User talk:Mah01007

Online Visibility
Online visibility is something that everyone should be cautious of, and yet it is rarely discussed in detail. In todays interconnected online world, it has become easier and easier to find personal information online; a name, a phone number, even an address.

Media convergence is prevalent throughout most forms of social media. For example, apps like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are available on your phone, laptop or tablet, and Twitter even has a feature that allows the publication of Instagram posts as tweets that link users directly to Instagram. My social media profiles are limited due to my own lack of updates, but even then, I still have a significant online presence. With posts from friends and family members, I don’t have much of a say in what information about me gets posted on certain social media platforms (such as Facebook). On other platforms I have more control over what gets posted about me, purely because I am the only person with access to that information. For example, I readily think that gaming networks like Steam and Xbox Live are completely under my control, and any information about me that is posted on these networks is done so by me and me alone. However, what the companies that own these networks do with that information, for example selling it to advertisers, is out of my control and knowledge.

Snapchat is a good example, as it is common knowledge that Snapchat pictures and messages are not saved to the user’s phone, but nobody knows whether the company is tracking what you are sending to your contacts. Even platforms like YouTube and Netflix are collecting and selling information about what I watch and when I watch it. Even my Google searches are tracked and logged. I do try my best to ensure that specific information about myself does not get posted online, but it is impossible to accurately ascertain where and how all the information about myself is made available online, through social media, gaming platforms and other online media. It is almost impossible to know what information about you is online, somewhere.

Online visibility and media convergence are intrinsically linked, as convergence involves the flow of content across multiple platforms and the migratory behaviour of media audiences, which is a perfect description of social media and how content and online presence across Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and all forms of social media.

Mah01007 (discuss • contribs) 11:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography
Johnson, D., 2012: ‘Cinematic Destiny: Marvel Studios and the Trade Stories of Industrial Convergence’, Cinema Journal 52(1): 1-24

In this article Johnson discusses the film industry, with particular emphasis on Marvel and their acquisition by Disney and how this has affected the production of movies within the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). The author uses quotes from interviews with Marvel executives as well as analysing the Marvel Model in order to emphasise the various contributing factors that led to the creation of the MCU that includes reference to the original comics that the characters first appeared and shows how Marvel have created a dominating franchise in the movie industry. The article covers the entirety of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, beginning in 1998 and continuing up to when the article was published, as well as referencing the comics, television series’, video games and fandoms. This article is useful as a source for our collaborative essay due to its specificity and relevance to our subject matter, as well as going into detail regarding the MCU and its scope. The article focusing on convergence within the MCU is perfectly suited to our essay topic. The main limitation of this article is that it was written in 2012, meaning it does not cover any events from 2012 to 2018 and cannot discuss how Disney’s acquisition of Marvel has affected the continued creation of their licenced properties. Johnson states that further examination of Marvel’s new place within the Hollywood film industry is needed to further understand the impact that a shared universe as vast as the MCU will have on the industry and on how convergence is viewed as a whole. This article could be useful as a basis for our understanding of convergence and the MCU and will be a useful source of information to fall back on.

(Mah01007 (discuss • contribs) 13:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC))

Hello. This was a great topic for an annotated bibliography. To deal with the subject of the Marvel Cinematic Universe was very interesting considering it's such a huge part of our popular culture. I like how you have talked about how interviews were featured in the article to give a better understanding of how Marvel has developed over the years in the film industry. MCU is clearly a perfect topic to write about in relation to convergence and therefore it seems as if you're off to a good start for your essay. I agree that is is a bit annoying the article has dated a bit, but I'm sure you'll be able to find plenty other articles that cover the missing years as MCU is such a huge part of culture. Are there any other great examples of convergence such as the MCU that you could maybe talk about in your essay as well?

Calumthomson1 (discuss • contribs) 21:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Reflections
While working on our collaborative essay project, I was introduced to Wikibooks for the first time. Wikibooks is an online platform, launched in 2003, that is a helpful tool for students to use in order to facilitate learning and the sharing of ideas and viewpoints. Wikipedia describes Wikibooks as ‘a wiki-based Wikimedia project hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation for the creation of free content e-book textbooks and annotated texts that anyone can edit’. It is essentially a large online textbook that anyone can access, edit and contribute towards. After using Wikibooks for several months, it is clear that there are both benefits and drawbacks to the user experience. The ability to converse with other users and edit/comment on articles they post creates a feeling of connectivity and shared learning, and the overall experience is one of shared mutual learning and discourse. The ability to simply click on a username and engage in mutually beneficial conversation is fantastic and really benefits the learning experience. Being able to edit our groupwork together without the difficult task of meeting in person meant that our collaborative essay contributions were made much easier in terms of arranging time to meet and conversate, and the emphasis on visibility made it easy to see who had added what to the essay as a whole.

One of the few drawbacks to using Wikibooks is that it can be quite difficult to get used to the interface. Our group got around this through face to face meeting and self-teaching, which was difficult at first, but once we had the basic functions figured out it was relatively simple from then on. Anyone can edit anything through Wikibooks. This could lead to slight drawbacks with this level of editing capability, as users could potentially post information that is inaccurate or misleading, whether intentionally so or otherwise. However, the focus on user visibility can be effective in combatting this as everyone can see anything someone posts, which helps with the level of connectivity and makes users aware of who they are conversing and engaging with.

Personally, I found Wikibooks to be a fairly useful tool to facilitate discussion and group learning, while also increasing my understanding of several aspects of the Digital Media and Culture module through shared learning within my group and through comments and edits posted by other users. Despite the initial difficulties we experienced as a group, Wikibooks was relatively easy to use once the first hurdle had been leapt over, and greatly increased our ability to converse and help each other with our module work.

Mah01007 (discuss • contribs) 15:32, 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:
 * Clear Fail. Assignment responses receiving marks below 30% tend to not contain any merit or relevance to the module. Contributions are one-liners, sometimes made up of text-speak, if there are any contributions at all. Often they are indicative of failure to comment on other students’ ideas, and therefore do not engage with the crucial peer-review element. Entries of this grade may have been subject to admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement, or the user has been blocked for vandalism or other contraventions of wiki T&C. 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.

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.

•	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


 * None.

•	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.


 * None

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 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.

Posts 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 and comments are often extremely brief or missing. 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.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band, so there’s clearly room for improvement here. 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. In addition, you seem to have missed altogether the requirement for peer-review.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – none undertaken. This would effectively halve your mark.

General:


 * Reading and research: Some evidence of this


 * Argument and analysis: A lot of work needed here – no engagement with the discussion or peer-review processes set up.


 * Presentation: Fair.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)