Strategically Communicating

The latest topic of the class is Agenda Setting theory and the reading that we have been exploring, The Shallows by Nicholas Carr, is about the shortening of our attention spans, and our diminishing ability to think deeply as a result of new media forms brought about by the Internet. It occurred to me that those in power like large media entities and politicians and their teams are aware of both of these concepts, and how they work together, which they then try to exploit for their own ends. These two ideas are related to each other in the sense that in order to “set an agenda” today, and to convince the public that a certain issue is important, any established media entity knows that it will need to transmit a message not only repetitively, but also through a wide variety of channels in order to break through all of the noise that we now encounter every day. However, to address a different side of this argument, I also wonder if the media is simultaneously and rapidly losing its power to set an agenda, because of the large number of ways that we can get our information and also because of an increasing level of distrust in conventional media sources.

I am fascinated by the idea of our brains physically changing in result of new technology, as discussed in Chapter Three of The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains.  While the concept of evolution over generations (and centuries) makes sense, we are still living in the dawn of the technology age, and already physical changes to our brains can be observed.

Author Nicholas Carr tends to lean toward a cautionary viewpoint in terms the measurable effects that technology has on our brains (he even states that he misses his old one at the conclusion of Chapter 1). Social media plays a significant role in the re-circuiting of our brains, as seen in the ASAP Science video, 5 Crazy Ways Social Media Is Changing Your Brain Right Now:

While I have certainly experienced all of the examples used in the video, the one that struck me as intriguing is that relationships initiated online through social media tend to be more successful. Sure, there could be an argument made to refute this research, but it seems logical that it would be accurate given the myriad ways that people can present themselves online.

I was perusing Facebook this morning, and what should appear in my feed? A viral video about double standards in sports coverage.

At first blush, I was mildly irritated because the article that led me to the video was entitled, “This video shows male athletes getting asked the same absurd questions as female athletes,” which is not exactly true. The offending questions are dubbed over the ones that were actually asked to make it appear as if the athletes were reacting to trivial inquiries. For reference, here is the raw footage of Russell Westbrook’s post-game interview from 2014 (apologies for the expletive).

Now, does this take away from the message? I would argue that it does not, though the entertainment site that picked it up gently misrepresented the content to aid in spreading it. The importance of addressing gender bias remains, and the video (garnering 350K views in six days) increases awareness. Reporting imbalance is ubiquitous in American media, permeating sports, politics, entertainment, and the like. I found it especially interesting, given the discussion Jordan started in class on Monday.

Let’s talk about this. What are your thoughts?

During last night’s discussion about the ways in which social media can affect a person’s perception of (and participation in) a particular issue, I thought of the Serial podcast. The format of the show, as its title implies, hearkens back to the days of serialized literature, and as a result every episode leaves its listener wanting more information. This encourages the listener not only to tune in to the next episode, but also to take to the internet and perform supplemental research, or at the very least, visit the website where the producers have posted pictures of relevant maps and evidence. We are no longer merely audience members, we are investigators; and oftentimes we feel so invested in the story that we start conversations on social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter.

This podcast is also relevant to our discussion of framing, as host Sarah Koenig seemingly becomes more sympathetic to Adnan, the accused, as her research progresses. Koenig even admits to her sympathetic tendencies in one episode, and by doing so she addresses the fact that Adnan is going to be viewed through all sorts of frames, based on his age, race and attitude (and the age, race and attitude of the person doing the framing). But by realizing her own bias is an imperfect assessment of the situation, she does not seem to let it undermine her journalistic intentions.

Do you agree? Can a journalist be openly biased and not let it affect the neutrality of his/her work?

Chapter Six in The Shallows talks about Costikyan’s independent games movement as well as how indie brands could survive in the market. This discussion reminds me that nowadays, there are more and more artists and designers setting up their brands instead of applying for jobs in big companies.

As they start marketing their brands and make it more “spreadable,” they prefer to use Instagram or any other social media to reach out to their potential customers. In addition to the now famous Daniel Wellington watch, another success story is Kaufmann Mercantile, a lifestyle company that sells everything you’ll use in daily life. After launching their brand, the company sent an email to some famous Instagramers, inviting them to choose whatever things they like from KM’s website, to help promote the brand. KM also gave each of photographers their own promotion code, so their followers would enjoy a special discount.

To indie brands like DW watch and Kaufmann, social media can be one of the most efficient tools to help them succeed, in addition to starting a project on Kickstarter to fund their brand. However, start-up companies have a long way to go before bringing their brand to the mainstream market, or even owning a physical store. Can indie brands survive or continue to be successful without relying on social media?

If media would help to dismantle barriers of understanding and encourage “deeper kinds of cultural exchanges…designed to foster richer understandings that address both common experiences and diverse perspectives,” as authors Jenkins, Ford and Green state in their book, Spreadable Media, then this Ted Talk by Susan Cain is a great example of participatory culture and media helping to serve the democratic process. Viewed over 12 million times, talks like Cain’s help to promote “deep cultural empathy” by bringing attention to a cultural bias and to an often overlooked population. Participatory talks like Cain’s strengthens people’s voices and accountability and opens up opportunities for widespread dialogue and engagement, all representative characteristics of a strong and thriving democracy.

Just last month, Netflix took a low-budget approach to viral marketing for Marvel’s Daredevil at the New York Comic Convention. Instead of showing potential viewers what the program is about, they simply put up flyers for the law firm depicted in the series, complete with a hashtag to discover what was going on via social media, as well as a URL that linked to bonus content.

This campaign was successful because it fell into two categories of spreadable media, outlined in chapter five of Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. To existing fans of the show, the flyers were a reference to something they understood and already had an appreciation for. To the curious and unaware, the flyers had an element of mystery, such that they required a bit of interaction to discover the meaning of the advertisement. This demonstrates the value of versatility in attracting multiple audiences in order to go viral.

Because of the hashtag, this campaign was quickly talked about on Twitter, picked up by entertainment websites, and cemented as a trend on social media. The hashtag remains in use on Twitter today, for fans of the show looking to engage in conversation and share content related to the series.

This weekend, for the first time, I thought of an e-book as spreadable reading material. Then while reading chapter 5 of Spreadable Media, I thought of the capacity for applications like Twitter to make certain content go viral, and wondered if short stories or novels will one day be released through a similar medium. Maybe some of you saw the articles that came out last weekend concerning a novelized series of Twitter posts written by an exotic dancer who goes by Zola. Her tweets, which are definitely not safe for work, recount a series of misadventures she experienced while visiting Florida with another female sex worker, and immediately went viral.

The public and news media raved about these tweets, praising the author for her candor and sense of humor, and it’s since been “storified for reading convenience.” Time even perpetuated a conversation about “dream-casting a movie version.” In reality though, this is a traumatic story of forced prostitution and murder, but the way in which it’s framed and presented to the public allows it to be viewed through a filter of ironic attachment. People view it like they would any other link in an online thread, and as a result it can be easy to laugh off the grotesqueness of Zola’s tale. But it is supposed to be non-fiction, right? So, should we pay attention to this as if it’s an example of amateur gonzo journalism? Or is it just receiving so much attention because people are fascinated with bad news?

Prior to the major eruption over Volkswagen’s emissions scandal, Greenpeace activists employed the weapons of parody and timeliness in the war against major auto makers.

In the era of the Disney company’s acquisition of Star Wars and the months leading to the release of the next film in the series, never before have George Lucas’ characters been more globally recognizable than today.

<br />

In Jenkins, Ford, and Green’s chapter on spreadable media, the Greenpeace media stunt is an apt example of “timely controversy” and “parody.”

By dressing as Stormtroopers and displaying a billboard mashup of Darth Vader and the Volkswagen logo, the alignment of major auto makers with symbols for ultimate evil are uncanny.

Unlike many protest events, the Greenpeace Troopers standing vigil over the auto maker event didn’t have to employ shouts and chants; their message was inherent in the symbols they employed.

But, as Jenkins, Ford, and Green state in their section on civic media, the Greenpeace protest is not a substitute for discourse about the Volkswagen issue; audience members who watch the video have to take their example and begin to organize a larger dialogue around the issues of civic change.