User talk:Amw00036

'''Annotated Bibliography. Student Number:2417062'''

Cohen, Mary M. (2016) “Always on and Always on them”: Portable radios and the creation of the mobile media experience. Northwestern University: Sage, USA (Vol.4, pp 1-14)

This article shows the development from the first portable radio to mobile phones today and the world’s dependency on them. The aim of the paper was to show how the portable radio is useful to the media experience today, because of its historical content for the mobile media platform. The paper also explains through evolution how mobile devices have become an extension of our being. Three themes are used throughout the article to refine our understanding of media today. They are: personalised, preferred and extended consumption which added together create ‘a home away from home’. The article will be useful to my essay topic as it shows the development of ‘always-on culture’. However, the research is limited as it only follows the portable radio, which only 10% of Americans ever owned. To summarise, viewing the history of media devices is helpful to my essay topic but needs to cover a broader spectrum of media. It is also shows the progression of media and how we can no longer be truly free from it; due to this the paper will provide supplementary reading to my chosen essay topic.

Comments

This article is useful in highlighting the 'always on culture' is not a new development as this source illustrates how it has historically been present and will be useful within your essay topic.


 * 1) Rachelmm0037 (discuss • contribs) 16:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I do find it very interesting to read about our history of 'always on culture'. I wish the research was more broad and that is why it will only be supplementary to the essay. I found a few more up to date articles which I will use to modernise the essay as otherwise it will be too dated for today's culture.


 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 10:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Though the source talks about the historic aspect of the always on culture I don't think the source is at a loss even though the research isn't that broad. You could use the source as a comparative piece in relation to how different technological developments over time have caused varying effects to our society and the always on culture. However as you've said more up to date articles will be useful in modernising the essay but also in developing an argument if you end up writing a discursive piece.
 * 1) Rachelmm0037 (discuss • contribs) 18:19, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I never thought of using it as a comparative piece that is a great idea. Using the new sources I find I can then refer back to this work as it shows development through history, giving the essay a more rounded and full view. Thanks for your feedback.
 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 10:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading your annotated bibliography! I enjoyed the reminder that 'always on' culture is not a new development within the expanding world and that it has been an ongoing issue within society. I find topics easier to understand when I can relate them back to the start of their movements and so this post really did ground me in my understanding of the topic. The look back into the past also poses a new question to me: where will we be in the future? If we think the 'always-on' culture is an issue within our society at this current moment, who knows where we could be in twenty- thirty- forty years when the technologies we own could be even more accessible and even more portable. Most people I know can hardly bare the thought of visiting the bathroom without their mobile phone, who knows what they'll be dragging to the bathroom with them in years to come? Virtual personal assistants? What would they be doing in the bathroom with you? Sounds a bit odd so I've decided that I no longer want to think about virtual personal assistants helping my friends out with their bathroom needs. This comment got really strange, really fast. Sorry about that. I really enjoyed your annotated bibliography though! Made me think about a lot of strange things for sure!

Digitalmediafiend (discuss • contribs) 17:48, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I am the same, I prefer looking back to find out how we got here; it just puts everything in perspective for me. I must admit I am also guilty of having my phone with me everywhere and can only think how soon it will be that these things will be holograms on our wrists or a chip in our body, who knows! For my group's collaborative essay I read an article by the guardian where an author on this subject Andrew Keen argues with guardian journalist Emily Bell about what the internet is doing to us. It discusses the fact that we no longer know what true art is and that artists (ie. musicians or composers) are much more amateur for their is no longer a need for a judging elite, like Simon Cowell for example. With youtube being available we can all become the judge and therefore are making our view of this 'art' as more dumb. What do you think about this angle? Personally I can see where he is coming from but can we really make this decision or contribute as one of these 'amateur judges'? I must admit after studying this I may leave my phone a little more; even if it just so I can go to the bathroom in peace without wanting to reply to a Facebook message.
 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! I found your comment about 'amateur judges/artists' really interesting. I, for one, absolutely love the fact that anybody can share their art with the use of technology and the internet. It allows us to see a more diverse and complex view of art and the world in general. Think back to when only the well-off could afford to buy celluloid for their cameras and have it developed- yes, there is a sense of importance in few numbers, but also it means that we are only being able to see the world through the eyes of those well-off. How can we extend our outlook on the world without being able to see the whole world?

As a huge fan of women artists (and women in general) I think the internet is an amazing place to be able to view the work of womankind. I study film at Stirling Uni and women are hardly ever mentioned despite being there at the very creation of the first film. Without the internet I would never have been able to reach further and find these female film pioneers work. And I think back to the work women are doing today- we don't get anywhere the same amount of film deals as our male counterparts but I get to go online and see the work of so many amazing female artists out there proving their work.

But also, I'm a big fan of believing that art doesn't necessarily have to be 'good' to be interesting. Yoko Ono is a fantastic artist who has many interesting approaches to her work that others may see as 'bad'. Without the internet I would never have been able to view her work and performances even while many consider her work to be of low standards.

Art is such a beautiful thing and I am 100% here for every single piece of it. Whether it is 'good' or 'bad'. Because it is subjective and there is always so much feeling to it and isn't that why we all make it in the first place? Nobody should be able to be a gatekeeper on art because it is such a personal and vast medium.

Kind of went off topic here but I want to end with a quote from a young adult novel I read when I was probably around the age of 14 which really stuck with me with it's description of art: "She never looked nice. She looked like art, and art wasn't supposed to look nice; it was supposed to make you feel something.” It's from the book "Eleanor and Park" by Rainbow Rowell (I wouldn't recomend it to be honest, this was just one of the highlights it contained).

Anyway, hope you are having a good day and your collaborative essay is going well! Also, you should consider joining the universities film making society next semester: AirTV - it is a bunch of fun, I promise. We meet on Wednesday's at 7pm in W1. It's great fun- I promise!

Digitalmediafiend (discuss • contribs) 16:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

This is a well written and concise summary of the article! I really liked how the article talked about the portable radio. Even though it is an old device, it shows how much our society has technologically advanced. A great visual of the evolution of technology. I truly believe that we as a society have become so heavily dependent on our mobile devices. Like you stated, we can no longer be fully free from it. In fact, sometimes I personally feel overwhelmed with having a smartphone because I am constantly bombarded by texts, emails, news and notifications.

Celine Hunt (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reading. In the article it actually states that only 10% of Americans had the portable radio! I couldn't imagine only 10% having the iPod nowadays that's for sure. I'm using this in my essay to discuss the evolution of media and how it is basically tethered to us now. I am so used to having my phone in one hand while clicking 'next episode' on my Netflix displayed on my laptop. It isn't all bad though, it means we can stay in touch with those further away or my mum who is a constant worry about where I am and how I am doing so it's good for that. I wonder if you have the same situation?
 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading your annotated bibliography a lot! I had never considered how the portable radio could be viewed as a precursor to the modern mobile phone. I think the three themes of viewing our devices today to be a useful way of categorizing our interactions with media devices like mobile phones; sometimes it is difficult to define our relationships with our mobile devices, and these three themes are very helpful in doing this. It sounds like you found a great article for your research! Mom00107 (discuss • contribs) 15:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Yeah I enjoyed taking a twist on the article and applying it to today's society where a portable radio is not really current anymore. These three films stem from the article however and I find it fascinating that they can still apply to the world today. Although, I never thought of referring to my phone as a 'home away from home' but I do feel uncomfortable without it so that may explain why I feel this way whenever I lose my phone.
 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Wow, only 10% of American had the portable radio! That’s funny because I still have my iPod nano (4th generation). However, I do not use it but I have kept it as an antique. I agree with you on how smartphones are not all that bad. I like how they allow us to connect with people around the world and at a more efficient rate. Celine Hunt (discuss • contribs) 17:20, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Reflective Account

With the online world continually growing, all of us using its interface must abide by the changing rules. Users must follow rules and yet still the online sphere changes all the time because of one rule breaker and then suddenly everyone is doing the broken rule.

Wikibooks has been an interesting platform to use through its lack of invisibility. With other media outlets, people can hide behind masks and not show others their true face. With the ability to become someone else many prefer to keep their interactions online so that they can become the person they wish they could be. On Wikibooks however, visibility is in the foreground. Every key stroke, letter and even font change, is recorded to each person’s specific user page. All communications are finished with a signature; claiming one’s comments as their own. It stops users having that webbed veil in front of them and shows their own work, thoughts and opinions as who they truly are.

For our collaborative essay and research it helped greatly. We were able to discuss before beginning our essay. We became an always on culture, as well as using media convergence to discuss with other class mates at any possible time on any possible device. Other students also doing our essay topic had great insights into the culture although from different angles. Discussion flowed easily as people opened up about their lives and their own personal experiences to explain the topics given to us.

Wikibooks allowed for us to all talk collectively and at whatever time suited us. It shaped a new community that could continue on after this assignment is over. We now have the accounts and our discussion pages to proceed forward with new information and include others. It could become so much more; users from previous classes could continue to post as new classes joined in the discussion after the module. Years of digital media students would be able to post as much as they wanted for as long as they wanted; a great advantage of Wikibooks.

Wiki and its platforms offer a small sense of emancipation from the online world. Usually some users feel they must change who they are to conform to what those online would want from them. Many do not mind changing who they are online but some feel that they must follow these changes, especially on social media, to gain a positive view from other people. On Instagram, many put up photos of themselves for lots of reasons; they liked the photo, they liked the memory, they enjoyed their day. However, just before they press share, they question whether it looks good enough for the masses, most of the time editing the colour of the photo, the comment they put under it or even the number of hash tag’s they used. Wikibooks allows its users to be who they want to be. They can post as they choose as it is their own opinion just like other users are doing. It is a platform for discussion not for conformation.

Wikibooks was a great place to express academic ideas to others studying the same course. Watching how people using the same materials can come to different conclusions was a great tool for the essay specifically.


 * 1) Amw00036 (discuss • contribs) 10:04, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey, ! I enjoyed reading your reflective account of your time on wikibooks greatly!

I found your description of users being able to hide behind their usernames whilst on other social media sites very interesting compared to that of the likes of on Wikibooks. But while I agree that while you are correct in saying that every edit you make on this site is recorded and open information for all users to be able to read, I also disagree with the lack of privacy you believe this allows any user. While you are able to read each users edits, I still believe it is possible to maintain a high standard of personal invisibility as wikibooks does not ask you to link any of your other social media accounts to your wikibooks profile in order to: 1. Prove you are the person you may claim to be on your discussion page, and 2. Prove that you are an actual living, breathing human instead of a machine simply providing edits online in aid of a growing corporation.

I recently signed up to a Podcast streaming site and it asked me to log into its site through the use of my google account in order to prove I wasn’t a bot (and then after that, it provided me with a further frustrating Capta Code). I believe many new websites are incorporating is new standard of self-certification for internet users through the linking of accounts- whether it is actually for self-certification or whether it is so the website/app can gather further information on my online presence in order to tailor the adverts it presents to me and/or in order to gather more of my personal information to sell to corporations is still to be determined however. You can’t fully trust any websites/apps protocols fully anymore.

Digitalmediafiend (discuss • contribs) 07:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: DISCUSSION, ENGAGEMENT, CONTRIBS

 * Engagement on discussion pages of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for contribs. 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:
 * Fail. Contributions of this standard do not address the assignment requirements. They offer little to no engagement with the concerns of the module. They are poorly written. Entries of this grade may have been subject to admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement. The wiki markup formatting will be more or less non-existent.

Students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.


 * None. See below.

•	Evidence from contribs to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of editorial activity as evidenced through ‘contribs’). These are primarily considered for quality rather than quantity, but as a broad guideline: o	Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial” o	Items on a contribs list that are <1000 characters are important, and are considered in the round when evaluating contribs as a whole because of their aggregate value


 * None on the discussion pages, although what has clawed back a few marks for you is the fact that you were commenting on User Discussion pages and suggesting content for the collaborative essay. This has probably saved you from failure overall.

•	Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages o	Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration o	Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay o	Evidence of peer-review of others’ work


 * See above comment.

•	Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of Discussion Pages o	Clear delegation of tasks o	Clearly labelled sections and subsections o	Contributions are all signed


 * None.

•	Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated.


 * You gave a decent account of yourself where evidence shows..

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall.

Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory entries may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work.


 * You show some potential in your critical reflective capacity, so although there’s clearly room and scope for improvement here, and this is achievable in future projects. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and (especially for this, perhaps, the Understanding) criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would have made a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good, if a little brief at times, and you attempt to sustain the discussion. You do this occasionally through framing some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and also that you are beginning to discuss in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about).

General:
 * Reading and research: Some evidence of this in various moments through your portfolio work.


 * Argument and analysis: some evidence of this through reflective engagement and discussion.


 * Presentation: see above note on markup.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)