Talk:Digital Media & Culture: Collaborative Essay Collection 2018/Convergence/Research Question 4:/Digital Dancers

Hi team Digital Dancers!

This is the discussion page for collaborative essay. Use this pages to edit in discussions, decision making, project planning, and information sharing. Invite other groups to add to the discussion, and contribute to others. Ask for advice from others and share your knowledge. This builds contribs considerably. Start off your discussion by recording your decision-making process re: your research question, email the lecturer to get approval/suggested amendments.Once that's done, you're away.

Also and  could you please get your teammates to sort out their user pages and user discussion pages - they are still showing up as red (means they haven't created their page as instructed several times) and should be sorted by now.

You can leave notifications for other users by using the reply to template (as I've used in this notice). You can also use your own and each other's discussion pages, as well as the main discussion page on the general theme page. All of this adds to contribs, which are essential to getting a pass mark for this assessment. Don't be tempted to use social media group chat or other platforms to do this. It won't be marked and really misses the entire point of the wiki.

Don't forget to use the four tildes (~) to sign and date your contribution. Every edit you make whilst signed in is still traceable, but a signature makes it much easier to track and respond, and much less likely that the edit will be mis-recognised as spam or vandalism. However: don't sign your edits on the essay page - it looks messy and is unnecessary.

Good Luck!
 * GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 09:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

=Task= So I thought I'd add a little bit of the task description form the FMSU9A4 tab on canvas just to make sure we are all staying on top of it and so we don't have to keep going between the two to remember what is wanted of us. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The aim of this project is to get you working at different levels as individual researchers, as research teams, and as research communities, to evaluate existing research and contribute original research to the subject area you are examining. That is to say: producing knowledge; collaboration and sharing; and peer-reviewing the work of others to benefit yourselves and for the good of the community.
 * Collaborative Essay – 3000 words (excluding references and image captions) This is the content produced by your group on the Book Page. It is the only component that carries a group mark.This component carries a weight of 12% for the module as a whole. The following aspects provide a rough sketch for how you might want to go about structuring a Wikibook essay:
 * Title: the essay question that your group come up with
 * Introduction: a brief overview of the subject you’re writing about and the discussion themes
 * Discussion: concepts associated with your subject, and where these concepts come from (i.e. critical definitions, who came up with what concepts, and what they have to say about them – what do YOU have to say about them?)
 * References: the primary and secondary sources you found about your chosen subject
 * Quality of research: evidence of critical engagement with set course materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic material.
 * Originality of thought: well-articulated and well-supported argument; evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the course, and supporting this position); evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the course and wider literature; support these connections); evidence of independent critical ability.
 * Clarity of expression: appropriate writing style; clear and coherent structure; consistency and accuracy in referencing (Wikipedia convention).

=Discussion=

Right, Digital Dancers team, today we need to decide on a question for our collaborative essay. Our topic is of course Media Convergence, so does anyone have any initial ideas? JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 12:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

We could attempt to define media convergence and look at its impact in todays society? very broad but what do you guys think?Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 12:40, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I would also like to say that we should include something along the lines of the different platforms(i.e. technology, social media etc) that have contributed to media convergence.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 12:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That would be a good start, but maybe we should delve deeper into a specific theorist? Or maybe how they approach the concept of convergence? Let me know what you guys think! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 12:48, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That might be a good idea actually! We could look at Henry Jenkins research on the matter? I've read briefly into his publication - "Introduction to Convergence Culture - and I believe his comments to be both accurate and arguable, which may give us the opportunity to write a concise essay, showcasing his findings and our arguments? JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 12:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hye Jin Lee and/or Mark Andrejevic?Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 12:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That's a good idea, looking at a specific theorist will allow us to go into more detail. What about the Holt or Sanson reading?Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 12:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah great ideas, I'll also throw in the idea of looking at Bolter and Grusin and their method of remediation in connection with convergence? Just exploring multiple topics within the one? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 12:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, so I guess we could go at it one of two ways;

1 - We could delve specifically into one theorist and discuss his findings as a sort of critical/discursive essay?

or

2- We could look at multiple theorists and discuss their findings and research, reviewing their stand points and come to a final conclusion on our opinions and arguments? JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I think the 2nd option would prove to be more effective with the depth we can go into on it. I believe it is less vague than the 1st option and would allow us to make better connections. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I think your second suggestion is stronger it will allow us to look at a wider range of theories in order to provide a more complete answer. Also the suggestions we have already given regarding different theorists remain useful as we can now look at each of them and include their views in our essay.Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 13:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I would probably go for the second option but with a particular emphasis on Henry Jenkins as he forms the general foundations for discussion on the theme of media convergence. Of course we would still need to discuss other opinions as you say.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 13:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, so we're agreed? So now we just need to decide on a specific written question and fire it off to greg, anyone have any initial ideas? JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:10, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I think we should do something in relation to Jenkins and forming the basis for our essay from him then comparing his views on convergence with 3 other theorists. That way we could take a theorist each and come back with our findings.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 13:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Well I have thought of a possible starting point. Compare Henry Jenkins theory of media convergence(2006) with other academic theories, discuss the limitations of each before reaching a conclusion over their effectiveness. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay so if we say something like "Comparing Henry Jenkins theory of media convergence (2006), how do other academic theorists base their approach off of Jenkins' theory? Discuss the limitations of 3 other theorists and comment on their effectiveness to the contribution of media convergence." Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That would be my preference.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 13:33, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I like its specificity and its formality, sounds like a good angle to argue from and will allow us to divide the work evenly into paragraphs, and to create a concise essay. JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Let's send it off to Greg and go from there! Hopefully it stands! Good work guys JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:43, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I think its good, provides us with a good discussion point and includes a henry Jenkins making it relevant to what we have already learnt. I'm happy to go with that.

So guys I was thinking and I think our question might be too vague and generalised for the task. I think we might need to adapt it to something a bit more specific, maybe to do with something that Jenkins refers to within the book we are using? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Right so I changed the question a bit, let me know what you think of it and feel free to critique it! "How does Henry Jenkins' theory of 'Media Convergence' correlate and contrast with alternative approaches to the term adapted by various other academic scholars?" Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 14:30, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I like this angle of argument Amy, it allows us to imply and compare Jenkins research clearly to a number of theorists, this will allow us to split up the work easily and come to a concise conclusion! Everyone agree? JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 14:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. I think this is a far more concise research question but does not retract from the previous one in any sense. It gives a clear view of where we are going in the question in terms of direction and as Josh says allows us to split up the work easily.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 14:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey how are you guys getting on at looking into the research? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 14:12, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm getting through it ok. Just trying to narrow it all down to the most relevant information for our research question which is the bulk of the work but I should be fine. Any ideas on how we are structuring this or are we all going to get our information on our theorists down before we think of actually completing our essay?Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 14:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I liked the previous question, but having read your new suggestion I feel it reads better and still allows us to explore the areas of media convergence we are focusing on. Also I am getting well with the holt and Sanson reading and will look to post some of my information soon, the size of mine is reasonable and allowing me to go into detail. Ii hope you are all getting on well. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Good evening Digital Dancers.

To kick off the formation of our work, we first need to decide who's doing what and how we shall structure it. Obviously we have worked out our question, so now its just a case of formatting and writingǃ Does anyone have preference on how we structure our essay? I would suggest that we do;

Introduction

- Covering the basis of our study and a brief introduction to convergence.

Jenkins - Concerning with his studies on convergence as we aim to base the rest of our research off his

Holt and Sanson - Firstly, open with a paragraph showcasing Holt and Sanson's findings Then secondly moving on to compare them to that of Jenkins findings?

Lee and Andrejevic - The same as mentioned above?

Bolter and Grusin - Same as mentioned above?

Conclusion

- This should be a showcase of our findings, summarising each theorist and how they relate to Jenkins research.

Sound good? Let me know.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 19ː09, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Guys just too add, I completely forgot that we had already assigned each other roles in terms of studying specific theorists, so we all just need to decide on structure and then we can get cracking with our own research?

Amy I believe you are doing Bolter and Grusin, Eachainn - Holt and Samson and Ewan - Lee and Andrejevic?

Can you all let me know if this is all ok/correct and how we aim to structure the essay?

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 21ː56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Josh, yeah that sounds pretty good to me! I can confirm I am looking into Bolter and Grusin. I think we should work together to come up with a strong introduction and conclusion once we have each, individually, worked on our paragraphs! I say that we come back onto the page sometime closer to the end of the week to provide a little bit more information that we have gathered on our individual tasks to start to form a solid basis and first draft of our essay? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:26, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amy, perfect, good idea, however we must be wary of our time as the deadline is Friday no? If we all spend tomorrow collecting our own information, could we all report back on the page around dinner time with what we've found?

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 21ː56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

No, I am 80% sure that the deadline for the collaborative essay is on the 29th? I think it's only the wiki exercise that is due on friday! I'll double check and get back to you on that. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:35, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Regardless, we should get our heads down and nail a decent bit of work on our assigned theorists tomorrow in prep for discussion tomorrow night.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 21ː56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

I won't be available most of tomorrow i'm afraid but i'll try get something added to the page! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 00:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with josh definetly a good idea to start constructing our essay given the due date is the 29th. Also I approve of the proposed structure and I am happy with completing my part of it, I'm currently looking to begin writing my section what stage are you guys at? Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds good to me also. Though I am going to have to have another look at my readings which will not take long whatsoever. That structure sounds good though. Also, does anyone know what referencing style we have to use for this piece? And if so who wants to construct the bibliography/reference list when it comes to it?Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 12:28, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Well noted Ewan, I believe the style is APA, as regular for the media department. However we can strutucre our bibliography at the end of this task and process. As of right now, how is everyone getting on with their own research and readings? Also a quick follow up question, how many sources are we all each individually expected to collect? Because does our style of essay not fall under looking at one theorists work in particular, and then basing it of Jenkins work (or in my case showcasing Jenkins work)?

Let me know your thoughts.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 20ː13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Guys, just another thought, is it a good idea to complete my section of the report first so that you all have evidence to base your individual theorists arguments off of? Because is the point of our structure not to compare to Jenkins findings, so to do so I will need to write about the findings you are all using in comparison. Let me know your thoughts.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 23ː39, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Josh I was about to ask the same thing. I think it is crucial that we have some notes from your findings just so we can compare and contrast our research. Just let us know when you have any sort of notes on the main findings from your reading that can help us out! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Good point josh. I agree if we have your findings it will make it much easier to compare the readings we have each been assigned. How are you getting on with your research into Jenkins' work?Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 11:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC

Ok, good, I think the best way for us to move forward is for you all to read your theorists work on media convergence in depth, and then by the time I have finished my piece on Jenkins findings of media convergence, you can all compare on contrast your notes to connect the dots of our collaborative essay. Sound good? let us know what you think so we are all on the same page.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 12ː14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

good work on the restructure of our page Amy, Lets add a section for initial findings on our theorists so we can start logging our findings, I'll get that done.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13ː00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! You have added some great stuff as well, it is coming along quite nicely. If we aim to have our main findings posted by tonight does that suit everyone?? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I think the structure you have suggested is great, the discussion we had in person was worth as it is clear everyone has understood what we are looking to achieve. I feel we need to know move on from planning to publishing some of our findings. In the findings/quotes section I have published a short summary of my own research for the main body, are you guys nearly ready to post yours? Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 16:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi enjoying reading your initial findings guys, great to see that we have all gathered important information on our theorists. @Ekm00007 I think you have made a really good start it seems that your theorist will provide an accurate account of how media convergence has impacted businesses and your examples help to make that clear. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Interesting points with Jenkins, I think I could contrast that with my findings from Andrejevic who says that convergence has been helped by the use of technology and not solely on the user. In fact I think this could form the basis of my part of the collaborative essay as it contrasts quite well in terms of different definitions of media convergence. Also my findings focus on how big corporations have actually benefitted from media convergence much to the determent of other theorists. Let me know what you guys think.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Guys, I have posted my section of the report and an attempt at the introduction, within the First Draft section. Could you all please go read it, and let me know what you think.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:08, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

, Hey guys, as you can see, @JoshCoates12 and I have began the first draft of the essay if you want to go and have a read of it that would be much appreciated. Also, if possible, could you post a first draft of you sections by tonight? Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 17:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

,, Hi guys, just to reiterate what @Amm00137 said, it would be really nice to hear your feed back on our sections and get your parts of the essay put up as previously agreed. Hope everything is going ok, and if there are any issues just say.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 17:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I have been having problems with my laptop but have now posted my findings on the draft page. I will now read the work previously uploaded, introduction is looking good will be easy to alter it if, once completed, our main body differs from the introduction. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 22:08, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I've just posted my first draft for my piece of the essay on Lee and Andrejevic. Let me know what you guys think. In terms of my own views I think I could improve my transition from the previous section to allow our essay to have a better flow. Also, do you guys think I should have another source amongst my piece just to add an extra dimension or is it fine as it is?Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Also just tidied up the draft section bit a little so everything is the same format etc.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey guys, just a quick update, I have edited my part that I think it may be finalised now (obviously it can be adjusted when we put everything together) I have also edited the introduction a bit and done a draft conclusion, just let me know how you all feel about it and change anything that you wish to. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 14:21, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey guys, looks like we are finished! It's been a pleasure working with you all and I wish you all the best of luck with whatever assessments/exams that you may have coming up soon. Here's hoping our essay does alright as well! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 10:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Great last push from us Amy, its been a hard slog, but glad we are doneǃ Here's to a good markǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 19:59, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

=Initial Findings/Information/Quotes=

Eachainn
Holt and Sanson begin by explaining connected viewing going on to say that it provides the framework from which we can understand the evolution of different media and entertainment, they take a more detailed look at television due to its popularity. They provide examples of how new technology has impacted the media, going as far as to suggest that connected viewing and the migration of media across all platforms has transformed the way we think about the media itself. It then looks at connected viewing in more detail looking at the various areas it has impacted including how it has impacted the distribution of media and how it is policed.

They mention Henry Jenkin’s work and explain that their work is an outgrowth of his media convergence culture. Explaining that they look at the impact it has had on the relationship between consumer and provider and how there is now blurred boundaries between the two. The piece again looks at connected viewing this time explaining how some types of media have adapted easier than others, using film’s struggle to adapt as an example.

Overall this piece is very helpful, it makes reference to the theorist’s you guys have looked at so would be keen to hear if your findings were similar?Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 18ː03, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Ewan
In terms of my findings from Lee and Andrejevic I have found that their main focus is on how convergence has helped marketers and traditional TV companies when it had been originally thought that this idea of on demand viewing would signal the end for these companies.

However, Lee and Andrejevic highlight how TV companies have actually used media convergence to their advantage-stating that they realised that convergence does not mean to converge on one device but rather the idea of interactive TV that had failed in the past could be done through piggy backing off of a second device. They termed this as the 'second screen'.

For example with the launch of the Ipad in 2010 ABC released an app to go along with it, it ultimately failed, however they then released a 'second screen' app that covered back stage at the Oscars. This was an unprecedented success and displayed how media convergence had not deterred traditional TV but rather added another string to its bow.

The ultimate goal of this approach was to turn TV programs into online events to get real time reactions from which marketers could garner relevant material on the audiences they were looking to market to. Thus, convergence had allowed traditional TV to maintain this feeling of 'liveness' which had looked to be a dead concept with the introduction of in demand TV.

The convergence has also been good due to the fact that the use of these 'second screen' apps maintain that live element which means that many people will actively look up what is being advertised to them thus maintaining that flow of money.

Furthermore this convergence is also good for TV producers who no longer have to wait for reactions to new shows but rather gain that from social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter immediately after the show has gone out.

That's all I have at the moment but I'll be sure to post more of my findings soon.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 18:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Josh
This is a great start to sharing our findings of our theorists. It's interesting to see how your chosen theorists document about the decline in a form of mass media, or rather how said medium has used convergence to revitalise the TV we know today by 'piggy backing' (as you put it) off a second device.

Very positive and analytical report on your initial findings of Lee and AndreJevic.

My initial research on Jenkins has proven successful and informative. I've discovered that in his research on convergence and 21st century society, Jenkins breaks down his findings into three seperate sub headings;


 * Media Convergence
 * Participatory Culture
 * Collective intelligence

Firstly, in this introductory chapter of his book Worship at the Alter of Convergence Jenkins draws comparison from real life examples to give us as the reader the best chance of understanding what he is saying, and what he is meaning when he argues his points on the three sub titles as mentioned above.

Dino Ignacio, an American school student, is the first example of convergence in today's world that Jenkins draws upon. This case study of Ignacio dictates how he decided to create a controversially 'funny' meme which included Sesame Street's 'Bert' along side Osama Bin Laden, in a segment that the Filipino school student entitled.... Evil Bert. However, what a school boy thought was a slight bit of humour quickly turned into a large media disaster. From the original photo, other World Wide Web users were inspired and took note of Ignacio's work, this further influenced the creation of more photos, of an even cruder nature. Pictures emerged of Evil Bert framed with Hitler, the KKK, other far right leaders and even pictured having sex with Pamela Anderson. 'Some of these you may have even seen, or further laughed at, however this was only stage one'.

The initial viral sensation of 'Evil Bert' however, quickly turned sour as a Bangladesh publisher broadcasted the original image of Osama and Burt - as it was quickly nicknamed - and turned it into anti-american hate crime(SOURCE). It began to gain widespread media coverage featuring in newspapers, television and even the likes of merchandise such as t-shirts furthering the controversy. Which, evidently, quickly caught the attention, and some would say outrage, of CNN. As hate for the whole campaign grew, and people discovered the originality of the author, Ignacio quickly delated his photo and site of posts, noting "I feel this has gotten to close to reality"(SOURCE).

This is convergence;
 * Where old and new media coincide, "where grassroots and corporate media interact" (SOURCE), where the power of the media producer and the power of the media consumer merge in unanticipated manners. Jenkins further elaborates that convergence refers to the flow of content across multiple media platforms - the co-operation between multiple industries and the migratory behaviour of media audiences who will go anywhere in search for a particular type of entertainment.

So, this journey of Media Convergence follows as so; the character of Burt originating in the child-friendly programme Sesame Street, and the evil figure of Bin Laden were merged together on Ignacio's photoshop to create the wide spreading meme. As the image went viral, it's message was construed and manipulated into hate propaganda by a Bangladesh publisher. The resulting image was then escalated over newspapers, t-shirts, and TV, which is then seen by CNN. This then seen the result of a world wide outrage of the imagery, with everyone involved affected.

This is convergence. Jenkins argues this to be the perfect way to describe convergence as a whole, noting that in media convergence, every story gets told, every brand story sold and every consumer gets courted across multiple media platforms.

However, the flow of content here to allow such convergence to take place, activates Jenkins second topic surrounding media convergence - Participatory Culture.

Jenkins here argues against the idea that the primary understanding of media convergence is a technological drift and shift, involving many different media sources and outlets through one device. He sees it rather as a cultural shift, as consumers actively go and seek their information on the platforms they choose, through the forums they like, and perceive it in their very own way, thereby actively participating in the culture of convergence, such as has happened in the example above. ː Participatory Culture, contrasts with older passive media spectatorship. Rather than thinking about media producers and consumers as occupying separate roles, we might now see them as participants who interact with each other according to a new set of rules. Corporations for example and individuals with corporate media hold greater powers than that of the average consumer like you or me, however, consumers have greater abilities to participate in emerging cultures than corporate consumers do. Further, as mentioned, Jenkins argues that convergence does not occur through a media device, or even a media platform, he argues that convergence occurs through the brain of an individual consumer, and through the social interactions they take part in both on and offline. We all individually perceive the media that we are exposed to and individually construct our own personal thoughts through fragments of information extracted from each source and each piece of media. This then effects our world and our every day life.

All of this information leads to the last initial sub heading argued by Jenkins of Collective Intelligence

Collective intelligence is the base created by consumers as they talk and communicate amongst yourself about the media they consume maybe even through the medium they are on (I drew the comparison to group chats, or even friend/social groups here). This sense of a large number of people sharing their own intelligence, through their own perceptions is how this statement of 'Collective Intelligence' appears.

At the moment, I feel I should leave it there to allow you all to dissolve such an amount of information. I am increasingly enjoying my research into Jenkins work on convergence, and hope you all are too. Please let me know what you all think, and continue to showcase your findings on your personal theorists. (Which to draw example from, is a perfect illustration of 'Collective Intelligence')

Keep working guysǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 17ː42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Josh! I have had a look at your paragraph and made a view edits! You can read over it and see if it's alright.

Edited by: @Amm00137 Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Amy, You've critiqued the wrong sectionǃ If you could edit my first draft that would be greatǃ Thanks againǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 16:58, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Amy
Henry Jenkins' theory of media convergence has been seen to have an effect on other scholars and the way in which they approach new digital media. Looking specifically at the work of Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin, they delve into the concept of convergence by highlighting it through new media terms developed and defined by themselves. They play off of a statement by Kevin Kelly and Gary Wolf in an article published in Wired magazine - the death of the graphical web browser. (Graphical web browser is the idea of being able to search video, pictures and content as such online - development from the archaic text-based browsers where you could only receive content in the form of words and texts) They speak of the 'death' of the web browser as convergence in modern day, electronically, can be seen as an instigator of "push" technology - the idea that we are given information without necessarily asking for it, information provided by servers automatically turned on with an option to be turned off - the opposite to 'pulling'; receivers seeking out the information themselves. So they state that the web browser has ultimately been replaced by "broader and deeper new interfaces for electronic media" but explain that what they share are "ways to move seamlessly between media you steer (interactive) and media that steer you (passive)".

They investigate the terms highlighted in relation to convergence: Transparency - the concept of determining how and why information is conveyed through various means. Immediacy - a "style of visual representation, whose goal is to make the viewer forget the presence of the medium and believe that he is in the presence of the objects of representation". Hypermediacy - a "style of visual representation whose goal is to remind the viewer of the medium". Remediation - the incorporation or representation of one medium in another medium.

They make the claim that convergence is just remediation under a different title. They look at convergence as the 'mutual remediation of at least three important technologies which mainly refers to the connection of telephone, television and computer - each of which can be considered as a hybrid of technical, social and economic practice and each of which proposes its own individual track to immediacy. He speaks of each device's benefits in terms of immediacy: Telephone having the immediacy of voice in real-time Television offers immediacy through real-time monitoring of the world Computers have the immediacy of the combination of three-dimensional graphics, automatic action and interactivity. They speak of how they join together and create their own version of immediacy. Readers of the Wall Street Journal state how they think convergence should be conveyed - "restoring the status quo" - instead of creating something new they should use a sense of innovation to develop already familiar territory. They also speak of the limitations exposed by convergence for the devices. In terms of visual representation, telephones are lacking, although, it is argued that convergence is about "authenticity of communication" and the solidarity of people physically speaking to one another. It is said that computers should rely on its original use as an information provider and proposes that convergence should focus more specifically on information being both verbally and visually available at the user's discretion. While those in support of television usage promote the idea that converged technology should "push" entertainment and information to whoever allows it. "yet the double logic of remediation suggests that in our heterogeneous culture, no one technology is likely to eliminate the others."

Hey guys, here is some stuff I have picked up on in my reading of Bolter and Grusin, it is quite a bit of mix and match and just general notes taken during my reading, but it's a start! Hope you guys are getting on alright with finding information and I suggest that we start focusing on structuring our essay and making sure we correlate our contrasting information to the best extent possible. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 14:51, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

=Draft 1=

Introduction
Media convergence in today’s society can be considered to be not only a dangerous topic, but a dangerous word (Meikle and Young 2012) This is because, the word itself can mean a number of different things and can be defined and be referred to in a number of different ways. It can refer to technological developments (Holt and Sanson 2014), industry structures (Bolter and Grusin 1999), changing forms of media texts (Lee and Andrejevic 2014) and further, shifts in the relationship between the consumer and the consumed (Jenkins 2006). This essay shall explore the main themes of Jenkins research on convergence, comparing to that of other renowned theorists in the area, noting both the clear similarities and arguments. By looking at a case studies drawn up from Jenkins, which he then relates to convergence, we are clearly able to break down his arguments and understand his point of view. From this we will be able to visibly match up other theorists work and eventually come to a concise conclusion, detailing our findings on the concept of convergence and be able to see how relevant Jenkins work is in today’s day in age.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

In modern social engagement, media convergence is a concept that can be considered highly dangerous in terms of topic but also definition (Meikle & Young, 2012). This is because the word itself can denote various meanings and can also be connoted in several different manners. It can often refer to technological developments (Holt & Sanson, 2014), it can be based off of industry structures (Bolter & Grusin, 1999) and changing forms of media texts (Lee & Andrejevic, 2014). However, the most dominant denotation being given by Henry Jenkins, being our main focal point, refers to shifts in relationship between the consumer and the consumed (2006). Our essay intends to explore the main findings of Jenkins' research on convergence, and expanding upon such by comparing his work to that of other renowned theorists in the area, noting both the clear similarities and arguments. By dissecting a case study conducted by Henry Jenkins, we were able to see the links he makes to convergence, while clearly breaking down his arguments and understanding his point of view. From this we were able to visibly match up other theorists work and eventually come to a concise conclusion, detailing our findings on the concept of convergence and being able to express how other scholars use the term of convergence; whether they find it relevant in their own studies and how we can link older methods of convergence with more recent approaches.

Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Josh, I took your introduction and made a view changes to it, but instead of deleting your version I've added mine beneath yours as I wanted to get the groups opinion on it before hastily making a change. Let me know what you think! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Josh, I think the introduction reads well, it is very concise which I am with. There was a few spelling mistakes which I have now corrected. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 21:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Amy, I like your version better, similar structure and information, just more professionally formatted and presented. This part is ready to goǃ However, are we ready for to put all the other sections together?

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 10:59, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Jenkins
@JoshCoates12

In the introductory chapter of his book, ‘Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide’, Jenkins draws comparison from real life case studies and examples to give us, as the reader, the best chance of understanding his main arguments and research through these sub headings.

- Media Convergence - Participatory Culture

Jenkins begins to convey his argument on convergence, by following the American school student Dino Ignacio, and how he decided to create a 'funny' meme which included Sesame Street's 'Bert' alongside Osama Bin Laden, in a segment that the Filipino student entitled.... Evil Bert. However, what a school boy thought was a slight bit of humour quickly turned into a large media disaster. From the original photo, other World Wide Web users were inspired and took note of Ignacio's work, this further influenced the creation of more photos, with a development of cruder images taking place. Pictures emerged of Evil Bert framed with Hitler, the KKK, other far right leaders and even pictured having sexual intercourse with Pamela Anderson. This, however was only the start of something much larger in terms of the convergent world that media places itself in today’s society.

The initial viral sensation of 'Evil Bert' however, quickly turned sour as a Bangladesh publisher broadcasted the original image of Osama and Burt - as it was quickly nicknamed - and turned it into various forms of anti-American hate crime. It began to gain widespread media coverage featuring in newspapers, television and even the likes of merchandise such as t-shirts furthering the controversy. Which, evidently, quickly caught the attention, and some would say outrage, of CNN. From being a child-friendly character in the programme Sesame Street, the characterisation of Bert has truly become evil in the media's eyes. This is convergence; “Where old and new media collide, where grassroots and corporate media interact, where the power of the media producer and the power of the media consumer and producer interact in unpredictable ways”. Jenkins further elaborates that convergence refers to the flow of content across multiple media platforms - the co-operation between multiple industries and the migratory behaviour of media audiences who will go anywhere in search for a particular type of entertainment. Bert’s photo travelled from Sesame Street, to Ignacio's Photoshop to create the meme, then further to becoming a global dispute blasted on the News, TV, T-shirts and even talked about on the radio. Jenkins argues this to be the perfect way to describe convergence as a whole, noting that in media convergence, every story gets told, every brand story sold, and every consumer gets courted across multiple media platforms. Jenkins argues this case study to be the perfect way to describe convergence as a whole, noting that in media convergence, every story gets told, every brand story sold, and every consumer gets courted across multiple media platforms.

However, the flow of content here to allow such convergence to take place, activates Jenkins second topic surrounding media convergence - Participatory Culture.

Jenkins here argues against the idea that the primary understanding of media convergence is a technological drift and shift, involving many different media sources and outlets through one device. He sees it rather as a cultural shift, as consumers actively go and seek their information on the platforms they choose, through the forums they like, and perceive it in their very own way, thereby actively participating in the culture of convergence, such as has happened in the example above. Participatory Culture, contrasts with older passive media spectatorship. Rather than thinking about media producers and consumers as occupying separate roles, we might now see them as participants who interact with each other according to a new set of rules. Corporations for example and individuals with corporate media hold greater powers than that of the average consumer like me or you, however, consumers have greater abilities to participate in emerging cultures than corporate consumers do. Further, as mentioned, Jenkins argues that convergence does not occur through a media device, or even a media platform, he argues that convergence occurs through the brain of an individual consumer, and through the social interactions they take part in both on and offline. We all individually perceive the media that we are exposed to and individually construct our own personal thoughts through fragments of information extracted from each source and each piece of media. Further to this, he argues, “Printed words did not kill spoken words. Cinema did not kill theatre. Television did not kill radio. Each old medium was forced to coexist with the emerging media” - Old media are not being displaced. Rather, their functions and status have shifted by the introduction of new technologies. Convergence, as argued by many, has not displaced or rendered extinct “old” technologies, rather it has forced them to adapt, and coincide with new forms of media technologies.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Amm00137:

@JoshCoates12: Second time lucky! I went through and changed a couple of things to make it flow more concisely as it was very similar to a bullet point list which I think is how you initially would've collected your information and I assume it was just parts that you forgot to change! You structure is easy to follow and you have a good basis for Jenkins' approach and have set a good ground for the rest of the group to expand on with our theorists. Well done. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 17:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Indeedǃ Thank you Amy, I know we read through and worked on it together yesterday, so I trust you made all the necessary edits we talked about. Thank you Amy, its good to know I've set the group on the right tracks to complete the essayǃ Nearly thereǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 15:14, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ekm00007:

@JoshCoates12: I would agree with Amy I think that this is a good basis for the essay from which the rest of us can move forward from and display our findings. I especially like the fact that you have broken Jenkins down into two main sections, namely media convergence and the element of participatory culture. This should make the structure simple to follow consequently.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:27, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Ewan, I've worked hard to ensure that the rest of the group found it easy to look at the findings I presented of Jenkins researching, thus allowing you to easily bounce the arguments or correlations presented by your specific theorists. I too think that clearly separating Jenkins research into these two sub headings will allow the rest of you to further understand his work. We could have also looked at Collective Intelligence, but after discussions with Amy, we came to the decision that it wouldn't be reflected by the other theorists we were looking at as a group, so left it out with the option to put it back in if required. Perfect, Thanks Ewan.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 15:14, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey sorry I just picked up on a mistake that you said in your reply to @Ekm00007, just to clarify, we decided to remove the section on Collective Intelligence not Participatory Culture as I have spoke about Participatory culture in some depth for my part. Just thought I'd correct you on that to save any confusion! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

yes, sorry Amy, I've changed it now. All goodǃ

Hi josh, really good effort to describe and explain the findings of Jenkins in relation to our essay question. I agree with Ewan and Amy, it reads well and provides the basis we needed to contrast and compare. I am going to make some slight changes to my piece to ensure a make a direct comparison.Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 21:08, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Holt and Sanson
@Eam00024

However, research by Holt and Sanson in their book 'Connected Viewing' focus their findings on the phenomenon of the television in relation to media convergence. Firstly, they define connected viewing as “more than just digital distribution, it is the broader eco system in which digital distribution is rendered possible, and the new forms of user engagement take place.” They then go on to explain connected viewing, stating that it provides the framework from which we can understand the evolution of different media and entertainment.

Holt and Sanson provide examples of how new technology has impacted the media, going as far as to suggest that connected viewing and migratory media, has transformed the way we think about the very core of media itself. Their study then looks into connected viewing, illustrating the various areas it has impacted; the distribution of media and how it is policed, how much more difficult it is to distribute of media because the relationship between the two is now much less straightforward, and finally how every user can now produce their own media thanks to the emergence of new technology. Holt and Samson further go on to explain how Jenkins work on media convergence, converting the use of technology and its relation to media convergence, is both outdated and inaccurate, arguing that it has had much more a 'takeover' affect than Jenkins states.

While the cooperation and collaboration of the user and producer has had its negative impacts on some businesses, Holt and Sanson further describe how film is an area that has also been affected by the emergence of media convergence. Using film’s struggle to adapt as an example, they explain the increasing popularity of online streams and sites such as Netflix, and further how this has caused a reduction in the number of people going to the cinema. Moreover, this is a perfect example of how a major businesses, or major industry (cinema) is being negatively affected by media convergence. However, Holt and Sanson go on to explain and argue how Cinema as a whole are attempting to adapt to ensure people continue to value the cinema experience. However, it remains to be seen wether these claims of adaptation will come of fact, or remain of fiction, allowing Netflix to surpass them, and for cinema to die out at the hands of convergence.

To compare to Jenkins; he believes that media convergence occurs through the individual minds of people themselves and that it is an achievement of the brain rather than a product of recent advancements in technology. This differs from the view of Holt and Sanson who believe that technology isn't the most important part of media convergence, adding that it is inaccurate to think that Technology is not at the sole of convergence. Instead, Holt and Sanson suggest that the advancements in technology and second screen viewing have led to media convergence, they place emphasis on the fact that the media has shown great expansion and that there are various examples in gaming where a video game has gone on to become a film or television series and therefore expanded across all media platforms. While it takes someone to come up with the idea to expand, they rank the human contribution behind the advancement in technology which has made it possible. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 22:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ekm00007

@Eam00024: I think that you have covered the findings of Holt and Sanson very well and have related it back to the findings from Josh, who looked into Jenkins, very well. Similar points to the ones I have made as well which adds another good element as it shows how other theorists are in agreement with each other also. Overall a good piece and I think the only thing really needed now is the sources and referencing etc.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:30, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@JoshCoates12

Eachainn, I concur with Ewan in the sense that you have covered and related your findings on Holt and Sanson, to that of Jenkins well. However, I altered a few of your sentences, just to make them flow better and for the content to sound less orchestrated and more natural (to avoid listing comments, and furthering our argument). Have a read and let me know what you think of the changesǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 16:47, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Bolter and Grusin
@Amm0137

Henry Jenkins' theory of media convergence has been seen to have an effect on other scholars and the way in which they approach various new forms of media and how they interpret the term of convergence. Looking more specifically at the work of Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin, they delve into the term by comparing new concepts of digital media - hypermediacy, immediacy, transparency and most importantly remediation. According to Bolter and Grusin, remediation is a term derived from the meaning of convergence. They state that "convergence is remediation under a different name" (Bolter & Grusin, 1999, p.224), it is a term that they have developed to connote the representation or combination of one medium in another. As mentioned above, Jenkins splits the term of convergence into three disparate categories; participatory culture being the one that is most applicable to Bolter and Grusin's approach. Participatory culture is touched upon by Jenkins as an important part of understanding convergence, as it is presumably the concept of accessing various forms of media through one device. He debates that it should be recognised as a "cultural shift" (Jenkins, 2006, loc.191) in terms of consumers actively going out and seeking the information they want, through whatever platform they wish; ultimately not abolishing an "out-dated" medium, rather perceiving it as a matter of preference (Jenkins & Thorburn, 2004, p.88).

With regards to Bolter and Grusin's approach, their take on the matter can be seen to correlate with Jenkins' as they state that one form of converged media cannot eliminate another but evolve from such. They view convergence as mutual remediation; the idea of mediums remodifying one another consistently. Bolter and Grusin like to think of the mutual remediation of at least three technological devices at the same time, focusing specifically on devices that allow a sense of immediacy (1999, p.224). They state the advantages that a few technologies have developed - the idea that telephone offers immediacy of voice interaction in real-time, how television guarantees the immediacy of real-time monitoring worldwide, and the notion that computers have a sense of immediacy through interactivity. Here they essentially "dumb down" (Deuze, 2006, p.70) the obvious functions of each device but, by doing so, they express the benefits of each device and ultimately, they provide the relevance that each one has that isn't offered by the other, promoting the importance of multiple mediums.

However, despite their statement regarding the beneficial side of remediation, Bolter and Grusin introduce the contradiction of double logic remediation. Here they discuss the contrast between immediacy and hypermediacy; both terms developed in connection with remediation but offer opposed definitions (Bolter & Grusin, 1999, p.225). Immediacy ultimately proposes the idea of forgetting the presence of the medium and making the consumer feel as though they are in the presence of those they are in communication with (Blakesley, 2000). For example, video games, where the interactivity is purposely to make the user absorbed into their surroundings and ultimately forget that they are indeed playing a game. While hypermediacy has the goal of reminding the viewer of the medium (Blakesley, 2000). The idea of having a PowerPoint on a smart board, while taking notes and updating your social media accounts from your smartphone at the same time, being fully aware of the different mediums you are experiencing (Grusin, 2004, p.17-18). Here it is presented with the double logic of remediation, as the initial thought would be that the two terms clash with one another but Bolter and Grusin argue that the two contrasting concepts actually converge themselves; "the appeal to authenticity of experience is what brings the logics of immediacy and hypermediacy together (Bolter & Grusin, 1999, p. 71)," experiencing the realness of the immediacy but also being partially aware of how the devices are actually working on your behalf.

To conclude, it is evident that Bolter and Grusin have not necessarily went against Jenkins' approach to convergence but have rather derived a specific way of defining it through alternative terms and expressed how they believe they develop from the meaning of convergence by expanding it and looking at it from an extensive perspective.

Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:08, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

(Hey guys, this is my first draft of my part of the essay, i am still to edit it and put sources in but give it a read and let me know what you think.)

Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 17:13, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Amy, you've clearly and concisely structured the introductory part of your report which is excellent as it will allow your section to flow well from the previous. You briefly break into Bolter and Grusin's specific study of convergence, concerning hypermediacy, immediacy, transparency and most importantly remediation. This then cleverly allows you to smoothly break into your initial correlations to Jenkins work on convergence. As a whole, you structure your essay very well, with a clear "A/B" format, looking at the main similarity and difference between Bolter and Grusin's work, compared to that of Jenkins.

In terms of content, you display a natural understanding for how Bolter and Grusin's work relates to convergence (and more importantly, Jenkins work on convergence) and further present their arguments clearly and accurately, as mentioned with your structure.

You've clearly broken down each section of their work on convergence, which will allow our marker to easily understand not only your findings on convergence, but our groups discussion as a whole.

This should fit in well with the body of our essay. Great Workǃ

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 17:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Amm0137: I would agree with Josh also. You have put Bolt and Grusin's findings forward very well and with a lot of clarity. Furthemore you have related it back to the findings of Jenkins well which in essence is the basis of our research question. Obviously as you said yourself the only thing needed is the references. Overall a very good piece of work. Well done.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:34, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey guys, thank you for your feedback on my contribution to the essay, it is much appreciated to hear what others in the group think of it. I intend to tidy up this section and add in the much needed references by tonight. Thanks again. Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 15:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey guys   I have now referenced my piece and I think mines might be finalised for now until you have all completed your parts and we start collating it all together, but please can you give it a read and make any changes that you see fit? Thanks in advance! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:11, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amy great job, I have read your reading and feel you provide a very accurate account of the findings it contains. Also great to see you have referenced throughout, iam in the process of adding references to mine and will use your approach to help me. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 21:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Lee and Andrejevic
@Ekm00007

Jenkins views compare and contrast to that of Andrejevic and Lee in multiple ways.

Media Convergence was thought to signal the end for the monopoly that was ‘real time viewing’ and terrestrial TV companies. Lee and Andrejevic (2014), state how convergence has helped marketers and traditional TV companies make more money rather than less.

TV companies while threatened by the emergence of on demand viewing provided by companies such as Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Instant Video, have realised that convergence does not mean convergence on one device but rather multiple, thus the idea of interactive TV which had failed to stem the tide of ‘on demand viewing’ in the past could be done successfully through ‘piggy backing off of’ secondary devices (Lee and Andrejevic, 2014). This was termed the ‘second screen’.

This process is perhaps best demonstrated with the launch of the iPad in 2010. The US TV network ABC, released a companion app for the Oscars where, for those who downloaded it, they were granted backstage access. The move was an unprecedented success (Lee and Andrejevic, 2014). This shows how media convergence helped traditional media and did not hinder it, thus pointing towards new media and old media coexisting rather than one replacing other. Media Convergence in this form also helped to maintain the relevance of ‘real time TV’. Lee and Andrejevic (2014), note how the ultimate goal of this approach by large TV corporations was to get real time reactions from audiences. This would help marketers garner the most relevant material for the most appropriate people. Thus, convergence in this sense, allowed traditional TV maintain this ‘liveness’ element and subsequently help to maintain their relevance.

Furthermore, this convergence helps to maintain the relevance of advertisements. Lee and Andrejevic (2014), also note how the ‘live’ element helps sell what is being advertised as people, using their ‘second screen’ will be able to look it up and even buy it instantaneously. Therefore, media convergence has helped advertisers as well, due to the convergence between devices allowing for more time relevant adverts.

This type of media convergence has also been to the advantage of television producers. TV producers do not have to wait for reaction to a particular show but can rather get an instant reaction via the use of social media such as Facebook and Twitter (Lee and Andrejevic, 2014). Thus, this technological convergence between different platforms and devices shows how old media can coexist with new media.

This point is mirrored by Henry Jenkins which displays an agreement between these theorists. Jenkins (2006), points out that convergence is where grassroots and corporate media collide and combine with one another. Lee and Andrejevic (2014), make a similar point with the emergence of on-demand viewing, though not spelling the end for big corporations and media outlets, has meant that viewers are given a modicum of power while big corporations must adapt to compensate for this change. Therefore, the initial theories between these theorists seem to be that of agreement.

Furthermore, the theorists agree over the influence of big media corporation’s ability to understand the flow of audiences towards a piece of entertainment. For instance, the example of ABC in 2010 shows how a TV company was able to release an app to compensate for the demand of ‘real time viewing’ of the Oscars (Lee and Andrejevic, 2014). Thus, this again shows areas of convergence of opinion, as it were, between the theorists.

However, the theorists do have areas of disagreement. Jenkins (2006), argues that media convergence is heavily reliant on the individual, in that individuals actively seek the media they want to see. However, this contrasts with an example provided by Lee and Andrejevic (2006), where they state that the emergence of the ‘second screen’ and ‘second device’ culture is a massive part in media convergence. These points are in direct contrast to one another and thus shows an area of disagreement. Therefore, it is clear that the definitions and views on media convergence between these theorists have differing perceptions however do agree in what some may call the fundamentals of media convergence.Ekm00007 (discuss • contribs) 00:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey Ewan, I have just had a quick read over your work and I am extremely happy with it. My only criticism would be the way you have referenced a few things (not a major issue just something that would make the referencing look a bit tidier), I would take a look back over it and think about how you are quoting the in-text citations - remember that the citation should be beside the quote if it is within a sentence rather than at the end if the quote doesn't finish where the sentence does. Also, this will be something we can sort once we all have our parts finalised, but just to point out that some of your Jenkins references are already mentioned by Josh but again this can be something we will sort once we are ready to collate it all. In response to your question on the discussion section, I think it would be beneficial to find another relevant source just to back up your argument in some sense. Overall great job! Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 15:51, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Conclusion
From Henry Jenkins' initial explanation of convergence; the manipulation of an innocent cartoon character turned media catastrophe when photoshopped with an evil figure, it is evident that convergence has changed the way we use multi media platforms. In our essay, we successfully used our findings of Jenkins to compare the concept of convergence with old approaches to 'new' media and more contemporary ones. We found that Holt and Sanson contrast with Jenkins' view of media convergence with their perception of technology being at the core of convergence; the idea of "second screen" viewing enabling an expansion of device viewing allowing convergence to exist. The theorists of Lee and Andrejevic concur with Holt and Sanson in terms of multi screen viewing but also seem to have point of agreement with Jenkins wherein he states that one medium does not ultimately eliminate another. Bolter and Grusin play on this point with their older methodology of remediation which the term convergence can be said to have derived from. So ultimately, the term of convergence is highly relevant in describing new media, however it is "dangerous" as described by Meikle and Young as it can be interpreted in various ways to mean different things depending on a number of personal beliefs and as well as the evolution of new media since the publishing of Jenkins' book.

Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 14:16, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amy, this a great summary of our findings and very concise, meeting up tomorrow will allow us to make any additional changes to ensure we cover all areas discussed in our essay. Eam00024 (discuss • contribs) 21:39, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Amy, you summarise the general findings, drawing on more spefic examples of our research very well. Reminding the reader about our overall research in this tight night conclusion, will allow us to strengthen the delivery of our argument as a whole. I agree with Eachainn that we should revisit the conclusion after competition of the essay to allow us to make the most concise conclusion, especially if we change or alter anything.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

=Essay Structure=

Introduction

 * Create a Breif outline for what media convergence is, and explain how we aim to structure our report looking specifically into Jenkins work and then bouncing other theorists research of said work to see if it agrees or disagrees.

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13ː06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Main Body

 * Begin with points on Henry Jenkins - delve into his findings and the research conducted by . Explain his relevancy to the term and how he has made himself a well-known figure within convergence culture.
 * Expand on Jenkins in relation to Holt and Sanson - reveal how they illustrate the term of convergence and whether or not it works for or against Jenkins' approach. Add in the research carried out by.
 * Highlight theorists Lee and Andrejevic - explain how the research you looked into either agreed or argued with Jenkins' ideology.
 * Make a final point with regards to Bolter and Grusin - looking into the new media terms they have developed in relation to convergence, speak on how this concept allows us to look into other theories of digital media.

Conclusion
(Change as we go along, I've only done this as a starting point) Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 12:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Main Sources
1. Jenkins, H. (2006) Introduction to Convergence Culture pp. 1-24

2. Holt and Sanson (2014) Introduction to Connected Viewing pp. 1-15

3. Lee and Andrejevic (2014) 'Second Screen Theory: From the Demographic Surround to the Digital Enclosure' in Holt and Sanson (eds.) Connected Viewing pp. 40-61

4. Bolter and Grusin (1999) Remediation: Understanding New Media pp. 220-226

Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:17, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Supplementary Sources
1. Jenkins, H. (2013) Spreadable Media

2. Meikle and Young (2012) Media Convergence Networked Digital Media in Everyday Life

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 11:19, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

JoshCoates12 (discuss • contribs) 13:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

3. Jenkins, H. (2006) Convergence Culture (Although this is a main source, it is also a supplementary one for me to refer to) Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

4. Jenkins and Thorburn (2004) Rethinking Media Change Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

5. Dueze, M. (2006) Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:26, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

6. Grusin, R. (2004) Premediation Amm00137 (discuss • contribs) 22:28, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK
General Feedback
 * Essays of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for the collaborative essay. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level:
 * Good. Among other things, work of this standard will make a clear point in a clear way. It will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. It will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). It may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and is likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.

Specific Feedback:


 * You have submitted an original response to the brief. Here you outline a number of arguments that represent a theoretical framework and overview of several approaches to the theme of Convergence. Your discussion of the research evidences a fairly good working knowledge of a range of key scholarship on your chosen topic. There is some good integration and application of some of the deceptively difficult concepts here (e.g. connected viewing) which you have managed to successfully relate to convergence.


 * The essay is written in a reflexive, accessible style, and your argument is fairly well structured. However, I did experience some difficulty in reading off the page as the essay is made up of large chunks of undifferentiated text. Some embedded links, images (from wikicommons) and interwiki links to other parts of the wikibook would help break this up, and an eye on formatting and presentation would have been worth the effort. I did note that there were several images used in earlier iterations, but these were taken down due to copyright infringement and deletion requests. This is a potentially serious matter, and something that ought to have been thought through more carefully.


 * N.B.:Feedback for your Discussion, engagement and contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.’’’

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:55, 23 April 2018 (UTC)