What is New Media?
New Media. Words that conjure up many different images at once. But what exactly is New Media? How is it defined? Why do we need to define it? Perhaps the answers to these questions are not as simple as they may seem. New Media impacts us on a day to day basis, molding the way we see the world and how we react to it. There have been many attempts at defining New Media, however it seems as though we are still at a loss as to what exactly New Media is and how important it is to our society.
Before going into the importance of New Media, let us first break it down and discuss some of the definitions people, over the years, have given it. The Cambridge Dictionary defines New Media as the following:
“ .. products and services that provide information or entertainment using computer or the internet, and not by the traditional methods such as television and newspapers.”
So, by that definition, New Media is composed of only the online side of the spectrum, which has valid logic. In this new “digital age” almost anything online is considered to be “new”, at least compared to the recent 50 years or so. But, could New Media mean more than this? Why are mediums like television and newspaper excluded? To answer this, we must first look at the phrase “atoms to bits” and what exactly is meant by this. Dr. Lucas, a professor at Middle Georgia State University goes into excellent detail with his quote,
“ No longer are the products of professional culture married to their physical containers; the new media are bits: free of atoms that seek to control their dissemination. ”
In other words, there are no physical containers to hold new media. The entire idea of atoms to bits simply means that everything is transforming to digital. No longer are we restricted to this notion of ‘only the experts know’, we can now become experts ourselves with all of the knowledge available to us. Forbes, with its article on this very topic states the following:
“ .. work previously done by human beings in physical space has been transformed into coded instructions executed by a digital machine. ”
Indeed, it seems as though a lot of work done previously by humankind has been digitized into a more free and less abrasive format. Many do not realize they hold more power in their hand than we had only a few decades ago. The argument is brought up that people only use this technology to search the internet for cat videos, but I must disagree. What are students now doing in the classroom? How is the classroom itself changing? All of this goes back to the idea of “atoms into bits” and how life is changing whether we like it or not. Students are now picking up their phones in classrooms and questioning things their professors are saying. This is not out of disrespect, but it is this idea that we can now question our experts. Some classrooms have even acknowledged this and began to integrate technology into the classroom, allowing the students to teach themselves and further their knowledge accordingly. It is all of these notions that we must look forward to as time advances.
Now, to return to the topic at hand and how we define media, there are many writers that attempt to explain this wholeheartedly. Lev Manovich, known for his book The Language of New Media, is one of the more well known writers of our time. It is within Manovich’s introduction to The New Media Reader, New Media from Borges to HTML, that he discusses eight propositions which are considered to be the more profound definitions of New Media. Quoting from the book, we have:
New Media versus Cyberculture
New Media as Computer Technology Used as a Distribution Platform
New Media as Digital Data Controlled by Software
New Media as the Mix Between Existing Cultural Conventions and the Conventions of Software
New Media as the Aesthetics that Accompanies the Early Stage of Every New Modern Media and Communication Technology
New Media as Faster Execution of Algorithms Previously Executed Manually or through Other Technologies
New Media as the Encoding of Modernist Avant-Garde; New Media as Metamedia
New Media as Parallel Articulation of Similar Ideas in Post-WWII Art and Modern Computing
Each one discusses its own notions when defining this expressive topic. As this article continues, many of these propositions will be referenced. But, to start with, let us breach the subject of Cyberculture versus New Media. To answer this, we must first understand exactly how Manovich defines Cyberculture. Within Borges to HTML, it states,
“ .. the study of various social phenomena associated with Internet and other new forms of network communication. ”
By contrast, New Media is less focused on the direct social aspects of networks than the technology and cultural paradigms that allow these social interactions to take place. For example, Cyberculture would study the interactions of people on Facebook, whereas New Media would focus on social media as a platform and the effects such platforms have on culture as a whole.
Manovich’s fourth proposition is especially impactful to our understanding of New Media as it states,
“..the Mix Between Existing Cultural Conventions and the Conventions of Software.”
This means that while computer technology has become more and more important to media, many old ways of thought still persist. The example Manovich gives in Borges about film holds true. Yes computer technology is critical to the production of movies, and platforms such as Netflix have had an enormous impact on how they are distributed, but much of the production process has remained unchanged. Humans are still the primary drivers of the creative process, leaving the computer to remain mere “technicians.”
It is this idea of new versus old that will be discussed in more detail. Many of Manovich’s other propositions will be spoken about later as well. Perhaps a question that should be asked is if writers like Manovich are correct in their assumptions. After all, isn’t Manovich an expert? It is this process of ‘questioning the experts’ that is such a part of today’s digital world. New Media is a very important topic that, as a society, we must continue to study and discuss. Only by looking through the research done before us can we come to the proper conclusions and learn from it.
{1/12/17}
-Joanna S Powell
___________________________________________________________________
New vs. Old
The idea of new versus old is a topic that has come up many times within today’s digital world. There have been many discussions about this subject, some more fruitful than others. However, before this topic can truly be explored, we must first look into why, as a society, we still need these old techniques and technologies.
This conflict of old and new media can be seen within a Startribune article which discusses why many people have not given up traditional cable TV for streaming services. They state,
“ Most people consider the hassle of cord cutting to be too great. ”
Even with the constant, rapid advancement of technology, old media remains a great and critical element in the daily lives of a large segment of the population. Why is this? Why can society not displace itself from our past and focus on our future as a whole? This is a topic that has been brought up many times within history, but perhaps not as much as in the here and now. The answer to this is a very complicated one, one which has not been found yet. So many arguments have stemmed from the idea of completely tossing out the old and starting fresh. But the question is why hasn’t it been done yet and is it the correct thing to do?
Get Joanna Shea Powell’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Perhaps the best way to answer this is to first define what media actually is and how it can become outdated. Media, according to the Oxford Dictionary, is defined as the following:
“ The main means of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet) regarded collectively. ”
Even this definition relies heavily on older notions. Given the changes in the media landscape it may be simpler to think of media itself as a container for ideas. The means through which these ideas are created, distributed, and consumed brings the distinction between old and new media. Vin Crosbie, in What is New Media?, breaks media into three distinct forms of communication: interpersonal, mass, and new.
Interpersonal media allows content to be easily individualized and gives all participants equal control, but has a very limited scope. Mass media on the other hand addresses the issue of scope by distributing content to an infinitely wide audience. This audience, however, has very limited ability to control this content as said content cannot be fully individualized. These two forms lead directly into New media which,
“..has the advantages of both the Interpersonal and the Mass media, but without their complementary disadvantages.”
Each of these three forms of media still center around the notion of communicating ideas. Thus media can be thought of as a container for ideas. As media has evolved the shape and form of these containers has changed greatly to the point where these containers no longer even require physical form to be distributed.
More discussion on this topic will be further explored in future entries.
{1/14/17}
-Joanna S Powell
To continue this topic, one question that could be asked is when what happens when New Media becomes old. Is there a set time frame for when we say ‘oh, that is old now, time to move on’. Or does it occur when new things are invented and naturally take the place of the old? According to Manovich’s fifth proposition, this is somewhat true. Quoting from the introduction once more,
“ ..some authors have suggested that every modern media and telecommunication technology passes through its ‘new media stage.’ In other words, at some point photography, telephone, cinema, television each were ‘new media.’ ”
This implies that there is a cycle that new media follows into old media. There have been many revolutionary inventions that could be considered new media, however we have ‘outgrown’ them. That is not to say they are considered useless now, no, technology has only advanced them to the point we do not need the original anymore.
Manovich’s definition discusses a change in immediacy and access to what could not be represented beforehand. His example revolves around film and the use of direct cinema, which can be considered a ‘revolt’ toward what was considered main stream at the time. However, this only brings in the notion of immediacy once again, where things are changing to either counter the current container, or modify it to be better (unknowingly or not). When people were using this direct cinema, or cinema verite as it is also called, they did not realize their ‘revolting’ would change how we view some films today.
This could offer an answer towards when we transition from new media to old. It offers many notions that open up new possibilities for creators and consumers of media alike. This could pose the question what makes New Media new in the first place. It is through the changing of media, through using old techniques and technologies and advancing on them that makes them new. In fact, New Media could not be considered new without the old media to compare it to. Manovich has something to say about this as well with his sixth proposition on the definition of New Media. It states,
New Media as Faster Execution of Algorithms Previously Executed Manually or through Other Technologies
As Manovich puts it, a ‘digital computer is a programmable machine’. But, for a machine to be programmed, a human must first understand what is being programmed and how to program it into the computer. In other words, and using a simple example, for a computer to be able to add 2+2, a human must first understand how to do it beforehand. This is a rather round-about way of saying that we still need previous, old, methods (and technologies) to advance ourselves. It continues to rev0lve around this notion of immediacy and how quickly we can get things done. Understanding the idea of old versus new only helps us in the end.
The PewResearchCenter did a study on blogs and how social media relate and differ from traditional press. Within their findings, they state that
“ ..most original reporting still comes from traditional journalists, but technology makes it increasingly possible for the actions of citizens to influence a story’s impact. “
So this leads us into another idea toward new versus old, the feedback loop. With old media it was almost impossible to get feedback on certain topics within a reasonable amount of time. Even with the use of mail, it was rather difficult to get feedback on time. The advancement of email certainly helped, but even email seems to be going the way of old media now. It is social media that is taking its place. With things like Twitter, Facebook and even Youtube, stories are getting out much quicker with even quicker responses. Something posted on Twitter can immediately get a reply and be discussed accordingly.
So, with this new immediacy spectrum, is the argument of old versus new still valid? Certainly more research is needed to answer this question alone, plus the many others that revolve around it.
{1/15/17}
-Joanna S Powell
___________________________________________________________________
“The Medium is the Message.”
Famous words by a famous man — Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan is best known for writing Understanding Media and being a pioneer in the New Media landscape. His entire idea of the medium being the message is a profound notion that has changed the way we see New Media as a whole. His idea revolves around the concept that how things are conveyed is just as important as what is being portrayed. If anything, the content is secondhand to the container. For example, when we see a wine glass, the content itself does not really matter, even if is assumed to be wine. It is the container that has meaning and that conveys its own message. To quote Dr. Lucas from his Intro to New Media lecture,
“What's inside doesn’t matter.”
Containers can change and influence what is contained within them. Much like a fluid, content will tend to conform to the container it is placed within.
Marshall McLuhan pointed out that focusing only or even mostly on the content of a medium misses much of the effect any medium has on ourselves and society as a whole. There are many instances in which content has driven a major societal change, but the medium that content is contained within can be just as important. For example, the Bible has had many tidal effects on society as a whole but it was the introduction of the printing press and its mass production that helped lead to events like the protestant reformation.
Another quote by McLuhan, perhaps even better illustrating his idea of the medium is the message is,
“the “content” of a medium as a juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind.”
The juicy meat works very well to distract the watchdog, but does not change the fact that the house is getting robbed. In the same way, if we focus on the content of a medium we can miss the greater implications of what is happening. An expansion of this idea may be that, the watchdog should be focused on the burglar, not wondering what cut or type of meat is being delivered.
It is all of these elements and notions that form the entirety of what McLuhan put forth. The idea of the container being more important than the content is crucial to our understanding of new media as a whole. It is also important to note that all of these ideas will continue to be explored and further explained as our society grows and advances further in this digital realm.
{1/16/17}
-Joanna S Powell
