Task 8 of NIE: Personal vs. Mass Media

Lüders article of course focused on a dying subject - how to define a mass medium. For me it is quite ungrateful to define anything these days. As persons own multiple-Me's, so appears to be happen to the fields which are built by persons.

Media as the message from the society of course is the first one to fall under these sorts of effects. As Lüders stated, that one should not think of Internet as a media but rather as a technology, I have to agree with such a notion.

The variety of products, or media forms (by Lüders) is so vast in the Internet, that defining Internet to be a form of media is problematic or impossible.

What I didn't agree with is that Lüders sort of wished or proposed, that mass media - its definition - should be revalued under new, now-existing circumstances. I think mass media is simply dying. As the humanity is becoming more effective by delivering its messages, mass media is simply not "efficient" enough to compete with the possibilities that personal media (rather "asymmetrical media") has to offer. Therefore in the case of mass media nothing should be revalued. It was at is was - just like front-wars existed in the past, nobody in the modern warfare thinks of using such tactics. While the example could be odd, the point I'm trying to emphasise is that mass media as a term should not be revalued, but rather put to history where it belongs.

Sure we have examples of the "ancient" mass media, but how long will these examples last? BMW already has started developing car-radios that are Internet-based, based on so called podcast-principle. As Lüders pointed out, television channels themselves no implement strategies and content, that have strict personal media similarities. The list is forever growing and puts more value on the fact that mass media as a term and idea, is extinct.


Source
Lüders, M. (2008). Concpeptualising personal media. New Media and Society, 10(5), 683-702.

Task 7 of NIE: My own understanding of interactivity

Although the articles reviewed in the former tasks were old in their datum, I think the messages delivered still exist today. While there has been in the past an immensely large proportion of overview put in to the types of interactive "something", I think interactivity has evolved to be as common, or as basic as air is.

For example we didn't do any research on the type of paper our daily newspapers were made "in the old days". Interactivity research I'm afraid will become as extinct as this offered idea already was back then and is now.

A human being is a interactive person. As we communicate with our five senses, so far the media consumption has been one-way consumed, the future (and in a large amount of fields "the today" already) will make this senses-dependent communication finally two-way. We shall not get any normative functionality from the objects without interacting with them.