Thursday, October 10, 2013

SPECULAR STARS - EXTENDED


The world’s biggest stars have always been in the public sphere, continually in the spotlight when on screen, and even more so off screen. It is the media’s spotlight which is constantly surveying their personal lives, resulting in extreme scrutiny of every facet of a celebrity’s life. In the past, the only way we were able to perceive celebrities was by seeing how they were being represented in television or films, or by reading stories in print media. For most of the twentieth century, spanning many careers, global stars were unable to personally represent themselves. In recent times, due to the rise of digital media and globalisation, celebrities are now able to use a range of social media sites to display themselves in a way they wish to be viewed. Due to the freedom of social media, it can often lead to detrimental outcomes for celebrities if used in a socially unsuitable manner. This post will explain the ways in which the celebrity’s life has been transformed; beginning with previous methods of media representation. Then I will highlight how modern media has positively affected the celebrity life, in terms of communication opportunities to positively present themselves in the specular economy. I will then examine the negative implications celebrities face which have arisen from digital media, such as increased surveillance of their lives, and now online activity.

 

 

Society and its public have forever been intrigued by the lives of the rich and famous. As Homes and Redmond state, there has always been an obsession with celebrities from their fans for a variety of reasons. They say that it is "the adulation, identification and emulation" at the heart of this obsession, and is what drives the celebrity culture (2006, p. 2). Whether it is Hollywood action stars or sports stars, there are always people reporting about them, and consequently, a massive audience willing to consume these stories. Before the age of modern media, the lives of celebrities were traditionally only reported through T.V and gossip magazines; often representing them in undesirable ways. It was a large issue for celebrities, as they had no avenues to pursue to deny or clarify a rumour or image, besides taking legal action. When the media depicts the celebrities on their behalf, it is called media representation, which was the most prominent form of presentation regardless of the truthfulness behind it.  Steve Baker describes this as taking “something that is real, a person or an event and they change its form to produce whatever text we end up with” (2007, p. 1). He says that what we see is not reality, but merely someone else’s version of it. So we do we get engulfed in these often false representations of celebrities? It is through mediation where we are influenced by the media. It places us a step away from reality, so that while it is often untrue or altered information, we still feel as if it is possible to believe.  It is all for the entertainment and in turn, to profit from the entertainment. There are countless examples of fabricated stories from the tabloids, often ridiculous rumours such as the one that claimed Richard Gere had sex with a gerbil among many others. Before digital media, tabloid stories were the only insight the public had into their idols’ lives. What we saw on screens or read in the press was the only material to influence our perceptions of celebrities.
 

Gossip Magazine rumours (source: Media Avengers)
 


In recent years, however the rise of social media has produced a new method to deliver the personal information of our favourite stars to a global audience. David Marshall's term "specular economy" describes the public presentation of ourselves in an increasingly online environment. He explains the term ‘specular’ to be "a two-way mirror of projection on to the screen and the circulation of and interaction with those images and texts into the wider world" (2010, p. 498). This means celebrities now have the chance to communicate firsthand information, and only information which they want to be viewed. Due to the effects of globalisation, which “stretches the relations of power and communication across the globe”, this form of online communication has the capability to reach a far more widespread audience, and at previously unimaginable speeds (Artz 2003, p. 4). Social media has become an advertising tool for modern celebrities to personally construct a public identity, instead of having popular media portray them in an idealised and mostly unwanted perspective. Celebrities use the specular economy to shape our perception of them into a way they wish to be seen. Marshall explains this action as a reconstitution of our lives "through screens of engagement and interactivity that serve to organise and shape our lives" (2010, p. 499). Sites like Facebook, Instragram and particularly Twitter let people employ “an economy of circulating images, information, text, conversation and interpersonal exchanges”, which has changed the celebrity culture forever (Marshall 2010, p. 502). It is these ‘tweets’, photos and other digital messages that consequently “circumvent the gatekeeping and controlling mechanisms of broadcast and print media” (Marshall 2010, p. 498). This means that the rise of digital media – specifically celebrity use of social media – has diminished the effectiveness of popular media’s representation of celebrities. It seems that the majority of famous stars have grasped new media and embraced the fact that they are constantly accessible. It has added a more personal experience between fans and celebrities, and allows the online public to interpret and share information between each other, which is an example of globalisation in the specular economy. Instead of relying on a publicist to quash untrue rumours, many celebrities now use social networking to clarify them. There is always misinformation being created and shared, and although celebrities are a main target of this, such as the common celebrity ‘death rumours’, digital media provides an avenue to quickly and efficiently provide a truthful explanation.

 
Hugh Hefner's twitter response to death rumour (source: Urban Legends)

 
 
Celebrities on Social Media (source: YouTube)


Although the specular economy has enhanced and changed the life of a celebrity, there are also ways in which it can be viewed as detrimental to a celebrity’s reputation, career and general living. The rise of technology and digital media is the major structural and cultural change within society in recent years, which we all must face and adapt to, including the famous population of the world. For them, this has meant the drastic increase in overall surveillance of their every action, due to “new technologies and their capacity to capture proof” (Marshall 2010, p. 500). The downfall of Tiger woods’ life is a perfect example of this increased surveillance, as the speed of circulation of information regarding the incident was multiplied with digital and social media sources compared to traditional media. It is interesting that his flawless public persona – which he had constructed partly through digital media in the specular economy – added to the severity of his public disgrace. There are certain stars that use digital media in highly individual ways, with almost no regard for society or consequences. It is known as hyper-individualism, a term that Marshall links with many modern celebrity’s expressiveness over the internet (2013, p. 5). Stars such as Rihanna and Miley Cyrus exemplify this carelessness of their content. Rihanna often posts photos of her smoking marijuana and Cyrus seems to welcome controversy over her recent actions. While many of their fans admire a celebrity’s individualistic values, it can it can also prove harmful to their reputation if it causes indignation among the public. Regardless of their public identity, if a well-known person posts a controversial tweet or image, it can result in negative repercussions and tarnish their image, career and their lives respectively. I can think of endless examples of certain sports stars and celebrities expressing their not-so-bright opinions through Twitter only to receive backlash from the public.

 
Shane Warne's controversial 'sexy-selfie' (source: The Daily Telegraph)



Celebrities have forever been in the public eye, with people sharing a fascination for the private lives of their idols. Traditional media – while it isn’t quite dead (yet) – doesn’t have the same influence over a celebrity’s life as it once did. Digital media has introduced a new style of self-representation, allowing for a more accurate interpretation of them through the mirror that is the specular economy. Due to its advanced globalising and surveillance capabilities, digital media has taken away even more of a celebrity’s privacy. Social media has increased audiences of stars, and with greater publicity comes greater responsibility. While some are hyper-individualistic and have little care of the world’s perception of them, others need to be more careful. Social media can taint or completely break down a celebrity’s image, far quicker than they constructed it. The specular economy may have given celebrities new opportunities to positively (or negatively) present themselves, but I think it has given anyone with access to mobile media to do the same. Although we are the non-famous majority, with a much smaller audience, it's nice to know we have at least one similar luxury that the mega-stars have.
 
 
References:
 
Artz, L 2003, Globalization, Media Hegemony and Social Class, University of New York Press, retrieved 9 October, 2013, <http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60803.pdf>
 
Baker, S 2007, Media Studies Key Concepts: Representation, Film communication Media, retrieved 8 October, 2013, http://www.adamranson.plus.com/Representation.pdf
 
Marshall, P 2010, 'The Specular Economy', Society, Vol. 47, No. 6, pp. 498-502
 
Marshall, PD 2013, ‘Persona Studies: Mapping the proliferation of the public self’, Journalism, pp. 1-18. Retrieved 9 October 2013, Sage.
 
Images:
 
 
Video:
MTV's 10 On Top: Celebrities on Twitter & Social Media 2011, YouTube Video, Shorty Awards, New York City, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99PtDfyyO6s 
 
Links:

 

ASIANIZATION REALISATION


The concept of Hollywoodization is intriguing in the fact that it is named after the most influential part of the global film industry, yet it is such a small area in a geometric context. Wasser says that it is Hollywood's domination of the film and related markets which has allowed it to gain control and keep control of the wider industry (1995, p. 426). Hollywood's engulfing powers now take some credit for almost all of world film, as although all countries produce films, its ideas, themes and characteristics are based on the foundations provided - and influenced by - Hollywood. Despite the overwhelming dominance of Hollywood, the Asian film market is on the rise.

 

 

The concept of Asianization is the transnationalisation of the Hollywood film industry, which stems from the early 1990's when Asian cultures and their themes began influencing Hollywood cinema (Klein 2004, p. 365). Since then, it has become an increasing trend in 'tinseltown' to incorporate Asian styles, methods, and of course actors to portray these. Martial arts is an obvious correlation between Asian influences on Hollywood, with most fight scenes based upon traditional Asian martial arts. The increased demand for variety in Hollywood has seen the introduction of Asian actors such as Jackie Chan and Jet Li. It has also meant Asian writers, directors and film related jobs are on the rise, and while some "blue-collar film workers worry about jobs lost. . . others find inspiration" in Asian influences (Klein 2004, p. 369).

 
Jackie Chan and Owen Wilson in Shanghai Knights (2003) (source: Entertainment Weekly)

 

Even though there is an unquestionable rise of Asianization in modern Hollywood film, it has not completely consumed it. While it is being incorporated, American cinema combines it with its own film styles, which has consequently constructed a new style of film. You don't see in the video store a section of "American-Asian" films, as it is not classed in its own genre. This is because the combination is found in all genres, from blockbuster action to horror and even comedy based films.


Transporter 3 fight scene (source: YouTube)
 

Asian actors, themes and styles have been "squeezed, patted, nipped and tucked in order to fit into a different culture history" (Klein 2004, p. 365). Hollywood will continue down this oriental path because so far it has been comprehensively successful. I think at the current stage of combining Hollywood's and Asia's key features is beneficial to the global film industry; and as long as one does not completely overpower the other, it will be an enduring and profitable relationship.

 

References:

 
Klein, C 2004, ‘Martial arts and the globalisation of US and Asian film industries’, Comparative America Studies, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 360-384.



Wasser, F 1995, 'Is Hollywood America? The Trans-Nationalization of the American Film Industry’ Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol. 12, pp. 423-437.

 

Image:


 
Video:

Transporter 3 fight scene featuring Jason Statham 2009, YouTube video, ajosephhh, 8 Decomber, retrieved 5 October, 2013, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pO329of1QU


Links:


 

Thursday, October 3, 2013

SPECULAR STARS

Celebrities and sports stars have always been in the public sphere, under the spotlight both on the screen/field and even more in their personal lives which been have continuously scrutinised. As Homes and Redmond state, there has always been an obsession over celebrities from their fans. They say that it is "the adulation, identification and emulation" that are at the heart of, and drive the celebrity culture (2006, p. 2). The lives of celebrities were traditionally only reported through T.V and gossip mags, however the rise of social media has produced a new method to deliver the personal information behind our favourite stars.
 
 
David Marshall's term "specular economy" describes the public presentation of ourselves in an increasingly online environment. He says that the term specular is "a two-way mirror of projection on to the screen and the circulation of and interaction with those images and texts into the wider world" (2010, p. 498).


Social media has given modern celebrities a new tool to advertise themselves, instead of having popular media solely portray them in an idealised and unwanted perspective. While social media doesn't stop the gossip mags creating stories about them, it allows them a way to present themselves, through now common methods like a Twitter tweet or an Instagram photo.


Contrary to the usually unflattering photos gossip blogs or magazines post, celebrities use the specular economy to shape our perception of them into a way they wish to be seen. Marshall explains this action as a reconstitution of our lives "through screens of engagement and interactivity that serve to organise and shape our lives" (2010, p. 499). In this case, the celebrity may choose to post just one selfie from a series of ten selfies as it was the best shot.


Although the specular economy has enhanced and changed the life of a celebrity, it can also prove harmful to their reputation if they post a controversial tweet or photo. I can think of endless examples of sports stars expressing their not-so-bright opinions through Twitter only to receive backlash from the public.



(Source: The Daily Telegraph)
The specular economy may have given celebrities new opportunities to positively (or negatively) present themselves, but I think it has given anyone with access to mobile media to do the same. Although we are the non-famous majority, with a much smaller audience, it's nice to know we have at least one similar luxury that the mega-stars have!

 
References:

Holmes, S & Redmond, S 2006, Framing Celebrity: New Directions in Celebrity Culture, Routledge, retrieved 29 September, 2013, http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=3sKwWqBQpbUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=%E2%80%98Celeb+2.0:+How+social+media+foster+our+fascination+with+popular+culture&ots=-WuDZ_esOK&sig=mASR9ybEe58qqRzw2AiEgCDhc3s#v=onepage&q&f=false

Marshall, P 2010, 'The Specular Economy', Society, Vol. 47, No. 6, pp. 498-502

Pictures:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/fans-get-shirty-with-shane-warne-over-sexy-selfie/story-fni0cvc9-1226665235209

Links:
http://www.sportal.com.au/afl/news/twitter-trouble-for-blues-182135


Wednesday, October 2, 2013

PERCEPTION PERSUASION THROUGH GAMING

Throughout my childhood I played many different games across different platforms, and although I still do, I don't consider myself a 'gamer'. I think this is because I don't fit the stereotypical gamer characteristics such as nerd, overweight, couch potato who rarely leave their room. However, recently I believe there is another reason why I'm not labelled with the gamer tag. It's because almost everybody now plays some form of game or engages in an entertaining app across modern digital media.

"Participatory media culture is not limited to cultural forms such as computer games" (Raessens 2005, p. 374). This exemplifies how people are not categorised under different names due to their use or participation in modern media. Growing up, there were always the gaming nerds and the sporty kids. In recent years, due to the globalisation of digital media, now all types of people have accepted and participate in the growing media culture. This is not restricted to games, but it acts as an effective example of media hegemony.


Artz (2003, p. 4) says that "globalisation of technology stretches the relations of power and communication across the globe", and with this growing force comes the power of 'interpretation', to influence our participation in media cultures and how we interpret that participation.

Raessens' 'four domains' include interpretation, which he connects to cultural texts. "Cultural texts. . . are viewed as open texts that different groups of viewers interpret differently, depending on social, cultural, and other contexts" (2005, p. 275). In this case, cultural texts are in the form of games. Spiderman, for example, both film and game version, emphasise masculinity and always have the protagonist character (Spiderman) saving the weaker, feminine Mary-Jane.


(Source: Comic Vine)

The image exemplifies the typical 'damsel in distress' scenario, as the burly Spiderman in a strong, dominant pose swings Mary-Jane to safety in her pink clothes and submissive stance. In relation to Raessens' interpretation  domain, it is because of our cultural background and context as to how we perceive images like this.

However, one can argue that it is the media itself - whether it be through films, advertising, video games etc. - that shapes our interpretation and leads to a perceptive shift within society's cultural context. I believe participatory media is a combination of both ways, allowing it to become the force it is today.


References:

Artz, L 2003, Globalization, Media Hegemony and Social Class, University of New York Press, retrieved 23 September, 2013, <http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60803.pdf>

Raessens, J. 2005, ‘Computer games as participatory media culture’, Handbook of Computer Game Studies, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp. 373-388.

Picture:

http://www.comicvine.com/spider-man/4005-1443/forums/spiderman-appreciation-thread-629913/
 
Links:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/DamselInDistress/VideoGames

MICRO BLOGGING - MACRO EFFECT

Humans are instinctively competitive creatures, and politicians (who some believe aren't human) take this to another level, always searching for new campaign methods to get a vote here or there, to gain any possible advantage over their opponent. The internet has birthed many great sources of information and communication, and the blogosphere has quickly become a domain for political messages through the form of microblogging.

Twitter, as Larrson and Moe explain, is "a derivative or miniature version of the regular blog” (2010, p. 730). It is restricted to only 140 characters, allowing only the most important parts of a message to be posted, and short enough to engage the reader's attention.



(Source: Blogger University)


Microblogging has become the persuasive political power it is today through the effects of globalisation. Rantanen defines this as "a process in which worldwide economic, political, cultural and social relations have become increasingly mediated across time and space" (2005, p. 8). It means, in the political context, microblogging allows almost everyone to follow political updates, and engage in discussions about them.

Twitter is a contemporary platform within the blogosphere that has generated an online public sphere, where people can access information and create discussions at their fingertips, which is why politicians have grasped its advantageous communicative characteristics.


(Source: Masters of Media)

As Gibson (2008, p. 15) states, technology, in this case microblogging, has become "a key driver of change in the electoral arena", and seems it is here to stay as a genuine campaigning method.

Politicians use Tweets "as vehicles of self-promotion"(Larrson & Moe, 2010, p. 734), especially during a campaign. Along with the dissemination of political information for the public to share and discuss, it allows the politician to monitor the reaction of the public and the effectiveness of their shared content.

Using Twitter reaches audiences that no other digital media may be able to. This applies to the younger generation, new voters who may not yet have a political opinion. Social media is something young people are very accustomed to, and if a politician can reach them through an informative tweet, it may sway their vote.

At this stage, politics in the blogosphere is a healthy addition as it currently provides information for those seeking it, and does not interfere with those who don't.




References:

Gibson RK, Lusoli W & Ward S 2008, 'Nationalizing and normalizing the local? A comparative
analysis of online candidate campaigning in Australia and Britain', Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 15–30.

Larsson, A & Moe, H 2011, ‘Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign,’ New Media and Society, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 729-747.

Rantanen, T 2005, Theorising Media GlobalisationThe media and globalization, Sage, London, pp. 1–18. 

Images:

http://bloggeruniversity.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/politics-and-the-power-of-social-media/

http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl/2011/10/06/the-public-sphere-new-media-and-politics/

Links:

http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/blogging-blogosphere-infographics/

http://mptweets.com.au/politicians/


Tuesday, October 1, 2013

THE PRODUCING CONSUMER

We are all aware of these two common words - "production" and "consumption" - and we understand that the two rely on one another to co-exist in society, and how important they are to economic and business related factors. However, many are unaware of the acronym "prosumption", which combines the two to provide a contemporary perspective of our consumer society, where we increasingly produce what we consume, and vice versa.



(Source: Planet Soho blog)


Ritzer and Jurgenson (2010, p. 14) describe prosumption as involving both production and consumption, rather than separating them or emphasising one's dominance over another. They believe that it is a "series of recent social changes" responsible for the Capitalism's return to a prosumer based society. The rise of the internet and user-generated platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are central to its reintegration.

I can think of many examples in my everyday life that would classify me as a prosumer. Routines such as using an ATM, a self-serve supermarket checkout, designing my own Subway roll for lunch, and of course, the use of social media all contain prosumerist characteristics. These actions indicate an increasing focus on convenience and independence.


Kramer's pizza (source: YouTube)

The danger society faces with Capitalist prosumerism is being shaped into a state called "McDonaldisation". According to Ritzer (2009), this occurs when a society or culture contains features of a fast-food restaurant, such as efficiency of time, quantity equals quality, predictability and control. McDonaldisation in society can be harmful as aspects of culture are broken down to find the most efficient method and reject all other methods. The self-serve routines stated earlier can be seen as McDonaldisation at work; in the form of Capitalism discovering "a way to exploit the labour power of a whole new population", employing the public rather than staff (Ritzer & Jurgenson 2010, p.13). This can lead to the homogenisation of global cultures, with traditions being discarded for a bland, prosumer driven world.

Prosumerism has given me more independence and freedom within my day to day life, adding efficiency and contrary to McDonaldisation's theory, I think it makes our encounters and interactions less predictable, as we are given more choice in many aspects of society.


References:

Ritzer, G & Jurgenson, N 2010, 'Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital 'prosumer'', Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 13-36.

Ritzer, G 2009, The McDonaldization of Society, Pine Forge Press, Los Angeles.

Photo:
http://www.planetsoho.com/blog/2012/02/production-consumption-prosumption/

Video:
Seinfeld - Kramer and Papi Pizza Debate 2009, YouTube, ppwtifilms, 6 September.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lOG3rD5CrQ

Links:
http://www.uncp.edu/home/acurtis/NewMedia/SocialMedia/SocialMediaHistory.html

http://www.mcdonaldization.com/whatisit.shtml