger, other than the fact that these sites are focused on one particular topic. Anyone can join these bulletin boards and discussion is there for people to find out information as well as just to have a simple conversation about something people find interesting. Anyone can join these groups- this count mean that they are unsafe? what does everyone else think here? The fact that anyone can join from anywhere in the world means that people could easily give out false information. Am i just over-exaggerating? (I usually do!)
Usenet is a way that only certain people with the right software can use. This already says that the people who use it are limited. This could mean possibly that it is a safer site to use, as there are not as many people on it.
I have never heard of usenet- however, i have heard of bulletin boards and have probably been on one without even noticing!
Monday 28 January 2008
MUD's and MOO's
MUDs- 'multi-user dungeon, dormain or dimention'. Consisting of computer gamimg where players are forced to intereact with each other. It is a game which is played over the internet and where chat rooms are found as well as the game itself.
I think this a good way to allow children to interect with each other while doing something they enjoy. However, it could lead to idle-ness as people would become obsessed.
MOO's- These are similar to MUD's- the players are again forced into playing games via text (keyboard-not phone!) It is then up to the players in how they play their game.
I think this a good way to allow children to interect with each other while doing something they enjoy. However, it could lead to idle-ness as people would become obsessed.
MOO's- These are similar to MUD's- the players are again forced into playing games via text (keyboard-not phone!) It is then up to the players in how they play their game.
our views on new media
In my opinion- it is the way in which you are socialised that shows how you erxperience media. The word 'new media', expresses that what is media is brand new and an improvement from something in the past.
Films are an example of this, with technological enhancements that occur within films, it is easy to say that this has effected films as a whole. with action shots being of a higher standard, i believe that as a society, we are instantly gratified. We are always demanding more and more. I believe we have become greedy and rely on technology an new mediums far too much. Does anyome else agree??
I have to say though, because we have been bought up in a world where we are surrounded by media, we do take it for granted a little bit. I cant imagine a life without media and its new medias that make our world go round. we simply cannot live without it!
What do others think??
Films are an example of this, with technological enhancements that occur within films, it is easy to say that this has effected films as a whole. with action shots being of a higher standard, i believe that as a society, we are instantly gratified. We are always demanding more and more. I believe we have become greedy and rely on technology an new mediums far too much. Does anyome else agree??
I have to say though, because we have been bought up in a world where we are surrounded by media, we do take it for granted a little bit. I cant imagine a life without media and its new medias that make our world go round. we simply cannot live without it!
What do others think??
TASK 2- Goebbels view of radio
Geobbel believed that the radio formed a sense of escapism when it came to people within society, within the era that the radio was first produced people within society, were going through traumatic times, such as the war and therefore the radio was a way in which people could escape the burden of everyday life.
The radio is a good way to reach the masses. Not only does it entertain people it also informs them about current events that are happenning around the world.
In my opinion, the radio is not used as much as it used to be, with television becoming the more popular form of entertainment. The radios only benefit is that there are no televisions in cars and so I believe that that is the only time people really listen to the radio is in their cars. What does everyone else think? Do you all listen to the radio, or are you more into television? I wish i was still into the radio, i feel as though i am missing out a little!
The radio is a good way to reach the masses. Not only does it entertain people it also informs them about current events that are happenning around the world.
In my opinion, the radio is not used as much as it used to be, with television becoming the more popular form of entertainment. The radios only benefit is that there are no televisions in cars and so I believe that that is the only time people really listen to the radio is in their cars. What does everyone else think? Do you all listen to the radio, or are you more into television? I wish i was still into the radio, i feel as though i am missing out a little!
Friday 25 January 2008
question....
On page 43, under the section 'Media Stuidies'
Is it trying to put across the idea that it depends on the ways an audience decode a certain media? Im really confused, I think this is what he is trying to say, but in a very academic way (that's probably why i dont understand it!) It says we can share a common 'text', so does that mean we all have similar ideas about certain medias, but within those ideas, we have varied beliefs when it comes to looking at it in real depth. I guess its like saying, you have identified that what someone like Frank Gallager is doing in shameless is wrong. However, those from a lower social class will find it humerous as maybe they have been bought up to see this as normal. However, someone of a higher class, will identify that he is doing something wrong. And also, have the knowledge that it is serious and not something of a humerous nature. Am i reading into this too much? All im trying to say, is that people like Morley believe that it depends on the individual and the way you are bought up.
Is it trying to put across the idea that it depends on the ways an audience decode a certain media? Im really confused, I think this is what he is trying to say, but in a very academic way (that's probably why i dont understand it!) It says we can share a common 'text', so does that mean we all have similar ideas about certain medias, but within those ideas, we have varied beliefs when it comes to looking at it in real depth. I guess its like saying, you have identified that what someone like Frank Gallager is doing in shameless is wrong. However, those from a lower social class will find it humerous as maybe they have been bought up to see this as normal. However, someone of a higher class, will identify that he is doing something wrong. And also, have the knowledge that it is serious and not something of a humerous nature. Am i reading into this too much? All im trying to say, is that people like Morley believe that it depends on the individual and the way you are bought up.
first reading!!!
Ok, so after reading Lister-et-al, i have decided that we are so idle!
As a country, we are instantly gratified-always wanting more and more and I think we rely way too much on technology. I think we use the internet as a way of communicating too much. Whatever happened to the days where we hand wrote letters to everyone. i know that i dont ever hand write things anymore. The interenet is an excuse for us to be bone idle and its ridiculas. I agree with the reading in that using digital media, allows us to experiment with new technologies and as a society the technologicalk enhancements mean that we are able to achieve things, that we would never be able to do in past centuries. I found it interesting that it has only been the last few centuries that digital media has taken forms in the entertainment media, such as cinema and of course not forgetting the mobile phone phenomenon! I didnt realise that it was used in the military units before it reached other types of mediums.
I also found it interesting that it was from the 196's onwards, where there was a rapid change in media. Is it me, or does that seem really early?? I guess that's just because we have been bought up in a world of technology, so we are just used to it!!
As a country, we are instantly gratified-always wanting more and more and I think we rely way too much on technology. I think we use the internet as a way of communicating too much. Whatever happened to the days where we hand wrote letters to everyone. i know that i dont ever hand write things anymore. The interenet is an excuse for us to be bone idle and its ridiculas. I agree with the reading in that using digital media, allows us to experiment with new technologies and as a society the technologicalk enhancements mean that we are able to achieve things, that we would never be able to do in past centuries. I found it interesting that it has only been the last few centuries that digital media has taken forms in the entertainment media, such as cinema and of course not forgetting the mobile phone phenomenon! I didnt realise that it was used in the military units before it reached other types of mediums.
I also found it interesting that it was from the 196's onwards, where there was a rapid change in media. Is it me, or does that seem really early?? I guess that's just because we have been bought up in a world of technology, so we are just used to it!!
Tuesday 22 January 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)